You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
-Short Attention Span Theater-
The Jacksonians vs the Wilsonians: Who is to Prevail?
2007-04-16
A great explanation of our enemy within.

The Wilsonians are suicidal; it is they who built the underclass which will destroy them
and perhaps us. It is they who control the press, academia, and the legislatures. They think words count more than actions, and that words can easily be re-written as they go along. For just one example, take their betrayal of so many hopes with the signing of the Treaty of Sevres in 1920. That doesn't work? Why it's back to the table for further dialogue and the Treaty of Lausanne.

And now? Now we have that nitwit Pelosi traipsing off to Tehran, and the American Congress inviting the Muslim Brotherhood in for tea and the British press condemning Israel. The Turks and Kirkuk are lobbing bombs and shoe bats at one another. Such is the diabolical and quite logical end of Wilsonian "dialogue." Now we know from where the expression "the chattering classes" emerged.

The Jacksonians are our only hope. The question is, what proportion of them remains? For sure, you can't make a Jacksonian into one of Wilson's talking heads. But perhaps, in the interests of self-preservation, some of the Wilsonians will taste reality and condescend to put on Jackson's facade, at least until the worst of the slaughter is over.
Posted by:SR-71

#6  Keep in mind what this article is calling "Wilsonian" is somewhat different from WRM's version(s).

WRM had "right" Wilsonians (the closest we have are neo-cons) and "radical" Wilsonians (more the One-World type). While the latter would overlap with the people this article is describing, many of the latter aren't really Wilsonian at all, more say soft-core Marxists.
Posted by: Jackal   2007-04-16 20:28  

#5  Missed the point as usual LH. The model refers to two generalized mindsets: action oriented optimist vs. talk oriented pessimists. No model covers everything - as you well know.
Posted by: SR-71   2007-04-16 16:22  

#4  Is Pelosi Wilsonia, or, is she Jeffersonian? A Wilsonian beleives in spreading US values, albeit by multilateral means, per Mead, while Pelosi seems closer in some ways to a pacifist Jeffersonian.

On the other hand, where does someone who believes in spreading US values by unilateral means, but whos not antiimmigrant, and who sees value to doing things for foreigners, and is even multilateralist to a limited extend, like the more moderate Weekly Standardish neocons, fall on that spectrum. Id say more Wilsonian than Jacksonian.

Esp when the multilateral institutions are hostile to the Wilsonian project of spreading democracy, its hard to say whos a Wilsonian? Those devoted to the international agencies above all, like some liberal Dems? Those who react with hatred to the international institutions, but support the rest of the Wilsonian project,like the more rightwing neocons? Those who lean mainly toward the substance of the Wilson project, but will tolerate the UN, like the moderate neocons? Or those who explicitly value the UN, but will be unilateral with reluctance, like the Clintonian liberal hawks?

Id say at this time the weaknesses of the Mead scheme are as great as its strengths. Unless one is just using it for namecalling.
Posted by: liberalhawk   2007-04-16 15:43  

#3  Jacksonians like cookies too. Jacksonian women make the best cookies.
Posted by: wxjames   2007-04-16 13:51  

#2  Where did my cookie go? Did I eat it? It's true I eat a lot of cookies.
Posted by: anonymous5089   2007-04-16 13:03  

#1  http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/845102/posts (original article linked by SdB is for sucribers only)
http://globetrotter.berkeley.edu/people3/Mead/mead-con0.html
Posted by: Alistaire Japer6213   2007-04-16 13:02  

00:00