Saturday, July 05, 2008

Useless Adherence to Ideology Terms

Doug Saunders writes in Globe and Mail that if Obama wins American election, quite likely he will be the only left leaning leader in a block traditionally referred as West.
(http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20080705.wreckoning0405/BNStory/International/home?cid=al_gam_mostview)

So what? What is the point? This whole article is one more useless exercise of attempting to use so called academic terms to describe political realities without any value addition. Starting with Neo-Con Bush and Labor Blair, post world war America-Europe relations are full of examples where leaders have co-operated despite coming from competing ideologies.

In today’s complex world, most of the world leaders are aware that pragmatic foreign policy instead of ideology driven world views is order of the day. Bush has been one of the rare breed of politicians who is much more ideology driven than the norm. With the end of Bush term, such extreme politics will be gone. By that comparison mainstream European leaders across the political spectrum are quite Centrists and hence well disposed to co-operation with new American President. And what about compulsions of contemporary world where China, Russia, Brazil, India and Oil Exporting countries are dominating world affairs? Barack or McCain, Europeans of all hues will work that president, unless the European leader is Neo-Nazi, extreme Right wing nut case.

And what of Post-Partisan Politics of Obama, Schwarzenegger and many other leaders attempting to move beyond Left and Right divide? Views expressed by Saunders are quite narrow and ignore the emerging reality where many leaders all across world are trying to go beyond divisive way of politics. Seems like that observation is lost on Saunders.

No comments: