Quick Links
XML/RSS Feed
Sections
The Honor Roll
Back Issues
Posts this Month
| Sun | Mon | Tue | Wed | Thu | Fri | Sat |
Our Sister Site
Statistics
Total entries in this blog:
Total entries in this category:
Published On: Mar 16, 2007 11:12 AM
Total entries in this category:
Published On: Mar 16, 2007 11:12 AM
Sat - February 24, 2007
Extremism in America
Thomas P.M.Barnett, Ph.D., "When did the Daily Kos turn from bully pulpit to just
plain bully,"
Thomas P.M. Barnettt Weblog,
February 21, 2007, 18:13
local
Juliet Eilperin and Michael Grunwald, "The Woman in the Middle: Moderate Democrat Is New Target of Liberal Bloggers, " Washington Post, 21 February 2007, p.A1
Juliet Eilperin and Michael Grunwald, "The Woman in the Middle: Moderate Democrat Is New Target of Liberal Bloggers, " Washington Post, 21 February 2007, p.A1
One of the leading grand strategists of the day -
and a lifelong Democrat - is as disgusted as I am by the kind of character
assassination in US politics used by the extremists of both
parties.
Read Barnett's post and the WaPo article that got it going.
While this particularly skewers the far left, the far right are no less blameless. What is worse, thelunatic fringe vocal extremes of both
parties look determined to hijack their respective primaries in 2008. Why else
would McCain, an avoded centrist, be pandering to the Republican Party's
evangelical/neocon/big-business right, and Barack Obama be doing same with the
Democratic atheist/hyperliberal/anti-business left?
What we need more of is loud voices from the strong center, people who spoke not just for the deepest of blue and the most crimson of red, but the vast, purplish middle, and people to represent us. I'd love to see a race between two opposing viewpoints of how to improve life for the average Janes and Joes, not just the loudmouthed special interests on both sides.
The only thing we have to fear in 2007 is the specter of extremism that haunts both parties, and that threatens to throw us into an election fought by two extremists.
ATTENTION ALL MODERATES: Get out there and register to vote! The strong middle is all that stands between America and more infantile politics that will get nothing done.
And remember - it's not just about nominating someone "electable." It's about nominating someone who will have the chops to actually develop and drive an agenda with the support of a majority of our elected solons on Capitol Hill.
Read Barnett's post and the WaPo article that got it going.
While this particularly skewers the far left, the far right are no less blameless. What is worse, the
What we need more of is loud voices from the strong center, people who spoke not just for the deepest of blue and the most crimson of red, but the vast, purplish middle, and people to represent us. I'd love to see a race between two opposing viewpoints of how to improve life for the average Janes and Joes, not just the loudmouthed special interests on both sides.
The only thing we have to fear in 2007 is the specter of extremism that haunts both parties, and that threatens to throw us into an election fought by two extremists.
ATTENTION ALL MODERATES: Get out there and register to vote! The strong middle is all that stands between America and more infantile politics that will get nothing done.
And remember - it's not just about nominating someone "electable." It's about nominating someone who will have the chops to actually develop and drive an agenda with the support of a majority of our elected solons on Capitol Hill.
Posted at 09:04 PM
Sun - October 8, 2006
News from the BSA: Underneath the Bluster, China feels insecure.
"Perspective: What China thinks about China," by
Robert Holleyman, CNET
News.com, October 5,
2006
Robert Holleyman, president and CEO of the
Business Software Alliance, appears to be trying to give his Global IPR
Stormtroopers a kinder, gentler face by doing a survey about how Chinese people
feel about China. The survey chose to go deep with a group of influential
respondents rather than a wide survey of the nation's sentiment (a wise approach
- YOU try doing a statistically significant sampling of China's heterogeneous
population.)
I give Holleyman an "A" for effort - I know what surveys like this cost (anywhere from $500 to $1,000 per respondent, if done well) and it could not have been easy for Holleyman to talk his members out of that kind of wampum when all they want the BSA to do is work for stronger IPR regulation and vigorous rights enforcement.
But based on what the BSA is telling us, I have to give him a "B-" for insight and a "D" for actionable intelligence.
What did the BSA find?
> Chinese elites feel that the rest of the world misunderstands China. This is only a story to people who do not deal with China regularly, and I think most of us would fess up to being limited in our understanding of the Middle Kingdom - even those of us who live and work here. What would have been a far more interesting issue to probe is the extent to which these elites understand (or misunderstand) the rest of the world.
> China sees India as more of a competitor than the U.S. This needs to be probed - do they feel this way because they see the U.S. and Japan as being so far out ahead - or because they see the U.S. and Japan as declining in their global economic and political power? Or because they have a different perception of competition for inputs and markets?
> Chinese have a "sober appreciation" of the challenges that face them. That's good. The bigger question is "what are they doing about those challenges, and what do they see are the barriers keeping them from addressing them?"
All interesting, none of it earth-shattering, and none of it likely to get the BSA pegged as a thought leader.
Now, I haven't seen the report, only Holleyman's op-ed on CNET. I checked the BSA website, and apparently the report is not public. That's a shame, because I have to believe there is more to all of this than what the BSA has chosen to tell us. But I also suspect the juicy bits are being held back for the members. I also suspect that one of the real motivations for this survey was to have a pretext to engage opinion leaders in China on a topic that was less confrontational than the BSA's normal desk-banging focus on getting China to enforce its IPR laws.
All pretty disappointing. Whatever BSA garnered for its members in this process, it has done little to advance the public debate about China's rise and shed light on issues critical to those of us doing business here.
I give Holleyman an "A" for effort - I know what surveys like this cost (anywhere from $500 to $1,000 per respondent, if done well) and it could not have been easy for Holleyman to talk his members out of that kind of wampum when all they want the BSA to do is work for stronger IPR regulation and vigorous rights enforcement.
But based on what the BSA is telling us, I have to give him a "B-" for insight and a "D" for actionable intelligence.
What did the BSA find?
> Chinese elites feel that the rest of the world misunderstands China. This is only a story to people who do not deal with China regularly, and I think most of us would fess up to being limited in our understanding of the Middle Kingdom - even those of us who live and work here. What would have been a far more interesting issue to probe is the extent to which these elites understand (or misunderstand) the rest of the world.
> China sees India as more of a competitor than the U.S. This needs to be probed - do they feel this way because they see the U.S. and Japan as being so far out ahead - or because they see the U.S. and Japan as declining in their global economic and political power? Or because they have a different perception of competition for inputs and markets?
> Chinese have a "sober appreciation" of the challenges that face them. That's good. The bigger question is "what are they doing about those challenges, and what do they see are the barriers keeping them from addressing them?"
All interesting, none of it earth-shattering, and none of it likely to get the BSA pegged as a thought leader.
Now, I haven't seen the report, only Holleyman's op-ed on CNET. I checked the BSA website, and apparently the report is not public. That's a shame, because I have to believe there is more to all of this than what the BSA has chosen to tell us. But I also suspect the juicy bits are being held back for the members. I also suspect that one of the real motivations for this survey was to have a pretext to engage opinion leaders in China on a topic that was less confrontational than the BSA's normal desk-banging focus on getting China to enforce its IPR laws.
All pretty disappointing. Whatever BSA garnered for its members in this process, it has done little to advance the public debate about China's rise and shed light on issues critical to those of us doing business here.
Posted at 01:33 PM
Mon - August 14, 2006
An Economist and a Gentleman
"China Names Economist as Central Bank Adviser,"
by Rick Carew. The Wall
Street Journal, Beijing, August
14, 2006
I had the rare and humbling honor of sharing a
podium with Professor Fan Gang, head of the National Economic Research
Institute, at a Singapore confab for Strategic Intelligence about six years ago.
He is every bit (and more) the worldly and sophisticated an economist as Steve
Green at Standard Chartered gives him credit for being, but he is also extremely
engaging, easy to talk to, and as comfortable in a salon full of western
businessmen as he is in a hall filled with party cadres.
It is this combination of intellect and social ambidexterity that makes him such a positive addition to the monetary policy committee at the People's Bank of China. I can only hope this is a stepping stone to a more official position.
If nothing else, China could use his talents to mange the fairly hawkish rhetoric coming out of U.S. Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson's office. After Snow had backed down a bit, Paulson's debut in office has been marked by increase demands to adjust the yuan. I think Fan Gang is the kind of economist that can help PBOC and Treasury build a clearer mutual understanding based on the economics rather than the rhetoric, both because he fundamentally agrees with some adjustment, but also because he can clearly and intelligently articulate (in terms U.S. economists would get) why it can't go any faster.
It is this combination of intellect and social ambidexterity that makes him such a positive addition to the monetary policy committee at the People's Bank of China. I can only hope this is a stepping stone to a more official position.
If nothing else, China could use his talents to mange the fairly hawkish rhetoric coming out of U.S. Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson's office. After Snow had backed down a bit, Paulson's debut in office has been marked by increase demands to adjust the yuan. I think Fan Gang is the kind of economist that can help PBOC and Treasury build a clearer mutual understanding based on the economics rather than the rhetoric, both because he fundamentally agrees with some adjustment, but also because he can clearly and intelligently articulate (in terms U.S. economists would get) why it can't go any faster.
Posted at 02:47 PM
Sun - May 7, 2006
"Oh, Gee, are you guys MAD?"
Beijing
My takeaway from the outrage coming out of the
Holy See around China's appointment of two new
bishops is simple: welcome to the table,
gentlemen.
A common Chinese negotiating tactic when complex discussions reach an intense stage is some form of demonstration of how little they need you (whether that's true or not). China clearly intends this as an attempt to demonstrate to the Vatican who has the power in this arrangement.
The reflexive reaction on the part of many western negotiators would be anger. "Bad faith," we would call this, a demonstration that the other side isn't really serious.
In reality, it's something quite different, possibly an effort to hide a weak position. The challenge for the Vatican - and anyone in this position - is to step back, re-assess what the move is saying about the Chinese negotiating position, and then to consider your alternatives.
Which I hope they do - all indicators suggest that not only has progress been made, but that both parties have already planned what some of the next steps are.
A common Chinese negotiating tactic when complex discussions reach an intense stage is some form of demonstration of how little they need you (whether that's true or not). China clearly intends this as an attempt to demonstrate to the Vatican who has the power in this arrangement.
The reflexive reaction on the part of many western negotiators would be anger. "Bad faith," we would call this, a demonstration that the other side isn't really serious.
In reality, it's something quite different, possibly an effort to hide a weak position. The challenge for the Vatican - and anyone in this position - is to step back, re-assess what the move is saying about the Chinese negotiating position, and then to consider your alternatives.
Which I hope they do - all indicators suggest that not only has progress been made, but that both parties have already planned what some of the next steps are.
Posted at 12:55 AM