Jump to content

Theme© by Fisana
 

Photo

What would it take for Russia to be #1?


  • Please log in to reply
7545 replies to this topic

#2761 donquijote

donquijote

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3919 posts

Posted 13 May 2004 - 10:01 PM

"The lion's share of the theft of development funds occurs in the implementation of projects and the use of loan funds by client governments," he said.

You know how it goes, a bite here, a bite there and the lion gets the lion's share...;) The little people that money is meant to help? Well, nothing's perfect, right?:confused:

'Sen. Richard Lugar (news, bio, voting record), an Indiana Republican, charged that "in its starkest terms, corruption has cost the lives of uncounted individuals contending with poverty and disease."'

World Bank Corruption May Top $100 Bln
By Carol Giacomo, Diplomatic Correspondent

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Corrupt use of World Bank (news - web sites) funds may exceed $100 billion and while the institution has moved to combat the problem, more must be done, the chairman of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee said on Thursday.

Sen. Richard Lugar (news, bio, voting record), an Indiana Republican, charged that "in its starkest terms, corruption has cost the lives of uncounted individuals contending with poverty and disease."

He commended World Bank President James Wolfensohn for bringing greater attention to the issue, but said, "Corruption remains a serious problem."

Lugar opened a hearing on corruption at the multilateral development banks, the first public examination in an ongoing Senate investigation.

He cited experts who calculated that between $26 billion and $130 billion of the money lent by the World Bank for development projects since 1946 has been misused. In 2003, the bank distributed $18.5 billion in developing countries.

Jeffrey Winters, an associate professor at Northwestern University, said his research suggested corruption wasted about $100 billion of World Bank funds, and when other multilateral development banks are included, the total rises to about $200 billion.

Damian Milverton, a bank spokesman, later disputed the $100 billion estimate, insisting it had "no basis in fact."

"We completely reject the figure offered by one of the panelists as an estimate of funding from the World Bank that might have been misused," Milverton told Reuters.

Winters testified that the World Bank's anti-corruption effort was having "minimal effects" and the banks should all focus on supervising and auditing their lending.

"The lion's share of the theft of development funds occurs in the implementation of projects and the use of loan funds by client governments," he said.

more...

http://story.news.ya...ldbank_probe_dc
  • 0

#2762 donquijote

donquijote

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3919 posts

Posted 13 May 2004 - 10:18 PM

This is a lesson to be learned by those who serve the lion...;)

THE LION'S SHARE

The Lion went once a-hunting along with the Fox, the Jackal, and the Wolf. They hunted and they hunted till at last they suprised a Stag, and soon took its life. Then came the question how the spoil should be divided. "Quarter me this Stag," roared the Lion; so the other animals skinned it and cut it into four parts. Then the Lion took his stand in fron of the carcass and pronounced judgment: "The first quarter is for me in my capacity as King of Beasts; the scond is mine as arbiter; another share comes to me for my part in the chase; and as for the fourth quarter, well as for that, I should like to see which of you will dare to lay a paw upon it."
"Humph," grumbled the Fox as he walked away with his tail between his legs; but he spoke in a low growl--
YOU MAY SHARE THE LABOURS OF THE GREAT, BUT YOU WILL NOT SHARE THE SPOIL
  • 0

#2763 woj1@cyberonic.

woj1@cyberonic.

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 10667 posts

Posted 14 May 2004 - 12:21 AM

Pliny; *The reason why a "democratic" leader needs protection is because he is not a "democratic" leader.*

Donq ; THE LION'S SHARE

*The Lion and the Wild ***
A Lion and a Wild *** went hunting together; the latter was to run down the prey by his superior speed and the former would then come up and dispatch it. They met with great success and it came to sharing the spoil the Lion divided it all into three equal portions. I will take the first, said he, because I am King of the beasts, I will also take the second, because as your partner, I am entitled to half of what remains, and as for the third
  • 0

#2764 donquijote

donquijote

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3919 posts

Posted 14 May 2004 - 02:54 AM

<Yes, I did it. Still I have to reminds you that Syria hasn't colonies as most sacred democratic countries nowadays have with excluding Germany.
What you see wrong with Syria besides that she refuses to give up Golan Highs to Israel, because it is Syrian territory?>

Howdy Woj
I brought you this report...

"Scores of people were arrested during the year for political reasons, including Syrian exiles who had voluntarily returned and others suspected of membership of unauthorized political groups. There was an increase in the repression of human rights defenders and lawyers. Hundreds of political prisoners remained in prolonged detention without trial or following sentences imposed after unfair trials. Some were ill but were still held in harsh conditions. Ten prisoners of conscience were sentenced to up to 10 years' imprisonment after unfair trials before the Supreme State Security Court (SSSC) or the Criminal Court. There were fewer reports of torture and ill-treatment, but cases from previous years were not investigated. At least two people died in custody."

It still looks like a jungle to me...:confused:

http://web.amnesty.o...syr-summary-eng
  • 0

#2765 Pliny

Pliny

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3587 posts

Posted 14 May 2004 - 02:56 AM

Woj,

>>>Working Difference between Democracy and Dictatorship is zero, nil , zip ,zilch. <<<

Democracies change dictators more frequently and often more peacefully than true dictatorships.

Donq,

That article re the World Bank verifies Baders point regarding the need for an honest money system, I believe you agree with that.
There is so much corruption and waste. We could feed the world with just that.

I was going to ask you how you thought co-ops compared to marketing boards. We have and the US also has, marketing boards that set prices for commodities for individual farmers. They buy the product from the farmer and sell it for them. They are actually a level of bureaucracy and I think a co-operative would probably be an improvement. They also pay farmers to not grow crops. There is no natural or free market anymore, sigh!
  • 0

#2766 donquijote

donquijote

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3919 posts

Posted 14 May 2004 - 03:14 AM

<What do you mean by social justice? That there should not be people without the basics of sustenance? Or that there should be a standard that all should be able to live under?>

Howdy Pliny
The former, not the latter.

<There are some people that little can be done for to improve their standard of living. I am not talking about the elderly or infirm. I am taliking about people who just do not want to have any sort of controls on their lives. They will not responsible for anything beyond themselves and are content to live in poverty as a trade off. They will take what is offered but not contribute.>

OK, we can set a bare minimum, say no homeless, no people without healtcare, no people without a job. We just got to transfer money from defense, but not in the form of handouts, but in the form of opportunities. Other than that you are free to have as much money as you want. But we should emphasize that ANYONE CAN HAVE THE GOOD LIFE WITHOUT MONEY. And the people in kibbutz prove just that.

<So if you feel social justice is the equalization of a living standard.
It is not justice. It is intervention and interference in people's lives.>

I'll give you an example: The homeless should be provided opportunities or be interned. Having respect toward others is having respect about yourself. If someone parades their filth before me, they are disrespecting me. On the other hand, what good is it that someone is filthy rich, but ignores the filth in society?

<You say some people don't want to live the way they are living? Most of the problem is in Baders point about money but some of it is in individual choice and behavior.>

I know. I'm poor but happy, and it's not wealth what I wish but simplicity. I don't envy Bill Gates because I love freedom too much...;)
  • 0

#2767 Bader

Bader

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1757 posts

Posted 14 May 2004 - 08:00 AM

Howdy All.

"One might say about crimes in commmunism today we can say it equally about democracy."

Not equally yet but there is no doubt that the so-called democractic world has turned a corner and is racking up the numbers in collateral damage to re-arrange the world. There is
no question the communist methods to re-create a new world
was much more brutal, however the brutality of the redevelopment of Palestine in the last half century is the same though the millions (numbers) arent there, and also in Africa today, and now
the theatrical event on Sept 11 has justified the most powerful
democracy to join in the blood seance. One could say it began in
1990 in the first Iraq war. The UN is not excluded, it is more guilty of the half million plus deaths of Iraqi children than Albright.
This thread has always recognised the Lion in most govts.
Dont be surprised to find the same international bankers behind the lot, starting in 1914 followed by 1917 in Russia.

The point about dictators changing more frequently in democracies is really meaningless because the issue is the Lion and its policy continues through every leader, the individual doesnt count for much, Bush or Kerry - makes no difference the game goes on. True, individuals are chosen for particular roles or tasks but there is always a plan B and C.

Dictators are puppet lions or minor lions. All lion types are
unacceptable in the main theme of this thread. The abuse of power is a problem in all govts so its pointless considering a
type of leader who is already over the edge in this respect. The dictatorial structure means it happens faster and deeper.
Syria, Iraq, Saudi Arabia are all examples of dictatotships who cannot tolerate any threat or opposition and a threat may simply be a popular leader on the rise who wants to create a freer and more equitable society. They are ruthless in rooting out any
chance for major change. It is a natural law of humanity that once people taste power they never want to surrender it.
Woj is right I have no respect for the individual (dictator).

"some people little can be done" they take and dont contribute.
I can think of some very powerful and rich persons who take
by currption and even war and their contribution is towards the
major problems facing the future or mankind and the earth as a place able to be inhabited.
It is true that some people are not very self-respecting and thus
a drain on the rest but in the environment of the fraudulent money system and the poverty and unhealthy environment that results it creates a sub-culture of such people which as we have seen in the slums a self-repeating way of life. We have been conditioned by the lion to believe that they are sub-humans and thats their lot. I expect that a small percent will never change
but if the society become more equitable by empowering people
by the practical means known as money-the only broadbased and practicle means to be able to fish for themselves is the basic tool called money. They will need time to change as they gain self respect.
Its their inherited right to a dividend on the past development by their forebares. I know many would object
because they are condemned as not making a proper contribution
which is class prejudice. If they "waste" it, it will become the
added means of those who dont waste it and the economy has turned over. The only way one can really waste money is burn it
not spend it.
So much for my disrespect for the individual, I'll give them money rather than a dictator.
The UE syphons off a hundred billion into farm subsidies. It (tax)could be not extorted from the people so they could buy better food! Wasted World Bank loans is in good company with the mad
economic policies caused by the inequitable money system which
is recognised causes poverty and desease in DonQs post. Its to be expected that the Bank spokesman didnt agree with the stats because it reflects poorly on the international banks. They are only interested in interest and the national assets. If the loans arent used effectively then the Govt will become further in the poo
and thus more quickly subjected to directives of the Bank which is even better for the bank.
  • 0

#2768 woj1@cyberonic.

woj1@cyberonic.

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 10667 posts

Posted 14 May 2004 - 10:38 AM

Donq; *Howdy Woj
I brought you this report...

"Scores of people were arrested during the year for political reasons, including Syrian exiles who had voluntarily returned and others suspected of membership of unauthorized political groups. There was an increase in the repression of human rights defenders and lawyers. Hundreds of political prisoners remained in prolonged detention without trial or following sentences imposed after unfair trials. Some were ill but were still held in harsh conditions. Ten prisoners of conscience were sentenced to up to 10 years' imprisonment after unfair trials before the Supreme State Security Court (SSSC) or the Criminal Court. There were fewer reports of torture and ill-treatment, but cases from previous years were not investigated. At least two people died in custody."

It still looks like a jungle to me*

My *democratic* Poland looks even worse jungle to me; l

In last week in Poland 2 persons were shot in head and killed and one is wounded by Police during Police intervention in student Juvenalia in Lodz. In the same week police killed in shot in head and one l wounded during Police speed for traffic violation in Poznan. In contrary, the same police was standing with hands in pocket when security beats worker demonstration against closing prosperous company in Ozarow/Warsaw for the price of real estate. Journalist lost eye during farmer demonstration when Police shot people with rubber bullets. You can not find this in international news list because Polish government sent Polish soldiers to Iraq as a coalition forces.

Pliny; *Democracies change dictators more frequently and often more peacefully than true dictatorships.*

It is true. But this is also part of the problem; dictator intend to stay forever in power so he looks with future vision on country, in contrary members of democratic government rob what they could, knowing that their time is set, and they are practically without accountability for their acts. .
  • 0

#2769 woj1@cyberonic.

woj1@cyberonic.

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 10667 posts

Posted 14 May 2004 - 11:31 AM

Pliny; ; *<There are some people that little can be done for to improve their standard of living. I am not talking about the elderly or infirm. I am taliking about people who just do not want to have any sort of controls on their lives. They will not responsible for anything beyond themselves and are content to live in poverty as a trade off. They will take what is offered but not contribute.>*

I would rather agree with Donq saying *OK, we can set a bare minimum, say no homeless, no people without healtcare, no people without a job. We just got to transfer money from defense, but not in the form of handouts, but in the form of opportunities.
  • 0

#2770 donquijote

donquijote

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3919 posts

Posted 14 May 2004 - 11:55 AM

<I was going to ask you how you thought co-ops compared to marketing boards. We have and the US also has, marketing boards that set prices for commodities for individual farmers. They buy the product from the farmer and sell it for them. They are actually a level of bureaucracy and I think a co-operative would probably be an improvement. They also pay farmers to not grow crops. There is no natural or free market anymore, sigh!>

Howdy Pliny
The middleman gets the lion's share. Using jungle jargon, the little animals can choose to cooperate and in so doing get rid of the lion...

<<<Farmers interested in capturing a large portion of the end consumer's dollar may doubt whether they can do so by selling to private businesses twice or more removed from those consumers. Farmers interested in incorporating sustainable farming practices may doubt whether the prices they would receive from large private buyers would ever begin to reflect whatever added costs more sustainable growing methods may incur. There is one additional category of marketing options that farmers may pursue -- cooperative ventures.

(snip)

A cooperative represents a collective self-help initiative. It is also a business, and as such it must meet the same "bottom line" that every business contends with. But beyond the bottom line of covering costs, private businesses seek profits for their owners. Cooperatives may also pursue profits, but they do so with one subtle difference -- the profits they seek are for their users, who, through personal investment, are also are the owners of the venture.

Each farmer co-op member that uses or "patronizes" the cooperative is rewarded with service-at-cost, plus a portion of cooperative profits that reflects their individual use of the business... In direct marketing, for instance, the exchange occurs between farmers and consumers.

(snip)

Direct Marketing to Consumers

Many of the farmers that participated in this project believed that their best marketing option was one that resulted in a direct cash exchange with the ultimate food consumer. In this way, farmers may enjoy 100% of the so-called "food dollar," sharing not a cent with the so-called "middleman."

Issues related to processing are discussed further below. For now, it will suffice to say that both raw and processed products can be marketed directly to consumers. A number of different approaches with respect to direct marketing exist. These include:

-on-farm storefronts,
-pick-your-own (PYO) operations,
-individual farm stands,
-farmers-markets,
-community supported agriculture (CSA), and
-mail order.>>>

Which goes to prove that the little cooperative ants can beat the lion...;)

http://www.wisc.edu/...uyer/text2.html
  • 0

#2771 woj1@cyberonic.

woj1@cyberonic.

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 10667 posts

Posted 14 May 2004 - 12:26 PM

Bader; *The UE syphons off a hundred billion into farm subsidies. It (tax)could be not extorted from the people so they could buy better food! Wasted World Bank loans is in good company with the mad
economic policies caused by the inequitable money system which
is recognised causes poverty and desease in DonQs post.;*

Farms have strategic values as airports, satellites, or helicopters. Money on farms are actually spent on defense industry.
It is not world problem that when US forced Russia to political compromises by setting conditions for selling grain or corn delivery put itself finally in long line with Australia , Argentina and others in attempt to sell Russia their goods.
Nobody likes to be pressed, better is to teach that choking somebody ones might chock himself to death.
  • 0

#2772 woj1@cyberonic.

woj1@cyberonic.

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 10667 posts

Posted 15 May 2004 - 01:44 AM

S?leyman the Magnificent ; The Ottomans arose from the obscure reaches of Anatolia in the west of Turkey; these Western Turks were called the Oghuz. They had come primarily as settlers during the reign of the Seljuks in Turkey (1098-1308);
The Ottomans inherited a rich mixture of political traditions from vastly disparate ethnic groups: Turks, Persians, Mongols, Mesopotamian and, of course, Islam. The Ottoman state, like the Turkish, Mongol, and Mesopotamian states rested on a principle of absolute authority in the monarch. , After 1150 AD Seljuk weakness enabled various Turkoman leaders to establish their own principalities along the fringes of the Empire. The Great Seljuks defended Syria and Palestine against incursions during the Crusades. THE Ottoman Turks Period (1299-1923)

1299 Establishment of the Ottoman Principality by Osman Bey in Sogut and Domanic (east of Bursa)
1326-1362 Orhan Bey period. Accepted as the real founder of the Ottoman State by his military and administrative organization and forming the divan. The first ruler to use the title of sultan.
1326 Ottomans under Sultan Orhan take Bursa and establish their first capital there
1364 Turks under Sultan Murat I capture Adrianople (Edirne) and establish Ottoman capital there
1389 Murat I wins the Kosova I Battle; He establishes the Janissary Corps
1396 Ottoman force led by Bayezit I defeats Crusader army at Nicopolis (Nigbolu)
1397 First Ottoman siege of Constantinople
1402 Tamerlane defeats Ottomans under Bayezit I at Ankara; the Sultan is captured and eventually commits suicide. Mongols overrun Anatolia, and Ottoman power in the subcontinent is temporarily crushed
1413-1421 Reign of Mehmet I; revival of Ottoman power in Anatolia
1421-1451 Reign of Murat II; Ottoman armies sweep through the Balkans and also regain lost territory in Anatolia
1451-1481 Reign of Mehmet II, the Conqueror
1452 He builds the Rumeli Fortress on the Bosphorus
1453
(May 29) Turks under Mehmet II conquer Constantinople, which becomes the fourth and last Ottoman capital under the name of Istanbul; he is entitled as the conqueror
1453-1579 Rise in the Ottoman Empire
1481-1512 Reign of Bayezit II
1512-1520 Reign of Selim I; Battles of Caldiran, Mercidabik, Ridaniye
1517 Selim I captures Cairo and adds the title of caliph to that of sultan
1520-1566 Reign of Suleyman the Magnificent (the longest in the Ottoman Empire; 46 years); zenith of Ottoman power; because he organizes the state by making new laws, he is called Kanuni meaning law-giver; the Mediterranean Sea becomes a Turkish lake with many captures
1526 Battle of Mohacs (Mohac) and the conquest of Buda and Pest (Peste)
1529 First and unsuccessful Siege of Vienna
1534-1535 Suleyman the Magnificient's expedition into Iran and Iraq
1538 Preveze naval battle, Barbaros Hayrettin Pasa (Barbarossa) becomes Kaptan-i Derya (Commander in chief of the fleet)
1566-1574 Reign of Selim II
1569 The great fire of Istanbul
1571 At Lepanto naval battle allied fleet defeat the Ottomans except one squadron of Kilic Ali Pasa.
1588 Death of Sinan
1579-1699 The rule of women. Ineffectual sultans give up control of Ottoman Empire to their women and grand viziers; Reforms and Renaissance in Europe
1607 Celali uprisings, rebellions against the land tenure system of the provincial fief-holding cavalry
1638 Murat IV captures Baghdad
1648 Great earthquake of Istanbul
1661 Another great fire in Istanbul
1666-1812 Period of intermittent wars between Turks and European powers; Ottoman Empire loses much power in southern Europe
1683 Second and unsuccessful Siege of Vienna by Grand Vizier Kara Mustafa Pasa of Merzifon
1686 Ottomans are forced to evacuate Hungary
1699 Treaty of Karlowitz (Karlofca); the first loss of territory by the Ottoman Empires
1699-1792 Decline of the Ottoman Empire
1711 Grand Vizier Baltaci Mehmet Pasa's battle of Pruth against Russians. According to a spicy tradition, Pasa surrounded Peter the Great's army but then let him avoid humiliation because he was persuaded by a secret nocturnal visit to his tent by the czar's mistress (later empress) Catherine
1718-1774 Treaties of Passarowitz (Pasarofca) and Belgrade with Austrians, Kucuk Kaynarca with Russians
1718-1730 Tulip period; Istanbul is decorated with beautiful palaces and gardens; the first printing house in Istanbul and the first paper factory in Yalova are set up
1750 Another great fire in Istanbul
1754 Major earthquake in Istanbul
1782 Fire in Istanbul
1789-1807 Recovery period; Selim III; education becomes obligatory, reform in the army; Nizam-i Cedit (organized army)
1790 Ottoman-Prussian alliance against Austria and Russia
1808-1839 Mahmut II period
1826 Mahmut II abolishes the Janissary Corps; Medical and military schools are opened; General Post Office is set up; Ministries are established instead of the Divan; Government officers obliged to wear trousers
1839-76 The Tanzimat Period; Mahmut II puts the westernizing Imperial Reform Decree of the Tanzimat into operation; Abdulmecit and Mustafa Resit Pasa prepare a new program of reform: laws are made instead of sultan's orders; equal rights for everybody; equal taxes according to incomes; no punishment without trials
1856 Paris Treaty: Ottoman Empire to be accepted as a European state
1876-1909 Reign of Abdulhamit II
1876-1877 Short-lived first Constitutional Regime
1876 First Constitution is prepared by Young Turks and the first Turkish Parliament is established
1877 Parliament is dissolved by Abdulhamit II
1877-1908 Autocracy of Abdulhamit II
1881 Birth of Mustafa Kemal in Salonika
1908 Constitutional Regime II
1908 Abdulhamit is forced to accept constitutional rule; parliament restored
1909 Abdulhamit deposed; Young Turks take power
1912-13 Balkan Wars; Turks lose Macedonia and part of Thrace
1914 Ottoman Empire enters World War I as an ally of Germany
1915 Turks, led by Mustafa Kemal, repel Allied landings on Gallipoli Peninsula
1918 Turks surrender to Allies; Istanbul occupied by Anglo-French Army
1919-1922 War of Independence
1914 Ottoman Empire enters World War I as an ally of Germany
1915 Turks, led by Mustafa Kemal, repel Allied landings on Gallipoli Peninsula
1918 Turks surrender to Allies; Istanbul occupied by Anglo-French Army
1919-1922 War of Independence
1919 Sivas Congress; Ataturk leads Turkish Nationalists to start the struggle for national sovereignty; Greek army lands at Smyrna
1920 Treaty of S?vres; Ottoman Empire dissolved
1920 Establishment of the Grand National Assembly of Turkey with Ataturk as the president
1922 Turks defeat Greeks and drive them out of Asia Minor; sultanate abolished
1923 Treaty of Lausanne establishes sovereignty of modern Turkey, defines its frontiers and arranges for exchange of minorities between Greece and Turkey; Turkish Republic is proclaimed; Mustafa Kemal is elected president; Ankara replaces Istanbul as the capital
The Ottoman Empire was a Moslem Turkish state that encompassed Anatolia, Southeastern Europe, the Arab Middle East and North Africa from the 14C to the early 20C.
The Ottoman Empire succeeded both the Byzantine Empire (1453) and the Arab Caliphate, the mantle of descent from Mohammed after the conquest of Egypt (1517).
empire was involved in World War I to take sides with Germany and Austria-Hungary. The defeat of these Central Powers led to the breakup and foreign occupation of the Ottoman Empire.http://www.wsu.edu/~...OMAN/ORIGIN.HTM
I don
  • 0

#2773 Pliny

Pliny

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3587 posts

Posted 15 May 2004 - 02:01 AM

Woj,
>>>It is true. But this is also part of the problem; dictator intend to stay forever in power so he looks with future vision on country, in contrary members of democratic government rob what they could, knowing that their time is set, and they are practically without accountability for their acts. .<<<

I was just pointing out a slight difference between a democracy and dictatorship I thought may have escaped your scrutiny. LOL

The above is a valid point, especially when people can't tell when they are being PR'ed, ie, sold a bill of goods, for their vote.

If we better understood humanity perhaps we could make some better choices. The candidates are groomed and pre-selected by the present system, so not much chance of voters making better choices.
  • 0

#2774 donquijote

donquijote

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3919 posts

Posted 15 May 2004 - 02:34 AM

<Dictators are puppet lions or minor lions. All lion types are
unacceptable in the main theme of this thread. The abuse of power is a problem in all govts so its pointless considering a
type of leader who is already over the edge in this respect. The dictatorial structure means it happens faster and deeper.
Syria, Iraq, Saudi Arabia are all examples of dictatotships who cannot tolerate any threat or opposition and a threat may simply be a popular leader on the rise who wants to create a freer and more equitable society. They are ruthless in rooting out any
chance for major change. It is a natural law of humanity that once people taste power they never want to surrender it.
Woj is right I have no respect for the individual (dictator).>

In total agreement.

<"some people little can be done" they take and dont contribute.
I can think of some very powerful and rich persons who take
by currption and even war and their contribution is towards the
major problems facing the future or mankind and the earth as a place able to be inhabited.
It is true that some people are not very self-respecting and thus
a drain on the rest but in the environment of the fraudulent money system and the poverty and unhealthy environment that results it creates a sub-culture of such people which as we have seen in the slums a self-repeating way of life. We have been conditioned by the lion to believe that they are sub-humans and thats their lot. I expect that a small percent will never change
but if the society become more equitable by empowering people
by the practical means known as money-the only broadbased and practicle means to be able to fish for themselves is the basic tool called money. They will need time to change as they gain self respect.>

In total agreement.

People are very skeptical of the jungle system and know there's only one way to survive: "f*** them before they f*** you!" It's not "human nature" however imperfect we may be, it's the jungle that makes us so much worse. Iraqi jungle created by lion made soldiers predators themselves. It's either prey or predator, kill or be killed...:confused:
  • 0

#2775 donquijote

donquijote

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3919 posts

Posted 15 May 2004 - 02:39 AM

<My *democratic* Poland looks even worse jungle to me; l

In last week in Poland 2 persons were shot in head and killed and one is wounded by Police during Police intervention in student Juvenalia in Lodz. In the same week police killed in shot in head and one l wounded during Police speed for traffic violation in Poznan. In contrary, the same police was standing with hands in pocket when security beats worker demonstration against closing prosperous company in Ozarow/Warsaw for the price of real estate. Journalist lost eye during farmer demonstration when Police shot people with rubber bullets. You can not find this in international news list because Polish government sent Polish soldiers to Iraq as a coalition forces.>

Where's Lech Walesa to denounce new Polish Lion?:confused:

Woj, would you personally accept a "no lion" policy?;)
  • 0

#2776 donquijote

donquijote

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3919 posts

Posted 15 May 2004 - 05:02 AM

"As power is presently distributed, workplaces are factories of authoritarianism polluting our democracy."

Some of us have a hard time imagining a lion like the president--so far removed from our daily existence. But there's another lion we face day in, day out: the Boss. Not even caring about public opinion, the boss doesn't tolerate any dissent. And the option is to be left out the dirty waterhole. Sure you are free to starve or sleep under a bridge. Life in the jungle...:confused:

Democracy and Participation, or Benevolent Dictatorship?
by Elaine Bernard

The worksite is also a place where workers learn about the relations of power. They learn that they actually have few rights to participate in decisions about events of great consequence to their lives. As power is presently distributed, workplaces are factories of authoritarianism polluting our democracy. It is no surprise that citizens who spend eight or more hours a day obeying orders with no rights, legal or otherwise, to participate in crucial decisions that affect them, do not then engage in robust, critical dialogue about the structure of our society. Eventually the strain of being deferential servants from nine to five diminishes our after-hours liberty and sense of civic entitlement and responsibility. Thus, the existing hierarchy of employment relations undermines democracy. Of course, this is not to suggest that all workers are unhappy, or that all workplaces are hellish. Rather, the workplace is a unique location where we have come to accept that we are not entitled to the rights and privileges we normally enjoy as citizens. Consider how employers, even very progressive employers, feel when asked how they would react to an effort by "their" employees to form a union. The normal response is that such an act is a personal rebuke, a signal of failure and a rejection of their management. Why is such a paternalistic attitude, which would be quickly recognized as such in politics, so widely accepted in employment relations? But is the workplace really so autocratic? Why such an extreme characterization? Some illustrations of the uniqueness of the work environment, in which the normal rules of our legal system simply do not apply, are worth noting. For it is in the workplace that citizens are transformed into employees who learn to leave their rights at the door. Take, for example, a fundamental assumption in our legal system - the presumption of innocence. In the workplace, this presumption is turned on its head. The rule of the workplace is that management dictates and workers obey. If a worker is accused of a transgression by management, there is no presumption of innocence. Even in organized workplaces the rule remains: work first, grieve later. Organized workers protected by a collective agreement with a contractual grievance procedure can at least grieve an unjust practice (or more specifically, one that violates the rights won through collective bargaining). Unorganized workers, on the other hand, have the option of appealing to their superiors' benevolence or joining the unemployment line. The implied voluntary labor contract - undertaken by workers when they agree to employment - gives management almost total control of the work relationship. "Free labor" entails no rights other than the freedom to quit without penalty. That's one step up from indentured servitude, but still a long distance from democracy. There is not even protection in our system against arbitrary and capricious actions by management. There is no general right to employment security and no prohibition against unjust dismissal in the private sector such as exists in most other advanced industrial countries. The law of the US workplace is governed by the doctrine of "employment at will." There is some protection to ensure that an employee may not be dismissed for clearly discriminatory reasons of race, gender, disability or age. But that same employee can be Black, female, older, white, male or whatever, and as long as the dismissal is for "no reason," it's legal. Most Americans believe that there is a law that protects them from being fired for "no cause." But they're wrong. Free Speech for Whom? A most glaring example of the power imbalance on the job concerns the freedom of speech. Often celebrated as the most cherished right of a free citizen, most Americans are astonished to learn that freedom of speech does not extend to the workplace, or at least not to workers. It is literally true that free speech exists for bosses, but not workers. The First Amendment of the Bill of Rights applies only to the encroachment by government on citizens' speech. It does not protect workers' speech, nor does it forbid the "private" denial of freedom of speech. Moreover, in a ruling that further tilted the balance of power (against workers) in the workplace, the Supreme Court held that corporations are "persons" and therefore must be afforded the protection of the Bill of Rights. So, any legislation (e.g. the National Labor Relations Act) or agency (e.g. the National Labor Relations Board) that seek to restrict a corporate "person's" freedom of speech, is unacceptable. Employers' First Amendment rights mean that they are entitled to hold "captive audience meetings" - compulsory sessions in which management lectures employees on the employers' views of unions. Neither employees nor their unions have the right of response. It's almost as if the worksite is not a part of the United States. Workers "voluntarily" relinquish their rights when they enter into an employment relationship. So, workers can be disciplined by management (with no presumption of innocence) and they can be denied freedom of speech by their employer. The First Amendment only protects persons (including transnational corporations designated as persons) against the infringement of their rights by government - but not the infringement of rights of real persons (workers) by the private concentration of power and wealth, known as corporations. Such limitations on workers' rights are incompatible with the requirements of a genuine democracy. In comparison to European countries, the legal rights of workers in the US are remarkably limited. For a country that prides itself on individual rights, how can we permit the wholesale denial of those rights for tens of millions of American workers?

http://www.rilaborin...om/bernard.html
  • 0

#2777 Bader

Bader

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1757 posts

Posted 15 May 2004 - 06:03 AM

Democracy and Participation, or Benevolent Dictatorship?

This reads like someone has become well aware of the conditions of the jungle but have no idea what causes the conditions and gets confused, like the Anarchist knows what it hates but cant
figure out how to replace it.

"work places are factories of authoritarianism polluting our democracy"
In a democracy peoples rights end where someone elses begins.
The owner of the business (eg factory) does not lose rights to a
person who agrees to work FOR THEM by agreement (informal or formal contract) and then the employee expects to pull citizen
(public) rights on them on private property eg Factory.
My suggestion to such screwed up persons is to go out and start your own business risking your savings and future income and give way to all your emplyeees demands!
I believe in the individual voting with their own feet for themselves (if you dont like any factory find another) not voting to force others to use their feet to suit another person (running someone elses factory into bankruptsy/forcing them to close and go somewhere else for a living.

IN a democracy rights of the individual are subject to pooling/
agregation through the communal interaction and thus one has to accept that absolutism about all rights is only attainable if one lives a recluse life seperate from everyone else.
Rights dont guarantee opportunity and opportunity is usually limited if isolated from other people. They need to unscramble their thinking first.

The factory owner faces the result of living in a world of other peoples rights eg bills, wages and debt to be paid etc, pleading democractic rights against these autocratic dictates doesnt work.
Why cant all factory owners be part decision makers in the banks who allow them to function through overdrafts, and sit in on Council meetings and help determine the rates, and the power companies etc etc.
Then there is the overall effects on the economy and various factors that affect businesses and prices etc of the debt money system where the whole economy is playing catchup and people are buying yesterdays goods with tomorrows income- if they are still employed.

What Elaine Bernard wants is a society outside the jungle (no lion), where she is part owner/worker. In short she should go and see DonQ.
  • 0

#2778 woj1@cyberonic.

woj1@cyberonic.

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 10667 posts

Posted 15 May 2004 - 10:06 AM

Bader; *This reads like someone has become well aware of the conditions of the jungle but have no idea what causes the conditions and gets confused, like the Anarchist knows what it hates but cant
figure out how to replace it.

"work places are factories of authoritarianism polluting our democracy"
In a democracy peoples rights end where someone elses begins.
The owner of the business (eg factory) does not lose rights to a
person who agrees to work FOR THEM by agreement (informal or formal contract) and then the employee expects to pull citizen
(public) rights on them on private property eg Factory.;*

Only true communism gives solution. Workers ownership of company not ownership of stockholders is rightful ownership. In workers ownership would be respected Bader concern of ownership rights to private property and same time work places will provide democracy.:)
Every business employed people should automatically gave them rights to the ownership of the company; the rights to company profit sharing , hiring company policy etc.
But still Bader if you own your company you could make your all decisions if you were owner and solely employer your company. :)
  • 0

#2779 woj1@cyberonic.

woj1@cyberonic.

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 10667 posts

Posted 15 May 2004 - 10:59 AM

Donq; Woj, would you personally accept a "no lion" policy?

No. I am spokesperson for an autocratic government. :)

The country is extension of the family and, as in the family not every member is able to make decision for the whole family for many reasons same situation is in the country; Reasons are many; mostly lack of experiences, education etc.
In statistical family the rationale of all members are heard but decisions are made by one or two members .
Of course some horrible minority may dictates demands like spaghetti and meet balls for half a year but still finally ones has to give up and goes along with majority will.
Similar situation is with the country. Majority of citizens understand politics as a TV show, and they shouldn
  • 0

#2780 donquijote

donquijote

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3919 posts

Posted 15 May 2004 - 02:30 PM

< Similar situation is with the country. Majority of citizens understand politics as a TV show, and they shouldn-t have the right to make decisions in the country. Unfortunately these confused people with help of press and Media are used by special interest groups and not for benefit whole country. Especially such situation is very dangerous for small country with week currency because an opposition might be soft on international corruption. :confused:>

I can tell you that Bush was voted in on the frustration over a certain child called "Elian Gonzalez"... Elderly Cuban-American voters, driven by Republican campaigns on Cuban radio stations, "punished" Democrats for having returned the "miracle child" to Castro. What a wise choice, ah?:confused:

Anyways, anytime you feel frustrated over the war in Iraq, thank the kid...;)

Elian Gonzalez
He was El Nino Milagro, "the miracle child." He was plucked from the waters, like Moses from the bulrushes, by a fisherman. He became known to us by one name. To have any greater religious overtones, the tale would have to involve visits from the Virgin Mary --which some said it did. And the standoff over what to do with Elian (now 7) after the November 1999 Cuban-refugee-boat sinking that killed his mother, was as intractable as a religious schism.

To his father Juan Miguel, in Cuba, the Miami relatives who took Elian in were kidnappers, buying the boy's love with chocolate milk and trips to Disney World. To the relatives and their vocal, anti-Castro, Cuban-American supporters, Juan Miguel was a dupe or worse who sought his son's return to hell. The father talked about strafing his adversaries with a rifle. The relatives dared the government to take Elian by force. Finally it came to that: a predawn raid that produced dueling images --a terrified Elian cornered in a closet, a happy boy with his father (at left, after their reunion, with crumbs around his mouth from a pre-cartoon-watching snack of toast). It is tempting but inaccurate to say politics simply overrode love in this case. Elian, it was clear, didn't lack for people who loved him. And love makes us do stupid things.

http://www.time.com/.../pwm/elian.html
  • 0




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Copyright © 2016 Pravda.Ru