Sorry, I realize that I am missing the magnitude of Leopold's excesses. I meant to confine my observations to the extent that power corrupts.
There is nothing to compare Leopold II to. I cannot begin to explain him.
Yeah, I read this book and was horrified by it. I had taught Conrad's Heart of Darkness for years, but had no vital statistics on it. This book laid it all out in spades.
Not so funny, Leopold does not seem so much an aberration as one might think. His behavior is in keeping with many powerful people. The Borgia's come to mind almost immediately. And that is only because of the excellent TV series.
Thanks for the historical perspective. It does not mitigate what took place in Boston, but it does shed some critical perspective on it, although I wonder about the charge of "weapons of mass destruction" in light of the Iraq debacle. One puzzles over what precise meaning this might have, given its usage in the run-up to the attack on Saddam.
I worry about this kid now on trial and how he will be perceived. I know that there is a contingent within the government who want his pelt nailed up on the wall in some trophy room to prove that we are tough on terrorism, and I also worry about what repercussions this will have on the Immigration Bill now under consideration.
That said and looking at the state of democracy as it currently stands, what chance does anyone in this country see that his individual vote has? What means of changing things are in the hands of the people?
Popular impotence breeds violence, and unemployment fuels this.
Sorry, I realize that I am missing the magnitude of Leopold's excesses. I meant to confine my observations to the extent that power corrupts.
There is nothing to compare Leopold II to. I cannot begin to explain him.
Yeah, I read this book and was horrified by it. I had taught Conrad's Heart of Darkness for years, but had no vital statistics on it. This book laid it all out in spades.
Not so funny, Leopold does not seem so much an aberration as one might think. His behavior is in keeping with many powerful people. The Borgia's come to mind almost immediately. And that is only because of the excellent TV series.
Thanks for the historical perspective. It does not mitigate what took place in Boston, but it does shed some critical perspective on it, although I wonder about the charge of "weapons of mass destruction" in light of the Iraq debacle. One puzzles over what precise meaning this might have, given its usage in the run-up to the attack on Saddam.
I worry about this kid now on trial and how he will be perceived. I know that there is a contingent within the government who want his pelt nailed up on the wall in some trophy room to prove that we are tough on terrorism, and I also worry about what repercussions this will have on the Immigration Bill now under consideration.
That said and looking at the state of democracy as it currently stands, what chance does anyone in this country see that his individual vote has? What means of changing things are in the hands of the people?
Popular impotence breeds violence, and unemployment fuels this.