Reject the Iran deal
Since 1972, U.S. policy toward China has been a worthy but disappointing two-part wager.
One part is that involving China in world trade will temper its unruly international ambitions.
The second is that economic growth, generated by the moral and institutional infrastructure of markets, will weaken the sinews of authoritarianism.
Damn silly idea, and neither part is working out.
The Iran agreement should be a treaty; it should not have been submitted first to the U.N. as a studied insult to Congress.
Wilson said that rejecting the Versailles Treaty would “break the heart of the world.”
The Senate, no member of which had been invited to accompany Wilson to the Paris Peace Conference, proceeded to break his heart.
It is a treaty that O and his supporters are unconstitutionally trying to sneak though in disguise because it is highly unlikely it could get two thirds support.
In 1951, Hannah Arendt, a refugee from Hitler’s Germany, argued bleakly (in The Origins of Totalitarianism) that tyrannies wielding modern instruments of social control (bureaucracies, mass communications) could achieve permanence by conscripting the citizenry’s consciousness, thereby suffocating social change.
The 1956 Hungarian Revolution changed her mind: No government can control human nature or 'all channels of communication.'
The famous conservative author of "Dictatorships and Double Standards" famously didn't get the memo, you may recall.
No comments:
Post a Comment