Political Science Students Philosophical Dialogues : Video

Our Final Requirement in our
Major Subject 
Political Science 1o9 : Ancient Politics.

Dialogue on Different Aspects of Politics:

• Democracy
• Government and its Role to Education
• Best Form of Government
• Separation of Church and Government
• Justice

SouthEast Asia: IndoChina

(Source: Paul, E. [2010]. Obstacles to democratization in Southeast Asia: A study of the nation state, regional and global order. London: Palgrave Macmillan.)

THAILAND

Thailand is the only country in Southeast Asia that was not colonized by Anglo-European powers. This was due partly to the King of Siam's negotiating skills and compliance with the commercial and political demands of colonial powers, as well as to the British and French strategic alliance to maintain the country as a buffer zone between their competing imperial ambitions. To maintain its independence, Siam had to cede Siem Reap, Battambang and Sisophon provinces to the French in 1907 and transfer the Malay states of Kedah, Pedis, Kelantan and Trengganu to the British in 1909. The judicious policy of the royal household kept the country from Japanese rule during WWII. Japan was given freedom of passage for its troops to Burma and elsewhere in the region and in exchange for friendly collaboration, Thailand was rewarded with the transfer of some territory which it claimed from British Burma and Malaya and French Cambodia. After WWII the communist insurgency prompted Thailand to support the growth of a powerful military establishment and the emplacement of a military dictatorship with the help of US money and aid. In exchange the United States built a number of military bases in Thailand as part of its war against communism in Indochina. In recent years, there has been some notable progress in the democratization of the country and, perhaps because it was never colonized it is possible to detect a positive trend towards the protection of human and political rights. Nevertheless, the military, as in Turkey and Pakistan constitute a continuing challenge to the political stability of Thailand.

Pathway to democracy. Democratization in Thailand as elsewhere in Southeast Asia is a form of war waged by citizens' demands for power and political equality. It has been fought on many fronts by communist uprisings on behalf of poor peasants of the north and northeast as well as by minority groups in the south. A major terrain of political engagement is the primate city of Bangkok where some major battles have been fought in recent years, such as the 1973 great student rebellion which overthrew the military dictatorship of field marshal Thanom Kittikachorn and the 1976 bloodbath when the military seized power. One of the most important confrontations was the 1992 Black May popular uprising which overthrew another military regime and introduced major political reforms and the 1997 Constitution which strengthened civil society and press freedom.

Aging USA: How pension debts ruined NYC subways, bankrupted Sa Diego, and loom as the next financial crisis

Chapter 1
WALTER REUTHER AND THE TREATY OF DETROIT

The weight of history on our results has been significant. -RICK WAGONER, chairman and chief executive officer, General Motors

Once upon a time, General Motors was a symbol of success. After World War II, the automaker routinely captured more than 40 percent of the American automobile market, and in 1955, when an entry-level Chevrolet cost $1,450, GM's market share climbed to 51 percent. The company's brass was moved to complain (or so went the joke) "We're still losing five out of every ten sales."1 In an age when GM was criticized for pursuing its own selfish aims rather than those of the country, Charlie Wilson, its outgoing president, testified, rather memorably, before the Senate Armed Services Committee, "What was good for the country was good for General Motors, and vice versa." Wilson's remark didn't fool anybody; GM, of course, was in business for its stockholders. To ensure that its profit targets were met, it methodically raised the prices of its cars, and year after year it had the highest sales, the highest profits of any com-pany in America. The shareholders made out like bandits. From the end of the war until 1965, a span of two decades, the stock registered a stupendous, eightfold gain.

But as an institution, General Motors was already beginning to age. Shareholders did not at first notice the great transformation that was occurring in their status-their great disenfranchisement. But in a manner of speaking, they lost their claim; General Motors was sold out from under them. Oh, it wasn't literally sold. But the gushing stream that was GM s cash flow, which previously and properly had flowed to the stockholders, was quietly but most assuredly diverted. Over the next four decades, GM's stock lost 60 percent of its value. The company continued to pay dividends, but the owners of America's biggest industrial enterprise would have done better holding T-bills. Even though, over those many years, GM sold as many cars or more as in Wilson's day, the putative owners-the stockholders-for all practical purposes had lost their title.