Call in Steingart.
Same old tired platitudes, fall out from our own globalization initiatives after WWII, 70 odd years ago now.
As I have pointed out, way too late now to turn back to a healthy nationalism, so
game over.
BOOMERBUSTER
OLD CELLO
Thursday, October 31, 2013
Wednesday, October 30, 2013
REPRISE MORAL PILLARS CARTOON BONOBOES
Someone liked this.
Here it is again.
http://bozonbloggon.blogspot.com/2010/07/monkey-see-monkey-do-cartoon.html
Here it is again.
http://bozonbloggon.blogspot.com/2010/07/monkey-see-monkey-do-cartoon.html
Tuesday, October 29, 2013
RE THE PUBLIC ROLE OF ACADEMICS
Put another way, my view, of the conflict between co Nobel laureates in economics, is that although theoretically this dispute could be resolved within the discipline of economics, it cannot actually be, as that discipline is constituted, and further, the only way to get beyond such an ostensibly intradisciplinary dispute, to see it in perspective, is from outside economics, to draw on insights from other fields.
Framed within economics, it takes on the character of an insoluble dilemma. Viewed from outside, a pseudo dilemma.
As I have pointed out, from a US perspective, economics turned out to be our own doomsday discipline.
Framed within economics, it takes on the character of an insoluble dilemma. Viewed from outside, a pseudo dilemma.
As I have pointed out, from a US perspective, economics turned out to be our own doomsday discipline.
Monday, October 28, 2013
WHEN YOU'RE A GLOBALIST COUNTRY YOU CAN SPY ON EVERYONE
Because they are all one, under the skin.
'We are the world', as the song goes.
'We are the world', as the song goes.
Sunday, October 27, 2013
re multidisciplinaryanism or interdisciplinarianism
http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=2973239501462830480#editor/target=post;postID=7416120139011028694
I actually meant interdisciplinarianism, rather than multidisciplinarianism, as urgently needed.
The current issue of the Stetson U Magazine nicely illustrates the distinction, and some of its confusions, in that a mere liberal education, (the issue's topic, whether liberal education is dead), is not enough.
Thus, one can see why mere casual multidisciplinarianism, which I equate to what is often meant by a liberal education, is dying, from irrelevance.
Some of the contributors equate the two, which is not appropriate.
I actually meant interdisciplinarianism, rather than multidisciplinarianism, as urgently needed.
The current issue of the Stetson U Magazine nicely illustrates the distinction, and some of its confusions, in that a mere liberal education, (the issue's topic, whether liberal education is dead), is not enough.
Thus, one can see why mere casual multidisciplinarianism, which I equate to what is often meant by a liberal education, is dying, from irrelevance.
Some of the contributors equate the two, which is not appropriate.
FREE COMMENT FROM TIM KREIDER HE NEEDS JARON LANIER WHO OWNS THE WORLD
Thanks very much for your compliments on my [writing/illustration/whatever thing you do]. I’m flattered by your invitation to [do whatever it is they want you to do for nothing]. But [thing you do] is work, it takes time, it’s how I make my living, and in this economy I can’t afford to do it for free. I’m sorry to decline, but thanks again, sincerely, for your kind words about my work.
Saturday, October 26, 2013
re DK POST RE ECONOMICS DISCIPLINE
Re my comment, I should add, that multidisciplinarianism unfortunately has long been practically impossible, as disciplinary compartmentalism has unfolded over the centuries.
Still, the urgency of a multidisciplinary approach has long been acute.
As the social sciences rolled out, efforts were made to connect politics and economics, thus ' political economy ', among other things. Unfortunately, this particular ' field ' was stigmatized as leftist, when little inherently lead to that interpretation except perhaps Smithianism itself.
Into the 20th century, these efforts, even, gradually fell away.
See eg Gilpin's The Political Economy of International Relations, one of the later efforts in that direction.
Randall Collins, The Sociology of Philosophies, another worthwhile effort.
Still, the urgency of a multidisciplinary approach has long been acute.
As the social sciences rolled out, efforts were made to connect politics and economics, thus ' political economy ', among other things. Unfortunately, this particular ' field ' was stigmatized as leftist, when little inherently lead to that interpretation except perhaps Smithianism itself.
Into the 20th century, these efforts, even, gradually fell away.
See eg Gilpin's The Political Economy of International Relations, one of the later efforts in that direction.
Randall Collins, The Sociology of Philosophies, another worthwhile effort.
Thursday, October 24, 2013
re DK ADVERSUS DUVALL
Contrary to the situation in Britain at that time, Americans today have weak conservatism and weak progressivism in the absence of the crucial ingredient, among others: nationalism.
American conservatives are globalists.
American progressives are globalists.
American liberals are globalists.
They are not nationalists, a dirty word, for us, since the Kaiser, and then Hitler.
American conservatives are globalists.
American progressives are globalists.
American liberals are globalists.
They are not nationalists, a dirty word, for us, since the Kaiser, and then Hitler.
RE DK ADVERSUS ROBERT DUVALL
Conservatives and progressives......nineteenth and twentieth century versions....
Funnily enough, if one looks back at the radical Whigs, who evolved over here into the American rebellion group, but among whom were also Tory loyalist types, the roots of our progressivisms, and conservatisms, were sort of related, and confused together, back then. They still are.
As Bailyn implies, both arose out of opposing ideologies, in the left and right opposition to the likes of Walpole.
Funnily enough, if one looks back at the radical Whigs, who evolved over here into the American rebellion group, but among whom were also Tory loyalist types, the roots of our progressivisms, and conservatisms, were sort of related, and confused together, back then. They still are.
As Bailyn implies, both arose out of opposing ideologies, in the left and right opposition to the likes of Walpole.
MONITORING MERKEL'S PHONE
All in a day's work over here.
Hope it wasn't ' low bid '.
Certainly, it was an outside, Snowdon ian, contractor.
Have to outsource work like this.
Hope it wasn't ' low bid '.
Certainly, it was an outside, Snowdon ian, contractor.
Have to outsource work like this.
the dollar
Perhaps someone who can raise prices, in dollars, wouldn't worry so much about a weaker dollar.
Who can do that?
Someone who has, or can credibly fake, production monopoly power.
Who can do that?
Someone who has, or can credibly fake, production monopoly power.
Tuesday, October 22, 2013
Sunday, October 20, 2013
LETS TALK THE DOLLAR
Why would anyone in their right mind want to start a run on the dollar?
After all, everyone who is anyone has a lot of them.
Let's start by asking a few other kinds of questions, sort of suss this thing out, so to speak.
Who could engineer such a thing? Why?
Let's reflect on recent remarks re de Americanizing the world.
How would you do that, would you say?
How would you de Americanize the world?
Answer, de dollarize it. For a start?
Actually, that's the endgame.
One had to start out, as the Japanese, especially, did, and de industrialize it, hollow it out.
That process has continued with Asian and Mexican, production, the Chinese eventually taking production away from Mexico, neutering to some extent NAFTA, in a dog eat dog, dog eat cat, production world.
Only in that way could one set the stage, so to speak, in Asia, for de dollarizing it.
After all, everyone who is anyone has a lot of them.
Let's start by asking a few other kinds of questions, sort of suss this thing out, so to speak.
Who could engineer such a thing? Why?
Let's reflect on recent remarks re de Americanizing the world.
How would you do that, would you say?
How would you de Americanize the world?
Answer, de dollarize it. For a start?
Actually, that's the endgame.
One had to start out, as the Japanese, especially, did, and de industrialize it, hollow it out.
That process has continued with Asian and Mexican, production, the Chinese eventually taking production away from Mexico, neutering to some extent NAFTA, in a dog eat dog, dog eat cat, production world.
Only in that way could one set the stage, so to speak, in Asia, for de dollarizing it.
Friday, October 18, 2013
RE CHINA OUTRAGED JAPAN LAWMAKERS VISIT JAPAN WAR SHRINE
Why shouldn't Japanese visit their own war shrine, in their own country?
Saturday, October 12, 2013
CHINA TO BUILD NUCLEAR POWER PLANT IN BRITAIN PEACE THROUGH FREE TRADE AND INVESTMENT
Call it ever decreasing leverage, peace, prosperity, or security, everywhere, going forward.
The current dean at BU, a great Cobden ist, as he has to be:
"...Business defines the common language that crosses all country boundaries--it is the best route to global peace and prosperity."
The current dean at BU, a great Cobden ist, as he has to be:
"...Business defines the common language that crosses all country boundaries--it is the best route to global peace and prosperity."
Friday, October 11, 2013
PHILIPPINES SOUTH CHINA SEA PERFECT FOR BI PARTISAN PHILIPPICS DUSTY
Why stay tacit?
Why not go philippic on em?
One reason: lack of ' leverage '.
But, hey, who needs leverage to go philippics?
Has lack of leverage stopped wanton, publicity hungry, American demagogues often, in the past?
American politician: "Lemme atem!"
Dusty: "Hold yur horses, buster, an nobody, ovr here, gits hirt."
Why not go philippic on em?
One reason: lack of ' leverage '.
But, hey, who needs leverage to go philippics?
Has lack of leverage stopped wanton, publicity hungry, American demagogues often, in the past?
American politician: "Lemme atem!"
Dusty: "Hold yur horses, buster, an nobody, ovr here, gits hirt."
audience today big in Bangladesh
| Entry | Pageviews |
|---|---|
United States
|
26
|
Bangladesh
|
13
|
China
|
4
|
Poland
|
2
|
Ukraine
|
2
|
Russia
|
1
|
RE DK'S CURRENT POST
"Because the German people believed that submarine warfare could win the war, the government had no choice but to undertake it rather than offer peace."
I will take a wild guess why, here, before I get real facts, and say that the German free press, possibly influenced by large munitions and industrial interests, had something to do with the German people's erroneous belief.
POSTSCRIPT: See Professor Rudd's much better answer.
I will take a wild guess why, here, before I get real facts, and say that the German free press, possibly influenced by large munitions and industrial interests, had something to do with the German people's erroneous belief.
POSTSCRIPT: See Professor Rudd's much better answer.
Thursday, October 10, 2013
RE FIELD MARSHALL MONTGOMERY WWII THE FIRST CHICHELE LECTURE 1957
"Understanding what must follow from the decision of unconditional surrender, and knowing that great troubles lay ahead with Stalin over eastern Europe and the future of Germany, the Western allies should surely have ensured that their forces gained possession of the great political centres of Central Europe before the Russians---notably Berlin, Prague, Vienna. If this had been laid down as the object by Roosevelt and Churchill in January 1943, in my considered view as a soldier, we could have grabbed all three in 1944 before the Russians."
At The Casablanca Conference, where Roosevelt announced unconditional surrender, at Morgenthau's instance and under the influence at that time of Russian agents in Treasury, Stalin did not even have to attend.
As Montgomery noted, it suited his plans to the letter...
Call it: "The Roosevelt Morgenthau" decision, or even more accurately, The Roosevelt Moscow Accord, and its aftermath.
Churchill had to go along, or lose so called allies he could not then do without.
I say ' so called ' because not only was the USSR clearly planning to absorb as much of Western and eastern Europe and the Middle East as they could, with active US collusion, but they were also colluding simultaneously with Japan re a secret nonaggression pact, enabling Japan's attack on Western and on American targets in Asia, especially Pearl Harbor.
Morgenthau had arranged for Patton's dismissal, with the help of the willing muckraking tool, Drew Pearson.
At The Casablanca Conference, where Roosevelt announced unconditional surrender, at Morgenthau's instance and under the influence at that time of Russian agents in Treasury, Stalin did not even have to attend.
As Montgomery noted, it suited his plans to the letter...
Call it: "The Roosevelt Morgenthau" decision, or even more accurately, The Roosevelt Moscow Accord, and its aftermath.
Churchill had to go along, or lose so called allies he could not then do without.
I say ' so called ' because not only was the USSR clearly planning to absorb as much of Western and eastern Europe and the Middle East as they could, with active US collusion, but they were also colluding simultaneously with Japan re a secret nonaggression pact, enabling Japan's attack on Western and on American targets in Asia, especially Pearl Harbor.
Morgenthau had arranged for Patton's dismissal, with the help of the willing muckraking tool, Drew Pearson.
BRER FOX OBAMA BRER RABBIT GOP BRIAR PATCH NO GOVERNMENT
Brer Fox: "If u don gif up, brer rabbit, Il thro u in at briar pach."
Brer Rabbit: "Ples ples, brer fox, don tro me in at briar pach.
Uu kin burn me, uu kan boil me, yu cun fry me.
But ples don tro me inat briar pach!"
Brer Rabbit: "Ples ples, brer fox, don tro me in at briar pach.
Uu kin burn me, uu kan boil me, yu cun fry me.
But ples don tro me inat briar pach!"
RE CHINA WARNS US DEBT DEAL BLAST FROM THE PAST
WHERE IS BARRY BLITT WHEN YOU NEED HIM?
http://bozonbloggon.blogspot.com/2010/08/another-great-cartoon-idea.html
http://bozonbloggon.blogspot.com/2010/08/another-great-cartoon-idea.html
Monday, October 7, 2013
Sunday, October 6, 2013
RE MUGGED BY A MUG SHOT
This kind of degenerate muck raking has always been the beating heart of American freedom of the press and government in the sunshine.
It has meant domination by the press, and by corrupt private firms not in the journalism business, in reality.
It has meant domination by the press, and by corrupt private firms not in the journalism business, in reality.
Friday, October 4, 2013
Wednesday, October 2, 2013
RE REUTERS EU CITIZENS RECOILING FROM THE EU
As well they should.
With existing other institutions, now in place, and put in place largely at the urging of the USA, it really amounts to the Asianization of the Western world, going forward, not merely of the USA.
With existing other institutions, now in place, and put in place largely at the urging of the USA, it really amounts to the Asianization of the Western world, going forward, not merely of the USA.
Tuesday, October 1, 2013
THE OTHER INCALCULABLE BLUNDER BIGGER THAN LOSING WWII TO THE SOVIETS
Was this role below, leading to American style market globalization, quoted in an earlier post from Sir Michael Howard:
"Only one thing could have prolonged the existence of the European Empires---the continuing approval and support of the United States. It was the denial of that support that spelled the end of the old European Empires. The citizens of the United States had not joined in the Second World War to prop up a system of imperial domination against which they had been the first people to revolt. And it has been with genuine bewilderment that they find themselves today so generally reviled as its inheritor....."
I would point out however, regarding Professor Howard's term ' imperial domination ', that the American colonies suffered nothing like imperial domination, really, nothing whatsoever comparable to that of more primitive pre industrial societies at that time.
Reading Bailyn's accounts in Ideological Origins, and The Origins of American Politics, and having been persuaded by Professor Allison's presentations on this topic, nothing like real imperial domination was ever really visited on the American colonists, except in their fevered imaginations.
Granted, they were unrepresented in Parliament, but so also were Birmingham, Sheffield, and I believe Manchester, at that time.....
As Allison pointed out, they were the most lightly burdened people by government impositions in the world, ever, while also being, on the other hand, among the most heavily benefited, I would add, before or since, in all of world history.
The British fought, and won, the Seven Years War, which Washington began, defending the colonies, among many other objectives, against both the French and the Spanish, shortly before the Colonies chose to rebel in gratitude.
"Only one thing could have prolonged the existence of the European Empires---the continuing approval and support of the United States. It was the denial of that support that spelled the end of the old European Empires. The citizens of the United States had not joined in the Second World War to prop up a system of imperial domination against which they had been the first people to revolt. And it has been with genuine bewilderment that they find themselves today so generally reviled as its inheritor....."
I would point out however, regarding Professor Howard's term ' imperial domination ', that the American colonies suffered nothing like imperial domination, really, nothing whatsoever comparable to that of more primitive pre industrial societies at that time.
Reading Bailyn's accounts in Ideological Origins, and The Origins of American Politics, and having been persuaded by Professor Allison's presentations on this topic, nothing like real imperial domination was ever really visited on the American colonists, except in their fevered imaginations.
Granted, they were unrepresented in Parliament, but so also were Birmingham, Sheffield, and I believe Manchester, at that time.....
As Allison pointed out, they were the most lightly burdened people by government impositions in the world, ever, while also being, on the other hand, among the most heavily benefited, I would add, before or since, in all of world history.
The British fought, and won, the Seven Years War, which Washington began, defending the colonies, among many other objectives, against both the French and the Spanish, shortly before the Colonies chose to rebel in gratitude.
RE FIELD MARSHALL MONTGOMERY
The reasons why we lost WWII, politically and militarily, are overwhelmingly the fault of the United States Administration at that time.
Having read Beschloss' book The Conquerors, though with all its shortcomings as an historical account, one can read between the lines so to speak even in that flawed work, and reach the same conclusion.
Montgomery's First Chichele Lecture outlined how this political failure unfolded, in a thumbnail sketch.
Having read Beschloss' book The Conquerors, though with all its shortcomings as an historical account, one can read between the lines so to speak even in that flawed work, and reach the same conclusion.
Montgomery's First Chichele Lecture outlined how this political failure unfolded, in a thumbnail sketch.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)