My reply to guest-llanmjn at The Economist

Thank you for your comment.
The very condition of ‘decline’ is an indictment of the Neo-Liberal model, or should I say the perception of ‘decline’. The very real question is this: where are the jobs that can help the average working family to buy a house,raise and educate their children and save for retirement? Poorly paying Service Sector jobs, Wall-Mart being the most ready example of the Neo-Liberal paradigm’s failure.
The War between the failed New Democrats and the nihilist Republicans is another kind of proof of that failure: the founding principle of republicanism was the notion and practice of the cultivation of civic republican virtue. See J.G.A. Pocock’s The Machiavellian Moment for a history of that idea/practice and it’s potency from the Greeks through the Italian City States, and the English/British experience to the Founders, to foreshorten it for brevity’s sake.
Neo-Liberalism seeks to and has sought to replace that guiding principle with Market Discipline,Free Market apologetics, the replacement of active citizenship as the bearer of the weight of that civic responsibility, with the notion of entrepreneurship as civic/ethical/political singularity.
See Never Let A Serious Crisis Go To Waste by Philip Mirowski for telling critique of the Neo-Liberal model.
Your first sentence is an assertion without foundation, not to speak of unnecessarily profane! What I attacked was the political cynicism of the New Democrats and the political nihilism of the Republicans: Government is the problem! Should a citizen have anything like faith in the democratic process, much less the good faith of her/his fellow citizens? See Annette Baier’s Postures of the Mind and her essay Secular Faith for an explanation of this civic/ethical necessity.
I also called into question Mr. Nye’s Political Theology i.e. his belief in the staying power of American hegemony, asserting another belief, that is American Exceptionalism: the notion that the ‘decline’ of American Power is somewhere in the distant future. The assertion is based on what empirical evidence? The myopia, not to speak of willful blindness, to a pernicious institutional sclerosis is the reason I called Mr.Nye’s approach to the question Brezhnevism. But we needn’t look any further that the utter jingoism of American politicians, think tank denizens, and pundits that are seeking to wage war on Putin, Iran and ISIS at the same time, as if our treasuries are endless, and the ultimate betrayal, to offer up our children to Mars!


About stephenkmacksd

Rootless cosmopolitan,down at heels intellectual;would be writer. 'Polemic is a discourse of conflict, whose effect depends on a delicate balance between the requirements of truth and the enticements of anger, the duty to argue and the zest to inflame. Its rhetoric allows, even enforces, a certain figurative licence. Like epitaphs in Johnson’s adage, it is not under oath.'
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.