Montana Maven's
        Opinions Worth Ropin'
     

Wish I Could Buy What Zakaria is Selling

Print the article

This entry was posted on 5/8/2008 4:09 PM and is filed under Peace,Imperialism,Terrorism,Economics,Neo Liberalism,WAR,militarism,Globalization,neo conservatism,Fareed Zacharia.

There's a discussion over at TPMcafe about Fareed Zakaria's new book , "The Post American World."  Zacharia himself has an entry called "We are Living in Scarily Peaceful Times."  I have to admit that I am having the same reaction to Zakaria that I had to Thomas Friedman.  I read Friedman's first book "From Beirut to Lebanon" and fell for his schtick, but couldn't get through "The Lexus and the Olive Tree" and thoroughly repudiated the very idea of "The World is Flat".

I'm afraid that I no longer pay much attention to Zacharia either. I read Zacharia's book "The Future of Freedom" which I vaguely remember was about too much democracy being not a good thing.  Anyway, there is a very heady discussion going on over that at tpm cafe about what we should and shouldn't be scared of.  And, as most always, one commenter on Zakaria's post hit the nail on the head for me.

I don't know who you mean by "we". Are you referring to the press or to Americans in general? In poll after poll, Americans say that the worst problems we face are the economy, the war in Iraq and the cost of health care. Unless prompted few Americans name security or the threat of terrorist attacks to be major problems for the nation.

If the media is concerned with security both national and international, and see all other countries as threats, it is because their source of information comes from other news pundits and the media. It is not the American people who are so concerned, so worried about national security and see every other country as a threat, it is the media who constantly enforce and re-enforce each others' superficial concept of the world.

The major reason for this is the inflated egos and conceited belief that their opinion actually matters, that they really are writing the first draft of history (which of course they are not) and that they should have an influence on outcomes and decisions made by the people and the government. They no longer feel it necessary to inform readers and viewers of what happened, they now think it their duty to speculate as why something happened and what might happen in the future because of it. This fulfills the need of the media to be "players" in events, instead of observers and avoid reporting on the much more difficult to understand issues such as the economy and health care. It is also far more glamorous to offer opinion and speculation on worldly events than to write articles that require slogging through government reports and textbooks explaining the workings of, say, health care or free trade agreements.

I wonder at your claim that the left's argument that Bush is incompetent creates more fear in Americans - why do suppose people think that? Bush is not incompetent, Bush is doing exactly what Bush said he was going to do, from the invasion of Iraq to the withholding of federal help to areas destroyed by Katrina - anyone who had paid attention to the 2000 debates would have been able to predict this outcome. Instead, we had a press fixated on candidate Gore's wardrobe, or recycling reports of other journalists on the "lies" told by Gore, or complaints of journalists who were "bored" during the debates because to them, Gore was boring, too cerebral, not beer buddy material and too ambitious.

You now argue that McCain is using those fear tactics of the right and the left to scare Americans and yet Americans aren't scared of China and Russia, it isn't even on the radar screen and instead of informing Americans that despite what McCain says, no other country is going to support McCain's policy and the chance that he might enact such a policy is zero, you choose to re-enforce his fear tactics. McCain is brazenly lying to the American people and instead of informing the public that this policy will be impossible to enact, you yourself frighten Americans with the specter of an alienated America, bereft of friends and a surfeit of enemies.

Frankly, there is no "we" or "ours" here - there is a you and your cohort who endlessly speculate in the echo chambers of book launchings and cocktail parties and foundation seminars and lectures, who have no idea as to what really worries Americans because you no longer have to worry about them. You have jobs, you have health care, you have pension plans - what you don't have is the fear that you won't have a job, you won't be able to make a living, you won't be able to afford health care and you will never be able to retire. It would seem that instead of speculating on which side is striking the most fear in Americans' hearts over foreign policy, you might want to know what it is they really fear and why they rightfully fear it. You needn't fear that "we" Americans have a "maximalist view of international security" because "we Americans" don't have this view, we're too busy worrying about making mortgage payments and filling the gas tank and feeding our children to form "maximalist views".

Posted by BevD
May 5, 2008 12:04 PM

Bravo, Bev!   All the back and forth over at the cafe  is pretty heady but for my money can't hold a candle to the brilliance of Naomi Klein's "The Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism".  She's my kind of intellectual. You know the kind that actually talks to poor people in foreign lands and doesn't just sit around in cafes talking to Princes,  Shahs, Pooh Bahs, and High Muckety Mucks. 

"Banana"  by Dan Koeppel is my next book purchase.  Could Chiquita be more evil than Exxon?   http://www.salon.com/books/feature/2008/04/19/bananas/index.html


 

What did you think of this article?




Trackbacks
Trackback specific URL for this entry
  • No trackbacks exist for this entry.
Comments
    Page: 1 of 1
    • 5/11/2008 10:28 AM Martin wrote:
      It's always good to look critically at either of these two writers: e.g.
      www.mkpress.com/flat
      sure takes Friedman to task.
      Reply to this
    • 5/16/2008 9:52 AM concerned citizen wrote:
      Joseph Stiglitz (Nobel winner for economics and was Chief Economist at World Bank) said while on a trip to India, that 600 million people from India (out of the one billion!) have been left out of the “development” fold of globalization. So, obviously, all India is not going to migrate into middle class, if anything the inequality is far, far worse now, after the advent of globalization.

      Similarly newspaper reports have pointed out how Chinese workers are working in apalling conditions, to churn out the low cost products, with poor pay, cramped rooms, no accident or health insurance benefits, no job security, no overtime, long working hours - so who is actually benefiting from this sort of globalization? Corporates ofcourse, and the few privileged people of India nd China who have been able to get educated in engineering and technology! Not the vast majority of population.

      I would much rather the discourse on Globalization came from economists like Joesph Stiglitz , Paul Krugman (Princeton), Pankaj Ghemawat (Harvard)etc. Ted Koppel interviews Friedman and Joseph Stiglitz, who of course doesn't find a mention in Friedman's book.
      http://select.nytimes.com/2006/04/25/opinion/25friedman-transcript.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all&oref=slogin

      Two books to read, which offer a counterperspective to Friedman's "The World is Flat."

      The Harvard Professor, Pankaj Ghemawat's latest book, "Redefining Global Strategy," is more academically inclined. I read an article of his published in the journal, "Foreign Policy", where he argues that the world is, at best, only semi-globalized. His argument being that Cultural, Administrative, Geographic and Economic aspects of a nation come in the way of total globalization from taking place and cites examples of the same.

      The other small, but interesting book, is by Aronica and Ramdoo, "The World is Flat? A Critical Analysis of Thomas Friedman's New York Times Bestseller." It is a small book compared to the 600 page tome by Friedman, and aimed at the common man and students alike. The authors point to the fact that there isn't a single table or data footnote in Friedman's entire book.

      "Globalization is the greatest reorganization of the world since the Industrial Revolution," says Aronica.

      You may want to see www.mkpress.com/flat
      and watch www.mkpress.com/flatoverview.html
      for an interesting counterperspective on Friedman's
      "The World is Flat".

      Also a really interesting 6 min wake-up call: Shift Happens! www.mkpress.com/ShiftExtreme.html

      There is also a companion book listed: Extreme Competition: Innovation and the Great 21st Century Business Reformation
      www.mkpress.com/extreme
      http://www.mkpress.com/Extreme
      Reply to this
      1. 5/16/2008 12:34 PM Montana Maven wrote:
        Thank you for the suggestions.  I'll pick up these books.  The more we puncture these hot air balloons of the neo-liberals, the more people will begin to see the extent of the media flim flam. 
        Sirota has a piece today calle "Toward a New Washington Consensus" http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/05/15/EDIR10N3RR.DTL
        He debunks the media disinformation regarding Canada's outrage over Obama and Clinton's anti- NAFTA talk. Seems Canadians too think these trade pacts are bad.
        Facts, however, are persistent things - facts like the Toronto Star report showing "almost half of all Canadians [believe] NAFTA should be renegotiated," with 80 percent saying it has done little or nothing for workers
        And this from Central America:
        When I spoke with Costa Rican economist Otton Solis, he told me, "Many Latin Americans see these trade agreements as an imposition." He pointed to accords helping agribusiness crush local farmers and pharmaceutical companies inflate medicine prices as typical examples of America foisting corporate-written edicts on poorer countries.

        Reply to this

    Page: 1 of 1
    Leave a comment

    Submitted comments will be subject to moderation before being displayed.

     Enter the above security code (required)

     Name (required)

     Email (will not be published) (required)

     Website

    Your comment is 0 characters limited to 3000 characters.



      

    Copyright . http://MONTANAMAVEN.COM. All rights reserved.