Public Opinion in the Islamic World on Terrorism

[jmm99]

from Marc
First, you are assuming that the US ideology and system of governance is not FUBAR. That may be a valid assumption, but it is still an assumption.

it is an empirical observation of the facts that I have seen and lived with over my lifetime. Although my experience with Canada is not as close, I also can say as an empirical observation that its ideology and system of governance are not FUBAR. Neither governance system is perfect; but both are legitimate (accepted as such by their respective Peoples) and both generally work.

Thus, both are superior to those in country X, where both ideology and system of governance are FUBAR (not working in their country of origin). It is entirely possible (for any of many possible reasons) that neither the US nor Canadian constructs will work in country X. That does not mean that country X's construct is equal to those of the US and Canada.

If you elect to read "superior" as being used in an absolute sense as "implied by my original usage", there is nothing I can do about that because you elect not to consider my other statements that provide the context.

All of this is just a micro example of why polls and their questions must be taken with a grain of salt - the answers reflect what the pollee interpreted, construed, assumed, etc. the question to mean. That is particularly so where somewhat abstract questions are being asked - as in ideology.

For example, I tried to define what I consider US ideology here (based on two documents - which is at least somewhat finite):

... we are in love with the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. OK, agreed that we (US) have an excellent ideology.

but you said:

The "US ideology" (there are actually competing ones including at least one that is technically Fascist, i.e. the older Fordist model) ....

I know not the older Fordist model nor the newer Fordist model - but I am sure you will tell me about that and the other competing models. I short, I am but a simple man; and if the pollster asked if I agreed with US ideology as defined by the older Fordist model, I'd say "I dunno".

You also said:

... at least in the romanticized form Bob's World talks about (and that is the one that has galvanized world notice from the French Revolution on), bears little resemblance to the forms of governance either practiced currently in the US or exported via "reconstruction" efforts.

and there is validity to this on two fronts. One is that Bob and I are probably idealists and perhaps romaticists. The other is that there is a difference between the principle and its reduction to practice - a theme which I have often hammered on. If the reduction to practice (e.g., governance) does not truly (a loaded word) reflect the principle, then there may something wrong with the practice.

Or what seems to be a bad reflection of the principle may simply be confusion as to what the principle means. E.g., "all men are created equal". True in a theological sense; but if that principle is morphed into "all persons are equal", it is an obvious fallacy. There are many people who are better pool players than I - and yes, they are superior to me - which gives me something to aspire to.

Again, a problem for the pollster and the results of the poll.

As to your ending question:

Let me ask you a question: if an ideology and system of governance is imposed, is this bottom up or top down?

top down, based on my understanding that the word "imposed" means without the consent of the governed. That I have to add because both the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution were authored by elites, but accepted in the end by those who remained in the colonies. Those who held to the British theories (which, as I have also remarked more than once in posts, corresponded to the mainstream of English constitutional history) departed for such places as Toronto.

A real kick would be to go back in time and poll the pre-1776 colonists on what they thought the Magna Carta meant, amongst other abstractions derived from finite documents.

PS: Since Marc elected to discuss financial FUBARs, here are exchange rates from the beginning of the market collapse (Oct 2007, when I thought about switching some assets to the Bank of Montreal; but decided not to) to the present:

10 Oct 2007 1.02 USD

24 Feb 2009 0.80 USD

Better than the US stock market, for sure; but a hit on the CAD.