Back in 1997, I wore a lot of flannel shirts, had a ponytail, and road my bike to school.
I also read Foreign Affairs quite a bit. Why? Don't ask. Anyway, I distinctly remember an essay entitled "The Rise of Illiberal Democracy," by somebody named Fareed Zakaria. I can also remember not being sure if I agreed or disagreed with the article, but felt it was important none the less. In fact, that same damn issue of Foreign Affairs is sitting on a shelf in Scarsdale right now.
Anyway, this Zakaria fellow apparently turned the long essay into a book called The Future of Freedom: Illiberal Democracy at Home and Abroad. Reading the review, I'm again not sure what to think. For example, I'm all for making the IRS some kind of independent fiscal agency that sets instead of just collects taxs. And sometimes I agree with his thesis, which seems to be: More Democracy = More Dysfunctional Govt. and Less Freedom. (For a better idea of what the book is about, read the review, linked below.)
I bristle though when people use "freedom" as their defense for all kinds of crap. As in, "Why should I pay such high taxes? Don't you believe in freedom?"Or, "If you don't believe in my right to have this handgun, you don't believe in freedom." The review makes a reference to Napoleonic France and offers a comparitive example, an unfair one I think, saying "...equality trumped freedom. The result was a new Napoleonic despotism."
Freedom and Equality are not mutually exclusive. I have no patience for assholes who think they are, just because they define freedom as "the right to do whatever the fuck I want." That is not freedom.
I think I'll get and read Zakaria's book, and I think I'll have the same mixed feelings I had about his article. Either way, he is someone who should be respected.
Posted by mike at April 17, 2003 02:39 AMI agree with you on a lot of your points here. I read the review and it looks like Zakaria's book doesn't follow the article (which is one of my favoriate articles from Foreign Affairs) as closely as I'd hope, but it's probably worth reading anyway. I thought his argument had a lot more applicability to the Former Soviet Union than to the US, was more useful for developing states than developed states, but people always find new applications for old theories.
I'll read the book if you will and maybe we can discuss in the sweltering heat of a NY summer.
Also, I find the flannel the most puzzling of all your 1997 behaviors.
Posted by: Alissa on April 18, 2003 08:45 AMFlannel Rocks!
Don't forget, in 1997 you were still legitimately crazy, you sellout! Then you cut your hair and shaved and stopped being a bear / Jesus impersonator.
Your site's a pretty interesting read, keep up the good work.
Posted by: Greg on April 21, 2003 09:51 PM