Freidman: A Theory Of Everything

The New York Times ^ | 06/01/03 | THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN

[DB]

With freedom comes both the fantastic and the disgusting.

It is up to free people to choose what they take in and what they reject.

Without that choice you don't really have freedom.

Your example of porn is far worse in many parts of Europe and has been for decades.

I am very grateful for your country's support during these difficult times.

Thank you.

[nutmeg]

read later bump

[MattAMiller]

This makes a lot of sense. You'll notice that most of the arguments over the war had little to do with actual war. Mostly people (here and abroad) just want to restrain the US for the sake of restraining the US. And after the war began frustration was voiced not so much with civilian casualties but with the the fact that the US didn't "listen."

[MattAMiller]

I've been wondering recently whether the entertainment products put out by American companies can really be considered American culture when they are so often so much more popular overseas. Could it be they're just products produced by Americans with American money that happen to sell for some reason? Or am I missing the forest for the trees?

[melsec]

Very true and I never advocated taking away freedoms. Rather I think it places a burden on all of us to do what we can to minimise the disgusting by A) promoting the fanatastic and B) letting our voices be heard on the disgusting. This is how we truely test and flex the muscle of the freedom we are given.

Mel

[DB]

Absolutely.

Regards, DB

[ReleaseTheHounds]

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/920335/posts

Victor Davis Hansen's piece in yesterday's NRO (posted on the Freep above) is a much better read and much better assessment of "how things have changed" since the collapse of the Evil Empire. Doesn't touch the economic side of things -- but that's another story.

Friedman has fallen into that "highly overrated" situation from believing his own press clippings. The fawning interviews on PBS and Imus, the high celebrity from his NYT Editorial Page post -- yes, his book will sell but it better be more insightful than this synopsis if it hopes to have any lasting value... Oh, yeah: he's just writing it to pay for his daughter's tuition, so no need for lasting value. JMHO.

[Lawgvr1955]

Recall that we, as a nation, have demonstrated ourselves capable of electing dangerous, irresponsible men. Plus, a craven Congress has failed to exhibit the will to bring him to account.

When a hegemon, even a democratic one, elects a sociopath, the entire world is in danger.

Excellent point!! Too bad the "talking heads" on television would never admit this. Or, if they did, they would picture Bush as the dangerous man and not Boy Clinton. (Think Ellinor Clift).

[JmyBryan]

You must compare the empires before you estimate the costs. US can easily afford it's military spending. If you look at the case of Afghanistan, you notice we are not trying, in anyway, to administer that country - where the costs are very high. Even in Iraq - with its oil money, we are utilizing a relatively small amount of manpower. (Unfortunately we couldn't get by as cheaply as we hoped).

US dominance in tech and space should remain unchallenged as long as our administrations recognize the priority. (China understands this and that is why Clinton was so stupid - Loral, Lippo grp et al - practically giving away some of our strategic advantage.)

Remember those debt projections are very similar to those made during the Reagan yrs - things worked out fine once the economy rebounded - largely because of the fall of the Soviets. Hopefully we can resolve the Arab/Israel war and destroy the impetus for this Islamist/US war. If ended, the world econ will grow at a much better rate.

[plusone]

Thanks for the much needed optimism!

[stop_fascism]

As Robinson Jeffers wrote: Corruption has never been manditory.

[conservatism_IS_compassion]

Imagine you are a Native American 150 years ago. Imagine you complain to your tribe that the locomotives are making it possible for the Europeans to spread _their_ civilization west and _replace_ your civilization. And imagine one of your own tribe said, "Hey, buddy, if you don't like trains, just don't buy tickets and don't ride on them..."

19 posted on 09/14/2001 12:47 PM EDT by MarkWar

IMHO Mark War is right--"Just say no" doesn't always cut it.

[stop_fascism]

Clever but - It wasn't culture that killed the Indians. It was war and disease.

[WaterDragon]

This business of the Europeans wanting to control America's power is not new. In World War I there was an ongoing battle over this. France and Britain wanted to parcel out American farm boys into their units (to use as cannon fodder). Pershing was a brick....he absolutely refused to consider placing Americans under the slovenly, inept British and French command, and President Wilson backed him up.

The Europeans have a different view of things. To them, they have a right to take their neighbor's earnings for themselves (that's what the welfare state is about), so naturally they think they should have control and use of the earnings of Americans, too.

But Americans have a different view.....we earned the wealth of this country on our backs and we'll be the ONLY ones in control of its use. Just like Pershing.

[jwh_Denver]

btt

[happygrl]

Ditto.

Solution ?

Bomb Hollywood.