AstroProdigy Posted September 7, 2006 Author Report Posted September 7, 2006 People go to communism as a result of extreme poverty with an elite class controlling everything. Democratic socialism is a great alternative now that we know about it and it's a much better alternative to totalitarian communism and its possible now. These countries were moving towards democracy before Stalin and returned to it after. The US isn't the sole modern democracy in the world. In fact, Western Europe has been a much bigger influence on Eastern Europe than the US has. There are lots of democracies today and more are on the way. Should we let dictators take over instead and no matter what they do play the "it's not our responsibility" card? Then when the people finally overthrow the dictator they'll hate us for letting it go on. The US is not heading towards a dictatorship and as you see now the moves away from democracy have backfired for Bush now. Individuals head countries away from democracy not the people (most of the time). The acception is certain religions which seem to steer people towards ignorance and oppression, but don't get me started about that. Democracy isn't easy to get, but just because it's not easy doesn't mean people should just go the easy way out of dictators.
Aileron Posted September 9, 2006 Report Posted September 9, 2006 Furthermore I'd say the at!@#$%^&*ude of "let them advance on their own and fight for their own freedom" is the easy way out. It isn't necessarily the best thing for the people caught in the corrupt antiquated societies, but is the easiest thing for us to do politically because it does not require us to make a decision. Astro, I would like to dissagree about communism though. Poor people don't resort to communism. Its usually started by low-end intellectuals - typically students of philosophy, political science, and the arts. Back to my previous point and to the topic though, Kurdistan would indeed quickly turn into another Israel. We would most likely create the region out of Kurdish territory in Iraq. Immeadiately, Iran, being the racist xenophobes that they are, would attack the nation in whichever way they could get away with it. Kurdistan would fight back, and with the US's support, would kick Iran's !@#$%^&*. They would use the opportunity to scoop up Kurdish occupied territory in Iran, using "land barrier" as an excuse. Then, it would be a neverending cycle of terrorist action and ineffectual peace deals. The good news is that Iran would be too distracted with Kurdistan to care about Israel, so Hezbollah's and Hamas' funds would go dry. Also, the territory Kurdistan would be created from has oil, so maybe the EU and possibly even the UN would support the nation.
AstroProdigy Posted September 9, 2006 Author Report Posted September 9, 2006 Low end intellectuals can't start communism without a basis of poor masses. Turkey+Iran+Syria against Kurdistan would be bad. If they actually won that conflict then they can't be taken down. Kurdistan would probably have animosity from its neighbors after that. Then again there is a base of people who hate Israel for religious reasons. It would be much harder to hate an oppressed people. Then again if Kurdistan gets independence then they most likely would create a moderate democratic society that might reverse the worsening relationship between the West and the Middle East.
Recommended Posts