Of course, the neoconservatives retain well-known figures like Charles Krauthammer. But when it comes to true depth or originality of thought, Krauthammer and other neoconservatives like Richard Perle might also be described as straw hyenas -- prominent and strikingly vicious features of the American foreign policy ecology, but hardly intellectual lions.

Fukuyama's strongest claim to have pursued for many years a trajectory quite different from the neoconservatives is provided by his best book, Trust: The Social Virtues and the Creation of Prosperity, published in 1996. This work is distinguished not just by its scholarship and sophistication, but by the breadth of its sympathy and understanding for a range of very different cultural, social and economic traditions.

As was said here years ago, and even now, Trust remains his best book.

Truly deep and radical thought in the foreign-policy-oriented sections of US academia and think tanks is deadened both by the hegemony of American civic-nationalist ideology and by the interlacing of these institutions with the organs of government. As a result, too many formally independent American experts in fact tailor their every statement so that it can never be held against them by a possible political patron or at a Senate confirmation hearing.

The training in self-censorship starts, sensibly enough, with risque pictures on MySpace. It produces, decades later, the kind of silence that leads to violent insurgency halfway around the world.

If Fukuyama wants to emerge as the great public figure that his intellect and learning qualify him to be, he needs to gamble: to risk short-term unpopularity and abuse in the belief that events ill eventually vindicate his stance.

Breaking with the neoconservatives is controversial but "safe"; challenging the basic assumptions of the US foreign policy elite on Russia and other key issues is not safe at all.

Western intellectuals and journalists instinctively turn to such liberal intellectuals, rather than either officials or ordinary people, for analysis of their societies. At best, this produces a copulation of illusions, with Westerners and their local interlocutors passionately misconceiving together. At worst, it lays us open to deliberate misinformation and manipulation by a range of would-be Chalabis.

This Anatol Lieven guy has a knack for phrases.

I am compelled here to reference Alan Kay:

If the children are being instructed in the pink plane, can we teach them to think in the blue plane and live in a pink-plane society?

The Two Fukuyamas | The National Interest

Francis Fukuyama writes:

In our ever-more-polarized political debate, it appears that it is now wrong to ever change your mind, even if empirical evidence from the real world suggests you ought to.

I find this a strange and disturbing conclusion.

Enjoy this clip of Jon Stewart on Larry King, from March 2006.

Why shouldn't I change my mind?

This document is worth your time, despite the way it glosses over reality in an attempt at clarity.

The White House is releasing its National Security Strategy, a report that reaffirms the strike-first policy that President Bush first laid out in 2002. The release comes "in conjunction with a speech that Bush's national security adviser, Stephen Hadley, is delivering at the U.S. Institute of Peace," the Associated Press reports, but you can read the report now.

You can download the full document from our site in PDF (note the large file size -- 632 KB), or read it in chunks on White House web pages.

Inside the report, the president's introduction is blunt: "America is at war. This is a wartime national security strategy required by the grave challenge we face -- the rise of terrorism fueled by an aggressive ideology of hatred and murder, fully revealed to the American people on September 11, 2001. This strategy reflects our most solemn obligation: to protect the security of the American people."

The National Security Strategy 2006

Net assessment is one of the principal frameworks for analyzing the national security strategy of the United States.

But net assessment remains something of a mystery to many people. This article aims to demystify net assessment by examining its key features. With this basic starter kit, one should be able to listen to briefings that use net assessment; comment intelligently on those briefings; and become a contributing member on a team that takes net assessment as its framework.

Net Assessment: A Practical Guide

He urged the liberation of Iraq. Now he claims he had misgivings all along.

Apparently the Wall Street Journal is dubious of Fukuyama's sincerity.

Fukuyama's Pivot | WSJ

Bipartisan global reform of madrassas will be the cornerstone of my Administration.

The quality of our religious schools directly affects us all as parents, as students, and as citizens of the world. Yet too many children around the world are segregated by low expectations, illiteracy, and self-doubt. In a constantly evolving terror landscape that is demanding increasingly complex skills from its workforce, children are literally being left behind.

It doesn't have to be this way.

Bipartisan solutions are within our reach. If our country fails in its responsibility to educate every child around the world, we're likely to fail in many other areas. But if we succeed in educating the world's youths, many other successes will follow throughout the world and in the lives of its citizens.

This blueprint represents part of my agenda for madrassa reform. Though it does not encompass every aspect of the reforms I plan to propose, this blueprint will serve as a framework from which we can all work together -- Christian, Muslim, Jew, and Athiest -- to strengthen both our oil-sponsored and drug-funded madrassas. Taken together, these reforms express my deep belief in our fundamental religious unity and our mission to build the mind and character of every child, from every background, in every part of the world. And I am very open to working with the United Nations who have additional ideas to meet our shared goals.

I look forward to working with the UN to ensure that no child is left behind.

...

To close the achievement gap for disadvantaged terrorists, we're going to set high standards. Most failed states have not established standards for what young terrorists should know in bombmaking, gun safety, and rhetoric. This proposal requires that failed states also set challenging content standards in Islamic history and creation science.

Establishes Assessments for Every Terrorist in Grades 3-8. A seamless mix of pervasive surveillance and annual assessments will provide parents with the information they need to know how well their budding terrorist is doing in school, and how well the madrassa is indoctrinating their child. With adequate time to plan and implement, failed states may select and design assessments of their choosing. The only requirement would be that the results in student achievement would be comparable from year to year. States will have three years to develop and implement the assessments. UN funds will cover the cost of developing these assessments.

Helps Failed States with Technical Assistance Funds to Help Turn Around Low-Performing Madrassas. UN funds will be available to failed states and religious organizations to augment their efforts to provide capacity building and technical assistance to madrassas identified as needing improvement. Technical assistance provided with these funds must be grounded in scientifically-based research.

If the madrassa f... [ Read More (0.2k in body) ]

Paul Krugman deconstructs health care in the current issue of The New York Review of Books.

Bottom line up front:

So what will really happen to American health care? Many people in this field believe that in the end America will end up with national health insurance, and perhaps with a lot of direct government provision of health care, simply because nothing else works. But things may have to get much worse before reality can break through the combination of powerful interest groups and free-market ideology.

The Health Care Crisis and What to Do About It

Nothing tells you more about Hollywood than what it chooses to honor.

Nothing tells you more about a columnist than what he chooses to oversimplify.

Consider a few rules:

1. Don’'t divide the world into "them" and "us."
2. Keep your sense of humor.
3. If you are not criticized, you may not be doing much.
4. For every human problem there is a solution that is simple, neat and wrong.
5. Simply because a problem is shown to exist doesn'’t necessarily follow that there is a solution.

Or these:

6. Belief and seeing are both often wrong.
7. Be prepared to reexamine your reasoning.
8. In order to do good, you may have to engage in evil.

Or these:

9. Get mad, then get over it.
10. Avoid having your ego so close to your position that when your position falls, your ego goes with it.

It's worth noting what "political message" films he chose to ignore, perhaps because they didn't necessarily confirm his thesis: "Good Night, and Good Luck.", "The Constant Gardener", and "Enron: The Smartest Guys in the Room."

About "Syriana", Decius wrote:

I didn't really think that any of the people in the movie were heroes. I thought that was the point.

This is where Krauthammer exposes his assumptions about the director's approach to filmmaking. In his view, the message of a film is communicated by what it says. Of course, sometimes a film's power derives from what is left unsaid, or by its "negative space."

Krauthammer continues:

On the very night the Oscars will be honoring "Syriana," American soldiers will be fighting, some perhaps dying, in defense of precisely the kind of tolerant, modernizing Muslim leader that "Syriana" shows America slaughtering.

Maybe Krauthammer really understands the "no heroes" thesis, because with this statement he has demonstrated it quite effectively.

Oscars for Osama

Rattle wrote:

This article's lead ... immediately makes me think of this song:

Clowns to the left of me,
Jokers to the right, here I am,
Stuck in the middle with you.

And those lyrics, coupled with the ending of Fukuyama's essay:

Neoconservatism, whatever its complex roots, has become indelibly associated with concepts like coercive regime change, unilateralism and American hegemony. What is needed now are new ideas ...

makes me think that Fukuyama is secretly singing this tune:

Yeah I'm here without a name
In the palace of my shame
I said love rescue me

I've conquered my past
The future is here at last
I stand at the entrance
To a new world I can see
The ruins to the right of me
Will soon have lost sight of me
Love rescue me

RE: The Long War

In the aftermath of Fukuyama's essay, Bill Kristol is feeling defensive.

It would be nice to wait until we were certain conditions were ripe before we had to act, a world in which the obstacles are trivial and the enemies fold up. Unfortunately, that is not the world we live in.

To govern is to choose, and to accept responsibility for one's choices. To govern is not wishfully to await the end of history. To govern is not fatalistically to watch a clash of civilizations from the sidelines.

The Long War