Great passage, pb p. 233.
After he talks about China having declared the US its main enemy, he describes our record playing a secondary balancing role. The US has had not much interest or ability at this, since the founding, really.
Nothing has changed. There are a lot of different kinds of reasons for this.
Another point, the US China relationship as it has developed, and his discussion of the US' balancing role weaknesses, are related, although he does not make any connection directly there.
Why would you promote development of your main adversary as both your main factory and your main creditor, and then, almost immediately, have to talk about playing a balancing role against it?
You're out on the flat ice of globalization.
BOOMERBUSTER
OLD CELLO
Monday, February 1, 2016
Sunday, January 31, 2016
DK CURRENT POST I LOVE THIS
"...Nor, given the surprising strength of the Sanders campaign, am I quite willing to give up yet...." Professor Pollyanna Kaiser.
THE FOUNDING FATHERS COULD GILD A LILY
I will give you another picture, an analogy, of the founding:
Say a colonial smuggler ship, out of Rhode Island, in 1776, is being overhauled by a British frigate.
The smuggler captain wants to give the ship up for search.
13 smugglers aboard disagree, and mutiny, rather than be captured by the British.
After these 13 take over the ship and kill the officers and crew, what sort of government will they form for themselves?
Without all the frills, linguistic flourishes, and disingenuous political and philosophical justifications, take a look at the Declaration Of Independence.
Think of it, behind all the smoke screen of rhetoric, as a compact for a group first of smugglers, then of mutineers, and now, of pirates.
Say a colonial smuggler ship, out of Rhode Island, in 1776, is being overhauled by a British frigate.
The smuggler captain wants to give the ship up for search.
13 smugglers aboard disagree, and mutiny, rather than be captured by the British.
After these 13 take over the ship and kill the officers and crew, what sort of government will they form for themselves?
Without all the frills, linguistic flourishes, and disingenuous political and philosophical justifications, take a look at the Declaration Of Independence.
Think of it, behind all the smoke screen of rhetoric, as a compact for a group first of smugglers, then of mutineers, and now, of pirates.
PPP CARTELS NOT MARKET STATES DK THE DEALBOOK STATE HOW THE WORLD NOW WORKS
What has emerged, from what most people over here still like to characterize as a more or less free and open system of liberal, free market, post Milner Group, CFR, nation states, is something more like what one might call the Dealbook State, or, say, the Public Private Partnership Cartel State, and less like what Bobbitt and others hailed as the emergence of the Market State. One might even call the new thing the Unmarket State.
"In the climactic scene of the indispensable book and film, Primary Colors, the composite figure Libby Holden berates Jack and Susan Stanton (Bill and Hillary Clinton) for betraying the ideals they all shared when they helped nominate McGovern in 1972. We were young then, Susan replies. We didn't understand "how the world works." As Hillary's record of speaking engagements and public positions makes all too clear, she understands only too well how today's world works. One can cast one's self as a fighter for the middle class and a crusader on social issues, so long as one takes care not to offend powerful economic interests and disturb the distribution of income. I can't help but wonder whether Chait, Vennochi, Cohen, Millbank, and even Krugman also can't help but trust a system which, for whatever reason, has found a very nice place within itself for them. Yet whether that strategy can get her the nomination and the White House in 2016 depends on whether the world has passed her by." DK
Regarding my remark above, this passage is the most telling: "...One can cast one's self as a fighter for the middle class and a crusader on social issues, so long as one takes care not to offend powerful economic interests and disturb the distribution of income...." DK
One must add, "one doesn't want to offend or disturb, if possible, powerful foreign interests, agreed or de facto cartellized distributions of global markets and deals, and existing foreign alliances and other relations."
This is not the world of the small player in Smithian free trade markets.
"We were young then, Susan replies. We didn't understand "how the world works." " DK
"As Hillary's record of speaking engagements and public positions makes all too clear, she understands only too well how today's world works." DK
To Susan / Hillary's disingenuous remark, I would just point out, agreeing with Professor Kaiser directly above, that Bill Clinton had been a Rhodes Scholar before he became a politician. He also had been a student of Quigley...
Say no more. Nuf said.
Terms search: trading American interests
Regarding my remark above, this passage is the most telling: "...One can cast one's self as a fighter for the middle class and a crusader on social issues, so long as one takes care not to offend powerful economic interests and disturb the distribution of income...." DK
One must add, "one doesn't want to offend or disturb, if possible, powerful foreign interests, agreed or de facto cartellized distributions of global markets and deals, and existing foreign alliances and other relations."
This is not the world of the small player in Smithian free trade markets.
"We were young then, Susan replies. We didn't understand "how the world works." " DK
"As Hillary's record of speaking engagements and public positions makes all too clear, she understands only too well how today's world works." DK
To Susan / Hillary's disingenuous remark, I would just point out, agreeing with Professor Kaiser directly above, that Bill Clinton had been a Rhodes Scholar before he became a politician. He also had been a student of Quigley...
Say no more. Nuf said.
Terms search: trading American interests
Saturday, January 30, 2016
SMUGGLER NATION
Cf Allison's talk "The Rebellion of 1689", and the one on smugglers, also the one on Captain Kidd.
The colonists were as unlikely to come together into a workable union then as later, or now.
By workable union, one definition might be low risk of secession of territory, low risk of civil war or revolution.
As David Kaiser's comments here and there clearly demonstrate as well, the US has failed and still fails to meet either of these criteria.
I would add that it has failed to do so either before the Civil War or after, although he refers to "preserving the union", in reference to Sherman and others, it is the same flawed union now as back then or before.
One can advert to Katrina, Bobbitt's passages in Terror essential reading, to understand why New Orleans was actually hindered, both before and after Katrina, by being part of an unworkable union.
The colonists were as unlikely to come together into a workable union then as later, or now.
By workable union, one definition might be low risk of secession of territory, low risk of civil war or revolution.
As David Kaiser's comments here and there clearly demonstrate as well, the US has failed and still fails to meet either of these criteria.
I would add that it has failed to do so either before the Civil War or after, although he refers to "preserving the union", in reference to Sherman and others, it is the same flawed union now as back then or before.
One can advert to Katrina, Bobbitt's passages in Terror essential reading, to understand why New Orleans was actually hindered, both before and after Katrina, by being part of an unworkable union.
FLAT ICE GLOBALIZATION
Guess what?
Under modern globalization, Thomas Friedman's flat earth, under ice, there is no rough ground left.
What emerges from under the ice will not be his idea of solid ground.
Flat ice earth diplomacy cannot even get traction, much less leverage.
What then is the point in using the Poppins to set down on ice, here or there, anyway?
Under modern globalization, Thomas Friedman's flat earth, under ice, there is no rough ground left.
What emerges from under the ice will not be his idea of solid ground.
Flat ice earth diplomacy cannot even get traction, much less leverage.
What then is the point in using the Poppins to set down on ice, here or there, anyway?
Friday, January 29, 2016
Tuesday, January 26, 2016
RE BIG PICTURE TERROR AND CONSENT
Very demoralizing, and to me misguided, interpretation he has, p 539 to 545. Bobbitt, Terror And Consent
RE DK POST JAN 8 2016 THE CLASH
Re my prior comment,
http://bozonbloggon.blogspot.com/2016/01/dk-post.html
I would add that I can think of no better explanation of my comment than Huntington's The Clash Chapter 10.
Monday, January 25, 2016
RE SHERMAN BOBBITT MOYAR RANDALL KENNAN CIVIL WAR DK
Terror And Consent has a nice quote from Kennan, re the Civil War, p 196, amid Bobbitt's misguided liberal, universalist, globalist, market state, rant, at that point.
As I said, I go with them, Bobbitt's many, unfortunate, post Milner Group, CFR, foibles aside, here, for the moment.
Where Bobbitt and Howard disagree, in print, I go with Howard, usually. Sorry, but not sorry, Phil.
As I said, I go with them, Bobbitt's many, unfortunate, post Milner Group, CFR, foibles aside, here, for the moment.
Where Bobbitt and Howard disagree, in print, I go with Howard, usually. Sorry, but not sorry, Phil.
Sunday, January 24, 2016
COMPARE MY COMMENTS ON THE CIVIL WAR PRESERVING THE UNION WITH FOR EXAMPLE HURRICANE KATRINA
Regarding preserving a union, we have a so called system of federal, state, and local governments as little able to competently handle larger political and social problems in an ordered and systematic way as we did before the Civil War.
On what caused Katrina, see for example Bobbitt, Terror And Consent, p. 216, 217. I believe the material on Katrina as a man made disaster, analogous in many ways to Sherman's campaign, and to Reconstruction, is voluminous.
From what I have read, Sherman was neither chasing an army, nor retreating from one, nor guarding against one, on his march to the sea. He was neither chasing an army nor retreating from one, nor guarding against one, on his march up the Atlantic Seaboard.
The Emancipation Proclamation is but another blatant example.
On what caused Katrina, see for example Bobbitt, Terror And Consent, p. 216, 217. I believe the material on Katrina as a man made disaster, analogous in many ways to Sherman's campaign, and to Reconstruction, is voluminous.
From what I have read, Sherman was neither chasing an army, nor retreating from one, nor guarding against one, on his march to the sea. He was neither chasing an army nor retreating from one, nor guarding against one, on his march up the Atlantic Seaboard.
The Emancipation Proclamation is but another blatant example.
RE NATION STATES OF TERROR DK POST SHERMAN BOBBITT RE MY COMMENT
See Shield p 217, citing his Democracy And Deterrence, p 20.
Although I have read very little on the Civil War, I tend to side with Randall, Moyar, and Bobbitt.
If wrong, at least I am in relatively good, and variegated, company.
Although I have read very little on the Civil War, I tend to side with Randall, Moyar, and Bobbitt.
If wrong, at least I am in relatively good, and variegated, company.
Sunday, January 17, 2016
RE FIRST BANK OF THE UNITED STATES
What was so bad about this?
Historians, including DK, praise Jackson for fighting against so called big banking interests , but private banks, (later The private Fed, etc.), which Jackson advocated, as against a public federal bank which Hamilton had favored, have been more responsible for trouble long term, not just in the last forty years, than Hamilton's original idea.
Historians, including DK, praise Jackson for fighting against so called big banking interests , but private banks, (later The private Fed, etc.), which Jackson advocated, as against a public federal bank which Hamilton had favored, have been more responsible for trouble long term, not just in the last forty years, than Hamilton's original idea.
Saturday, January 16, 2016
Friday, January 15, 2016
CLASSIC PAST BLAST POPULAR NOW FOR NO PARTICULAR REASON
http://bozonbloggon.blogspot.com/2010/09/re-david-kaisers-current-post_29.html
Thursday, January 14, 2016
TO PARAPHRASE KENNAN RE AMBASSADORS
They don't really know what an economy is for.
If you think it is for business as usual carrot and stick economic diplomacy, as even Huntington, sadly, did, as well, eg The Clash, pb p.206, you have another thought coming.
If you think it is for business as usual carrot and stick economic diplomacy, as even Huntington, sadly, did, as well, eg The Clash, pb p.206, you have another thought coming.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)