But why are they screaming it so loud, why are they browbeating us about it, why is it always mentioned with a qualifier? Real Diseases versus The Disease Concept or Theory of Drug Addiction In a true disease, some part of the body is in a state of abnormal physiological functioning, and this causes the undesirable symptoms.
Quiggin enjoy many of the institutions and rights he currently possesses without the violence of the past? What sort of world would this non-violent attitude give us?
|Latest Health Headlines||This is due to the symptomatology of the disorder resembling an addiction not dissimilar to that of substance-abuse.|
|Crisis intervention||I was a bit nervous that night.|
Violent revolutionaries in general have been much better than spinning their administrations than actually administering them. They are vastly over-rated as a means of effecting worthwhile political change.
Conservative reformation beats obstructive reaction and destructive revolution hands down. As I understand it the Magna Carta was a more or less peaceable settlement between barons and king. That seemed Arguing against television addiction work out pretty well for quite a while.
More generally, the spectacular success of the generally civil British political culture greatly strengthens the case for peaceful reform against violent revolt. And it validates the general principle of conservative reform, with freedom broadening down through the several strata, by successive precedent.
Gandhi is the pardigmatic example of the way in which non-violent protest can secure lasting progress in constitutional order.
The Japanese social revolution cunningly branded the Meji Restoration was noticeably peaceable and Arguing against television addiction successful until disgruntled officers tried to muscle in on the act, with dreams of conquest. Things went downhill rapidly after that.
Not sure that the French Revolution would be my first example of the success of political violence in establishing a stable and democratic constitutional order. How many republics and empires have they gone through since Robespierre? And was it really necessary for the American revolutionaries to come to blows with the British Empire for 40 years in order to secure the traditional rights of Englishmen?
Australia and Canada managed to pull off the trick with nothing more exciting than an extended committee meeting chaired by a man with a beard. Meanwhile the slavery issue festered on in the US for another 50 years, during which time even the Russian Tsar managed to free his serfs without too much fuss or bother.
Both the English Civil War and the French Revolution fit the pattern I described — a brief period of success, a new dictatorship, restoration of the ancien regime. As to the possible non-existence of Germany as a unified state, maybe you need to look again at the history of C20 before suggesting that would have been an unthinkable disaster.
Your example of Portugal illustrates the point. But, thanks to the existence of armed groups, Angola suffered decades of civil war thereafter, none of which achieved anything. Otto Pohl 17 said: Other than the Mennonites in the USSR whose goal was emigration not overturning the Bolshevik Revolution I can not think of any purely pacifist movements that were successful.
Had there been no wars it is doubtful that any Portuguese government would have given up the colonies. They considered them to be integral parts of Portugal.
The revolutions of in Czechoslovakia, Hungary etc. I think it very odd to discuss the English and French revolutions in this context. Take the French case.
There was a fiscal crisis of the French state followed by an attempt by the nobility to reassert their traditional rights, an attempt that backfired once the Estates General were assembled.
After that, things just spun out of the control of the various actors in a cycle of action and reaction. Essentially, you seem to be arguing against some kind of caricature Leninism here. Or that a democratic Portugal would have continued to fight these wars? Just that we should recognise them as disasters, and seek to draw lessons for the future.
What seems to be happening here is that Prof. That is obviously historically unknowable, unless you have access to a portal into several alternative universes. What we do know is that the civil rights, democratic governments, legal equality and other things we value are owed to past convulsions which included violence.
Knowing that, we should be careful about saying violence is never justified unless we definitely prefer living on our knees to dying on our feet.
The British only gave up their African coloniesin part because of violent resistance or the threat of it. The most famous example is the Mau Mau uprising in Kenya.
But, even where the independence movements were peaceful like in Ghana it was not guaranteed that it would remain so in the face of colonial obstructionism. I thought it was too early to tell. Quiggin at 22 says that both the English Civil War and the French Revolution resulted in return to the status quo ante after a shortish period.
In both cases, that is just wrong. In fact, nobody can know that. We study history seriously in large part to understand why things are the way they are.There are seven methods of intervention that are widely used and condoned as the most professional ways of managing addicted patients.
Most interventions fall into the direct intervention category, but there are other forms known as indirect interventions and forcible interventions, too. There is a place with four suns in the sky — red, white, blue, and yellow; two of them are so close together that they touch, and star-stuff flows between them.
I know of a world with a million moons. I know of a sun the size of the Earth — and made of diamond. There are atomic nuclei a few.
There are alternative views and methods of change which I hope you’ll take the time to learn about on The Clean Slate Addiction Site.
There are many different ways to argue against the brain disease model of addiction. Addiction is everywhere, from celebrity tabloids, to television, and possibly to a family member or close friend. There is alcoholism, drug abuse, and gambling addiction ; the effects of such are devastating.
Problem gambling (or ludomania, but usually referred to as "gambling addiction" or "compulsive gambling") is an urge to gamble continuously despite harmful negative consequences or a desire to stop.
Problem gambling is often defined by whether harm is experienced by the gambler or others, rather than by the gambler's behaviour. PS: I wanted to mention, but omitted, that an unequivocal commitment to non-violence makes it easier to isolate and identify agents provocateurs (like the appalling Patrick Howley), and hooligans like the rioters in Rome (a mixture of self-styled anarchists and rightwing soccer thugs according to the NYT).