Grossly OT - he probably doesnt even own a hammer. Francis Fukuyama, an
audio netcast of an interview. Gives the fascinating background history
of the American Neo-Con movement.
Nice to hear someone, of ANY political persuasion, being able to make
an articulate case for their beliefs rather than just spouting generic
abuse. Gives some surprising (and unknown to me) history.

http://www.abc.net.au/rn/talks/lnl/a...042006_28M.asx

If you open with Windows media, you can move the cursor thingy about a
quarter of the way across to get the start of his talk.

Andrew VK3BFA.

Andrew VK3BFA wrote:
Grossly OT - he probably doesnt even own a hammer. Francis Fukuyama, an
audio netcast of an interview. Gives the fascinating background history
of the American Neo-Con movement.
Nice to hear someone, of ANY political persuasion, being able to make
an articulate case for their beliefs rather than just spouting generic
abuse. Gives some surprising (and unknown to me) history.

http://www.abc.net.au/rn/talks/lnl/a...042006_28M.asx

If you open with Windows media, you can move the cursor thingy about a
quarter of the way across to get the start of his talk.

I got his book "The End of History" or whatever it was titled, back when
the wall came down (I was living in Germany at the time)

I didn't think much of it. An early attempt to dress up the ideology in
the ideas of important thinkers (i.e., Hegel). I.e., Hegel thought
Napoleon was the last Man, and history was no longer the stuff of men,
of individuals. Fukuyama has repackaged that idea in the wake of dust
following the fall of the wall.

I don't think anyone else thought much of it, either. 'Cept the neocons.

But, I just found a decent treatment of it at wikipedia:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_End...d_the_Last_Man

So you can think whatever you like.

er
--
email not valid

Enoch Root wrote:

I got his book "The End of History" or whatever it was titled, back when
the wall came down (I was living in Germany at the time)

I didn't think much of it. An early attempt to dress up the ideology in
the ideas of important thinkers (i.e., Hegel). I.e., Hegel thought
Napoleon was the last Man, and history was no longer the stuff of men,
of individuals. Fukuyama has repackaged that idea in the wake of dust
following the fall of the wall.

I don't think anyone else thought much of it, either. 'Cept the neocons.

So you can think whatever you like.

Dunno. I cant argue/debate with you on an intellectual level. Never
read his book - too many big words and no pictures. Never readed Hegel
either - same reason. My current bedside reading is my Tech College
textbook on Fitting and Machining. Much more interesting, and its got
pictures of tools. (You can buy some decent drill bits for the price
of a political book...)

My political prejudices were fully formed by the time I was 18. No need
to listen to or read anything that contradicts them. Might have to
admit that the other person has a valid point of view. All I need is
one or two word primes and I can go into rant mode. Saves time
thinking.

But I do try and think. Its hard. Got out of the habit over the years.
Thats why I posted the link. it will take 15 minutes to hear, rather
than 20 years of reading big dull books. And as a blue collar worker
without any university degrees in "big ideas" I found it most
interesting.

And I dont think whatever I like. Thats stupid. Like a machining
problem I try to find out the facts and then maybe figure out how to do
it with the tools and resources I have on hand.

So, if you have any specific rebuttal of fact in his interview, I would
be most glad if you could tell me. Because I dont know enough about his
ideas to do that. With references. That way, I might learn something.
And you can feel that you have advanced understanding of difficult
concepts as well as reinforcing your own prejudices.

Andrew VK3BFA.

"Enoch Root" wrote in message
...
Andrew VK3BFA wrote:
Grossly OT - he probably doesnt even own a hammer. Francis Fukuyama, an
audio netcast of an interview. Gives the fascinating background history
of the American Neo-Con movement.
Nice to hear someone, of ANY political persuasion, being able to make
an articulate case for their beliefs rather than just spouting generic
abuse. Gives some surprising (and unknown to me) history.

http://www.abc.net.au/rn/talks/lnl/a...042006_28M.asx

If you open with Windows media, you can move the cursor thingy about a
quarter of the way across to get the start of his talk.

I got his book "The End of History" or whatever it was titled, back when
the wall came down (I was living in Germany at the time)

I didn't think much of it. An early attempt to dress up the ideology in
the ideas of important thinkers (i.e., Hegel). I.e., Hegel thought
Napoleon was the last Man, and history was no longer the stuff of men,
of individuals. Fukuyama has repackaged that idea in the wake of dust
following the fall of the wall.

I don't think anyone else thought much of it, either. 'Cept the neocons.


But, I just found a decent treatment of it at wikipedia:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_End...d_the_Last_Man

So you can think whatever you like.


You have to hand one thing to the guy though, at least he is willing to
admit it when he is wrong. That in itself ought to disqualify him from the
republican party. As Bush and his cronies have shown, admitting a mistake is
something a real republican cannot or will not do. Fukuyama is clearly
bright, well educated, and has what it takes to change course and his views
when new evidence shows he was wrong. Too bad that doesn't apply to the Bush
administration.

Hawke