Thursday, March 02, 2006

The End of Fukuyama?

Christopher Hitchens debunks Francis Fukuyama's recent anti-Neocon tirade, in an amusingly titled piece, The End of Fukuyama, for Slate (via Instapundit):
I have my own criticisms both of my one-time Trotskyist comrades and of my temporary neocon allies, but it can be said of the former that they saw Hitlerism and Stalinism coming—and also saw that the two foes would one day fuse together—and so did what they could to sound the alarm. And it can be said of the latter (which, alas, it can't be said of the former) that they looked at Milosevic and Saddam and the Taliban and realized that they would have to be confronted sooner rather than later. Fukuyama's essay betrays a secret academic wish to be living in "normal" times once more, times that will "restore the authority of foreign policy 'realists' in the tradition of Henry Kissinger." Fat chance, Francis! Kissinger is moribund, and the memory of his failed dictator's club is too fresh to be dignified with the term "tradition." If you can't have a sense of policy, you should at least try to have a sense of history. America at the Crossroads evidently has neither.
Do read the whole thing.

1 comment:

Davebo said...

Did you read the Fukuyama piece?

Or is debunk going to be your word of the day tomorrow?

Seriously, Let's go over Hitch's checklist.

Complain about clichés in a reply that's laden with them.


Offer definitions of phrases not even uttered? (The opening words, "It is no accident, comrades," used to be the dead giveaway of a wooden Stalinist hack)


More griping about choices of words such as "root cause" "magnet" or "and the like." (really pulled that last one out of his ass didn't he?)

I was half expecting to read something along the lines of "Notice Fukuyama's use of the word 'is', as in ' America is evil'"

But when does he get to refuting Fukuyama's "cliche drenched" points?

Does that come next week?