Greg:

That's a great interview. Thanks for bringing it to everyone's attention. I think, for example, a lot of your readers would be nodding their heads up and down with Kennan's answer to this question:

Q. But are there not occasions—such as mass murder in Rwanda and ethnic cleansing in Kosovo—when violations of human rights are so horrendous that standing by and doing nothing places us in the position of virtual accomplices of a murderous regime? ...

G.K.: I hope you will forgive me, Dick, but Istand somewhat aghast at your question, because it seems to me to imply that we should not simply engage in a brief humanitarian intervention—which might be feasible—but should seriously consider taking over, and this for an indefinite time, a good part of the powers of government in a number of non-European countries, and to run things there in our own way rather than in ways that are traditional to their societies. You think, I gather, that we have the resources to do that. This, Igreatly doubt. Neither dollars nor bayonets could secure success. It would take a lasting commitment on the part of people and government to make even a beginning at this task, and for this I can see no reason or possibility.

I know a lot of your non-US readers would agree with this:

These thoughts, and others like them, cause me to feel that what we ought to do at this point is to try to cut ourselves down to size in the dreams and aspirations we direct to our possibilities for world leadership. We are not, really, all that great. We have serious problems within our society these days; and it sometimes seems to me that the best help we could give to others would be to allow them to observe that we are now confronting those problems with a bit more imagination, courage, and resolve than has been apparent in the recent past.

But I wonder how much of this realism is based on this worldview I tend to think we Americans really do not share:

Q It isn't only our military power that makes us number one. For better or worse, our cultural impact is equally profound. The world flocks to American popular culture.

A This, alas, appears to be true. We export to anyone who can buy
it or steal it the cheapest, silliest, and most disreputable manifestations of our "culture." No wonder that these effusions become the laughingstock of intelligent and sensitive people the world over. But so long as we find it proper to let millions of our living rooms be filled with this trash every evening, and this largely to the edification of the schoolchildren, I can see that we would cut a poor figure trying to deny it to others beyond our borders. Nor would we be successful. In a computer age, it is available, anyway, for whoever wants to push the button and receive it. And so we must expect, I suppose, to appear to many abroad, despite our military superiority, as the world's intellectual and spiritual dunce, until we can change the image of ourselves we purvey to others.

Posted by: Appalled Moderate at October 9, 2007 03:20 PM | Permalink to this comment

We aren't even all that certain that we can manage the elementary mechanics of vote-counting correctly -- and we're going to tell the rest of the world about "democracy"?!?! Hell, I'll bet "very, very tired" doesn't begin to capture the general reaction to our ostentatious self-regard.

I had occasion to read Washington's Farewell Address for the first time a few weeks ago. His foreign policy suggestions were never more appropriate than now.

Posted by: sglover at October 9, 2007 05:40 PM | Permalink to this comment

The Bush administration policy which I equate with the grandiose position of which Kennan speaks is flawed to the point of criminality.It is also very tiresome to me, an American patriot.Whatever happened to the Monroe Doctrine?I believe it has gone the way our Constitution has-- to the shredder.These criminal types do so rely on shredders to remain in power and out of jail.That is also very tiresome to me, one who has ancestors who heroically and faithfully served this country two generations ago.To watch the demise of one`s country is extremely disheartening.

Posted by: Sully18 at October 9, 2007 07:24 PM | Permalink to this comment

Yes, extremely disheartening.

But I can't think of anything more cheering than Kennan quoting JQA on the folly of the arrogance of imperialism and exceptionalism. Increasingly, the old masters are the only place to go for inspriration, or even oxygen.

D'ya think GWB has copies of "The March of Folly" or "Rise and Fall of the Great Powers" on his reference shelf? They should have been current about the time he had to be reading something. How about Cheney? Jeebus, even a casual reader of the popular foreign policy literature has to have been exposed to this stuff.

Oh, darn. I forgot. George is on a mission from God. And Cheney is on a mission from Haliburton. No references for them. They get it straight from the source.

Posted by: Adams at October 10, 2007 03:25 AM | Permalink to this comment

Let's say US national policy adopted the spirit of JQA/Kennan's council. What the specifics of such a policy would be is a somewhat more murky issue. The end result, certainly, would have to be a smaller military/industrial/service sector/academic complex. And, one imagines, the smaller the "complex", the smaller the govt needed to run it. And, therefore, the smaller the "complex", the smaller the "govt", the less attractive they become for private enterprises HQ'd in the US. (albeit, at times the US seems to include the Cayman Islands, Dubai, etc)

The less attractive the govt becomes for private enterprise, all things relative of course, the less pressure there will be to give great sums of money to candidates running for office. The nation, either explicitly, or implicitly, has signed on to this kind of govt. It is the driving force behind most (all?) of the numerous foreign policy failures the US has experienced. To the extent there is domestic discontent regarding the Empire, it is soothed with domestic spending programs.

I believe the Italians have a term for this kind of hidden (or purposely ignored) dynamic I am trying to describe, dietrologia. Essentially, the things behind view, that make things happen.

This is why, ineffective, does not have a chance, cranky, and offbeat, Ron Paul is , desperately, ignored, and loath, at the same time. Paul, for all his gold standard, abolish the IRS rhetoric, is closest thing today channeling the old Taft wing of the GOP, with its clarion call for (and they meant it)for smaller govt. He demonstrates how far the GOP has abandoned its core principles. No one likes to be reminded of that...even if the person doing the reminding is not seen a 'serious' person in the Village.

And I don't see anyone but Paul proposing downsizing the Empire. While we may we sense that Kennan's warnings/counsel are wise, the policy he advocated, is not in the cards anymore. The nation is hooked.

Posted by: jonst at October 10, 2007 10:11 AM | Permalink to this comment