Can you spare a summary, please???
Our founding fathers would have thought this was light reading...lol
Diverse American Patriots cut the knees out from under our enemies.
Google and Yahoo helped prop them back up.
If the Supreme Court rules against the Second Amendment and the Bill of Rights, It will look like 1860.
marking for later
Can we trade them our liberals for some of their hardest workers? I’d say it would balance itself out very nicely. They (Chinese) have overpopulation, we have liberals, ya catching my thrift? It would SOOO work out.
Um, not sure if this require a sarcasm tag, well, you decide.
Ping.
I predict that the countryside in Maine is going to look a lot like 19th century England, with neuvoux aristocrats with their posted and inaccessible lands, and a semi-slave class desperate for work from the “manor house.” As well as the custodial class which gives the shrinking middle class something to do for a living.
The sky is falling... the sky is falling... yawn...
Can't be, I read it right here on FR that if we traded with the Chinese they would become just like us!
“In the early 1990s, optimism was understandable. The collapse of the communist empire...”
That was the great deception of the 20th century which the West accepted in its unjustified pride of having “defeated” communism. The Iron Curtain came down. Big deal.
Communism as a phylosophy was not conquered — the West, because of its vibrant economy, was able to outspend the Soviet Union. We did not defeat the USSR on any battlefield, we merely impoverished it.
Communism merely changed its appearance into liberalism, political correctness, a desire for diversity, multiculturalism and a one-world-government. And it is killing us as a nation.
Notice however, that present day Russia is not of the same mind with these western notions. Its first concern is to preserve its national identity while we, in the US, seem to be ashamed of it i.e. the “blame America first” mentality.
“The world’s democracies need to begin thinking about how they can protect their interests and advance their principles in a world in which these are, once again, powerfully contested.”
Translated, democracies have to depend on countries like England, France and Denmark and politicians like Obama, Reid and Clinton to defend their freedoms.
Bend over, tuck your head between your knees and hold your ankles. It’s gonna be a bumpy ride.
Blah, blah, blah. Representative government is overrated, democracy is too chaotic, autocracy is the new black, etc., etc., etc.
Mussolini said it all a century ago, with a lot more flair.
Except that both of the author’s pin-up girls, Russia and China, depend on the cash they make from selling to the American/European/Japanese markets. In Russia’s case, they only have one thing to sell, the carcasses of animals that died 65 million years ago.
If autocracies are so great, then why aren’t all these countries beating down the door to sell to the red-hot Zimbabwe and Cuba markets?
Not impressed.
Personally I think the core of Russia and China is fascism all over again and didn’t die with the end of WWII.
_______________________________
Kosovo in 1999 was a more dramatic and disturbing turning point for Russia and China than was the Iraq war of 2003....
From Moscow's perspective, it was a clear violation of international law,...To the Chinese, it was just "liberal hegemonism." ...The Russians and the Chinese were in good company...(Henry Kissenger, et. al)...
...the United States and its democratic allies succeed in imposing their views on others not because they are [legally] right but only because they are powerful enough to do so. To non-liberals, the international liberal order is not progress. It is oppression.
___________________________
In other words, Jim Crow laws can be imposed, for example.
Marked for later. Thanks for the post.
Mr. Kagan uses the term “liberal’ in its old fashioned and classic sense: the belief in man’s inherent, if not freedom, its dignity - or human rights.
But the “liberals” of today, at least the American ones, are, if not avowed believers in autocracy, obvious practitioners of it, with them being the autocrats.
Today the autocrats (kings, czars, emperors, imams, you name it), use economic freedom and material goods to subjugate their citizens. But as they maintain political power, they still control what happens.
In the end the “war” is not democracy (self rule) vs communism, but democracy vs autocracy. Russia and China are autocracy's and are still rivals.
IMHO, in the end, desire for power is the nature of man. "Above all else men desire power", as in LOTR. All men want to be god and this is just the same story that we have seen since the beginning of time. It is a battle that will never end.
schu