By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
highwaystar101 on 28 May 2010
Edit Thread
Samus Aran said:
highwaystar101 said:
Samus Aran said:
highwaystar101 said:
He is a peaceful man.

It's just that the kind of peace he wants will only come about by threatening the rest of the world to conform on pain of death... Kinda defeats the object.

Cause the Western peace is so much better right? You know except for the fact we're destroying our world and the south is paying for all the ecological and social costs while the north is leeching from their back.

With north I mean Europa/USA and with south I mean mostly Africa, but south america and parts of Asia as well.

Because of our global economical system 9 million people die of starvation each year in AFRICA alone. It's destroying the local agriculture which is/was the primary source of survival for many people in the world. A lot of people will die for our global economical system. A lot. 

A. Are you suggesting that if president Ahmadinejad conquers the world through a bloody genocidal war, all of that would stop? Is a better system of peace "do as we say or you will die"?

B. I know that the world is unbalanced and we are causing vast amounts of damage to it and exploiting the poor. But I fail to see how that has anything to do with trying to reason that their way of achieving peace through threats and violence to force conformity is better than our way of achieving peace through diplomacy, with violence most often being a last resort.

No, I'm just saying that the West isn't better then the Rest and that we should stop thinking that the way of the West is a normal path to take. The path the West took(Rise of the West, and the Great Divergence) wasn't normal. Why should other people be forced to follow something?

Just because the Pax America is very strict and focused on international organisations doesn't mean that there aren't any better systems out there. There's clearly a fundamental problem with the USA. If everyone followed the example of the USA then we'd need 5 extra planets... Participation in the world market doesn't solve the problems of the poor countries like many people say. In fact, it makes it even worse. Europa/USA only make up for 20% of the world population yet they own 70% of the wealth in the world.  

You can judge about Ahmadinejad all you want, but in the end, we aren't much better(we are however a lot better in treating our own people better then Ahmadinejad is doing in Iran, obviously). At least not for the south(Africa, south america, parts of Asia, etc.)

To be honest, my original comment was made in passing and didn't expect a debate. So I'll keep this short.

...

The foundation stone of western society is freedom of speech. We recognise that we are not perfect in any form, and we allow our population to voice their opinion on what they believe would build better the society. People are allowed to influence a change in their government, people don't have to accept the way society is ran, nobody is forced to follow any doctrine other than free speech (which in itself can be questioned).

But people in Iran don't have this freedom of speech, they are ranked by 'Reporters without borders' as 172/175 for press freedom. People in Iran cannot question their government, or at least not for long. The Iranian government doesn't feel as though it should be questioned, it feels as though it has some divine infallible right to run the country how they feel, and everyone has to follow suit.

Now you said at the end of your first statement "Why should people be forced to follow something?", which society best suits your view?

...

You talk about (in essence) how western society driven by capitalism is destroying the world and ploughing through resources. I recognise that this is true, and I am a sceptic of both capitalism and communism. We may not know of a better system, but we also facilitate change. Can you think of how this space age economy is going to be ran? Then suggest it to your government and your countrymen, I'm sure they'll be most impressed.

Yes, things are far from perfect and if a better society exists which would allow for equality and a high standard of free living, then I would be the first in line, and our system provides the key for adopting any future forms of government that may operate better. 

...

This has gotten derailed fast. Let's go back to my original point. President Ahmadinejad would only want peace if his opposition are either eradicated or converted. I think our method of keeping peace is somewhat better. This is the central point to my original argument, and I think I have a valid point there.