Is Paul Wolfowitz for Real?

"The US system is a flawed and occasionally awful system, but it is still the best flawed and occasionally awful system that the world has to offer."

Are you equating "US system" and "democracy"? If so, why? The points I made were not about democracy in general, but about the situation in the US in particular.

Or do you really mean that the particular system of the US is the best that the world has to offer? If so, what do you know about other democracies, and in what way is the US system better? I am really curious; to me as an outside observer it does not seem like that at all, and the idea of Europe becoming more like the US would be a nightmare.

Both the left and the right in this country still believe this stupid myth of American exceptionalism. Any American who has lived for any length of time in a foreign country, any foreign country, will see after perhaps 5 or six years living abroad and learning to speak the foreign language that the American system of government and American culture is the most banal and the most vitiated of Western democracies.

The government of Spain which came out of dictatorship only 30 years ago works a hundred times more efficiently and more representatively than that of the US.

The main problem with the US, one that never gets any coverage, is that there are too many layers of government, city, state, and federal, all of which together punch a mean tax hole in the pockets of citizens. Add to that the way in which many of these government entities serve either the interests of foreign lobbies, unions, or other lobbying organizations, it becomes obvious that the average American has much less representation by his government than the average Spaniard.

Now-- you may think-- so what? Perhaps Spain has a better government than the US-- we still have a damn good government. But the fact is that Spain 25 years ago was an emerging third-world country. Now largely through effective and pragmatic government action, Spain has a much better quality of life than countries like the US or Italy where legalized corruption and lobbying is rife.

Say what you will, but most thinking Americans don't believe that drivel about the best of a flawed lot any longer. Our own government provided services more efficiently and was more representative of its citizenry just 40 years ago. The US has been in decline since the late 1960's and it ain't coming out of that decline anytime soon.

Hoping to make my point clearer, "real" realism would not only be about a sober assessment of the nature of international relations, the interests of all the players involved, the limits of your own power etc., but also about a sober assessment of what you are yourself. Being aware of your own weaknesses in terms of your own value system and also the value systems of others, without immediately going easy on yourself ("yes our systems has its flaws but...") does not lead logically necessarily to a change in your policy choices, but might influence your perspectives and attitudes (for the better). If you drop exceptionalism, which is completely unwarranted, you will realise that American war crimes, e.g., are not different from other peoples' war crimes. From that a different foreign policy might follow.

Another issue is the proper definition of your own interests. To me a superpower that constantly runs a trade deficit of about 50% of its import volume (in other words, that exports half as much as it imports) is not a superpower, but only the world's biggest gun nut.

Well said

him

You talk about the level of corruption, for instance. China's corruption runs so deep and is so pervasive that it extends all the way down to people who sell fruits or vegetables from bikes; they are beaten and their things destroyed if they do not pay the middle men.

Likewise, In Russia, while the actual care of the physicians is reasonably good, one must provide almost all nursing to a family member of friend in the hospital in that the rest of the staff consists of alcoholics who, while on the take, are still no good even after you pay them off to simply do their jobs. The corruption there in general is also quite pervasive.

There certainly are smaller democratic nations whose systems are better honed than the US's, but on the whole, for a nation of our size, our system is pretty darn good. Not so good that it ought to be forced on others who are not ready to accept it, but good nonetheless.

Russia was NOT ready for our way of life. The only people there who WERE ready after the assets of the nation were sold in a firesale was the Mob, and they now essentially run the nation, and they do not reinvest in Russia, but take those assets elsewhere. The system that eventually WILL work for Russia will be its own version of capitalist democracy, but it will only arise after the current government and the Oligarchs are replaced and the people there finally wise up. China, although awash in pollution and drowning in corruption is doing the right thing by making a slower transition towards capitalist democracy, and their ultimate version of it will be distinctly Chinese as well.

So, again, it is not that we are so great, but we were afforded a special opportunity to reinvent the practice of free market capitalism, democracy, and infuse them with a higher general living standard and respect for Human rights (at least for our citizens), over the last 200 years and it has given us an edge in the world, which the world would do well to emulate, but in their own way and own time. Does this help clarify my point?

The US still has most of the outward and inward manifestations of great power, but it has long since been "great" in the sense of being a great place to live. The first and most important cut was the Immigration and Naturalization Act of 1965, which over the past 40 years has brought in so many immigrants that the country would be barely recognizable to someone from the 60's. Having a country that is so multi-cultural has caused ethnic lobbies to take over-- the country's government can not respond to the needs of the majority and so the majority is quickly losing faith and confidence in the government.

I voted for a third party candidate as a protest vote, but I do sympathize with Obama-- the task he has of governing this monstrosity is impossible. The government does not seem capable of responding to its citizens political desires, and more over the country has become so ethnically and geographically diverse that its political desires may simply be unknowable. I am so glad that my children have the option of European citizenship, because the body politic is in such bad shape in the US that I believe things are basically irretrievable. The country is unable, for example, to police its own borders. I would like there to be a national health service, but even with my leftist politics (traditional leftist in that I believe that a country has to have a healthy manufacturing base to survive), I don't believe the government could ever manage such a service effectively.

We will limp along like this until some major catastrophe happens-- another economic crisis or an invasion of Iran-- and then all bets are off.

Balanced View, of course the US compares favourably to China or Russia. But you fail to see that while the US once led the world in terms of democracy, the rule of law (with some qualifications) and the respect for human rights (with a lot of qualifications), much of the world has moved on while the US seems to have regressed. There's no use mentally resting on your laurels.

I am not at all hostile to the US, on the contrary, I am very sympathetic, but if you ask me what I envy the US for, it is companies like Google and Apple, Harvard, Stanford and MIT, American music and sitcoms. Your political system, I want none if it. No please.

American politics has been my hobby for years, if not my obsession, but still hardly a day goes by without my jaw dropping due to some thing happening that would seem unimaginable elsewhere. The US is shockingly, breathtakingly corrupt (much of it being legal), something you might fail to appreciate because you are so used to it. No country is corruption free (I assume, but who knows, Finland might be), yet for example the biggest scandals (in terms of media attention) of recent years in Germany, my own country, that come to mind were that the Minister of Health used her staff car during her vacation in Spain (for which she was later vindicated by the GAO) where it got stolen, and a couple of years back it was revealed that Members of Parliament had used their frequent flyer miles for private or semi-private trips. That was a big thing.

From the outside, the US often looks like some banana republic. The US attorney scandal, the prosecution of Don Siegelman, Guantànamo bay etc., blanket pardons for lawbreaking, the flawed position of the Attorney General - the law as a whore of politics. And no, it does not have to be like that. And Americans should appreciate that while the US criminal justice system is undoubtedly the result of a democratic process, thus can be said to represent the will of the people, it often looks as barbaric to outsiders as sharia law might look to you.

And talking about human rights, it will be years until an American President can speak about that issue internationally again without making people laugh or cringe.

All this might seem beside the point of the debate about "Realism", but it really is not. It goes to the heart of the issue. America does not lead the world any more, it is just a big rich country with a huge military that foolishly let much of its manufacturing base disappear. As long as the idea of American exceptionalism lurks in the minds of policymakers and scholars, consciously or not, it will cloud their judgment, even that of "realists". Besides, if you recognize your own shortcomings, the conclusion might be "maybe we should get our own house in order first". And that would be a good thing.

Funny that American exceptionalism really is a centrist idea, challenged primarily by leftists and paleocons.

Guys,

Like any nation, and ESPECIALLY any world power, the US must accept and stand up to scrutiny of all sorts. Few of the criticisms that either of you have leveled at the US are even very debatable. Furthermore, you failed to add that the nation was founded upon an ocean of native american blood and suffering, and has moved through each major period of its existence attended by calamity and injustices of all types. However, So did China. So did Russia, so has the EU, the middle east, and virtually every other part of the world. The history of every nation is overflowing with such things. In the final analysis, despite all the political drama, we have GREAT national security, and a very high standard of living. And I do believe that we will achieve single payer health care, and that it will ultimately be good, but also worthy of constant complant and tweaking, much like the US itself.

One thing that I DO take issue with is the immigration laws and practices in the US. It is a STRENGTH of the US that we accept so many immigrants and I in no way believe that it has done anything but IMPROVE the overall US landscape. Interest groups are HARDLY wagging the dog here, but the contributions made by Immigrants from all over the world who are working hard to get educated, start businesses, and work for and support some of our largest businesses and institutions are an invaluable part of the American social and Landscape.
Those who don't like it don't understand some fundamental things about the US.

It is very difficult if not impossible to compare a nation the size of the US, with all of the geopolitical imperatives that we carry upon our shoulders with a nation the size of Spain or other smaller EU nations. We are not able to only worry about our own security issues or even those only in our general area. We have security imperatives that are both Vital to US interests and those of other nations around the World that we carry upon our shoulders, and there are prices to pay for such responsibilities. That we often screw up in our execution of both national security and geopolitical imperatives is without question, but then, compared to other major world powers, we are still doing considerably better, IMHO.

Our discussion is CENTRAL to the issue covered in the Wolfie article, because we are talking about whether it is ever acceptable to FORCE what we consider to be a good system on someone else, or simply because it helps us meet other goals. Or, in the case of Wolfowitz and Iraq, use this lofty ideal as an excuse for your naked agression after all of the lies about WMD vanish in thin air.

Wolfowitz is living proof that it is NEVER a good idea to force your ideals down someone else's throat. Iraq, gagged on it, and the World Bank gagged on it, probably mostly due to the fact that both entities understood that there was not a small amount of very screwed up self interest liberally mixed up in Wolfie et al's "good intentions". Those guys personally squandered decades of US good will and hurt the security of the US for decades to come by using 9/11 as an excuse to further some very questionable objectives that helped to inspire the terrorist recruitment and funding that helped make 9/11 possible in the first place. Forcing the US system on Iraq should not really even be part of the wolfowitz discussion in the first place, in that our invasion would have happened had they not built up the case of Iraq becoming a nuclear power. It was all predicated on lies, not on promises of building up a beautiful "Little America" in the middle east. I think the truth is that Wolfie et al could have cared LESS what actually happened to Iraq; they were simply using it as a staging ground for other conflicts. He would now like to salvage his reputation by suggesting that his motives for selling this war were something other than 1) incompetence, 2) naked aggression, or both.

We should encourage other nations to adopt free market driven , democratic states that respect Human Rights by our example and NEVER by force.

Now that's funny.

I think we ought to attack Iraq ALL OVER AGAIN!!!!

But seriously, There is a new program for obsolete Neocons such as yourself and Wolfowitz that will will teach you useful woodworking and seamstress skills so that you can find a productive place in society once again, in that frightening nations into attacking other non threatening nations in an effort to export values that very few people even in THIS nation share with you has been done to death already.