VDH On the Entirety of Everything
VDH – The Future with Europe The Swiss newspaper Junge Freiheit interviews VDH
There are way too many tidbits in this, and tons of snide and catty comments I could intersperse among them. But then this post would be ridiculously long and everything would get lost. So read the whole thing. But I had to include this as a taste:
No, I don’t think Europeans are “unrealistic.” They are instead canny in fabricating a utopian veneer and a sophisticated humanistic rhetoric to mask everything from cut-throat trade policies to a complete abrogation of international military responsibilities.
Americans, in contrast, are the naive ones. They spend billions trying to jump start democracy in Afghanistan and Iraq, while being blamed as “imperialists.” They keep the peace on the high seas, whether in the Persian Gulf, the Aegean, or the Korea Sea, and run up enormous deficit in the international free commerce that ensues. And they open their markets to almost anyone, and run on enormous massive debts that encourage a China or India to enter the international system of commerce and trade.
February 28th, 2008 at 5:33 pm
“Forthright” is the word that comes to mind. I can imagine the Swiss reporter recoiling … then he recovers somewhat and gets in a EuroSnidely question .. then VDH hits that out of the park. Very entertaining interview.
February 28th, 2008 at 6:36 pm
Yeah. I’m assuming it’s one of these submitted-questions-to-be-answered-by-email things because there’s no sign of a did-he-just-SAY-that reaction in any of the subsequent questions.
VDH is annoying to blog on though because he always writes like that. Forthright, to the point, pithy. Most writers have an extended introduction that can be skipped, unless it’s funny in which case it can’t, then they state their thesis, then they list some examples which can be skipped unless they’re interesting or funny in which case they can’t, then they ramble on some more which can usually be skipped, unless it’s funny in which case it can’t, then they tend to be quite accommodating and restate the entirety of their piece in the final paragraph or two with a resounding and eminently quotable closer. Whereas VDH states the general sort of arch-topic and then in short pithy paragraphs goes from sub-topic to sub-topic and ends with the rhetorical equivalent of “so that’s why” which leaves one either quoting the whole damned thing or none at all.