on PolicyMic
Max Markham I still don't see why. It is in the interests of NATO to defend and support democratic initiatives and oppose oppression and authoritarianism. Why should the US, as part of NATO, not be involved in the liberation of long oppressed country?
Max Markham It's funny, both articles in the "debate" come to the same conclusion. I absolutely agree. What was the United Nations created for, if not situations like these? Libya is going to be an extremely fragile state for the next few years, and it is up to a global group to ensure that they are able to survive as a free state. North Africa now has the potential to become a model for democratic (or at least, quasi-democratic) transition, and it is the responsibility of the international community to help it realise this potential.
Max Markham What about the war in Libya was a bad idea? Rebels, independent of the US or any western powers, decided that they were unhappy with the authoritarian dictator that had ravaged their country for almost a half century. The west, led by France, supported them in their quest to end Qaddafi's regime. They succeeded. How else does change occur? The outcome is theirs to shape, and you may be right with your cynicism that the rebels will fail to secure a stable free state and rule of law, but when you have a dictator threatening to destroy his own country in order to maintain power, there aren't a lot of alternatives.
Max Markham For the GOP to truly drop the ultra-conservative tones on social issues, I think the issue of religion will have to be de-emphasised. Someone has to take a stand against religion being an elective platform in a "secular" country. And the Democrats are often equally as guilty of falling into this trap as is the GOP.
Max Markham I agree with Jake and Christopher. It's up to Twitter to decide what they think is appropriate, and I would be surprised if they didn't state that in their user agreement. If people aren't comfortable with censorship (or lack thereof) on Twitter, it's their prerogative to stop using it. As much as I agree with censorship in certain situation, I think it completely undermines first amendment rights, and basic human rights of free press/media that America works so strongly to promote in places like China and Iran. What would then stop Twitter from removing trending topics that politically influence situations, like the Arab Spring?
Max Markham I think one of the things that many liberals (like myself) fail to take into account is that Obama is the no1 representative of all 330 million American people. And the American people are, in large part, fairly conservative - not necessarily in the Republican vs. Democratic sense, but on the political spectrum. Yes, he was elected on the liberal platform of change, but his responsibility is also to serve the interests of the American people. So yes, I think Obama has tried to be a centrist more so than his 2008 campaign would have led people to believe, and I think he has made some mistakes in judgement in terms of how to push a liberal agenda (healthcare). I personally am disappointed, but I would certainly not consider it a failure.
Max Markham I like the idea of this article and I definitely think it's something worth exploring. At the same time - how will this impact the funding of education? Admissions in many universities (or at least when I applied) is supposedly financially need-blind, but A.A. based on income would be completely counter intuitive to that idea. I feel like a change in that policy would be hugely controversial. Furthermore, A.A. might act in detriment to the legacy policies of lots of universities, which might deter a lot of donations that the school receives. Which, in turn, would then decrease the amount of financial aid the school gives. That's just me speculating, but I'd be interested to hear your thoughts.
Max Markham I agree with both of you. Yes, it's definitely true that people "get" why Affirmative Action was created, but at the same time I feel like many people (including myself) often take for granted how post-racial the country is at this point in time. Affirmative Action may be a flawed policy, but it has served its purpose since its inception. And I don't think it hurts to reaffirm why A.A. was created.
Max Markham I definitely didn't realise this was satire until I got to the second slide. I thought I had missed something in the news when you wrote about Gore taking over from Nader. God forbid. Although, to be honest, I don't think the idea of having a political 'open season' a la NFL would be such a bad thing. We could use a challenge to the two-party system...
Max Markham I think what Todd might have meant is that PM as a platform for expressing ones political and policy-related thoughts and ideas is an important thing to have. Not necessarily specific to PM, but the overall idea of PM, I think, is an important right to have.
Max Markham I think one of the issues, at least in terms of the GOP "finding their Obama" (circa 2008), is that Obama relied HEAVILY on certain demographics, namely the youth vote, to propel him into the spotlight. The GOP does not have that youth vote/movement to rely on like the liberals do, so I think finding a leader that really unifies an already jaded portion of society - namely, older people - will be much more difficult. On the other hand, I don't think we've seen a GOP candidate of any sort with a rhetoric mastery anywhere near the level of Obama's.
Max Markham Interesting point. I feel like the small scale of Alaskan Indian groups that engage in whaling as part of their culture wouldn't actually be detrimental to the overall population of whales in the world had it not been for western (and, in this case, eastern) industrialised societies promoting/sustaining a non-traditional habit. But that' just a guess - maybe the population of cultural whalers is larger than I'm estimating.
Max Markham Great article! It's important to remember that even though sharks are a huge fear for a lot of people, they're an important part of our ecosystem! I had shark fin soup once when I was in polynesia (I was like 12 or something) and now every time I hear about how detrimental shark fin harvesting is I feel really bad :-\
Max Markham Great article. I didn't see his WWIC address but I saw him on Wolf Blitzer soon afterwards and - other than sounding absolutely incompetent and unsure of his own country's politics - he highlighted the effectiveness of his regime's tactics to eliminate Al-Qaeda leaders, to which Wolf Blitzer conceeded that he had a point. By no means am I an expert on US-Pakistani relations, but I can't really imagine this to be very true. What do you think? Democracy under his regime was practically non-existant, that much is obvious, but do you think his appeal to the US was the fact that he was more of a reliable Al-Qaeda opponent/fighter?
Max Markham Agreed. I think the fact that Colbert was able to secure a Super PAC just highlights the need for a change to the system. And I think that was 100% what he was hoping to do - he's making a complete mockery of the system in an effort to bring attention to its faults.
Max Markham I think what Padmini says is true - as a NYCer it's been very difficult for me to swallow anti-Park51 sentiment. At the same time, I take issue with the fact that New Yorkers associate 9/11 terrorist attacks with Islam in general. The 9/11 terrorists were radicals, in the same way that many KKK members are radical evangelicals. Their bastardisation of Islam has no bearing on the Islamic faith, nor should it be associated with the 9/11 attacks in that manner. It would be like saying the Norwegian extremist who recently carried out deadly attacks in Oslo is blond, and therefore no blonds should be allowed anywhere near the bomb/shooting sites. It's a ridiculous claim, and the association, and I feel like it endorses a shallow-minded and ignorant attitude.
Max Markham I think the issue is that the government and Defence dept itself don't truly understand AQ - I don't think most people/governments outside of the Middle East and/or poverty-stricken countries where AQ has been centralised (i.e. Niger, Somalia, etc.) do either. Politics is too often in the mix, and decisions like the invasion of Iraq are made, acting to the detriment of intel missions against AQ. I don't have confidence that the government has the means or political wiggle room to actually comprehend how to effectively combat an organisation like AQ.
Max Markham I really wish that were true, but I don't think it is. The GOP has been the most obstructionist I can ever remember it being as of late - healthcare, the debt ceiling, DADT, and various presidential appointments have all been heavily and overly disputed simply for the sake of making Obama look bad. And I honestly think they have succeeded - they learned from their 1995 (?) mistake and merely brought the US to the verge of a shutdown rather than actually letting it shut down. I think they'll do the same with the debt ceiling - they don't want the US to default on its payments any more than Dems do, but they're going to milk it to make it look bad for Obama and good for them.
Max Markham I disagree. I don't mean this patronisingly, but the vast majority of Americans probably don't even know who John Boehner is. If the US defaults (I don't think it will, but IF) on its debt, in two month's time the blame will be 100% on Obama.
Max Markham Alabama obviously has some budding politicians. I had also actually never seen the Christine O'Donnell video until now. Great stuff
Max Markham YES! That video was absurd. I remember seeing it in California in 2010.
Max Markham I like the idea of this article, but I don't think I'm on board with your first two justifications. I don't think capitalism (US capitalism, I assume) is a good basis for your argument for cooperation - the American economy is built on the foundation of capitalism, and economic regulations are put in place specifically to encourage and enforce capitalism, which is the completely opposite of the anarchistic philosophy (as far as I know). Further, I don't really think saying that terrible events associated with anarchy are already happening is a justification for creating an environment where they would occur irrevocably and more frequently. I do agree with the gist of the article - I definitely think anarchism is taboo and should be evaluated (not considered, necessarily) more seriously.
Max Markham I see what you're saying, but I think you're confusing NYC with the state of New York. Yes, in terms of population, NYC is by far the most influential city/area in the state, but when you look at the rest of the state, much like California, it's pretty conservative. Enough for a Republican State Senate majority, albeit slim. And that Senate is making Cuomo's job a LOT more difficult, yet he is managing to maintain his liberal agenda almost flawlessly.
Max Markham Agreed. There is no doubt that running a nation is more challenging than running a state, especially when said nation is much more conservative than said state. But I definitely think Obama had a lot of missed opportunities pre-midterm elections (and even he admitted that in his town hall yesterday at U of Maryland). I think that Cuomo has started off with a running, if not sprinting, start.
on PolicyMic
Max Markham I still don't see why. It is in the interests of NATO to defend and support democratic initiatives and oppose oppression and authoritarianism. Why should the US, as part of NATO, not be involved in the liberation of long oppressed country?
Max Markham It's funny, both articles in the "debate" come to the same conclusion. I absolutely agree. What was the United Nations created for, if not situations like these? Libya is going to be an extremely fragile state for the next few years, and it is up to a global group to ensure that they are able to survive as a free state. North Africa now has the potential to become a model for democratic (or at least, quasi-democratic) transition, and it is the responsibility of the international community to help it realise this potential.
Max Markham What about the war in Libya was a bad idea? Rebels, independent of the US or any western powers, decided that they were unhappy with the authoritarian dictator that had ravaged their country for almost a half century. The west, led by France, supported them in their quest to end Qaddafi's regime. They succeeded. How else does change occur? The outcome is theirs to shape, and you may be right with your cynicism that the rebels will fail to secure a stable free state and rule of law, but when you have a dictator threatening to destroy his own country in order to maintain power, there aren't a lot of alternatives.
Max Markham For the GOP to truly drop the ultra-conservative tones on social issues, I think the issue of religion will have to be de-emphasised. Someone has to take a stand against religion being an elective platform in a "secular" country. And the Democrats are often equally as guilty of falling into this trap as is the GOP.
Max Markham I agree with Jake and Christopher. It's up to Twitter to decide what they think is appropriate, and I would be surprised if they didn't state that in their user agreement. If people aren't comfortable with censorship (or lack thereof) on Twitter, it's their prerogative to stop using it. As much as I agree with censorship in certain situation, I think it completely undermines first amendment rights, and basic human rights of free press/media that America works so strongly to promote in places like China and Iran. What would then stop Twitter from removing trending topics that politically influence situations, like the Arab Spring?
Max Markham I think one of the things that many liberals (like myself) fail to take into account is that Obama is the no1 representative of all 330 million American people. And the American people are, in large part, fairly conservative - not necessarily in the Republican vs. Democratic sense, but on the political spectrum. Yes, he was elected on the liberal platform of change, but his responsibility is also to serve the interests of the American people. So yes, I think Obama has tried to be a centrist more so than his 2008 campaign would have led people to believe, and I think he has made some mistakes in judgement in terms of how to push a liberal agenda (healthcare). I personally am disappointed, but I would certainly not consider it a failure.
Max Markham I like the idea of this article and I definitely think it's something worth exploring. At the same time - how will this impact the funding of education? Admissions in many universities (or at least when I applied) is supposedly financially need-blind, but A.A. based on income would be completely counter intuitive to that idea. I feel like a change in that policy would be hugely controversial. Furthermore, A.A. might act in detriment to the legacy policies of lots of universities, which might deter a lot of donations that the school receives. Which, in turn, would then decrease the amount of financial aid the school gives. That's just me speculating, but I'd be interested to hear your thoughts.
Max Markham I agree with both of you. Yes, it's definitely true that people "get" why Affirmative Action was created, but at the same time I feel like many people (including myself) often take for granted how post-racial the country is at this point in time. Affirmative Action may be a flawed policy, but it has served its purpose since its inception. And I don't think it hurts to reaffirm why A.A. was created.
Max Markham I definitely didn't realise this was satire until I got to the second slide. I thought I had missed something in the news when you wrote about Gore taking over from Nader. God forbid. Although, to be honest, I don't think the idea of having a political 'open season' a la NFL would be such a bad thing. We could use a challenge to the two-party system...
Max Markham I think what Todd might have meant is that PM as a platform for expressing ones political and policy-related thoughts and ideas is an important thing to have. Not necessarily specific to PM, but the overall idea of PM, I think, is an important right to have.
Max Markham I think what Todd might have meant is that PM as a platform for expressing ones political and policy-related thoughts and ideas is an important thing to have. Not necessarily specific to PM, but the overall idea of PM, I think, is an important right to have.
Max Markham I think one of the issues, at least in terms of the GOP "finding their Obama" (circa 2008), is that Obama relied HEAVILY on certain demographics, namely the youth vote, to propel him into the spotlight. The GOP does not have that youth vote/movement to rely on like the liberals do, so I think finding a leader that really unifies an already jaded portion of society - namely, older people - will be much more difficult. On the other hand, I don't think we've seen a GOP candidate of any sort with a rhetoric mastery anywhere near the level of Obama's.
Max Markham Interesting point. I feel like the small scale of Alaskan Indian groups that engage in whaling as part of their culture wouldn't actually be detrimental to the overall population of whales in the world had it not been for western (and, in this case, eastern) industrialised societies promoting/sustaining a non-traditional habit. But that' just a guess - maybe the population of cultural whalers is larger than I'm estimating.
Max Markham Great article! It's important to remember that even though sharks are a huge fear for a lot of people, they're an important part of our ecosystem! I had shark fin soup once when I was in polynesia (I was like 12 or something) and now every time I hear about how detrimental shark fin harvesting is I feel really bad :-\
Max Markham Great article. I didn't see his WWIC address but I saw him on Wolf Blitzer soon afterwards and - other than sounding absolutely incompetent and unsure of his own country's politics - he highlighted the effectiveness of his regime's tactics to eliminate Al-Qaeda leaders, to which Wolf Blitzer conceeded that he had a point. By no means am I an expert on US-Pakistani relations, but I can't really imagine this to be very true. What do you think? Democracy under his regime was practically non-existant, that much is obvious, but do you think his appeal to the US was the fact that he was more of a reliable Al-Qaeda opponent/fighter?
Max Markham Agreed. I think the fact that Colbert was able to secure a Super PAC just highlights the need for a change to the system. And I think that was 100% what he was hoping to do - he's making a complete mockery of the system in an effort to bring attention to its faults.
Max Markham I think what Padmini says is true - as a NYCer it's been very difficult for me to swallow anti-Park51 sentiment. At the same time, I take issue with the fact that New Yorkers associate 9/11 terrorist attacks with Islam in general. The 9/11 terrorists were radicals, in the same way that many KKK members are radical evangelicals. Their bastardisation of Islam has no bearing on the Islamic faith, nor should it be associated with the 9/11 attacks in that manner. It would be like saying the Norwegian extremist who recently carried out deadly attacks in Oslo is blond, and therefore no blonds should be allowed anywhere near the bomb/shooting sites. It's a ridiculous claim, and the association, and I feel like it endorses a shallow-minded and ignorant attitude.
Max Markham I think the issue is that the government and Defence dept itself don't truly understand AQ - I don't think most people/governments outside of the Middle East and/or poverty-stricken countries where AQ has been centralised (i.e. Niger, Somalia, etc.) do either. Politics is too often in the mix, and decisions like the invasion of Iraq are made, acting to the detriment of intel missions against AQ. I don't have confidence that the government has the means or political wiggle room to actually comprehend how to effectively combat an organisation like AQ.
Max Markham I really wish that were true, but I don't think it is. The GOP has been the most obstructionist I can ever remember it being as of late - healthcare, the debt ceiling, DADT, and various presidential appointments have all been heavily and overly disputed simply for the sake of making Obama look bad. And I honestly think they have succeeded - they learned from their 1995 (?) mistake and merely brought the US to the verge of a shutdown rather than actually letting it shut down. I think they'll do the same with the debt ceiling - they don't want the US to default on its payments any more than Dems do, but they're going to milk it to make it look bad for Obama and good for them.
Max Markham I disagree. I don't mean this patronisingly, but the vast majority of Americans probably don't even know who John Boehner is. If the US defaults (I don't think it will, but IF) on its debt, in two month's time the blame will be 100% on Obama.
Max Markham Alabama obviously has some budding politicians. I had also actually never seen the Christine O'Donnell video until now. Great stuff
Max Markham YES! That video was absurd. I remember seeing it in California in 2010.
Max Markham I like the idea of this article, but I don't think I'm on board with your first two justifications. I don't think capitalism (US capitalism, I assume) is a good basis for your argument for cooperation - the American economy is built on the foundation of capitalism, and economic regulations are put in place specifically to encourage and enforce capitalism, which is the completely opposite of the anarchistic philosophy (as far as I know). Further, I don't really think saying that terrible events associated with anarchy are already happening is a justification for creating an environment where they would occur irrevocably and more frequently. I do agree with the gist of the article - I definitely think anarchism is taboo and should be evaluated (not considered, necessarily) more seriously.
Max Markham I see what you're saying, but I think you're confusing NYC with the state of New York. Yes, in terms of population, NYC is by far the most influential city/area in the state, but when you look at the rest of the state, much like California, it's pretty conservative. Enough for a Republican State Senate majority, albeit slim. And that Senate is making Cuomo's job a LOT more difficult, yet he is managing to maintain his liberal agenda almost flawlessly.
Max Markham Agreed. There is no doubt that running a nation is more challenging than running a state, especially when said nation is much more conservative than said state. But I definitely think Obama had a lot of missed opportunities pre-midterm elections (and even he admitted that in his town hall yesterday at U of Maryland). I think that Cuomo has started off with a running, if not sprinting, start.