There has been much written about the failure of the US elites, with three recent thoughtful cases being that of Aurelian and Charles Hugh Smith and Harold Robertson. While all three make excellent contributions to the discussion they make some incorrect assumptions and miss important contextual drivers. All of them seem to assume that at some point in US history the nation was led by a highly competent leadership, rather than by a relatively weak leadership which again and again had its wars fought for it, fought relative weaklings, or had its main opponents commit fratricide while luxuriating in a vast continent full of resources far away from its main enemies. To put it bluntly, the US elite has never really been tested against a peer competitor. Let’s start with a little history.
Correlli Barnett: 'The power of a nation-state by no means consists only in its armed forces, but also in its economic and technological resources; in the dexterity, foresight and resolution with which its foreign policy is conducted; in the efficiency of its social and political organization. It consists most of all in the nation itself: the people; their skills, energy, ambition, discipline, initiative; their beliefs, myths and illusions. And it consists, further, in the way all these factors are related to one another. Moreover, national power has to be considered not only in itself, in its absolute extent, but relative to the state’s foreign or imperial obligations; it has to be considered relative to the power of other states.'
thanks roger - i do agree with you on the observations on aurelians post on the professional management class - pmc.. it is better expressed as the 'courtier class' and a very good point of emphasis..
So many commentators make this mistake, for example Ron Formisano in American Oligarchy. There seems to be a great blind spot around the owner class, perhaps because it requires an acknowledgement of the Marxist concept of the owners of production. The Amsterdam School is the best at this, this is an excellent paper covering how the US courtier class follows the interests of the owner class and how it drives US foreign policy:
Great stuff!
Correlli Barnett: 'The power of a nation-state by no means consists only in its armed forces, but also in its economic and technological resources; in the dexterity, foresight and resolution with which its foreign policy is conducted; in the efficiency of its social and political organization. It consists most of all in the nation itself: the people; their skills, energy, ambition, discipline, initiative; their beliefs, myths and illusions. And it consists, further, in the way all these factors are related to one another. Moreover, national power has to be considered not only in itself, in its absolute extent, but relative to the state’s foreign or imperial obligations; it has to be considered relative to the power of other states.'
Love the concept of the “courtier class”. Excellent essay and I concur. 100%
👍
thanks roger - i do agree with you on the observations on aurelians post on the professional management class - pmc.. it is better expressed as the 'courtier class' and a very good point of emphasis..
So many commentators make this mistake, for example Ron Formisano in American Oligarchy. There seems to be a great blind spot around the owner class, perhaps because it requires an acknowledgement of the Marxist concept of the owners of production. The Amsterdam School is the best at this, this is an excellent paper covering how the US courtier class follows the interests of the owner class and how it drives US foreign policy:
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Bastiaan-Apeldoorn-2/publication/260833991_Corporate_Elite_Networks_and_Us_Post-Cold_War_Grand_Strategy_From_Clinton_to_Obama/links/548c872d0cf214269f1e128a/Corporate-Elite-Networks-and-Us-Post-Cold-War-Grand-Strategy-From-Clinton-to-Obama.pdf
This is also an excellent comparison of how the US and Chinese ruling classes operate:
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Bastiaan-Apeldoorn-2/publication/322268653_US-China_relations_and_the_liberal_world_order_Contending_elites_colliding_visions/links/5f5609e992851c250b99793b/US-China-relations-and-the-liberal-world-order-Contending-elites-colliding-visions.pdf
thanks roger - more reading which i will find time to engage in.. cheers