Public Opinion in the Islamic World on Terrorism

[jmm99]

from Marc
Indeed, I am forced to ask why you consider US ideology and governance as "superior"? Superior for whom in what conditions?

JMM, I believe that you have fallen into what I call the Baskin Robbins Fallacy - 31 flavours of governance and they all taste the same. You are assuming that governance must come from the top; i.e. a systemic form rather than an organic, bottom-up form. Why?

First point. Please re-read this quote from me, especially the "if" clause:

In short, if the ideology and governance system of the host nation is FUBAR, what difference can our superior ideology and governance system make in the end result ?

Since the qualifying premise is that the host nation's ideology and governance system is FUBAR, our (US) ideology and governance system, which is not FUBAR, is superior to one that is FUBAR.

My opinion on US ideology and governance is in the same post, which you ignore:

While the two of us have disagreed on specific points, both of us are in love with the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. OK, agreed that we (US) have an excellent ideology. And, I would say we have a good (albeit scarcely perfect) system of governance. A number of other countries could present the same message (albeit somewhat different, as in David's UK).

If I did not believe the first three sentences, I would move to Canada or Finland, both of which would be happy enough to give me landed status.

As to the second point - and your ice cream store, that is refuted by the last sentence of the quote immediately above. As to the trickle down vs. bubble up theories of governance, I've made it clear, in more than one post discussing US constitutional law, that I take the Preamble ("We, the People ... do ordain and establish") very literally. It is "You [who] are assumiing" what you think I am assuming - bad assumption and a bad windmill at which to tilt.

Now, as a final point, I happen to agree with this from you - and would add the bracketed insert:

If an HN system of governance is FUBAR, then it has to be up to them to reconstruct it, unfettered by inane [or superior] systems that will not work for their people.

My question, which I'll repeat again, was rhetorical:

In short, if the ideology and governance system of the host nation is FUBAR, what difference can our superior ideology and governance system make in the end result ?

My answer is the same as yours - "In short, not much."

For "COIN" to work, the host nation's message must work - not the US message, nor the Canadian message for that matter.

PS: In some of my first posts here, you and I discussed in some detail (and mostly agreement) why the US message failed in Canada during both the Revoltionary War and the War of 1812. We also discussed and agreed on why the British message and governance system, adapted for Canadian conditions, succeeded - albeit over a very long timespan. I still remember that discussion.