Dear All
1. I have not read the texts of Naomi Klein and Milton Friedman being referred to in this group - but I would tend to weigh in on the side of Joe and Peter - by this I mean that, I find Eddie's
characterization of the character of western liberal democracies underpinned by the more general economic and globally expansionist post Marxian philosophy characterized by the "smoke screen antics" of the Chicago school - as being a bit less finely nuanced than I find Eddie's
views in general.
An analysis, or for that matter a criticism, of periods of history and its dominant players - must be nuanced in my opinion - if they are to be useful for coming generations and not just talk that can be disregarded by those who hold power in particular societies at particular epochs in history.
This in my opinion holds true for all ages and is a condition of humanity that we must avoid over simplifying in our quest for easy recourse to criticism and analysis of swathes of human thought and achievements.
Post Marxian Chicago school inspired neo liberalism - the core ideology of western democracies that have collectively ganged up as federations to play the role of global policemen - as the basis of the dominant economic conglomerates of US and EU must also be seen in this light. This is my opinion and I think that this kind of view - allows for more nuances of real politik - to be seen clearly in the light of liberal western democracy as a post Marxian ideology that is packaged into a product fit for export around the world.
2. With regard to the Myanmar crisis, I note the extreme reluctance in supporting an obvious revolution from the bottom - of the same policy architects of Indian foreign policy - who get together in Washington and criticize Indian parliamentarians as a group of headless chickens and yet cry themselves hoarse in saying that India must not let go of the historic opportunity to come out of its nuclear pariah status holding the coat tails of the US president who is himself now on his way out from White House as well as the pages of history.
Indian foreign ministry is supposedly weighing up the strategic losses and gains of supporting an obviously brutal military junta on its extreme eastern borders - the issues of Myanmar's natural gas reserves and Chinese real politik in the Bay of Bengal have been often commented on.
However, I would like to step back a bit and see in the reluctance of Indian democracy that is pallying up with Washington corridors of power - a certain unanimity of interest in supporting military dictatorships in critical parts of the world. Is this not the quintessence of the Chicago school economic doctrines, now emerging as a starkly Indian response to the unrest on its eastern borders ?
It is time we now begin asking ourselves the question, what is it really that now separates New Delhi from Washington ?
Saturday, September 29, 2007
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)