We are developing the social individualist meta-context for the future. From the very serious to the extremely frivolous... lets see what is on the mind of the Samizdata people.

Samizdata, derived from Samizdat /n. - a system of clandestine publication of banned literature in the USSR [Russ.,= self-publishing house]

Squander Two on the difference between international and internal politics

I like this (the second paragraph (of two) of this):

For better or worse, there’s a world of difference between international and internal politics. Heads of state are like in-laws: obliged by their position to meet each other and smile about it no matter how they may feel about it. Their subjects are more like neighbours: they can pick and choose which ones to socialise with, and report the psychotic ones to the police.

That, which I only just noticed, was posted on June 23rd. But some things will keep.

Time was when lots of heads of states were, literally, in-laws.

Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on LinkedInShare on TumblrShare on RedditShare on Google+Share on VK

4 comments to Squander Two on the difference between international and internal politics

  • What if the queen just said, “no”?

  • Stephen Willmer

    I think it was Paul Bakery who said that the existence of neighbours keeps us from permanent civil war.

  • Rob: Constitutionally, there is an assumption that if the Queen does not do what her ministers advise her to, the people will rise up and depose her. Of course, what would actually happen in such circumstances is unknown, and extremely unlikely in the case of the present Queen.

    The Queens is able to express her reservations privately to the PM, of course. One suspects that if she really objects to something, accommodations would be made to her wishes to at least a reasonable extent.

  • Rich Rostrom

    It isn’t just heads of state who have to be polite regardless; heads of government and diplomats are constrained too.

    The U.S. and some of its allies are frequently denounced for having more-or-less friendly relations with various sleazy, slimy, or putrid regimes.

    They are also denounced regularly for imperialist interference in internal affairs when they denounce such a regime as unfit to rule.