Following the censorship / deletion of a few posts here recently, after I noticed an increasing number of them were getting to be off-topic and outside the scope of what this group was set up to document and discuss, I am called upon to clarify what exactly is wanted here and what is not. I wrote a similar piece to this early on, and some general guidelines... but frankly few read them, and perhaps now we're more operational, more of us will read this, and I won't need to delete anything else.
First of all, what is 'Geopolitics', as opposed to any other politics? As group founder, have I understood that correctly... do others not think of it in the same way? I'm open to being corrected where I'm wrong, and any discussion that comes from this post should clear this up once and for all.
HERE are a couple of different definitions, giving us a good all-round idea of the meaning.
Personally, I understand it to be about the things listed in the group's profile - international relations, war over natural resources like oil, terrorism, nuclear proliferation, rivalry between ideologies as in The Cold War, territorial disputes and man's inability to co-exist peacefully unless there's a mountain or an ocean in the way... a blend of politics and geography, then?
I see it as international, but perhaps that is wrong. Can more local issues such as at the State level be 'geopolitical' too? The gas row between Russia and Ukraine which froze half of Europe last January, that's geopolitical. What about the MP's expenses scandal in Britain recently? Is that? Or the issue of Sotomayor's ethnicity, in the US?
The single biggest subject within that third of the group's title was always going to be Islam, Israel, the West's crusade in Central Asia and associated terrorism. With that in mind, I would ask a couple of things of everyone...
It is hoped that we can develop a peaceful environment, perhaps even unique among these groups, where all political affiliations, nationalities and religious creeds can come and talk openly without being offensive or being offended. Take this as an opportunity. In order to acheive that, it's my job, with some help, to make sure people who are only here to mock and abuse those who they don't agree with, are kept in line, or kept out completely. There are plenty of other groups that allow much more freedom to insult each other... that's not welcome here. If you have an axe to grind about Islam, Israel, America or whatever else... make your point without being rude about it, please. Without wishing to single anyone out, can we not have provocative titles on posts, either? The fact that you have x or y viewpoint is already respected - but not everyone will agree with you. Please understand that. And one post on the same subject is usually enough per person, per day... it takes more than a day for a post to become a quality 'thread', with replies.
Theology and religion, too... some discussion is unavoidable if you're talking about Kashmir, Afghanistan, Israel and the like. Religious differences are at the very heart of the matter, but there is one aspect of religion which makes it unsuitable for a forum like this. This is the fact that 'God' or 'Allah''s law is more important to the religious adherent than any ground-rules laid down here. If you are so strictly religious that you are unable to abide by some basic standards in debate, you're not likely to fit in here (I don't think this has been much of a problem thus far, but bashing and baiting in general are, by common sense, not helpful). I said right at the beginning... ok, so you don't like Muslims / Jews / Christians / Atheists / left / right... fine, say so. But don't expect everyone to like it. Personally, I'm an atheist and I think you're all going to get us killed if we carry on the way we are. But that's just one opinion.
'Attack the idea, not the person' is a standard that works well elsewhere - I've seen some threads getting a little too personal, which is alright if it clears the air and we achieve better understanding. But not if it doesn't.
So... what about 'Spies & Lies'? Well, lies and politics go hand-in-hand, I think we all understand that perfectly. 'Spies' refers to the intelligence agencies and covert ops, secretive groups working behind the scenes, the general topic of 'espionage', I suppose. This could extend into 'corporatocracy' and some economics, just as the geopolitical / tribal issues might extend into the realm of 'anthropology'. 'Lies' could equally be about debunking myths... there are a few here who I know love taking conspiracy theories apart.
Also, groups like the United Nations, military alliances such as NATO, developments like Iran's alleged nuclear program (is it just for energy?) or Kim Il Jong's persistent sabre-rattling.
What is not needed here are links to adult friend-finders, reviews of toy robots (though that was quite funny) or discussions about whether Noah let a raven or a dove go first during the Biblical flood. I anticipate some UFOs and stuff like that... but if you start on about Ancient Sumeria and Atlantis, you will be asked for evidence. On your head be it :)
I don't enjoy coming across like I haven't got a sense of humour, but it's how it is in these groups... anyone here now or in future who I find just taking liberties and testing to see what they can get away with, I will smite their souls with my wrath. I'm not daft - I can tell the difference between someone having a joke and someone being nasty about someone else's religion etc
I have one last question... for the members to decide. 'Demographic' topics, such as abortion rates among different ethnic groups, China's population control, cultural matters such as the role of women in Indian society... shall we expand the scope to things like this? I can see how that fits... just not the results of last night's 'baseball game', as Gurcan eloquently put it yesterday.
I hope that's everything, and the last time I need to say this for a long while. I'm sorry if you've had something of yours deleted, but that's how it has to be. I hope nobody leaves after reading this, and of course, if you know anyone who might like it here, please invite them.
First of all, what is 'Geopolitics', as opposed to any other politics? As group founder, have I understood that correctly... do others not think of it in the same way? I'm open to being corrected where I'm wrong, and any discussion that comes from this post should clear this up once and for all.
HERE are a couple of different definitions, giving us a good all-round idea of the meaning.
Personally, I understand it to be about the things listed in the group's profile - international relations, war over natural resources like oil, terrorism, nuclear proliferation, rivalry between ideologies as in The Cold War, territorial disputes and man's inability to co-exist peacefully unless there's a mountain or an ocean in the way... a blend of politics and geography, then?
I see it as international, but perhaps that is wrong. Can more local issues such as at the State level be 'geopolitical' too? The gas row between Russia and Ukraine which froze half of Europe last January, that's geopolitical. What about the MP's expenses scandal in Britain recently? Is that? Or the issue of Sotomayor's ethnicity, in the US?
The single biggest subject within that third of the group's title was always going to be Islam, Israel, the West's crusade in Central Asia and associated terrorism. With that in mind, I would ask a couple of things of everyone...
It is hoped that we can develop a peaceful environment, perhaps even unique among these groups, where all political affiliations, nationalities and religious creeds can come and talk openly without being offensive or being offended. Take this as an opportunity. In order to acheive that, it's my job, with some help, to make sure people who are only here to mock and abuse those who they don't agree with, are kept in line, or kept out completely. There are plenty of other groups that allow much more freedom to insult each other... that's not welcome here. If you have an axe to grind about Islam, Israel, America or whatever else... make your point without being rude about it, please. Without wishing to single anyone out, can we not have provocative titles on posts, either? The fact that you have x or y viewpoint is already respected - but not everyone will agree with you. Please understand that. And one post on the same subject is usually enough per person, per day... it takes more than a day for a post to become a quality 'thread', with replies.
Theology and religion, too... some discussion is unavoidable if you're talking about Kashmir, Afghanistan, Israel and the like. Religious differences are at the very heart of the matter, but there is one aspect of religion which makes it unsuitable for a forum like this. This is the fact that 'God' or 'Allah''s law is more important to the religious adherent than any ground-rules laid down here. If you are so strictly religious that you are unable to abide by some basic standards in debate, you're not likely to fit in here (I don't think this has been much of a problem thus far, but bashing and baiting in general are, by common sense, not helpful). I said right at the beginning... ok, so you don't like Muslims / Jews / Christians / Atheists / left / right... fine, say so. But don't expect everyone to like it. Personally, I'm an atheist and I think you're all going to get us killed if we carry on the way we are. But that's just one opinion.
'Attack the idea, not the person' is a standard that works well elsewhere - I've seen some threads getting a little too personal, which is alright if it clears the air and we achieve better understanding. But not if it doesn't.
So... what about 'Spies & Lies'? Well, lies and politics go hand-in-hand, I think we all understand that perfectly. 'Spies' refers to the intelligence agencies and covert ops, secretive groups working behind the scenes, the general topic of 'espionage', I suppose. This could extend into 'corporatocracy' and some economics, just as the geopolitical / tribal issues might extend into the realm of 'anthropology'. 'Lies' could equally be about debunking myths... there are a few here who I know love taking conspiracy theories apart.
Also, groups like the United Nations, military alliances such as NATO, developments like Iran's alleged nuclear program (is it just for energy?) or Kim Il Jong's persistent sabre-rattling.
What is not needed here are links to adult friend-finders, reviews of toy robots (though that was quite funny) or discussions about whether Noah let a raven or a dove go first during the Biblical flood. I anticipate some UFOs and stuff like that... but if you start on about Ancient Sumeria and Atlantis, you will be asked for evidence. On your head be it :)
I don't enjoy coming across like I haven't got a sense of humour, but it's how it is in these groups... anyone here now or in future who I find just taking liberties and testing to see what they can get away with, I will smite their souls with my wrath. I'm not daft - I can tell the difference between someone having a joke and someone being nasty about someone else's religion etc
I have one last question... for the members to decide. 'Demographic' topics, such as abortion rates among different ethnic groups, China's population control, cultural matters such as the role of women in Indian society... shall we expand the scope to things like this? I can see how that fits... just not the results of last night's 'baseball game', as Gurcan eloquently put it yesterday.
I hope that's everything, and the last time I need to say this for a long while. I'm sorry if you've had something of yours deleted, but that's how it has to be. I hope nobody leaves after reading this, and of course, if you know anyone who might like it here, please invite them.
And always remember, if you have an issue with something a moderator says or does, they are accountable to each other, and are myself, Diogenes12345, CosmicRat, Dockbillin, Delborgreebies, Bohdanp, NicebutDim, Gurcanaral, Rcouchenou, Quietlaughter and thedudeoforkut. The last four tend to take a less active role... any complaints should be addressed to one of the others. Thanks
AntwortenLöschenthanks for the clarification!
AntwortenLöschen:o)
I think Demographic topics are important - they are bound to come up in the political arena - just not at the moment.
After all when you get doctors being gunned down to support the views of a minority because they are carrying out a medical act - that is Political and it has ramifications that reverberate around the world.
This is especially important now in Europe. We saw an amazing sea-change in politics last night, it will take time for those effects to trickle through but I think it was you who said - America has gone to the left whilst Europe has gone to the right - this will make for a very interesting relationship in the years to come and no doubt some very robust debates!
Nessie
I am puzzled now.
AntwortenLöschenIt is YOU who established and named this forum. I assume you had something in mind. And to "help" that something, you had an image of what kind of issues YOU wanted to have here.
Now, turning around and asking us about YOUR vision is totally unfair!
:)
But, it is unfair!
Most of us are perfectly capable to establish (yet) another forum. No big deal. The BIG question is "why?" What exactly would one aim to get out of that.
Since you have chosen a very elaborate name, I was convinced that you knew what you wanted...
Alas, here we are...
Here is what I recommend in full sincerity:
Just ignore the recent "perturbation" you may have caused. Instead, simply ask yourself what do you want to get from this forum?
And then announce it.
That is it.
You had a good point: "I want to hear about global politics, not about the petite skirmishes of one town against another.
Think of a "Soccer" forum. It does not make any sense to wonder if people should also post there about beauty pageants. Not even about cricket!
Do not ask "us". Ask yourself. And let us know.
:)
Who said running a forum is "effortless"?
Ah.. here I recall:
"Don't ask what your country can do for you. Ask what you can do for your country"
--JFK
It is THAT simple.
Thanks to you for providing a discussion environment.
Thank you Martin, for this clarification. It is comprehensible and reasonable. I wish this group luck and many inspiring exchanges of thoughts.
AntwortenLöschenWow...I pleased to see a moderator...moderating. It is good to ask for input from the group, the people make the group what it is.
AntwortenLöschenGurcan - everything I have to say on this, I've already said here... can't think of any more, really. The questions are just to be flexible, and get some feedback, let the group evolve how its' members want it to be. There's over 400 people here, not just me. I want to hear people's opinions.
AntwortenLöschenIt is sometimes hard to strictly define what is and is not related to geopolitics, especially in the globalizing world that we live in these days. However, I think it is very easy to apply common sense and some critical judgment to determine what belongs here or not. It is important to get feedback from everybody, but ultimately the owner and the moderators of the forum decide, and Mike has clearly indicated that he is not loath to apply surgical instruments when needed :).
AntwortenLöschenBottom line, I think, the last definition of geopolitics offered - the study of the relationships between a nation and the rest of the world - is the best and the broadest. Roughly speaking, it includes anything that is of interest to at least two nations. Notice the word "nations", not "states" or even "nation-states". In other words, something that is internal to a multinational state and involves some conflict or confrontation between two nationalities within that state may be relevant to geopolitics. This, for example, possibly makes Judge Sotomayor's appointment a relevant point of discussion. Or, another example could be the standoff between the state and the Russian minority in Ukraine, with Russia, as an immediate neighbor and a former imperial power, also being a player in this standoff. And so on.
World news, current affairs, not too much of one thing all the time, easy on the less verifiable conspiracy stuff, anything I suggested above, keeping it civil and moderating firmly but as little as possible, easy on religious content and as much diversity as possible, in both members and topics, and we should be on the right road.
AntwortenLöschenAnd such an eminently reasonable approach explains why the group has grown so quickly :)))
AntwortenLöschenLook to understand Geopolitics you have to look at Britain
AntwortenLöschenThese Islands are similar or the equivalence of a Lightweight Boxer who became The Heavyweight Champion of The World
What happens in British Politics has ramifications throughout The planet.
America may have been proclaimed "The Great Satan" by The Founder of The Islamic Republic of Iran
but it was Britain and Russia which it Feared and Lived in Terror of.
Britain it was which caused The Downfall of Mossadeq The C.I.A. were just it`s catspaw.
Suez if Russia had not invaded Hungary Britain and Israel would have destroyed Gamel Nasser.
Zimbabwe Britain refused to allow Mugabe`s Wife treatment in a British Hospital.
Britain may no longer seem important, But Sarkosy better watch himself:
After insulting the Queen on D Day.
Compared to that election of BNP M.E.Ps are as nothing
But Sarkosy watch Your Back if we can take Out an English Mother and Her Egyptian Storeboy in the middle of Paris
Nicky Baby, watch your step!!!
They`re not called Perfidious Albion for Nothing....ROFLMAO
great words and that is my idea of what we should be-great-
AntwortenLöschen
AntwortenLöschenGood friends all,
Several excellent comments...
For more, see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geopolitics
peace...
as ever, el diablo, I remain
Zee (aka Chuck)