A very quick look over what this particular person has written about on the site you mention (Chicago Boyz? Chicago school? Ultra-monetarists? LIBERAL?) reveals this little nugget of wisdom:
Quote:
America is a state without a nation. Ideology, and not innate identity, unites Americans.
The fatal flaw in Belgium and many other countries in the world is a parliamentary system which assigns power directly to parties instead of individuals. In diverse societies, parliamentary parties inevitably evolve around group identities. People cannot move beyond their identity loyalties without losing political power. Soon all political battles become conflicts between identity groups, and the natural fissures in all human societies are exacerbated to the point of failure.
America would have never survived if we had adopted a such a system. Numerous parties would have evolved, each attached to a specific ethnic or religious group. We survived because the Constitution grants power to individual office holders, not groups. (Winner-takes-all also helps drive the formation of broad coalitions.)
Parliamentary governments only work for nation (unitary ethnic) states like England, France and most of the rest of Western Europe. For the majority of countries in the world who are significantly multi-ethnic, they are a disaster waiting to happen. Those countries need to look to the example of diverse America for their political model instead of to the freakishly uniform countries of Western Europe.
|
(
link)
I would contend that far from being a candidate for the kernel of a document which should substantially add to the weight of human knowledge (doctorate), either or both of these should be treated as exactly what they are... unsubstantiated, ill thought out rants of a slightly fevered ego.
His assertions about England (unitary ethnic? he thinks all white folks are the same eh? Go to one of the other states represented in Westminster and start calling them ethnically united with the English and see how quickly your blood flows...) in particular are so insanely incorrect that it should make people question anything this chap says without a reference.
Unfortunately though, it seems like there is a pattern here. Very long chains of non sequiturs and flat out inaccuracies passed off as hardened fact which directly relate the starting point to the final conclusion in some inane, tenuous way.