Comments by "No One" (@joermundgand) on "Hillary Clinton's Comically Bad Vision For Democrats In 2017" video.

The corporate persistance, hahahahaha. She did it, how clueless are the Beltway boys and girls.
4
Uncle Mo, Paine was in a dispute with Burke who advocated to reinstall the French Monarchy with Burke using the argument that only Britons deserved freedom because their ancestors had earned that right through legal means and that the revolutionaries in France had no legal framework for their desire to overthrow the institution of monarchy. Paine's reply to Burke establishes that the revolutionaries had as much right as anyone to free themselves from autocratic rule and that the British were not unique in their desire for freedom, nor could Burke be such a pearl clutcher about how the revolutionaries achieved it. Paine expressed that it would be illogical for Britain to intervene in the affairs of another peoples sovereign nation. Regardless of what tender sensibilities of Burke and others like him felt about the so called barbarity of commoners assailing their "betters" in overthrowing the established order, but even the French revolution and it's ideas were the product of the enlightenment, which btw was felt most forcefully and most of it's ideas originated in France itself. Therefore it can be said that the revolution was a product of French thought, tradition and that many laws were passed in France itself that expressed these ideals prior to the revolution. What Paine writes fits in nicely with why the respect for internal political changes in other sovereign states is something that can be super imposed upon the existing system of sovereign states.
3
Learned Hand, Dude, that's all good and fine, but as I allready asked you, what do you propose to replace it with, no states or nations, how?, how will we govern ourselves instead? It's fine to just spew high minded thought, but you must remember, none of these ideas came from a vacuum, we stand on the shoulders of the past, every idea is a part of an ever evolving structure, every law comes from these ideas, every framework of law supports them. The American State is a Westphalian state with all its accoutrements. "That is what the French and even the American revolution was about. Common Sense was so influential that John Adams said, "Without the pen of the author of Common Sense, the sword of Washington would have been raised in vain." If you want to replace something you must have something to step into its place.
2
Shobhana Rajasenan, Yeah, that article states the obvious, their precious consensus is failing and nationalism(old school Westphalian style) is replacing it, the poor little neolibs and neocons don't like this blatant imperialism.
1
Learned Hand, Israel is created like all states through the force of arms, no state that exists today has come into being with people sitting in a circle singing kumbaya... Internal monopoly of violence, external projection of force, that's how states are maintained and exist in the Westphalian system.
1
Learned Hand, the congress at Vienna reaffirmed the Westphalian system as the framework for a international order of states. The rights of man are but an idea that was incorporated into the Westphalian system after the second world war.
1
Learned Hand, Gun beats spear, that's all that is, before that it was horse archer beats spear.
1
Learned Hand, not quite, the Westphalian system was originally a system of mercantilism, not globalism, the states were sovereign states and their existence(if they were signatories) were protected from being absorbed by other states. What you are talking about is the Wilsonian model of the Westphalian system, the system has been expanded to include non original signatory states after the congress of Potsdam.
1
Learned Hand, don't be facile, our system of states have a foundation in the Frankish successor states, law and legitimacy are ever evolving, even Thomas Paine acknowledged history, the rights of man have a distinct influence from the Germanic common law and the christian/pagan idea of the divine individual.
1
Learned Hand, Colonialism, from the Roman method of ensuring the continued subjugation and cultural unification by the means of having military settlers in conquered territory, the Westphalian system after the congress protects the territorial integrity of states(in theory, in practice the invasion of Iraq rendered it quite brittle). Colonialism was the conquest of markets, see mercantilism.
1
Learned Hand, Anyway, if you honestly think the destruction of he nation state will bring about your earthly paradise then that's okay, just know that it is impossible to do at this point in time, there has to be a unified idea of humanity before you can accomplish that. I supposed this is where you start calling me a statist or a fascist. sigh.
1
Learned Hand, You are being a bit too simple now I think, rhetorical question on your part, what we have now is an amalgamated system, nation states are no longer fully protected from stronger nation states(if they ever were, European states during Pax Brittanica were protected). Ideally Israel should retreat back to the 1967 borders(prior to 1947 the local populace were colonial subjects in the British mercantilistic colonial empire), the US and other states should refrain from interventionist resource wars in he middle East and elsewhere by respecting the Potsdam agreement and the Paris accords, both of which are rooted in the Westphalian system.
1
Learned Hand, the states that signed the agreement were the surviving states, Bohemia for instance was during the war conquered by Austria. Only the survivors had a seat at the table. Off course the system has flaws, it's an evolving legal system for interstate relations, we can only hope to improve upon it, did the signatories of the Potsdam agreement abide by it completely, no they did not, but were new states afforded sovereignty and decolonised, yes they were.
1
Learned Hand, I believe that you are again retreating behind platitudes, nothing comes from nothing. The Westphalian peace was the first time states agreed upon having a set of rules that was more than merely might makes right. What would you suggest to replace this paradigm?
1
Nothing comes from nothing. It requires but a very small glance of thought to perceive that although laws made in one generation often continue in force through succeeding generations, yet they continue to derive their force from the consent of the living. A law not repealed continues in force, not because it cannot be repealed, but because it is not repealed; and the non-repealing passes for consent.
1
The evolution of inter state law. The circumstances of the world are continually changing, and the opinions of men change also; and as government is for the living, and not for the dead, it is the living only that has any right in it. That which may be thought right and found convenient in one age may be thought wrong and found inconvenient in another. In such cases, who is to decide, the living or the dead?
1
The principle of non intervention in the affairs of other states in firm but breathtakingly beautiful terms. It was not against Louis XVI. but against the despotic principles of the Government, that the nation revolted. These principles had not their origin in him, but in the original establishment, many centuries back: and they were become too deeply rooted to be removed, and the Augean stables of parasites and plunderers too abominably filthy to be cleansed by anything short of a complete and universal Revolution. When it becomes necessary to do anything, the whole heart and soul should go into the measure, or not attempt it. That crisis was then arrived, and there remained no choice but to act with determined vigor, or not to act at all. The king was known to be the friend of the nation, and this circumstance was favorable to the enterprise. Perhaps no man bred up in the style of an absolute king, ever possessed a heart so little disposed to the exercise of that species of power as the present King of France. But the principles of the Government itself still remained the same. The Monarch and the Monarchy were distinct and separate things; and it was against the established despotism of the latter, and not against the person or principles of the former, that the revolt commenced, and the Revolution has been carried.
1
Besides I have read it before, it's a good read, Paine is concise and precise, unlike this guy. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reflections_on_the_Revolution_in_France
1
Uncle Mo, oh no, I'm not defending those bozos, they do not respect the sovereignty of other nations at all. They are the unelected kleptocracy of the US engaging in outright blackmail of the entire world by holding the dagger of the petrodollar at everyones throat.
1
Uncle Mo, I'm saying that ideally nation states should respect other nation states.
1
Uncle Mo, Observe good faith and justice toward all nations. Cultivate peace and harmony with all.
1
Uncle Mo, We can only try to strive towards an ideal world, we will never get there, but in our quest to make it so we may improve things a little. The Aliens probably put a big beacon out in Oort cloud with a message repeating over and over, "dangerous savage planet ahead, do not approach, locals will kill you on sight".
1
Uncle Mo, Stellaris style waiting for the stupid locals to blow themselves up in thermonuclear war, terraform and repopulate. Yeah, that seems likely.
1