> [Original Message] > From: Eric Yost <eyost1132@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > To: <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Date: 9/29/2006 6:17:21 PM > Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: Ideology vs Experience > > Simon: I do not want to see any 'fight against terrorism' > lost, but I do not want to see a victorious war for Empire. > Whoever is fighting to gain one. > > > Presto! This is why we disagree on such issues. You see "an > American Empire" in the making and oppose it. I don't see an > emergent empire, or even the desire to have one. > > But then, you thought Saddam was responsible for the WTC attacks. Annie Myelroie ... Even Bush said Saddam had nothing to do with 9/11. Regarding empire, we may have the desire, that's not entirely clear, but we don't have the ability, so there can be no emergent empire. When England was the world's empire, it exported capital. We import capital. Niall Ferguson, an America the Empire proponent, thinks the 20th century was not the American century, as is widely thought, but, in retrospect, will be considered the Asian century. He thinks the Japanese invasion of the U.S. will come to be considered the first time an Asian power flexed its muscles. China is coming on board as sole superpower as early as 2030, less than 25 years away. Asia lends, America spends ... Also, back to Ferguson, when England exported its culture, which presumably we're doing with exporting democracy, they were in their colonies for many decades, even centuries, until they were thrown out. That's what he sees for us in Iraq, except we're doing it wiith Asian money. From what I can tell, Ferguson likes America. But he is open to looking at reality. He who has the gold rules. And he who has the gold is ... well, China, Japan ... ------------------------------------------------------------------ To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off, digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html