The Weekly Standard has adapted as an article the 2009 Wriston Lecture of the Manhattan Institute delivered this past week by Charles Krauthammer. The topic is whether that sound we now hear resonating throughout the globe is the death knell of America’s tenure as a superpower.
Unfortunately, the video link to the entire address at the Institute’s website is down, but YouTube has the following two-minute clip, which captures the speech’s flavor.
Then of course there’s the article. In it, Krauthammer lays out the argument put forth by the left that our time is indeed at hand — that we have already begun our descent into ordinary nationhood as China rises up to assume the role as the world’s next America. Face it, they say. China already owns the U.S. national debt. All that remains is for us to leave the keys in the mailbox on our way out.
As the above clip reveals, Barack Obama is no small cheerleader for the new order. He seems to believe, as do the Europeans who have so eagerly embraced him on the world stage, that we have it coming to us. In the Obaman view, the decline in American hegemony and exceptionalism is redress for our past sins, which include unilateralism when multilateralism was called for (which is always), arrogance, derision toward Europe, and — let’s not forget — mistreatment of natives here at home.
Peter Wehner at Contentions suggests that Obama’s repeated mea culpae for these and other transgressions, many of them made while standing on foreign soil, are the reason he was awarded the Nobel Prize.
Krauthammer also presents the opposing view, that fears of China’s preeminence are exaggerated and that “declinist” predictions are cyclical. Then he rejects both views. Krauthammer maintains that the “question of whether America is in decline cannot be answered yes or no” because ultimately it comes down to a matter of choice. America, he insists, can write its own future — that “America is in the position of deciding whether to abdicate or retain its dominance. Decline–or continued ascendancy–is in our hands.”
Which brings us back to the Obama Doctrine, which in turn suggests the choice has already been made for us. It’s a grim picture, but one countered correctly I believe by Max Boot, also of Contentions. Boot notes that Obama, whether it was intention or not, has already assumed the reins of leadership on a variety of International issues, including renewed Israeli-Palestinian peace talks and global warming.
Boot also notes optimistically that the
U.S. economy remains the most dynamic among all the industrialized nations; our defense budget remains the largest in the world — bigger, by some measures, than the rest of the world put together; and our population remains young and energetic — not aging as rapidly as Europe, Russia, Japan, or even China.
These “fundamental ingredients of American success” are so deeply woven into the American fabric, Boot argues, that Obama may find it more difficult than he imagines to relinquish superpower status.
One can only hope.
Comments 55
Max Boot has responded to Krauthammer with a relatively optimistic “Yes, but…” He argues that there is a limit to the damage that one president can do to American power and influence.
October 10th, 2009 at 1:58 pm
@Peter Shalen — Peter, that was the point of the penultimate paragraph of my post.
October 10th, 2009 at 2:10 pm
A former member of our crew left in frustration, I’m afraid. “RCAR” constantly warned about the explosion of debt, replacing capital.
So, It’s not just 0-slash. The rise, year after year, in the size of our local and national governments, with their mushrooming retirements and other benefits, just adds to my concern about our children’s and grandchildren’s future.
Talking points have replaced dialogue in a world in which rational voices are increasingly irrelevant.
I see some hope in the not so official media, including our little band of Zombies, but not so much.
October 10th, 2009 at 4:32 pm
All a matter of will. The debt problem will be simply solved, for instance, in the time honored way.
Ironically it will probably be a President like Obama, perhaps the man himself, who will do a Roosevelt by closing the banks, calling in gold and redeeming our green dollars with red or purple ones thus “paying off” foreigners at five or ten percent of face value for their bond holdings.
There will naturally be a bit of world unrest on that day, and quite a bit of pain for everyone who has a stake in world trade.
But, as Boot pointed out, our economy remains capable, and as he didn’t, we’re probably the most self sufficient country in the world. We’ll pay $20/gallon for gas and drive a lot less, and we won’t be able to buy cheap plastic storage containers at Walmart; but we’ll be eating.
And then, just as banks clear the credit records of bankrupts after seven years, the world will start taking dollars again because it has to.
October 10th, 2009 at 4:33 pm
@Zoltan Newberry — Zoltan, I wasn’t aware that RCAR left. (I was aware that he essentially said I was one of the authors who should be demoted to a commentator, but that’s another story.)
I understand what you’re saying about exploding debt replacing capital as a key issue (as I struggled to understand it when RCAR said it), but how does it relate to my post?
October 10th, 2009 at 5:13 pm
@Howard Portnoy – See what your wrongheadedness hath wrought?
Do the honorable thing, Howard. Settle your affairs, have a last dram in the ‘drawing room, and clear the way for RCAR’s return.
‘Twill be a far better thing….
October 10th, 2009 at 5:29 pm
@fuster — Hey, you egged me on! You don’t remember?
October 10th, 2009 at 6:09 pm
@Howard Portnoy – Yeah, I did.
But only a little.
October 10th, 2009 at 6:22 pm
I took what he said about who should or shouldn’t have the right to post as a deeply creepy parting shot. I don’t think he intended to keep hanging around after saying something that nasty.
October 10th, 2009 at 6:35 pm
@Howard Portnoy – Sorry, I guess I read too hastily.
October 10th, 2009 at 7:16 pm
@Peter Shalen — Maybe so. Still, I’m sorry to see another of the original Contentions commentators leave the fold. Has anyone communicated with him about his decision?
October 10th, 2009 at 7:22 pm
As for RCAR, as you may recall, he had stopped posting or commenting for a while before his latest re-appearance. In e-mails he described having gotten kind of sick of his own spiel. The last time he showed up, it was a bit more of the same but worse in terms of arguments with the rest of us. Plus he also said something about starting a new job. You know how these things go.
There are a few others who dropped away – or who were planning on coming by, or said they were, and never paused even to leave a note.
“Good riddance!” he wept.
October 10th, 2009 at 7:30 pm
And btw I was shocked to think someone thought I was qualified to post about anything – or any more qualified than anyone else.
October 10th, 2009 at 7:31 pm
@CK MacLeod – It must have been comforting to have had Howard scoff at that bit.
October 10th, 2009 at 8:10 pm
@fuster — What are you talking about?
October 10th, 2009 at 8:35 pm
fuster is engaging in a bit of inverse irony – as one of the internet’s most highly qualified fusterists, I believe I can make this out: You see, he’s taking me at my word that I was “shocked,” and pretending to sympathize, but in reality skewering me for the false modesty in my statement, since what I must really have wanted to point out was that I’m such a fabulous genius I managed to persuade RCAR that I possessed qualifications.
Get it?
October 10th, 2009 at 8:39 pm
Huh?
October 10th, 2009 at 8:42 pm
Well, I guess that must show that even highly qualified fusterists sometimes can’t make him out.
Maybe fuster himself can explain what he meant by #14.
Or might #17 have been meant ironically?
I’m going to go watch the football game and figure out what I’m having for dinner.
October 10th, 2009 at 8:50 pm
@CK MacLeod -
I suggest
http://store.engrish.com/subwei.html
for casual Zombie dining
October 10th, 2009 at 9:00 pm
Myself, I like a large side of flies with it.
October 10th, 2009 at 9:04 pm
I can’t say I miss RCAR all that much; he seemed to have a rough row to hoe with a disabled child, frustrations with work, difficulties with health care. We all have our have had our troubles, but you never know what’s around the next bend. For me, a new life started about 21 years ago, after many years of loneliness and frustration and horrible mistakes and not such wonderful people. Hanging in there, or, as Woodie said, ‘showing up,’ is very important for those with temporarily lost souls to keep in mind.
I do miss Joe Nocera, the guy who depicted himself with his non gravitor as a smiling black man. Hope he’s not finding teaching too difficult.
Just back from a lovely, funny movie about a guy who learned how to lie in a world where no one knew how to lie, and a fine meal out at Yoshi’s. If you’re ever in Cheekago, Yoshi’s has the best hamburgers on Planet Earth.
I shared Howard’s video of Charles K with several libral frems. Never mind the man’s obvious bravery and virtue, how could any honest soul not be struck by CK’s clarity and insight? How can so many otherwise intelligent people not get it? Is it some kind of deep self deception? Is it an affliction of the soul, an ability to ignore reality, a comfort zone in a make believe zone of fantasy alone?
Fuster, by the way, is a very jolly person. Think of him as your conscience. The frog carries a lantern. This space would not be nearly as much fun without our dear frog, I’d say.
October 10th, 2009 at 10:36 pm
@Zoltan Newberry — Wow, what a night of revelations. I’ve missed Joe N as well, but had no idea he wasn’t planning a comeback at some point.
I agree with your assessment of fuster, except for the conscience part. He does make life more interesting, though I wouldn’t go too far with my praise lest the frog develop a swell head.
October 10th, 2009 at 11:57 pm
@Howard Portnoy http://www.storeappeal.com/images/Darn%20Frog%20Fountain.jpg
I remain ever so unassuming
October 11th, 2009 at 12:18 am
La grenouille superbe, en vain tâche de s’enfler
Pour atteindre la taille d’un boeuf. Elle n’y peut aller ;
Mais en simple grenouille au marais élevée,
N’est dans son espèce qu’une grenouille crevée.
Le marquis fait le duc, le duc fait le prince ;
Chacun s’enfle, et enfin chacun devient si mince,
Qu’ainsi que la grenouille, il crève avec éclat.
On se perd à vouloir sortir de son état.
October 11th, 2009 at 1:17 am
I’m struck nearly dumb by Peter’s post, which I didn’t much understand since I’m a good American like President Obama and don’t speak no furrin languages; but I’ll force out the thought that the stream was coming out of the wrong end of the frog fountain to be representative of fuster.
October 11th, 2009 at 1:33 am
@Sully – Are you insinuating that fuster is a pisher?
October 11th, 2009 at 2:36 am
@Sully –
Sully, this should answer your questions about Peter’s post.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w06x1MkAtPs
How cruel of them meantime to advertise French restaurants in the middle of fuster’s tale. (Or is that fuster’s tail?)
October 11th, 2009 at 9:41 am
@Peter Shalen –
Fuster, fuster, cojone buster
presents his pics most oft’ to fluster
This time a bronz-ed frog was there
Spouting water into air
From his lip outlin-ed fissure,
Making him not then a pisher.
October 11th, 2009 at 10:32 am
@Howard Portnoy – That’s a curious video, a frog telling the story of “Sleeping Beauty.” To me the symbolism is evident, as Perrault, who wrote the tale, was a Frog; but would this really have occurred to the Frogs who made the video? Il y a de quoi se perdre en conjectures.
Anyway, I’m not sure quite I see the connection between this and La Fontaine’s fable, which I was quoting in my earlier comment, about a frog who wants to be as big as an ox and puffs himself up until he bursts. (I was reminded of the fable by your comment about the danger of giving fuster a swelled head.)
October 11th, 2009 at 10:45 am
@Peter Shalen — Peter, there is no connection whatsoever between the video and La Fontaine’s fable save for the appearance of a frog. It was a ham-handed effort at humor in response to Sully’s comment about not speaking “no furrin languages.” I was saying in essence, “Oh, this will help you understand,” then directing him to video also in French.
I am confident now that taken more words to explain a stupid joke than any joke is worth. Hey, where’s that time machine of yours? This would be a good opportunity for me to take a trip to 9:40 this morning.
October 11th, 2009 at 11:13 am
@Sully –
fuster, b— -buster
grenouille qui casse les couilles
October 11th, 2009 at 11:18 am
@Howard Portnoy – No time machine required. I’m a strange visitor from another planet who is capable of enjoying a joke even when it has to be explained to me. And it gave me a chance to make my gag about Perrault being a Frog, which was at least fun for me.
October 11th, 2009 at 11:23 am
After reading through this thread, I’m forced to conclude that, indeed, America’s time as superpower may be over, and the decline is accelerating. The best lack all conviction and all that.
October 11th, 2009 at 12:10 pm
@CK MacLeod — CK, curious to know what in particular leads you to that conclusion?
October 11th, 2009 at 12:18 pm
@CK MacLeod -
The best defense in decline days,
Retreat to jokes, avoid malaise.
Eat and drink and toke up hearty,
Meet grim reaper aft’ the party.
October 11th, 2009 at 12:40 pm
@Howard Portnoy:
see #35
The Zombie Pope is really on a roll.
October 11th, 2009 at 12:44 pm
Peter intro’d la langue de losers
After fuster took the thread astray
And made me think of joining boozers
Rather than deal with troubles today
Update – “No results found for “la langue de losers”.”
First time ever on the web.
October 11th, 2009 at 12:56 pm
First time ever on the web – well, regardless of whatever the search-meisters encourage you to believe, they don’t really search the entire web. There may be an entire Langue de Losers Club with cups and t-shirts that Google or Bing or whoever just hasn’t gotten to yet.
October 11th, 2009 at 1:09 pm
luc’fers
October 11th, 2009 at 1:11 pm
un clique de les fusteristes.
October 11th, 2009 at 1:12 pm
fuster, I think your joke at #20 was the best on the whole thread. As for your French, it’s about as good as one would expect from a Bronx Science graduate.
If we’re going to return this thread to a serious discussion, we could take Sully’s comment #4 as a starting point. I’m interested in reading people’s reactions to it.
October 11th, 2009 at 1:22 pm
@CK MacLeod –
It is a cruel, cruel thing to do,
To inject reality into the stew
And say that a phrase
thought uniquely put
May be webwide anything but.
October 11th, 2009 at 1:32 pm
Following Grampa Simpson, one could also say “la langue des singes capitulards qui mangent du fromage.”
October 11th, 2009 at 1:43 pm
@Sully – I’ve seen too many priority disputes among mathematicians to get exercised about these things. All our favorite conjectures may have been settled a long time ago in a galaxy far away.
October 11th, 2009 at 1:51 pm
@Peter Shalen -
When you’re right, you’re right.
http://www.cowboysfringants.com/Forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=28617
My french teacher’s abject failure lead to the unique result.
October 11th, 2009 at 2:29 pm
@Peter Shalen – I think that Sully’s #4 is, in a sense, implicit – that is, it’s the beginning point for the larger global negotiation.
In other words, the US still possesses fundamental advantages, including an ability to induce storms from behind higher breakwaters than most or any other countries possess. Some of these advantages – such as a military preponderance in numerous categories – may be wasting assets, however. In addition, our populace is accustomed to higher levels of security, luxury, and freedom, and therefore more vulnerable emotionally and intellectually to smaller setbacks, a problem compounded by aspects of our culture and our political system. The latter has always made it more difficult for us, as for other democratic polities, to execute consistently on the fine details of any master strategy.
We won the Cold War in much the same way that we won World War II – by throwing our massive economic preponderance at strategic problems, and exploiting a tremendous margin for error. We’ve been able to sustain the outlines of a grand strategy, and even elements of it at somewhat lower levels of abstraction (i.e., “containment” as the overarching strategy of the Cold War) even against ourselves, even while seeming to forget or largely misunderstand for long periods what we were actually trying to accomplish.
In short, we’re well-positioned to muddle through, always have been, probably still are – yet this very fact enables us to test the limits of self-destructiveness, like a rich teenager shirking his studies and walking on the wild side, or a sheltered child or desperate housewife indulging in overeating or narcissistic depression – because she can.
If we tried hard enough, we probably could break ourselves, and it sometimes does seem like we’re giving it the old college try, so I think K-hammer is right on that level. To get back to Sully’s point, everyone knows that extreme measures such as the Great Re-Write are possible, but will be extremely costly for many, and entail great uncertainties. That fact, along with the nature of politicians and of people in general to cling to well-established customs and habits, means that we’ll likely exhaust and even over-exhaust the stop-gaps and compromises, until and unless forced to do otherwise, and at the cost of making the eventual reckoning more painful and destructive.
Plus the young probably have to learn for themselves why they don’t really want to do what they’re doing.
October 11th, 2009 at 2:46 pm
@CK MacLeod – Interesting thoughts, CK.
I wouldn’t mind hearing your thoughts about which outdated and wasteful ideas that our generals and politicians won’t abandon.
October 11th, 2009 at 2:55 pm
@fuster – I’m looking for that famous exchange when Bob Dylan was asked what he was protesting against and he replied something along the lines of “What do you got?”
I think you know or may have gleaned that I consider Obamaism to represent reactionary liberalism, a reaction to a crisis of statism with hyper-statism or hypertrophied statism (incipient corporatism) – expansion of the vast super-mechanism of destructive consumption represented by the state and its ancillaries in the law, the media, education, and business.
You’re probably familiar with the Vonnegut short story “Harrison Bergeron.” What if that’s us? And what if the convenient yet terrifying truth is that if we threw off our artificial handicaps, we’d shortly re-discover vast capacities and energies, with no Diana Moon Glampers in a position to shoot us down?
October 11th, 2009 at 3:28 pm
Or was that James Dean?
October 11th, 2009 at 3:35 pm
@CK MacLeod – Third guess oughta get it
http://www.scene-stealers.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/05/xin_420701031044828120167.jpg
October 11th, 2009 at 3:42 pm
There ya go! Marlon Brando > James Dean > Bob Dyan > fuster cluck, a direct line of descent… so to speak.
October 11th, 2009 at 4:11 pm
I believe it was Dean who claimed that Brando had plagiarized his style.
October 11th, 2009 at 4:37 pm
Montgomery Clift probably thought they were all a bunch of phoneys.
October 11th, 2009 at 4:41 pm
@CK MacLeod –
“That fact, along with the nature of politicians and of people in general to cling to well-established customs and habits, means that we’ll likely exhaust and even over-exhaust the stop-gaps and compromises, until and unless forced to do otherwise, and at the cost of making the eventual reckoning more painful and destructive. ”
The problem is that the great default won’t be a calm decision of the sort that’s put off. It will be a forced one like last year’s need for the banking bailout, about which I impudently argued with a very highly qualified economist friend – me saying better to let ‘em crash.
Tomorrow, or next month, or ten years from now the interest coupon rate needed to sell new U.S. bonds will rise fast and the value of the existing bonds will fall fast. The one thing will make it more and more plain that U.S. dept is unsustainable even in the short run and the other thing will put foreign governments under irresistable pressure from their own people as the scale of their losses become plain.
Sometime during that chain of events, which will play out in days, Brenanke or his successor will call the president and a few members of congress and tell them the only choices are a complete meltdown with the dollar going to zero for at least a while, or an “orderly” setting of a new value for the dollar.
October 11th, 2009 at 6:19 pm
I think what makes your scenario more likely is that any effort by anyone with the power to do anything about the situation (accelerate or suspend sales of debt holdings, hold international negotiations in the open or in secret, etc.) will be as likely to precipitate the crisis.
How can the Great Write-Down Re-Write Re-Set Default Jubilee not leave someone awful pissed off? In the short term especially, it will have to tend either to reinforce prior alignments or install new ones. For the winners and losers it could hardly be higher stakes – it would virtually define “the stakes,” possibly for generations.
October 11th, 2009 at 7:08 pm