Lest we forget

[Ozme52]

I think we do care and I think the reasons behind the our problems to get organised stem from some basic problems modern democracies in the world are facing. We, (humans) like to define ourselves by what we're not. So the democratic political system in all democratic countries have followed much the same polarised pattern, (please correct me if I'm wrong anywhere on earth. I would love to be).

Is there not in every democratic country two dominant parties? One is liberal/leftist? Mostly pacifistic and tend to negotiatiate with every enemy even when negotiation is pointless, (Saddam! Hitler!)? The reason they keep doing it even after everybody agrees on it being pointless is because they can't agree on which affirmative action to chose? They also tend to be cultural relativists and don't want to step on the sensitivities of various cultural groups which off-course is totaly paralysing because you always step on somebodies toes, no matter what you do. It effectively ties your hands behind your back?

The other party being the conservative/right-wing, seemingly driven mostly by fear? More police, more hard-line, more army more agressiveness? More paranoia all around? Also it's voters tend to be from the lower and uneducated classes which makes the analysis of the conflict very shallow and choice of action that the voters agree on far too course and simplistic?

Is there any democratic country on earth I didn't sum up correctly here, (give or take a label)? It's certainly true for Sweden and most countries in Europe.

If this is the case we have one political party/side who understands the problem but are unwilling to do what ever is needed and the other political side who is willing but lacks the understanding to pull it off. I know, extremly simplified but I do think it sums it up.

To be absolutely clear. When I say political party, I do mean the voters. The party just do and say what the voters want them to. That is the nature of democracy.

Just caring isn't enough.

Tom,

I'm not sure it's as black and white as that... but as one who tends to lean to the right... my concern is that while I have no problem with knocking you flat on your back for bloodying my nose or even one of my friends' noses, (a somewhat simplified analogy,) I don't want to be the bully of the neighborhood either.

I'm concerned that this time... we've been just that... the neighborhood bully. I don't know... it's something that will be better understood in 20 years...

[TomOfSweden]

Tom,

I'm not sure it's as black and white as that... but as one who tends to lean to the right... my concern is that while I have no problem with knocking you flat on your back for bloodying my nose or even one of my friends' noses, (a somewhat simplified analogy,) I don't want to be the bully of the neighborhood either.

I'm concerned that this time... we've been just that... the neighborhood bully. I don't know... it's something that will be better understood in 20 years...

I agree with the basic theory. But what if you only will lose in the long run from knocking the guy on the back. If it's only down to pride and the other guy will never back down, then it's not the smart thing to do. Pride in international politics is never helpful.

Sometimes punishment, simply doesn't work. If the person being punished doesn't accept the punishment. All you've done is strengthen the behaviour. Then you'll need to break the person down mentaly to win. And that's a lose-lose.

Can you tell that I lean to the left? But I'm a bit of a disgrace for the leftists though, because I root the the right in lots of issues, (like invading Iraq for one).

edit: And yes off-course it's a simplification. Off-course. Simplifications are more fun to read.