Decius wrote:
] His suggestion that we construct a formal federal department
] of nation building is both pragmatic and extremely unsettling.
]
] Hammers tend to find nails.

I was just skimming over the article again, and I missed the point where he suggested setting up a federal department of nation building.. I only saw the suggested creation of multi-national institutions.

I would support the creation of a formal institution to study nation building, while granting that doing it as a federal department is not the greatest of ideas. These topics are already addressed at organizations ranging from academia to RAND and Heritage Institute like think tanks. I can't think of any reason why such important and relevant studies should continue to take place only under these circumstances, and not as the primary research mission of a more focused (and ideally open) multi-national institution.

We have many hammers, ranging from our military complex to our government backed r & d. These were created because of the nails.. Taking our hammers and clearly labeling them, the creation of infrastructure (or bureaucracy?), is not vanity or avarice.

RE: Fukuyama: The Neoconservative Moment