´óÏó´«Ã½

A CHILLING RESONANCE

with #1 on the 'prospects' thread. Clever kit but no wisdom.

August 1914, nightmare scenario, we are the worst species on earth for learning lessons. Russia is being labelled the bad guy over this in the western media, let's forget about illegal adventurism in Iraq, Afghanistan, Grenada, Vietnam etc., Bush with his Guantanamo legacy calls for Russia to observe 'restraint'. What a good job NATO is not the umbrella for Georgia other wise it would be all hands to defend as it was for 'plucky little Belgium in 1914' The build up of NATO encircling Russia is not even addressed in the western media, don't say you weren't warned.

I don't think the Crimean War led to the other conflicts mentioned. War is war and as old as history.

Old Ivan is being "Nekulkturniy"... as usual...

Tracing the American Civil War and the Opium Wars back to Sebastopol is surely stretching historical connectivity too far. Even with the Prussian wars, it is a bit tenuous.

What is blindingly obvious is the correlation between the locations of the world's trouble spots and those areas where the 'great powers' of the last 2 centuries simply drew borders on maps with no regard for cultural or ethnic considerations.

If borders are to be respected, they have to have some kind of logic which goes beyond the 'what suited Yeltsin and Shevardnadze doesn't suit Putin and Saakasvili' mentality.

#4 threnodio

Unfortunately the borders were often drawn with a lot of "regard for cultural or ethnic considerations", in that they were drawn deliberately to divide such identities. Hence Stalin's decision to divide the Ossetians in 1922.

nations arise out of a common feeling among a group of people. destroy that common feeling and you destroy the nation. which is why ethnic cleansing works and multiculturalism works in destroying the common feeling.

today the uk has no common feeling which is why the break up of the uk is inevitable as those who do have strong common feeling [scots, irish, welsh] become strong in the face of disunity brought on by multiculturalism.

#6 bookhimdano

You are right in saying that "nations arise out of a common feeling among a group of people". However, I don't know where you get the idea that nations who are asserting their political identity are doing so "in the face of disunity brought on by multiculturalism."

In Scotland we are quite happy being multi-cultural. The culture of the Gaeltachd (Highlands) is very different from that of the Norse in the Northern Isles, or the Sassenach Lowlands, but we all get along perfectly well. Our Muslim community (mainly from Pakistan) have a significant membership in the SNP because nationalism here is happy with the concept of multiple identities.

...we all get along perfectly well..

in the unity against the english. if you look at the history of inter scots warfare things were different as the clans fought for their own common feeling?

multiculturalism is based on the nihilist idea there is no such thing as the good. therefore it is said the good cannot be known and so their is no hierachy of better and best and so everything is relative. its not about being tolerant. it is a prejudice against the idea that there is a such a thing as the good. it gives rise to cynicism.

now we know some choices are better than others [otherwise all people would be paid the same for the same job for example]. they are not all equal. because we know this we want to make those choices. it is out of this fact there is a good that a common feeling comes. so no state is multicultural. it may be mutli racial, multi lingual but never multi cultural. its a jedi mind trick word used by the nihilists as they pretend their 'multiculturalism' is about 'equality' when it is nothing other than a prejudice against the idea of the good. [which goes against the natural order of things that there is a hierarchy]

no one can serve two masters. no one can have two equal common feelings. which is why the netherlands has reversed multiculturalism and the UK lords [like lord lester] who promoted it recently said in a tv documentary that it was an experiment and has proved a mistake.


so multiculturalism is a prejudice that poisons common feeling and so society because it does not encourage people to choose that which is good and it neglects the discipline of arguments that show why something is good and should be preferred.


if all was equal then there would be no benefit or good in choosing to be in the uk, somalia or north korea. yet people do choose. they naturally rank them and choose the better or the good.

Why is the present conflict seen only through the eyes of the big powers? What of the wishes of the indigenous people who have for millennia lived out their lives in the area?

The end of the Ottoman Empire has left a patchwork of aggrieved peoples all over the whole of the region. WE the great powers told lies to many and these lies gave rise to expectations of statehood.

North and South Ossetia are a 'nation' divided, indeed these is a further ossetian enclave 100 km south of South Ossetia in Georgia proper according to a recent ethno-linguistic map. The ossetians are historically Alans Iranian speaking descendants of the Sarmatians.

The real problems arise when for whatever reason attempts are made by a ruling class to impose a foreign language and culture upon an area and ethnically cleanse. Did Georgia do this? Did the USA support this?

The USA has a very sorry history of destroying its own aboriginal peoples at home in the past (and today - I do not know?) - the balance between the 'melting post' and multi-culturalism.

These states and proto-states need and deserve respect - many are still infants flailing about wildly. All nations fear separatists and secessionists, however cultural imperialism had damages this area for thousands of years and we should be more accepting of the need to allow for flexible solutions.