Thursday, April 01, 2004
The Village Ideologue
Another reader wrote in complaining that liberals' knowledge of history goes "as deep as a coat of paint."
I disagree.
I believe liberals tend to be very weak on European and Russian history, but are much, MUCH stronger on, say, Latin American history, particularly with regard to US policy there.
And so it happens that the Marxist model, economic determinism, explains the excesses of US policy towards Latin America pretty well--better than most other international relations models. And so you have the tendency of people with strong interests in Latin America to gravitate toward adopting liberal politics, because economic liberals tend to have a distrust of corporations such as United Fruit (A central corporate figure in Latin America throughout the 20th Century) and Halliburton (Iraq).
Conversely, those who take a strong interest early in life in European history, tend to gravitate toward the realpolitik models of guys like Hans Morganthau, who argues that in a chaotic, lawless world arena, nations tend to make foreign policy decisions based on power, force projection, and security concerns, rather than to placate corporate interests.
And it so happens that the realist model explains US policy initiatives in post war Europe--containment, the Marshall Plan, the extention of the Marshall Plan to the Eastern bloc (which was declined) a heck of a lot better than the Marxist model.
And so the Europhiles become hawks, who tend to become conservative, while those with interests in North v. South conflicts--which tend to be more economic than military--tend to become neoMarxists, and therefore tend to become dovish.
This blog happens to focus on the war in Iraq, the war on terror, its coverage in English language media in the west, and the cultural and political battles over the same, which have their vortex in Europe and the United States.
Latin America is largely irrelevant here.
If this were, instead, a blog on Latin American conflicts, politics, and north-vs. south, First world v. developing nations conflicts, most current IraqNow readers would probably think I was screaming pinko Chomsky chump.
Splash, out
Jason
I disagree.
I believe liberals tend to be very weak on European and Russian history, but are much, MUCH stronger on, say, Latin American history, particularly with regard to US policy there.
And so it happens that the Marxist model, economic determinism, explains the excesses of US policy towards Latin America pretty well--better than most other international relations models. And so you have the tendency of people with strong interests in Latin America to gravitate toward adopting liberal politics, because economic liberals tend to have a distrust of corporations such as United Fruit (A central corporate figure in Latin America throughout the 20th Century) and Halliburton (Iraq).
Conversely, those who take a strong interest early in life in European history, tend to gravitate toward the realpolitik models of guys like Hans Morganthau, who argues that in a chaotic, lawless world arena, nations tend to make foreign policy decisions based on power, force projection, and security concerns, rather than to placate corporate interests.
And it so happens that the realist model explains US policy initiatives in post war Europe--containment, the Marshall Plan, the extention of the Marshall Plan to the Eastern bloc (which was declined) a heck of a lot better than the Marxist model.
And so the Europhiles become hawks, who tend to become conservative, while those with interests in North v. South conflicts--which tend to be more economic than military--tend to become neoMarxists, and therefore tend to become dovish.
This blog happens to focus on the war in Iraq, the war on terror, its coverage in English language media in the west, and the cultural and political battles over the same, which have their vortex in Europe and the United States.
Latin America is largely irrelevant here.
If this were, instead, a blog on Latin American conflicts, politics, and north-vs. south, First world v. developing nations conflicts, most current IraqNow readers would probably think I was screaming pinko Chomsky chump.
Splash, out
Jason
Comments:
Post a Comment
