Politics - 2 July 2007

Many US and European leaders want to institute a "new world order." Hegemony is defined on Wikipedia as "Hegemony (pronounced [ˈhɘ.dʒɘ.mɘ.ni]) (Greek: ἡγεμονία hēgemonía) is the dominance of one group over other groups, with the implicit threat of force, to the extent that, for instance, the dominant party can dictate the terms of trade to its advantage; more broadly, cultural perspectives become skewed to favor the dominant group. The cultural control that hegemony asserts affects commonplace patterns of thought: hegemony controls the way new ideas are rejected or become naturalized in a process that subtly alters notions of common sense in a given society. Hegemony results in the empowerment of certain cultural beliefs, values, and practices to the submersion and partial exclusion of others. Hegemony influences the perspective of mainstream history, as history is written by the victors for a congruent readership."
Sounds famliar, doesn't it? Since the end of the Cold War, analysts have used the term "hegemony" to describe the United States' role as the sole superpower (the hyperpower) in the modern world. However, some scholars of international relations (such as John Mearsheimer) argue that the United States does not have true hegemony, since it lacks the resources to impose dominance over the entire globe. Also, China, India, and the European Union are considered by some to be emerging superpowers capable of competing with the U.S in their own regions, and, in the case of the EU, worldwide.

2007-07-02 02:20:31 · 2 answers · asked by Anonymous

I had a con squawk at me about wait till someone I know is affected. The fact they grossly miss that if it wasn't for BUSH's bungled war most Americans wouldn't be affected. The sooner are troops are home, the less casualties we will have.
Fact.

2007-07-02 02:12:24 · 17 answers · asked by Anonymous

Some idiot somewhere started this whole "you can't fight a war with bombs on an ideology" thing . I suppose that some thought 'Hey , that's clever , and probably right' . But it's DEAD-wrong .
What some people don't seem to grasp is that this is a religious war , at least in the minds of the Terrorists . And there is NO negotiating . They've clearly stated their objectives and they're clearly carrying out the means to affect those objectives . They don't call for negotiations , they list absolute demands . Convert to Islam or Die . Sounds pretty damn clear to me !!

Changing an ideology may be possible. . . . over generations , but in the mean time we must use the only thing that has any effect on these Evil people. . . . . .

And that 'one thing' is bombs , not Crayons . and if any of you want dialogue , then just go to a prison that is holding imprisoned terrorists . You can have all the dialogue you want .

Do You Think Terrorism Can be Stopped , Or Will It End In Disaster ?

2007-07-02 02:05:11 · 28 answers · asked by Anonymous

Do our leaders expect the reaction from the left-wingers to be different from when we entered Iraq? Were the people of Iraq less deserving of our support (removing their evil dictator) than the people of Darfur are?

2007-07-02 02:03:47 · 8 answers · asked by Liam H 2

to the next president, or will the whole house of cards fall before Jan 09?

2007-07-02 02:02:10 · 11 answers · asked by Anonymous

Does anyone think that the security threat and the detioration of peoples rights and freedoms, isn't about terrorism at all, but is about setting up a infrastrucuture for controlling and monitoring the poor and the disgruntled working classes - in a society that has one of the greatest disparities of wealth, and is worried about the effects of globalisation and the resulting threats of mass unemployment to the common citizen?

We are all slaves to debt, slaves to mortgages and slaves to our employers - and we ar being spoon fed a million boring and repetitie middle class morality tales... doesn't it seem like they are only now getting around to installing the cameras and the barbed wire?

2007-07-02 00:52:02 · 6 answers · asked by Anonymous

Do people agree that we both have the best defence systems and intelligence/ military mechanisms?

2007-07-02 00:40:56 · 7 answers · asked by Anonymous

Because they can't beat us. They are protected by us and they are supported by us. They are willing to point their pathetic little fingers but can't even face their own insignificance.

2007-07-02 00:00:59 · 17 answers · asked by ? 6