The twentieth century was the bloodiest era in history. Despite the comfortable assumption that the twenty-first will be more peaceful, the same ingredients that made the last hundred years so destructive are present today. In particular, a conflict in the Middle East may well spark another global conflagration. The United States could prevent such an outcome -- but it may not be willing to.Good stuff. Since you can't really link to the original unless you subscribe to Foreign Affairs, you'll find Wretchard's citations and comments the next best thing as he guides you through Ferguson's interesting reason.BTW, Foreign Affairs—published every other month by the Council on Foreign Relations—while at times maddening for its occasional leftist tics, is nonetheless an old-style, popular, and relatively nonpartisan academic publication whose distinguished writers offer deep and very frequently perceptive insights into the murky world of global politics. It's the kind of content Americans rarely see anymore. We've subscribed from time to time (it ain't cheap), and find the publication generally first rate and loaded with the kind of genuine intellectual heft you won't find in the MSM, on TV, or in the usual political debate and commentary. For info and sample content, click here.
Friday, August 25, 2006
Wretchard Riffs on Niall Ferguson's Future Shock
Wretchard, whom we've already introduced below, mostly turns over the podium to Niall Ferguson today, commenting on Ferguson's recent, "provocative summary" in Foreign Affairs. (You can link to FA for a preview, but reading the whole piece requires a subscription.) Ferguson's initial observation:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment