Venezuala is a different story: I'd put that in the liberal proceduralist column. They havea multiparty democracy, a fair amount of free speech, and decide on policies by majority vote -- sometimes with a lot of popular involvement. That's not how it is in Cuba or Vietnam. Or China or North Korea. jks
Charles Brown <cbrown at michiganlegal.org> wrote:
...and they are alternatives , acceptable alternatives to liberal proceduralism; they aren't tyranny or civil war and they are acceptable alternatives to liberal proceduralism.
CB
From: andie nachgeborenen
Of course you support that, Charles. That's why you're a Leninist and I'm a liberal!
Charles Brown wrote: From: andie nachgeborenen
Well, I will think about it. But your liberal proceduralism clearly has failed.
* * * There is no alternative. Really. None. No acceptable one. I mean, there's tyranny or civil war, but those are really bad ideas, don't you think?
^^^^
CB: I'm for what they got in Cuba, Viet Nam and Venezuela. I wouldn't call it liberal proceduralism.
I like the changes that the Civil War made in the U.S. The ends justified the procedure
___________________________________ http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
--------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Get it on your mobile phone. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <../attachments/20040829/47b13038/attachment.htm>