Islamist totalitarianism
I've written before about the dilemma of choosing a term to describe our enemies in this war.
Islamofascists? No, not exact enough; and misleading, hearkening back to our World War II enemies who had different political ideologies and methods. Islamic fundamentalists? Incorrect as well; not all Islamic fundamentalists have adopted violence as a way of life. "Jihadis" is too inclusive and not specific enough.
Austin Bay has called attention to a recent article appearing in the London Times, written by Michael Gove. Well worth reading, it is a good summary of the aims and ideology of the enemy, as well as offering the useful and descriptive term "Islamist totalitarians" to refer to the movement.
The piece is an excerpt from Gove's recently published book, Celsius 7/7. The thrust of Gove's article is that the enemy we face is, first and foremost, our old nemesis: totalitarianism. The jihadis are at war not only with the West, but with most of their co-religionists, whose version of Islam they consider fatally compromised and in need of revision, violent if necessary (and they deem violence to be necessary).
"Islamist totalitarianism" may indeed be the very best name of all for those who adhere to this vision, since it places the movement firmly in the twentieth/twenty-first century context in which it belongs, which is one of world dominance through force, and the negation of human freedom. That is why all totalitarian movements are, in their dark hearts, a reaction to and a profound rejection of the Enlightenment. Islamist totalitariansim is no exeption to this rule.
As Gove writes:
Islamism is a twentieth-century phenomenon. Like its sibling ideologies, fascism and communism, it offers followers a form of redemption through violence. Like fascism, Islamism envisages the creation of a purified realm purged of toxic outside influences and internal corruption. Like communism, Islamism is not ethnically exclusive, it seeks to enlist new converts through proselytisation, political education and military advances. Like both, it reserves a special hatred for the West, for political freedom the separation of the public and private realms, dissent, sexual tolerance and a belief in the sanctity of individual life. And like both it finds a dark and furious energy in hatred towards the Jewish people.
Politically correct thinking dictates that we respect all religions. When Islamist totalitarianism is described as the enemy, many have a kneejerk response that such thinking as anti-Moslem or racist in some way. But it is not. Make no mistake about it. The war the Islamist totalitarians have decreed is every bit as much against the everyday, garden-variety Moslem as it is against all the rest of us.
posted by neo-neocon @ 11:40 AM
38 comments
38 Comments:
"Wog" works wonders for me, though I've never been one to quibble on what to call people out to kill me, my children and way of life. Your point about these jihadis being violent to their own moderate kind is well taken, though such folks are further down the ol' priority list of whom to kill. Aren't we all just a bit too smug and confident that we can invest time and energy in a debate of this nature when we are in agreement that cessation on their part depends on many of them being killed? I think it is a tea party approach to not wanting to look too closely at their dead bodies any more than we have to, which is understandable but not necessarily practical.
Thanks for the heads up about Gove.
Paul Berman's Terror and Liberalism is also a great look at the nature of the threat we face, and how to deal with it. I'd also recommend Natan Sharansky's The Case for Democracy for the interested reader.
-sort of like gook I suppose, or nip or kraut - I like the idea of calling enemies names that won't be offensive to them, makes alot of sense. And as far as looking at the nature of the threat and how to deal with it, may I suggest a Charter Arms 44 spl ? Weighing in at only 22 oz. the recoil is surprisingly managable and with a 200g semi-wadcutter HP, it leaves the question of appropriate names illrelevant what with large hunks of skull blown out of the back of the head. After all, that is what war is all about, assuming one believes there are real enemies and there is a real war on terrorism going on. Enjoy your tea, wasp, and in the meantime let's hope the troops in afghanistan and Iraq keep blowing them away, oops, I mean taking decisive action against totalitarian individuals who really would prefer to torture them before beheading them and making a nice al-jazeera video instead of just sniping them or hitting them with an IED. I've heard the totalitarians have private videos of those captured in ideological opposition to their cause having their balls cut off prior to beheading. My! Wouldn't that generate a lively debate at the Barnes & Noble coffee shop??
Charles doesn't like mentioning the economic difference between the wonder economy of Western Germany to Eastern Germany. He also won't mention the Japanese economic revival.
The merchants would prefer to not only have a free market, but they'd also like to have stable currencies and a good non corrupt police force. The countries without those things, like South America, won't exactly shine in economic terms.
There's nothing total (totalitarian) about guaranteeing human liberties and rights, the lawful contract binding agreements between two consenting individuals. Nothing total about it, except totally justified.
Partial birth abortion.
....right hang on i have lost track a bit here..
which of these neo con retards called the muslims wogs?
which one was showing off about what gun he wore in public private etc? (when the old man dont work have to get yourselve a bigger weapon i imagine)
who was it said germany was a decadent society?
ok then neo. Now tell they are not all racist, violence obsessed, keyboard warriors..
oh shit
but i am a "troll"
says you thinking..
...two dead British Soldiers today. But you real warriors probably think they were leftie euro trash. My what heros you are.
Glory of Women
You love us when we're heroes, home on leave,
Or wounded in a mentionable place.
You worship decorations; you believe
That chivalry redeems the war's disgrace.
You make us shells. You listen with delight,
By tales of dirt and danger fondly thrilled.
You crown our distant ardours while we fight,
And mourn our laurelled memories when we're killed.
You can't believe that British troops 'retire'
When hell's last horror breaks them, and they run,
Trampling the terrible corpses--blind with blood.
O German mother dreaming by the fire,
While you are knitting socks to send your son
His face is trodden deeper in the mud.
Siegfried Sassoon
- e.g., we can criticize Islam per se without being "anti-moslem" on a personal basis. And, in any case, it would require that we reject the spurious and frankly racist attempt to make a "race" out of culture, and thereby treat every cultural critique as "racism".
hmm ok then silly you are trying to define away racism.
what differences exist between people apart from culture? You are racist because you make dumb arguments that all Islamic people are...(insert one of your ill informed comments at this point).
But actually corrct thinking requires that we be capable of judging some belief systems as better or worse than others, based on their objective effects.
so on what basis do you objectively do this?...seems to me on how like american culture they are.
.......objective
funny word that
...subjective....hmmmm
but you dont have to worry love because i am a "troll" and that saves you having to think
At 5:38 PM, June 27, 2006, stumbley said...
"United Kingdom ranked 25th (at 78.54 years)"
Dang! If I moved to Blighty I'd live a whole 6/10 years longer?
not if i see you first
(humour! - just in case you decide to visit armed like quartermaster putrescent wasp0
oh come on that is the crappiest comment you have ever made and i generally rate your stuff. Admit it that is cheesy and cheap
"Islatarians"(?)
Also, I once liked this word to describe the stagnation present in the melding of Islam with tribal cultures: "Islagnation".
So, our dual problems = Islatarians + Islagnation!
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
There is no such thing as market totalitarianism. One can have totalitarian systems with markets (China), totalitarian systems without markets (Rhmer Rouge), free systems with markets (Japan), and free systems without markets (barter in ancient tribal Arabia).
That being said, does it make sense to continue to push for more socialism in industries like medicine?
Nope. More socialist health care, by increasing demand, will push costs for those not using the system through the roof. Doing so would feed a socialist black hole that consumes more and more resources, driving up costs for everyone and making more and more people dependent upon a crappy system that rations, inhibits development, and finally collapses upon itself. Like Medicare.
This basic supply and demand. Don't drink the Communist Kool-Aid.
Wasp--
Establishing liberal democracy in Iraq is part of the mission. We don't need to be in Iraq to destroy Iran's bomb program, for instance. Infact, being in Iraq makes that more difficult since attacking Iran would likely inflame more violence against our servicemen on the ground in Iraq.
I read this today as well, and I intend to pick up the book. One quote stuck out to me:
"Islamism appeals to that part of the human soul which has always been capable of being drawn to revolution, violence and the exaltation of the self through membership of the elect. There are aspects to Islamism which lend it the same appeal which seduced young men into the Red Guards or the Waffen SS, but there are also specific aspects to the ideology which attune it to the discontents and yearnings of young men in our time."
This is not an entirely Islamism related phenomenom nowadays. I think many of our "young revolutionaries" today who think they are entitled to bust up cities, start fires and spread mayhem for their "causes" are summed up well here. I think that the part regarding how they feel "exalted" by being one of the "elect" is key.
They feel they are part of a special group, and as such are entitled to their own rules, their own logic and their own facts. Of course, all of these are so flexible as to be meaningless because the "cause" is the only thing that matters. Frequently, that cause turns out to be nothing more than perpetuating this special status for themselves.
I think there are quite a large number of discontents who wish to justify their destructive, selfish and morally vapid behavior. They seek to cloak in some lofty cause fighting against nebulous or imagined threats rather than dealing with the very real ones.
Doing the former is easy and fun, and entails no risk.
Doing the latter is dangerous and hard.
Of course, there may come a time when there is no longer a choice between the two, and ugly reality will come crashing down.
Revolutionaries might do well remember how often revolutions devour their own.
Paul Krugman in the New York Times. 4/11/05:
Uh oh, charles is bringing out the heavy artillery. Better be prepared and dig in!
Dude, France let 10,000 something French citizens die in the heat wave. I'm pretty sure their higher "life expectancy" really really calmed down those dehydrating.
Charles can quibble over 3 something odd years in statistics, but I'll tell ya, I'm not going to be one of those that France euthanizes nor am I going to be there in a heat wave waiting for help from the French socialized medicine.
You can, of course, prefer to ignore the data, or claim that it's biased, but that will be hard to do since the data is from the CIA World Factbook. See for yourself -- no need to take my word for it.
Others can waste energy on the facts, but my analysis of charles' argument does not produce very high marks.
As we can see, the agent provocateurs don't care about you responding, the very fact that they know you are reading them is enough to stoke their passions. THey have infinite patience, in the knowledge that those who they harass have finite patience.
They're Islamic Jihad, and they'll get their jihad.
Revolutionaries might do well remember how often revolutions devour their own.
Well, if they devour you, then that's a net positive for them.
The problem with racism-culture is because classical liberals are likely to exterminate people who really can't reform themselves into liberal democracies or just a civilization that respects human rights and the rules of war.
My above comment reads, funny because there should be like a **** break line between
produce very high marks.
As we can see, the agent
And patience.
They're Islamic Jihad,
But it still certainly says something true if you read it without the subject breaks.
One reason not to deal with oily French socialistic merchants.
Oh ya, slore's reasoning is also why big business contributes to Democrats. Great way to get rid of the competition.
"Tens of millions of Americans? Relatively few citizens are not either insured or covered by a government program that is retroactively available (i.e., you can sign up after you become ill if your eligible). Our domestic left chooses to inflate the numbers by including illegals and those eligible for government programs. Foreign critics choose to use their flawed numbers for their own purposes...."
The actual number is 45 million people in 2004, that's the most recent data that I could find, also that the percentage rose from 15.2% in 2002 to 15.6% in 2003 to 15.7% in 2004
http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewNation.asp?Page=\Nation\archive\200408\NAT20040827a.html
"I see. No service is preferable to paying a high cost for service right now.. got it... "
When you have to add in other factors like food, housing, taxes, etc, something has to give. I know quite a few people who aren't poor enough for medicare but aren't rich enough to affort health care.
On my 2 cents on Islamist totalitarianism. I'm not for Islamic totalitarianism but I'm not for corporate totalitarianism either. In both cases democracy won't exist.
Right now with the COPE act which pretty much ends Net Neutrality, the fact that there are people in congress who oppose something trivial like flag burning, and the Patriot Act 1 & 2, it makes me wonder if we are heading to totalitarianism. I hope not.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Many on the left refuse to acknowledge that there is a cost to everything. They deny that we make economic choices, a very theological belief indeed.
Sure, we can have free government health care. But there is a cost.
One, the runaway price tag for the taxpayer. When we give stuff away for free, there is always runaway demand.
Two, increased prices for everyone else. Increased demand will raise tuition, insurance premiums, and wherever the government gets involved.
Three, socialism inhibits innovation. Less competition means less development of new treatments which only the rich can initially purchase before economies of scale are developed.
Four, what the government pays for, the government controls. This means rationing-- without markets, the government will have to decide what's best for individuals.
Socialism is the *cause* of these problems, not the cure. And socialist programs are like economic black holes, because they suck up more and more resources, raise the prices for everyone else making more people dependent upon the system, and the cycle continues.
That's the tradeoff one has to accept to get everyone health care coverage. The irony is that health care will be easier for everyone to obtain it if the government would just butt out.
Those insisting on applying what the Marxists, or the "third way" of the National Socialists advocated to today's economy are definitely theological in the sense that they maintain their beliefs in the face of all evidence confirming what classical economics implies.
Many on the left refuse to acknowledge that there is a cost to everything. They deny that we make economic choices, a very theological belief indeed.
Excellent point, and timely.
Those insisting on applying what the Marxists, or the "third way" of the National Socialists advocated to today's economy are definitely theological in the sense that they maintain their beliefs in the face of all evidence confirming what classical economics implies.
They are theological along a great many more lines than that, as we've seen. Your point in regards to their lack of understanding, or caring, about tradeoffs can be applied to a great many things. Take this from Belmont Club:
"There would be no problem with the NYT's leaks, or acceding to demands that every enemy combatant be provided with the full panoply of procedural protections, requiring that captured terrorists only be asked their name, rank and serial number -- if they have any of those -- and insisting that gentlemen don't read other people's mail for so long as one was willing to pay the price. The problem is that many of the very same persons who want to restrict society's ability to make war also want casualty free wars, no collateral damage to enemy targets and a guarantee of safety not only to the population of the US and Allied Countries, but even to civilians in Iraq and Afghanistan. This is not principled behavior. It is infantile behavior.
http://fallbackbelmont.blogspot.com/2006/06/childhoods-end.html
It is quite easy to declare support for a better world, the environment, peace, human rights, economic prosperity for the impoverished, etc. It is much harder to accept both the costs necessary to bring these about, and the limitations on all of them that human existence entails. Indeed, some of them may be contradictory.
Want human rights? You may need to fight to secure them, either for yourself or someone else.
Want to spread economic prosperity? Certain nations may need to cut down some trees to allow that to happen. Oh, and, total economic equality would require equal output from everyone. Good luck with that.
Its okay to dream of a better world. Just acknowledge the reality you live in.
Again, you're cherry-picking details that fit your case.
Again, ignoring the facts is called "bias". If you got 500,000 that died in the US, to buffet your claims, go ahead.
(Notice that I could have replied, saying that "the USA let x number of its citizens die in the hurricane Katrina", but I would not stoop so low.
Right, if you did do that, that'd be called debating via the evidence and the facts, which can be proven true or not. My claims can be proven true, your claims are also true, which basically means Socialist Democrat governance in France and New Orleans is the problem. Ah, but just because the facts say one thing, doesn't mean your interpretation of them are correct. You would have thought that Katrina proved the US system wrong in this debate.
You don't want to provide the evidence because I am able to not only verify the truth or falsity of that evidence, but I can tell you whether your interpretation is correct or not, as well. If your interpretation rests upon a bad premise, I'll provide an alternate, better, interpretation of the facts.
The fact is, Ymarsakar, there's no substitute for hard data when discussing.
There's no substitute for a bad miscelaneous interpretation either, except a better interpretation.
"Those who refuse to do arithmetic are doomed to keep on talking nonsense".
Did they check which Base Math they were doing arithmetic on, or did your friend assume everyone was using base 10 and that anyone using base 2 arithmetic was not doing his arithmetic? Again, facts are not a substitute for bad interpretations.
What do the figures show?
What does Charles' interpretations of the figures show? Bad logic, from my perspective.
France with its socialized medicine ranks 11th in the world in life expectancy,
You got your expectancy vs the reality of thousands dieing in France's heatwave. Does France get hurricanes? How many died in Katrina's hurricane? Was the Democrats in charge, in favor of socialized healthcare? All these "facts" are not in your interpretation, charles. Which makes it a bad interpretation.
Again, here's the life expectancy of France compared to your example of Chicago.
1995 July 12th. to 16th. - USA, Illinois, Chicago: heat wave with unusually high maximum daily temperatures, ranging from 93 F to 104 F (33.9 C to 40.0 C). On July 13, the heat index* peaked at 119 F (48.3 C) -- a record high for the city. Deaths classified as heat-related by the Cook County Medical Examiner's Office met one of the following three criteria:
1) core body temperature of the decedent greater than or equal to 105 F (greater than or equal to 40.6 C) at the time of or immediately after death,
2) substantial environmental or circumstantial evidence of heat as a contributor to death (e.g., decedent found in a room without air conditioning, all windows closed, and a high ambient temperature), or
3) decedent in a decomposed condition without evidence of other cause of death and with evidence that the decedent was last seen alive during the heat wave period.
During July 11-27, a total of 465 deaths were certified as heat-related; during July 4-10, no deaths were certified as heat-related. The number of heat-related deaths peaked 2 days after the heat index peaked. Deaths increased from 49 (July 14) to a maximum of 162 (July 15). Of the 465 decedents, 257 (55%) were male. Based on race-specific data, 229 (49%) decedents were black; 215 (46%), white; and 21 (5%), other racial/ethnic groups. Within racial categories, 128 (56%) blacks were male, and 114 (53%) whites were male. Of the 437 decedents for whom age could be determined, age ranged from 3 years to 103 years (median: 75 years, mean: 72 years); 222 (51%) were aged greater than or equal to 75 years.
During July 13-21 (when most heat-related deaths were certified), a total of 1177 deaths occurred in Chicago -- an 85% increase over the same period in 1994 (637 deaths).
http://www.emergency-management.net/chicago_di.htm
Your solution is to make sure people aren't alone. Well, France agrees.
The bulk of the victims — many of them elderly — died during the height of the heat wave, which brought suffocating temperatures of up to 104 degrees in a country where air conditioning is rare. Others apparently were greatly weakened during the peak temperatures but did not die until days later
Remember, socialized healthcare is about providing air conditioning, and that means power, which means socialized healthcare is about the Power Infrastructure as well. And on it spreads.
France heat wave death toll set at 14,802
PARIS (AP) — The death toll in France from August's blistering heat wave has reached nearly 15,000, according to a government-commissioned report released Thursday, surpassing a prior tally by more than 3,000.
A funeral home worker in Saint-Maur-des-Fosses, southeast of Paris, prepares coffins for heat victims last month.
AP
Scientists at INSERM, the National Institute of Health and Medical Research, deduced the toll by determining that France had experienced 14,802 more deaths than expected for the month of August.
The toll exceeds the prior government count of 11,435, a figure that was based only on deaths in the first two weeks of the month.
The new estimate includes deaths from the second half of August, after the record-breaking temperatures of the first half of the month had abated.
The bulk of the victims — many of them elderly — died during the height of the heat wave, which brought suffocating temperatures of up to 104 degrees in a country where air conditioning is rare. Others apparently were greatly weakened during the peak temperatures but did not die until days later.
The new estimate comes a day after the French Parliament released a harshly worded report blaming the deaths on a complex health system, widespread failure among agencies and health services to coordinate efforts, and chronically insufficient care for the elderly.
Two INSERM researchers who delivered the report were to continue their analysis of deaths to determine what the actual cause was for the spike in mortality, the Health Ministry said.
The researchers, Denis Hemon and Eric Jougla, were also to recommend ways of improving France's warnings system to better manage such heat-related crises in the future.
The heat wave swept across much of Europe, but the death toll was far higher in France than in any other country.
Health Minister Jean-Francois Mattei has ordered a separate special study this month to look into a possible link with vacation schedules after doctors strongly denied allegations their absence put the elderly in danger. The heat wave hit during the August vacation period, when doctors, hospital staff and many others take leave. The results of that study are expected in November.
The role of vacations is a touchy subject. The National General Practitioners Union says that only about 20% of general practitioners were away during the heat wave.
Other European countries hit by the heat have been slower than France to come out with death tolls, but it's clear they also suffered thousands of deaths.
Environmental experts warn that because of climate change, such heat waves are expected to increase in number in coming years, meaning Europe — a continent that historically has enjoyed a temperate climate — will have to make adjustments.
http://www.usatoday.com/weather/news/2003-09-25-france-heat_x.htm
Charles likes to point to the 700+ deaths in Chicago and say "let's do it France's way". I doubt 10,000 is a particularly good reason for me to do it France's way
Heh,
• As many as half the deaths were at nursing homes, which were short-staffed because many aides and doctors were on vacation and were overcrowded because many families had checked in elderly relatives and also headed off to beaches and mountains. During August, much of the nation goes on vacation, and it is common for elderly relatives to be left at nursing homes. Most nursing homes and hospitals lack air conditioning because of health laws. French authorities have long believed air-conditioning systems do more harm, by spreading germs, than good.
http://www.usatoday.com/weather/news/2003-08-26-france-death_x.htm
Ja, let's do it France's way, nobody will be left in their homes like Chicago elderly were. Let's just put them in a concentration camp called an elderly home, have everyone go on vacation, and watch the deaths skyrocket. Not particularly smart.
Charles interpretation that "France's care" is superior to "Chicago's 1995 free market care" is um.... a bad interpretation, to say the least. Even assuming Charles got Chicago's "care" rightly labeled as "free market". I doubt that given Chicago's political machine.
I got a belly-laugh out of that remark, but it is quite thought-provoking, actually, that they consider facts a waste when facts interfere with their pet beliefs.
Again, I've demonstrated the hardcore ignorancy and willfull blindness of people like you, Charles, when it comes to making bad interpretations of the facts and trying to pass off this divinely inspired creation of yours as if it was something reasonable. The Chicago vs France heat waves and the Katrina vs France heatwaves Charles has ridiculously attempted to fabricate as evidence for his cause, is just the tip of the iceberg. Until Charles titanic starts sinking anyways.
The totalitarian belief that there is one, and only one true, interpretation upon one set of facts, is the example of an extremely closed minded mental flexibility.
When facts do not fit theological beliefs, the believers stretch the facts to fit the beliefs, rather than altering the beliefs.
This mindset leads to totalitarianism, the very thing you oppose.
12:50 PM, June 28, 2006
Here we have Ymar's interpretation of how totalitarianism is applied compared to Charles' interpretation of totalitarianism as applied by free market forces.
My interpretation is that while there are only one set of facts, there are many many bad and good interpretations of those facts, existing in the same plane of existence.
Charles' interpretation that he, and only he, has the one true set of interpretations for the one true set of facts, is indicative of the differences that we see outlined.
And, in spite of so much spending, life expectancy in the USA ranks only 29th in the world.
Clearly, the model is not working.
is it a fact that the USA ranks 29th on an arbitrarily conducted computer and statistics analysis? Yes.
Is it a fact that clearly this means the model is not working? No, that's an interpretation.
And people who try and make their interpretations into fact, are not called classical liberals. They're something else.
Charles' position is basically that you can't argue against his interpretation that the US is failing, why? Simply because. For you to argue against his position, that means you are "denying the facts".
The problem is not with the facts, the problem is with the human mind, like Charles', that are forming the facts into supports for the positions that they believe in.
Germany's bureacracy actually has some redeeming qualities. Simply because the people who run them, place such importance on timeliness and punctuality, part of the German culture of Alles in Ordnung, Order and Efficiency.
Change the people that run the bureacracy, and the efficiency drops.
yeah well steve what you have to remember is that neo likes some extremists but not others....depends if she agrees with them or not.
if you wanna laugh read "yrmar" and "wasp"....seriously deranged friends of neo
Islamic totalitarianism, to Charles market totalitarianism, to the superiority of socialism vs totalitarianism, to back to what is real totalitarianism.
It's called setting the terrain for the battle.
its called drug abuse yrdwnkr....what on earth are you on about?
His country hasn't been on the winning side of a war for 60 years but they are unbeatable. sounds a bit harsh.....which wars have they lost?
...apart from the one on their waistlines
You people actually believe Ymar is reading your stuff? Man he just shipped it to me, and I (Sakar) sees no evil, hears no evil, and speaks no evil baby.
I don't know what you guys wrote or said or heard or have fjorded out here. It's called compartamentalization. Drastic, but effective.
People can trust Charles' and CNN's interpretation of the facts, but I wouldn't recommend it.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Charle, confude--
My position is principled. I do not considere that a bad thing, since it is backed up by mountains of evidence.
I explained the problems of socialized medicine. The evidence is out there if you're willing to look. If I supply the evidence here, it will be dismissed as a capitalist or a right wing source, so it is important to understand the principles of each theory and the predictions they make.
A lot of the problems socialist systems have are predicted by the classical model-- the rationing, the runaway costs for the government, the lack of innovation, and the increased costs of not using the government system. Furthermore, if the socialist model is correct, health care access should be progressively getting better in countries with socialized medicine, but it is progressively getting worse in these respects.
I don't find the correlation between socialism and life-expectancy convincing. In the United States, there are cultural aspects that make people unhealthy, especially food and exercise. But when it comes to access to technology, for example, the United States is clearly superior. Here is a comparison between the American and the Canadian system leftists here in the United States worship so frequently.
I didn't notice if anyone adressed the infant mortality issue.
Firstly, any report that doesn't cover how *exactly* infant mortality is measured in each country is going to be lying to you with statistics.
We count births and deaths differently from other countries. One example...
"According to the World Health Organization (WHO) definition, all babies showing any signs of life, such as muscle activity, a gasp for breath or a heartbeat, should be included as a live birth. The U.S. strictly follows this definition. But many other countries do not.
Switzerland, for instance, doesn't count the deaths of babies shorter than 30 cm, because they are not counted as live births, according to Nicholas Eberstadt, Ph.D., Henry Wendt Scholar in Political Economy at the American Enterprise Institute and formerly a Visiting Fellow at the Harvard University Center for Population and Developmental Studies. So, comparing the 1998 infant mortality rates for Switzerland and the U.S., 4.8 and 7.2 per 1,000 births, respectively, is comparing apples and oranges."
That's one example.
So... lets compare infant mortality why don't we.
On health care:
One, no one has addressed the inevitable rationing in socialist systems. They're supposed to be more fair, but they also get the deleterious results predicted by the classical model. For instance,
"Rationing of health care occurs in the U.S. too, especially in public hospitals that provide care for the uninsured, and for those on Medicare and Medicaid. In spite of this, average wait times in the U.S. are far shorter than in countries with national health care systems.
For example, 27 percent of Canadian patients and 36 percent of British patients must wait more than four months for elective, non-emergency surgery. By contrast, only about 5 percent of American patients wait that long."
Secondly, no one addressed how socialist systems retard the development of new technology, as seen in the link of my June 28, 1059Pm post.
Third, here is an article about how programs like Medicare are driving up prices in the United States. Also, there is the explosion of cost to the taxpayer. Again, this is what is predicted by the classical model, not the socialist model.
These are real costs inherent to socialist systems. My health care is great, and I don't want rationing or high premiums simply because a lot of people have bad diets. You guys have to come up with a reason better than that.
The Jew-baiting by this deranged individual is unreal.
Socialism, with its conspiratorial worldview, almost always leads to Jew-baiting, since the Jews symbolize everything that is capitalist, commercial, greedy, and materialist in their eyes. Take the recent ranting by socialist hero Hugo Chavez, for instance, remarked a few months ago that
"You [the audience] didn't have money, and where was that money? The money in Venezuela was concentrated with them...like it is in the world, for this is a worldwide phenomena, you know? I just finished reading early this morning the latest report from the United Nations about the world situation, and it's alarming because it says that today more than ever before, 2005 years after they killed Jesus Christ, because the world, the world, is worsening every day, every day, the riches of the world, because God, nature provides, the world has sufficent water for those who need water, the world has sufficent riches, land sufficient to produce foodstuffs for the entire world population, the world has sufficient stone and minerals for construction, so that there is no shortage for anyone who is living. The world has these things for all, sure, but because of some minorities, the decendents of those same people who killed Christ, the decendents of the same people who fought Bolivar, and also those who crucified them in Santa Marta, over in Colombia. A minority that has seized the riches of the world, a minority that has seized the gold of the planet, the silver, the minerals, the water, the good land, the oil, all these riches, well, and they have concentrated the riches in only a few hands: less than 10 percent of the world population has more than half the riches of the entire world..and more than half the entire population of the planet is poor and each day there are more poor in the entire world."
Confudd--
With respect to Muslims, I agree with you completely. It is human nature for human beings to choose liberty when given the choice. Those here who have stated otherwise on this blog are not only bigoted against the few million Muslims living here in the United States, but undermine their position of keeping American forces in Iraq until its democracy can defend itself. If Islam is not compatible with democracy (Turkey? Indonesia? Bangladesh?), there is no reason for us to be in Iraq. I have faith that it is.
Speaking of democracy, Israel, a liberal democracy, has a right to exist. If we agree on this, then discussion about the appropriateness of the means Israel has chosen over the last few decades becomes academic. Sometimes the responses have been appropriate, other times they have been questionable. But if someone believes that we must choose policies that result in the extermination of every Jew living in Israel, the "discussion" will go nowhere. Liberalism requires argument and persuasion, while members of anti-liberal movements that worship force will "discuss" things in an analogous manner. I've already dignified the charade more than I ought have.
Post a Comment
<< Home