04-09-2003, 05:39 AM
That was why I added the "involuntary" in brackets. Obviously, if it's such a superior model (and I think it is, generally), it should be trumpeted from every turret, broadcast on every station and shouted from every minaret.
But the people themselves have to pick up the message. If they want it, they should have it, in that order. It might conceivably work backwards, but I haven't seen it really happen. At best, it turns out to be lukewarm and easily shakeable. At worst, it just implodes.
I've always thought the Marxists (with some exceptions, like Krushchev on his better days) were blatantly contradictory on this point; if your system is inevitable, why do you have to keep insisting that it's better, backed up with the latest in military equipment? Just sit back, relax, and the proletariat will inevitably rise up, leading equally inevitably to communistic paradise.
That's the point I'm making. This war in Iraq IS at the barrel of a gun. So would be such a war in Syria. Or Iran. Or anywhere else where one has to speak of "installing" a democracy.
Jester
But the people themselves have to pick up the message. If they want it, they should have it, in that order. It might conceivably work backwards, but I haven't seen it really happen. At best, it turns out to be lukewarm and easily shakeable. At worst, it just implodes.
I've always thought the Marxists (with some exceptions, like Krushchev on his better days) were blatantly contradictory on this point; if your system is inevitable, why do you have to keep insisting that it's better, backed up with the latest in military equipment? Just sit back, relax, and the proletariat will inevitably rise up, leading equally inevitably to communistic paradise.
That's the point I'm making. This war in Iraq IS at the barrel of a gun. So would be such a war in Syria. Or Iran. Or anywhere else where one has to speak of "installing" a democracy.
Jester