|
of course i'm not saying that all decisions at all levels are influenced in some way by the international dynamic. but, i do think it is unrealistic (hypothetically, not naming you specifically) for someone to claim that the international community doesn't fundamentally effect important aspects of policy.
perhaps i am confusing terms... but i'd like to discard the word altogether in this discussion as i dont' think it fits the relationships countries have with eachother very well. the discrepancy occurs when you liken it to a king and similar authorities: king's have legitimate legal authority of their domain. they decide when the slaves get a break because the slaves, in a sense, are theirs.
nation to nation relationships are different. if i were having a dispute with a friend and i call a more powerful third party to broker a bargain with said friend... would you call the third party a dictator? if i were short cash and only one person had the resources to lend me money... would that person be a dictator? if i and a host of my friends were milling around unsure of how to tackle a problem... would i be a dictator if i gave our group coherance and leadership? i don't think dictatorial actions necessarily follow in these circumstances.
__________________
If you will not fight when your victory will be sure and not too costly, you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you and only a precarious chance for survival. There may even be a worse case. You may have to fight when there is no hope of victory, because it is better to perish than to live as slaves.
~ Winston Churchill
|