A new world order, united under communism, where the people are free from the burden of making their own decisions.

In general I'd like the West to mind its own business and stop ruining the world. I'd like the West to stop instigating and propping up color revolutions in the CIS. I'd like them to stop instigating and propping up jihadist insurrections in the Middle East. Just leave people alone, is that so much to ask? What I find ironic is that for as libertarian as this forum claims to be, people are very fond on antagonizing other countries around the world and getting on their sanctimonious soapbox about other countries social systems.

What people in the West fail to appreciate is that most of the rest of the world is heavily burdened with the process of state-building, which by the way took hundreds of years to complete in the West. These countries do not have the luxury of building states at a time when there was no mass politics, there was no international standards of behavior. They do not have the luxury of building states in an organic, evolved way. They have to hurry the process along. Building a state is an incredibly difficult process as it is, and they have to do it as humane, liberal, and democratic way as they can, as quickly as they can, even though the demands of mass politics and liberalism are often, if not usually, at odds with the demands of state building. So you can act self-righteous about how liberal and humane politics in the West is, but this is the result of 400 or so years of bloody evolution, of civil war and wars of expansionism. European states had to go through a very deadly process of conquering local rivals for power before their configuration could be established and before they could extend opportunities for representation that they like to brag about.

So just leave people the hell alone, you're not making these things any better with your constant interventions and your constant lecturing. You're increasing the burden on already overburdened states, to the point of collapse in many cases. You think you're better than everybody else but you're not, you just went through the process earlier.

"where the people are free from the burden of making their own decisions."

People are making decisions for themselves under your neoliberal world order?

"I think it's great you have the courage to pick your own side in a debate..."

LOL He picks ALL sides of the debate at various times in order to argue with everyone.

"In general I'd like the West to mind its own business..."

So that Tyrants in the east have a freer hand to interfere and ruin the world..

Because the Soviet Union thing was such a success....and the Middle Eat prior to US invovlement was all peace, harmony and love....because Asia was century upon century of bliss

Putin, You are, and always shall be, an assclown.

Because the states rights small government conservatives like Krellin would enjoy it if foreign countries told us what to do and how to live. These are the same people who object to signing innocuous human rights treaties and refuse to accede to the ICC.

"and the Middle Eat prior to US invovlement was all peace, harmony and love"

Never said that, although the M.E. was largely pacified under Ottoman rule, the point is intervening in their affairs isn't going to lead to better outcomes and is just going to slow development.

Funny, the people you get a hard on for violate human rights on a fairly regular basis. You demented, perverse world view is sickening, Putin. Seems to me the West has a far greater standard of living than your blessed east...

Putin, you are, and always shall be, an assclown.

Thanks for missing the point as always, Krellbell.

I think it's difficult for the West to understand a few key differences in perspective.

Most easterners understand that life is not always peachy-keen in the west, but feel that it would be inappropriate for them to involve themselves in Western affairs. That Westerners disagree, sometimes over the barrel of a rifle, tends to confound easterners.

Furthermore, if an effective world leadership had to be elected, America would probably not be people's first choice, not globally. America has plenty of problems. Life is far better in other countries, the Nordic states in particular. If there were an actual election for World Police, America would not win that election. Most of the countries that probably would make the international short list are mostly disinterested in the job, which should tell you something.

American intervention in foreign affairs tends to follow economic capitol. This is largely transparent to easterners.

One other thing, is that Americans tend to be baffled by Eastern non-interest in actual representative democracy, to the extent that it reduces the effectiveness of Americans to successfully intervene in foreign affairs.

"Putin, You are, and always shall be, an assclown"

...said the pot to the kettle...

http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa058.html

Haha Putin I was only kidding, really. I liked your response to the question.

What confuses me is why Putin33 disagrees with me so often, because I think the exact same as him in the first reply.

I mean, I play devil's advocate regularly myself, and even though people assume it's my opinion even if I say it isn't all day long, it isn't.

But this doesn't seem to be the case with Putin, yet he always seems to assume we're not agreeing...

Much like krellin in that aspect.

Putin's response is great and this particular paragraph is really strong. +1.

"What people in the West fail to appreciate is that most of the rest of the world is heavily burdened with the process of state-building, which by the way took hundreds of years to complete in the West. These countries do not have the luxury of building states at a time when there was no mass politics, there was no international standards of behavior. They do not have the luxury of building states in an organic, evolved way. They have to hurry the process along. Building a state is an incredibly difficult process as it is, and they have to do it as humane, liberal, and democratic way as they can, as quickly as they can, even though the demands of mass politics and liberalism are often, if not usually, at odds with the demands of state building. So you can act self-righteous about how liberal and humane politics in the West is, but this is the result of 400 or so years of bloody evolution, of civil war and wars of expansionism. European states had to go through a very deadly process of conquering local rivals for power before their configuration could be established and before they could extend opportunities for representation that they like to brag about."