Choice, freedom and governance

Choice and being able to make choices are fundamental for freedom. By no means does that freedom have to be wrapped in a democratic style of governance. However we have come to link the two as if one can not live without the other. With all the revolutions in the Middle East we are living through a time where freedom of choice is being expressed by the people. Often these people live in Autocratic societies.

Now, as an outsider, I know that I should have no say in how these people choose to be governed, that is up to them. When I hear leaders (as has Canada’s leader) call for regime change, I feel the bullet of oppression rip through the right to self-determination. I am all for ending the violence in these revolutionized countries but I do not want to support war mongering or anything else that will cause more bloodshed. Furthermore I do not want to force a system of government on anyone.

In Syria we have many countries flapping their mouths off about regime change. These same countries are providing support as well in the form of weapons and training. What is really surprising is that the support is given to opposition forces that have very little support amongst the people within Syria. By supporting these opposition forces we are supporting a group that represents a minority seeking power and using force to get that power. This is the very thing the revolution sought to end in the first place.

Over the course of events in Syria I have sided with the plan in which Russia and China have always stated. That being a coalition of leaders meeting with the Syrian government to hammer out a peace plan. Doing this will ensure sovereignty, legitimacy and hopefully a quicker agreement to a ceasefire agreement. At the outset the other three permanent members of the United Nations Security Council have fought those plans, which in the meantime more people of been killed. Somehow the popular perception has it that Russian and China are the ones that have been blocking peace efforts. The fact is opposite.

The people of Syria need to be given the chance to exercise their will to run their own country. That is their right and their freedom. If they want to be ruled by a monarchy or dictator so be it. What ever format they choose to make that choice we must support. Now of course the international community has to abide by international law and human rights. So we can not support a system that selects a leader by shooting each other.

Now to throw even more mud into the mix. The international community may be ethically bound to stop  violent conflicts, legally there are no grounds to do so unless such violence spills into neighbouring countries. This has not happened in Syria. However there are forces outside of Syria going in.

In Syria, the path to peace is to support the people of Syria. That path is through the existing government and a ceasefire agreement with all opposition forces. This is the support in which the international community has always been asked to provide: The support of the current government to uphold the current laws and constitution of the sovereign state.  With that the international community has limited that support if a government is actively killing its own people such as genocides. In such a case regime change is deemed necessary.

In conclusion, the international community must support the people in its right to choose the system and the leadership of their own country. Those rights must be protected up to the point where the system used threatens regional peace or threatens an unequal section of the population (what ever that is).

Society and Systems

Reading past postings I have written is a common thing I do. It gives me a sense of continuity as well as stirring the existing thoughts I have. One of the thoughts deals with systems and society.

I am not all the attached to labelling systems of order. For example, democracy has taken on many descriptors such as one person one vote, capitalism, human rights, equality and others. Yet even in the countries that have democracy as a system they rig elections, tramp on human rights, and allow capitalism to eat the country to death. All with the objection of society. No matter what lable you put on a society, it has to function. The irony is that no system can exist unless the people are willing to apply it. With that understanding, ultimately every system is either agreed to or not by each person.

Every society is going through change,progressing, moving or what ever, it is part of being alive. Each country is an experiment of change and at the moment Russia is one of the most daring experiments of change we have the pleasure of witnessing. 

Russia is in the mix of building their system. The election is by all accounts won and Putin will be the next president. Of course there are concerns with the voting that took place within the Duma. Do to these concerns we can see where improvements have to be made to ensure the system is well protected. Welcome to the world of red tape and bureaucratic hurdles.

In reality all the red tape and bureaucracy will never stop corruption, it will only limit the incidents. As you think about this you have to realize that the major energy, cost and time is spent/wasted because of those we can not trust. That is the root of every reason why we even have or need laws, systems, religions, or structures of order.

In Russia, they are in the midst of developing their system as they see fit. In truth so is every other country in the world. To me the focus has been pointed in the wrong direction. There is no system that can not work, the problem is the people that apply it.  What I would like to point out is the reality of such systems that have a capitalist ideology.

Capitalism is rooted on growth, must grow or die. That is the ideology. Of late we have come to the understanding that a sustainable economy is the best way forward. Sustainability, in reality is producing  what you consume , it is very much a balance of equality. In my understanding the perfect balance is zero. Zero is a capitalist nightmare, but it is the perfect balance of sustainability.

As Russia goes about its progress in economics and politics their society will morph as well. These are their decisions as to what path to take. In pursuit of a strong economy, Putin has noted that he wants to build a strong economic block within Asia. Really that needs to happen as it did in North America, South America, West Africa, South Asian and Europe. Putin wishes also to work more within the BRIC countries. Building stronger working/scientific ties with the countries that ring the North Pole are in his plans as well.

Such times are very interesting. I just wish we could trust eachother to be peaceful.

Fear, Security, Power, Rights and Dreams

When a government uses fear to control, uses threats of violence to persuade and speaks to the need for the use of physical force to defend freedom, we are all in for chaos and hell.

There is no greater threat to peace than physical violence.  There is not greater threat than an insane person with the capacity to use violence.  Right now all I can see are the ones that have the capacity to use violence are the ones that are insane.

As individuals we are all very much alike.  As we begin to form groups we lose a little bit of our commonalities.  These groups we gravitate to become insulated and the fear of the other starts.  Russia is now in the midst of such a battle, Libya has gone through such a battle and may have a further war developing due to the desires of group power struggle.  Europe is going through a very difficult time and the causes are so complex that a solution is lost due to the search for blame. 

In these situations, the words that divide us have become so vague that mistrust builds exponentially.  We are experiencing a nuclear explosion of mistrust around the world.  It is difficult to find a government that is trusted by its people.  This mistrust builds fear, which is met with a need for security, which is secured through a show of power, which is justified through our right to protect, which was developed from a dream that we should live peacefully. 

We are caught in a prisoner’s dilemma.

That is why I wrote about game theory a few days ago.  We are involved in a game of Russian roulette.  There is only one strategy in that game, be in or out.  To phrase it another way as it was once stated, with us or against us.  Such a game is pure chaos.  To be part of such a game acknowledges that you have no hope for the future; it is an all or nothing end game.  The problem we face is that the leaders are at the table playing roulette yet they are pointing the gun at the citizens.  In turn the citizens know that the gun only has a limited number of bullets so fire away.  This is the enduring spirit of the dream that peace will prevail.

We have seen peaceful demonstrations all over the world, many that were countered with bullets and all with some degree of public disdain –such as the occupy protests in Canada.  The part in which the peaceful protesters play in this game is very dangerous.  The protesters know they can be killed but they also know that a just society is possible.

In Egypt and Tunisia, ultimately the soldiers would not fire upon people.  We had seen this same peaceful resolve during the Russian August coup in 1991 and I believe that we have witnessed the same resolve in Russia during the past weeks.  Libya was not so lucky, neither is Syria, Yemen or the DRC.

We are indeed living through an interesting time period.  The political games that are now taking place have deep connections to history.  Political lines are being redrawn, new identities being forged, flawed ideology are being brought to light and discarded, hopefully the result will provide for ideology and strategy for peace.