|
Agreed,
Ray, but would we want all our political leadership to come from one Ivy League
school or just the Midwest, etc? My concern
is the recent tendency to place military people in diplomatic posts at NATO, in
the Middle East, the Far East. While
I realize in some places a former military man will command more respect from
some cultures as opposed to an academic or just another well-heeled party fundraiser,
it is troubling to me that men in uniform are becoming spokesmen and the face
of America overseas. KWC REH wrote: Karen and Ed, I would
remind you all that the military is the only truly equal opportunity employer
in the nation and admits all religions, cultures and only discriminates against
Gays and that is beginning to be questioned. It might be good for
the rest of society to question how children from trailer parks and Louisiana
bayous can become generals as often as Ivy League school graduates.
It may very well be that the most democratic institution in America is the
military. Like the arts, the military is performance oriented and
not build upon the European aristocratic model. Prejudice
against the military is unseemly and we should not carry that prejudice over
into creating the kind of anger carried by the police. We pay
the military poorly but train them well and demand much from them.
They, more than any other Americans, can truly speak to the values of equality
and equal opportunity. As they say in the Army,
A "F...k up is a F....k up" no matter where you were
born. And no one wants to follow a fool simply because he was
born with a silver spoon. They may have loved Bush but Iraq
will change that quickly. The words from the hinterland is that
there is a lot of anger and hostility out there. I smell a change
coming. It seems that the Yale Drama school is the only place
producing serious work these days while the other departments are working the
legacy routine. Legacy doesn't mean anything in the theater
unless you can produce. -----
Original Message -----
To: futurework Cc: Ed Weick Sent: Wednesday, July 16,
2003 11:56 AM Subject: RE:
[Futurework] Ten simple rules Ed, when I read this piece
earlier it struck me as you mention, that Kaplan was writing about these events
as if he had created them into being.
He glorifies the soldier as the epitome of the modern democratic
ambassador, a highly trained, deadly working representative of the superpower. Hemingway had such an effect, did he not, on a generation of
men and women and war? Meanwhile, more retired
military fill former diplomat-only posts around the globe and increasingly,
multinational corporations with ties to the military industrial technology
complex. Have we undermined public
education so much or lost all confidence in it that we only trust the military
to train our leaders? KWC -----Original Message----- The current
issue of Atlantic contains an article by Robert Kaplan entitled "Supremacy
by Stealth". I’ve read most of it, but it's the kind of article that I
find difficult to finish. It sets out ten rules that America, as the new Rome,
should use to govern the world and make it safe for freedom and democracy,
American style. I first
encountered Mr. Kaplan a few years ago in an article entitled "The Coming
Anarchy", also in Atlantic. The message there, seeming entirely credible
at the time, was that the world was going to hell in a handbasket. The message
in the current article is anything but credible. It’s that, yes, the world
could go to hell in a handbasket, but it won’t because America is there to
prevent it from doing so. And it can even be fixed up if America but follows
Mr. Kaplan’s ten simple rules. It must, for
example, produce more Joppolos, the central figure in John Hersey’s second
world war novel "A Bell for Adano". Apparently, Mr. Joppolo knew
exactly how to win the trust of the townspeople he had to deal with. As Iraq
and Afghanistan have demonstrated, it would be nice to have people like that,
but they don’t come around very often. And, by being "light and
lethal", you can accomplish great things, like helping the Bolivian
government track down and kill Che Guevara in 1967. (Sorry, Mr. Kaplan, but
some of us still remember Che as the eternal revolutionary and a force for
liberating the oppressed. I for one do not see tracking him down and killing
him as a good thing. It's a bit like the Romans bragging about tracking down
and killing Christ!) Or, like the British, and the Romans before them, by
speaking Victorian and thinking pagan you can try to persuade people of the
wisdom of your ways, but, if you can’t accomplish that, you do have other
means. What Mr.
Kaplan suggests is that American forces have already followed his ten simple
rules, though perhaps not consistently enough. He says they have done a very
good job at times, as when they trained Salvadorian counterinsurgency forces,
but he doesn’t then mention is that these forces became government death squads
and killing machines that brutalized the countryside and cost thousands of
people there lives. The image
that Mr. Kaplan presents in his ten points is a clean, tidy and efficient one
that, like B52 bombers, flies high above the messy, dirty world of his earlier
article. Sorry, Mr. Kaplan, it just doesn’t figure. Ed Weick |
- [Futurework] Ten simple rules Ed Weick
- RE: [Futurework] Ten simple rules Karen Watters Cole
- Re: [Futurework] Ten simple rules Ed Weick
- RE: [Futurework] Ten simple rules Karen Watters Cole
- Re: [Futurework] Ten simple rules Ray Evans Harrell
- RE: [Futurework] Ten simple rules Karen Watters Cole
- RE: [Futurework] Ten simple rules Karen Watters Cole
- Re: [Futurework] Ten simple ru... Ray Evans Harrell
- RE: [Futurework] Ten simpl... Karen Watters Cole
- Re: [Futurework] One simpl... Brad McCormick, Ed.D.
- Re: [Futurework] Ten simple rules Ed Weick
- RE: [Futurework] Ten simple rules Cordell . Arthur
- RE: [Futurework] Ten simple rules Karen Watters Cole
- Re: [Futurework] Ten simple rules Stephen Straker
- Re: [Futurework] Ten simple rules Ray Evans Harrell
- Re: [Futurework] Ten simple rules jerome schatten
