"After Neoconservatism - New York Times" [Daypop Top 40]

Sorry for the exclamation but when I saw who wrote this, I said 'Holy Crap!' Fukuyama's writing had provided some of the academic underpinning for neoconservatism that brought us the current Administration. This was the belief that we could bring democracy to the Middle East by using force. That the US would provide a benevolent hegemony around the world. He now feels that neoconservatism deserves to be on the ash can of history.

He bringsback some great quotes. Remember when conservative pundits said, 'It is precisely because American foreign policy is infused with an unusually high degree of morality that other nations find they have less to fear from its otherwise daunting power.' How does that morality look today after Abu Ghraib?

He makes some really important points. '...benevolent hegemony presumed that the hegemon was not only well intentioned but competent as well.' The Neoconservative position 'was, by contrast, Leninist; they believed that history can be pushed along with the right application of power and will. Leninism was a tragedy in its Bolshevik version, and it has returned as farce when practiced by the United States.''although most Americans want to do what is necessary to make the project of rebuilding Iraq succeed, the aftermath of the invasion did not increase the public appetite for further costly interventions. Americans are not, at heart, an imperial people. Even benevolent hegemons sometimes have to act ruthlessly, and they need a staying power that does not come easily to people who are reasonably content with their own lives and society.'

So, what does he suggest to fix this? 'In the first instance, we need to demilitarize what we have been calling the global war on terrorism and shift to other types of policy instruments.' Not a war but a battle for the hearts and minds. We also need to create new organizations that can work across national lines to find solutions. This is the opposite of the vertical sios we have today of states acting independently. I think he is right on here, because the problems of terrorism, pollution, global warming transcend the idea of states and their solutions will require organizations that can work that way.  11:32:53 PM