Friday, December 05, 2003

Clinton to Bush - continuity? Posted here Friday, December 05, 2003 at 5:10:41 PM     Thought ... and we have to push the analysis further. 1. How much did Clinton set the stage for the Bush presidency by not in any way catching the drift toward American bubble dominance (soros's expression)? 2. what deeper forces made this all kind of inevitable, the illusionary dominance of the US after WW2, the Marshal plan,? That others want to have a life of their own means that our success will generate opposition, first Marxist, then anti-colonialist, then anti market. We have fought back since WW2 (the earlier story is not less difficult as Gore Vidal works out rather poetically in the reviews of him in the current New York Review, especially his view of Lincoln as creating the conditions of centralized dominance )by aligning with elites - which means business/government combinations - in much of the world thereby guaranteeing the creation of hostility to the United States. Elites try to manage the whole for their own benefit, with a mild payout to middle class and democratic tendencies. The history of the US fits this, from Harvard, the Council on Foreign Relations, the NYT, and down the line till one reaches voiceless "silent majorities" that are now aimed to pull it apart. ********

Keynes, Hayak etc on polarization Posted here Friday, December 05, 2003 at 4:29:12 PM     On the ideologizing and mythologizing of instititons into polarized language. Then whole article is very interesting and worth reading The central institutions of our society, the government and the economy, have become, in contemporary politics, objects of ideology. Rather than being perceived as entities that contain processes and practices of a diverse and complicated nature, they have become, like the gods of Greek mythology, actors imbued with motivation, an inner nature, and designs upon our individual well-being. While the reality of governments and economies is that they vary enormously in the range and moral content of their activities, the ideologized version ascribes uniform and predictable qualities to them -- qualities that create reassurances and threats evocative of public support and opposition. These politicized responses undermine the ability of citizens to understand how these institutions work, and what new possibilities may be found within them. Prof. Kenneth R. Hoover Western Washington University   Citation: Journal of Political Ideologies, February, 1999, 4 (1), 87-115. Allrights reserved.   ********