In 2017, with a new administration, we witnessed an acceleration of a trend that had already begun, namely the retreat of the United States from global leadership.
One can go back in time to trace the origin of the retreat, but arguably it was present during the Obama administration when there was an acknowledgement of the arrogance that had emerged during the years of US "superpowerdom" (my term). The assumption of global leadership did not start out that way after World War II, but, gradually over time, the arrogance of power seeped in. The statement that the US was the one indispensable power (late 1990s) is a manifestation of that arrogance. That view has tended to underlie US foreign policy up to the present, and it has not publicly been negated.
Ironically, the assertion of the current US administration headed by President Donald Trump that the US has been shortchanged in a variety of negotiations and deals is both a reaffirmation of the "indispensable" argument and a retreat from that policy. It is a two edged sword.
The current administration does not accept the fact that to be the #1 power means one has to make a lot of concessions and in some cases seemingly lose power and advantage in the short term. The TransPacific Partnership (TPP) is a case in point. The goal was to limit China's influence in Asia. The US was willing to make some sacrifices short term to achieve its long term goal of maintaining power in Asia and containing the power of China, the largest, most ambitious power in Asia. The withdrawal of the US from TPP has created a power vacuum in Asia which China will cheerfully fill to the long term disadvantage of the United States.
For those of us who are students of foreign policy, this is a painful time, regardless how we view the US in the world. The international order which we have known our whole lives is breaking down. Whether we see the US as a winner or a loser in this process, we have to recognize that the world order which we studied, lectured on, and accepted as reality is breaking down. Uncertainty lies ahead.
This is just a preliminary analysis. I plan to reflect more on this in the future.
Sunday, December 31, 2017
Monday, December 11, 2017
Polling in the Current Era: How reliable are polls?
How accurate are polls? We are finding them less accurate and reliable than ever before. Our specialists are more sophisticated in profiling voters, for example, or trends, but... and it is a big but, most people either do not have landlines or do not answer the phone unless they recognize the caller's name.
So, polls or any other efforts that rely on the phone will be far less effective.
I take myself as an example. I no longer answer the phone unless I recognize the number or caller.
When I am at home, the phone may ring about a dozen times a day. I rarely pick up the phone until I know the caller.
Once in the recent past, when the phone rang, I recognized the number which belonged to the service account on my computer only to discover after some conversation and the caller's access to my computer, that the caller was a spoofer. My computer was compromised, and I can no longer use that computer. It was a very costly phone pick up. I had to reset my passwords, copy out critical files, report the cyber intrusion to the police, my insurance company, etc. I spent about a week correcting what I could, and I cannot download any of the files and put them on my other computer since they may be contaminated. I am handicapped on a number of projects.
So, now I am finding it is not even possible to answer the phone when I recognize the number. I need to hear the voice.
A friend was recently asked to do some calling for a charity. Three people of 100 whom she called picked up the phone. She has had the same experience with other volunteer organizations.
The poor response rate makes it unlikely that polling can be reliable. How can we work out way out of this problem?
So, polls or any other efforts that rely on the phone will be far less effective.
I take myself as an example. I no longer answer the phone unless I recognize the number or caller.
When I am at home, the phone may ring about a dozen times a day. I rarely pick up the phone until I know the caller.
Once in the recent past, when the phone rang, I recognized the number which belonged to the service account on my computer only to discover after some conversation and the caller's access to my computer, that the caller was a spoofer. My computer was compromised, and I can no longer use that computer. It was a very costly phone pick up. I had to reset my passwords, copy out critical files, report the cyber intrusion to the police, my insurance company, etc. I spent about a week correcting what I could, and I cannot download any of the files and put them on my other computer since they may be contaminated. I am handicapped on a number of projects.
So, now I am finding it is not even possible to answer the phone when I recognize the number. I need to hear the voice.
A friend was recently asked to do some calling for a charity. Three people of 100 whom she called picked up the phone. She has had the same experience with other volunteer organizations.
The poor response rate makes it unlikely that polling can be reliable. How can we work out way out of this problem?
Why Leadership Today Is Harder Than It Used To Be
It is hard to be a leader today. In the era of the internet, social media, and open communication, everything a leaders says or does is videotaped, recorded, repeated, researched, and there.
This is true for all of us, but writ large for people in the public eye like governors, senators, the president, etc. In the corporate sector, CEOs are extremely well rewarded but still walk a tightrobe.
See Oscar Munoz and United.
Every word of President Trump's firing of James Comey of the FBI was analyzed and parsed. Had Roosevelt's actions during World War II been thus analyzed, the long term effect would have been far different.
Every comment an official makes is remembered far into the future. Ten, twenty, or thirty years mean nothing in this age.
Many have reluctance to serve in high profile positions. And understandably so. It takes a lot of fortitude to withstand the publicity. On the one hand high profile figures have to aware of the world around them, On the other hand, they have to turn off the noise about themselves.
While show business personalities may say, I don't care what they write about me, so long as they write about me, that may be harder to endure when you are in the public square.
This is true for all of us, but writ large for people in the public eye like governors, senators, the president, etc. In the corporate sector, CEOs are extremely well rewarded but still walk a tightrobe.
See Oscar Munoz and United.
Every word of President Trump's firing of James Comey of the FBI was analyzed and parsed. Had Roosevelt's actions during World War II been thus analyzed, the long term effect would have been far different.
Every comment an official makes is remembered far into the future. Ten, twenty, or thirty years mean nothing in this age.
Many have reluctance to serve in high profile positions. And understandably so. It takes a lot of fortitude to withstand the publicity. On the one hand high profile figures have to aware of the world around them, On the other hand, they have to turn off the noise about themselves.
While show business personalities may say, I don't care what they write about me, so long as they write about me, that may be harder to endure when you are in the public square.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)