Fox News takes on Straight, Inc.
The Dunn Family
Alano wrote:
>On Mon, 03 Jun 2002 09:47:54 -0700, Guido Marx
><guidomarx@SPAM?_NO_yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>The Dunn Family wrote:
>>
>>>The totalitarian structure of a military is why autocrats always love
>>>their militaries so much and why they attempt to militarize society. It
>>>also explains why there are dozens military dictators around the globe
>>>rather than dictators from other professions. We've all heard about Gen.
>>>Castro and Gen. Mushharraff (sp?), but who ever heard of a doctor,
>>>lawyer, or minister becoming a dictator?
>>>
>>
>>How about Alberto Fujimori of Peru ? He was an agronomist and never
>>served in the military. I'm sure I can find other dictators who have
>>non-military backgrounds.
>>
I didn't mean that all dictators are military dictators. I only
meant that a disproportionately large number
are.
>>
>>
>>Guido
>>
>
>
>Wasn't Milosovitch a lawyer?
>
I'm not sure we can even call a lawyer who practiced in the former
Yugoslavia a lawyer. What
would a law career in a communist country involve anyway? Torturing
prisoners until they give
incriminating confessions?
>
Kleuskes & Moos
> I'm not sure we can even call a lawyer who practiced in the former
> Yugoslavia a lawyer. What
> would a law career in a communist country involve anyway? Torturing
> prisoners until they give
> incriminating confessions?
Nah. That's for amateurs. They got pro's. They don't need confessions, they
allready know. In fact, Yougoslavia wasn't even all that bad. Albania was
paranoid. Yugoslavia had Tito, who prevented the country from going
stalinist. In fact, yougoslavia was never part of the warsaw pact, but was
nonaligned. Pretty smart move, considering.
The story runs thus.
Kissing somebodies butt on one side and kicking some ones but on the other,
whilst strickty sticking to the party line (i.e. what your boss tells you)
is what usually gets you to the top.
Continue that simple pattern over a sizable proportion of the country,
which is easy to do, since you control pretty much everything, licenses,
jobs, housing, the works. You don't play ball, you don't get the goods.
The higher you are in the but-kissing-contest, the more people you can kick
in the ass to kiss your butt harder. Every now and then, you can trip
somebody up real bad, or they die, get old, retire, voluntarily or
otherwise.
Those who play ball and become good at it, will rise in the hierachy of
power. You only reach the top by invitation, you only become ruler by
ruthlessness.
You end up with only a relatively small amout of people who
a) do not kiss anybodies butt
b) don't have anybody telling them what the party line is.
Pretty much like anywhere else. On some scale.
So when Tito died, there were (off the top of my head 5 people who fitted
the discription above, trying to govern 6 different nationalities with an
age old tradition of hating each others guts and a large proportion of the
populace not conforming to abovementioned description. An oligarchy.
Then communism falls. The political figleaf of the powers that be was no
more. There were calls for democracy. Milosevic, sensing his cance, turned
serb-nationalist. Tudjman turned Kroat-nationalist. Everyone turned
nationalist.
Slovenia declared independence, the powers that be decided to split up te
corpse of what once was Yugoslavia, a wretched remnant of The Versaille
treaty. None of them knew how. Then these people got into an argument. Over
how to split up the country, over power.
Then there was a war. And they became 'Fathers of the Fatherland',
'Defenders of a Just and Noble Cause', Cried things like 'Dulce et Decorum
est Pro Patria Mori' and were als known as 'Dictators'.
Seeemple, no? Or do you _still_ think LotR is about 'Good vs Evil'?
Peter H Proctor
> I didn't mean that all dictators are military dictators. I only
>meant that a disproportionately large number
>are.
Generals have access to an alternate source of power, distinct
form the civilian political structure. So they can displace it.
The first modern example is Oliver Cromwell, who after defeating the
kings forces in the English Civil war, turned on the parliament that
had appointed him. Napoleon did the same.
The Dunn Family
Kleuskes & Moos wrote:
>The Dunn Family wrote:
>
>
>> I'm not sure we can even call a lawyer who practiced in the former
>>Yugoslavia a lawyer. What
>>would a law career in a communist country involve anyway? Torturing
>>prisoners until they give
>>incriminating confessions?
>>
>
>Nah. That's for amateurs. They got pro's. They don't need confessions, they
>allready know.
>
If they claim to already know, what would a lawyer be for? Show?
>In fact, Yougoslavia wasn't even all that bad. Albania was
>paranoid. Yugoslavia had Tito, who prevented the country from going
>stalinist. In fact, yougoslavia was never part of the warsaw pact, but was
>nonaligned. Pretty smart move, considering.
>
>The story runs thus.
>
>Kissing somebodies butt on one side and kicking some ones but on the other,
>whilst strickty sticking to the party line (i.e. what your boss tells you)
>is what usually gets you to the top.
>
That's pretty much how politics is conducted in the United States
and throughout most of the world.
>
>
>Continue that simple pattern over a sizable proportion of the country,
>which is easy to do, since you control pretty much everything, licenses,
>jobs, housing, the works. You don't play ball, you don't get the goods.
>
And the fascist then tricks people into thinking they own private
property by letting themselves call
themselves the owner and excercise a small amount of control that can be
voluntarily exchanged on a
highly regulated market. The fascist dictator, however, is the true
owner because he's the one who
excercises the most control. Is that how the Yugoslav economy really
worked? If so, it's a method that's
been used successfully at many times and places.
>
>
>The higher you are in the but-kissing-contest, the more people you can kick
>in the ass to kiss your butt harder. Every now and then, you can trip
>somebody up real bad, or they die, get old, retire, voluntarily or
>otherwise.
>
>Those who play ball and become good at it, will rise in the hierachy of
>power. You only reach the top by invitation, you only become ruler by
>ruthlessness.
>
>You end up with only a relatively small amout of people who
>
>a) do not kiss anybodies butt
>b) don't have anybody telling them what the party line is.
>
>Pretty much like anywhere else. On some scale.
>
>So when Tito died, there were (off the top of my head 5 people who fitted
>the discription above, trying to govern 6 different nationalities with an
>age old tradition of hating each others guts and a large proportion of the
>populace not conforming to abovementioned description. An oligarchy.
>
>Then communism falls. The political figleaf of the powers that be was no
>more. There were calls for democracy. Milosevic, sensing his cance, turned
>serb-nationalist.
>
If Milosevic was really a fascist. Both his communist and
nationalist manifestations were political stunts
rather than sincerely held belief systems. He did whatever appeared
neccessary to maintain total control
over his subjects. That's what fascism is.