Now that the United Kingdom has officially acknowledged its independence as a nation, it is in position to do some zero-base union calculating as to the benefits of joining with 27 other nations in the EU.
There certainly the benefit of paying less export duties when purchasing products from the other 27 countries in EU, if co-joining with them. Of course, the UK would have to charge them less in import taxes from them.
In regard to security, the UK's interactions in the INTERPOL system won't change, including even the EU-INTERPOL version. And of course, the UK remains in NATO and remains in constant contact with the US military.
But the glaring change is in going-it-alone on immigration governmental policies and quotas. The UK's borders will be solely under their own control--at least, that is an intended consequence of leaving the EU.
I believe that no country is actually capable for long of withstanding the migration of peoples into or across any artificially-drawn no-man's land. For desperate peoples, driven and motivated, by the survival drive will accomplish penetration through any resurrected boundaries of any country. In other terms, man is driven by the herd instinct, no matter the cost in human life.
What any nation should do, when invaded by hordes of peoples is seek to accommodate the influx as best it can--as does Germany, Turkey, and Jordan, today's humane exemplars in the Middle-East migration. It will be recalled that the Roman Empire attempted to withstand the human hordes from overrunning its northern borders only to find eventually that their cities, Rome among them, were sacked and destroyed.
Natural forces combined with social exigencies ensure that the human sapiens species will always be on the move across the world, no matter what obstacles are set in his path.
It seems to me that the UK is attempting to maintain a posture of international prominence among nations as it once had a century or two previously--when the English navy ruled the seas. Not anymore, however, are its efforts as fruitful. Instead, the UK's joining with other nations to achieve a common interest among them all just makes sound sense: as in the case of lowering tariffs among most favored nations; and benefiting from EU money to go to its poorer neighborhoods.
Actually, the drive toward globalization is not that of the EU or any other particular conglomerate of nations, but of international trading itself as represented in the stated aims and goals of the World Trade Organization. That is to say, the movement oi globalization is not that of any established assemblage of governments but of trading partners in international commercial ventures, e.g., trading members of a free trade organization, such as the WTO or the regional NFTA.
.
Sunday, June 26, 2016
Monday, June 20, 2016
What's the major thing wrong with Russia!
I've been asked to talk about Russia, as I know it to be.
I had a major hand in designing the Russian Federation Constitution. Essentially, I freed its satellites from the control of Mother Russia. But I could not affect the major problem with Russia itself--namely, its governmental officials and civilian workers. The entire government is corrupt--riddled with favoritism--who you know, not what you know.
Lest you think that's how it has to be--written in genes dating back to the Tartars: I disagree. The Chinese government has sent its youth replacements in governmental positions to the US for training at prominent universities and colleges and trade schools. That method seems to be working out well. And its civilization has lasted far longer.
It's true--the older President Bush was with the CIA, but he had a lot of knowledge beyond knowing how to play "king of the mountain" or "pack man."
Russia needs technocrats disparately to rule the country. HELP! Don't let the Russian people suffer under poor governments! I was brought in by the Kennan Institute that has its offices in DC and Moscow to evaluate the Georgian government that was established after the Rose (?) Conflict. I warned them not to go the way they had been trained by the Russians: you need a technocratic government throughout the state to oversee water, garbage-and-waste, etc., I urged. (Incidentally, that includes the military.) These leaders were educated in military tactics and military-like strategies yet knew nothing how to rule a country and take care of its civilian departments. Ok in centuries previous to the Nineteenth!
Until Russia is willing to submit to the people who know how to run a government and render its services satisfactory, it will be on the verge of sinking into a quagmire of inefficiencies ordered by governmental officials acting out of their own ignorance.
I had a major hand in designing the Russian Federation Constitution. Essentially, I freed its satellites from the control of Mother Russia. But I could not affect the major problem with Russia itself--namely, its governmental officials and civilian workers. The entire government is corrupt--riddled with favoritism--who you know, not what you know.
Lest you think that's how it has to be--written in genes dating back to the Tartars: I disagree. The Chinese government has sent its youth replacements in governmental positions to the US for training at prominent universities and colleges and trade schools. That method seems to be working out well. And its civilization has lasted far longer.
It's true--the older President Bush was with the CIA, but he had a lot of knowledge beyond knowing how to play "king of the mountain" or "pack man."
Russia needs technocrats disparately to rule the country. HELP! Don't let the Russian people suffer under poor governments! I was brought in by the Kennan Institute that has its offices in DC and Moscow to evaluate the Georgian government that was established after the Rose (?) Conflict. I warned them not to go the way they had been trained by the Russians: you need a technocratic government throughout the state to oversee water, garbage-and-waste, etc., I urged. (Incidentally, that includes the military.) These leaders were educated in military tactics and military-like strategies yet knew nothing how to rule a country and take care of its civilian departments. Ok in centuries previous to the Nineteenth!
Until Russia is willing to submit to the people who know how to run a government and render its services satisfactory, it will be on the verge of sinking into a quagmire of inefficiencies ordered by governmental officials acting out of their own ignorance.
Wednesday, June 15, 2016
Don't aim for perfection!
The Pragmatists of Twentieth Century America had it right: the cost to reach perfection in any one field of endeavor is just to high to make it a worthwhile goal for humans to reach.
For example, Candidate Trump would have the court system to enact policies that would make it a certainty that justice is always meted out. But what would be the cost to society to bring about such a end? No, humans must settle on, "It's good enough, but not perfection."
Today, we are being confronted with the prospect of automated driving by means of using artificial intelligence. I suppose, one might argue that we approach perfection in the world through our dependency on computers and other devices that augment human endeavors. This may be so, for I know it as a fact of my experience that humans, left on their own, never come even that close to achieving an ideal as a stated goal.
I must remind myself as I grow older into old age that there are body parts which no longer behave as they once did. The question I must pose to myself as a test as to whether I should pursue a remedial course of action is, am I still able to function with the use of the particular body part? If so, let it go! Enjoy must learn to live with what capabilities I have and can make use of!
For example, Candidate Trump would have the court system to enact policies that would make it a certainty that justice is always meted out. But what would be the cost to society to bring about such a end? No, humans must settle on, "It's good enough, but not perfection."
Today, we are being confronted with the prospect of automated driving by means of using artificial intelligence. I suppose, one might argue that we approach perfection in the world through our dependency on computers and other devices that augment human endeavors. This may be so, for I know it as a fact of my experience that humans, left on their own, never come even that close to achieving an ideal as a stated goal.
I must remind myself as I grow older into old age that there are body parts which no longer behave as they once did. The question I must pose to myself as a test as to whether I should pursue a remedial course of action is, am I still able to function with the use of the particular body part? If so, let it go! Enjoy must learn to live with what capabilities I have and can make use of!
The Mitt Romney Conference tentatively explores the making of a tyrant
It's necessary to piece together various discussions at the Conference to get the entire picture of a President who uses the office for tyrannical purposes.
Romney led the entry into the topic by expressing concern that a tyrant is made out of the unfulfilled desires of a people who have become despondent that their interests have not been publicly acknowledged and the people's political leaders have not been so engaged. Further, the despot is formed when he alights upon a group of individuals to isolate from the mainstream only for the purpose of accusing them of the cause of the injustices against the majority's stated demands. If Trump were in some formative stage of becoming despotic, he would single out some group standing in the way of the people's achieving their righteous will--for example, the Mexicans. He would further point to others--politicians and prominent dignitaries alike--as adversaries of the people, calling each by some pseudo name and derogatory nomenclature.
A would-be tyrant in the making then would claim that his way is the only true way to achieve the stated aspirations and hopes of the majority of the people. And, he would aspire to religious devotion in pursuing fulfillment of their desires and interests.
But, as hinted at from the information leaked what other discussants at the Conference claimed on the topic, the vital, necessary power a tyrant must have is the control of the country's military, which he would say emphatically, that without his intervention would be insufficient to maintain the security of the country he controls. He would revamp the military and the country's police forces, that is, to achieve his own ends for power over the people and for personal gain.
Shocking discussion, to be sure. My high regard for "the Mitt" is predicated on his daring and forthrightness in this matter.
Romney led the entry into the topic by expressing concern that a tyrant is made out of the unfulfilled desires of a people who have become despondent that their interests have not been publicly acknowledged and the people's political leaders have not been so engaged. Further, the despot is formed when he alights upon a group of individuals to isolate from the mainstream only for the purpose of accusing them of the cause of the injustices against the majority's stated demands. If Trump were in some formative stage of becoming despotic, he would single out some group standing in the way of the people's achieving their righteous will--for example, the Mexicans. He would further point to others--politicians and prominent dignitaries alike--as adversaries of the people, calling each by some pseudo name and derogatory nomenclature.
A would-be tyrant in the making then would claim that his way is the only true way to achieve the stated aspirations and hopes of the majority of the people. And, he would aspire to religious devotion in pursuing fulfillment of their desires and interests.
But, as hinted at from the information leaked what other discussants at the Conference claimed on the topic, the vital, necessary power a tyrant must have is the control of the country's military, which he would say emphatically, that without his intervention would be insufficient to maintain the security of the country he controls. He would revamp the military and the country's police forces, that is, to achieve his own ends for power over the people and for personal gain.
Shocking discussion, to be sure. My high regard for "the Mitt" is predicated on his daring and forthrightness in this matter.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)