Kevin Drum reports the following from the big how-down:
According to an anonymous but well-connected source here at Netroots Nation, the First Law of Foreign Policy Punditry states that the less you know about a region, the more dangerous it must be. Thus, when a foreign policy expert knows nothing about a region, it automatically becomes elevated to the gravest national security threat we face as a nation. Unfortunately, this sounds oddly plausible.
No it doesn't -- if this was true, television and print would be replete with people warning about the manifold dangers of sub-Saharan Africa -- only to find themselves shouted down by the people predicting doom in Bangladesh.
There is, however, a selection bias at work in IR punditry. In my experience, TV producers and op-ed editors aren't interested in hearing you say, "nothing has changed" in response to the
news du jour. Therefore, one is more likely to hear and read statements by pundits who genuinely believe that recent events
are threatening.
[
So is there a First Law of Foreign Policy Punditry?--ed. Blame any situation on anti-Americanism.]
COMMENTS (0)
Read More
