On my recent trip to China, I went to Tsinghua University, which is usually ranked the #1 research university in China, where I participated in a debate with Professor YAN Xuetong, who is arguably the most important IR scholar in China.
In my humble opinion, if we in the US weren’t such idiots we would have very good relations with our current allies AND everyone else including China, Russia, Iran, North Korea (all of the BRICS).
We would have taken John Mearsheimer’s advice and avoided the nasty war in Ukraine.
We would have taken John and Stephen Walt’s advice and avoided the debacle that’s currently happening in the Middle East.
And we would be actively and cooperatively working on trying to solve all of the problems we share as a species.
This is not to say that realism isn’t the basic reality of the situation and the reality of international relations, it’s just that we could have largely overridden those forces if we had played our cards right.
In my humble opinion it’s not too late to make the changes that would be required to try to straighten things out but that would take very good leadership qualities and abilities on the part of the leaders in the US and that does t look like it’s going to happen anytime soon.
I have a lot of ideas along these lines but it seems like everything I have to say falls on deaf ears.
And this fact points to the accelerating trend that we will most likely be confronted with an overall situation that is equivalent to that which is outlined in John’s book “The Tragedy of Great Power Politics” on a multitude of fronts.
The escalation of kinetic warfare will most likely occur along with a host of other rapidly emerging problems which together make for dark clouds on the horizon.
If we were smart we’d head these problems off at the pass and try to avoid them. Unfortunately we don’t seem to collectively be smart enough to figure it out.
It never ceases to amaze me that we don’t have any trouble making the trains run on time but when it comes to seemingly more basic and more simple problems we can’t solve them.
We could turn things around but instead it seems like we’re engaging in a case of the tragedy of the commons which is leading to a race to the bottom.
Diplomacy should be the focus and at the forefront of all international relations and the number one job of top political leaders should be to avoid conflict at all cost.
Unfortunately Ronald Regan was little bit of a dummy. He acted as a cheer leader for the USA, which wasn’t all bad…
I’ve come to the conclusion that presidents can be measured as to whether they did (or do) a good job or not on three (3) criteria. They have to be honest, logical and they have to do the right thing.
Maybe I would need to hear more of it, but I don't think I care much for Pr. Yan's theory of leadership. It seemed, as Pr. Mearsheimer quickly zeroed in on, to lack explanatory and predictive power, and be rather circular in nature: if things are stable, it's because leadership is moral and vice-versa, and if things are bad, it's because leadership is immoral and vice-versa. "Things good because stable" -- yeah, okay, thank you.
On the other hand, I found a comment he made in passing about the polarity question highly interesting. He argued that the world (today) was not multipolar, but bipolar, between China and the US. As proof, he advanced that with the Ukraine affair, the US had willingly let Russia be pushed into China's arms, in order to secure Europe to its side, thus indicating that Russia didn't matter that much, and thus was not a Great Power.
Whether Russia is a Great Power is a bit of a taxonomy question, of course. Is it, as Mearsheimer would say, the third Great Power, or is it a secondary power? No one questions that it's neither in the first nor second spot. Personally, I think it should be called a Great Power, with the proof for that being that a) it has a great deal of influence and b) the US does not wish to fight them.
Still, there's something to Yan's argument that I find compelling, which is that the US willingly sacrificed any hope of friendly relations with Russia, presumably in order to get Europe on its side in view of a forthcoming competition with China. If that was the idea, as far as I can see it's a solid success. There's been such a wedge driven between Europe and Russia (or Russia and the rest of Europe, one should say), there's been so much bad blood whipped up in the minds of the people and the rotten letters of the law, that there's nothing but enmity on the horizon. To be clear, many peoples' heart are still sympathetic to Russia, but the systems, the structures -- they're definitely not. And in the wake of this, we're starting to see signs of economic decoupling between Europe and China, the recent row over electric vehicles portending further things to come.
Pr. Mearsheimer says that driving Russia into the arms of China was a foolish idea. But was it really, if the prize was Europe?
A professor of both political science and international relations at the University of Chicago, Mearsheimer, 74, is a favorite of progressive think tanks, podcasters and media outlets in the U.S. Widely known for his realpolitik approach to foreign policy, he has been a vocal critic of Washington’s antagonism of Moscow through its manipulation of Ukraine, and the blank check it has cut to its incorrigible ally, Israel.
But it beggars belief that a scholar as acclaimed as Mearsheimer could assert that institutionalized racism began to peter out in the 1960s. If anything it has only gotten worse as the U.S. has entered its post-industrial phase, depleting the economy of decent-paying jobs on the shopfloor and leaving investors with only the finance, insurance and real estate industries, --or FIRE sector—to turn a profit.
The shift from manufacturing to speculation has combined with austere, neoliberal policies to dry up public investment in the inner cities, paving the way for gentrification, increasing competition for good jobs, expanding predatory financial schemes —student debt, the prison industrial complex, subprime mortgages, unnecessary amputations –– that target African Americans.
A Harvard historian, Evelynn Hammonds, told the New York Times:
“There has never been any period in American history where the health of blacks was equal to that of whites. Disparity is built into the system.”
Thor, I would be interested in hearing how old you are.
I think those of us who remember people who argued black folks were the sons of Ham, lived in different parts of town and had better not move elsewhere have seen some big positive changes. Boy that Sons of Ham thing sure shocked me the first time I heard it expressed. As a 10 year old I could not tell the lady she was crazy but I sure thought it and I give the credit for that to my parents.
In my humble opinion, if we in the US weren’t such idiots we would have very good relations with our current allies AND everyone else including China, Russia, Iran, North Korea (all of the BRICS).
We would have taken John Mearsheimer’s advice and avoided the nasty war in Ukraine.
We would have taken John and Stephen Walt’s advice and avoided the debacle that’s currently happening in the Middle East.
And we would be actively and cooperatively working on trying to solve all of the problems we share as a species.
This is not to say that realism isn’t the basic reality of the situation and the reality of international relations, it’s just that we could have largely overridden those forces if we had played our cards right.
In my humble opinion it’s not too late to make the changes that would be required to try to straighten things out but that would take very good leadership qualities and abilities on the part of the leaders in the US and that does t look like it’s going to happen anytime soon.
I have a lot of ideas along these lines but it seems like everything I have to say falls on deaf ears.
And this fact points to the accelerating trend that we will most likely be confronted with an overall situation that is equivalent to that which is outlined in John’s book “The Tragedy of Great Power Politics” on a multitude of fronts.
The escalation of kinetic warfare will most likely occur along with a host of other rapidly emerging problems which together make for dark clouds on the horizon.
If we were smart we’d head these problems off at the pass and try to avoid them. Unfortunately we don’t seem to collectively be smart enough to figure it out.
It never ceases to amaze me that we don’t have any trouble making the trains run on time but when it comes to seemingly more basic and more simple problems we can’t solve them.
We could turn things around but instead it seems like we’re engaging in a case of the tragedy of the commons which is leading to a race to the bottom.
Yeah, I'm 77 and, after today learning the Zionists have just bombed the world's oldest and longest inhabited city of Sour (Tyre)
Lebanon, a UNESCO. World Heritage Site and not seeing any outrage..
( compare this act to the Taliban's destruction of the Buddha Statues of Bimyan and the subsequent invasion of Afghanistan)
The world is phuckd!
Hezbollah or Iran there? If yes, I would expect you to be more angry at them for turning it into a legitimate military target.
Yup - It’s a pathetic situation.
Totally agree.
But as many 'thinkers' say: We have lost the art of Diplomacy.
Diplomacy should be the focus and at the forefront of all international relations and the number one job of top political leaders should be to avoid conflict at all cost.
Yes.
I think the last President in the US to use dipolmacy may have been Ronald Reagan?
Unfortunately Ronald Regan was little bit of a dummy. He acted as a cheer leader for the USA, which wasn’t all bad…
I’ve come to the conclusion that presidents can be measured as to whether they did (or do) a good job or not on three (3) criteria. They have to be honest, logical and they have to do the right thing.
Yes he was feeble.
I am deaf. Cannot get subtitles in English.
Here are two transcripts posting I sorted out about professor JJM and Yan’s English debate last week. You can read!
YAN Xuetong & John Mearsheimer Conversation: Who Shapes Global Order, and Who Will Win the Competition?
https://www.chinaffairsplus.com/p/yan-xuetong-and-john-mearsheimer?r=2mgfwm&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web
And the QA session
"American Israel Policy is foolish"：Debate Between Mearsheimer &Yan Xuetong
https://www.fredgao.com/p/american-israel-policy-is-foolishdebate
Thanks so much. How kind some people are.
Thank you for sharing!
link works fine.
Maybe I would need to hear more of it, but I don't think I care much for Pr. Yan's theory of leadership. It seemed, as Pr. Mearsheimer quickly zeroed in on, to lack explanatory and predictive power, and be rather circular in nature: if things are stable, it's because leadership is moral and vice-versa, and if things are bad, it's because leadership is immoral and vice-versa. "Things good because stable" -- yeah, okay, thank you.
On the other hand, I found a comment he made in passing about the polarity question highly interesting. He argued that the world (today) was not multipolar, but bipolar, between China and the US. As proof, he advanced that with the Ukraine affair, the US had willingly let Russia be pushed into China's arms, in order to secure Europe to its side, thus indicating that Russia didn't matter that much, and thus was not a Great Power.
Whether Russia is a Great Power is a bit of a taxonomy question, of course. Is it, as Mearsheimer would say, the third Great Power, or is it a secondary power? No one questions that it's neither in the first nor second spot. Personally, I think it should be called a Great Power, with the proof for that being that a) it has a great deal of influence and b) the US does not wish to fight them.
Still, there's something to Yan's argument that I find compelling, which is that the US willingly sacrificed any hope of friendly relations with Russia, presumably in order to get Europe on its side in view of a forthcoming competition with China. If that was the idea, as far as I can see it's a solid success. There's been such a wedge driven between Europe and Russia (or Russia and the rest of Europe, one should say), there's been so much bad blood whipped up in the minds of the people and the rotten letters of the law, that there's nothing but enmity on the horizon. To be clear, many peoples' heart are still sympathetic to Russia, but the systems, the structures -- they're definitely not. And in the wake of this, we're starting to see signs of economic decoupling between Europe and China, the recent row over electric vehicles portending further things to come.
Pr. Mearsheimer says that driving Russia into the arms of China was a foolish idea. But was it really, if the prize was Europe?
The link leads to a page of videos but trying to play any of them opens a link to the BiliBili app in the Apple App Store.
Here are two transcripts posting I sorted out about professor JJM and Yan’s English debate last week. You can read!
YAN Xuetong & John Mearsheimer Conversation: Who Shapes Global Order, and Who Will Win the Competition?
https://www.chinaffairsplus.com/p/yan-xuetong-and-john-mearsheimer?r=2mgfwm&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web
And the QA session
"American Israel Policy is foolish"：Debate Between Mearsheimer &Yan Xuetong
https://www.fredgao.com/p/american-israel-policy-is-foolishdebate
Jennifer (JennyStokes), I hope John will public a transcript of the debate with Yan Xuetong. It is excellent. Then you and all of us could read it.
Here are two transcripts posting I sorted out about professor JJM and Yan’s English debate last week. You can read!
YAN Xuetong & John Mearsheimer Conversation: Who Shapes Global Order, and Who Will Win the Competition?
https://www.chinaffairsplus.com/p/yan-xuetong-and-john-mearsheimer?r=2mgfwm&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web
And the QA session
"American Israel Policy is foolish"：Debate Between Mearsheimer &Yan Xuetong
https://www.fredgao.com/p/american-israel-policy-is-foolishdebate
Thank you Clarence! That debate was so good and thought-provoking and informative that I wanted to read it. Thank you for posting those links.
you’re welcome!! My pleasure
A professor of both political science and international relations at the University of Chicago, Mearsheimer, 74, is a favorite of progressive think tanks, podcasters and media outlets in the U.S. Widely known for his realpolitik approach to foreign policy, he has been a vocal critic of Washington’s antagonism of Moscow through its manipulation of Ukraine, and the blank check it has cut to its incorrigible ally, Israel.
But it beggars belief that a scholar as acclaimed as Mearsheimer could assert that institutionalized racism began to peter out in the 1960s. If anything it has only gotten worse as the U.S. has entered its post-industrial phase, depleting the economy of decent-paying jobs on the shopfloor and leaving investors with only the finance, insurance and real estate industries, --or FIRE sector—to turn a profit.
The shift from manufacturing to speculation has combined with austere, neoliberal policies to dry up public investment in the inner cities, paving the way for gentrification, increasing competition for good jobs, expanding predatory financial schemes —student debt, the prison industrial complex, subprime mortgages, unnecessary amputations –– that target African Americans.
A Harvard historian, Evelynn Hammonds, told the New York Times:
“There has never been any period in American history where the health of blacks was equal to that of whites. Disparity is built into the system.”
https://www.blackagendareport.com/john-mearsheimers-folly-how-whites-agree-misinterpret-world-fulfill-their-racial-contract
Thor, I would be interested in hearing how old you are.
I think those of us who remember people who argued black folks were the sons of Ham, lived in different parts of town and had better not move elsewhere have seen some big positive changes. Boy that Sons of Ham thing sure shocked me the first time I heard it expressed. As a 10 year old I could not tell the lady she was crazy but I sure thought it and I give the credit for that to my parents.
https://substack.com/@checkbalance/note/c-73813255?utm_source=notes-share-action&r=18b8y7