Ironically, a libertarian or liberal democracy allows intellectuals who disagree within the overall framework, which is usually justified by some argument from enlightenment ideals. The works of the Cathedral are useful in more ways than one, as the author eludes to at the end of the article.
I also question why someone should fear retribution for intellectual works, the fact remains that Americans voted for a lot of what’s currently happening. If there is discontent with the current agenda it’s because Americans don’t fully appreciate how bad they could have it if their nation loses world supremacy ranking. Or maybe they do appreciate it, but they worry about their country turning into some unreasonable collective without any rule of law; I think it’s this latter reason that’s the main concern. There’s also the issue that there are people who are actually Nazis or white supremacists or racists out in the open now, and that way of thinking (correctly) doesn’t seem rational, justified or substantiated to any reasonable population. America first doesn’t have to mean racists first.
The problem is how do you establish national sovereignty over your border protocols when you have various incidents in your national history which detractors can use against you for any number of reasons. How do you ensure maintaining an internationally competitive posture without alienating allies, or not causing a ruckus in global alliances or markets.
In a way, we’ve already been doing this by ensuring the success of American companies without explicitly stating the motivations for their success except via enigmatic phrases such as “too big to fail”. The problem is that you can’t expect international stakeholders and investors to care about that. Some combination of economic incentives to encourage national investments and focus, and emphasizing overall national identity in national culture without being constrained to a particular race or religion may help. The thing to note is that libertarian frameworks are more likely to produce the intended effect than liberal or leftist ones. These are just my two cents, obviously.
nis0s•4mo ago
I also question why someone should fear retribution for intellectual works, the fact remains that Americans voted for a lot of what’s currently happening. If there is discontent with the current agenda it’s because Americans don’t fully appreciate how bad they could have it if their nation loses world supremacy ranking. Or maybe they do appreciate it, but they worry about their country turning into some unreasonable collective without any rule of law; I think it’s this latter reason that’s the main concern. There’s also the issue that there are people who are actually Nazis or white supremacists or racists out in the open now, and that way of thinking (correctly) doesn’t seem rational, justified or substantiated to any reasonable population. America first doesn’t have to mean racists first.
The problem is how do you establish national sovereignty over your border protocols when you have various incidents in your national history which detractors can use against you for any number of reasons. How do you ensure maintaining an internationally competitive posture without alienating allies, or not causing a ruckus in global alliances or markets.
In a way, we’ve already been doing this by ensuring the success of American companies without explicitly stating the motivations for their success except via enigmatic phrases such as “too big to fail”. The problem is that you can’t expect international stakeholders and investors to care about that. Some combination of economic incentives to encourage national investments and focus, and emphasizing overall national identity in national culture without being constrained to a particular race or religion may help. The thing to note is that libertarian frameworks are more likely to produce the intended effect than liberal or leftist ones. These are just my two cents, obviously.