Tweet
A good friend and I were talking about the founding fathers recently and realized that we couldn't think of a country whose government wasn't the result of some sort of revolution or the product of an occupation by some insidious foreign power.
-
The UK. -
Sweden.Comment
-
Ha, Glorious Revolution!Originally posted by Adrian Hon
The UK.
BlahComment
-
Re: Which Modern Governments ARE NOT The Result Of A Revolution?
Originally posted by bipolarbear
A good friend and I were talking about the founding fathers recently and realized that we couldn't think of a country whose government wasn't the result of some sort of revolution or the product of an occupation by some insidious foreign power.1066 and the Norman occupation.Originally posted by Adrian Hon
The UK.Exult in your existence, because that very process has blundered unwittingly on its own negation. Only a small, local negation, to be sure: only one species, and only a minority of that species; but there lies hope. [...] Stand tall, Bipedal Ape. The shark may outswim you, the cheetah outrun you, the swift outfly you, the capuchin outclimb you, the elephant outpower you, the redwood outlast you. But you have the biggest gifts of all: the gift of understanding the ruthlessly cruel process that gave us all existence [and the] gift of revulsion against its implications.
-Richard DawkinsComment
-
Last edited by Robert; May 4, 2007, 05:23.Formerly known as "CyberShy"
Carpe Diem tamen Memento MoriComment
-
Countering a factual mess with a hypothetical mess isn't that great of an idea.Originally posted by CyberShy
Civilization is most of the time being born through war and revolution and anarchy.
That's why people can't say: "It's a mess in Iraq and Afghanistan, blame Bush" since that mess would have happened anyway eventually.BlahComment
-
So if everything is peaceful and nice Bush's plan is working. If there's horrific anarchy Bush's plan is working. How very convenient.There's hope for Iraq and Afthanistand, civilization and freedom and democracy are on their way. The anarchy proves it.Stop Quoting BenComment
-
Re: Re: Which Modern Governments ARE NOT The Result Of A Revolution?
1066 was an outright invasion, and 1688 was partly an invasion too.Comment
-
Doesn't the Isle of Man have the oldest consistently existing government form?Comment
-
Does everything have to come back to the current state of Iraq? Call me heartless but it gets a bit tiring to see it dragged into so many posts that aren't directly related.Originally posted by CyberShy
Civilization is most of the time being born through war and revolution and anarchy.
That's why people can't say: "It's a mess in Iraq and Afghanistan, blame Bush" since that mess would have happened anyway eventually. Maybe after Saddam died, maybe after his son died, maybe after another incident. And then the crap that happens now would have started in a maybe even more bloodthirsty way. After all right now the Americans can try to save the civilizations as much as possible.
There's hope for Iraq and Afthanistand, civilization and freedom and democracy are on their way. The anarchy proves it.Comment
-
What about Iceland? Viking settlement can hardly count as "occupation by foreign power", or can it?
BlahComment
-
I'm sorry, but this sounds barmy. Let's nuke Cybershy's town, as sh1t will probably happen there eventually.Originally posted by CyberShy
That's why people can't say: "It's a mess in Iraq and Afghanistan, blame Bush" since that mess would have happened anyway eventually.Comment
-
The Russian Federation came about from the collapse of the old regime. Maybe that counts here.Comment
-
Are we regarding the rule of the British empire as constituting "an occupation by some insidious foreign power" in the cases of Canada, Australia, and New Zealand? Are we also regarding the governments that developed there as a product of that occupation?
If so one reason your observation holds true is that practically every square centimeter of dirt on this planet has been subject to occupation by a foreign power. Either the current government could be seen as a product of such an occupation or we would view the removal of the occupiers government as a revolution.Comment
Comment