Farhad Manjoo is speaking the truth
Before purchasing the iPhone, I used both a work-issued BlackBerry and a cheapo Motorola handset. Both were dowdy but reliable. Now, at precisely the time I need it most — in an unfamiliar city, trying to keep appointments — it has died.
Thanks guys.
Farhad digs deeper.
I’m here in St. Paul for various convention-ish events, staying with the Martin family, friends and readers of The American Scene. TAS readers really are unusually cool people.
A friend of mine noted that the tone around here has gotten harsher and more partisan, and I regret that. Or rather my tone has gotten harsher and more partisan. The truth is that I’ve grown very frustrated by the race, and particularly by the state of the foreign policy debate. I talked to a friend of mine the other day, a foreign policy scholar and also an avid Democrat and Obama partisan, and the conversation quickly spiraled into uncomfortable territory. It was more than a little depressing. As a general rule, I am a post-statist, i.e., I tend to be more interested in 5GW, the power of systems disruption, and the general weakening of states and how that’s shaping the political and economic landscape. But I’m increasingly convinced that strong states and power politics still matter, and that the Ikenberryan argument from strategic restraint and strategic magnanimity is, while valuable, not one that has limitless utility.
Also, some people don’t seem to get the idea that Russia has interests that dovetail with ours at some points and that clash at others. Being “nice” to Russia when its government behaves badly won’t eliminate conflict and friction (it might actually do the opposite), and being “mean” to them won’t make them want to arm terrorists with nuclear weapons — they have an interest in survival.
“ Being “nice” to Russia when its government behaves badly won’t eliminate conflict and friction (it might actually do the opposite), and being “mean” to them won’t make them want to arm terrorists with nuclear weapons — they have an interest in survival.”
What does being “nice” and being “mean” actually mean to you? Some concrete examples maybe.
— cw · Sep 1, 04:16 PM · #
Re: the iPhone, isn’t the problem really with AT&T? I’ll see when I’m in the U.S. but I get my 3G through Orange here and it works just dandy. Of course then you could say the problem is with Apple choosing to go with just one carrier instead of opening up the phone but Jobs does as Jobs does. I’m very optimistic about Android, not so much about the platform itself which is apparently not without flaws but with the transformative potential of a truly open mobile platform. I think it’s very interesting that Google chose to call its equivalent of the App Store the “Android Market.” The metaphor is very apt: in a store, the storekeeper decides what products to sell and at what price, but in a market buyers and sellers interact directly (by definition); cool stores are neat but markets are a blessing.
I think now technologies such as e-paper and Wi-Max and decentralized wi-fi networks envisioned by startups like Meraki make it possible to create a developing world iPhone, a sturdy, durable web-faring device that will allow Africa to leapfrog us and places like Nairobi to become the next Silicon Valley in this future mobile web world. You know what good cell phone adoption has done for developing countries, imagine how exponential that effect would be with web-faring phones (people going online to get microloans to buy drip irrigation equipment online, etc.). I firmly believe in the virtues of leapfrogging and I think technological trends make this more and more obvious, even for the Bottom Billion. People talk about getting the “next billion” online and that is definitely of paramount importance but I think that will be done not through desktop or laptop computers but through phones. I think if there is to be a One Laptop per Child-like device (and I certainly hope so) it will be more of a web tablet device than a fully fledged computer and I think this is a Good Thing.
Re: foreign policy, it’s very interesting that you describe yourself as a post-statist because you have much less illusions about the power of states as most foreign policy commentators, and I think this is a good thing. I think I am a statist; I see all of the trends that point to a loss of relevance of the nation state as the cardinal unit of geopolitics, but I don’t see them as a bellwhether of the end of the unit as such, rather as a redefinition. Globalization and asymmetrical (media-)warfare allows people and movements to redefine themselves independent of nation-states but when people do so they mostly tend to define themselves in relation to a national identity. Which is more relevant, the fact that more and more people are transnational or the blooming of movements of national liberation that see their future as nation-states? From a transnational perspective the former trend is more obvious but I believe the latter is equally significant.
— PEG · Sep 1, 05:41 PM · #
On the “harsher and more partisan” note, I wanted to say that while I disagree with most of the views expressed at the American Scene, I think of it as one of the most civil political sites on the web. I think the posters are doing a great job on that front.
— Tom G. · Sep 1, 06:22 PM · #
Reihan, please don’t sweat the criticism about your writing “becoming more partisan” nor edit yourself too heavily. I don’t think you’ve become anything other than the fair, self-questioning blogger you are. Passions are running high and people who have in past been courteous, thoughtful writers are adopting the nasty tone of their commenters (why Yglesias is off my read list). You don’t. If you want some reassurance, go look at Tyler Cowen, who put up some sensible, carefully neutral thoughts, and — wow. That’s what’s going on, and that’s what you’re hearing.
You are in a particular odd spot because the only times I’ve ever seen you go there in terms of acid writing have been when personal friends of yours get attacked (I remember in particular one back-and-forth with Will Wilkinson in defense of Douthat, where it seemed to me as a reader that you got a bit loopy.) And, well, some of your vast circle of connections are moving well beyond the world of the rational and civil in this election cycle (Sullivan, Sullivan, Sullivan). There’s going to be flak. Keep doing what you’ve been doing, and my guess is in the end you’ll be pretty comfortable with it.
That is my almost-certainly-wrong two cents. But I admire your writing and (see Cowen) there’s a hell of a lot of illegitimate criticism floating about.
— Sanjay · Sep 1, 07:44 PM · #
Ugh, I wrote a really dope post about the true meaning of heterodoxy, balance and fairness in campaign season, and why I think Reihan both has been nastier recently and yet shouldn’t sweat it or be too hard on himself. But it appears to have been lost to the fates….
— Freddie · Sep 1, 09:57 PM · #
I wouldn’t dismiss Ikenberry. As a grand strategy, “the binding norms and institutions that reassure potential competitors to prevent balancing detrimental to our interests” still looks like our best option. And Russia’s interests needn’t coincide with ours – they could make their own grand bargain with Iran (naval base in Bandar Abbas, OPEC for natural gas, preferential treatment for Russian energy and weapons firms in return for support at UNSC, full membership in the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, and nuclear assistance) that turns a potential problem into a short and medium term solution.
We need a way of changing the Russian narrative about international politics.
— Zak · Sep 2, 02:27 PM · #
Being “nice” to Russia when its government behaves badly won’t eliminate conflict and friction (it might actually do the opposite), and being “mean” to them won’t make them want to arm terrorists with nuclear weapons — they have an interest in survival.
Reihan needs to understand the Iterated Prisoner’s Dilemma. How you cooperated in earlier iterations effects how rational players will cooperate with you in future iterations. Cooperation is sensible in the IPD in a way in which it isn’t sensible in a one-shot PD.
— Consumatopia · Sep 4, 03:37 AM · #