Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

What is "Educated Incapacity” ?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • What is "Educated Incapacity” ?

    What is Educated Incapacity you might ask?
    “ the inability of a few, acquired only by sustained effort, to understand or even to perceive realities obvious to the unschooled many,”
    Why is it epidemic in the intelligence services ?

    In a detailed analysis published recently by Security Studies Group, author and expert Angelo Codevilla, who is Professor Emeritus of International Relations at Boston University and a fellow of the Claremont Institute, goes into the historic role of American institutions, including the State Department and the CIA, to forge relationships with terror groups in the mistaken belief that they can be weaned away from violence.

    He traces this flawed thinking by these state institutions and other actors to the Arab Gulf states rift with Qatar.

    Codevilla writes: “As he applauds Saudi Arabia’s and its Gulf allies’ attempt to force Qatar to stop supporting terrorists, even his secretary of State not so subtly echoes the Establishment’s chorus that this is a bad idea. No one denies that whoever supports terrorism should stop doing so, that the state of Qatar in fact does support terrorists with billions of dollars, facilities, and a television network, and that the Muslim Brotherhood carries out terrorist acts directly and through affiliates. Hence the question imposes itself: how do opinions so contrary to reality and to the common sense of ordinary people acquire such power in high places?”

    The author then lists the ways that Qatar has been peddling its influence in the West and especially in the US, even corrupting many institutions of the US national security “Deep State”.

    “The counterintuitive influence of Muslim Brotherhood/Qatar is yet another example of what Herman Kahn used to call ”educated incapacity” – the inability of a few, acquired only by sustained effort, to understand or even to perceive realities obvious to the unschooled many,” writes Codevilla.

    He then exmines how that influence has taken hold. “It is a story of how the Muslim Brotherhood’s ideas and the Qatari state’s money have encouraged the professors, think-tankers and bureaucrats of America’s National Security State to foist upon America a peculiar set of values and priorities by indulging their own prejudices.”
    Indentical articles
    The author points out that as President Trump was about to command the State Department “to list the Muslim Brotherhood as a terrorist organization (Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Syria, and the United Arab Emirates had already done so), Foreign Policy magazine and the Brookings Institution published nearly identical articles.”

    After President Trump praised Saudi Arabia and its Gulf allies’ cutting of diplomatic and commercial contact with Qatar to force it to end its support for the Muslim Brotherhood, among other terrorists, an adviser to Secretary of State Rex Tillerson told The New York Times that, while “The president is focused on ending terrorism; the secretary is focused on diplomacy that will return GCC focus to fighting terrorism.”

    In other words: The US government – the President notwithstanding – far from helping to isolate Qatar, will focus on ending that isolation and hope that this will have a beneficial effect on fighting terrorism.

    Tillerson himself, while admitting that Qatar was supporting terrorism, made clear that this support was less important than the relationship itself.

    Codevilla says that this was tantamount to saying: “We would rather support a Qatar that does not support terrorism. But we’ll support it even though it does.”

    The answer also lies in the confluence between the Progressive prejudices of the American foreign policy establishment and the material reinforcement thereof by Muslim regimes, particularly that of Qatar.

    The author painstakingly goes back to the post-World War II American security establishment and its moral compass, viewing view themselves on the side of the world’s emerging peoples, as “the true revolutionaries.”
    Crude influence-buying
    “Qatar is one of the many entities that have capitalized on the US foreign policy establishment’s predispositions to Progressive ideology and to meddling. Let us abstract from such crude influence-buying as the Qatari government’s gift of one million dollars to the Clinton Foundation on the occasion of Bill Clinton’s 65th birthday or the lucrative business connections,” the author says.

    “Qatari operatives rightly regard these contributions, many deployed by their National Research Foundation, as having produced the political equivalent of strategically located military units,” says Codevilla.

    There are American academic institutions in Qatar, and there are as well dozens of Qatari-supported foundations and countless scholars.

    Codevilla concludes:“The al Thani family, which has ruled it for decades, has used the country’s great wealth to pursue influence abroad in ways that are inherently incompatible. Tamim, the current emir, has taken that foreign policy to a point where the incompatibilities may no longer coexist.”
    http://english.alarabiya.net/en/feat...ep-State-.html
    Dispite our best intentions, the system is dysfunctional that intelligence failure is guaranteed.
    Russ Travers, CIA analyst, 2001

  • #2
    So the Saudi owned news is attacking Qatar and the piece is expected to be legitimate?

    Seems like a Middle East witch hunt to me.
    BoRG
    "... and that was the last time they called me Freakboy Moses"

    Comment


    • #3
      Seems more a case of politics makes strange bedfellows...

      Comment


      • #4
        The concept of "Educated Incapacity" was developed by Angelo Codevilla, not the news source the story was published by.
        It is an interesting concept that fully explains why politicians and heads of states and government agencies, all well educated continue to repeat the same mistakes over and over again.
        There is no logical explanation as to why the public never demands better....
        Dispite our best intentions, the system is dysfunctional that intelligence failure is guaranteed.
        Russ Travers, CIA analyst, 2001

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Urban hermit View Post
          The concept of "Educated Incapacity" was developed by Angelo Codevilla, not the news source the story was published by.
          It is an interesting concept that fully explains why politicians and heads of states and government agencies, all well educated continue to repeat the same mistakes over and over again.
          There is no logical explanation as to why the public never demands better....
          We do demand better, but there is no working mechanism to make that happen since the system only produces more of the same.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
            We do demand better, but there is no working mechanism to make that happen since the system only produces more of the same.

            If that were true Pelosi, Boxer, McCain and a few other national embarrassments would've been out of office a long time ago.
            Dispite our best intentions, the system is dysfunctional that intelligence failure is guaranteed.
            Russ Travers, CIA analyst, 2001

            Comment


            • #7
              Short answer to the OP ...

              Too many college courses and not enough Common Sense/Real World Experience.
              TANSTAAFL = There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by G David Bock View Post
                Short answer to the OP ...

                Too many college courses and not enough Common Sense/Real World Experience.

                Everybody gets a trophy, And a lifetime of college debt for a degree in "Interpretive Repetition"
                Dispite our best intentions, the system is dysfunctional that intelligence failure is guaranteed.
                Russ Travers, CIA analyst, 2001

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Urban hermit View Post
                  If that were true Pelosi, Boxer, McCain and a few other national embarrassments would've been out of office a long time ago.
                  Not true, since you reversed the actual statement that I made.

                  The system is corrupt, broken and self-sustaining. It only creates one type of politician; therefore, "change" is not possible.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
                    We do demand better, but there is no working mechanism to make that happen since the system only produces more of the same.

                    Actually there is a "working mechanism" and it is largely citizen participation at the grassroots level in the major parties. Unfortunately most find it easier to bitch and present false and useless conclusions than actually show up and get invovlved.

                    I notice this at the local monthly GOP committee meetings where it's usually the same 40-50 people there and "doing something" versus the thousands of supposed members whom could get involved.

                    The Catch 22 is that it is literally a very small number that show up, get involved and get things done. The vast majority might show up every couple of years for a caucus, and/or vote, but otherwise fail to do their duty as citizens.

                    Apathy and non-participation is what produces the results and politicians we get, not "the system".
                    TANSTAAFL = There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
                      Not true, since you reversed the actual statement that I made.

                      The system is corrupt, broken and self-sustaining. It only creates one type of politician; therefore, "change" is not possible.
                      I didn't reverse anything. The system isn't designed to rid us of poor leadership, it's designed to acquire power through committee positions and eventually, chairmanship of committees, then whip positions.
                      That is why it's so difficult for voters to get rid of the likes of Pelosi, Boxer and McCain, self interest trumps (no pun intended) self respect.
                      Dispite our best intentions, the system is dysfunctional that intelligence failure is guaranteed.
                      Russ Travers, CIA analyst, 2001

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by G David Bock View Post
                        Actually there is a "working mechanism" and it is largely citizen participation at the grassroots level in the major parties. Unfortunately most find it easier to bitch and present false and useless conclusions than actually show up and get invovlved.

                        I notice this at the local monthly GOP committee meetings where it's usually the same 40-50 people there and "doing something" versus the thousands of supposed members whom could get involved.

                        The Catch 22 is that it is literally a very small number that show up, get involved and get things done. The vast majority might show up every couple of years for a caucus, and/or vote, but otherwise fail to do their duty as citizens.

                        Apathy and non-participation is what produces the results and politicians we get, not "the system".
                        I am active, however, it has changed nothing, nor do I expect it ever will.

                        How have your efforts to change the system worked out for you?

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Urban hermit View Post
                          I didn't reverse anything. The system isn't designed to rid us of poor leadership, it's designed to acquire power through committee positions and eventually, chairmanship of committees, then whip positions.
                          That is why it's so difficult for voters to get rid of the likes of Pelosi, Boxer and McCain, self interest trumps (no pun intended) self respect.
                          Which is essentially what I said in the first place. The system is corrupt, and it's deliberately self-sustaining to the point where any replacements waiting in the wings are just more of the same. "The will of the people" has become the punchline to a very bad joke.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
                            I am active, however, it has changed nothing, nor do I expect it ever will.

                            How have your efforts to change the system worked out for you?
                            I think we have differing definitons of "the system" and different expectations.

                            Our Constitution was designed to provide a restrained government, not an overpowering one.

                            Way it works for me is I've come to personally know and work for my reps to get elected and don't consider them the "crooks and criminals" broadbrush label applied by some posting here. I've seen where most whom bash politicians "in general" haven't the fortitude(or qualifications) needed to campaign for office themselves.
                            TANSTAAFL = There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Urban hermit View Post
                              What is Educated Incapacity you might ask?
                              “ the inability of a few, acquired only by sustained effort, to understand or even to perceive realities obvious to the unschooled many,”
                              Why is it epidemic in the intelligence services ?
                              That is an incredibly "all inclusive" statement you just made. Your position, to say the least, is remarkably devoid of nuance. Define epidemic in the intelligence services and exactly what are you referring to? Are you simply talking about the current debacle with Qatar or are you heading in a different direction altogether? I will also caution you that in many cases when people in leadership positions are presented with intelligence that does not support their narrative there has been a well documented tendency to either ignore the intelligence information received or to spin it in a such a manner that it supports the positions of the leadership, which clearly occurred on a number of occasions in the lead-up to "Shock and Awe."
                              Give me a fast ship and the wind at my back for I intend to sail in harms way! (John Paul Jones)

                              Initiated Chief Petty Officer
                              Hard core! Old School! Deal with it!

                              Comment

                              Latest Topics

                              Collapse

                              Working...
                              X