Decius wrote:

the cry I do not have an idealogy (i was taught by my left wing teachers) is the cry of a person so immersed in what Gramsci called hegemony that their idealogy is held entirely unconsciously.

That perspective is a bit circular. I'm not talking about hegemony. I'm talking about people who conciously choose to evaluate what they think about an issue based on their favorite philosophy as opposed to considering the effect that they wish to acheive and asking how they might acheive it. An example would be Catholics opposing sexual education in Africa on purely idealogical grounds in spite of the fact that distributing condoms will in fact lead to a healthier society there and in no way limits their ability to advocate abstinance. They justify their policies based on philosophy rather then strategy.

I think we agree but are arguing at cross purposes. By idealogy I mean the consistent or not set of ideas and beliefs used to make judgements. What you refer to I would simply call dogma.

RE: Francis Fukuyama: The acceptable face of the neo-cons? | Al-Ahram Weekly | Profile

noteworthy wrote:

if there is a big opening up in the Egyptian political system and it looks like the banned Muslim Brotherhood could capitalise on such moves to come to power -- the same concerns Hamas in the Gaza Strip -- would the US be happy with the outcome, would it want, for instance, Hamas to be the dominant political force?:

this is an important point,I think, democracy in the Middle East may not conform with the United States best short term political interests however if such forces come to power democratically they will have to learn to accomdate ( a process Iran is currently going through although of course it is only partially democratic but certainly more so than Kuwait or Saudi Arabia) they must learn to live in the wider global civil community.

"America has never created democracy abroad. People who live in a society that want it have created democracy. The US can't simply decide it wants to democratise this part of the world, it has to build on internal discourse that is pushing in that direction.

"There is," Fukuyama insists, "no single global strategy that works in terms of democratic openness. Sometimes it happens from the bottom up and sometimes it happens from the up down, and to be successful it usually has to work in both ways. There has to be elite that wants change, though that desire can be supported and driven by popular participation. For example in Chile, the Philippines and Korea it required pressure on leaders on top to open up their systems and those pressures couldn't have come only from civil society. In Ukraine and Georgia on the other hand there was obviously a big push from below -- pressure in both directions is necessary. There is not one single strategy that produces democratic transition."

thats great
we need to encourage civic society
unlike Fukuyama I believe we need an International Criminal Court which by its very existance instills the values of human rights and the notion of the rule of law

Fukuyama is, after all, on record -- in an interview with this paper last year -- as arguing that the Muslim world is long overdue the kind of reformation spearheaded by Martin Luther in Europe. Is it possible a more liberal Middle East could arise from such a process, and where would that leave civil society?

i understand the argument in that medieval Catholic power models were fundamentally dictatorial and Protestantism arguably led to the English Civil War, John Locke and thence liberal political theory and over time liberal democracy but a lot of blood was spilled note the 30 years war in Germany as example 1.

noteworthy said

He holds out hope that Arab governments can improve without becoming fully democratic

surely the point is that a civic society can grow and mature
the US wasn't the democracy we know ... [ Read More (0.2k in body) ]

RE: Francis Fukuyama: The acceptable face of the neo-cons? | Al-Ahram Weekly | Profile

Ensure you don't become another Terry Schiavo in case some biological tragedy besets you.

I, _________________________ (fill in the blank), being of sound mind and body, do not wish to be kept alive indefinitely by artificial means.

Under no circumstances should my fate be put in the hands of peckerwood politicians who couldn't pass ninth-grade biology if their lives depended on it.

If a reasonable amount of time passes and I fail to sit up and ask for a cold beer, it should be presumed that I won't ever get better. When such a determination is reached, I hereby instruct my spouse, children and attending physicians to pull the plug, reel in the tubes and call it a day.

Under no circumstances shall the members of the Legislature enact a special law to keep me on life-support machinery. It is my wish that these boneheads mind their own damn business, and pay attention instead to the health, education and future of the millions of Americans who aren't in a permanent coma.

Under no circumstances shall any politician butt into this case. I don't care how many fundamentalist votes they're trying to scrounge for their run for the presidency in 2008, it is my wish that they play politics with someone else's life and leave me alone to die in peace.

I couldn't care less if a hundred religious zealots send e-mails to legislators in which they pretend to care about me. I don't know these people, and I certainly haven't authorized them to preach and crusade on my behalf. They should mind their own business, too.

If any of my family goes against my wishes and turns my case into a political cause, I hereby promise to come back from the grave and make his or her existence a living hell.


Signed: ________________________________________

Living Will

Or have we?

The Way We Live Now: Bad Connections

I watched the debate. I could not believe how some members of congress struggled with the word AUTONOMOUS. Half looked like they were reading something - and couldn't read.

It was so very political. They were so transparent. Our country is clearly in trouble.

Congress Condemns Schiavo to Undeath!

] Apple's attorney Riley countered by saying that free
] speech protection applied only to legitimate members of
] the press and not to website publishers. Freedom of the
] press was for the press, meaning the traditional media,
] he said.

The judge ruled in favor of Apple without explanation.

Bloggers not protected by Constitution, says Apple

Someone snapped a picture of this truck in an Applebee's parking lot in Kentucky. I hope this turns out to be a fake. This is sad.

[ It almost seems like too much, but who can say anymore. It's sad enough to know that even if this is a fake, there are people who think that way. -k]

Enlightened Motorist

] From a former professor:
]
] At Harvard Business School, thirty years ago, George
] Bush was a student of mine. I still vividly remember him.
] In my class, he declared that "people are poor because
] they are lazy." He was opposed to labor unions, social
] security, environmental protection, Medicare, and public
] schools. To him, the antitrust watch dog, the Federal
] Trade Commission, and the Securities Exchange Commission
] were unnecessary hindrances to "free market competition."
] To him, Franklin Roosevelt's New Deal was "socialism."
] Recently, President Bush's Federal Appeals Court Nominee,
] California's Supreme Court Justice Janice Brown, repeated
] the same broadside at her Senate hearing. She knew that
] her pronouncement would please President Bush and Karl
] Rove and their Senators. President Bush and his brain,
] Karl Rove, are leading a radical revolution of destroying
] all the democratic political, social, judiciary, and
] economic institutions that both Democrats and moderate
] Republicans had built together since Roosevelt's New
] Deal.

[ Yeah... as a Vanderbilt grad, i've had my own exposure to the "people are poor because they don't want to work hard". And as much as i try to be fair to people, it's usually the most intellectually lazy sons and daughters of priviledge that have this opinion. It's a bullshit argument from people who lack any perspective on what a normal human being is like. Bush is a rich kid. He's never been poor, and he's never been close enough to it to have a clue what it means. I don't think he's interested in discovering what it really means to be poor, or what it takes to help people. His policies are transparent, like every so-called fiscal conservative i've ever met. I'm convinced most fiscal conservatives are like most fundamentalist christians... going through the motions, preaching self righteously about beliefs and ideals they don't actually live by, when their true motivating factors are power and greed. You want to support a candidate because he'll hook you up with more money, and fuck the rest? Fine, say so outright. But i'm pretty sick of hearing the "i'm fiscally conservative, but socially liberal" line. Bullshit. 9 times out of 10 you're greedy and want more money... quit sugar coating it. Bush is bad for the average american. Period. -k]

The Bush Social Policy

] "An amendment to the Constitution is never to be
] undertaken lightly," Mr. Bush said. "The amendment
] process has addressed many serious matters of national
] concern, and the preservation of marriage rises to this
] level of national importance."

I've been at a loss for what to say about this gay marriage issue. I don't feel its an issue that effects me. Is that selfish? I'm starting to think so. It definitely is if we are now talking about making amendments to The Constitution.

San Francisco, before and after allowing same-sex marriages, seems the same to me. There have been no riots. There has been no break down of order. No screaming in the streets. No masses of heathens roaming the streets raping small children. No breakdown of family values. No burning churches. Nothing that the fundamentalist right would have you believe is right around the corner following such a drastic change in policy.

I can tell you what I have seen. I live about 5 blocks away from City Hall, so I've had a pretty good view. I've seen nothing. Just a rise in activity in and out of the building, and slightly more news vans present then usual. Have I seen happy gay couples? Sure, I see those every single day. I'm also about 8 or 10 blocks away from the Castro. I've seen a few "we all deserve the right to marry" banners on cars, but parking has not been any harder to find. In general, its business as usual in San Francisco. If I wasn't paying attention to the news, I might not even know anything was going on or think strangely of it. No one around me seems to.

The rest of the country however, seems up in arms. Its almost hard for me to believe that there is serious talk about making an amendment to the Constitution over this. I'm not sure where to even begin trying to analyze or comment on such a bone headed maneuver.

I'm one of those people who was raised in an environment where "faggot" was general purpose playground insult. As years wore on, I was exposed to real gay people, had friends come out of the closet, etc. I came to detest the type of discrimination that gays endure. I have my own form of "white guilt" over the issue. In that respect, I am America. In the same way that America hated blacks, or women, or any other group that we have oppressed in our history. America changes its mind given evidence of wrong doing. America rises to right wrongs. America is about equality.

I think my views are pretty common. I'm "average" in many respects. I'm moderate in my politics. In general, whatever situation I'm in, I try to find "the opposition" and play it, if only for the thought exercise. That leads people to believe I'm a "radical", but any given group has a very different opinion about what I'm so "radical" about. Here though, I have a really strong opinion. I believe in freedom. I believe in liberty. I believe that people should be able to live the way they want to l... [ Read More (0.4k in body) ]

Bush Backs Ban in Constitution on Gay Marriage

The brother of Iran's reformist president was among those who resigned. He said, "This is the end of the reform movement."

One-Third of Iranian Parliament Quits in Protest