Monday, September 15, 2008

Terminalology

Well, to be fair, although I agree that SP's got as much practical knowledge of foreign policy as Popeye of seamanship, I think that this whole "Bush Doctrine" episode has highlighted the fact that "doctrine" is a woefully inappropriate term, and I propose the faggier and more accurate sensibility as an alternative. We can thus bring to an end all this petty nit-mongering about the precise doxologies of the fever dream and instead understand it as an array of largely aesthetic commitments, which also nods properly to the underlying fascism of Forever-War State-Capitalism. The Bush Sensibility--with sibilant, lishping Esses.

7 comments:

Agi said...

At least it's an ethos.

Mark said...

"Doctrines" are tinker toys for the Dan Drezners of the world to play with.

Crusader AXE said...

When the services use the term doctrine they are referring to something that is directive in nature, tested and usually works at least as a starting point. The Bush sensibility doesn't apply, when measured against those standards. It is directive in nature, it was untested and it hasn't worked for shit. However, he did get to wear that flight suit...

Anonymous said...

"Doctrines" are tinker toys for the Dan Drezners of the world to play with.

Or, in PowerPoint form, for the Tom "SysAdmin, Baby!" Barnetts. But hell, it's not even an ethos, really.
-- sglover

Thomas Daulton said...

Off topic, but speaking of people who play with tinkertoys...

I kid you not, the "Most E-Mailed" sidebar on the New York Times website today starts off with the following:

1) Once Elected, Palin Hired Friends and Lashed Foes
2) Thomas L. Friedman: Making America Stupid
3) 6 Food Mistakes Parents Make
...

Hmmmm, I like that #2 there, but perhaps not for the reasons the NYT likes it. I haven't actually bothered to click-through yet, it was just such a perfect statement. Perhaps journalistic integrity has finally returned to the Times. Well, forlorn hope.

almostinfamous said...

Perhaps journalistic integrity has finally returned to the Times
i think friedman must have pissed someone off at teh copy desk.

Phillip Allen said...

[...]Thomas L. Friedman: Making America Stupid [...] it was just such a perfect statement.

Was it a statement, or an imperative? A subtitle?

I loves me some ambiguity.