Thursday, April 14, 2005

Shorter David Brooks

Loudly, With a Big StickBadges?  We don't need no stinkin' badges!
Badges? We don't need no stinkin' badges!
Now, what Brooks - and to some extent Daniel Drezner - seem to be forgetting in this little peek behind the curtain is that the constitution clearly states that a treaty which is ratified and signed by the pres has the rule of law. And while treaties cannot violate our own constitution, even our own government will undo laws and take corrective action at the consent of global organizations such as the World Trade Organization.

Now, I really can't believe that Brooks doesn't know this basic fact of constitutional law, so maybe he means something else.

If you read Drezner, he explains the Bolton Talking Pointstm by pointing out the UN can't really do jack without the United States.

To which I say "duh" and ask "is the concept of veto on the UN security council so very hard to understand?"

And I guess it kind of is, seeing as how most wing nuts simply cannot comprehend the linkage between what the UN actually does and what we - the United States - permit. The UN is certainly not our lap dog, but we clearly put a fence around it, limiting its actions significantly and in accordance to our foreign policy goals.

Part of the answer - I guess - as to why conservatives feel compelled to write about what should be obvious statements in an attempt to explain Bolton - who clearly was not trying to make a subtle point - has to do with the "social conservative" wing of the Republican party.

Now it's just a theory, but the whole One World Governmenttm paranoia is pretty strong in the particular brand of evangelical Christians the right seems to pander to. For example, you can just read the Left Behind series for a characterization of the UN which isn't that far off from how even supposedly mainstream republicans characterize the organization. Clearly just two of the rabid ideological conspiracy theories within the party as a whole that are clearly compatible and provide each other with positive feedback.

In any event, if you take the crazy LGF, wing nut, and Birchers out of the equation, you're left with the defense of Bolton either being a trivial point of constitutional law and observation of international politics or another one of David Brook's wild Tiffin phantasms.

Clearly - if we survive the coming decades as a species - our nation will grow ever more intertwined with other nations. If nothing else, the forces of globalization of trade (which Drezner seems to know a thing or two about) will ensure this. Already we have seen the United States leave the court of the WTO, hat in hand, and change laws in response to rulings in that World Governing Bodytm - pretty much the exact thing that Brooks says the United States would never do.

devil-in-a-blue-dress.jpgWhich I must say that I find pretty hilarious, considering the rabid right wing Christians and other UN hating cohorts.

World government isn't going to come from the UN. It's going to come from the WTO.



Blogger oldwhitelady said...

I think it's just plain funny that they had to hold off on the Bolton voting. HA HA!

7:55 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home