As I sit here, bathed in the brilliant sunshine pouring into my room (seemingly, a very unusual occurrence this month) heightened by the glare from a snow-covered landscape, I read about the day’s news … and think about the loneliness of our wondrous planet and its uncertain future.
When the calendar indicated a new year, the habitual tradition of resolutions entered my head and it occurred to me that a New Year’s Resolution had become no more important than the Daily Horoscope. But I had already made a decision regarding this Blog to avoid, what appeared to be, unpopular political comment. Unpopular, it seems, because of the misunderstanding of my deliberate use of controversy to create exciting discussion. Oh dear!
Nevertheless, there is so much to discuss about people who affect our lives. For example, Presidents Putin and Xi, Prime Ministers May, Trudeau and Netanyahu, Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, to name a few and, of course or should I say not least, President Trump. All brought together under the banner of Islamism, an ancient religion attempting to force its fundamental beliefs into the global milieu.
But, even though I believe it very important to be aware of matters that, although seemingly matters that may not affect us personally, certainly matters that will affect our children.
Now, what have you got to say?
Now, what have you got to say?
Bernie my friend, life is all about what is happening every day and everywhere. It may be social, economic, political, chit chat or serious. As little cogs in the wheel of life, we can speculate and ruminate usually without fear of consequences, particularly in Canada. The same might not be true in many other countries, probably isn't.
ReplyDeleteAs small cogs, we have been gifted with a close-up view of the new American president (whose name shall remain unsaid). World-shaking events appear to be happening, lives will be lost, freedoms curtailed, opportunities to gossip enhanced. Such things happened during the reign of George W Bush of course but the wheel kept turning. Think of the Big Eye in London that turns slowly, inexorably around its axis returning what went before back again for ever and ever.
You and I can hide north of the border clothed in our Canadian passports and make comments. Lucky us.
Now here is my question. Do you agree we are living in the era when liberal democracy is replaced by an autocratic government? If so what style of autocratic government?
A liberal democracy or an autocratic government? Even very qualified pundits would argue eternally on that question.
ReplyDeleteAn interesting, if not ambiguous, question. Could there be a Conservative or aristocratic government with liberal policies — yes. At least, there have been examples of such in the past. But, you seem to be referring to the new US president (who I’ll refer to as the Donald). I should qualify him as a working class billionaire (if we accept his asset values) with a yuge (huge) ego … an amazingly fantastic ego … and a habit to aggrandize. .
Nevertheless, given his very short period in office, and equally with other presidents, he should be allowed a period of doubt. Therefore, unless we believe ‘faux news’, he was elected justly and, as yet, has done nothing illegal. On the other hand, as an example, some cities, including London (Ontario) are referring to themselves, illegally, as refuge cities … as an objection to a temporary, and legal, travel ban (How many countries, including Canada, often enact travel bans?).
I am in favour of a monarchist form of government (when necessary) but the Donald could never be referred to as a monarch or a dictator … no matter what those liberal, window smashing, protestors, or those in silly woollen hats may seem to believe.
Therefore, I do not agree that a liberal democracy has been replaced by an aristocratic government, and the jury is only just about to start the style verdict. One thing is certain, the Justin will not be given a second term. Now, where have we heard that before … and why?
The Donald is an example of an autocrat but there are others. Ms May in England may be one and there is a chance others will be elected in France, Holland and elsewhere soon. Mr. Harper was one but our system replaced him with another. I'm not suggesting liberal democracies are gone yet but they are weakening as strong commercial interests undermine them to obtain greater wealth and power. Military establishments have vested interests in control of governments to the detriment of the population. Religious hierarchies are a threat to democracy. Examples of these are found in many countries. Maybe autocratic systems work as long as the governors can be replaced but countries like China, Iran, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Syria, maybe Russia and many others do not have mechansisms to change the governors.
ReplyDeleteMy dictionary defines an autocrat as, 'Someone who insists on complete obedience from others ...'
ReplyDeleteTherefore, you seem to suggest that there are two types; those that do not have mechanisms for change (those listed in your final sentence), and those who are pro temp. My definition does not apply to the later ... to which the Donald belongs. His egotism may be restrained by impeachment ... perhaps.
You are correct my learned friend. The Donald acts like an autocrat as does Putin. Both have constitutional limits on their terms of office but Putin found a workaround for that. As for the Donald, impeachment is a long process, remember the Nixon saga. Don't hold your breath, the Donald has already obtained a copyright on his campaign slogan for 2000.
ReplyDeleteI am thoroughly enjoying this discussion, but it is very speculative at the moment. Firstly, he must get everyone suggested for his staff confirmed. Then, we must give him, at least, six months to prove himself ... or not. This could take until year's end because of filibustering. Thank God that I'm not a journalist, I'd hate to imagine what I'd do in that time.
ReplyDeleteLearned ... - not.
Some New Year's resolutions, it seems, are impossible to keep.
ReplyDeleteYou have omitted in the list of 'leaders' who will certainly influence the future of this delicate planet those from Africa who are dragging their countries down into the bottommost circle of hell: CRC, Sudan, Ethiopia, RSA, just to begin with. Kenya. Uganda.
ReplyDeleteI hate to say this, but in my opinion, Africa's descent into the bottomless pit will have little affect on this planet, other than to increase the volume of the snakelike procession of economic migrants. Maybe lions and elephants too.
ReplyDeleteYou're harsh Bernie. The human species originated in Africa, perhaps it will end there.
ReplyDeleteThat snake of mass migration towards Europe has left nothing untouched on that continent - economy, borders, politics, society, education, health, housing, environment, funerals, emotions, religion, safety, transport - it slithered over everything, leaving chaos behind.
ReplyDeleteThe African continent itself is unbalanced and devastated by civil war, disease and devastation. And this problem is too large not to affect the planet.
Over $70 billion is taken annually and illegally out of the global money system by African dictators who refuse to resign and who devastate their countries. Not only Africa - Eastern Europe also comes to mind.
So HOW do you mean - African problems only affect Africa?
I agree with what John is suggesting - we should stay each in our own continent. Let's not even think about the grrrreat British Empire and the problems it caused.
Steph.
ReplyDeleteAh, I can tell that you’re enjoying this Steph. But, surely, you can’t keep blaming the devastation of the African continent on the British … and forgetting the Dutch and Portuguese influences. Of course, there was never going to be a Dutch Empire because they are too nice.
Africa (in my mind) wasn’t such a bad place to live a hundred years ago, relatively speaking. Of course, racism was (is) a terrible illness but, don’t forget that colonialists were forced out as not being needed any longer. Of course, that is a simplification, and I bow to you superior knowledge.
Probably, the increasing U.S. nationalism by the Donald will reduce the $70 billion somewhat, and it will become Y480 billion RMB.