|
i have to say that while i am sympathetic to your position, superbelt,i dont share the concern with security that you outline--by which i mean that my objections to the bush administration do not run out along the same lines.
i think that the security problems will not diminish unless there is a serious rethinking of both the way the states functions in a globalising capitalist economy (a recognition of the effects of that process at least--hell even robert macnamara talked about empathy with the enemy as being fundamental to a coherent response--see fog of war if you havent--interesting interview with the subject, bad film about him) and of american foreign policy.
because i do not accept the idea that the states acquires adversaries without cause. i do not accept the fiction that adveraries are irrational or jealous---the americans are either complicit or associated with the political reasons that animate its enemies. to think otherwise is to blind yourself.
the problems with the bush folk is that their ideological frame is so limited and limiting that an infinite amount of information would not matter in the way that i think it should for the development of coherent policies.
for example---neocons have nothing coherent to say about capitalism in part because they fixate on the hallucination of free markets, so the entire logic of their position would lead them to see only a narrow band of data as relevant.
that alone makes them a menace.
another way of saying the same thing: i do not understand why thinking about the present situation should be restricted to turning in circles about tactics for dealing with a security problem that is taken as given in advance and without remedy as to cause.
i just dont get it.
__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear
it make you sick.
-kamau brathwaite
|