>I believe you are correct, Gerhard.  These are certainly 
>important
> considerations.  It is fundamentally true that culture and 
> location are to
> important to overlook.  Thank you.

>>> [...] but with respect to political philosophy I am 
>>> still inclined to
>>> believe that the constitutional republican government in 
>>> the U.S. has as
>>> close to a level playing field as possible, ideally.

>> I agree with that, with two additions. One is that what 
>> works as
>> government
>> structure depends a lot on the culture of a region; what 
>> works in one
>> place
>> may not work in another.

May I add a "straw man" that I hope is correct, and may or 
may not be :-).

Assertion:    There are limits to what is acceptable 
cultural 'bias'. There is a limit beyond which it is by 
definition unacceptable to go, even if doing so looks to 
"make things work". Because, the very act of accepting such 
fixes destroys the level playing field one is attempting to 
create. This may be so self evident as to be not worth 
saying, or may not.

An obvious example is "corruption". There are many societies 
where corrupt practices are endemic, where they form part of 
the fundamental basis of societal transactions and where, if 
they were removed, the society would not be able to function 
in a 'competent' manner - or perhaps that is "in an 
apparently competent manner'. This latter case occurs when 
revenue from corruption forms an understood and substantial 
part of the remuneration package that goes with an official 
position to the extent that the office holder could not live 
at the level intended to be possible for a person in that 
position. I'm saying that notwithstanding the paralytic 
effect that removal of such would have on such a society, 
the practice has no place in the targeted level playing 
field and equal opportunity.

Too obvious, maybe ?

Alas it's all too inobvious to many many nations.

Taken to extremes this ends up, (along with being the 
consequence of other moral and philosophical positions) 
where positions of leadership in government armed services 
are understood to be remunerated in large part by the 
holders ability to enslave and sell such members of the 
areas that they control as they see fit. I'm aware of this 
being the case (BIMBW) in at least one country and I would 
be surprised if it were not variously true in numerous 
others.


            Russell





 

-- 
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist