Really appreciated Michta's article and the way he foresees a possible restructuring of the Continent. Haven't heard much about "hard power" from the Europeans. I don't know what it is with France: 1940 all over again. Is this in the French DNA? You live in Paris, any thoughts on this? I found the article and illustrations so profound I spent more than a half hour to read and re-read.
Hi Ms. Kiecolt, thanks so much for the vote of appreciation. Did you see the very, very long article I wrote on the subject of "what's wrong with the French?" Here: https://claireberlinski.substack.com/p/france-goes-to-the-polls?s=w. Make sure to scroll down and read the long version; the version in Politico is abridged.
I actually disagree with Michta's argument on realist and realpolitik arguments quite strongly however, I know there are other people here like Jon Nighswander that disagree with me but my short answer response to Michta's proposition that Ukraine and Poland can build an alternative economic pole to France, Germany, and the Benelux is one word NO!!
As always, an excellent summary of news from around the world. I was particularly struck by the item on Chile's new leftist president, Gabriel Boric. It tends to confirm my opinion, based on President Biden's plunge in the polls, that an electoral campaign strategy tending to raise people's expectations isn't really a good idea. Chances are that reality and the Law of Unintended Consequences will prevent you from delivering as promised, or maybe you're just an incompetent fool. Then what...?
How do you run for *any* office in a democracy without raising people's expectations? "My fellow Americans, if you elect me this fall, I give you my vow that life will stay the same or get worse" is not a famous winning campaign slogan, you know?
It's quite the conundrum, isn't it? On the one hand there are the realities of high office, on the other there are the electorate's unrealistic expectations. Thus what it takes to get elected is a kind of feckless irresponsibility and pandering that makes actual governing difficult if not impossible.
The American presidency, I'm afraid, has arrived at just such an impasse. A politician of vision and genius might find ways to square that circle. But the whole point of the Constitution as originally conceived was to lower the bar—to make possible good government despite the known deficiencies of human nature. The development of the imperial presidency took us in the opposite direction. It has become an office that's pitiless in its exposure of every human deficiency.
Claire,
Really appreciated Michta's article and the way he foresees a possible restructuring of the Continent. Haven't heard much about "hard power" from the Europeans. I don't know what it is with France: 1940 all over again. Is this in the French DNA? You live in Paris, any thoughts on this? I found the article and illustrations so profound I spent more than a half hour to read and re-read.
Thank you,
Ms. Helene Kiecolt
Hi Ms. Kiecolt, thanks so much for the vote of appreciation. Did you see the very, very long article I wrote on the subject of "what's wrong with the French?" Here: https://claireberlinski.substack.com/p/france-goes-to-the-polls?s=w. Make sure to scroll down and read the long version; the version in Politico is abridged.
I actually disagree with Michta's argument on realist and realpolitik arguments quite strongly however, I know there are other people here like Jon Nighswander that disagree with me but my short answer response to Michta's proposition that Ukraine and Poland can build an alternative economic pole to France, Germany, and the Benelux is one word NO!!
As always, an excellent summary of news from around the world. I was particularly struck by the item on Chile's new leftist president, Gabriel Boric. It tends to confirm my opinion, based on President Biden's plunge in the polls, that an electoral campaign strategy tending to raise people's expectations isn't really a good idea. Chances are that reality and the Law of Unintended Consequences will prevent you from delivering as promised, or maybe you're just an incompetent fool. Then what...?
How do you run for *any* office in a democracy without raising people's expectations? "My fellow Americans, if you elect me this fall, I give you my vow that life will stay the same or get worse" is not a famous winning campaign slogan, you know?
It's quite the conundrum, isn't it? On the one hand there are the realities of high office, on the other there are the electorate's unrealistic expectations. Thus what it takes to get elected is a kind of feckless irresponsibility and pandering that makes actual governing difficult if not impossible.
The American presidency, I'm afraid, has arrived at just such an impasse. A politician of vision and genius might find ways to square that circle. But the whole point of the Constitution as originally conceived was to lower the bar—to make possible good government despite the known deficiencies of human nature. The development of the imperial presidency took us in the opposite direction. It has become an office that's pitiless in its exposure of every human deficiency.