Things are never unambiguous by TheophileEscargot (2.00 / 0) #22 Wed May 21, 2008 at 03:16:24 PM EST
From the "War, Peace and Power" lecture series on diplomatic history, the big divide in diplomatic history is between Idealist and Realist factions. Those are not prescriptive categories, but descriptive: arguments about whether cultural values influence policy, or whether policy is purely pragmatic.

History is not a subject in which causes can be determined with certainty. Any time Historian A says Cause 1 was important, it's possible for Historian B to say, no, that was trivial, it was Cause 2 instead.

Now if you want specific examples where the cowboy role could influence policy, there are obvious things to choose from. Alaskan oil-drilling for example: if your self-image is as a frontiersman, you're more likely to want to explore and exploit the frontier. The disbanding of the Iraqi army is another example: co-opting them would have been the pragmatic thing to do given the lack of stabilizing manpower. But cowboys and sheriffs defeat their enemies, they don't co-opt them (unlike Robin Hood after he beat Little John at quarterstaffs, for instance).

But there's not much point me naming a bunch of instances. There are very many to choose from, and you're just going to say "oh no it isn't" to each one. Possibly you're on the far-Realist edge of the Realist-Idealist spectrum.
--
"Everything is vague to a degree you do not realize till you have tried to make it precise." -- Bertrand Russell
[ Parent ]

Login
Make a new account
Username:
Password: