Create an Account
username: password:
 
  MemeStreams Logo

Spontaneous Sociability and The Enthymeme

search

Rattle
Picture of Rattle
Rattle's Pics
My Blog
My Profile
My Audience
My Sources
Send Me a Message

sponsored links

Rattle's topics
Arts
  Literature
   Sci-Fi/Fantasy Literature
  Movies
  Music
Business
  Tech Industry
  Telecom Industry
Games
Health and Wellness
Holidays
Miscellaneous
  Humor
  MemeStreams
   Using MemeStreams
Current Events
  War on Terrorism
  Elections
Recreation
  Travel
Local Information
  SF Bay Area
   SF Bay Area News
Science
  Biology
  History
  Nano Tech
  Physics
  Space
Society
  Economics
  Futurism
  (International Relations)
  Politics and Law
   Civil Liberties
    Internet Civil Liberties
    Surveillance
   Intellectual Property
  Media
   Blogging
  Military
  Security
Sports
Technology
  Biotechnology
  Computers
   Computer Security
    Cryptography
   Cyber-Culture
   PC Hardware
   Computer Networking
   Macintosh
   Linux
   Software Development
    Open Source Development
    Perl Programming
    PHP Programming
   Spam
   Web Design
  Military Technology
  High Tech Developments

support us

Get MemeStreams Stuff!


 
From User: Decius

Current Topic: International Relations

NYT Review of 'America at the Crossroads,' by Francis Fukuyama
Topic: International Relations 7:18 pm EST, Mar 15, 2006

Michiko Kakutani calls Fukuyama's new book "tough-minded and edifying."

In "America at the Crossroads," Mr. Fukuyama questions the assertion made by the prominent neoconservatives Mr. Kristol and Robert Kagan in their 2000 book "Present Dangers: Crisis and Opportunity in American Foreign and Defense Policy" that other nations "find they have less to fear" from the daunting power of the United States because "American foreign policy is infused with an unusually high degree of morality." The problem with this doctrine of "benevolent hegemony," Mr. Fukuyama points out, is that "it is not sufficient that Americans believe in their own good intentions; non-Americans must be convinced of them as well."

That's where the General Memetics Corporation comes into the picture.

Fukuyama writes:

"Bureaucratic tribalism exists in all administrations, but it rose to poisonous levels in Bush's first term. Team loyalty trumped open-minded discussion, and was directly responsible for the administration's failure to plan adequately for the period after the end of active combat."

Fukuyama is getting hell from people for what they perceive as him changing his mind. First, I'm not sure that's completely the case. I was happy to see Saddam go down as well, even though I thought our timing and approach was way off. I also do not think its contradictory to be anti-war and applaud the downfall of Saddam at the same time. You can be happy about ends and still think that means suck. You can also want a particular end, but have a different set of means in mind to get there. However, all these things involve complex arguments. Most people don't like complex arguments that actually require a few levels of thinking. Meaningful ideas are like onions, they must grow a few layers before they are edible and taste good. The outer layers don't have as much flavor, but they can also easily be peeled off.

Since I've followed Fukuyama's works, I'm looking forward to reading his new book and seeing where he goes with it. I don't always agree with him, but I consistently find some great insight in his writings.

This interview is also worth a read. Dare I say it ends on a note that makes Fukuyama look like an intellectual snob?

NYT Review of 'America at the Crossroads,' by Francis Fukuyama


Daily Kos: Muslim Cartoon Controversy: What the Media Isn't Telling You
Topic: International Relations 6:21 pm EST, Feb  9, 2006

The most recent Hajj occurred during the first half of January 2006.

There were a number of stampedes, called "tragedies" in the press, during the Hajj which killed several hundred pilgrims.

These were not unavoidable accidents, they were the results of poor planning by the Saudi government.

And while the deaths of these pilgrims was a mere blip on the traditional western media's radar, it was a huge story in the Muslim world. Even the most objective news stories were suddenly casting Saudi Arabia in a very bad light and they decided to do something about it.

The 350 pilgrims were killed on January 12 and soon after, Saudi newspapers (which are all controlled by the state) began running up to 4 articles per day condemning the Danish cartoons.

There rarely is a clearer case of "Death to the West" being used to divert attention away from local problems.

Daily Kos: Muslim Cartoon Controversy: What the Media Isn't Telling You


 
 
Powered By Industrial Memetics
RSS2.0