I have no idea why people are obsessed with regime change like it’s something bad. Is it because of Iraq and Libya? But those are savages, of course they messed it up.
Look at the 15 republics of the USSR, though. Look at the Warsaw Pact countries. They all experienced dramatic regime change far beyond Iraq. And it was fantastic. Or is there anybody here who wishes the USSR continued until now?
Germany regime-changed in 1945 and turned into a wonderful, civilized country. Even Mexico pulled off an excellent regime change in 1910, although being Mexico and all it did take 20 years and a civil war to make it stick. Spain regime-changed beautifully in 1975. The US achieved one of the most remarkable regime changes in history in 1776.
I don’t think that we should invade anybody to effect regime change. I’m against people invading other people. But that’s why I say I’m against invasions. I don’t say I’m against regime change. Because that’s a weird and random thing to oppose. Do you believe that people should be stuck for eternity in a regime that doesn’t work for them? Why? Because of one situational fail in one stupid Iraq?
Honestly, it’s not even the belief itself that annoys me but people’s eagerness to repeat these fake expressions without even trying to ask what they mean. I despise the use of verbal clichés.
Clarissa's Blog 
OT: I’ve been listening to interviews with Abby Innes, a British economics professor who’d studied Central Europe in soviet times. She had wanted to write a book about Brexit as a case of state failure and ended up recognizing modern neoliberalism as a mirror image of Stalinist economics – both see socio-economic systems as closed sets, problems that can be solved through rational policy measures. This always fails because human systems are open and constantly changing.
Her book is called “Late Soviet Britain: Why materialist utopias fail”
Are you familiar with her work?
LikeLiked by 1 person
No, but very interesting, thank you!
LikeLike
“I have no idea why people are obsessed with regime change like it’s something bad. Is it because of Iraq and Libya? But those are savages, of course they messed it up.”
According to Matt Walsh, Washington DC has a higher homicide rate than Baghdad. Who are the savages?
Incidentally, regime change is interference in the affairs of sovereign nations. Not exactly a recipe for peace and good international relationships.
LikeLike
In the examples I have given, who exactly interfered in the affairs of sovereign nations? Have you read the examples? I gave several examples of when the regime changed because the people of the countries wanted it to. You decided to assume that regime change is always external. That’s on you. I specifically said that I oppose invasions. You thought it was a good idea to disregard that. None of this is the problem of my argument.
As for crime rates in DC, you can easily find them online and find out who the savages are.
LikeLike
The problem with the expression regime change is that people invested it with meaning that has nothing to do with the concept. As a result, they are trapped in an argument with themselves. Carelessness with terminology is always like that. The real, true regime changes like in the USSR and Spain in 1975 get excluded from the term and utterly unrelated events like Ukraine in 2014 get included.
LikeLike