Bookle +
书呆子
2011 年12月 21日
 分享 | «上国际 |  电子邮件  打印 |
金正日如何成为在现代史上最成功的独裁者
到迈克尔Hirsh2011年12月19日，11:19 AM ET 1
朝鲜的政权已经在 1984年奥威尔所谓社会最接近，文字无法受孕非正统的思想在这1997年的照片中，金正日看起来在一个仪式，以纪念三周年之际，他的父亲和朝鲜的开国领袖金日成/美联社去世，在一个巨大的人群
金正日是一个现实生活中的邪恶博士，被重视，但几乎无一例外地笑的意图。
趾 高气扬和pouf的头发，一个优良的葡萄酒和雪茄以及（根据朝鲜的有史以来的发明媒体）一个辉煌的发明者谁打出低于标准杆38他第一次打高尔夫球的自我描 述的鉴赏家，金会已被彻底的滑稽了之一已经能够得到过去的事实，他带来了数以百万计的人死亡和无尽的苦难。 他危及世界各地的许多与他的核炸弹和其他武器的鲁莽追求。 金，69岁，是由朝鲜媒体上周日宣布其死亡，也可能是最后一个真正的，一个地球上的极权专政，很可能下继续他的儿子金正云现在什么大师，他明显的继任者。
即使作为民主似乎在其他地方重新蓬勃发展，离奇，死亡和蔑视的不朽王朝，金氏家族已经65岁的监督很可能只是轻微受金正日逝世。
我 首次相信朝鲜政权的权力的奇特的停留在11年前，当我看到金正日近距离。 日期是2000年10月22日。 像什么，他作为朝鲜的“亲爱的领袖”，遇到了一个巨大的惊喜。 A组我们记者的陪同国务卿马德琳奥尔布赖特秘书长在她的历史性访问朝鲜。 由于太阳平壤，金正日深居简出的国家资本，我们迎来了一个巨大的圆形体育场。 我们已被告知，我们看到一个“体操秀”。体育场是沉默，因为我们走了进来，仿佛是空的。 但是，当我们环顾四周，我们看到，每个座位是充满与朝鲜官员后来说，超过10万人。 在球场上，摆在我们面前摆着，成千上万的表演者身着鲜艳的服装和携带红旗。 他们都只是站在那里，一动不动，unspeaking，像一个巨大的西洋镜件。
然后，突然，走奥尔布赖特和金正日，毛泽东适合“亲爱的领 袖”这21亿人的共产主义国家。 金正日是一个看起来很奇怪的家伙，胖墩墩的，而不是比身材矮小的秘书高，他的头发bouffed获得另两英寸。 但是，你不知道它的反应：瞬间全场观众站起来，狂风暴雨般的掌声和呐喊，每一个黑色适合朝鲜向金正日craning爆发，每个试图外拍手其他。 为一体，在球场上表演飙升着，欢呼跳跃在他面前上下。
如果由一个主开关轻弹，就像突然，欢呼停止，灯光变暗。 金大中和奥尔布赖特坐下彼此相邻。 随之而来的是一次真棒，有点吓人，远远优于任何在超级碗半场表演。 显示出精确的同步程度，会作出任何百老汇编舞羡慕，杂技演员从55年的历史光荣的“革命”（其中，说实话，是苏联金正日安装一个小时的主题演出舞者约10 万金正日的父亲金日成，在1945年）。 数以千计的腿和手臂移动在近乎完美的齐声;数百个身材娇小，胭脂颊不超过7或8岁女童多个handsprings调整，如数字“领导没有将永远与我们同 在”和“我的在党的阳光下的国家。“杂技下滑沿绳索数百英尺以上的表演，或跨越半个球场上网的长度一跃。 几乎没有任何人错过了一步。
在大球场的另一边，广大革命的伟大时刻的图像闪过，摆在我们面前的转移。 只用了几分钟，我们才意识到，这个体育场的部分官员后来说是另50,000人，每一个在他手中的彩色标语牌的书。 通过转动紧阵列从一个导体提示标语牌，这众多的投被拉断惊人的逼真L'眼睛的功勋。 在革命面临“困难的汹涌的大海”，他们创造了巨大的海浪和闪电。 他们描绘的拖拉机犁地休耕地球，击败1997年的饥荒，的全球地图“54场合”，金日成访问他昔日的共产主义的朋友（现在都不见了）国外。 主题，这是可笑的形象，这是辉煌的。
该节目已打算后，奥尔布赖特，美国最高级官员到平壤之旅留下深刻的印象，共产主义是活得很好，如果只在这寂寞的亚洲前哨。 它有点成功。 “只有一个极权国家可以把这个，”我低声对我的同伴之一，试图使glibness我缺乏理解。
我 想的那一幕在随后的几年中，往往因为我听到美国官员预测，朝鲜很快就会去其他共产主义和极权主义的独裁统治的方式。 我想它当朝鲜国家媒体，虔诚的最终，上周日再次宣布金正日已经死亡的一列火车上的心脏疾病，12月17日因“伟大的精神和身体压力”，在“高强度的实地考 察。“
西， 有点逗乐的5尺3寸金的努力，以获得其注意力，不停地等着他被推翻。 他是一个令人震惊的，不道德的人，私下沉迷在昂贵的白兰地和雪茄，而他的人饿死;曾经被绑架的韩国电影名人，这样他可以开始了自己的电影业。 在 一个秘密的会议上，布什与共和党参议员在2002年 - 我当时的“新闻周刊”的同事，霍华德Fineman报告 - 美国总统叫金可恶的“俾格米”谁喜欢表现“被宠坏的孩子在餐桌。” （后这些言论报道，朝鲜官员经常抱怨华盛顿的韩国学者塞利格哈里森，经常访问平壤：“我们怎样才能对付你，当你的领导者不会显示我们连起码的尊重吗？”） 保布什的经常犯错误的国防部副部长沃尔福威茨在2004年宣布，朝鲜“经济崩溃的边缘摇摇欲坠”，并建议冻结援助会带来政治上的崩溃。
但 有一个还没有发生的原因 - 为什么它不可能很快发生，即使是现在。 也许，还有就是，没有在世界上，如朝鲜的概括性的极权主义。 类似的东西已经不存在的，因为斯大林去世（和他非常喜欢周围的金氏个人崇拜）。 我花了时间在其他警察国家，但即使在一些最恶性其中，如地下水流通过的餐馆，酒吧，和私人会议室的后面房间跑异议的暗流。 即使在萨达姆侯赛因，伊拉克出租车司机一眼周围按下时，吐出的独裁者的仇恨。 在缅甸持不同政见者，在最坏的打击力度，将耳语效忠民主派领导人昂山素季。 在越南，胡志明市的居民会提高他们的眉毛，在北中央规划者和Snort。 在中国，毛泽东逝世后，重新评估自己的政策，并最终允许共产党的某些元素“毛泽东思想，”像上世纪50年代灾难性的大跃进或上世纪60年代的文化大革命， 没有取得成功。
但在朝鲜，不久后斯大林主义已成为一个在其他史书泛黄章 - 尽管在顶部的权力斗争的间歇性报告 - 很少有证据，广大市民的异议存在，即使到了今天。 踺的影响似乎已经达到了中国，可能还有俄罗斯。 但也有报告没有任何民主运动在朝鲜。 目前似乎很少有人愿意的问题是否金氏家族王朝可能归咎于经济下滑，北与韩国的平价，最近在上世纪60年代，营养不良的世界上最高的之一和成千上万人因饥饿 死亡。
这种心态归结到一个单纯的压制或自我审查的恐惧，这是过于简单化。 是的，根据国务院的人权报告和为数不多的叛逃者，使朝鲜，也有错误的思维在偏远地区的劳改营。 但就整体而言，似乎很少有独立思考的方式，向检查员。 平壤的外国居民，当问及我们的行程，如果在2000年他所见过的任何异议的证据 - 甚至超过与朝鲜联营公司的饮料 - 回应：“不要。 没什么。“朝鲜的政权最接近任何奥威尔所谓的社会已经到来，在1984年，常无法想象一个非正统的思想。 如果一个预留的事实，朝鲜是一个经济的天坑，爱好自由的敌人后，它的拥挤，从各个方面，它甚至可能被称为极权主义在现代历史上最成功的。
美国人的自然反应，一直在说，这必须会发生变化。 但是，这是低估了奇特的逗留朝鲜的极权主义的权力。 有一个原因的金氏政权的生存，而它周围，苏联集团解体和中国开辟和改革。 朝鲜政权的思想，所谓的主体 ，往往是简单地定义为韩国的自力更生和在西方的嘲笑。 但朝鲜精英， 主体仍 然是一个有力醉人的韩国传统排外主义和民族主义，儒家尊重权威，和马克思列宁主义的乌托邦的BREW 。 党体现所有这些理想 - 民族主义，孝敬，乌托邦。 利用这样的理念和经验的汇合，金日成和金正日创建“防渗和专制的国家，许多人相比，邪教，写道：”韩国长期观察员，唐Oberdorfer在他1997年 出版的“两韩”。
因此它不分解，其他政权后不久，尽管西方的政策，包括从严厉的制裁措施，以援助偶尔冻结的大杂烩。 布什开始与对抗，并最终推出争议与朝鲜的外交，是由他的最强硬的支持者，其中包括副总统切尼否认。 但是，太失败了移动平壤放弃其核计划。 国务卿希拉里克林顿还设置了与朝鲜的“战略耐心”政策，拒绝向平壤提供任何新的激励措施，以促使它返回核裁军会谈。
这一政策似乎有略多于过 去的成功。 事情增长只有更加紧张，包括朝鲜和韩国之间的公开敌对行动，在2010年。 近几个月来，美国已蹒跚朝外交，大多暗中。 金正日去世前，平壤和华盛顿，据说日（星期四）在北京举行会议，讨论长期停牌的“六方”北韩的核武器计划的会谈可能恢复。
但遗憾的是，这些努力都不可能只要取得任何进展，作为朝鲜政权仍然存在，其性质不变。
金正日是一个现实生活中的邪恶博士，被重视，但几乎无一例外地笑的意图。
趾 高气扬和pouf的头发，一个优良的葡萄酒和雪茄以及（根据朝鲜的有史以来的发明媒体）一个辉煌的发明者谁打出低于标准杆38他第一次打高尔夫球的自我描 述的鉴赏家，金会已被彻底的滑稽了之一已经能够得到过去的事实，他带来了数以百万计的人死亡和无尽的苦难。 他危及世界各地的许多与他的核炸弹和其他武器的鲁莽追求。 金，69岁，是由朝鲜媒体上周日宣布其死亡，也可能是最后一个真正的，一个地球上的极权专政，很可能下继续他的儿子金正云现在什么大师，他明显的继任者。
即使作为民主似乎在其他地方重新蓬勃发展，离奇，死亡和蔑视的不朽王朝，金氏家族已经65岁的监督很可能只是轻微受金正日逝世。
我 首次相信朝鲜政权的权力的奇特的停留在11年前，当我看到金正日近距离。 日期是2000年10月22日。 像什么，他作为朝鲜的“亲爱的领袖”，遇到了一个巨大的惊喜。 A组我们记者的陪同国务卿马德琳奥尔布赖特秘书长在她的历史性访问朝鲜。 由于太阳平壤，金正日深居简出的国家资本，我们迎来了一个巨大的圆形体育场。 我们已被告知，我们看到一个“体操秀”。体育场是沉默，因为我们走了进来，仿佛是空的。 但是，当我们环顾四周，我们看到，每个座位是充满与朝鲜官员后来说，超过10万人。 在球场上，摆在我们面前摆着，成千上万的表演者身着鲜艳的服装和携带红旗。 他们都只是站在那里，一动不动，unspeaking，像一个巨大的西洋镜件。
然后，突然，走奥尔布赖特和金正日，毛泽东适合“亲爱的领 袖”这21亿人的共产主义国家。 金正日是一个看起来很奇怪的家伙，胖墩墩的，而不是比身材矮小的秘书高，他的头发bouffed获得另两英寸。 但是，你不知道它的反应：瞬间全场观众站起来，狂风暴雨般的掌声和呐喊，每一个黑色适合朝鲜向金正日craning爆发，每个试图外拍手其他。 为一体，在球场上表演飙升着，欢呼跳跃在他面前上下。
如果由一个主开关轻弹，就像突然，欢呼停止，灯光变暗。 金大中和奥尔布赖特坐下彼此相邻。 随之而来的是一次真棒，有点吓人，远远优于任何在超级碗半场表演。 显示出精确的同步程度，会作出任何百老汇编舞羡慕，杂技演员从55年的历史光荣的“革命”（其中，说实话，是苏联金正日安装一个小时的主题演出舞者约10 万金正日的父亲金日成，在1945年）。 数以千计的腿和手臂移动在近乎完美的齐声;数百个身材娇小，胭脂颊不超过7或8岁女童多个handsprings调整，如数字“领导没有将永远与我们同 在”和“我的在党的阳光下的国家。“杂技下滑沿绳索数百英尺以上的表演，或跨越半个球场上网的长度一跃。 几乎没有任何人错过了一步。
在大球场的另一边，广大革命的伟大时刻的图像闪过，摆在我们面前的转移。 只用了几分钟，我们才意识到，这个体育场的部分官员后来说是另50,000人，每一个在他手中的彩色标语牌的书。 通过转动紧阵列从一个导体提示标语牌，这众多的投被拉断惊人的逼真L'眼睛的功勋。 在革命面临“困难的汹涌的大海”，他们创造了巨大的海浪和闪电。 他们描绘的拖拉机犁地休耕地球，击败1997年的饥荒，的全球地图“54场合”，金日成访问他昔日的共产主义的朋友（现在都不见了）国外。 主题，这是可笑的形象，这是辉煌的。
该节目已打算后，奥尔布赖特，美国最高级官员到平壤之旅留下深刻的印象，共产主义是活得很好，如果只在这寂寞的亚洲前哨。 它有点成功。 “只有一个极权国家可以把这个，”我低声对我的同伴之一，试图使glibness我缺乏理解。
我 想的那一幕在随后的几年中，往往因为我听到美国官员预测，朝鲜很快就会去其他共产主义和极权主义的独裁统治的方式。 我想它当朝鲜国家媒体，虔诚的最终，上周日再次宣布金正日已经死亡的一列火车上的心脏疾病，12月17日因“伟大的精神和身体压力”，在“高强度的实地考 察。“
西， 有点逗乐的5尺3寸金的努力，以获得其注意力，不停地等着他被推翻。 他是一个令人震惊的，不道德的人，私下沉迷在昂贵的白兰地和雪茄，而他的人饿死;曾经被绑架的韩国电影名人，这样他可以开始了自己的电影业。 在 一个秘密的会议上，布什与共和党参议员在2002年 - 我当时的“新闻周刊”的同事，霍华德Fineman报告 - 美国总统叫金可恶的“俾格米”谁喜欢表现“被宠坏的孩子在餐桌。” （后这些言论报道，朝鲜官员经常抱怨华盛顿的韩国学者塞利格哈里森，经常访问平壤：“我们怎样才能对付你，当你的领导者不会显示我们连起码的尊重吗？”） 保布什的经常犯错误的国防部副部长沃尔福威茨在2004年宣布，朝鲜“经济崩溃的边缘摇摇欲坠”，并建议冻结援助会带来政治上的崩溃。
但 有一个还没有发生的原因 - 为什么它不可能很快发生，即使是现在。 也许，还有就是，没有在世界上，如朝鲜的概括性的极权主义。 类似的东西已经不存在的，因为斯大林去世（和他非常喜欢周围的金氏个人崇拜）。 我花了时间在其他警察国家，但即使在一些最恶性其中，如地下水流通过的餐馆，酒吧，和私人会议室的后面房间跑异议的暗流。 即使在萨达姆侯赛因，伊拉克出租车司机一眼周围按下时，吐出的独裁者的仇恨。 在缅甸持不同政见者，在最坏的打击力度，将耳语效忠民主派领导人昂山素季。 在越南，胡志明市的居民会提高他们的眉毛，在北中央规划者和Snort。 在中国，毛泽东逝世后，重新评估自己的政策，并最终允许共产党的某些元素“毛泽东思想，”像上世纪50年代灾难性的大跃进或上世纪60年代的文化大革命， 没有取得成功。
但在朝鲜，不久后斯大林主义已成为一个在其他史书泛黄章 - 尽管在顶部的权力斗争的间歇性报告 - 很少有证据，广大市民的异议存在，即使到了今天。 踺的影响似乎已经达到了中国，可能还有俄罗斯。 但也有报告没有任何民主运动在朝鲜。 目前似乎很少有人愿意的问题是否金氏家族王朝可能归咎于经济下滑，北与韩国的平价，最近在上世纪60年代，营养不良的世界上最高的之一和成千上万人因饥饿 死亡。
这种心态归结到一个单纯的压制或自我审查的恐惧，这是过于简单化。 是的，根据国务院的人权报告和为数不多的叛逃者，使朝鲜，也有错误的思维在偏远地区的劳改营。 但就整体而言，似乎很少有独立思考的方式，向检查员。 平壤的外国居民，当问及我们的行程，如果在2000年他所见过的任何异议的证据 - 甚至超过与朝鲜联营公司的饮料 - 回应：“不要。 没什么。“朝鲜的政权最接近任何奥威尔所谓的社会已经到来，在1984年，常无法想象一个非正统的思想。 如果一个预留的事实，朝鲜是一个经济的天坑，爱好自由的敌人后，它的拥挤，从各个方面，它甚至可能被称为极权主义在现代历史上最成功的。
美国人的自然反应，一直在说，这必须会发生变化。 但是，这是低估了奇特的逗留朝鲜的极权主义的权力。 有一个原因的金氏政权的生存，而它周围，苏联集团解体和中国开辟和改革。 朝鲜政权的思想，所谓的主体 ，往往是简单地定义为韩国的自力更生和在西方的嘲笑。 但朝鲜精英， 主体仍 然是一个有力醉人的韩国传统排外主义和民族主义，儒家尊重权威，和马克思列宁主义的乌托邦的BREW 。 党体现所有这些理想 - 民族主义，孝敬，乌托邦。 利用这样的理念和经验的汇合，金日成和金正日创建“防渗和专制的国家，许多人相比，邪教，写道：”韩国长期观察员，唐Oberdorfer在他1997年 出版的“两韩”。
因此它不分解，其他政权后不久，尽管西方的政策，包括从严厉的制裁措施，以援助偶尔冻结的大杂烩。 布什开始与对抗，并最终推出争议与朝鲜的外交，是由他的最强硬的支持者，其中包括副总统切尼否认。 但是，太失败了移动平壤放弃其核计划。 国务卿希拉里克林顿还设置了与朝鲜的“战略耐心”政策，拒绝向平壤提供任何新的激励措施，以促使它返回核裁军会谈。
这一政策似乎有略多于过 去的成功。 事情增长只有更加紧张，包括朝鲜和韩国之间的公开敌对行动，在2010年。 近几个月来，美国已蹒跚朝外交，大多暗中。 金正日去世前，平壤和华盛顿，据说日（星期四）在北京举行会议，讨论长期停牌的“六方”北韩的核武器计划的会谈可能恢复。
但遗憾的是，这些努力都不可能只要取得任何进展，作为朝鲜政权仍然存在，其性质不变。
在大西洋
在密尔沃基的艰难岁月
赞助商链接
在网络上的其他地方
特别报告
 Shutterstock | 年度的前10名健康的故事 B计划，自闭症和疫苗，手机和癌症，并在我们的2011年年度回顾。 更多> |
刚刚在
1324476000
詹姆斯法洛斯
来自朝鲜多个表达式的悲痛...
东部上午08:10
梅根麦卡德尔
当涉及到对穷人的税，供应...
2011年12月16日，
大Nehisi科茨
希钦斯和战争
东部上午9:00
杰弗里戈德堡
做什么用的最猛烈的移民？
2011年12月18日，
亚历克西斯马德里加尔
为绿色无完善内疚的设备 ...
上午10:23 ET
史蒂夫克莱蒙斯
佩里在开放的偏执
2011年12月11日，
德里克汤普森
金里奇的税收计划是一种耻辱，它不是... ...
2011年12月15日，
克莱夫克鲁克
退休轮盘
2011年12月15日，
查看所有记者
| 号Yoni阿贝尔鲍姆作家和历史学家 | 雷蒙德邦纳调查记者，外国记者 | Thanassis Cambanis记者和作家 | 安德鲁科恩法律分析师 |
| 条例草案“达维企业家，互联网观察员 | 米奇爱德华兹前国会议员 | 加勒特艾普法学教授和记者 | 理查德佛罗里达创意专家 |
| 约书亚Foust外交事务分析家和作家 | 霍华德W ·法国国际新闻分析员 | 亚历克斯Gibney纪录片制片人 | DB格雷迪老兵，小说家，散文家 |
| 沙迪哈米德中东分析师 | 本W.海涅曼小政策专家 | 史蒂文海勒设计的作家和教育家 | 杰夫豪问及新媒体专家 |
| 温迪卡米内的律师，民间自由主义 | 达米安麻中国分析师 | 丽莎Margonelli能源与环境的作家 | 彼得奥斯诺斯记者，出版商 |
| 阿莉莎罗森伯格作家，编辑，流行文化的怪胎 | Cristine罗素科学和健康的作家 | 埃伦Ruppel壳牌科学记者 | 大卫申克科学与文化作家 |
| 安妮-玛丽屠宰的外交政策专家学者， | 埃里克Tarloff小说家，编剧 | 爱德华Tenner文化和高科技的历史学家 | 国际事务分析师多米尼克蒂尔尼 |
| 在外交政策上的布赖恩，直到作家 | 凯瑟琳肯尼迪汤森政治家，作家，活动家 | 福特VOX医生和记者 | 巷华莱士飞行员，企业家，作家 |
| 詹姆斯沃伦政治分析师 | 亚当韦巴赫可持续发展专家 | 格雷姆木 |
立即订阅
节省59％！ 10个问题，每本售价2.45美元
最受欢迎
- 1
- 朝鲜内部
- 2
- 如果金正日的继任者还没有准备好 ？
- 3
- 一个封装了埃及的镇压恐怖的照片
- 4
- 爱荷华州生活20年的观测
- 5
- 希钦斯和战争
- 6
- 我是金正日的厨师
- 7
- 雄蜂伦理简介：领先的机器人专家告诉中央情报局
- 8
- 火山活动年
- 9
- 2011年：在照片的年份，3第 1部
- 10
- 所有的单女士
版权所有© 2011年由大西洋月刊“集团。 保留所有权利。
Edgecast网络供电的货。
Edgecast网络供电的货。
并非适用于所有在中国茶
的含义
不是不惜任何代价。原产
这句话周围19th/early 20世纪后期起源的事实是，中国是众所周知的，以产生大量的茶的产物。 这仍是如此，中国现在占大约一个季度全球最大的茶叶生产。 所以，拒绝提供做“为所有的中国茶”的东西，是决定不这样做，提供的诱因。牛津英语词典声明短语澳大利亚的起源和重印1890年埃里克鹧鸪短语日期，但遗憾的是没有提供任何支持证据或者断言。 最近，我可以来验证的日期，以及澳大利亚的起源，是JJ曼的旅行回合在一辆汽车，1914年的世界：
澳 大利亚是不是一个好客的国家的人，有没有一个白皮肤，一个白皮肤，清晰地记录。 没有灰蒙蒙的，黄褐色，或黄种人，通过该国法律允许土地... ...当让在我们的印度同胞的科目，建立教育标准，如果不吉利印度不会发生知道所有的问题就来了欧洲语言，他是在他检查地板，必须留在外面。 之一是允许携带一个黑色的仆人，而当我向有关当局申请许可，带我Samand，得到的答复是：“为所有在中国的茶不”
本站由WordPress的和WordPress的主题创建Artisteer 同步刊物 。Jeremi苏瑞
Mack布朗全球领导力特聘教授，历史，和公共政策/ /
在得克萨斯大学奥斯汀分校自由的最可靠的卫报“：美国的国家建设从创办到奥巴马（自由出版社/西蒙与舒斯特，2011年秋季）
美国人是一个国家建设的人，并在自由的最可靠的卫 士，Jeremi苏瑞看起来美国历史上看到它提供失败的国家，在世界各地，并应避免，又是什么样。 被冷帝国主义，美国人认真尝试失败国家的出口在世界各地的代议政制的发明。 我们曾经的成功（美国南北战争后重建，菲律宾，西欧）和失败（越南），和我们可以借鉴双方一个很好的协议。 建国是在美国的DNA。 它可以追溯到革命的日子时的开国元勋发明了主权在民的思想，你不能有一个国家的政府没有一个集体意志的概念。 宪法的制定者发起了一个谨慎的国家建设的政策，希望不是为了征服其他国家，但是，建立一个稳定的，自治的社会，将支持美国的生活方式的世界。 然而，没有任何其他国家干预遥远的国度，追求不切实际的变化，为自己和他人更多的问题。
在本书的网页> >。
自1898年以来的美国外交关系：一部纪录片阅读器（2010年Wiley - Blackwell的）
万方数据Jeremi苏瑞。 部分书系列“揭露了过去：在美国历史文献的读者”
本卷汇集了50多个文件，这不仅在领导和国家的外交政策研究，而是通过社会运动，文化，思想和图片，还提供全面的了解美国人如何与更广阔的世界互动自1898年以来。
Wiley - Blackwell的网站上阅读更多> >。
。
。
亨利基辛格和美国世纪（哈佛大学出版社，2007年）
是什么让亨利基辛格的外交官，他？ 哪些经验和影响塑造了他的世界观，并为他的做法对国际关系的框架？ Jeremi苏瑞提供了一个令人深思的解释性研究，二十世纪最有影响力和争议的政治人物之一。
哈佛大学出版社网站阅读更多>
下载从书中摘录
评论和评论这本书：
英国泰晤士报文学副刊
密尔沃基杂志星书评
华盛顿邮报“书评
美国威斯康星大学
forward.com
蒙特利尔公报书评
芝加哥论坛报“书评。
1968年全球革命“（WW Norton出版社，2007年）
万方数据Jeremi苏瑞。 诺顿在历史上一系列的个案资料。
1968年的革命代表了20世纪60年代世界各地的抗议运动的高潮。 本个案记录簿探讨抗议的共同来源和机制的动荡成为一个全球性现象。 它还包括深入讨论如何反应不同国家的抗议。
诺顿网站阅读更多>>。
。
。
电源和抗议（哈佛大学出版社，2003）
Jeremi苏瑞将成为一个真正的国际视野的20世纪60年代的动荡，在第一项研究中，研究大国的外交和全球社会抗议之间的连接。 他介绍了政策和伯克利骚乱抗议“布拉格之春之间的连接，从巴黎的罢工在武汉，中国大规模动乱。 几乎在每一个社会的不信任和幻灭的增长留下了全球动荡，条块分割，和前所未有的公众对权威的怀疑持久的遗产。
哈佛大学出版社网站阅读更多>
这本书的评价和评论：哈佛向上收集审查概要推荐图书自由的最可靠的卫报“：美国的国家建设从创办到奥巴马（自由出版社/西蒙与舒斯特，2011年秋季）
美国人是一个国家建设的人，并在自由的最可靠的卫士，Jeremi苏瑞看起来美国历史上看到它提供失败的国家，在世界各地，并应避免，又是什么样。
在更多的图书网站 >关于Jeremi苏瑞
Jeremi苏瑞Mack布朗在得克萨斯大学奥斯汀分校的全球领导地位，历史和公共政策的特聘教授。 他是当代政治和外交政策的五本书的作者。 2011年9月，他将公布对过去和未来国家建设的新著：自由的最可靠的守护者：从创办到奥巴马的美国国家建设。 教授苏瑞的研究和教学都获得了无数奖项。 史密森杂志在2007年他成为美国的“最年轻的创新者”，在艺术和科学。 他的著作广泛出现在博客和印刷媒体。 教授苏瑞也是频繁的公共讲师，电台和电视节目的嘉宾。
分类
... ...我SiDevilIam@topcogitoergosum.com
| Share | «Previous International | Email Print |
How Kim Jong-Il Became the Most Successful Dictator in Modern History
By Michael HirshNorth Korea's regime has come the closest of any society to what Orwell called, in 1984, the literal inability to conceive an unorthodox thoughtIn this 1997 photo, Kim Jong Il looks out at a huge crowd during a ceremony to mark the third anniversary of the death of his father and North Korea's founding leader Kim Il Sung / AP
Kim Jong-Il was a real-life Dr. Evil, intent on being taken seriously and yet almost unfailingly laughed at.
Strutting and pouf-haired, a self-described connoisseur of fine wine and cigars as well as (according to North Korea's ever-inventive media) a brilliant inventor who shot 38 under par his first time playing golf, Kim would have been outright comical had one been able to get past the fact that he brought death and untold misery to millions of people. And that he endangered many more around the world with his reckless pursuit of a nuclear bomb and other weapons. Kim, whose death at age 69 was announced by North Korean media on Sunday, was also the master of what may be the last truly totalitarian dictatorship on earth, one that is likely to continue now under his son Kim Jong-Un, his apparent successor.
MORE ON KIM JONG-IL'S DEATH
Max Fisher: What If His Son Isn't Ready?
B.R. Myers: After Kim Jong-Il
In Focus: Inside North Korea
Kenji Fujimoto: I Was Kim Jong-Il's Cook
Even as democracy seems to flourish anew elsewhere, the bizarre, undying dynasty of death and defiance that the Kim family has overseen for 65 years is likely to be affected only marginally by the passing of Kim Jong Il.
I first became convinced of the peculiar staying power of the North Korean regime 11 years ago, when I got to see Kim Jong-Il up close. The date was October 22, 2000. Like much of what he did as North Korea's "Dear Leader," the encounter came as a big surprise. A group of us reporters were accompanying then-Secretary of State Madeleine Albright on her historic visit to North Korea. As the sun set over Pyongyang, the capital of Kim's reclusive country, we were ushered into a giant circular stadium. We had been told we were about to see a "gymnastics show." The stadium was silent as we walked in, as if empty. But when we looked around, we saw that every seat was filled with what North Korean officials later said were more than 100,000 people. On the field, arrayed before us, were tens of thousands of performers dressed in brightly colored outfits and carrying red flags. They all just stood there, unmoving and unspeaking, like set pieces in a vast diorama.
Then, suddenly, in walked Albright and Kim Jong-Il, the Mao-suited "Dear Leader" of this communist nation of 21 million people. Kim was an odd-looking fellow, pudgy and not much taller than the diminutive secretary, with his hair bouffed up to gain another inch or two. But you wouldn't know it from the reaction: Instantly the entire audience stood and erupted into torrential applause and shouts, every black-suited Korean craning toward Kim, each trying to out-clap the other. As one, the performers on the field surged forward, cheering and jumping up and down in front of him.
Just as suddenly, as if by the flick of a master switch, the cheering stopped and the lights dimmed. Kim and Albright sat down next to each other. What followed was at once awesome, somewhat terrifying, and by far superior to any halftime show at the Super Bowl. Demonstrating a degree of precise synchronization that would have made any Broadway choreographer envious, some 100,000 acrobats and dancers performed for an hour themes from the 55-year history of their glorious "revolution" (which, in truth, was the Soviet installation of Kim Jong-Il's father, Kim Il-Sung, in 1945). Thousands of legs and arms moved in near-perfect unison; hundreds of petite, rouge-cheeked girls no more than 7 or 8 years old did multiple handsprings to the tune of such numbers as "The Leader Will Always Be With Us" and "My Country Under the Sunshine of the Party." Acrobats slid along ropes hundreds of feet above the performers, or were catapulted across half the length of the stadium onto nets. Barely anyone missed a step.
At the far side of stadium, vast images of the great moments of the revolution flashed and shifted before us. It took only several minutes before we realized that this portion of the stadium consisted of what officials later said was another 50,000 people, each with a book of colored placards in his hands. By turning the placards in tight array on cue from a conductor, this multitudinous cast pulled off amazing trompe l'oeil feats. They created giant ocean waves and flashes of lightning in the "raging sea of difficulty" faced by the revolution. They depicted tractors plowing up fallow earth to defeat the 1997 famine, and a global map of the "54 occasions" that Kim Il-Sung had to visit his erstwhile communist friends (all gone now) abroad. Thematically, it was ridiculous; pictorially, it was brilliant.
The show had been intended to impress upon Albright, the most senior American official ever to journey to Pyongyang, that communism was alive and well, if only in this lonely Asian outpost. It succeeded somewhat. "Only a totalitarian state could bring this off," I whispered to one of my companions, trying to make up in glibness what I lacked in comprehension.
I thought of that scene often in subsequent years as I heard U.S. officials predict that North Korea would soon go the way of other communist and totalitarian dictatorships. And I thought of it again on Sunday when the North Korean state media, reverent to the end, announced that Kim had died of a heart ailment on a train on Dec. 17 due to a "great mental and physical strain" during a "high intensity field inspection."
MORE FROM NATIONAL JOURNAL:
U.S. Unclear on Israel's Intentions for Iran
WikiLeaks' Collateral Damage
Blackwater Wants to Go Back to Iraq
The West, somewhat amused by the efforts of the 5-foot-3 Kim to get its attention, kept waiting for him to be toppled. He was an appalling, immoral man who privately indulged in expensive cognac and cigars while his people starved; who once kidnapped South Korean movie celebrities so he could start his own film industry. In a secret meeting that George W. Bush had with Republican senators in 2002 -- reported by my then-Newsweek colleague, Howard Fineman -- the U.S. president called Kim a hateful "pygmy" who behaved like "a spoiled child at a dinner table." (After those remarks were reported, North Korean officials regularly complained to Washington-based Korea scholar Selig Harrison, who visited Pyongyang often: "How can we deal with you when your leader doesn't show us even a minimum of respect?") Paul Wolfowitz, Bush's often-errant deputy Defense Secretary, declared in 2004 that North Korea was "teetering on the edge of economic collapse" and suggested a freeze in aid would bring political collapse as well.
But there is a reason that hasn't happened -- and why it's not likely to happen soon, even now. There is, perhaps, no totalitarianism in the world that is as all-embracing as North Korea's. Something like it hasn't existed since Stalin died (and with him a personality cult very much like that which surrounds the Kims). I have spent time in other police states, but even in some of the most vicious of them, an undercurrent of dissent ran like a subterranean stream through the back rooms of restaurants, bars, and private meeting rooms. Even under Saddam Hussein, Iraqi cab drivers would glance around when pressed and spit out their hatred of the dictator. Dissidents in Myanmar, during the worst of the crackdown, would whisper their fealty to democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi. In Vietnam, Saigon residents would raise their eyebrows and snort at the central planners in the North. In China, after Mao's death, there was a reappraisal of his policies, and the Communist Party ultimately allowed that some elements of "Mao Zedong Thought," like the disastrous Great Leap Forward of the '50s or the Cultural Revolution of the '60s, had not been successful.
But in North Korea, long after Stalinism has become a yellowing chapter in the history books elsewhere -- and despite intermittent reports of a power struggle at the top -- there is little evidence that dissent among the public exists at all, even today. The effects of the Arab Spring seem to have reached China, and possibly Russia. But there are no reports of any democracy movement in North Korea. Very few people yet seem willing to question whether the Kim family dynasty might be to blame for an economic slide that took the North from parity with South Korea, as recently as the 1960s, to one of the highest rates of malnutrition in the world and the death of hundreds of thousands of people from starvation.
It is too simplistic to attribute this mindset to a mere fear of repression or self-censorship. Yes, according to State Department human-rights reports and the few defectors to make it out of North Korea, there are gulags in remote areas for the wrong-thinking. But on the whole, there seems little in the way of independent thought to censor. One foreign resident of Pyongyang, when asked on our trip in 2000 if he had ever seen any evidence of dissent -- even over drinks with North Korean associates -- responded: "Never. Nothing." North Korea's regime has come the closest of any society to what Orwell called, in 1984, the literal inability to conceive an unorthodox thought. If one sets aside the fact that North Korea is an economic sinkhole, and that its freedom-loving enemies are crowding in upon it from every side, it may even be called the most successful totalitarianism in modern history.
The natural response of Americans has been to say that this must and will change. But that is to underestimate the peculiar staying power of North Korean totalitarianism. There is a reason why the regime of the Kims survives while, all around it, the Soviet bloc disintegrated and the Chinese opened up and reformed. The North Korean regime's ideology, called juche, is often simplistically defined as Korean self-reliance and ridiculed in the West. But to the North Korean elites, juche is still a powerfully intoxicating brew of traditional Korean xenophobia and nationalism, Confucian respect for authority, and utopian Marxism-Leninism. The party embodies all of these ideals -- nationalism, filial respect, utopia. Exploiting this confluence of philosophies and experiences, Kim Il Sung and Kim Jong Il created "an impermeable and absolutist state that many have compared to a religious cult," wrote longtime Korea observer, Don Oberdorfer in his 1997 book, "The Two Koreas."
Hence it hasn't broken down, long after other regimes have, despite a smorgasbord of Western policies ranging from tough sanctions to occasional freezes in aid. George W. Bush started off with confrontation and ended up launching controversial diplomacy with North Korea that was disowned by his most hawkish supporters, including Vice President Dick Cheney. But that too failed to move Pyongyang to give up its nuclear program. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has also set a policy of "strategic patience" with North Korea, refusing to offer any new incentives to Pyongyang in order to induce it to return to nuclear-disarmament talks.
That policy seemed to have had little more success than past ones. Things grew only more tense, including open hostilities between North and South Korea in 2010. In recent months, the U.S. has lurched back toward diplomacy, mostly secretly. Before Kim's death, Pyongyang and Washington were reportedly set to hold meetings in Beijing on Thursday to discuss a possible resumption of the long-suspended "six-party" talks on the North's nuclear weapons program.
But, sadly, these efforts are unlikely to make any headway as long as the North Korean regime remains in place, its character unchanged.
Kim Jong-Il was a real-life Dr. Evil, intent on being taken seriously and yet almost unfailingly laughed at.
Strutting and pouf-haired, a self-described connoisseur of fine wine and cigars as well as (according to North Korea's ever-inventive media) a brilliant inventor who shot 38 under par his first time playing golf, Kim would have been outright comical had one been able to get past the fact that he brought death and untold misery to millions of people. And that he endangered many more around the world with his reckless pursuit of a nuclear bomb and other weapons. Kim, whose death at age 69 was announced by North Korean media on Sunday, was also the master of what may be the last truly totalitarian dictatorship on earth, one that is likely to continue now under his son Kim Jong-Un, his apparent successor.
MORE ON KIM JONG-IL'S DEATH
Max Fisher: What If His Son Isn't Ready?
B.R. Myers: After Kim Jong-Il
In Focus: Inside North Korea
Kenji Fujimoto: I Was Kim Jong-Il's Cook
I first became convinced of the peculiar staying power of the North Korean regime 11 years ago, when I got to see Kim Jong-Il up close. The date was October 22, 2000. Like much of what he did as North Korea's "Dear Leader," the encounter came as a big surprise. A group of us reporters were accompanying then-Secretary of State Madeleine Albright on her historic visit to North Korea. As the sun set over Pyongyang, the capital of Kim's reclusive country, we were ushered into a giant circular stadium. We had been told we were about to see a "gymnastics show." The stadium was silent as we walked in, as if empty. But when we looked around, we saw that every seat was filled with what North Korean officials later said were more than 100,000 people. On the field, arrayed before us, were tens of thousands of performers dressed in brightly colored outfits and carrying red flags. They all just stood there, unmoving and unspeaking, like set pieces in a vast diorama.
Then, suddenly, in walked Albright and Kim Jong-Il, the Mao-suited "Dear Leader" of this communist nation of 21 million people. Kim was an odd-looking fellow, pudgy and not much taller than the diminutive secretary, with his hair bouffed up to gain another inch or two. But you wouldn't know it from the reaction: Instantly the entire audience stood and erupted into torrential applause and shouts, every black-suited Korean craning toward Kim, each trying to out-clap the other. As one, the performers on the field surged forward, cheering and jumping up and down in front of him.
Just as suddenly, as if by the flick of a master switch, the cheering stopped and the lights dimmed. Kim and Albright sat down next to each other. What followed was at once awesome, somewhat terrifying, and by far superior to any halftime show at the Super Bowl. Demonstrating a degree of precise synchronization that would have made any Broadway choreographer envious, some 100,000 acrobats and dancers performed for an hour themes from the 55-year history of their glorious "revolution" (which, in truth, was the Soviet installation of Kim Jong-Il's father, Kim Il-Sung, in 1945). Thousands of legs and arms moved in near-perfect unison; hundreds of petite, rouge-cheeked girls no more than 7 or 8 years old did multiple handsprings to the tune of such numbers as "The Leader Will Always Be With Us" and "My Country Under the Sunshine of the Party." Acrobats slid along ropes hundreds of feet above the performers, or were catapulted across half the length of the stadium onto nets. Barely anyone missed a step.
At the far side of stadium, vast images of the great moments of the revolution flashed and shifted before us. It took only several minutes before we realized that this portion of the stadium consisted of what officials later said was another 50,000 people, each with a book of colored placards in his hands. By turning the placards in tight array on cue from a conductor, this multitudinous cast pulled off amazing trompe l'oeil feats. They created giant ocean waves and flashes of lightning in the "raging sea of difficulty" faced by the revolution. They depicted tractors plowing up fallow earth to defeat the 1997 famine, and a global map of the "54 occasions" that Kim Il-Sung had to visit his erstwhile communist friends (all gone now) abroad. Thematically, it was ridiculous; pictorially, it was brilliant.
The show had been intended to impress upon Albright, the most senior American official ever to journey to Pyongyang, that communism was alive and well, if only in this lonely Asian outpost. It succeeded somewhat. "Only a totalitarian state could bring this off," I whispered to one of my companions, trying to make up in glibness what I lacked in comprehension.
I thought of that scene often in subsequent years as I heard U.S. officials predict that North Korea would soon go the way of other communist and totalitarian dictatorships. And I thought of it again on Sunday when the North Korean state media, reverent to the end, announced that Kim had died of a heart ailment on a train on Dec. 17 due to a "great mental and physical strain" during a "high intensity field inspection."
U.S. Unclear on Israel's Intentions for Iran
WikiLeaks' Collateral Damage
Blackwater Wants to Go Back to Iraq
But there is a reason that hasn't happened -- and why it's not likely to happen soon, even now. There is, perhaps, no totalitarianism in the world that is as all-embracing as North Korea's. Something like it hasn't existed since Stalin died (and with him a personality cult very much like that which surrounds the Kims). I have spent time in other police states, but even in some of the most vicious of them, an undercurrent of dissent ran like a subterranean stream through the back rooms of restaurants, bars, and private meeting rooms. Even under Saddam Hussein, Iraqi cab drivers would glance around when pressed and spit out their hatred of the dictator. Dissidents in Myanmar, during the worst of the crackdown, would whisper their fealty to democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi. In Vietnam, Saigon residents would raise their eyebrows and snort at the central planners in the North. In China, after Mao's death, there was a reappraisal of his policies, and the Communist Party ultimately allowed that some elements of "Mao Zedong Thought," like the disastrous Great Leap Forward of the '50s or the Cultural Revolution of the '60s, had not been successful.
But in North Korea, long after Stalinism has become a yellowing chapter in the history books elsewhere -- and despite intermittent reports of a power struggle at the top -- there is little evidence that dissent among the public exists at all, even today. The effects of the Arab Spring seem to have reached China, and possibly Russia. But there are no reports of any democracy movement in North Korea. Very few people yet seem willing to question whether the Kim family dynasty might be to blame for an economic slide that took the North from parity with South Korea, as recently as the 1960s, to one of the highest rates of malnutrition in the world and the death of hundreds of thousands of people from starvation.
It is too simplistic to attribute this mindset to a mere fear of repression or self-censorship. Yes, according to State Department human-rights reports and the few defectors to make it out of North Korea, there are gulags in remote areas for the wrong-thinking. But on the whole, there seems little in the way of independent thought to censor. One foreign resident of Pyongyang, when asked on our trip in 2000 if he had ever seen any evidence of dissent -- even over drinks with North Korean associates -- responded: "Never. Nothing." North Korea's regime has come the closest of any society to what Orwell called, in 1984, the literal inability to conceive an unorthodox thought. If one sets aside the fact that North Korea is an economic sinkhole, and that its freedom-loving enemies are crowding in upon it from every side, it may even be called the most successful totalitarianism in modern history.
The natural response of Americans has been to say that this must and will change. But that is to underestimate the peculiar staying power of North Korean totalitarianism. There is a reason why the regime of the Kims survives while, all around it, the Soviet bloc disintegrated and the Chinese opened up and reformed. The North Korean regime's ideology, called juche, is often simplistically defined as Korean self-reliance and ridiculed in the West. But to the North Korean elites, juche is still a powerfully intoxicating brew of traditional Korean xenophobia and nationalism, Confucian respect for authority, and utopian Marxism-Leninism. The party embodies all of these ideals -- nationalism, filial respect, utopia. Exploiting this confluence of philosophies and experiences, Kim Il Sung and Kim Jong Il created "an impermeable and absolutist state that many have compared to a religious cult," wrote longtime Korea observer, Don Oberdorfer in his 1997 book, "The Two Koreas."
Hence it hasn't broken down, long after other regimes have, despite a smorgasbord of Western policies ranging from tough sanctions to occasional freezes in aid. George W. Bush started off with confrontation and ended up launching controversial diplomacy with North Korea that was disowned by his most hawkish supporters, including Vice President Dick Cheney. But that too failed to move Pyongyang to give up its nuclear program. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has also set a policy of "strategic patience" with North Korea, refusing to offer any new incentives to Pyongyang in order to induce it to return to nuclear-disarmament talks.
That policy seemed to have had little more success than past ones. Things grew only more tense, including open hostilities between North and South Korea in 2010. In recent months, the U.S. has lurched back toward diplomacy, mostly secretly. Before Kim's death, Pyongyang and Washington were reportedly set to hold meetings in Beijing on Thursday to discuss a possible resumption of the long-suspended "six-party" talks on the North's nuclear weapons program.
But, sadly, these efforts are unlikely to make any headway as long as the North Korean regime remains in place, its character unchanged.
More at The Atlantic
Sponsored Links
Elsewhere on the Web
Join the Discussion
After you comment, click Post. If you’re not already logged in you will be asked to log in or register.
Notifications
- You have no messages
You've received a new rank!
Add New Comment
Logout
 | SiDevilIam ( edit profile ) |
| 1 comment 0 likes received |
Showing 1 comment
Real-time updating is enabled. (Pause)
0 new comment was just posted. Show
SiDevilIam
2 minutes agoMy dear Michael Hirsh,I am Sid Harth.
Jeremi Suri
Mack Brown Distinguished Professor for Global Leadership, History, and Public Policy at the University of Texas at Austin
What is next in North Korea?
18 December 2011
The death of North Korea’s dictator, Kim Jong Il, opens a new era in East Asia. He was the absolute ruler of North Korea, appointed by the charismatic founder of the totalitarian society who most citizens viewed as a God. For all the questions about his leadership, Kim Jong Il could always rely on the fact that his father, also the father of the country, said he should rule. He had inherited legitimacy.If history is any guide, we know that legitimacy is not easily inherited for a third generation, more distant from the charisma of the founding moment. We also know that a large proportion of the North Korean people have lived near starvation for more than a decade. Their capacity to embrace a new savior in Kim’s very young, inexperienced, and largely unknown son, Kim Jong Eun, is questionable.North Korea seems ripe for a period of turmoil in leadership and society at large. South Korea, Japan, and China should expect more refugee movements, and perhaps some uncoordinated and provocative North Korean military maneuvers. Military leaders in Pyongyang will want to show strength as they jockey for power after Kim.What should the United States and its allies do? How should we react? There are limitations to external leverage in North Korea, but there is also space for important foreign influence during this time of transition:1. Show Military Strength without Provocation: South Korea, Japan, and the United States must do everything they can to discourage military adventurism by a faction in North Korea during the period of uncertainty. This means keeping forces on alert and at full strength to repulse any offensive or probing action. This also means remaining clearly in a defensive posture, with a firm statement that we do not seek a military clash. There will be unrest, and perhaps significant violence, in North Korea. It must remain contained in North Korea.2. Engage China: Beijing is Pyongyang’s only friend, and even that relationship has frayed in recent years. The United States must work closely to assess Chinese aims, anticipate Chinese moves, and persuade China to act in ways that do not simply reinforce a dictatorship on the old model. Washington and Beijing must begin an intense dialogue about what stable change in North Korea should look like, and the two capitals must work toward that end. Support for reforms in North Korea that approximate the economic and political openings of China in the 1980s, under Deng Xiaoping, are a good place to start. The South Koreans would embrace that vision as well.3. Speak to the North Koreans: North Korea is a closed society, but this period of transition will create some new openings. The United States and its allies must prepare to take advantage of opportunities for direct communications with people on the ground. Radio, video, and even air-dropped leaflets should convey a simple message: “We want peace with North Korea and we want to help improve the lives of the people in your country. Work with us.” In the short term, we should encourage openness, not immediate democracy. We should advocate economic assistance, not immediate capitalism.The history of post-authoritarian transitions in other societies warns against excessive expectations. North Korea’s totalitarianism and its foreign aggressiveness will not die quickly with Kim Jong Il. North Korea will enter a period of uncertainty that might last for months and years. The United States and its allies must watch closely, they must try to exert cautious influence, and they must prepare to combine firmness with an open hand.This is the time to offer mutually beneficial partnership. This is the time to embrace change, even as we do not control the outcomes. Instead of simple slogans, American foreign policy requires sophisticated and consistent diplomacy. Let’s hope that we can rise to the occasion. This blog post originally appeared at http://globalbrief.ca
Posted in Blog, Foreign Policy, Geopolitics, Grand Strategy, history | Tags: change, China, death, democracy, Japan#, Kim Jong-il, North Korea, post-authoritarian, Pyongyang, Russia, South Korea, transition, United States | No Comments »
Why the Debt Panel Failed 21 November 2011
Today it became official. This U.S. Congress is incapable of making balanced and judicious policy decisions. The failure of the specially created “supercommittee” of 12 congressional members to reach even a partial compromise on mandatory budget cuts and revenue increases is telling. Republicans and Democrats have simply decided to stop working with one another. They have forfeited all responsibility to govern. They have, therefore, forfeited all claim on the public trust. When my son asked tonight, I could not name a single Congressman or Congresswoman that I admired, trusted, or even supported strongly. Respect needs to be earned, and those in Congress have not earned it over the last year.
We have been here before. Think of the U.S. Congresses in the 1850s, the 1880s, and the 1920s. They did not establish a strong record or a broad mandate for public trust. These U.S. Congresses, like our own today, gave reason for the public to invest its support elsewhere: in the president, in the courts, in business, and in local governments. Our representatives in Washington have forced this same choice upon us. Our big national problems are not going to be solved by the incapable members of Congress; solutions will have to come from elsewhere in our society. The failure of the debt panel makes that point irrefutable.
My bet is not on the business community. My bet is not on “expert” technocrats with fancy degrees. Instead, I have faith in educated citizens who are taking matters into their own hands by starting local organizations, mobilizing people, investing in public philanthropy, and even “occupying” some of their city streets to voice their opinions. These educated citizens are using technology and social networking, intellectual study and media savvy, to shift our politics. I can feel it happening. The debt panel was the tired old politics; the local political dynamism around us is the new movement.
As with all periods of political transition, change is rough and scary. The old regime clings to power as long as it can. The new political framework is hard to see amidst all the contention and controversy. It is nonetheless there. Angry, educated citizens are more motivated to do something than ever before in recent memory. Representatives in Congress are incapable of meeting public demands. All the “special interest” money in the world will not sustain this imbalance. Expect the failure of the debt panel to mark the emerging success of something new in American politics…perhaps a renewed attention to fairness, equality, and merit-based accountability. We might even call this renewed democracy, after a year of self-defeating partisan warfare.
This blog post originally appeared at: http://globalbrief.ca
Featured Book
Liberty's Surest Guardian: American Nation-building from the Founders to Obama (Free Press/Simon & Schuster, Fall 2011)Americans are a nation-building people, and in Liberty’s Surest Guardian, Jeremi Suri looks to America’s history to see both what it has to offer to failed states around the world and what it should avoid.More at the book website >
About Jeremi Suri
Jeremi Suri is the Mack Brown Distinguished Professor for Global Leadership, History, and Public Policy at the University of Texas at Austin. He is the author of five books on contemporary politics and foreign policy. In September 2011 he will publish a new book on the past and future of nation-building: Liberty's Surest Guardian: American Nation-Building from the Founders to Obama. Professor Suri's research and teaching have received numerous prizes. In 2007 Smithsonian Magazine named him one of America's "Top Young Innovators" in the Arts and Sciences. His writings appear widely in blogs and print media. Professor Suri is also a frequent public lecturer and guest on radio and television programs.
Categories
Select CategoryAwards (4)Blog (29)Foreign Policy (46)Geopolitics (54)Grand Strategy (45)history (46)Kissinger (16)Meetings (6)Speaking events (8)Teaching (39)
Links
American Historical Association (AHA)
Cold War International History Project
Foreign Relations of the United States
Global Brief blog
LBJ School of Public Affairs
National Security Archive
Organization of American Historians (OAH)
Robert S. Strauss Center for International Security and Law
Society for Historians of American Foreign Relations (SHAFR)
Univ of Texas Department of History
Wisconsin Academy of Sciences, Arts, and Letters
Michael Hirsh's Archive
Special Report
| Shutterstock | The Top 10 Health Stories of the Year Plan B, autism and vaccines, cell phones and cancer, and more in our 2011 Year in Review. Read more › |
Just In
1324476000
- James Fallows
More Expressions of Grief From the North Korean…
8:10 AM ET - Megan McArdle
When It Comes to Taxes on the Poor, the Supply…
Dec 16, 2011 - Ta-Nehisi Coates
Hitchens And The War
9:00 AM ET - Jeffrey Goldberg
What To Do With the Most Violent Settlers?
Dec 18, 2011 - Alexis Madrigal
The Perfect Guilt-Free Device for the Green…
10:23 AM ET - Steve Clemons
Rick Perry's Out-in-the-Open Bigotry
Dec 11, 2011 - Derek Thompson
The Gingrich Tax Plan Is a Disgrace, and It's Not…
Dec 15, 2011 - Clive Crook
Retirement Roulette
Dec 15, 2011
- James Warren
Farewell to a Singular Soul, Christopher Hitchens
- Andrew Cohen
Think Our Wild Horses Are Safe?
- Wendy Kaminer
'That's Our Job': The Government Investigates Cellphone Wiretapping
View All Correspondents
| Yoni AppelbaumWriter and historian | Raymond BonnerInvestigative Reporter, Foreign Correspondent | Thanassis CambanisJournalist and author | Andrew CohenLegal analyst |
| Bill DavidowEntrepreneur, Internet observer | Mickey EdwardsFormer congressman | Garrett EppsLaw professor and journalist | Richard FloridaCreativity expert |
| Joshua FoustForeign affairs analyst and writer | Howard W. FrenchInternational News Analyst | Alex GibneyDocumentary filmmaker | D.B. GradyVeteran, novelist, essayist |
| Shadi HamidMiddle East Analyst | Ben W. Heineman Jr.Policy expert | Steven HellerDesign writer and educator | Jeff HoweJournalist and new media expert |
| Wendy KaminerLawyer, civil libertarian | Damien MaChina analyst | Lisa MargonelliEnergy & environment writer | Peter OsnosJournalist, publisher |
| Alyssa RosenbergWriter, editor, pop culture geek | Cristine RussellScience and health writer | Ellen Ruppel ShellScience journalist | David ShenkScience & culture writer |
| Anne-Marie SlaughterScholar, foreign policy expert | Erik TarloffNovelist, screenwriter | Edward TennerCulture-and-tech historian | Dominic TierneyInternational affairs analyst |
| Brian TillWriter on foreign policy | Kathleen Kennedy TownsendPolitician, writer, activist | Ford VoxPhysician and journalist | Lane WallacePilot, entrepreneur, writer |
| James WarrenPolitical analyst | Adam WerbachSustainability expert | Graeme Wood |
A Propaganda Tour of Kim Jong-Il's Death
U.S. Is Trying to Exchange Gitmo Prisoners for Peace with Taliban
Iran Shows the Man It Alleges Is a U.S. Spy on State Television
Last Update: 10:00 AM
Security Cameras As Planning Tools
11 New Buildings to Visit in 2012
Nativity Scene Starring Hugo Chavez
Last Update: 9:06 AM
Subscribe Now
SAVE 59%! 10 issues JUST $2.45 PER COPY
Most Popular
- 1
- Inside North Korea
- 2
- What If Kim Jong-Il's Successor Isn't Ready?
- 3
- A Photo That Encapsulates the Horror of Egypt's Crackdown
- 4
- Observations From 20 Years of Iowa Life
- 5
- Hitchens And The War
- 6
- I Was Kim Jong Il's Cook
- 7
- Drone-Ethics Briefing: What a Leading Robot Expert Told the CIA
- 8
- The Year in Volcanic Activity
- 9
- 2011: The Year in Photos, Part 1 of 3
- 10
- All the Single Ladies
Copyright © 2011 by The Atlantic Monthly Group. All Rights Reserved.
CDN powered by Edgecast Networks.
CDN powered by Edgecast Networks.
Not for all the tea in China
Meaning
Not at any price.Origin
This phrase originated around the late 19th/early 20th century and derives from the fact that China was well-known to produce tea in huge quantities. That's still the case and China now accounts for around a quarter of the world's production of tea. So, to decline the offer to do something 'for all the tea in China' is to be determined not to do it, whatever inducement is offered.The Oxford English Dictionary declares the phrase to be of Australian origin and reprints Eric Partridge's 1890s date for the phrase, but unfortunately doesn't provide any supporting evidence for either assertion. The nearest I can come to verifying the date, and to an Australian origin, is J. J. Mann's travelogue Round the world in a motor car, 1914:
AUSTRALIA is not a hospitable country for anybody that has not got a white skin, and a clear record of white skins. By the laws of the country no dusky, tawny, or yellow races are allowed to land... When the question came up of letting in our Indian fellow subjects, an education standard was established, and if the unlucky Indian does not happen to know all the languages of Europe he is floored in his examination, and must stay outside. One is not even allowed to bring in a black servant, and when I applied to the authorities for permission to bring Samand with me, the reply was : "Not for all the tea in China."
Powered by WordPress and WordPress Theme created with Artisteer by Synchronous Publications.Jeremi Suri
Mack Brown Distinguished Professor for Global Leadership, History, and Public Policy//
at the University of Texas at Austin
Liberty’s Surest Guardian: American Nation-Building from the Founders to Obama (Free Press/Simon & Schuster, Fall 2011)
More at the book webpage >>.
American Foreign Relations Since 1898: A Documentary Reader (Wiley-Blackwell, 2010)
This volume brings together more than 50 documents which examine foreign policy not only in terms of leaders and states, but also through social movements, cultures, ideas, and images, to provide comprehensive understanding of how Americans have interacted with the wider world since 1898.
Read more at Wiley-Blackwell website >>.
.
.
Henry Kissinger and the American Century (Harvard Univ Press, 2007)
Read more at Harvard Univ Press website >
Reviews and commentary on this book:
UK Times Literary Supplement
Milwaukee Journal-Star book review
Washington Post book review
University of Wisconsin
forward.com
Montreal Gazette book review
Chicago Tribune book review.
The Global Revolutions of 1968 (W.W. Norton, 2007)
The revolutions of 1968 represent the culmination of 1960s protest movements across the globe. This casebook explores the common sources of protest and the mechanisms by which unrest became a global phenomenon. It also includes in-depth discussion of how different countries reacted to the protests.
Read more at W.W. Norton website >>.
.
.
Power and Protest (Harvard Univ Press, 2003)
Read more at Harvard Univ Press website >
Reviews and commentary on this book: Harvard UP collected review synopsesFeatured BookLiberty's Surest Guardian: American Nation-building from the Founders to Obama (Free Press/Simon & Schuster, Fall 2011)
Americans are a nation-building people, and in Liberty’s Surest Guardian, Jeremi Suri looks to America’s history to see both what it has to offer to failed states around the world and what it should avoid.
More at the book website >About Jeremi SuriCategories
Links
- American Historical Association (AHA)
- Cold War International History Project
- Foreign Relations of the United States
- Global Brief blog
- LBJ School of Public Affairs
- National Security Archive
- Organization of American Historians (OAH)
- Robert S. Strauss Center for International Security and Law
- Society for Historians of American Foreign Relations (SHAFR)
- Univ of Texas Department of History
- Wisconsin Academy of Sciences, Arts, and Letters
...and I am SiDevilIam@topcogitoergosum.com
加入讨论
你对此有何评论后，点击“发表”。 如果你尚未登录，您将被要求登入或注册。通知
很高兴你喜欢它。 你想分享吗？
添加新评论
显示1条评论
Jeremi苏瑞
Mack布朗特聘教授在得克萨斯大学奥斯汀分校的全球领导地位，历史和公共政策
什么是朝鲜的未来？
2011年12月18日
朝 鲜独裁者金正日死亡打开在东亚的新时代。 他是朝鲜的绝对统治者，极权社会大多数公民作为神看的魅力创始人任命。 对于所有关于他的领导的问题，金正日总是可以依靠的事实，他的父亲，也是该国的父亲，说他应该统治。 他继承legitimacy.If历史是任何指导，我们知道这种合法性是不容易继承了第三代，从建国时刻的魅力更遥远的。 我们也知道，大的比例，朝鲜人民生活十余附近饥饿。 自己的能力，在金正日的非常年轻，经验不足，很大程度上是未知的儿子，金正银，拥抱新的救世主questionable.North韩国似乎大期间的领导 和社会的动荡的时机已经成熟。 韩国，日本和中国应该希望有更多的的难民流动，也许还有一些不协调和挑衅朝鲜的军事演习。 在平壤的军事领导人将要显示实力，因为他们的权力赛马后Kim.What美国及其盟国应该做呢？ 我们应该如何反应？ 在朝鲜的外部杠杆的限制，但也有重要的外交影响力，在这个过渡时期的空间：1。 显示没有挑衅的军事实力：韩国，日本，美国必须做的一切他们可以劝阻派在朝鲜的军事冒险主义在不确定的时期。 这意味着保持警觉和力量，全力击退任何攻击或探测行动。 这也意味着其余清楚了坚定的声明，我们不寻求军事冲突，在防御姿态。 将有动荡，也许显著暴力，在朝鲜。 它必须保持在北Korea.2所载。 与中国接触：北京是平壤唯一的朋友，即使这种关系在最近几年的磨损。 美国必须紧密合作，以评估中国的目的，预计中国移动，并说服中国采取行动的方式，不要简单地加强一个专政的旧模式。 华盛顿和北京必须开始在朝鲜的稳定变化应该是什么样子的激烈对话，两国首都必须为此努力。 支持朝鲜的改革，近似中国的经济和政治的开口，在20世纪80年代邓小平领导下，是一个良好的开端。 韩国将作为well.3拥抱这一设想。 发言朝鲜：朝鲜是一个封闭的社会，但这个过渡时期，将创造一些新的开口。 美国及其盟国必须准备采取与地面上的人直接沟通的机会的优势。 收音机，视频，甚至空投传单应该传达一个简单的信息：“我们希望与朝鲜的和平，我们希望能帮助改善贵国人民的生活。 与我们合作。“在短期内，我们应该鼓励的开放性，不能立竿见影的民主。 我们应该提倡的经济援助，而不是立即capitalism.The其他社会对过高的期望警告后独裁过渡的历史。 与金正日朝鲜的极权主义和外国侵略性不会死很快。 朝鲜将进入一段时间的不确定性，可能会持续几个月甚至几年。 美国及其盟国必须密切关注，他们必须设法施加谨慎的影响，他们必须准备与开放hand.This的坚定性相结合，提供互惠互利的合作伙伴关系的时间。 这是拥抱变化的时候，即使我们不控制的结果。 而不是简单的口号，美国外交政策的需要复杂和一致的外交。 让我们希望我们能够挺身而出。 这个博客帖子最初出现在http://globalbrief.ca
张贴在博客，外交政策，地缘政治，大战略，历史|标签：改变死亡，民主，日本，金正日金正日，朝鲜，后威权，平壤，俄罗斯，韩国，过渡，美国，中国， |没有评论»
为什么债务面板失败2011年11月21日
如今，它成为正式。 美国国会不能作出平衡和明智的政策决策。 专门设立的“supercommittee”的12名国会议员未能达到甚至强制性削减预算和收入增加的部分妥协是告诉。 共和党人和民主党人都只是决定停止与另一个工作。 他们已丧失执政的全部责任。 因此，他们没收所有声称对公众的信任。 当我的儿子问今晚，我无法说出一个单一的国会议员或国会议员，我很钦佩，信任，甚至坚决支持。 尊重需要赚的，和那些在国会没有获得它在过去的一年。
我们一直在这里。 想想美国国会在19世纪50年代，19世纪80年代，20世纪20年代。 他们没有建立一个强大的记录，或公众的信任广泛的任务。 这些美国国会，像我们自己的今天，给了到其他地方投资的支持：在总统，在法院的业务，并在地方政府，公众的原因。 我们的代表在华盛顿强加给我们同样的选择。 我们大的国家的问题都不会解决无能的国会成员;解决方案，将有来自其他地方在我们的社会。 债务面板的失败使得这一点是无可辩驳的。
我敢打赌，没有对商界。 我敢打赌，没有花哨程度上的“专家”技术官僚。 相反，我在受过教育的公民的信仰，谁是考虑到自己手中的事项，通过启动地方组织，动员人民，投资于公共慈善事业，甚至“占领”，一些城市街道，以表达他们 的意见。 这些受过教育的公民使用的技术和社交，学术研究和媒体精明，转移我们的政治。 我能感觉到它的发生。 债务面板是累了的旧政治;我们周围的政治活力的地方是新的运动。
与所有的政治过渡期，变化是粗糙的和可怕的。 旧政权，只要能坚持权力。 新的政治框架是很难看到所有的争夺和争论之中。 但却是在那里。 愤怒，受过良好教育的公民是在最近的记忆中的东西比以往任何时候都更有动力。 在国会中的代表是不能满足市民的需求。 所有的“特殊利益”在世界的钱不会维持这种不平衡的现象。 预计债务面板的失败标志着新兴的新的东西在美国政治中的成功... ...也许是重新关注公平，平等，择优的问责制。 我们甚至可以调用这一新的民主国家，后一年弄巧成拙党派战。
这个博客帖子最初出现在： http://globalbrief.ca
推荐图书
（自 由出版社/西蒙与舒斯特，2011年秋季）自由的最可靠的守护者：美国国家的建设从创办到奥巴马美国人是一个国家建设的人，和自由的最可靠的监护 人，Jeremi苏瑞看起来美国历史上，它有两个什么失败的国家，在世界各地，它应该avoid.More图书网站提供>
关于Jeremi苏瑞
Jeremi 苏瑞Mack布朗在得克萨斯大学奥斯汀分校的全球领导地位，历史和公共政策的特聘教授。 他是当代政治和外交政策五本书的作者。 2011年9月，他将公布对过去和未来国家建设的新著：自由的最可靠的守护者：从创办到奥巴马的美国国家建设。 教授苏瑞的研究和教学都获得了无数奖项。 史密森杂志在2007年他成为美国的“最年轻的创新者”，在艺术和科学。 他的著作广泛出现在博客和印刷媒体。 教授苏瑞也是频繁的公共讲师，电台和电视节目的嘉宾。
分类
选择CategoryAwards（4）博客（29）外交政策（46）地缘政治（54）大战略（45）历史（46）基辛格（16）会议（6）演讲活动（8）教学（39）
链接
美国历史协会（AHA）
冷战国际史项目
美国的外交关系
全球简讯博客
约翰逊公共事务学院
国家安全档案
美国历史学家组织（OAH）
罗伯特S ·斯特劳斯国际安全和法律中心
美国外交关系史学会（SHAFR）
大学，得克萨斯大学历史系
威斯康星州科学院，艺术和文学