| ★阿修羅♪ > 戦争78 > 678.html ★阿修羅♪ |
|
| Tweet |
フランシス・フクヤマ、他のネオコンとけんか別れ【ヤバイと思って逃げを打ったかな？】
２月２１日付のNews Scotsman.com紙によりますと、「歴史の終り」の著者で、ビル･クリストルやロバート･ケイガンなどと並んでネオコン・イデオローグの中心的な一人であったフランシス・フクヤマが、ブッシュ政権の外交方針に対して「私がもはや支持できないものに変化してしまった」「恥ずべきものである」と語り、他のネオコン・メンバーを『レーニン主義者』と呼んで非難しています。（確かに元トロツキストもいるが。）
フクヤマの言によりますと、ネオコンの運動の主唱者たちは「歴史は力と意思の正しい適用によって推し進めることが出来ると信じたレーニン主義者である。レーニン主義はそのボルシェヴィキ・ヴァージョンでは悲劇だった。そして、それが米国によって実行されるときに茶番劇として戻ってきている。」のだそうです。（下にNews Scotsman.com紙の記事本文を貼り付けておきますのでお読みください。）
なおこの記事の見出しは《Neocon architect says: 'Pull it down'（ネオコンの建築士は言う；「これを解体せよ」）》となっており、ＷＴＣ解体に引っ掛けてからかっているようです。
なお、このニュースは２５日付のスペイン語情報誌IAR-Noticiasでも紹介されています。見出しは『米国：フクヤマとネオコンサーバティブズのにぎやかな離婚』で、ニュース･ソースはＩＰＳ通信です。
･･････････････････････････････････････････････････････････････････････････････
http://www.iarnoticias.com/secciones_2006/autores/0104_jim_lobe_24feb06.html
EEUU: Ruidoso divorcio entre Fukuyama y neoconservadores
･･････････････････････････････････････････････････････････････････････････････
まあ、世界から指弾を受ける前に逃げを打ったのでしょう。ネオコンでも少し系統の異なるマイケル・レディーンは（私はこの男がネオコンの「建築技師」だとにらんでいますが）明確に「ファシズム革命」を志向しています。（本人は近年になってファシズムを民主主義に置き換えてカモフラージュしていますが。）他に明らかにユダヤ・ファシズム系統の者もおり、むしろ「ファシズム革命の完成版」といった方が良いような気がします。
逆に言えば、レーニン主義とファシズムはさほど差が無いのかもしれませんが。
＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊
http://news.scotsman.com/international.cfm?id=266122006
Neocon architect says: 'Pull it down'
ALEX MASSIE
IN WASHINGTON
NEOCONSERVATISM has failed the United States and needs to be replaced by a more realistic foreign policy agenda, according to one of its prime architects.
Francis Fukuyama, who wrote the best-selling book The End of History and was a member of the neoconservative project, now says that, both as a political symbol and a body of thought, it has "evolved into something I can no longer support". He says it should be discarded on to history's pile of discredited ideologies.
In an extract from his forthcoming book, America at the Crossroads, Mr Fukuyama declares that the doctrine "is now in shambles" and that its failure has demonstrated "the danger of good intentions carried to extremes".
In its narrowest form, neoconservatism advocates the use of military force, unilaterally if necessary, to replace autocratic regimes with democratic ones.
Mr Fukuyama once supported regime change in Iraq and was a signatory to a 1998 letter sent by the Project for a New American Century to the then president, Bill Clinton, urging the US to step up its efforts to remove Saddam Hussein from power. It was also signed by neoconservative intellectuals, such as Bill Kristol and Robert Kagan, and political figures Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Perle and the current defence secretary, Donald Rumsfeld.
However, Mr Fukuyama now thinks the war in Iraq is the wrong sort of war, in the wrong place, at the wrong time.
"The most basic misjudgment was an overestimation of the threat facing the United States from radical Islamism," he argues.
"Although the new and ominous possibility of undeterrable terrorists armed with weapons of mass destruction did indeed present itself, advocates of the war wrongly conflated this with the threat presented by Iraq and with the rogue state/proliferation problem more generally."
Mr Fukuyama, one of the US's most influential public intellectuals, concludes that "it seems very unlikely that history will judge either the intervention [in Iraq] itself or the ideas animating it kindly".
Going further, he says the movements' advocates are Leninists who "believed that history can be pushed along with the right application of power and will. Leninism was a tragedy in its Bolshevik version, and it has returned as farce when practised by the United States".
Although Mr Fukuyama still supports the idea of democratic reform - complete with establishing the institutions of liberal modernity - in the Middle East, he warns that this process alone will not immediately reduce the threats and dangers the US faces. "Radical Islamism is a by-product of modernisation itself, arising from the loss of identity that accompanies the transition to a modern, pluralist society. More democracy will mean more alienation, radicalisation and - yes, unfortunately - terrorism," he says.
"By definition, outsiders can't 'impose' democracy on a country that doesn't want it; demand for democracy and reform must be domestic. Democracy promotion is therefore a long-term and opportunistic process that has to await the gradual ripening of political and economic conditions to be effective."
This article: http://news.scotsman.com/international.cfm?id=266122006
Last updated: 21-Feb-06 00:18 GMT
題名には必ず「阿修羅さんへ」と記述してください。