Friday, April 28, 2006

All-time-stupid web-feature award (a rant)

Is it "Foreign policy for idiots" or "Foreign Policy: For Idiots"? Take a look at this "web feature" over at Foreign Policy and see what you think?They even tell us how! Wow! I'm floored! What insights! What depth! (No more !'s, sorry.)

I've always known that FP wasn't the world's most serious "serious" magazine, but this? Just when I begin think the mindless, brain-washed Washington crowd can't go any lower in my esteem, they give me a present like this. I know, America needs a policy magazine that even its senators can understand, but do we have to insult everybody in the process. Honestly, this looks more like psy-ops to condition 14-year-olds for Porter Goss' next target, and perhaps it is. Or, just as likely, these are these the flash cards they use to prep Bush.

But let's allow FP to tell their own story:

Founded in 1970 by Samuel Huntington and Warren Demian Manshel, and now published by the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace in Washington, D.C., FOREIGN POLICY is the premier, award-winning magazine of global politics, economics, and ideas. Our mission is to explain how the world works—in particular, how the process of global integration is reshaping nations, institutions, cultures, and, more fundamentally, our daily lives.
And they go on to say about themselves:

What You WON'T Find in FP

  • Cliché sound bites masquerading as reportage
  • Predictable, read-them-a-hundred-times analyses of examined-to-death global stories
  • Polite essays that fail to challenge your assumptions, excite your passions, or raise your ire

Well, I'm really glad they put up this assassination web feature. FP really avoided the sound bites and facile assumptions this time.

In case you didn't know it, Samuel Huntington, still the editor at FP, has penned such racist and xenophobic classics as Clash of Civilizations and Who Are We?. He is a Harvard professor (parents beware--there's still time for your kids to apply elsewhere) who gets a lot of money for penning theories that justify American belligerence. There's also Moises Naím. According to Wikipedia:

Dr. Naím served as Venezuela’s minister of trade and industry and played a central role in the initial launching of major economic reforms in the early 1990s. Prior to his ministerial position, he was professor and dean at Instituto de Estudios Superiores de Administración, in Caracas. He was also the director of the projects on economic reforms and on Latin America at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. Dr. Naím was also associated with the World Bank on two occasions, first as an executive director and later as a senior advisor to the president.

He is currently one of six members of Time magazine's board of international economists and is also the Chairman of the Group of Fifty, an organization of the CEO’s of Latin America’s largest corporations.

World Bank, Caracas, Group of Fifty.... Interesting that we find Hugo Chavez in this list of most-likely targets. But, hey, these are our foreign policy leaders!

Anyway, that's my rant du jour. You'll have to go do some more digging if you want to find out more about Huntington's dubious scholarship. You can start here at the Left Coaster, if you want. As for me, I would love to come to some brilliant conclusion here. Unfortunately, my brilliant conclusion is that the people informing our foreign policy and teaching "our best and brightest," as the saying goes, are simply not that brilliant.