|
 daimyo
Monticello
Registered: 05/13/04
Posts: 7,751
Last seen: 12 years, 2 months
|
 Imperial America 
#3601165 - 01/08/05 11:23 PM (19 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
I am looking for opinions from Americans first. How would you feel if President Bush came out and said the equivalent of "We are now an empire with full intentions to expand."?
Through this imaginary new doctrine we would remove any group of people that pose a risk to our security through any means necessary. Whether it be a terrorist cell, a beligerent foreign leader or government, or whatever.
Also included in this new doctrine is the old "to the victor goes the spoils" attitude. Whatever funds and assests are seized are used to support our ongoing war on terror and give the soldiers a bonus. If buildings are seized and can not be used for strategic purposes, then something such as a library, or school could be built for the locals.
Would you support the President? Why or why not?
If not, what would you suggest be done to protest this new doctrine?
If so, what would you suggest be done to support this?
And for the non-Americans(state your country),
What would be your opinion of this?
What would you recommend be done to support or protest this new doctrine?
How do you think your fellow countrypeople would react to this?
--------------------
"I have sworn upon the altar of God eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man."
|
 Shroomism
Space Travellin
 
Registered: 02/13/00
Posts: 66,015
Loc: 9th Dimension 
|
 Re: Imperial America [Re: daimyo]
#3601272 - 01/08/05 11:43 PM (19 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
This should be in PA&L.. is there a specific reason you posted it here?
--------------------
|
daimyo
Monticello
Registered: 05/13/04
Posts: 7,751
Last seen: 12 years, 2 months
|
Re: Imperial America [Re: Shroomism]
#3601292 - 01/08/05 11:46 PM (19 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Wasn't really looking for a political breakdown or logistical debate of it as much as a philisophical exchange of ideas and opinions.
--------------------
"I have sworn upon the altar of God eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man."
|
Shroomism
Space Travellin
Registered: 02/13/00
Posts: 66,015
Loc: 9th Dimension
|
 Re: Imperial America [Re: daimyo]
#3601308 - 01/08/05 11:49 PM (19 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
fair enough.. carry on
But if it turns into a PA&L thread it's moving to PA&L
We'll see how it progresses..yarr 
--------------------
|
daimyo
Monticello
Registered: 05/13/04
Posts: 7,751
Last seen: 12 years, 2 months
|
Re: Imperial America [Re: Shroomism]
#3601318 - 01/08/05 11:51 PM (19 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
OK. You got any opinion on the matter?
--------------------
"I have sworn upon the altar of God eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man."
|
Shroomism
Space Travellin
Registered: 02/13/00
Posts: 66,015
Loc: 9th Dimension
|
 Re: Imperial America [Re: daimyo]
#3601340 - 01/08/05 11:56 PM (19 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
"We are now an empire with full intentions to expand."?
Through this imaginary new doctrine we would remove any group of people that pose a risk to our security through any means necessary. Whether it be a terrorist cell, a beligerent foreign leader or government, or whatever.
Also included in this new doctrine is the old "to the victor goes the spoils" attitude. Whatever funds and assests are seized are used to support our ongoing war on terror and give the soldiers a bonus. If buildings are seized and can not be used for strategic purposes, then something such as a library, or school could be built for the locals.
Quote:
Would you support the President? Why or why not?
Hell no. Because I don't jive with fascist totalitarianism or war mongering.
Quote:
If not, what would you suggest be done to protest this new doctrine?
overthrow the government. help the empire fall. have a more practical working system ready to take its place.
--------------------
|
daimyo
Monticello
Registered: 05/13/04
Posts: 7,751
Last seen: 12 years, 2 months
|
Re: Imperial America [Re: Shroomism]
#3601365 - 01/09/05 12:02 AM (19 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Overthrow by any means necessary?
This would likely lead to a split in the country and perhaps erupt into civil war. Would you rather endure a civil war than allow the empire to expand uninhibited?
If, during the civil war, we were attacked by a foreign enemy force would you side with, or against them?
--------------------
"I have sworn upon the altar of God eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man."
|
Frog
Warrior
Registered: 10/22/03
Posts: 4,284
Loc: The Zero Point Field
Last seen: 11 years, 2 months
|
Re: Imperial America [Re: daimyo]
#3601382 - 01/09/05 12:07 AM (19 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
I would rather see the United States expand than have civil war or whatever. I think the U.S. is a pretty good country.
You know what I loved the most about the tsunami? Well, I didn't like any thing about it, but thing that I DID like is that in general, Americans are hated, but we're the first ones called upon in time of crisis. 
--------------------
The day will come when, after harnessing the ether, the winds, the tides, gravitation, we shall harness for God the energies of love. And, on that day, for the second time in the history of the world, man will have discovered fire. -Teilard
|
daimyo
Monticello
Registered: 05/13/04
Posts: 7,751
Last seen: 12 years, 2 months
|
Re: Imperial America [Re: Frog]
#3601423 - 01/09/05 12:15 AM (19 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
How about the questions in my first post? What are your thoughts there?
--------------------
"I have sworn upon the altar of God eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man."
|
Shroomism
Space Travellin
Registered: 02/13/00
Posts: 66,015
Loc: 9th Dimension
|
Re: Imperial America [Re: daimyo]
#3601443 - 01/09/05 12:19 AM (19 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
civil war or world war 3.. civil war or world war 3.. decisions decisions
neither
peaceful overthrow (oxymoron of the week?)
--------------------
|
Huehuecoyotl
Fading Slowly
Registered: 06/13/04
Posts: 10,689
Loc: On the Border
|
Re: Imperial America [Re: Frog]
#3601444 - 01/09/05 12:19 AM (19 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
"Americans are hated, but we're the first ones called upon in time of crisis"
We are hated for our prosperity. Misery loves company.
--------------------
"A warrior is a hunter. He calculates everything. That's control. Once his calculations are over, he acts. He lets go. That's abandon. A warrior is not a leaf at the mercy of the wind. No one can push him; no one can make him do things against himself or against his better judgment. A warrior is tuned to survive, and he survives in the best of all possible fashions." ― Carlos Castaneda
|
Drink_Punk_Soda
Now with ExtraVaganza!?
Registered: 06/14/02
Posts: 1,677
Loc: Nowhere fast
Last seen: 3 years, 1 month
|
Re: Imperial America [Re: Shroomism]
#3601456 - 01/09/05 12:21 AM (19 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Right now, the way world politics are set up very, very similarly reflects Athens (in its prime) and the Delian League. The DL was a system of Imperial expansion, based on this concept:
Athens: We would like your country to join our league. In return for joining, we will protect you from anyone perceived to be a threat to you, or us, or who would attack you for joining with us. In return, we expect regular tributes in the form of money, goods, and the unrestricted right to occupy your territory if it is required for military purposes. Also, you will agree to provide a portion of troops and military equipment proportional to your population, should we require them, to protect ourselves and our other members.
Country X: What if we don't want to join?
Athens: Then we will either aquire your territory by force, or allow one of our enemies (or better yet, one of YOUR enemies) to destroy you, and we will not come to your aid. If you have no enemies, we will cut off all trade routes to your country.
Country X: Well Gee, when you put it that way...
--------------
It has a snowball effect- the more people join, the stronger the League becomes. It also has a detrimental effect- the more countries that join, the further the League has to spread itself to protect everyone. The benefit of Imperial expansion is that if any one member country is attacked, there should be (ideally and theoretically) several other countries that can send aid in a short amount of time.
The reason this worked in acient Athens was because in the ancient Greek world, the polis or city came first. It was more important than you, your family, your job, or any interests you held. Therefore, expansion (which lead to increased trade, and military power) was a superb idea. Also, Athens was a true democracy (albeit a slightly unfair one.) On any day, a speaker could request (from his local representative) time to speak to whoever showed up at the forum, on any subject. He could suggest going to war with a rival state, or suggest tax changes, or suggest a new scouting expedition. Anyone who was present at the end of the speech was eligable to vote, and the majority vote was the IMMEDIATE decision. This resulted in two problems- most of the rich, educated members of society lived in or close to the city, where the speeches were held. The poor farming majority could not afford to travel into the city to vote, because missing one day of grueling work could be devestating to their well-being. Because of this, the vote was usually biased. Furthermore, ANY DECISION MADE COULD BE REVERSED THE NEXT DAY, as long as the majority voted on it.
Now, cut to the present. The expansion theory, at least militarily, politically, and economically, has been in use since the birth of our nation. If your country agrees to be "democratic" (or at the very least, a democratically elected republic), we will come to your aid and trade with you, assuming you will do the same. If you are a communist or other totalitarian state, which is bad for capitalism, we will not trade with you, nor will we ally with you militarily. Furthermore, we will aid your enemies to destroy you (sometimes to our detriment, a la IRAQ/AFGHANISTAN). Vietnam is also a good example.
In that way, Bush is not hardly the first US president to push for the expansion of US ideals, nor is he the first to do it by force. He's also not the first to occupy territory (anyone ever hear of PUERTO RICO? or HAWAII?).
If he publicly announced that he planned to hostilly take over anyone who resisted or refused to comply with his ideals/laws, we would be NUKED INTO OBLIVION within the hour. I am 100% certain of this. On the other hand, if he took the Roman perspective, we might actually be able to expand a good deal. The Romans, for every country they took over (read:occupied indefinately), learned as much as they could from the locals, and then educated them in the Roman fashion. Some countries were glad to have them and accepted them with no resistance- the Romans coming meant trade, work, education, and protection.
Now, I wouldn't support the decision, if it were made in the near future, because the radical change in political and military stance was not voted on by the public. Keep in mind the incredible barrage of propaganda we'd receive prior to voting though- it would make the current pro-war propaganda look pale and meek in comparison. Then again, for Greek Orators, there were no holds barred, especially for the Sophists, who openly admitted that they did not base their speeches in Truth, rather in persuasion. I have a feeling that the White House speechwriters have a solid grounding in Gorgias, Plato, and Aristophenes.
I'm done ranting for now, although I'm excited to hear any responses.
Can anyone tell what I majored in?
--------------------
Kumbayah my lord, Kumbayah...
|
Huehuecoyotl
Fading Slowly
Registered: 06/13/04
Posts: 10,689
Loc: On the Border
|
|
The way to expand your borders is for your culture to have the ability to integrate other cultures without destroying them. The US has a history of this due to our colonial history. I am not promoting expansionism...just pointing out a fact.
--------------------
"A warrior is a hunter. He calculates everything. That's control. Once his calculations are over, he acts. He lets go. That's abandon. A warrior is not a leaf at the mercy of the wind. No one can push him; no one can make him do things against himself or against his better judgment. A warrior is tuned to survive, and he survives in the best of all possible fashions." ― Carlos Castaneda
|
daimyo
Monticello
Registered: 05/13/04
Posts: 7,751
Last seen: 12 years, 2 months
|
|
If it were voted on and a majority ruled in favor, would you then support the expansion efforts?
I agree that the Roman style is the way to go, but I was not referring to taking over countries in my original post. Just the removal of hostile leaders, governments, cells.
Once removed however, it becomes a question of what to do(e.g. - Iraq). Leave and let them mend themselves with our financial support? Set up a puppet government? Only allow a democratic government to take control?
--------------------
"I have sworn upon the altar of God eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man."
|
Drink_Punk_Soda
Now with ExtraVaganza!?
Registered: 06/14/02
Posts: 1,677
Loc: Nowhere fast
Last seen: 3 years, 1 month
|
|
Okay, I lied, I only answered the first question.
" If not, what would you suggest be done to protest this new doctrine?
If so, what would you suggest be done to support this?"
If not- if Bush declared a totalitarian regime, the only way to end it would be to remove him from power. Since it would likely be impossible to to that through force (because the military would be under his control) there would be only three real options:
1)Attempt, through rhetoric (or oratory, depending on which side of the fence you stand) to convince either the military leaders to rebell (although that could lead to a military conflict, especially if the soldiers rebelled, although THAT could be highly effective..),
2)Convince the public to remove him from office (although in a totalitariam regime that might not be possible through democratic means), or
3)Leave the country and aid a rival country (or League/alliance) to remove him from power.
On the other hand (and I do SO love playing Devil's Advocate), supporting his actions would be easy, dangerously so.
This is because there are a number of positive aspects to expansion, and several of the more negative aspects can easily be spun to positive points.
Examples- Positive:
More allies means stronger military, more intelligence, increased trade/economy, and preserving our way of life.
Examples- negative turned around
Destroying those who oppose us ensures our safety
Occupying (hostile) foreign territory gives us the ability to learn from and educate the locals,
As well as reform their governments into productive members of our alliance
"To the victor, the spoils." (we could "liberate" natural or other resources, ie. oil, diamonds (think south africa), forest land,etc)
My biggest gripe with the current set of propaganda/rhetoric is that it focuses on the negative aspects of NOT complying/going to war. Such as, not supporting the war is unpatriotic (although that was one of THE STRONGEST arguments an Athenian could make), or not removing insurgents allows them to attack us. The problem with the current set of rhetoric is that it is based on unreasonable claims, claims of Logos that are non sequitors (they "do not follow", literally.)
We must go to Iraq because there MAY BE wmd's.
But what if there aren't?
Well what if there are?
Granted, neither side has a good standing point there, but you'd be hard pressed to make a case for either side (that's the current problem, people who support the war argue(d) what if? whereas people against it argue(d) what if not?).
Okay, now I'm really done. I probably won't check back until the morning, but leave me something to kickstart my brain tomorrow. I love a good argument.
--------------------
Kumbayah my lord, Kumbayah...
|
Frog
Warrior
Registered: 10/22/03
Posts: 4,284
Loc: The Zero Point Field
Last seen: 11 years, 2 months
|
Re: Imperial America [Re: daimyo]
#3601522 - 01/09/05 12:43 AM (19 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
daimyo said:
How about the questions in my first post? What are your thoughts there?
There were several questions. Which one in particular were you asking me to cut my throat upon?
--------------------
The day will come when, after harnessing the ether, the winds, the tides, gravitation, we shall harness for God the energies of love. And, on that day, for the second time in the history of the world, man will have discovered fire. -Teilard
|
daimyo
Monticello
Registered: 05/13/04
Posts: 7,751
Last seen: 12 years, 2 months
|
Re: Imperial America [Re: Frog]
#3601530 - 01/09/05 12:47 AM (19 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Would you support the President? Why or why not?
--------------------
"I have sworn upon the altar of God eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man."
|
Frog
Warrior
Registered: 10/22/03
Posts: 4,284
Loc: The Zero Point Field
Last seen: 11 years, 2 months
|
Re: Imperial America [Re: daimyo]
#3601569 - 01/09/05 12:58 AM (19 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
But I answered this question, above, as follows:
"I would rather see the United States expand than have civil war or whatever. I think the U.S. is a pretty good country."
--------------------
The day will come when, after harnessing the ether, the winds, the tides, gravitation, we shall harness for God the energies of love. And, on that day, for the second time in the history of the world, man will have discovered fire. -Teilard
|
Drink_Punk_Soda
Now with ExtraVaganza!?
Registered: 06/14/02
Posts: 1,677
Loc: Nowhere fast
Last seen: 3 years, 1 month
|
|
Quote:
Huehuecoyotl said:
The way to expand your borders is for your culture to have the ability to integrate other cultures without destroying them. The US has a history of this due to our colonial history. I am not promoting expansionism...just pointing out a fact.
Agreed and noted. That was my point when referencing Puerto Rico and Hawaii. Not to mention the countless military bases we've set up in foreign countries (Okinawa for example).
Quote:
daimyo said:
If it were voted on and a majority ruled in favor, would you then support the expansion efforts?
I agree that the Roman style is the way to go, but I was not referring to taking over countries in my original post. Just the removal of hostile leaders, governments, cells.
If every intelligent person in all of our territories voted (and I mean all, not limited to age or demographic, simply limited to "citizens") in favor, I would support the expansion efforts. Of course, I would support it on the condition that the entire public (as defined before) was able to vote on the method of expansion, be it military by force, amicably by politics, or by open invitation. Believe it or not (and I know this isn't a popular opinion, especially on this board), not everyone hates America. While it's true that many, many places harbor resentment and ill will towards us as a superpower abusing our position, many other places envy our economy and quality of life, education, medical knowledge, and personal freedom. I'd be willing to bet that several countries would step forward and offer to join with us, especially since given current global politics, a US expansion campaign would be join us or fight us.
The point I'm trying to make is that I don't think people realize that this whole "War or Terrorism" is a BRILLIANT euphamism for global expansion. IT'S ALREADY HAPPENING. We're sending representatives abroad, in the form of politicians, soldiers, and mediators, and removing anyone who is a threat to our politics or our polis (in the grand sense, America is a united polis). If we have the opportunity to convert the government there to one similar to our own, we will do anything in our power to make sure it is done. And of course, we try to at least maintain the image of improving the quality of life in these places, because neglecting our allies would look terrible.
And to answer the second half of your response- you can remove hostile leaders, you can reinstate entire governments, and you can destroy terrorist cells. But anyone with a philosophy and a decent head on their shoulders can convince a friend of an alternate worldview, and in that way, "terrorism" is impossible to eradicate. Anyone who truly believes that the world can and should be changed is a potential terrorist. Only when the entire world becomes homogenized and sedated to the point of complete mindless consent will "terrorism" be destroyed. And that trancends philosophy- that's a recipe for the destruction of our species.
--------------------
Kumbayah my lord, Kumbayah...
|
daimyo
Monticello
Registered: 05/13/04
Posts: 7,751
Last seen: 12 years, 2 months
|
Re: Imperial America [Re: Frog]
#3601603 - 01/09/05 01:07 AM (19 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Frog said:
But I answered this question, above, as follows:
"I would rather see the United States expand than have civil war or whatever. I think the U.S. is a pretty good country."
I posed the first question without civil war in the equation. I took your answer as a response to that issue.
If there is no civil war(as of yet. pretend it was just announced), just the new doctrine, would you support it?
--------------------
"I have sworn upon the altar of God eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man."
|
|
Threaded
Previous
Index
Next
Cultivation Supplies 
Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order 
Maeng Da Thai Kratom Leaf Powder 
Red Vein Kratom 
Isolated Cubensis Liquid Culture For Sale
Edit 
Reply 
1 2 3 all )
fivepointer
Larrythescaryrex
lIllIIIllIlIIlIlIIllIllIIl
Effed
