Good article. Our founding fathers including James Madison and John Adams cautioned against the establishment of a pure democracy. “In a pure democracy, there is nothing to check the inducement to sacrifice the weaker party or the obnoxious individual.” You won’t find the word “democracy” in either the Declaration of Independence or the U.S. Constitution. The United States of America was established as a Republic.
This is what I’m talking about… This is how China treats their OWN people… How do think they’re gonna treat non Chinese (who they clearly view with disdain… Part of their “good” brand of nationalism) once they establish themselves as a military superpower?
You are right, United States of America is not a Democracy but a Republic per it’s Constitution.
But it aspire to be Democratic, though. (Sometime maybe too Democratic??)
For years America has been trying to export it’s way of governing and Democracy to others, either by example, persuasion, or by force.
Very few countries have copied the Presidential system, with a President as both Head of State and Head of Government. Preferring instead the British “Westminster System of Parliament”, with a Prime Minster as Head of Government and a ceremonial President, or constitutional King/Queen as Head of State.
The option of an all powerful Dictator appears to fit better for some countries. (Notably Russia and the Arab world)
The third way is leadership by a small group of people in a benign one party system, which has proven successful in China. (But now MAY be changing)
The difference between Capitalism, Social Democracy and Communism is becoming blurred, with few countries being hardline any one of the above.
The US is struggling to make up it’s mind on whether to go for pure Capitalism, or turn towards something resembling Social Democracy. We’ll know which winns out when the next generation takes power.
There are no real Communist countries left in the world. China is more capitalistic than communist, as is Vietnam. North Korea is a dynastic dictatorship with no other aim than to stay alive and Cuba is likely to be absorbed back in the American sphere of influence within the next decade or so.
Countries that attempt to form some sort of representative government always run the risk of of the majority party (or the person in charge of the majority) changing the rules so that they remain in power. It takes time for societies to embrace a systems of government where the populace will not accept the corruption of the governing principles.
Even we in the US are not immune to these corrupting influences.
Just my opinion…
more trouble making…
“The difference between Capitalism, Social Democracy and Communism is becoming blurred, with few countries being hardline any one of the above.
The US is struggling to make up it’s mind on whether to go for pure Capitalism, or turn towards something resembling Social Democracy. We’ll know which winns out when the next generation takes power.”
Since it’s establishment the USA has been a mixed economy neither socialist or capitalist [communism didn’t exist]. There are phrases in the US constitution that mention the “general welfare” of the people as the primary focus. Also mentioned are regulating trade, imposing tariffs etc to do so. Later laws were passed to regulate and prohibit monopolies that would control industry and hence prices the citizens paid. Since the 1980’s these laws have been weakened and monopolies control a great deal of what people pay. An example being your internet service provider. How many can you choose from in your home? The same goes for drug companies and insurance companies who are protected from competition in the states. So there is no “free market” . A mixed economy understands that a pure capitalistic system will ultimately destroy a country due to unchecked greed. Therefore they put in place regulations to check that greed and promote the common welfare of the people not the welfare of a few. It is up to the citizens of the USA to decide if they want to continue down this path or go back to a truly mixed economy as existed from 1932 to the 1980s while keeping in mind they can no longer exist as an all powerful island but must realize they are part of a macro economy now. The idea that immigrants or some religion is the root cause of a country’s problems is an argument from tyrants or those that aspire to be tyrants have been shouting for centuries. None lasted long, neither the country or the tyrant.
A logical step to streamline the coast guard and bring it in line with most countries. (I.e. managed by the Navy, but not being part of a fighting force)
As long as they don’t put civilian Maritime Authority under the same umbrella I see nothing unusual or threatening in this.
its has taken it from a civilian force to a military force.
I thought the idea of a coast guard is a police force on the water for dealing with civilians?
Not sure about most countries have a coast guard run by the navy, who would that be? ( other then Japan)
They have just added guns to their newest Coast Guard vessel.
One of the CG’s official missions is military readiness along with port security, ATON, SAR etc. When I was on the big cutters we used to do exercises with the Navy including UNREP and ASW exercises.
Coasties were doing security in Kuwait when I was there.
Thats for USCG, When you look at the wikipedia page most CG,s in the world are civilian organizations as they need Police powers.
Collins Dictionary definition of “coast guard”:
you better tell half the world they have it wrong having their coast guards as civilian forces…
In Singapore the Coast Guard is under the Police:
But the Singapore Navy is doing much the same, at least their smaller patrol vessels.
Other than that, the definition is from Collins Dictionary, not from me.
BTW; The Norwegian Coast Guard are manned by a mix of civilian and military personnel, but run by a military command structure:
the issue is a country trying to make legislation that says a military serviceman has control over a civilian where in most cases they have no training.
Fine for guarding the coast but if there is no water police you have a problem.
According to wikipedia Indo has water police and coastguard, I have never seen either just navy but they cant deal with civilians less illegals so no policing on the water.
Just go across to Batam, the Indonesian Coast Guard (Maritime Security Agency) has it’s main base for the Western waters there:
Each time the Neptune sailing regatta is on from Nongsa point the navy comes to show its presence/support, I have never seen any of those light coloured boat with red stripes nor any mention of those vessels or dept.
We get told the navy has a copy of our papers so they can stop us to check.
Seems like the Coast Guard doesnt exist?
I know I have seen them, but not very frequently.
I’ll check and see if I have any pictures of any of their vessels taken on Batam or Bintan.
What about a car from a vending machine??:
my guess is that is the future, time share, choose a colour for the day and either drive it or select AV.