Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

49331Wilson (was: Austria-Hungary)

Expand Messages
  • elfuncle
    Feb 1 12:29 PM
    • 0 Attachment
      "Think for a moment upon the problem, 'How much would Woodrow Wilson's brain be worth if this brain were not sitting in the Presidential chair of the United States?' "
      ( -- Rudolf Steiner: The Reappearance of Christ in the Etheric, XII: Individual Spirit Beings and the Undivided Foundation of the World: Part 3 , Dornach 25th November, 1917, GA 178)
      The development of Europe with all its new nation-states and all that developed into the opposite of what Wilson had expected or hoped for, a veritable nightmare. The reason is that Wilson's proposals were totally unrealistic. And that reminds me: On June 15, 2010, Johan Galtung was asked by Amy Goodman on Democracy Now  what he thought about Obama's remarks about Afghanistan, and he said "totally unrealistic".
      PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA: Now, the people of Afghanistan have endured violence for decades. They have been confronted with occupation by the Soviet Union and then by foreign al-Qaeda fighters who used Afghan land for their own purposes. So tonight, I want the Afghan people to understand: America seeks an end to this era of war and suffering. We have no interest in occupying your country. We will support efforts by the Afghan government to open the door to those Taliban who abandon violence and respect the human rights of their fellow citizens. And we will seek a partnership with Afghanistan grounded in mutual respect, to isolate those who destroy, to strengthen those who build, to hasten the day when our troops will leave, and to forge a lasting friendship in which America is your partner and never your patron.

      AMY GOODMAN:
      That was President Obama. Your response?

      JOHAN GALTUNG: Totally unrealistic and extremely badly informed, and that from such an intelligent, such a charming man with such a brilliant rhetoric.
      Those exact words by Galtung about Obama in 2010 could have been said about Woodrow Wilson in 1918: Totally unrealistic and extremely badly informed!  The most tragic thing about Wilson -- apart from getting the (totally debased) Nobel Peace Prize in 1919 after being hailed in Paris like Jesus riding into Jerusalem on Palm Sunday (just like Obama, who found it necessary to inform his supporters before inauguration that he wasn't born in a manger) -- the worst thing is that all of Wilson's successors have been looking up to him like a role model to be emulated. And listening to Obama is like hearing the echo of Wilson -- pretty ox-poo rhetoric. And the world never learns, apparently -- it wants to be deceived.

      Tarjei


      --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, "Frank Thomas Smith" <fts.trasla@...> wrote:
      >
      >
      >
      > --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, "ted.wrinch" ted.wrinch@ wrote:
      > >
      > > On the subject of Der Staudi's distorting mirror world, I've been looking into a little more detail at the later half of the C18 history of the Austria-Hungary 'empire'/'state'…? It's hard to find the right name for it as it was such a patch-work of languages (11 recognised), peoples and ethnicities, sometimes described as 'ramshackle' or 'decaying' in English circles. Wiki has this to say on the nationalities issue:
      > --------
      > http://southerncrossreview.org/Ebooks/ebbasicissues2.htm
      >
      > Note 15: Page 139 President Wilson's 'fourteen points' constituted the ideological basis for the principle of 'self-determination of peoples', which was to underlie the political restructuring of Europe after the war. This principle presupposes that ethnic groups (peoples, nations) are perfectly separable and definable, like so many individual pieces of a jigsaw puzzle. If each governs itself through its own national state, then the cause of political morality is served. In fact, Europe was and is a quilt of nations with many overlapping ethnic 'grey' regions. The effect of self-determination or the 'nationalities principle' is the disenfranchisement of many smaller or larger minorities with the resultant bitterness and frustration. The course of history since this principle was put into effect in Europe and elsewhere would seem to support such criticism. Winston Churchill wrote the following about the carving up of the Austro-Hungarian empire: 'The second cardinal tragedy was the complete break-up of the Austro-Hungarian Empire...There is not one of these peoples or provinces that constituted the Empire of the Hapsburgs to whom gaining their independence has not brought the tortures which ancient poets and theologians had reserved for the damned.' The Second World War, Vol. 1, Chap. i, The Gathering Storm. According to the idea of the 'social triformation', or 'threefold society', the nationalities (ethnic) problem can only be solved by liberating 'national' life from the power of the political state. In other words, the creation of a free cultural-spiritual sector.
      >

    • Show all 9 messages in this topic