Francis Fukuyama (Original PNAC Signer/Repulican/Neconservative) backs Obama for US presidency

[ballsalicious]

:shrug: ?

http://au.news.yahoo.com/080527/21/170xi.html

http://medias.lemonde.fr/mmpub/edt/ill/2005/03/31/v_7_ill_634015_20051310_fukuyama+x1p1_ori.jpg

ELEANOR HALL: That is a big shift for you, isn't it? To go from a registered Republican voter to an Obama supporter.


FRANCIS FUKUYAMA: Yeah, but I think a number of people are doing that this year because I think the world is different at this juncture and we need a different foreign policy and there is this larger question about in American politics, I do think that we are at the end of a long generational cycle that began with Reagan's election back in 1980 and I think unless you have a degree of competition and alternation in power, certain ideas and habits are going to get too entrenched.

ELEANOR HALL: Barack Obama talks a lot about sort of big change and what sort of revolution do you expect him to deliver in the United States if he does become president?


FRANCIS FUKUYAMA: That is an interesting question because I think that one of our problems in the United States is that the existing polarisation has gotten very debilitating, where you cannot talk about certain issues like raising taxes or starting a program in investing in infrastructure without this being cast in this old ideological debate. So I think that he probably has got a better chance at trying to forge a different kind of rhetoric. Different ways of thinking about that.


ELEANOR HALL: Do you expect to see a real shift in America? In 10 years' time will it be a very different place if Barack Obama is elected?


FRANCIS FUKUYAMA: I think the shift will happen regardless of who is elected. I think that the politics of the country is going to be different. I think in tone and certainly in terms of the international perception of the United States, if you elected someone like Obama, it is really going to be really quite something I think to witness and I think that is why a lot of people would like to see him as president because it symbolises the ability of the United States really in some way to renew itself in a very unexpected way.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francis_Fukuyama

[smiley_glad_hands]

1. We are a big tent, but only if he repents for his prior sins. eom

[anigbrowl]

3. He backed away from PNAC quite a while ago.

He was never a driver of it, they adopted him as the political philosopher du jour and co-opted him to give themselves more (K) street cred.

[ballsalicious]

4. very big tent - if there is anybody who can get an eclectic mix like this going.. its BO

[nadinbrzezinski]

30. He has... he has repudiated his former buddies

I wonder if his book, the End of History, is now seen by him as the piece of fiction it was

(And yes I do own a copy, great for when I need over bombastic quotes)

But he has

[Cha]

2. My thoughts, too, Frances..

I see so much of this kind of thing and from what I've learned over the years I'm not surprised. HopeAndChange, baby, HopeAndChange.

[RevolutionToday]

15. Pass the hope bong!

Bogarting is discouraged in the drum circle :smoke:

[mcctatas]

5. Does it make me a bad person if I say Fuck off Francis...

unless he disembowels himself on live TV without anasthesia, he is partially responsible for way too much pain and suffering to be welcomed with open arms...

[scarletwoman]

10. He already repudiated his earlier assertions and apologized a couple years ago.

Bleeding heart liberal that I am, I'm still willing to grant the possibility of redemption.

sw

[Neshanic]

26. Again, this is why we lose elections. They are like cockroaches.

[arewenotdemo]

42. Not in my eyes, it doesn't. I'm curious, did he come out against the war

that he helped pave the way for?

First one off the sinking ship may be a smart rat, but it's still a fucking rat.

[beachmom]

53. Yes, he was opposed, or at the least, skeptical of the Iraq War:

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/26/books/review/26berman.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1

In 2002, Fukuyama came to the conclusion that invading Iraq was going to be a gamble with unacceptably long odds. Then he watched with dismay as the administration adopted one strange policy after another that was bound to make the odds still longer.

[Neshanic]

6. Wow, are we really lowering the standards to this?

[ballsalicious]

11. I think Hillary is the one lowering her standards... Fukuyama just wants change...

...lots of HRC's 'big tent' just don't want a Black President.

[Neshanic]

12. Nice try.

[dkf]

7. People are finally coming to their senses. Thank goodness.

When Obama can get to someone like Francis Fukuyama that says a lot to me.

[LordJFT]

8. He recently visited my progressive college

Perhaps we rubbed off on him :hippie:

[Catherina]

9. This is something that concerns me

Clinton has more of them backing her but this still doesn't sit well with me.

[Alexander]

13. Fukuyama disassociated himself from PNAC and the neo-cons years ago.

He was also one of dimson's professors, and later said Bush liked to brag about his family wealth and connections and wasn't curious about anything.

[Catherina]

23. I never quite trust those disassociations

but I think people like Fukuyama have a vested interest in keeping the US afloat economically. This isn't much of a time for smart people to quibble because the ship is sinking fast. It makes sense that between Clinton and her fabricated resume, McCain who's a blithering idiot, and Obama who's the smartest one out there, they'll go for Obama. I'm sticking with Obama because Clinton and McCain's backers are dangerous without any smarts.

Thanks for the information.

[ballsalicious]

14. This is an interesting backing... because the idea of change is so powerful...

...that he is willing to back the one who will bring the biggest change regardless of philosophy.

[Catherina]

25. I think he's wanting to back the guy who won't sink his investments

anymore than he'll sink our investments (401K, Social Security). It speaks well of Obama that he's trusted by rich and poor alike.

[anonymous171]

17. Sounds like he has changed more than which party he's endorsing

[Neshanic]

18. "Fukuyama is on the steering committee for the Scooter Libby Legal Defense Trust"

They just are buddies. No problem there.

[anonymous171]

21. You know Libby is just a fall guy right?

[Neshanic]

22. OMG! That makes it so much more palatable. Thanks.

[Alexander]

41. Yeah, we should just hate it when a Republican supports a Democrat.

:sarcasm:

[Neshanic]

44. Or seriously wonder why.

[Alexander]

50. If there was evidence Obama was a neocon, I might wonder. But there isn't...

especially when he's compared to Hillary Clinton and John McCain.

So forgive me if I don't shit a hippo over this like you're doing.

[casus belli]

33. If you were planning on complete disassociation...

I think you're fooling yourself. The trick to being able to stomach a conversation with Republicans is making a real effort to find the common ground. Unless the person is completely irrational, there will always be SOMETHING that you can find that you agree on. It's those grey areas that are vital to change. That common ground is a very powerful place where real understanding has a chance to flourish. The trouble with the polarization of our political climate by 8 years of Bush has been a diminishing of that grey area. I see in Obama a real chance to make a path toward a new discourse in this country. Hillary may be capable of that as well, but Obama has a level of sincerity that is unmatched by any of the other candidates in my opinion.

On that we may have to agree to disagree, I realize. But, I think we can both agree that four more years of a Republican White House will do nothing to forward a progressive agenda in this country and throughout the world.

[Catherina]

28. People can change but I think the backing is more for economics

The last thing anyone smart wants is to watch McCain or Hillary launch the US into another disastrous war. Economically we'd be finished. He may have changed more, we'll never know. I'm sticking with Obama regardless. One look at Hillary and McCain's team is enough to make room for Fukuyama.

[anonymous171]

29. Yep. He's a typical Obamacan.

A republican who understands foreign policy and economic policy. Rare these days, but they are definitely more numerous than they seem.

[Catherina]

32. I know several at work

They're good, hard-working decent people who want a decent life for their children and an end to this national nightmare of polarization that empowers scoundrels at the top. It's been a refreshing change already.

[casus belli]

34. We have that in common...

..maybe we should start there with a new discourse that focuses on commonality instead of variance in our political stances. I'm not saying we should abandon our progressive ideals, but if we spent as much time trying to find the common ground on issues and using that as a base for negotiation as we did discounting an opinion because it comes from someone who calls themself "conservative", then we'd all be a lot better off.

[Catherina]

36. I'm all for it

I'm very excited about the possibilities in front of us for the next 8 years. May they be good to us all :toast:

[casus belli]

37. I think that explains the momentum...

Hope is, after all, contagious. Particularly when you believe the person behind the message.

:)

[Catherina]

39. Yes it is

It feels good after 8 years too!

[anonymous171]

16. Holy shit! Good news!

[Wetzelbill]

19. he's pretty much an academic

He's a true believer in Democracy, he's not a lunatic at all costs like Wolfowitz or a greedy warmonger like Cheney. He's a neocon, but he believes in actual values. He knows what good it would to our reputation in the world if Obama is elected. He understands engagement and diplomacy are necessary. He backed the war and he was a member of PNAC, but Fukuyama believes in Democracy and promoting it, that's his big connection with them. He believe in the Democratic peace and that Democracy and Free-Markets have won out over Communism and that we should cultivate it. In the end, I don't think he believes blindly that Iraq was the right thing to do and that Democracy at the point of a gun is the best approach. Somebody with his belief set is more likely to stand back and see that his values and ideas were perverted by cronyism and corruption in Iraq, by overt warmongers who couldn't properly run a war and by GOP partisan politics.

I wouldn't say he is without sin, but if he has moved into a different realm of thinking and believes that Dems have a better vision nowadays, well, good for him. It shows that he's open-minded at least. It's a big tent, and he's more than welcome, imho.

[Neshanic]

24. The smartest fucking rat on the ship named NeoCon. That's the excuse?

[Wetzelbill]

31. I've been published on neoconservatives

I'm just saying he's different. There are few different types of neoconservatives. The far right ideologues who are rapid true believers and stringent warhawks, the greedmonger warhawks who aren't really neoconservative but more or less rats who will rip off anybody at anytime, the realist/neocon types who fit comfortably in either camp like say Richard Armitage, and the actual true believers like Fukuyama.

I would recommend for any serious student of foreign policy to read Frances Fukuyama's work. He's a legit expert, yeah you could question his judgement, but then again, you could also question the judgement of say Hillary and Joe Biden who both voted for the war. Fukuyama is probably less of a hawk than Hillary, I don't think he's ever suggested creating a NATO like umbrella in the Middle East or obliterating Iran in the manner she has. She's still a Dem though, so I can't see why somebody like Fukuyama wouldn't be welcome. Scoop Jackson, Lyndon Johnson, Truman, FDR, they were all hawks to an extent, but still Dems. I don't think there is any excuse for anything, if he wants to support an internationalist candidate who was opposed to the Iraq War, that's his opinion, and it fits into his belief system because Obama promotes the same ideas of democracy and free markets too. Just in a different way than he has in the past. More diplomacy, for example. I think McCain's approach would be unacceptable to him. Too hawkish. Hillary too, after her Kyl-Lieberman vote and refusal to admit her vote on Iraq was a mistake, plus the obliterate Iran and 3am phone call stuff. He's a neocon who probably views Hillary as too hawkish to support. That's telling. I don't totally buy that she is, but that is telling.

[Neshanic]

35. When he is campaigning for Obama, then I will cut him some slack.

[Wetzelbill]

38. yeah he can bring the huge Francis Fukuyama voting block with him

I doubt he'd make a difference either way. It's just an interesting thng that a signatory of PNAC would be so turned off that he would end up supporting a guy like Obama.

[Gore1FL]

20. 3 words

Yes we can.

[Bear down under]

27. Margaret Throsby interviewed him for the ABC this morning.

Well worth hearing. He's here to give lectures.

http://www.abc.net.au/classic/throsby/

It will stay up on the website for about a fortnight.

[DerekJ]

40. Isn't that the motherfucker who is pretty much the Nietzsche of the NeoCons?!!

:wtf:

No thank you

[Neshanic]

45. Yes that first rat off the ship motherfucker.

[beachmom]

54. In 2002. Anyone who said they were skeptical of the Iraq War in 2002 does have some cred.

[anigbrowl]

59. I'm inclined to trust him a lot more than someone who specialized in one-line arguments.

I've been reading Fukuyama and other foreign policy thinkers for 10 years so I've had plenty of time to think about their actual politics. Somehow I doubt you've ever read any of his output - you just know who he is in general terms and your objections have the tone of emotional reaction rather than rational argument. Perhaps you should try writing a few paragraphs explaining what you find objectionable about Francis Fukuyama, and examining his recent pronouncements (eg post 2001-2) as well as those from the mid to late 90s.

Basically you think He's a 'rat' because he was once signed up to something you object to, so now you have assumed that that reflects his true opinions for all time.

[RainDog]

43. I'd say he's reading the polls, knows the repukes are dead, wants to position himself

...and is trying to remain relevant in some way. Something of an opportunist, tho I do remember that he said the neo-con positions were failures as far military policies. Nevertheless, he's still big on American imperialism, it seems, but favors diplomacy rather than invading nations... so I guess that's what's pulled him out of the Republican all-war-all-the-time camp.

He was wrong about "the end of history" and revised his pronouncements - When he wrote that there was no more "history" b/c liberal democracy had triumphed, I thought he was an idiot at the time - but what do I know... except that he was wrong.

The way I read him now, really, is that he wants to remain relevant and he will not be if he continues to be associated with republicans. he's probably offering to bring something along with him... certainly republican credentials to make it okay for republicans to cross over and vote for Obama like democrats did for Reagan.

I'd bet FF wants some sort of official capacity in the Obama administration. we'll see. If I were Obama, however, I wouldn't take the things FF says as gospel b/c the guy is too enamored with his own grandiose ideas.

The reality is that pols see the amount of money Obama is raising, see Obama is bringing in the new generation to be politically involved - and those new voters are more likely to continue to vote with the same party once they vote. The guy sees the gutter-level approval ratings for Bush, sees the republicans lost three seats in special elections, and recognizes that the U.S. is undergoing an electoral revolution very similar to the one that brought FF to the public eye in the first place via Reagan.

So the REAL good news that I see from this is that it's sort of like animals that respond to an earthquake before humans know its coming. Smart pols will be trying to position themselves to remain relevant now that the Republican party committed suicide by allowing the religious right and the "war idealists" to destroy much of this nation's good reputation it had in the world.

[Zodiak]

48. I think you are right, Raindog

Opportunism and relevancy were the first thoughts I had, as well.

[pnorman]

46. "the existing polarisation has gotten very debilitating, where you cannot talk about certain issues"

That's the part that got my attention.

pnorman

[ballsalicious]

47. ?

[RichardRay]

49. Quiet your jerking knees

Read America at the Crossroads that he wrote over a year ago. He's a smart guy who continously questions his previous decisions and corrects them as he can. Others might do well to follow a similar path.

[Iceburg]

51. Good god who's next -- Cheney?

[beachmom]

52. Ah, another misleading post by someone ignorant of what Fukayama's views are

I guess hating on Obama supersedes learning the entire truth, and wondering why he would endorse Obama.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/26/books/review/26berman.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

'America at the Crossroads,' by Francis Fukuyama
Neo No More

Review by PAUL BERMAN
Published: March 26, 2006

In February 2004, Francis Fukuyama attended a neoconservative think-tank dinner in Washington and listened aghast as the featured speaker, the columnist Charles Krauthammer, attributed "a virtually unqualified success" to America's efforts in Iraq, and the audience enthusiastically applauded. Fukuyama was aghast partly for the obvious reason, but partly for another reason, too, which, as he explains in the opening pages of his new book, "America at the Crossroads," was entirely personal. In years gone by, Fukuyama would have felt cozily at home among those applauding neoconservatives. He and Krauthammer used to share many a political instinct. It was Krauthammer who wrote the ecstatic topmost blurb ("bold, lucid, scandalously brilliant") for the back jacket of Fukuyama's masterpiece from 1992, "The End of History and the Last Man."

But that was then.

Today Fukuyama has decided to resign from the neoconservative movement ...

His resignation seems to me, in any case, a fairly notable event, as these things go, and that is because, among the neoconservative intellectuals, Fukuyama has surely been the most imaginative, the most playful in his thinking and the most ambitious. Then again, something about his departure may express a larger mood among the political intellectuals just now, not only on the right. For in the zones of liberalism and the left, as well, any number of people have likewise stood up in these post-9/11 times to accuse their oldest comrades of letting down the cause, and doors have slammed, and The Nation magazine has renamed itself The Weekly Purge. Nowadays, if you are any kind of political thinker at all, and you haven't issued a sweeping denunciation of your dearest friends, or haven't been hanged by them from a lamppost — why, the spirit of the age has somehow passed you by.

The criticisms he does propose are pretty scathing. In 2002, Fukuyama came to the conclusion that invading Iraq was going to be a gamble with unacceptably long odds. Then he watched with dismay as the administration adopted one strange policy after another that was bound to make the odds still longer. The White House decided to ignore any useful lessons the Clinton administration might have learned in Bosnia and Kosovo, on the grounds that whatever Bill Clinton did — for example, conduct a successful intervention — George W. Bush wanted to do the opposite.

Read the whole article, which shows that Fukuyama is a very complex man -- I still disagree with him on certain things, but he is no longer a neocon, and as you see above, was never excited about the invasion of Iraq.

[Inuca]

56. Interesting, I did not know. Thanks n/t

[samsingh]

55. i don't know what to make of this

[Marie26]

57. Great

More neoliberals/neocon supporters. Obama's not a populist; his economic & foreign policy have more in common w/Thomas Friedman's globalization/free trade vision. IMO the only real difference between neocons & neoliberals is the willingness to use war rather than economic pressure to achieve the same ends.

[panhead1961]

58. Sounds like a Monty Python Skit - Sorry,Sorry now for something completely different

[panhead1961]

60. Trying to add a picture

C:\Documents and Settings\warrj892\My Documents\My Pictures\different.bmp

[Bucky]

61. Gaaah!! Make it go away!

Fie on all PNACers. It may be the "end of history" but seems like we'll never hear the end of Frank Fukuyama. At least Doug Feith can blame his ideas on his total stupidity. What's this knucklehead's excuse?