Songs of death

The ahistorical arrogance of this is breathtaking (or nauseating, take your pick). Obama's hegemonic ambitions are noteworthy in their scale: "the American moment" is to extend for "this new century." This is the undiluted embrace of "American exceptionalism," which I have discussed in detail: see my first Iran/foreign policy series, in particular "Messianic Zealotry as Foreign Policy" and the discussion there of the "Idea of Progress"; and the new "Dominion" series too, especially this installment and this one. Those essays discuss some of the internal inconsistencies and contradictions of the "exceptionalist" doctrine, one for which no one has ever been able to provide a convincing proof. Such a failure is unavoidable, since no such proof exists or is possible.

Let me very briefly mention another insurmountable problem in this view, and that is its assumption of omniscience. Note the famous formulation, which almost every politician robotically repeats: "the last, best hope of Earth." Well, "last" and "best" until another candidate appears better able to fill the generally accepted requirements for world leadership. Consider one instance of what I mean: if we continue on our present path, it is more than likely that "this new century" will see a significant economic weakening in the U.S., perhaps even a financial collapse. It is further likely that at some point in the next 50 or 100 years, our currently unparalleled military strength will be surpassed by China, for example. If China has undergone some not unimportant transformations of its own by that time (which is also far from unimaginable), China might then be able to make claims like Obama's with much more truth and conviction than the United States.

This point is in addition to the fact that every great civilization of the past has, in some form, made claims like those made by "American exceptionalism." Their time came and went, as will ours. But as I recently observed, our ignorance is close to perfect: we have rendered ourselves incapable of grasping the past, the present or the future. Understanding developments over broad historic periods is a task for which we are singularly unsuited, and our sole concern remains today and tomorrow, and at most the next election. In addition, to talk accurately and sensibly about such matters flatters the vanity of neither the political class nor Americans more generally. Even though it is the truth, no one wants to hear: "The United States represented a revolutionary and glorious political development at its founding. But the original principles upon which this nation rested began to be seriously eroded only one hundred years later, and today they are all but vanished. Unless we again radically alter our path, we are headed to the trash heap of history, like every nation of once great achievement before us." Such views need not apply: they will not garner large campaign contributions, they will not lead to speaking engagements, and they will certainly not get you to the White House.

~ more... ~

 

MTV martial law warnings

Excerpts from Pentagon's plan: 'Prevent the Re-Emergence of a New Rival'

Our first objective is to prevent the re-emergence of a new rival, either on the territory of the former Soviet Union or elsewhere, that poses a threat on the order of that posed formerly by the Soviet Union. This is a dominant consideration underlying the new regional defense strategy and requires that we endeavor to prevent any hostile power from dominating a region whose resources would, under consolidated control, be sufficient to generate global power. These regions include Western Europe, East Asia, the territory of the former Soviet Union, and Southwest Asia.

There are three additional aspects to this objective: First, the U.S. must show the leadership necessary to establish and protect a new order that holds the promise of convincing potential competitors that they need not aspire to a greater role or pursue a more aggressive posture to protect their legitimate interests. Second, in the non-defense areas, we must account sufficiently for the interests of the advanced industrial nations to discourage them from challenging our leadership or seeking to overturn the established political and economic order. Finally, we must maintain the mechanisms for deterring potential competitors from even aspiring to a larger regional or global role. An effective reconstitution capability is important here, since it implies that a potential rival could not hope to quickly or easily gain a predominant military position in the world.

The second objective is to address sources of regional conflict and instability in such a way as to promote increasing respect for international law, limit international violence, and encourage the spread of democratic forms of government and open economic systems. These objectives are especially important in deterring conflicts or threats in regions of security importance to the United States because of their proximity (such as Latin America), or where we have treaty obligations or security commitments to other nations. While the U.S. cannot become the world's "policeman," by assuming responsibility for righting every wrong, we will retain the pre-eminent responsibility for addressing selectively those wrongs which threaten not only our interests, but those of our allies or friends, or which could seriously unsettle international relations. Various types of U.S. interests may be involved in such instances: access to vital raw materials, primarily Persian Gulf oil...

~ more... ~

 

Iceland: the land of cool turns bitter

So how did the Hotel 101 - named after Reykjavik's most exclusive postcode - come to be the watering-hole of a financial elite? For centuries Iceland had a fish-based economy, even fighting a war with Britain to keep its lucrative cod trawling grounds. Then it began exporting aluminium, and then, after free-market reforms introduced by the Thatcherite Prime Minister Davìd Oddsson, it rapidly privatised its banking sector and moved into the business of financial engineering - to such an extent that a handful of Icelandic banks, expanding aggressively, have ended up with liabilities more than eight times the national GDP.

That gold rush, at the beginning of this century, has spun the illusion of wealth. Dorrit Moussaieff, the jet-setting jewellerydesigner wife of President Ólafur Ragnar Grimsson, set the tone, with her coterie of girlfriends - Rannveig Rist, the general manager of Alcan Iceland; Tinna Gunnlaugsdóttir of Iceland's National Theatre; artists and gallery owners - all regulars at the now eerilly silent 101.

But it wasn't just a wealthy elite who surfed the Zeitgeist. Ordinary Icelanders were swiftly freed from the idea that they belonged to an impoverished society where the key question about a future bride was: is she a good housekeeper? In the past five years, people's average wealth has grown by 45 per cent - and the money has gone into houses and cars, financed by 100 per cent loans based on a spread of foreign currencies. Now the krona is plummeting, loans are ballooning and thousands are defaulting. The only good news is for foreign visitors, for whom beer has at last become affordable.

[...]

There are only a few tell-tale signs of trouble - the hole where the foundations for a new Landsbanki headquarters were to be sunk has been quietly filled and tarred over to form part of a car park. And the new Landsbanki-sponsored opera house looks as if it may not be finished.

If there are still Vikings in this Iceland, they are the financial marauders setting out for Britain - not to pillage and plunder, but to snap up a chunk of French Connection.

But now, suddenly, Icelanders have grasped that such activities do not represent the future of the island and, indeed, they could be its downfall. The new Vikings have been thriving on the cronyism and back-scratching culture of Reykjavik. Since the beginning of the 20th century banks and government have worked hand in glove. If a minister slipped into Opposition, he was more or less guaranteed a post as a bank director. The privatisation of the banks was supposed to end all that, but it merely continued by other means.

Professor Thorvaldur Gylfason of Reykjavik University has been predicting disaster for years - on his desk sit wooden blind and deaf monkeys, representing central bank policymakers - and has been shunned for his efforts. "We have Thai-style croneyism that has failed the system," he says. "The Government is not on top of the situation. It is in denial and has not been truthful about the system."

 ~ more... ~

 

United States remains on top of competitiveness rankings

The United States tops the overall ranking in The Global Competitiveness Report 2008-2009, released today by the World Economic Forum. Switzerland is in second position followed by Denmark, Sweden and Singapore. European economies continue to prevail in the top 10 with Finland, Germany and the Netherlands following suit. The United Kingdom, while remaining very competitive, has dropped by three places and out of the top 10, mainly attributable to a weakening of its financial markets. The People's Republic of China continues to lead the way among large developing economies, improving by four places this year and joining the top 30. All of the BRIC economies figure in the top half of the ranking, with China followed by India, Russia and Brazil. Several Asian economies perform strongly with Japan, Hong Kong SAR, Republic of Korea and Taiwan, China in the top 20. In Latin America, Chile is the highest ranked country, followed by Panama, Costa Rica and Mexico.

 

~ more... ~