open Democracy News Analysis - story - Comments

nisaba on " Russia vs Georgia: a war of perceptions"

nisaba — Sat, 06 Sep 2008 16:51:18 +0100

In Georgia live, Armenians, Osetians, Abkhazians, my country isn't monoethnical, everybody, who lives there and is truethful, knows it, the Georgians live on this land from the III millenium B.C. Russia has no rights to make us divide our country into pieces. I have never had the existens of Ossetian or Abkhasian states on this land, how can you dare to blinden the world!!!!!

Not logged in on "India’s Christians: politics of violence in Orissa"

Not logged in — Sat, 06 Sep 2008 01:50:53 +0100

Missionaries should stop conversion they are just making the poor people fool. In exchange of money they are converting these poor people. The missionaries are themselves converted christians for the sake of money. It is a game of money. more conversion more money for missionaries.

opendemocracy on "Russia and the Georgia war: the great-power trap"

opendemocracy — Sat, 06 Sep 2008 00:30:06 +0100

"It's precisely this kind of apologia that makes me question just exactly where Open Democracy is coming from."

I'm glad you question it - it means we're doing something right :)

openDemocracy is "coming from" a desire to find the faculty of judgment in "critical insiders" to a situation. This is inevitably an editorial strategy of looking for the "but ..." in entrenched positions. It also makes it hard to figure out "a line", because the strategy does not determine the content, but tries to emphasise the credibility of the voice.

Tony

Thomas Christiansen on "Islamism and war: the demographics of rage"

Thomas Christiansen — Fri, 05 Sep 2008 22:07:55 +0100

Gunnar Heinsohn,s points of views and his scientifically statements have to be taken seriously by the acamedics. No doubts. Dr. Heinsohn is pointing to something which in fact has a "common sense" background. Give teenage men (monkeys) food - but no position and you create the groundwork for war, and turmoil regardless of ideology if they outnumber the older males.
Unfornutately this logical development is hitting Europe with full force in our time. Europe has all the probability for becomming a battle zone in the 10-20 years to come. Thanks to the "Euro-Arab dialogue" our countries are now being invaded by muslim immigrants. In 2025 - 25 % (at least) of the population will be muslims. A disaster in the perspective of Dr. Heinsohns. We see the tendency allready. Increasing rape and violent statistically.
Islam is NO religion of peace. Whoever says this - Mr. Bush includet have never read the Koran or the Hadith. Islam has been stopped 2 times in Europe,previously - in Tours/Poiters 732 (remember the Cognac - "Martell" ?) and in Vienna in 1683. The polish hero Jan Sobiesky won his medal.
Now we all have to join forces to stop the 3. invation of Europe.

Thomas/ Stopp islamiseringen av Norge.
www.s-i-a-n.com
www.sioe.com

Not logged in Lawrence Efana on "Iraq, Iran, China: the emerging axis"

Not logged in Lawrence Efana — Fri, 05 Sep 2008 13:01:37 +0100

There is much to read in order to dilute and get closer to the heart of this article, which could not have come at a better time considering the eve of American presidential elections and the two parties involved with their respective running candidates and vice candidates.

As usual, it would appear to me that Professor Rogers always foresees, tells things as they are - especially the implications and challenges - quite often too, 'wise' warning signals, not in the negative sense but to truly encourage self-searching! If I am not wrong, what the responses should be are seldom prescribed in most of his texts - the work of a "professional"scientist: be as objective as you can: describe and explain but be cautious in passing judgments - it could be the responsibility of the "others"! In short he is good at paving ways for those who care to think and see what to do.

No bad approach from the scientist when serving policy-making agencies and technocrats and experts as well as the intelligence officials. Quite one of the good ways to work for change, which in general makes the contributions of commentators worthy of what they should be, especially when they are informed, clear and less cryptic.

Fortunately or unfortunately, the eight years of present US administration soon to end, has many loopholes to attract impulses over whether it has failed or not - as it seems it is the hour of verdict! Diplomacy has been dirty and clumsy and others have capitalised. Who? Can the diplomacy be cleansed that no one capitalises - presumably that all benefit!! Today's wars and diplomatic challenges increasingly seem different from past ones if we give 'renewed' thoughts about what the NUANCES are made of [I can still be corrected should I be wrong!]. I mean wars are not always going to be the solution to victory and winning hearts hence sustainable development and peace our greatest goal or objective!

Lawrence Efana [Finland]

Steven Rogers on "Iraq, Iran, China: the emerging axis"

Steven Rogers — Fri, 05 Sep 2008 01:17:53 +0100

I don't see any reason to discern a "loose axis between China, Iran and Iraq". Certainly China will do business with Iran and Iraq, but they will also do business with many others, and if doing business makes you part of an axis, then China and the US must be part of an axis too.

Neither is there any visible reason to see this as a threat. China's interests in the region are very similar to those of the US. As a massive oil importer, China wants to see oil production rising and oil prices falling, or at least holding stable. That gives the Chinese every reason to want to maintain political stability in the Middle East. Given their own restive Muslim minorities, the Chinese also have no reason whatsoever to promote Islamic radicalism.

China and the US do compete, to some extent, but at the end of the day both are trading powers, both are oil consumers, and both are status quo powers - and that means their common interests are at least as great as their divergent interests. Prosperity in the US and Europe - the major export markets on which China depends - is very much in China's self interest, and the Chinese have no real reason to be rocking any boats. China's influence in the Middle East is more likely to be a moderating force than a radicalizing force.

Not logged in on "Russia and the Georgia war: the great-power trap"

Not logged in — Fri, 05 Sep 2008 00:51:41 +0100

The author of this piece talks elegantly about the need for Russia to give up its 'Nineteenth Century approach' yet neatly sidesteps the much greater imperialism being practised by the USUK 'Internatuional Community'!

It's precisely this kind of apologia that makes me question just exactly where Open Democracy is coming from.

raysimlee on "Iraq, Iran, China: the emerging axis"

raysimlee — Thu, 04 Sep 2008 23:51:47 +0100

Looks like the terrorist themselves is pointing an accusing finger on others. When USA and the west is terrorizing the rest of the developing world with its superior arm and killing machines it is putting a spin on the truth.

The world belong to all human beings not just the whites form Europe and those that occupy America after death and destruction of ethnic people (they are just as human as the whites from Europe). As all human are equal DO NOT use your 'human right' against other human.

Be human, learn to love. If you believe in your God at all, READ THE BIBLE.

FreeWest4Ever on "Byzantium: always an Empire, never a Nation"

FreeWest4Ever — Thu, 04 Sep 2008 21:21:56 +0100

The Byzantine Empire was a decadent and putrid shadow of the Roman Empire. Once the reins were handed over to the Greeks, more and more territory was lost, never to be regained.

They had no cultural inventions of their own.

Tom Paine on "Iraq, Iran, China: the emerging axis"

Tom Paine — Thu, 04 Sep 2008 20:57:47 +0100

The
transfer of authority in Iraq's Anbar province from American to Iraqi security forces on 1 September 2008 is an index of confidence that the situation in Iraq is indeed improving.

What does this transfer mean? Patrick Cockburn notes that 25,000 US troops will remain in the province after the "turnover" to the Iraqis.

US corporate media reports that the number of troops in Al Anbar will only eventually decline by about 2000.

I don't see how this can be painted as a huge indicator in how great it is in the province. Many here in the US see this as only Bush administration propaganda designed to impact the US presidential election.

andreea123 on "Tibet: looking for the truth "

andreea123 — Thu, 04 Sep 2008 19:24:08 +0100

The thing that I've always dreamed of was to go in Tibet, so see the tigers! Really, that's my dream! If it would be possible, I'd like to raise one. I saw a clip on utube, about a couple who raised a lion since he was little, but had to let him go in the wild, and afterwards they wanted to see his reaction after a couple of years.. and imagine what happened when they encountered.. the lion practically embraced them, it was a very touching scene..I guess it's gonna be a google massacre when people will start searching it.

Bobrevich on "Russia and the Georgia war: the great-power trap"

Bobrevich — Thu, 04 Sep 2008 16:59:35 +0100

Of corse, US knew EXACTLY what was going on, otherwise Saakashvili would never do what he've done.

nikolay denin on "Russia and the Georgia war: the great-power trap"

nikolay denin — Thu, 04 Sep 2008 13:47:37 +0100

it's not too much on the topic but wasn't the pillar of the world order during the cold war the mutual nuclear deterrent? did s'th change from then? how the russians can be scared from nato expansion?! it's rediculous, it's an excuse for internal consumption! vladivostok is closer to seattle and alaska than any eu capital to moscow!
just stop bothering about the russians so much! this doesn´t mean 'forget georgia', but the priority is another - china! tha last years they invested heavily on infrastructure and now their major cities are better equiped that the us and eu! and what we did (the west)? war on terror!!!! destroying instead of creating! new weapons, new controls, closed borders.... please! i'm not a hippy or anti us or s'th like this. i'm human and i want schools, hospitals, highways, etc.
not too much into the topic and obviously i'm not a specialst in this matter, however i liked the article and used the platform to voice my opinion.
thank you

Not logged in Lawrence Efana on "The neighbor in the self"

Not logged in Lawrence Efana — Thu, 04 Sep 2008 13:15:23 +0100

Open democracy needs articles of this kind to nurse and continue polishing democracy for peaceful coexistence of peoples and states in modern world. I would therefore state that James R. Mensch rocks, re-vibrates, invokes hence stirs and wakes the world on issues of religious [in]tolerance, sectarianism and secularism. By implication, "religion" and "politics" are at the center of his article. The italicized text above summarizes much of its corner-stone: "Religions and States, even when apparently open, are subject to 'auto-immune' reactions which make them turn against the other within...". Thus "transcendence" defined by 'panthesism' and 'immanentism', lends the 'theoretical particles' for the summary - when closely examining given references].

A key issue here is: human [nature] - its vulnerability to evil, no less a problem that also worried Plato, among others in past centuries. It is about "dark-side" pressures in man also played out in "Star Wars" film, with 'Luke' - one of the key 'actor-characters'. Here, note: also Anne Baring - not verified said: lifting President George Bush's thesis "The Axis of Evil"; imprints of archaic solar mythology; and influence of archetypal ideas on behaviour at times to demonise non-existent evil: a project to support using force to eliminate its threat? Here cases can be made particularly for or against intolerance. Obviously there are many questions also to answer!

Beyond the potentials of evil in religions, it is interesting to see in 'Blessdkrumheit' said, the concepts: 'ponerology' or 'penerology' synonymous? used to explain the subject "evil", further elucidated by "Hubris" in that comment. The central issue here is 'evil' in relation to politics as might be understood in terms of the problems of secularism because good governance is now and then dented for unaccountable - call 'immoral' reasons]. Looked at from the background of both commentators, the article theme benefits from value-relativism, no lesser also for the 3rd commentator, who though agrees with Hegel on origin of religion and state, blames and negates their dual relationship, equating religion with war - a reason to separate it from the state!

Who speaks for or against, where, why and how? History and human nature sincerely pose problems. Branches of the tree RELIGION, consequent upon multiplicity of human beliefs becloud TRUTH, making it rather than manifest, latent variable value - inflammatory at times. Difficulties thus induced confuse rallying for consensus with enormous adverse effects on the organisation and management of human political, economic, social and environmental affairs conflict-free. Even so it is possible to construct new conciliatory discourses, if humans allow themselves benefit from accumulated lessons and pains of failures or threats of co-existence. EVERYONE IS HAMMERING ON CHANGE NOW NOW - WHY, IF WE DO NOT MEAN IT?

Wars are debris of failures. While relationship between religion and state will keep hunting moral values and notion of secularism, there are some quite positive though who see apocalypse ahead if care is not taken. Even in our Christian faith some cannot stop recalling contextually the narratives in the Holy Book that on the way carrying the Cross - they say], Jesus turned to the weeping crowds along the roadside, saying to them "weep not for me for this happens when the grass is still green, what about when it will be dry" - my emphasis]. People are not and should not be forced to believe or disbelieve so religion can indeed be democratic - being convinced! Many are inclined to ague that belief is personal, though sometimes group and culture bound.

History should not be wiped out as enlightenment continues and modernisation presses on. Secularism is over-dramatised many would argue. Here many are not too confused about what Jesus meant, for example, when He - in the narrative] said to PETER: "You are the rock; to you I give the KEY - whatever He shall bind on Earth shall be bound in Heaven". Humans have nearly lost the "inner" light and touch - no doubt they are unable to grasp the narratives of Adam and Eve or Gain and Abel! However, a question not necessarily from this single frame, worth raising is: What things make sense to us, able to UNITE RELIGIONS and BELIEFS to the benefit of SECULARISM and a politics [in which the state is MORALLY concerned and simultaneously democratically accountable?

There is a saying that what should unite us ought to be greater than that which could divide - important to take to heart that the "grass is not dry", because we shift our faith to science and technology given to us to nurse by the grace above! Returning therefore to unity of religions and need for the peace needed to support sustainable development, 'Wikipedia'- one of the reference sources in the article, identifies sectarian religions across: Judaism, Islam, Christianity, Sikhism, Hinduism, Baha's Faith, Wicca and Neopapanism, and the Death of God and end of Transcendence, etc.", is worth consulting on interrelated arguments. Implicit as a frame, the essence is that beliefs and faiths are multiple and culturally a thing with overwhelming impact across political, social, economic and the environmental hence aspects of secularism: a particular problem the article lifts to the forefront and we should be able to cope with. The rationality is pluralism of values and practices, not as negative...! It does not therefore surprise me that the writer of this article chooses to carefully consult "transcendence" defined by 'panthesism and immanetism'- as the logical base on which empathy is raised for overcoming the other in us, using narratives of the "openness", "our neigbour" and "the good Samaritan". Who cannot understand even in the vaguest sense the dualism of relationship between religion and the state here? Thanks to open democracy for raising hope to transcend themes of this kind on its desks!

Lawrence Efana [Finland]

Kanishk Tharoor on "India’s Christians: politics of violence in Orissa"

Kanishk Tharoor — Thu, 04 Sep 2008 12:13:08 +0100

sunniva, interesting statistical comparison to the uk, but i'd warn against extrapolating much further! that said, hindu chauvinism/nationalism in its more extreme incarnations (such as the VHP mentioned in Ignatius' piece) has the same insidious lure of groups in the UK like the BNP. they draw recruits from the disaffected, the recently displaced, the embittered, of which in india there is a sadly large pool.