SI
SI
discoversearch

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: carranza2 who wrote (45113)9/18/2002 12:31:47 PM
From: JohnM  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 281500
 
I've read a bit of Lacquer, c2. And he's interesting. Will, most likely, read some more. But right now he sits, at the very least, behind, in the foreign policy cue, finishing Kepel and reading Huntington (and thinking about it, carefully).

Isn't terrorism one of the principal concerns we have about Islamism? Do you really think that an expert on terrorism, who holds the Kissinger Chair at CSIS, is going to neglect Islamism?

You are misreading me, whether deliberately or not, I cannot tell. Islamism is a separate topic of which portions overlap with portions of terrorism as a topic. To be an expert in one is certainly not enough to be an expert in the other. But one should not ignore them. As for Lacquer occupying an academic chair and thus should be taken as some sort of gospel, we don't even need to discuss that. We can both recite very famous academic names which, given your politics, you would consider not worth reading, at best. I need only start with Edward Said as a name.

If you agree, I think it's time to put this Lacquer-Kepel debate to rest. We are starting to plow old ground.

I will go look at the Partisan Review piece by Lacquer again (I only skimmed it the first time around) if you will put the url up again. If I come to some new conclusion, I will post it; if you read some of Kepel and come to some new conclusion, you might wish to post that.