From a foreigners' perspective, this analysis fails to examine the role of 'exceptionalism' in US culture and politics. For example:-
"[...] Are we capable of putting forward a vision of the world that is consistent with our values and is yet consistent with peaceful competition in the twenty-first century? [...] conduct our foreign policy in accordance with how we see the world [...] We have already lost Indonesia and Malaysia. And they’re bang in the middle of the most strategic region of the twenty-first century."
From a BRICS perspective, the first word to describe foreign policy is "cooperation" not "competition". And what business does the US have in describing Indonesia and Malaysia as "lost"? They are equal sovereign states, not lost “strategic region” possessions of a sulking child.
The sooner the US grow up, and simply stops its disgusting global warmongering – since WW2: Korea, Vietnam, Iraq (twice), Cuba, Grenada, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Afghanistan, Yemen, Pakistan, Somalia, Libya, Uganda, Niger, Syria, and proxi wars in Israel & Ukraine – and the cold war anachronism NATO breaks up peacefully, the better for peace and prosperity for all of us on this pale blue dot.
Further, the US must also stop its other corrupt interferences in global affairs and institutions such as WTO, IMF, World Bank etc., and drops its veto at the UN SC.
In other words if the US doesn't drop its ugly 'exceptionalism' behaviours, it will self implode violently as it is an outlaw empire in rapid decline anyway, and would surely loose any world war it may want to start either on purpose or inadvertently on its way to it's federal junta breaking back into separate states.
"America’s three oligarchies in control of U.S. foreign policy. It is more realistic to view U.S. economic and foreign policy in terms of the military-industrial complex, the oil and gas (and mining) complex, and the banking and real estate complex than in terms of the political policy of Republicans and Democrats. The key senators and congressional representatives do not represent their states and districts as much as the economic and financial interests of their major political campaign contributors. A Venn diagram would show that in today’s post-Citizens United world, U.S. politicians represent their campaign contributors, not voters."
It was an interesting moment, as all of a sudden Biden's dramatic senility went from being treated as if it were invisible to the MSM, to not any more. Of course it was plain as day for several years, and I don't think even a single person was fooled. But there was an unspoken agreement to pretend. So that's a good demonstration, which will need to be repeated for a few other pretend-invisible items that aren't.
As far as an opening to a newfound self awareness and policy discussion. In a world where things made sense... ... ...
But we're not all on the same page here. The author of this piece is ahead of the curve in perceiving the potentially fatal flaws of the US geopolitical and economic power structure. And likewise ahead of the curve on diagnosing many of the reasons and chains of cause and effect. The same can't be said of Team Biden and Democratic leadership (B&D for brevity). And it especially can't be said of their immediate audience of US elite, who's comfort zone as imagined by B&D, is a good part of the bounds of discourse. And it is B&D who have the delegates at a Democratic convention. So rather than any policy discussion as you might have if it were voters in the audience, I'm pretty sure we'll just see an earnest search for someone to take the place of Biden as he was 4 years ago.
In 2008, Team D had to make peace with the National Security State as the price of power.
Team D made its choice.
There is no reforming Team D or Team R or The Republic, for that matter, the Republic. Entrenched interests will not allow their slice of pie to be touched.
From a foreigners' perspective, this analysis fails to examine the role of 'exceptionalism' in US culture and politics. For example:-
"[...] Are we capable of putting forward a vision of the world that is consistent with our values and is yet consistent with peaceful competition in the twenty-first century? [...] conduct our foreign policy in accordance with how we see the world [...] We have already lost Indonesia and Malaysia. And they’re bang in the middle of the most strategic region of the twenty-first century."
From a BRICS perspective, the first word to describe foreign policy is "cooperation" not "competition". And what business does the US have in describing Indonesia and Malaysia as "lost"? They are equal sovereign states, not lost “strategic region” possessions of a sulking child.
The sooner the US grow up, and simply stops its disgusting global warmongering – since WW2: Korea, Vietnam, Iraq (twice), Cuba, Grenada, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Afghanistan, Yemen, Pakistan, Somalia, Libya, Uganda, Niger, Syria, and proxi wars in Israel & Ukraine – and the cold war anachronism NATO breaks up peacefully, the better for peace and prosperity for all of us on this pale blue dot.
Further, the US must also stop its other corrupt interferences in global affairs and institutions such as WTO, IMF, World Bank etc., and drops its veto at the UN SC.
In other words if the US doesn't drop its ugly 'exceptionalism' behaviours, it will self implode violently as it is an outlaw empire in rapid decline anyway, and would surely loose any world war it may want to start either on purpose or inadvertently on its way to it's federal junta breaking back into separate states.
"America’s three oligarchies in control of U.S. foreign policy. It is more realistic to view U.S. economic and foreign policy in terms of the military-industrial complex, the oil and gas (and mining) complex, and the banking and real estate complex than in terms of the political policy of Republicans and Democrats. The key senators and congressional representatives do not represent their states and districts as much as the economic and financial interests of their major political campaign contributors. A Venn diagram would show that in today’s post-Citizens United world, U.S. politicians represent their campaign contributors, not voters."
https://michael-hudson.com/2022/02/america-defeats-germany-for-the-third-time-in-a-century/
And yet squander we shall.
I want whatever drugs you have been taking.
It was an interesting moment, as all of a sudden Biden's dramatic senility went from being treated as if it were invisible to the MSM, to not any more. Of course it was plain as day for several years, and I don't think even a single person was fooled. But there was an unspoken agreement to pretend. So that's a good demonstration, which will need to be repeated for a few other pretend-invisible items that aren't.
As far as an opening to a newfound self awareness and policy discussion. In a world where things made sense... ... ...
But we're not all on the same page here. The author of this piece is ahead of the curve in perceiving the potentially fatal flaws of the US geopolitical and economic power structure. And likewise ahead of the curve on diagnosing many of the reasons and chains of cause and effect. The same can't be said of Team Biden and Democratic leadership (B&D for brevity). And it especially can't be said of their immediate audience of US elite, who's comfort zone as imagined by B&D, is a good part of the bounds of discourse. And it is B&D who have the delegates at a Democratic convention. So rather than any policy discussion as you might have if it were voters in the audience, I'm pretty sure we'll just see an earnest search for someone to take the place of Biden as he was 4 years ago.
In 2008, Team D had to make peace with the National Security State as the price of power.
Team D made its choice.
There is no reforming Team D or Team R or The Republic, for that matter, the Republic. Entrenched interests will not allow their slice of pie to be touched.
The only thing left to do is to Burn It All Down.
Yes… time for a change.