If countries are concerned about getting paid by Iraq why couldn't the US and Europe
and the UN say that a new freer government will have to pay those debts?
How can we permit a country like Iraq to so badly treat is own people. Don't these people
there have the same human rights as us?
Diplomatic speech should be blunter at the US against these Neanderthal regimes.
By having freedom as our sole foreign policy criteria we will disable all attempts to blame us
for propping up untenable regimes.
Rank each country by a freedom index.
Use our diplomatic corp. and regular citizens and the peace corp. etc. to give lessons in
civil society.
We can not both push for human rights and woman's rights and also respect cultures that
don't respect these rights because of their traditional values. Positive culture things like
language, holidays, food, religion can be maintained without the negative cultural things.
With countries like Haiti we should simply adopt it, move in with people and the military to
teach the basics of our institutions, help rewrite the laws and provide the education system
-- a cost benefit analysis will show that it is cheaper to build a country like Haiti than to
constantly deal with the disasters and the immigration. If we spend $100 million a year on
Haiti then let's not give it fish, but teach it how to fish.
At times it may seem to be better to physically separate some people such as the Hutu
and Tutsi; Muslims, Serbs, Croats and Albanians. It will only be for a short time, perhaps
two or three decades, which isn't very long considering they have been slaughtering each
other for thousands of years.
It's like separating kids on the playground, over time, as these societies progress mature
into commerce directed, liberty based societies then they can start to trade with each
other and learn to respect the other.
Oddly, no human activity is as peaceful as making money legally; by creating merchants
we create peaceful people. The creation of an education system or program about the
separation of people is necessary. The argument by some strongmen that their societies
aren't ready for democracy and commerce is only true to the extent that even the
strongman himself isn't mature enough.
What do we do for countries, like Libya, Sudan, Somalia and north Korea? Nothing short
of massive military invasion and control will solve the problems.
For the rest of the world: Basically an open embrace with free trade, that is, no restrictions
on any American enterprise trading or opening offices in any country but also absolutely
no tax payer financial help, no military support. No US government bailouts. Total risk to
the company.
Countries can trade with the US only when they can begin to satisfy the rules of
commerce and liberty.
For situations like Venezuela Columbia and Argentina, not much different than royal
regimes, where the entrepreneurial set got up and left. So they are doing now. The same
with other countries, that these immigrants plunge into hard work and business in the
United States is the purist proof of their entrepreneuiralism. In Europe it is harder to be a
entrepreneur and thus it is harder for these Entrepreneurs to get going in life.
and the UN say that a new freer government will have to pay those debts?
How can we permit a country like Iraq to so badly treat is own people. Don't these people
there have the same human rights as us?
Diplomatic speech should be blunter at the US against these Neanderthal regimes.
By having freedom as our sole foreign policy criteria we will disable all attempts to blame us
for propping up untenable regimes.
Rank each country by a freedom index.
Use our diplomatic corp. and regular citizens and the peace corp. etc. to give lessons in
civil society.
We can not both push for human rights and woman's rights and also respect cultures that
don't respect these rights because of their traditional values. Positive culture things like
language, holidays, food, religion can be maintained without the negative cultural things.
With countries like Haiti we should simply adopt it, move in with people and the military to
teach the basics of our institutions, help rewrite the laws and provide the education system
-- a cost benefit analysis will show that it is cheaper to build a country like Haiti than to
constantly deal with the disasters and the immigration. If we spend $100 million a year on
Haiti then let's not give it fish, but teach it how to fish.
At times it may seem to be better to physically separate some people such as the Hutu
and Tutsi; Muslims, Serbs, Croats and Albanians. It will only be for a short time, perhaps
two or three decades, which isn't very long considering they have been slaughtering each
other for thousands of years.
It's like separating kids on the playground, over time, as these societies progress mature
into commerce directed, liberty based societies then they can start to trade with each
other and learn to respect the other.
Oddly, no human activity is as peaceful as making money legally; by creating merchants
we create peaceful people. The creation of an education system or program about the
separation of people is necessary. The argument by some strongmen that their societies
aren't ready for democracy and commerce is only true to the extent that even the
strongman himself isn't mature enough.
What do we do for countries, like Libya, Sudan, Somalia and north Korea? Nothing short
of massive military invasion and control will solve the problems.
For the rest of the world: Basically an open embrace with free trade, that is, no restrictions
on any American enterprise trading or opening offices in any country but also absolutely
no tax payer financial help, no military support. No US government bailouts. Total risk to
the company.
Countries can trade with the US only when they can begin to satisfy the rules of
commerce and liberty.
For situations like Venezuela Columbia and Argentina, not much different than royal
regimes, where the entrepreneurial set got up and left. So they are doing now. The same
with other countries, that these immigrants plunge into hard work and business in the
United States is the purist proof of their entrepreneuiralism. In Europe it is harder to be a
entrepreneur and thus it is harder for these Entrepreneurs to get going in life.
| Diplomatic Speech |
| Jim Hlavac |
| Poltics Re-explained |
