From: Johannes Volmert (jvolmert@student.uni-kassel.de)
Date: Wed Dec 17 2003 - 16:46:50 GMT
Ok, Jon,
I guess direct questions do need direct answers. No, I don't think the
world is really in bad need of USA.
If Northamerica was until today inhabitated by a handful of indians,
well I guess, one or many other nations, would have taken up a similar
role, like the USA did in history. We must not consider historical
events and processes too static. A similar perspective, which I
consider to be in the same way wrong, is when someone is saying: If
this or that person hasn't been born, we would not have this or that
invention. I'm quite sure, that any developement of importance is more a
case of ripeness. That does not mean, that the person in question is
not ingenious or super-talented. I only would say, that ingenous people
in other countries, at other times could have and would have taken their
place instead.
The same is valid in my opinion for nations: The moral evolution, does
not tolerate any moral vacuum. No doubt, history would look different
without the USA ( or Germany, or China, or India, or take whatever you
like). I prefer a more global perspective in which every nation is more
or less in need of some/many other nations. Insofar I can see a global
dependence of one nation on others. You can't cut out virtually any
nation, and that is true also for the USA - in both directions: The USA
depend on other nations as other nations depend on the USA.
No, I don't think God (if there is a god) has chosen the USA to be the
healing of the world, nor is there any mission to fulfil. As a matter of
fact, I don't like people with missions at all. And I don't think it is
a good way of spreading freedom or any other higher goal, by means of
arms, either. And furthermore I cannot see by what criteria your
president and goverment (today and in the past) chose the countries to
free from dictatorship, but anyway, it doesn't look very consequential
to me.
I hope, I'd given you an adequate answer to your question. It may not
sound like what you had expected, but I think it's quite clear on the
crucial point.
Anyway, I still believe in the United States' ability of self-correction.
I don't think there is much wisdom in a over-patriotic, dogmatic
position, nor can it lead to wisdom IMO - instead it's leading people
away from real understanding.
All that high-flying talk of freedom, free speech and so on, can be
misused. It has certain similarities with a shiny christmas-gifts
wrapping: that can come from the heart, but it can also let things only
look better from their outer appearence than they really are. As a
regulary reader of the NYT editorials, I can see that honourable Mr.
Friedman for example (I mostly like his commentaries) is always
hammering very hard on the freedom-theme, but it is mostly somehow
untied to the rest of his articles.
Greetings from "old europe", a merry X-mas and happy new year to all of you,
JoVo
PS.: The proclaimed main reason to invade Iraq, were WMD in the hands of
Saddam, no matter how often Platt is telling otherwise. The focus-shift
to the ending of Saddams tyranny is a recent move. But maybe we get to
know more about the whereabouts of the WMD at a given time or even soon
- if there are any.
Ascmjk@aol.com schrieb:
> And the question goes totally unanswered by everyone. Which country
> does the world NEED the most? Drop all talk of greatness. People do
> have needs, obviously, or there would be no need for socialism.
>
> Jon
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archives:
Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Dec 17 2003 - 17:30:07 GMT