A few links to some interesting reading from today:
A new era in U.S. foreign policy – Global Public Square – CNN.com Blogs http://bit.ly/puP05i
So I have not read much from Fareed Zakaria. I have watched his Global Public Square on CNN a few times and he is a well-respected thinker on political and international affairs. I hope to get to reading his most well-known book sometime in the near future. Today he offers some interesting commentary on how the U.S.’s role in the intervention in Libya represents a shift in approach in America’s foreign policy. I am a firm believer in the values of democracy and individual freedoms and am more or less proud of America’s history of supporting that around the world. It would be foolish however to not recognize that at times America has overstepped its bounds at a great cost to both America and those they were seeking to assist. Does the Libyan revolution represent a new model for American intervention in world affairs? Fareed say’s yes. Read the whole story
Why Assad Need Not Fear Qaddafi’s Fate – Council on Foreign Relations http://on.cfr.org/nWYPB8
The question on many people’s mind is “Qaddafi is gone so now when will Asssad go?” Is that the logical conclusion? While no one will argue that there are violent conflicts going on in some parts of Syria the story there is different than that of Libya. Much to the confusion of many westerners President Bashar al-Assad is popular with many on the streets, especially in the largest cities of Damascus and Aleppo (about 60 miles from where we lived last year). With international media being banned from the country it has been difficult for the global community to really get a clear picture of what is going on. The tweets and youtube videos that have been coming out of the country have showed atrocities that have been committed. These have led for some, President Barack Obama among them, to call for him to step down. Have those calls helped or hurt the situation? Ed Husain (author of The Islamist) gives some reasons for why this may actually have hurt the situation, rather than helped. Read the whole story
Cathleen Falsani: The Trouble With Christian Labels http://huff.to/nVFixT
This is a good piece written on how little understanding there is in the wider public sphere of the discussions that take place within a particular religious tradition. In Cathleen’s article the New Yorker’s profile of Michelle Bachman provided the catalyst for needing to think about what the difference is between “Evangelical,” “Fundamentalist,” and “Born-Again.” In her article I feel like she takes a step in the right direction in promoting an understanding of what these terms are and what they represent for those who claim them as labels for themselves. Her piece is helpful especially as it regards the “Evangelical” label. I feel she lacks a firm grasp on what it means to be a “Fundamentalist” in the historic sense. I will not delve into that debate in depth here (perhaps at a later time) but if that topic is of interest to you I’ll include a couple of links to resources that may be helpful.
Let’s Get Clear on This – In the Nick of Time by Kevin Bauder has a whole corpus of writing that relates to this issue for what and why there is a distinction between Evangelicals and Fundamentalists, if the labels is helpful, etc.
Reclaiming Authentic Fundamentalism by Douglas McLachlan
A Dialogue on Fundamentalism video from a dialogue between some evangelical and fundamentalist figures.