re: #199 freetoken

Here’s the real problem with the Stanford Hoover academics - they are in love with the era of the formation of American foreign dominance - basically 1900-1950. They want to analyze it over and over, and I think romanticize the policy processes.

But I think that is woefully narrow minded. It really does have on an Americana blindfold, found in the same dresser-drawer as the other blindfolds which dominate the Trump crowd and the allied War Hawk crowd.

If the market doesn’t crash in 1929, creating a situation where the US can’t offer loans to Germany to pay its debts under the Treaty of Versailles, it’s entirely possible that Hitler doesn’t rise to power (or for that matter, the fascists in Italy and Spain), which means the European theater of WWII doesn’t happen, meaning the European powers have a chance to rebuild after WWI and it’s entirely possible that the US doesn’t become the default leader of the west in the 1950s. Now, it’s still entirely possible that Imperial Japan tries to invade the Asian mainland, and there’s likely still colonial fighting in Africa and the Mideast, but the power dynamics everywhere are completely different.

But all of that aside, there’s also the obvious fact that the US suffered the fewest casualties of both wars and didn’t have any infrastructure damage, which really put us in the unique position to lead in the new post-war alignment. Unfortunately, the world has changed a lot since then. Applying the same logic to today’s world makes about as much sense as applying the same logic as the Roman Empire.