Phil Osborn has written,
>I could go on for some length, but the bottom line is that there are vast
>and profound differences in culture and philosophy that make certain kinds
>of relationships difficult or impractical in certain cultures. Fukayama
>does the subject a lot more justice than I possibly could here.
Do you think culture accounts for relationships more than relationships account for culture? Or do extended relationships become culture? Does this have anything to do with geography? If so, how? If not, why call it Eastern culture?
The power to corrupt comes from the desire to do so, not from the magnitude of the power. It seems to me that people pretend that "power corrupts" so that they don't have to take responsibility for their own corruption (however weak).