That article was massively important, thank you for that... I’ve been struggling lately with getting a clear view of the ypg/ pkk, is there anything that you could offer on that?
Thanks for the kind words about Danny's article, we're pretty psyched on it too! In terms of YPG/PKK stuff, I'm going to save that question for Derek when he gets back from vacation. That said, we're still putting out our series on the Kurds with Djene Bajalan, so we'll definitely broach those groups in a future episode.
Othgerwise, I always found Djene and Michael Brooks' conversations would touch on that stuff in a really interesting way. Here's one I found randomly, hopefully it's enlightening!
I didn't see it cross-promoted as widely as a few other guest appearances, but Danny's spot on last week's episode of kiwi activist podcast 1/200 was really good. Many years ago when I studied international relations it always seemed odd to me that realism was dismissed as this cartoonishly evil take on the world by so many people, especially as they busied themselves supporting models which acted in more cartoonishly evil ways while putting a kinder justification on it. Was really good to have the concepts and development broken down.
Thank you, Tara. I was amazed to click and hear Branko Marčetić - one of my favorite analysts and Danny having this wonderful discussion.
Shame on you American Prestige boys for not keeping us old folks updated on your "doings" ;-) I think I catch most of your writings, but out of my league in this podcast world (maybe I should consider running for office, LOL).
Great article, two related questions that have been bugging me for some time.
a) What would it look like if in 1945, the US didn't pursue empire, and instead took it's foot off the gas? Were the internal new deal policies sufficiently independent of war-time manufacturing that they could survive without them? I'm having a difficult time imagining the conditions of the US domestic situation that didn't also an necessitate an expansionist foreign policy during that time period
b) Regarding the 'new cold war' w/ China, why is this even being proposed like it could possibly happen? My sense if the Chinese and American economies are so interlinked that even a frigid cold war could never break out. Are foreign policy analysts who think that this is going to happen blind to the material dependencies or is there something I'm missing?
1) Tough to know, as that's a huge question that requires engaging in serious counterfactual history. Simply put, there's just no easy answer. But historically, in the US, military Keynesianism has been the key path to some types of social democracy. But I don't think that relationship is inevitable.
2) I completely agree. My guess is partially ideology, partially motivated reasoning.
That was a fantastic article, thank you for the great read.
A question I have is, what would your response be to someone who criticized “American Burlesque” as being too idealistic? Whether that be in relation to bucking liberal internationalist primacy in policymaking or achieving international cooperation on issues such as climate change.
Thanks for reading. I'd basically say to those questions that it's not a policy or strategic essay, but more of a manifesto about what US foreign policy should be.
That article was massively important, thank you for that... I’ve been struggling lately with getting a clear view of the ypg/ pkk, is there anything that you could offer on that?
Thanks for the kind words about Danny's article, we're pretty psyched on it too! In terms of YPG/PKK stuff, I'm going to save that question for Derek when he gets back from vacation. That said, we're still putting out our series on the Kurds with Djene Bajalan, so we'll definitely broach those groups in a future episode.
Othgerwise, I always found Djene and Michael Brooks' conversations would touch on that stuff in a really interesting way. Here's one I found randomly, hopefully it's enlightening!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JhvtWBZgRcQ
I didn't see it cross-promoted as widely as a few other guest appearances, but Danny's spot on last week's episode of kiwi activist podcast 1/200 was really good. Many years ago when I studied international relations it always seemed odd to me that realism was dismissed as this cartoonishly evil take on the world by so many people, especially as they busied themselves supporting models which acted in more cartoonishly evil ways while putting a kinder justification on it. Was really good to have the concepts and development broken down.
https://www.1of200.nz/podcast/1200-episode-162-the-realist-deal
Thanks! Really appreciate it.
Thank you, Tara. I was amazed to click and hear Branko Marčetić - one of my favorite analysts and Danny having this wonderful discussion.
Shame on you American Prestige boys for not keeping us old folks updated on your "doings" ;-) I think I catch most of your writings, but out of my league in this podcast world (maybe I should consider running for office, LOL).
Great article, two related questions that have been bugging me for some time.
a) What would it look like if in 1945, the US didn't pursue empire, and instead took it's foot off the gas? Were the internal new deal policies sufficiently independent of war-time manufacturing that they could survive without them? I'm having a difficult time imagining the conditions of the US domestic situation that didn't also an necessitate an expansionist foreign policy during that time period
b) Regarding the 'new cold war' w/ China, why is this even being proposed like it could possibly happen? My sense if the Chinese and American economies are so interlinked that even a frigid cold war could never break out. Are foreign policy analysts who think that this is going to happen blind to the material dependencies or is there something I'm missing?
Thanks again for the great read!
1) Tough to know, as that's a huge question that requires engaging in serious counterfactual history. Simply put, there's just no easy answer. But historically, in the US, military Keynesianism has been the key path to some types of social democracy. But I don't think that relationship is inevitable.
2) I completely agree. My guess is partially ideology, partially motivated reasoning.
And thanks for reading!
That was a fantastic article, thank you for the great read.
A question I have is, what would your response be to someone who criticized “American Burlesque” as being too idealistic? Whether that be in relation to bucking liberal internationalist primacy in policymaking or achieving international cooperation on issues such as climate change.
Thank you for your time.
Thanks for reading. I'd basically say to those questions that it's not a policy or strategic essay, but more of a manifesto about what US foreign policy should be.
Underrated Dylan album, and great piece.
Thanks!