Stop the America-bashing!

[Willem]

Originally posted by Sir Ralph
What concerns the might of Her Majesty the Queen over Canada and Australia, she has no more power than in her own country, and that is practically zero. It's not like in the United States or in Russia, where the President is the head of the government. Most European countries have a government with a Prime minister (in Germany it's Chancellor Schroeder) as leader for the executive power, and either a President (in Germany that's Johannes Rau) or a (constitutional) Monarch for representation only.

The Queen has even less power in Canada than she does in England. Her role as head of state is purely symbolic and she's more of a celebrity than anything else. She's represented here by the Governor-General, who's only real duty is to preside over ceremonial functions. The only reason we still accept her as our head of state is that it's not seen as a priority at the moment. Occasionaly some politician brings up the notion of getting rid of her influence, so we can have a Republic with a President, but though sympathetic to the idea, no one wants to go through all the trouble.

Partly this is because of our Quebec problem. Changing our constitution and implementing a Republic would no doubt open up the issue of their seperation. In case you aren't aware, we have one province that is predominantly French speaking. There are a number of it's politicians who would like to see it become a sovereign state, and every so often they hold a referendum and allow the people of Quebec to vote on the issue. But the seperatists lose everytime. Although it was very, very close last time, about a 1% difference IIRC. And they have blocked attempts in the past of changing our constitution, so a real effort of dropping the Queen right now would no doubt stir up a lot of trouble and uncertainty. So at the moment, it's not worth it. We have complete control over all our affairs now, so why bother?

[Willem]

Originally posted by siredgar


Can you say the same for the differing viewpoints of the Canadian figure skating pair and the Russian judge?

To tell you the truth, I know very little about that situation and I just don't care. The only thing that appeals to me about the Olympics is that it gives the world a chance to be together in peace. Everything else is just spectacle IMHO.

[Willem]

Originally posted by Arrian
Willem,

I too have enjoyed our running discussion here. As for forums devoted to things like this, I have no idea, but what I can recommend is a newspaper that offers a good mix of ideas/opinions on current events (terrorism, etc.) like you don't get from our (N. American) media: The Lebanon Star. The editorials and letters to the editor are pretty good for getting a variety of viewpoints, especially from the Arab world - something U.S. mass media totally ignores.

Serb - Your English is excellent considering it's not your native language (seriously, your writing compares favorably to many U.S. highschool students), but I think you may have misunderstood my last post, like Ralph said.

-Arrian

Yes, that's a good idea, thanks.

BTW Serb, you would shame many Canadian students as well. In fact some of our college students for that matter. I was in school a couple of years ago, and I was appalled at some of my fellow student's command of English.

[Dauphin]

Her role as head of state is purely symbolic and she's more of a celebrity than anything else

She isn't even a celebrity here, she is seen more as a leech.

The only reason we still accept her as our head of state is that it's not seen as a priority at the moment.

Don't worry, we will get rid of her for you.

[Serb]

One more note, Serb. I just read your response to Arrian and must say you seem to have greatly misunderstood him. He with no word offended you, and he also did not take your words as offense.

I understand him right Ralph, and of course it was nothing offensive in his words, but when I reed his post I’ve just realized that some guys from Europe might find arrogance in my post, it was mostly reply to them not to Arrian. I’ve just wanted to explain that I didn’t want to be arrogant.

[Serb]

Originally posted by siredgar


Can you say the same for the differing viewpoints of the Canadian figure skating pair and the Russian judge?

Do you think it was Russian conspiracy?
As far as I know the fate of gold medals was determinate by vote of judge from Poland not from Russia.
Btw, when Canadian pair becomes the world’s champions it was the same scandal situation.

[Serb]

Originally posted by Sir Ralph
Serb, Chechnya has never been as independent from Russia, as the members of the British Commonwealth are from the UK. It has had some kind of "local autonomy" with no international rights, without an own foreign policy, a regular army (not talking about rebels) etc.

Disagree.
“It has had some kind of "local autonomy" with no international rights” when it was the part of Russian Soviet Federative Socialistic Republic, in times of SU, it was the same situation for period of time since 1991 until 1996. But, for the period of time since 1996 until 1999, it was not autonomy not even a close. As I see one of the condition of autonomy is that the local (within an autonomy) laws do not denied, (not in conflict) with the constitution of entire country. For that period of time, laws used by them have nothing common with laws by which whole Russia live, this laws were in huge conflicts with the major law of our country- the constitution. We do not use physical punishment, we do not cutting off hands of our thieves, they done. Now about foreign policy, they have their emissaries in many countries of the world. Do you heard about Chechen delegation sent by Maskhadov on previous, and last Parliament Assembly of Europe? I can assure you, they have their foreign policy. On the West their policy was to show how good they are, and how they threaten by evil Russians, to make image that they are not terrorists but only righteous freedom fighters, that their leaders like “president” (btw, no one elected him actually, they lived under fundamentalist, extremist’s regime not under democracy) Maskhadov has nothing common with terrorists, while all this was lies. And they were successful; you prefer to trust them, not to trust us. On East (for most of the part in Afghanistan) their policy was to beg for money and reinforcements of fanatics and mercenaries. And they were successful too; the Taliban constantly supported them with money, people and weapons. Now about an army, of course they have army. What type of regiments Maskhadov salute on all this military parades in Grozny then?
I am waiting for other arguments. And I really like that you use arguments to defend your pov and don’t claim arguments of your opponent as “Russian propaganda”.

What concerns the might of Her Majesty the Queen over Canada and Australia, she has no more power than in her own country, and that is practically zero.

Isn't it the exactly what I said? Does it mean only “de juro” power, while “de fucto” it is not. May be I type this Latin words incorrect?
Yes, for the period of time 1996-1999 the power of Russian’s president in Chechnya was not zero, it was less then zero, he has no power at all.

It's not like in the United States or in Russia, where the President is the head of the government. Most European countries have a government with a Prime minister (in Germany it's Chancellor Schroeder) as leader for the executive power, and either a President (in Germany that's Johannes Rau) or a (constitutional) Monarch for representation only.

Thanks for the lecture. Do you really think that I know nothing about Europeans government systems?

At the same time, Russia always had it's thumb at Chechnya.

I am ready to make vow on Bible that for period of time 1996-1999 Russia has had not even a little finger in Chechnya.
And I don’t know for how long period of time this situation may continue, if they do not attack Russia, not invaded Dagestan. Why you do not want to understand that they started the second Chechen’s war? They are attacked us, not we are attacked them. And you (not you personally Ralph, I mean whole West) do not understand that those wars have absolutely different reasons. And if in first campaign local population was against us, and this war last for few YEARS and finally we’ve LOST that war, then in second campaign population of Chechnya support Russian’s army, and this is the major reason why the second war was WIN within few MONTHS.

[Serb]

Originally posted by Willem


It's an expression in the west, at least in North America, I'm not surprised you don't understand. We say that when a person has said something really stupid, and also somewhat embarrassing, that they've put their foot in their mouth. Don't ask me where it comes from, it's just one of those sayings.

May be it comes from Yoga’s exercises?
Anyhow, Russians have no less ‘extreme’ sayings. For example “ glaz no jopu natyanu” it means- I’m gone put your eye in your as*hole. It’s really hard for me to understand how is it possible to do so, even with enough Yoga’s trainings.

[Serb]

Originally posted by Willem
BTW Serb, you would shame many Canadian students as well. In fact some of our college students for that matter. I was in school a couple of years ago, and I was appalled at some of my fellow student's command of English.

Oh, no I think I’m starting to cry.
Stop this bullsh*t guys, I know the truth about my English, and no one of you will never convince me that it is good, I am just using Word’98 to type my posts, it put red lines below the words if I’ll type something wrong.

[Willem]

Originally posted by Sagacious Dolphin

She isn't even a celebrity here, she is seen more as a leech.

Aah, you must be from Australia. There's a lot of people in Canada that feel the same way, I'm sort of inclined that way myself. It costs us millions of dollars a year to put up this pretext, and for what. I'd rather see that money spent for other things. Still there's quite a number of people who would be aghast at the idea of getting rid of her.

[Harovan]

LOL, at one point the whole British Monarchy has influence even in Germany: It feeds the local yellow press and the cable TV with all kinds of scandals, thus dragging the typical "German Michel" from seeing the real problems.

[Dauphin]

I am actually from England.

The feeling about royalty as seen by the average Brit is the same as the average Aussie or Canuck. The only reason we keep the Monarchy is for tourism and the fact we don't want a President.

Hardly anyone is going to celebrate the Queens Golden Jubilee this year.

[Dry]

Originally posted by Serb
Isn't it the exactly what I said? Does it mean only “de juro” power, while “de fucto” it is not. May be I type this Latin words incorrect?

Even if there was a very, very small error ('de facto', instead of 'de fucto'), it was perfectly understandable.

I am ready to make vow on Bible that for period of time 1996-1999 Russia has had not even a little finger in Chechnya.

I understand what you are saying, but maybe you have to know that for us, western european people, it is not enough just to say that.
Let give me an example, where belgians are the bad guys. Congo.
We colonized Congo and did not educate native people. The few that were allowed to study, were put in subordinate jobs. So, when decolonisation could not be avoided, we 'gave' them independence. Having no experience in how to rule a state, they made mistakes (some slaughter of europeans were not stopped). And it was easy for us to say: 'hey look, they are unable to rule themselves', 'people are killed', 'we need to intervene for humanitary reasons', 'let send the army to save lifes'.
Now you can be even more machiavellian: in Rwanda: you educate only a small part of the natives, and you do it on ethnical base. Only Tustsis get education, so when independence come, they get all the decision posts and soon or later, the others, feeling the unfairness, will get upset... and some may even become killers ('those big bad Hutus, they are just killers').

These were 'classic' scenario of (de)colonization. This was not exclusive to belgian evilness, most europeans colonists did it this way. Today, europeans citizens know that, and they are no more ready to believe simple
redneck theories like 'They are unable to rule themselves', or 'They are terrorists/killers'. We keep asking 'What did you do to them that they become like that?', 'Didn't you s#!t in their boots even a little bit?'.

So, understand me well, I don't say that THIS happened in Chechnya, but as long as we don't know in which conditions this independence was given, we cannot really say who are the good and the bad guys .
Sorry if we wear armored underpants, but we have been (beeeeep)d too much before, and we don't like it.

[Serb]

Nice try Dry
I think I understood you properly.
I wish you can understand my well too. I do not want to say that during our history we were nice guys always, of course not. Every nation has ‘good’ and ‘bad’ periods of own history. Yes, we’ve done bad things too. I am clearly realizing it. I am saying this to explain that my words below are not arrogance of some kind.
So, I should remind that history of Russian expansion is different from European’s. We never have colonies. None territories Russian Empire are included, never were treated as colonies. This is the main reason why Russia was able to keep such huge territories for such long period of time. All territories that Russia included have the same rights; some of territories like Finland for example may have special privileges- they do not pay taxes to budget of Empire and spending all their money within their autonomy, there was other minor privileges. But majority of territories have equal status and rights. When some territory becomes part of R.E. we’ve come there for a long time and brings to this territory all our cultural achievements. Do you know that some of our southern territories like Kazakhstan for example did not even has own alphabet, they have only oral language and do not known writing. When they become part of R.E. Russians invent alphabet for them, using Russian’s letters. So the most important thing that was made to hold territories within empire was the cultural intervention, but it is not exclude military presence of course. As I remember it calls “the policy of an apple and a whip”. You cannot deny the fact that Russia still (not even in times of SU or R.E.) is perhaps the most multinational country in the world, as well is the largest country. (Please don take it as Russian arrogance, I just want to prove my point of view with use of facts). Does it not prove that we learned to maintain our territories a little better than other great empires? We never have “(de)colonization” periods in our history. You may said that SU was disintegrated, but I suppose that you realize that it was because absolutely different reason, it has nothing common with “(de)colonization”.
So, portraying Chechnya as some kind of Russian colony is absolutely absurd, as I see it. Chechens always have the same status and rights as other citizens of R.E./S.U./R.F., as well as always takes benefits of our civilization.

Now you can be even more machiavellian: in Rwanda: you educate only a small part of the natives, and you do it on ethnical base.

Excuse me, we are, In Rwanda? It is in Africa, right? Are you really talking about Russians?

Today, europeans citizens know that, and they are no more ready to believe simple redneck theories like 'They are unable to rule themselves', or 'They are terrorists/killers'

As long as you talk about Africa I am complete agree with you. Of course Europeans was much, much advanced then local population in that times, more advanced in all aspects including social aspect, and possibility to rule the country. Of course natives were unable to rule themselves properly, if I understand you properly they do it as in times before they become a Belgian colony.
1) How else they can do, you said that you do NOT EDUCATE them?
2) Do they have EXPIRIENCE to do it in proper, non-violence way?
3) Do they have connection to the other countries of the world, which may teach them how to do it?
In Chechnya it was absolutely reverse situation:
1) As I said they was educated as well as any other republic in Russia, we have, and always has one general standard of education in all subjects of Russian federation.
2) They have experience how to rule themselves. Chechnya has autonomy when it was part of RSFSR. (former name of Russia it times of SU) and they have an autonomy in Russian Federation.
3) It was in 1996, the end of 20 century, they were not in an information isolation, and have every opportunity to build democratic state. For example the same is happening today in Afghanistan, Afghans starting to build democracy based on experience of other countries, they establishing institutes of powers familiar with western.
So, portraying Chechnya, as some kind of colony is the super absurd, all colonial powers lost their colonies decades ago.

And it was easy for us to say: 'hey look, they are unable to rule themselves', 'people are killed', 'we need to intervene for humanitary reasons', 'let send the army to save lifes'

EDIT: Almost forget a very important thing. Did your former colony attacked continental Belgium? And if (only hypothetically) Congo army attacked Belgium what would you do then?

So, understand me well, I don't say that THIS happened in Chechnya, but as long as we don't know in which conditions this independence was given, we cannot really say who are the good and the bad guys.

I’ve understood you right. All I’ve said above, I’ve said to guys who might think that period of (de)colonization has something common with Chechnya.
P.S. I am really had to run now. If you really want to hear in which conditions this independence was given, write it, I’ll promise to answer after a couple of hours.

P.P.S. Thanks again for Latin lesson.
I think only now I’ve realized how funny this “de Fucto” sounds.

[Harovan]

Originally posted by Serb
So, portraying Chechnya as some kind of Russian colony is absolutely absurd, as I see it. Chechens always have the same status and rights as other citizens of R.E./S.U./R.F., as well as always takes benefits of our civilization.

No, it's even pretty similar. The core Russia is a small part of today's, it's even less than it's European part. And that is where Russians come from. All other territories were captured and "colonized" by the Russian Emperors during many centuries. That concerns parts of the Middle East (all those "...stan" countries and regions) as well as the territories of the Mongol type populations in Central and Eastern Asia. People who live there, are all but Russians.

Many of those civilizations (yes!) in Eastern Asia didn't even care that they were captured, they were nomads, hunters and fishermen and remained this till today, not caring about governments and local powers. And the area there is relatively thin settled anyway, so there's not much man power for revolts.

But especially in the Middle East regions live enough people, who are tired of this state. As seen in Chechnya, Russia keeps it's "colonies" by cruel oppression. As long as this lasts, Russia will not have inner peace.

As for the Chechens and other non-Russian parts of the population... Yea, by laws they have the same rights, but I have even in Soviet times seen, how disdainful Russians talked about the merchants from the caucasus, who sold fruits in the market places, about Jews (I would not wonder if half of Israels population are former Russian Jews) and other minorities. On the other hand, being in Estonia (I know it's not Russia), I got not served in stores, because the people thought I was a Russian (I talked in Russian to them) and later got nearly my feet licked when they realized, that I'm from Germany (just from saying the word sh*t in German). Serb, I know that "at the paper" all citizens of Russia (and formerly the SU) have/had the same rights, but they never have been real friends. Admit this. This will always be a problem. Look at Yugoslavia. And take advice from Chechs and Slovaks. They went apart and remained friends.