<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="/styles/rss-style.xsl"?>

<rss version="2.0"
 xmlns:blogChannel="http://backend.userland.com/blogChannelModule"
>

<channel>
<title>teodesian.net</title>
<link>http://teodesian.net//posts/4e6cbed6-13f4-11ec-bdd7-ab46b9295393?format=xml</link>
<description>teodesian.net : /posts/4e6cbed6-13f4-11ec-bdd7-ab46b9295393</description>
<language>en</language>
<pubDate>2026-04-30T21:08:33</pubDate>
<lastBuildDate>2026-04-30T21:08:33</lastBuildDate>


<item>
<title>Thierry Meyssan &#x22;gets&#x22; the US political system</title>
<link>http://teodesian.net/posts/4e6cbed6-13f4-11ec-bdd7-ab46b9295393</link>
<description><![CDATA[<blockquote>
At no point in this analysis have I spoken of the candidates’ programmes. This is because, in the reality of the local political philosophy, they don’t count. Since Oliver Cromwell’s «Commonwealth», Anglo-Saxon political thought considers the notion of general interest as an imposture aimed at masking dictatorial intentions. So the candidates do not have a programme for their country, but «positions» on given subjects which enable them to collect «support». The elected officials - the President, parliamentary representatives, governors, prosecutors, sheriffs, etc. - do not pretend to serve the Common Good, but to satisfy the greatest majority of their electors.
</blockquote>
Bravo.  This article is overall a good and clear-headed look at things.  There are some minor errors, but one should expect such given the large distance (culturally and otherwise) between Lebanon and the US. ]]></description>
<author>doge</author>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://teodesian.net/posts/4e6cbed6-13f4-11ec-bdd7-ab46b9295393</guid>
<pubDate>2016-04-04T07:48:57</pubDate>
<enclosure url="http://teodesian.net/posts/4e6cbed6-13f4-11ec-bdd7-ab46b9295393" type="text/html" />
</item>
<item>
<title>Thierry Meyssan &#x22;gets&#x22; the US political system</title>
<link>http://teodesian.net/posts/1459756137</link>
<description><![CDATA[<blockquote>
At no point in this analysis have I spoken of the candidates’ programmes. This is because, in the reality of the local political philosophy, they don’t count. Since Oliver Cromwell’s «Commonwealth», Anglo-Saxon political thought considers the notion of general interest as an imposture aimed at masking dictatorial intentions. So the candidates do not have a programme for their country, but «positions» on given subjects which enable them to collect «support». The elected officials - the President, parliamentary representatives, governors, prosecutors, sheriffs, etc. - do not pretend to serve the Common Good, but to satisfy the greatest majority of their electors.
</blockquote>
Bravo.  This article is overall a good and clear-headed look at things.  There are some minor errors, but one should expect such given the large distance (culturally and otherwise) between Lebanon and the US. ]]></description>
<author>doge</author>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://teodesian.net/posts/1459756137</guid>
<pubDate>2016-04-04T07:48:57</pubDate>
<enclosure url="http://teodesian.net/posts/1459756137" type="text/html" />
</item>
</channel>
</rss>
