When I was at University of Illinois, I met John Mearsheimer on several occasions. At first I had expectations that he would be helpful--as the situation under the Bush tyrrany in 2002 and 2003 was quite grim.
But I soon realized that he was not interested in addressing any serious issues, and was only interested in complaining about "bad apples" or listing specific bad policies, and never addresses the fundemental corruption of government, or twisted form of the economy. The implication of his statements to me was that if the Bush administration was replaced by Democrats, things would go back to normal. I knew that would not happen unless we cleaned house after two terms of criminality. The results, more than 20 years later, prove that Mearsheimer was totally wrong. Perhaps he even knew he was wrong back then and just said such things just so he could be a famous professor. I watch him on YouTube on occasion and I am astonished at his skills. He brings an enormous amount of information to bear at any time, but he avoids so many critical points that might suggest some other interpretation is possible. That is his buries the audience in facts, and powerful rhetoric while steering away from many essential truths. Above all, he suggests it is the personalities, the mental limits of presidents, that determine the course of events. I suspect that if he mentioned anything about bankers it would be the end of his stardom.
Also, Meirsheimer enjoys identifying foolish, ignorant or stupid bad apples who cause wars but never considers that certain economic systems demand war because it creates demand and political systems demand it because it gives authority to governments that have lost all legitimacy. The structural causes of conflict are left out. He loves blaming generals and occasionally politicians. There are no bankers in his history
Thank you for another masterful critique of establishment "facts" and writers/speakers who help to "establish" them. I think it is much too long for the average person, on contrast to mass media "reports" and declarations that are "short and sweet" pronouncements without and evidence and explanation which you always abundantly provide. By the way, I plead guilty to using the incorrect pronoun "we" when speaking of U.S. federal government actions. I think that most people do, as well. Your caution against the practice is quite correct.
Very well explained!! Thank you for this.
When I was at University of Illinois, I met John Mearsheimer on several occasions. At first I had expectations that he would be helpful--as the situation under the Bush tyrrany in 2002 and 2003 was quite grim.
But I soon realized that he was not interested in addressing any serious issues, and was only interested in complaining about "bad apples" or listing specific bad policies, and never addresses the fundemental corruption of government, or twisted form of the economy. The implication of his statements to me was that if the Bush administration was replaced by Democrats, things would go back to normal. I knew that would not happen unless we cleaned house after two terms of criminality. The results, more than 20 years later, prove that Mearsheimer was totally wrong. Perhaps he even knew he was wrong back then and just said such things just so he could be a famous professor. I watch him on YouTube on occasion and I am astonished at his skills. He brings an enormous amount of information to bear at any time, but he avoids so many critical points that might suggest some other interpretation is possible. That is his buries the audience in facts, and powerful rhetoric while steering away from many essential truths. Above all, he suggests it is the personalities, the mental limits of presidents, that determine the course of events. I suspect that if he mentioned anything about bankers it would be the end of his stardom.
Also, Meirsheimer enjoys identifying foolish, ignorant or stupid bad apples who cause wars but never considers that certain economic systems demand war because it creates demand and political systems demand it because it gives authority to governments that have lost all legitimacy. The structural causes of conflict are left out. He loves blaming generals and occasionally politicians. There are no bankers in his history
Thank you for another masterful critique of establishment "facts" and writers/speakers who help to "establish" them. I think it is much too long for the average person, on contrast to mass media "reports" and declarations that are "short and sweet" pronouncements without and evidence and explanation which you always abundantly provide. By the way, I plead guilty to using the incorrect pronoun "we" when speaking of U.S. federal government actions. I think that most people do, as well. Your caution against the practice is quite correct.