--- Phil Enns <phil.enns@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Omar Kusturica wrote: > > "... moral right to rule over lands like ..." > > There is no moral right to rule. There is only the > ability to enforce > authority to rule. *I beg to differ. I would still like to make some distinction between might and right. For some states this authority > arises from an > enlightened agreement amongst the citizenry. For > other states, it > arises from the threat to commit violence against > those who disagree. > If there is a moral distinction to be made with > regards to the rule of > states in the Middle East, the distinction between > enlightened agreement > and threats of violence is a good place to start. *I don't know of any state that asks those whom it rules for agreement. (Well, other than Montenegro which has held a referendum on independence recently.) In settler-states like Israel or Canada you might perhaps construe the decision of the first generation who came to live there as agreement, but I doubt if it qualifies as enlightened agreement. And surely you are not suggesting that the Israeli rule in the West Bank and Gaza is based on "enlightened agreement" of the population ? What happens to those who do not agree, should they be forcefully expelled ? > To insert a practical dimension, if one were to find > oneself in trouble > with the law, in which Middle Eastern country would > one prefer to be > located? *I have no idea. I'm not perfect but I am not a criminal either. O.K. __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ------------------------------------------------------------------ To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off, digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html