As I have pointed out many times, it's very much too late to salvage our relative trade technology and industry position.
But it is great to finally have a President who will admit an enormous problem, even if he can do little about it except antagonize those we have long aggrandized.
The situation has further deteriorated dramatically, even since Perrot made similar but less sweeping noises regarding Clinton WTO and NAFTA.
Clinton of course was another Rhodes scholar. As a group they have been relentless Milner Group type globalizers. See DK's recent post re his father...
Clinton of course was another Rhodes scholar. As a group they have been relentless Milner Group type globalizers. See DK's recent post re his father...
When you realize this, you see that there has long been little to lose, given the alternative at this point, which is merely further ever hastening relative decline.
Just think of voluntary radical globalization as a suicide mission, now past the point of turning back, either way.
That is what the West's liberal globalizers always planned for, and they got their wish.
The mistake, especially now, is to think of liberal globalization merely as liberalism. That has been the great deception in the movement since the late 19th Century.
Liberal globalization has actually been a radical movement from the beginning, looked at in terms of its origins in The Age of the Democratic Revolution, long now running, under the political radar, regarding its radicalism, everywhere it has now taken over.
I am one of those few who think it would have been much better to have kept the European Imperial System, as Michael Howard implied.
As Kennan said of Eastern Europe, after the fall of the Austro Hungarian Empire, 1919, it had been better than anything that has come after....For me, that is very safe for Kennan to have said, even back then...
To counterpose my view to radical globalization, call me an Old Western Imperializer, in a world where, in the West, they no longer exist.
Just think of voluntary radical globalization as a suicide mission, now past the point of turning back, either way.
That is what the West's liberal globalizers always planned for, and they got their wish.
The mistake, especially now, is to think of liberal globalization merely as liberalism. That has been the great deception in the movement since the late 19th Century.
Liberal globalization has actually been a radical movement from the beginning, looked at in terms of its origins in The Age of the Democratic Revolution, long now running, under the political radar, regarding its radicalism, everywhere it has now taken over.
I am one of those few who think it would have been much better to have kept the European Imperial System, as Michael Howard implied.
As Kennan said of Eastern Europe, after the fall of the Austro Hungarian Empire, 1919, it had been better than anything that has come after....For me, that is very safe for Kennan to have said, even back then...
To counterpose my view to radical globalization, call me an Old Western Imperializer, in a world where, in the West, they no longer exist.
No comments:
Post a Comment