Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: greenspirit who wrote (40983)	8/30/2002 12:51:46 PM
From: JohnM	Respond to of 281500

Also, thanks for the link to Kagan's 2000 review of Kaplan. Printed it out. Afternoon reading.

To: greenspirit who wrote (40983)	8/30/2002 9:43:26 PM
From: JohnM	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

Michael, I've now read both the Kaplan pieces, the debate with Tom Friedman and the review of his Anarchy book by Robert Kagan. Thanks again for the links. While the debate was interesting, the book review was far and away the more informative. Kagan does a superb job of (a) recreating, not summarizing, the argument of the Anarchy essay, which is the principle reason for the book; (b) offers very telling comments from within the structure of Kaplan's argument--that is doesn't ask him to have written a different book; and (c) most important and most uncharacteristic of neocon analysts does this with an absolute minimum, I don't think I spotted a one, of grumbles about liberals this or that. On that latter point, so much of neocon writing appears to have no other purpose than to slam liberals, to point out either how dumb they are, how unpatriotic they are, how mean they are, whatever, but fails to argue its point. Kagan is definitely not like that. A first rate book review. Well worth a very careful read. As is Kaplan's essay which is the reason for the review. I found the remaining essays in the book more than a little uneven. Moreover, I completely agree with the points at which Kagan decides to argue with Kaplan; but I have some misgivings about the content of Kagan's argument. Those, however, are the key points. Kagan considers himself a tragic idealist and Kaplan a tragic realist, whatever those labels might mean, but they certainly capture the heart of Kagan's argument with Kaplan. I recommend a careful read. As for the Friedman-Kaplan debate, it's fun but nothing new. Friedman is his usual just a bit too cute for my tastes and Kaplan trots out his historical knowledge. But they talk past one another a great deal. So, if you already know their views from other writings, there is definitely nothing new here; if you don't I wouldn't start here. Thanks again for the links.