Obama and the wrong side of history
Email 
Print
—Bernd Debusmann is a Reuters columnist. The opinions expressed are his own.—
Ringing words, smoothly delivered: “To those who cling to power through corruption and deceit and the silencing of dissent, know that you are on the wrong side of history, but that we will extend a hand if you are willing to unclench your fist.”
Did that memorable line from President Barack Obama’s inaugural address on January 20 mean his administration would break with a long American tradition of paying lip service to democracy and human rights while supporting authoritarian rulers friendly to Washington? Too early to say for sure, but probably not.
Four months into his presidency, Obama and his Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, lean towards pragmatism over ideology and principle, closer in foreign policy outlook to Richard Nixon and Henry Kissinger than to George W. Bush and Condoleezza Rice.
On her first official visit to China, Clinton said concern over human rights must not “interfere” with cooperation on the global financial crisis, climate change and security issues such as North Korea’s nuclear arms programme.
As for those on the wrong side of history, one leader who fits Obama’s description is President Hosni Mubarak of Egypt, from where the U.S. president is scheduled to make a high-profile speech to the Muslim world early in June.
A long-time U.S. ally, Mubarak has been in power since 1981. He won uncontested elections four times. The fifth and latest, in 2005, featured charges of vote-rigging and the arrest of his main opponent.
The U.S. Department of State, which issues annual reports on human rights, gives Egypt poor grades and notes “the government’s respect for freedoms of press, association and religion declined during the year (2008).” No unclenched fist here.
To boot, Mubarak has played host and acted as a sponsor to Omar al-Bashir, the Sudanese president who has been indicted by the International Criminal Court in The Hague for war crimes in Darfur. The court issued a warrant for Bashir’s arrest in March.
At the height of the Bush administration’s “freedom agenda,” the second-term drive for “democracy promotion,” Washington publicly scolded Mubarak. Rice, during a visit to Cairo, announced a break with the past:
“For 60 years, my country, the United States, pursued stability at the expense of democracy in the region. And we achieved neither. Now we are taking a different course. We are supporting the democratic aspirations of the people.”
TARNISHED IMAGE
By 2005, when Rice made her democratic aspirations speech, the U.S. image in the Arab world was so badly tarnished by the war in Iraq, the Abu Ghraib prison scandal and Guantanamo that few Arabs were inclined to believe anything the Bush administration said.
Her remark stood out for its bluntness and its venue but the idea was not new. Support for democracy against dictatorships has been a key theme of American foreign policy since the U.S. rose to big power status at the turn of the 20th century.
That did not keep the U.S. from overthrowing democratically-elected leaders it did not like (Chile’s Salvador Allende, Guatemala’s Jacobo Arbenz) and propping up dictators it did (the Shah of Iran, Congo’s Mobutu Sese Seko, Ferdinand Marcos of the Philippines). Saying one thing and doing another earned the U.S. an enduring reputation for hypocrisy.
The Bush administration’s enthusiasm for democracy promotion in the Middle East fizzled rapidly after the Islamist group Hamas, shunned as a terrorist group by the West, won a resounding electoral victory in Gaza in 2006. Since then, part of the American foreign policy establishment has framed the alternatives in the region as Islamists or authoritarians.
If there were free elections today in Egypt, many experts predict that the Muslim Brotherhood, whose aim is the establishment of an Islamic state, would win easily, an uncomfortable prospect for Washington.
To push an Arab peace plan Obama wants to make part of an effort to create a Palestinian state side-by-side with Israel, Mubarak is clearly a better partner even though he may be on the wrong side of history. The plan offers Israel normal relations with all Arab states in return for withdrawing from territory it seized in the 1967 Arab-Israeli war.
The plan was first floated by Saudi Arabia, another staunch U.S. ally far from democracy and prone to silence dissent.
How (and whether) Obama intends to persuade countries on the wrong side of history to switch to the right side should become clear in his speech to the Muslim world. It could be a turning point in America’s relations with a fifth of the world’s population, but there is a lot that could go wrong, even for a president with Obama’s charisma and outstanding political skills. Not to mention a middle name that resonates: Hussein.
The goal he set himself for the speech, spelt out before he took office, is ambitious: “Reboot America’s image” in the Muslim world. Words alone won’t do it, but they are a start.
Comments RSSPost Your Comment
-
Author Profile
-
My grandparents certainly had problems with English when they came to this nation with nothing. Yet despite this awful nation they somehow managed to get my parents educated and somehow despite the awful capitalistic system I have a law degree. I don’t see a lot of people like you taking my job, suffice it to say I happen to fall in your age range and know a little more than just grammar.
Do I like the fact that corporations control much of the wealth and infrastructure here? No, but do I want the government having more control, even more emphatically NO!!! As bad as corporate corruption and greed is the only thing worse is over reaching government idiocy and incompetence. I don’t know where you come from or what government you espouse, but I know that more government only means more problems.
C.D. Walker,
And all of you who disparage lawyers,
Did you think what an alternative would be? Not sure if you would like that.
Humans in any and every society have conflicting interests. In a civilized society these conflicts are resolved within confines of the legal system, and that’s where lawyers are instrumental. Just as somebody who has no clue can’t do even farm work that doesn’t require college education, the same way somebody lacking proper training can’t do legal work. If you believe you can – I’m afraid the legal documents you’d produce will not be worth the paper they’re printed on, and definitely will not serve the purpose of protecting your rights.
The alternative would be something like Russia of 1990s, when the old legal system evaporated, and the new one had not yet materialize. In case of any dispute people had to go to the local bandit for protection of their legal or not-so-legal rights. The “legal fees” collected by the bandits were in fact less outrageous than the ones collected by American lawyers, but there was a catch. Your opponent could turn for protection to another bandit, and that guy could have a gun of larger caliber than yours. When legal issues are decided by the size of guns instead of merit of arguments, all sides lose.
The nature doesn’t tolerate vacuum. When lawyers are missing, bandits take their place.
Not sure about you, but I’d rather pay higher legal fees to a lawyer with a briefcase than pay less to a bandit with a gun. If only for the reason that the gun may shoot, and I don’t want to happen to be the one stopping the bullet. The briefcases don’t shoot.
So, while lawyers may be evil, they are necessary evil. Less evil than taxes and some other properties of every known civilized society.
What is everyone’s beef?
There is only one solution needed for the economy. Stop poor people from taking loans that they can’t afford.
There is nothing wrong with capitalism. Or economics. The system is working sound. The rules of economics still work.
Yes, the banks overextended their debt. They were cocky because of the boom. As were the people who decided to take out the subprime mortgages in the first place.
But that does not mean capitalism is wrong. The system responded to overextended debt by crashing, just as could be expected.
Recessions happen, and this one was overdue.
Next time around, we just need to make sure the banks don’t give out too many subprime loans. It is no simpler then that.
Let’s leave the socialism and/or ‘evil rich fatcats’ stuff out of it.
Agreed, fellow Anon.
People who see lawyers as scum misunderstand the profession.
Lawyers uphold legal rights. They act as a trusted agent for their retainer, and are bound by professional standards.
If you don’t like what a Lawyer is doing, then you should look to his or her client.
Anon-
I think some guy named Jesus warned us not to let Lawyers and Bankers run the world.
Lets see, by LAW, all Lobbyists are Lawyers. I think almost all Politicians are Lawyers, or Businessmen.
And who were the ones who got money from Bailouts? BANKERS!
I look at Americas Society and i see a small group of people in Wall St. and Washington (Bankers, Lawyers, and Businessmen) and the culture of greed and selfishness that has been created by these people on the backs of hard working Americans, and i can’t help but wonder at the wisdom of it all. The effect this “Culture” has had on the entirety of America, let alone the world, has been extremely negative. Wall St. and Washington have no one to blame but themselves, and trying to blame the working American, well, just shows what kind of people, these people really are.
Was it worth it, letting lawyers and bankers set laws?
By the way, on the law and civilized society-
The old west was tamed, not by lawyers, but by Judges and police, the real LAW of the land.
They did just fine taming the west without lawyers, i bet they could do it again.
I work every day. But I work for results. I work for the actual benefit it brings. I don’t work FOR money. I need it to live in this place. And that’s as far as I take it. You still think that money is the ultimate reward for work. It’s not. The ultimate reward is increased skill, increased knowledge, respect for your ability to perform with excellence.
That’s what you work for. Money is a tool. You’re just one of those people who don’t want to dare consider anything different because it hurts your head to think too much.
But if you did share in GDP you’d be able to concentrate on your writing skills which are sorely lacking. On the one hand you talk about working to earn money as if it were the holy grail of meaning in life. Yet on the other hand you dream of being a writer. But you can’t be a writer because you haven’t developed your skill to a high enough level. You would need uninterrupted time in order to learn those skills and become proficient with them.
And a steady stream of income would give you the time you need to hone your skills. But since you don’t believe such things are worth the effort, you condemn yourself to a life of misery and hate. And when others get on this board and discuss alternative solutions to the very real problems we face, you don’t even have an intelligible argument to make for your own views.
If you can’t even bring yourself to admit when another poster makes a valid point then you really serve no purpose in these discussion groups other than to stir the pot. If you want to be heard and respected for your views, then perhaps you should learn to articulate them. Go back to your fictional writing. Pray for some wisdom. And work extra hard at your job. Earn some overtime so that you can take a few days off every so often to sharpen your writing skills.
Last post was to CD.
Benny- lol
“I work every day. But I work for results. I work for the actual benefit it brings. I don’t work FOR money.”
Good for you not to fall for money’s allure and to work for results! But you do agree that you should be compensated for the work you do? and that should be an honest wage for your honest work. With that wage you can spend it on whatever your heart desires. If your a Gamer, you can keep playing, if you like skiing, you can go ski. If you become a good enough gamer, you could start making money at it, get even better, get even more money, all based on skill and ability. That is what makes this Free Capitalist society great, without any need to “distribute wealth”.
If anything we need to become a more Agricultural Economy that is not so dependent upon Consuming cheap products from Slave Labor countries. If we become more Renewable in our energy, how much better for all, even those Bankers, Lawyers, and Businessmen?
CD,
“But you do agree that you should be compensated for the work you do?”
Yes I do agree that one should be compensated for the one does. Where we differ is that you believe money is what should be used as compensation.
If I as an acupuncturist, show great skill in relieving the suffering of my patients, then money is a small reward. And no amount of it will suffice.
Money is used to exchange for the service being provided. So that I can turn around and buy what I need and want.
You will always need to eat and sleep. But people won’t always need YOUR particular service. So where does that leave you? It leaves you in a constant struggle to find or create a need for your skill.
If you had a steady stream of GDP coming to you. Then you could focus on your skill which would result in an increase of it. That would bring you more notoriety than any amount of advertising, which would bring you more money in terms of business.
In this sense my logic is no different than the pure capitalistic axiom, “it takes money to make money”.
Equally sharing in GDP is NOT WELFARE. It is an ACTIVE INVESTMENT in our citizenry. Giving the people what they need to be creative and innovative so that we can lead the world again.
We are NOT going to retain our leadership role in the world by fixing a system that was created to serve us in the previous millennium. We need real innovation. We need real daring. And we need real results. If America is the greatest nation on Earth, then it would be wise for us to invest in ourselves collectively, rather than in just a select few.
Benny-
“Yes I do agree that one should be compensated for the one does. Where we differ is that you believe money is what should be used as compensation.”
What else are you going to use? Sticks? Beads?
“If I as an acupuncturist, show great skill in relieving the suffering of my patients, then money is a small reward. And no amount of it will suffice.”
As much as would want the nation to be a nation of Jesus Christs, you have to admit, a society like that would be BORING!
come on Benny, give it up.
“Was it worth it, letting lawyers and bankers set laws?” – posted by C.D. Walker
________________________________________
If we put lawyers in charge of farms like yours there will be food shortages. For one simple reason – lawyers usually have no clue about farming.
If we put farmers like you in charge of legislation, laws will not work. For the same reason.
While my education lets me see that as far as laws are concerned, every single letter matters, I would not claim being qualified to always correctly interpret the law. Much less so to write the law in such a way that it could be interpreted one, and only one, intended way.
You are no more qualified to write the laws than me. That’s unless you graduated from a law school, in which case I apologize.
And by the way, if you want to be back in the wild, wild West where there was no lawyers, beware that anyone liking your farm could claim it. “Meet my gun”, as you posted somewhere earlier? What if it’ll be met by RPG?
I’m not one of anti-gun crowd. Contrary to that, I shot quite a few guns in my life, including AK-47. I still can hit the bull’s eye with it from 50 meters. The picture of me shooting Colt .45 was hanging in my cube until HR told me to remove it as inappropriate. But I believe that legal issues need to be decided by the law, not by guns, and lawyers are instrumental in this process.
Hmm I wonder what those judges in the old west started out as…lawyers maybe? And who argued before those judges?
It never ceases to amaze me how ignorance portrays itself as knowledge on the internet these days. I guess that’s what happens when anyone who can work a keyboard can get “published”. It also comes from people being the smartest person they know, makes it easy to seem intelligent.
To C.D. Walker,
“SKV- your so fake, why suddenly the WORSE grammar when typing?”
Hey, take it back. English is not may native language. I don’t do bad grammar on purpose
.
You provide right facts about China, you just fail to interpreted them!
West invests into China & 3rd World to build factories, roads, mines etc. West invests because “China slave labor” is cheaper than yours. Here is the reason why china labor is so cheap:
1. They don’t ask for medical insurance, retirements benefits etc.
2. Here is the main reason:
China & 3rd world goes through industrialization. Every Western nation including US, Europe, Russia etc went through this process. It cost Russia two revolutions…
Industrialization triggered when new agricultural technologies become economical to use. Few big industrial farms using new agricultural technologies win completion against 10,000′s small farms. It makes redundant 1,000,000′s small farmers and rural workers. They loosing they land and flood sites with dirt cheap labor. They ready to work for food. That the people who settled British colonies in 1700′s, 1800′s. Built US in 1800′s, 1900′s.
Now time for China and 3rd world…
EU/US factories also were built by ‘slave’ labor in 1900′s. But today workers earns $1000′s on these factories and pay taxes to gov. Gov pays pension to people who built factories. When Corporations build factories in China we will see nothing from taxes from these factories. So who is going to pay taxes to fuel my pension?
And this is exactly what I mean about you CD,
“What else are you going to use? Sticks? Beads?”
You post on these boards and expect to be respected. But you haven’t really done anything to earn” it. You want to be recognized for your skill, but you aren’t putting any “work” into it.
You don’t really WANT money. You NEED money. What you WANT, is to be respected. What you want, is to be understood. What you want, is to be appreciated for what you bring to the table.
That is real currency in this world. Because if you work for those things, then should you ever run into hard times, you would have the support of those more fortunate to whom you showed the best of yourself.
It doesn’t matter how hard times ever get. My brother always has a home to come to should he be in need. And not because he’d pay me, but because I love him. That’s what you work for in this world CD. Not money.
“As much as would want the nation to be a nation of Jesus Christs, you have to admit, a society like that would be BORING!
come on Benny, give it up.”
And this from the man that got self righteous when asked about his Christian charity. Now God is boring? You want ME to give up?
And Anon,
look at the open software movement for a better understanding of how open market principles would look. Brush up on your logic skills. It’s your kind of limited “it’ll never work” thinking that has produced all of this wonderful misery the majority of the people are suffering from.
Instead of saying it won’t work give me something to think about. Tell me WHY it won’t work. Telling me to brush up on my theory is a nice cop out. But can you explain why it won’t work? Or are you just trying to sound intelligent?
Hey Ed
Judges usually traveled across the West under the Protection of the United States Marshals.
Being a Judge is an Appoinment, meaning no need to be a lawyer.
In those small towns across the west, do you really think each one had a large lawyer community?
The old west court usually happened like this:
the two people who had a beef with each other(Civil law, property law, criminal law, whatever) came before the Judge and told their side of the story. Judge listened, gave his ruling, next case.
Who needed lawyers then?
Have you seen Judge Judy? She rocks it without Lawyers.
Call me ignorant, LMAO.
Benny
Again with the illogical arguments?
One post you saying i want everyone to have a piece of the GDP. another your saying that the Accupuncurist does their work for the pleasure of helping, not for money, now your saying i don’t want money, i NEED money.
As for SKV- or Sergey- Or whatever
If your country was so great, why are you here?
Why are you defending the horrid abuses of Human rights that China is responsible for?
Come on people
keep some consistency with your arguments.
As for God, i’ll let my past posts on the subject speak for themselves. Any honest person should be able to see what i feel about the subject.
What are you for again? what do you stand for Benny, you never answered that simple question.
Well I call them as I see them, and the more you post the more ignorant you look. Judge Judy…LOL. Please enlighten us more with your legal acumen. Why back in the day on CHiPs they fought crime without ever using guns, why not elect the president using American Idol style voting? Hell, if you want base your ideas on what you see on TV, well I can’t think of a more perfect example of ignorance. If ignorance is bliss, you my friend must be ecstatic. It would be funny if it wasn’t so sad.
Ed
you want to talk about the idiocy of the “Legal System”?
how about this little tidbit- we all know that “Ignorance of the law is no excuse” right? Have you been to a law library? Do you have ANY idea at the VOLUMES of books filled with points of law? Go into any Judges office, and they will have a small Library of Law Books on the subject that Judge Specializes in like Land law, or Civil law, or Criminal Law, Corporate law, Patent Law, Intellectual law, International Law, do you get the picture or the Idiocy of this “Legal System”.
CD I do want you to realize that the only reason I keep replying to you is so that more reasonable minds can see the type of thinking that has led us down this path.
Hopefully you will continue to illustrate how not to approach a real problem. I know you can’t be so dull as to miss the meaning of clearly stated ideas.
But you choose to feign ignorance.
For the benefit of others who didn’t see my post regarding the subject, I support our democratically elected republic. In terms of our economic system I advocate for an open system. where the treasury and federal reserve are automated so that they can perform the task of balancing the supply of money/value in the system. An automated system would do this free of political/corporate influence.
Dividing GDP equally amongst all adult citizens would put the money directly in the hands of the real producers, inventors, educators, etc… of this country and allow them to create and innovate.
My other posts explain it more clearly.
Hello Edward M. Blake,
My apology for bad words about lawyers…
I came to US with degree in Math & Computer Science. I thankful to many Americans who helped me a lot with my first steps in this complex society. But I also was blown away that my ordinary education gave me ticket to some prosperity while many of my American friends struggle to make their living. At the same time look at any Bank/Technology in NYC. Most jobs pay over $70,000 many over $100,000… Very few Americans, most positions filled by guys from India/China. They don’t take somebody else place because there is nobody around… Most technically savvy Amiricans I saw from ‘Race to Moon’ Generations. I travel a lot across US and saw abandon factories, farms… Small towns sunk in poverty. Tell these people about $70,000. US government didn’t stop corporations from shipping business abroad nor it provided people with flexible education so they can find new jobs.
US is enormously wealthy country. But World is full of countries that used to be wealthy…
I don’t like regulations. Especially I don’t like US way for regulations. But I see that corporate governance fails shareholders and fails society.
You are the guy who knows The Law of this land. What is you opinion?
How US can preserve wealth for our kids and our retirement?
Well, I can see the firm’s law library from from my desk, but demonstrate more of your ignorance, most legal research is done online these days. Lawyers also tend to specialize as well, but who am I to tell such a astute legal scholar anything.
To C.D. Walker,
“As for SKV- or Sergey- Or whatever”
0. I usually post using my nick SKV_USA. But here everybody is using real name so I do the same.
1. I don’t defend abuses in China.
. Please revisit my previous posts. My main point in n.4.
2. I against Corporations reallocating jobs abroad. It drains jobs away and also drains wealth. We need this wealth because taxes from this wealth fuel education for our kids and our retirement.
3. I like idea of some regulation. But the way how US does regulations usually makes thing worse. Here we come to bunch of technicalities that you don’t like
4. I like to see laws that make Corporate executive personally responsible for Corporation actions. Today corporation shield executives from any responsibilities. When court penalize corporation it penalizes shareholders rather than people who actually made decisions.
To Benny Acosta:
Before you continue with your “Equally sharing in GDP”.
Pls Read definition of GDP on wikipedia and tell us what exactly you would like to share and how…
GDP = [Consumption] + [Investment] + [Government spending] + ([Export] − [Import]).
There is no single account called ‘GDP’ that you love to plunder. Pls go back to job and earn money for being interface between chair and monitor. At least you don’t have to put thermal isolation on a middle of summer heat.
How to fix the mess we’ve gotten into..sadly I don’t really know. The things I do know are that neither corporations nor the government alone provide the answer. Personally, I’m for less regulation, but strong penalties for those who violate the rules. Rather than have an inflexible system that forces inefficiencies I would rather more options, but strong sanctions for violators. Then the force of the law is applied to those who deserve it rather than forcing unneeded rules on everyone. I’d like to see white color criminals go to the same jail with all criminals.
As to politicians, the drive for re election and the need to please special interests to stay in power argue to me for one term and out. Maybe make the terms a bit longer, but I would rather lose a few good representatives in order to flush out the many incompetent and corrupt. This might also attract different people than the typical politicians for life we have now who represent no one but their own re election bid and the special interests that support that. Many politicians start with high ideals but feel the need to compromise these to get elected so the can do good, then the need to stay in power to do more good. In order to do that in our system requires more compromise and thus leads to loss of ideals in the chase for elections.
Thank you, Ed.
I have th
Her is a little bit charged question…
If I cause some harm to somebody even without bad intentions I am usually responsible for damage and may be some penalties.
US government bailed out banks. I honestly believe that was the only option. But. Why US Gov don’t charge execs with neglect? I don’t want witch hunt. But after all, we see 1,000,000 are losing retirements savings and… Nobody to blame.
AFAIK The idea of Corp law is to separate personal responsibility from business responsibility. It looks we went way to far down on this road.
Why the whole power of US legal system failed to stop AIG bonuses and government was forced to begged them: “please give us bonuses back! please…”
Well I’m not in anyway going to defend the bailouts, personally I don’t even think they were needed, witness how fast these banks want to give the money back now that there are strings attached. The whole too big too fail flies in the face of our anti trust laws (regulations that are needed but sadly ignored in many of these cases) I mean there’s a little thing like the Sherman Anti Trust Act that is supposed to stop such nonsense. Somewhere John Sherman is spinning in his grave.
Corporate law is designed exactly as you say to protect ownership from personal liability, which is a double edged sword in many ways. It allows for certain efficiencies and provides legitimate protection in many cases, but it certainly allows officers to act with near impunity, particularly in cases like this.
Sergey-
“But the way how US does regulations usually makes thing worse.”
How are we doing bad “Regulation” when we have De-Regulated? Twisting words again, trying to make them what you want.
“like to see laws that make Corporate executive personally responsible for Corporation actions. Today corporation shield executives from any responsibilities”
Couldn’t agree more. Limited Liability Corporations can act like Psycopaths without worry of lawsuits targeting the Decision Makers within the company. Nice legal Loophole.
Ed
Well, I can see the firm’s law library from from my desk, but demonstrate more of your ignorance, most legal research is done online these days. Lawyers also tend to specialize as well, but who am I to tell such a astute legal scholar anything.
What does your “Law Firm” specialize in? Litigation? Family Law? Divorce? Real Estate? Tax Law?
All i was saying is, how twisted is the legal system when “Ignorance of the Law is not an Excuse for Breaking the law.” Yet there are so many Laws on Books, NO ONE LAWYER or even a Judge, can know all the laws. Have you seen just the Tax Code?
I’m not a legal scholar, but i’m not an idiot either.
Benny-
Still inconsistent with your illogical attempts at trying to convince people of whatever it is your selling?
you said “Dividing GDP equally amongst all adult citizens would put the money directly in the hands of the real producers, inventors, educators, etc… of this country and allow them to create and innovate.”
Where is the drive to be creative and innovative if you know your going to get a piece of the pie?
AGAIN
I say to you, if you work honestly, you deserve an honest wage. If you don’t work, you don’t deserve to get payed.
It is really simple.
Work = Pay
No Work = No Pay
Six words, don’t get any easier than that.
CD.
I agree that Benny’s ideas are a little too socialist for my liking.
But at the same time, you seem to have a few anti-elitist ideas of your own.
I doubt you have much to do with business or the legal industry. So trying to speaking about their worth only makes you look bad.
Anon-
want to know what my experiences have been with the legal system?
My family went up against TYCO international when it was run by that crook Dennis Kozlowski, now in jail. In Virginia’s Federal “Rocket Docket” (Google it) under The Honorable Judge Lonnie Brinkema. My family was represented by Niro, Scavone, Haller & Niro out of Chicago. At issue was intellectually property rights, Proprietary rights to technology, Theft, Conspiracy, and Fraud.
An employee of TYCO admitted to lying to my families company on the stand. The jury of peers decided in my families favor. The Judge over-turned the jury decision. Still not too clear why. Cost my family everything to pay for the litigation fees that lasted years. I didn’t get to go to college. The Technology involved coming up with a chemical formula that enable a plastic to be infused with micro sized balls of silver, enabling the plastic to be conductive.
The second part involved the design of a mold that enable the Plastic to be injected and formed into computer chips. That mold was in TYCO possession, but was only a prototype, a single cavity mold. TYCO then shipped that mold to several other engineering companies trying to reverse engineer it. Finally the were successful and copied the mold for their profit, cutting out my families company, breaking an exclusivity clause, STEALING from my dad, a Vietnam Vet.
If you look inside any ADT keyboard panel, you’ll find my families stolen technology.
I still love this country, there is just some people in charge who are ruining the dream our Founding Fathers had of America.
one of the best articals I have read in internet. thank you. Rational thinking must prevail over wail of hypocrisy.
I wish I could comment on your case, CD. But the decision could have been for any number of reasons.
Judges make rulings as to how the law is applied.
Juries only deal with the facts. And sometimes, no matter how they might feel about a case, the application of the law does not agree.
But even if the judge was in error, and the law was applied incorrectly, this does not destroy the credibility of the legal industry as a whole.
While I empathize with you regarding your unfortunate experience with the legal system it doesn’t mean we can do without lawyers.
Do you think it would be better if ignorance of the law was an actual defense? Or that the law can somehow be simplified so that it can be easily understood and interpreted by all? Sadly in a complex society the law must be complex and ignorance can never be a valid defense.
Why are people talking about taxes and regulations? This is stupid. The article is about foreign policy and democracy-promotion (or lack of). Say something intelligent on the topic, not something random.
Blake there is a simple and elegant solution to problem of the law. I could certainly be wrong but it appears to me that courts don’t use the intent of the law as a criteria for making a decision.
It would make things a lot easier for the public if congress passed laws in which the intent of the law itself is clearly stated. And it would help if the court system used that intent as a measure to decide if a real infraction has taken place.
That way laws don’t get broken on technicalities and people can’t “play the system” on technical grounds.
Well the road to hell is paved in good intentions. It’s difficult to discuss how people “get off” on technicalities when in some case that “technicality” is the Fourth Amendment for example. Oft times laws get used for very valid purposes and accomplish good when they go beyond the intentions of the drafters. People also forget that in the US system courts of law and equity are combined, and equity courts are concerned with exactly that, equity. Thus judges are free to go beyond the letter of the law in order to do justice.
The law is full of jargon and is in some ways purposely opaque, hell the laws are generally written by lawyers and they don’t want to cut themselves out of work. It may seem there are simple ways to reform the system, but it’s not as easy as many folks think to have a system that can deal effectively with the myriad and complex situations that come before courts everyday.
But isn’t that the point Blake? The law is too complex. That complexity serves to hide behavior that would otherwise be cause for prosecution.
By making the intent of the law clear. It is easy to determine if an individual went beyond the scope of what is permissible.
Adding more complexity to the law would be like trying to cure our debt problems by adding more debt. As everyone can see. That approach is failing miserably.
Simplicity is the cure for complexity and complex language.
For example our treasury/federal reserve has embarked on a course of “quantitative easing”
Why did they say “quantitative easing”? Because no one would agree to the idea of simply printing more money to get out of debt.
The law is no different. It is enacted by people with interests to protect. And unequal protection under the law requires language that will uphold this unequal structure while at the same time making it sound to the uninitiated that such things are good ideas for society.
Hello C.D.
“But the way how US does regulations usually makes thing worse.”
1. Finance was/is heavy regulated. Every major bank must be member of FDIC. Most trading is done through exchanges and ESNs. Banks required to meet big number of requirements on risk/capital blah…blah…blah… Only Derivatives were explicitly unregulated. They played bad role in Sep/Oct 2008. But crises began in Apr/May 2008 with collapse of mortgages. Mortgages one of the most regulated markets.
Despite tons of regulations we all saw ads on TV/Web/News like ‘Mortgage doctor’. Companies that officially helped clients fool regulations and ruin their lives. Fraud was so wide spread that even major banks run own appraisal/financial companies to ‘help’ people get Mortgage that they deserve.
What is good about regulation that impossible to enforce?
When gov go after very few companies they punish business with big BIG penalties while crooks walk away! I know only one case when mortgage broker was prosecuted. He lost his license and now his wife runs the same business.
My point was/is the same. Enforce existing regulations and make actual decision makers accountable for mistakes. Accountable means penalties/jail etc. Something more serous than losing license. Even the best regulations means nothing without enforcement.
Anon,
I do not advocate socialism. I advocate our democratically elected republic for government.
In financial terms I advocate for an “open” market place.
Look to the open software movement for a better idea of what I mean.
In open software, code is the building block of production. That building block (the code), is distributed freely. Anyone may modify, reverse engineer, redistribute,or sell open software as they choose. All that is asked is that the original source code be included in the program so that the originators get credit. This is a very basic explanation.
But suffice it to say that all of this work was done not for money but out of a spirit of innovation and creativity.
Linux and open software have come such a long way that it now competes in the market place with Microsoft, Apple, Sun, etc… and it cannot be discounted by any of them.
In an economy currency is the building block of production. An open economy gives equal access to that building block so that people can produce. And with everyone having equal access to the means of production, people can work together without having to seek an outside source of funding. So the producers are the only ones in financial control of their product.
In socialism the government controls the money and doles it out according to who they think is qualified to have it.
(In reply to scattered posts above, none in particular)
Amazing that anyone could accept such a lame (and pessimistic) argument as there being nothing that motivates creation and work except cash. And it should be noted the “innovative” rich don’t work at all and spend their time sucking resources while the “stupid” “un-entrepreneurial” majority slave loads of hours in the USA and everywhere else; to say otherwise is a conceited lie. But in any case, if you want fool around in a Anti-Communist area of analysis you could say:
(It inevitably ends up here for the brave defenders of inequality and the profit system:)
The Soviet Union, despite its backwardness, maintained GDP growth rates usually greater than the USA for 50-60 years, industrialized from rural poverty, maintained a huge economy in isolation from the world… etc. Even the counter-revolutionary backwardness that was Stalinism proves that no mythical profit motive stands in the way of basic economic production (scratch that, mammoth economic production).
It doesn’t seem like anyone can make an absolutist argument based on relative statistics between non-capitalist Russia and the capitalist United States with its dominance of the world market and superior development. Its hard to see how even a relative argument is valid given the distinct circumstances and the reactionary nature of the Stalinist state.
The Non-capitalist economy in the USSR was not even close to a Socialist economy, either, and yet in many aspects and in its general functioning it still makes Capitalism by implication look useless and in quite a few areas cruel.
That isn’t a praise of Stalinism, that just shows how historically exhausted and limited the Capitalist scheme is. A non-capitalist world economy would free vast potential for production and quality of life, not to mention rid us of the parasitic and exploitative practices of the corporate caste and profit motivated destruction of all kinds.
When I say socialist, I mean in the economic sense. Not a ‘rotten-red-under-the-bed’ sense.
An open economy is one where a person is free to produce and trade without interference. In other words, free trade. It has nothing to do with the division of GDP.
The ability of a person to produce depends on the four economic factors. Land, Labour, Capital and Enterprise.
A person with access to those factors can produce and profit. The more access to those factors you have, the more profit you make.
If you can not access to the factors, then by the rules of an open economy, you should not produce.
Profit is the driving force behind any economy. People strive to use the factors of production in order to profit, and this profit allows them to gain more resources.
You define socialism as being when the government artificially controls the resources, and doles them out to whoever they choose.
Yet when you propose to divide GDP evenly through the population to control production, you propose that very thing.
Such an approach will not encourage an economy to grow, because it does not allow profit. And by interfering with the division of the factors of production, it will not encourage an open or efficient market.
Anon-
“The ability of a person to produce depends on the four economic factors. Land, Labour, Capital and Enterprise.”
Those are the factors for a whole country to produce. A person just needs to have a strong work ethic to be productive, and a job with which to be productive at.
Anon wrote-
“Profit is the driving force behind any economy.”
Not so, Profit is the driving force behind any corporation or company, the driving for behind any GOOD economy should be stability, the ability to provide steady reliable growth. When PROFIT is the main motivator for a whole economy, well, look at the world economy right now.
Anon-
“I wish I could comment on your case, CD. But the decision could have been for any number of reasons.
Judges make rulings as to how the law is applied.”
The Judge is like a ref in the court of law. The judge makes sure both sides play fair during the trial process.
THE JURY makes the ruling based on evidence provided and the arguments between the two sides.
If the Judge is to rule on law, what need for a JURY then? Why even have a JURY of your PEERS if a Judge has the power to decide a case at their whim?
Ed-
“While I empathize with you regarding your unfortunate experience with the legal system it doesn’t mean we can do without lawyers.
Do you think it would be better if ignorance of the law was an actual defense? Or that the law can somehow be simplified so that it can be easily understood and interpreted by all? Sadly in a complex society the law must be complex and ignorance can never be a valid defense.”
There is a technology called MRI (magnetic resonance imaging) with which doctors can scan the human mind.
Imagine if such a machine was employed in courtrooms with a certified doctor intent to detect the lies of defendants! When one lies, the part of the brain associated with imagination lights up. When one tells the truth, the part of the brain associated with memory lights up.
What need for a lawyer when a Judge can ask a question, like “Did you kill this person.” in front of a Jury of Peers. If the person lies, the scan will know, and show the truth for all to see.
Imagine how easy it would be to end corruption. Bring those suspected of Corruption before a judge and jury, ask the questions, and discover the truth!
What need for lawyers when the truth can be know with science?
We know all about the HONEST reputation of Lawyers.
Anon,
“The ability of a person to produce depends on the four economic factors. Land, Labour, Capital and Enterprise.”
That is correct. but capital is what provides access to the other three. On an individual level this amounts to you as a citizen, having access to the capital you need in order to develop the skills you want to use to provide a product or service.
Say you always wanted to be a doctor. But because you were in the majority of those that could not beat the financial odds, you had to take a different direction career wise.
If you had had access to a steady stream of income. You would have been able to pursue your dream while still young and enthusiastic enough to really produce results in your field.
I’m talking about a capital investment of a higher order. Paper is worthless. Our money is backed by the “good faith and credit of the United States government”. Good luck cashing it in for it’s real value. Instead, the capital of truest value is that of human capital. Money doesn’t cure disease or better the quality of life. People do that. Money is just a tool that allows them to get the resources they need in order to learn how to do these things. Currency is an exchange medium, not an end to itself.
The value being sought through money is found in people.
That’s why businesses can’t prosper without people. It’s people who produce. It’s people who consume. Without human interaction money is worthless. Understanding this relationship is important because it illustrates the dependence on human activity that money has.
So if money is dependent on us then whey do we serve it?
“You define socialism as being when the government artificially controls the resources, and doles them out to whoever they choose.
Yet when you propose to divide GDP evenly through the population to control production, you propose that very thing.”
Can you please explain to me how you come to that conclusion? I don’t see the connection you’re trying to make.
Anon-
“In open software, code is the building block of production.”
Not so, obviously you have never written code. WORK is the building block of production, ESPECIALLY in writing code since it is a tedious labor of love.
Code is like a pile of bricks laying in your yard. If you work, you can build something. The harder you work with your code(blocks of information, or bricks) the more you produce.
its that simple
Well, first off I certainly don’t have as much trust in technology as you. Second, there’s another little “technicality” that would get around your scheme, it’s that minor bit of constitutional law know popularly as the 5th amendment. I imagine that this piece of legislation might be familiar.
If you can’t get past your own bad experiences with lawyers, it’s pointless to discuss.
Benny- still at it I see? why?
Benny said
“If you had had access to a steady stream of income. You would have been able to pursue your dream while still young and enthusiastic enough to really produce results in your field.”
You must not know kids. Most kids i know who have access to a steady stream of income, without working hard for it, usually wind up spending it on activities they see as fun. Drinking, partying, playing, buying clothes, going on trips.
The only people who produce results in their fields are HARD WORKERS because they know their success depends DIRECTLY with HARD WORK. The HARDER they WORK the more successful they become. It is what makes America beautiful. It is the promise of America that with hard work and dedication, you can do anything.
Ed-
If you could pay attention, focus, you would see that my problem is with the Judge. Do you really think id be mad at Niro, Scavone, Haller & Niro, the lawyers who won the case for my family? WOW, i don’t want to point out how flawed your thinking is, but its soo obvious.
Ed said
“Second, there’s another little “technicality” that would get around your scheme, it’s that minor bit of constitutional law know popularly as the 5th amendment.”
If a judge asks a person “Did you kill so-and-so”
why would a person plead the 5th if they didn’t kill them? Same with fraud and corruption. If they are innocent, what need for them to plead the 5th?
again, i see your thinking as flawed. Or not if your trying to defend the flawed legal system we have. BUT HEY, its your right to defend that flawed dinosaur i hope gets reworked, redone for the betterment of America, and Justice.