A return to imperialism Log Out | Lost Password? | Topics | Search
Contact | Register | My Profile | SO home | MOL home

M-SO Message Board » 2004 Attic » Soapbox » Archive through January 21, 2004 » A return to imperialism « Previous Next »

  Thread Originator Last Poster Posts Pages Last Post
  ClosedClosed: New threads not accepted on this page        

Author Message
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Cato Nova
Citizen
Username: Cato_nova

Post Number: 33
Registered: 12-2003
Posted on Sunday, January 18, 2004 - 12:47 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

It is time to face facts. Much of the so-called Third World, particularly in Africa, is in chaos. Corrupt kleptocracies and kakistocracies vie for power, impoverishing the populace further and further every year. If left untouched, this situation threatens to degenerate further, and as we've learned, populations devoid of hope are fodder for terrorist organizations worldwide. Left untouched, this is not only a humanitarian disaster but also a security threat as well to the developed world.

The only solution is a return to a quasi-imperialism, but one done in the interests of the ruled, rather than the rulers. The large powers should divide up the worst parts of the world, and administer them on behalf of their peoples, deposing the current crop of leaders. This should be done, of course, not for traditional imperialistic reasons but in order to create (perhaps over a twenty to forty year period) stable, democratic, market based societies that would gradually be returned to local governance once a generation has been trained in each nation to be responsible enough to rule itself.

Nation-states should not necessarily be respected in this endeavor. If it makes sense to redraw borders, the great powers should not shrink from this responsibility.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Michaela May
Citizen
Username: Mayquene

Post Number: 40
Registered: 1-2004


Posted on Sunday, January 18, 2004 - 2:17 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Weren't some of the same arguments used to justify imperialism in the first place? Seems to me like it'd be deju vu -- it would become an excuse for Western powers to take other countries resources.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

tjohn
Citizen
Username: Tjohn

Post Number: 2082
Registered: 12-2001


Posted on Sunday, January 18, 2004 - 2:44 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Cato,

Assuming you are serious, please work out the annual cost and manpower requirements of this endeavor.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ainsworth Hunt
Citizen
Username: Ainsworth

Post Number: 174
Registered: 1-2003
Posted on Sunday, January 18, 2004 - 3:23 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

http://politics.guardian.co.uk/attacks/comment/0,1320,1036772,00.html
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Michaela May
Citizen
Username: Mayquene

Post Number: 41
Registered: 1-2004


Posted on Sunday, January 18, 2004 - 4:32 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Cato, this is tongue-in-cheek, no?
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Cato Nova
Citizen
Username: Cato_nova

Post Number: 35
Registered: 12-2003
Posted on Sunday, January 18, 2004 - 6:30 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Think about this rationally. We will spend $100 billion plus in Iraq, and several billions more in Afghanistan; how much more will we spend vis-a-vis Iran, Syria, etc? What if more African nations slide into chaos, and become homes to terrorist organizations? Wouldn't it be cheaper to run these nations rather than deal with the after-effects of the inability of the natives to run themselves?

I am not suggesting that the U.S. take on this task itself. France, the U.K., Japan, Germany can administer a nation or two themselves. And we don't have to establish protectorates over all nations; we can choose regionally important nations and hope that greater stability in those nations spill over into their neighbors.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

tjohn
Citizen
Username: Tjohn

Post Number: 2084
Registered: 12-2001


Posted on Sunday, January 18, 2004 - 7:25 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Actually, it would be cheaper to just exterminate the inhabitants of nations in chaos.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

anon
Citizen
Username: Anon

Post Number: 929
Registered: 6-2002
Posted on Sunday, January 18, 2004 - 8:35 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Germany and Japan controlling other nations? Really!
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

mfpark
Citizen
Username: Mfpark

Post Number: 177
Registered: 9-2001
Posted on Sunday, January 18, 2004 - 10:04 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Cato, A Modest Proposal.

Instead of nation-states footing the bill, we should privatize the process. Multinational corporations could be contracted to run these recidivist countries, keeping the profit in excess of the costs of operations. The SEC and FASB will control reporting of finances so we can be assured they are fairly monitored. Global EPA and OSHA agencies will enforce environmental and workplace safety. The companies will be required to issues stock options to the natives so they will work hard and have a stake in stable operations and governance.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

hariseldon
Citizen
Username: Hariseldon

Post Number: 155
Registered: 5-2001


Posted on Sunday, January 18, 2004 - 11:18 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

mfpark:

Your privatization scheme is just the salaryman's burden.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

tjohn
Citizen
Username: Tjohn

Post Number: 2085
Registered: 12-2001


Posted on Monday, January 19, 2004 - 5:54 am:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Cato,

The programme you describe is not imperialism. Perhaps we can call it Kiplingism.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

eratosthenes
Citizen
Username: Eratosthenes

Post Number: 16
Registered: 9-2003
Posted on Monday, January 19, 2004 - 6:06 am:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

"Corrupt kleptocracies and kakistocracies vie for power, impoverishing the populace further and further every year."

I assume that if US fiscal policy continues in its current direction, you will be advocating later in this decade that management of the US be taken over by the Canadians and the British?
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

tjohn
Citizen
Username: Tjohn

Post Number: 2087
Registered: 12-2001


Posted on Monday, January 19, 2004 - 6:08 am:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

No, the Germans or the Swiss.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

bobk
Supporter
Username: Bobk

Post Number: 4355
Registered: 5-2001
Posted on Monday, January 19, 2004 - 9:00 am:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

In the old days, imperialism was profitable. I doubt if this would be allowed today given all the yacking about our invasion of Iraq being for the oil revenues.

This is another conservative post by someone who thinks history started with the election of Ronald Regan. LOL

Any of you know how much of the wealth of Great Britain came from India?
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

court07040
Citizen
Username: Court07040

Post Number: 25
Registered: 8-2003
Posted on Monday, January 19, 2004 - 9:06 am:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

My good friend from Ghana says that Africa needs benevolent dictators. It's very sad that things are so out of hand over there...
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

bobk
Supporter
Username: Bobk

Post Number: 4356
Registered: 5-2001
Posted on Monday, January 19, 2004 - 10:07 am:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Jerry Rowlands? Hope I got the name straight. I think he viewed himself in that light, with some justification.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

notehead
Citizen
Username: Notehead

Post Number: 892
Registered: 5-2001


Posted on Monday, January 19, 2004 - 2:15 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

What about a country like Haiti, which appears to have nothing to offer (except perhaps a revamped tourism industry - good luck!)??
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

greeneyes
Citizen
Username: Greeneyes

Post Number: 458
Registered: 8-2001
Posted on Monday, January 19, 2004 - 2:45 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

I haven't seen the words kleptocracies and kakistocracies since 9th grade vocabulary class with Mr. Markson. Because of him I knew what those words meant. However, I don't think I've ever used them in conversation.

Topics | Last Day | Last Week | Tree View | Search | User List | Help/Instructions | Credits Administration