From: Samantha Atkins (samantha@objectent.com)
Date: Fri Apr 11 2003 - 00:49:14 MDT
Lee Corbin wrote:
> Samantha writes
>
>
>>[Lee wrote]
>>
>>>[Damien S. wrote]
>>>
>>>>Such as one where one person owns all the land? Or would
>>>>redistribution there still be a violation of the sacred
>>>>rights of property?
>>>
>>>That's exactly the right question, and it was the one asked
>>>by a number of American administrations in the 1950s - 1980s,
>>>when they were doing whatever they could---hang preconceptions
>>>and ideology---to keep nations in Latin America and Africa
>>>from falling into the hands of the Russians.
>>
>>In some cases they were doing all they could to keep the nations
>>out of the hands of the nations' own people and their duly
>>elected representatives.
>
>
> For what motive? That is, in your model of reality, what would
> the motive of the U.S. have been to avoid having the land fall
> into the hands of a nation's own people?
Simple. If it was not in our economic and geo-political
interest to have them be independent and sometimes uncooperative
with us we sometimes apparently decided to oust their duly
elected government. I am not making this up. Do you want
chapter and verse quoted? It is not up to me to say why we did
this. Especially since I don't understand the "why". I simply
point out that we did do this.
>
>>From earlier postings, I get the feeling that you just believe
> U.S. foreign policy to be intrinsically wicked, so that it would
> of course immediately follow that it would have as its first
> priority the detriment of the people, which ignores incentives,
> and is a dumb reading of history.
>
This is an exceedingly dumb reading of what I have said. Like I
say, I did not make this up. I am going on vacation starting
tomorrow but if you want a list of such events, just say the word.
>
>>I do not believe that all of this was only about keeping
>>the Russians from grabbing these countries.
>
>
> Well, then, which country's land distribution would you
> like to discuss first?
>
Land distribution? Do you want to reduce our actions
interfering with other countries to only that issue? Why?
>
>>I especially do not believe when our policies did not
>>become more hands-off after the fall of the USSR.
>
>
It may be a week before I get to go into detail on this and some
other current issues as I hope to not be around computers much
for about 7 days or so.
- samantha
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Apr 11 2003 - 00:51:41 MDT