 |
 |
|
|
|
||
Richard Spencer makes a fair point that the 19th century saw an impressive degree of global economic integration at the same time that modern nation-states were gaining strength. By the end of the “long 19th century” in 1914, the world was as interconnected economically as it would be until the post-Cold War drive for [...]
Filed under: economics, hegemonism, politics
Freddy notes Andrew Roberts’ strange review of The Post-American World, but Freddy missed what was by far the strangest remark when he talks about Zakaria’s supposed gloominess:
It’s a pretty gloomy analysis from the man who is advising John McCain on foreign policy [bold mine-DL]…
This CFR page, which is a copy of this Newsweek article, includes a mention of [...]
Filed under: foreign policy, hegemonism, politics
One of Sullivan’s readers whines about the use of the word empire:
This is not the British in Malaysia.
Quite true. Unlike the British, our government seems to have no intention of leaving Iraq under any circumstances.
One wonders if these people understand how British rule, or Roman rule for that matter, was extended to many of the [...]
Filed under: foreign policy, hegemonism, history, politics
Scott relates a worrisome, but unfortunately very predictable, remark by Robert Kagan:
The most alarming thing he said in a generally fluid presentation concerned Georgia and the Ukraine. “Would the United States really want to live in a world where Russia held sway over Georgia and the Ukraine?” (I’m not sure the quote is verbatim, but [...]
Filed under: foreign policy, hegemonism, politics
In the next issue of TAC (2/25), Brendan O’Neill provides an excellent summary of the case against Obama, focusing on his hyper-ambitious interventionism. Here’s a short excerpt:
Obama’s stress on how everything is interconnected not only sets up the United States to intervene everywhere, but it makes any coherent strategy impossible. If every problem is an American [...]
Filed under: foreign policy, hegemonism, politics
Using the word “imperial” to describe what great powers have been doing for decades pretty much strips the term of any concrete meaning. ~Daniel Drezner
This doesn’t seem to make very much sense, since great powers usually are imperialistic. This is part of how they operate as “great powers”: by dominating other powers and using force when [...]
Filed under: foreign policy, hegemonism, politics
Via Yglesias, I see that Fred Kaplan is appropriately horrified by Rudy Giuliani’s Foreign Affairs essay, but Kaplan’s reaction suggests that the essay reveals a policy view markedly worse than other major candidates’ views. In fact, while his essay is a more undiluted form of neocon madness, his proposals are not really that much more unrealistic and arrogant than what we’ve heard from Obama, Romney [...]
Filed under: foreign policy, hegemonism, politics
Of course, Obama is being dishonest when he pretends that the U.S. government was trying to “ignore the rest of the world” prior to 9/11. Isolationism did not provoke the terrorists. On the contrary, the terrorist attack was partly a result of decades of U.S. intervention overseas–precisely the kind of meddling that Obama euphemistically calls [...]
Filed under: foreign policy, hegemonism, politics
Price Floyd traces the decline of America’s standing in the world to this moment. “Back then, the USIA transmitted American values—and this was separate from selling American policy,” he said. “The two aren’t separated now. There’s no entity that makes it possible to separate them. So, if you disagree with our policy, which is easy [...]
Filed under: foreign policy, hegemonism, politics
For decades, the French supported the Hutu regime even when it became Nazi-like in its racial nationalism. It may be difficult for Americans to comprehend such imperialistic motivations, but the main reason for French support of Hutu power was that the Hutu are Francophone and the Tutsis Anglophonic, and that the latter group was aided [...]
Filed under: France, foreign policy, hegemonism, politics