Bush ideology incompatible with an open society

[tagos]

I'm interested in doper opinion on this Soros article in which he argues that the Bush ideology as he outlines it is incompatible with an open society (crude paraphrase).

Please read the full article before commenting, this extract is only a facet of his argument.

I found it interesting because his position, stated with way more erudition than I can muster, crystallises and clarifies my own.

Full George Soros article

The United States cannot create a global open society on its own. No single country can act as the police officer or the benefactor of the entire world. But a global open society cannot be achieved without American leadership. This means that the United States must engage in international cooperation. It must be willing to abide by the rules it seeks to impose on others, to accept its share of the costs and, most importantly, to accept that other participants are bound to have other opinions, and other states other national interests. The United States will always have veto rights due to its weight and importance.


Here is an alternative vision of America's role in the world. It is the vision of America leading the world toward a global open society. Such a vision is badly needed. After September 11, President Bush has managed to convince the country that it is unpatriotic to disagree with him.


The two visions – American supremacy and America as the leader of a global open society – are not that far apart. In fact, they are so close to each other that I am afraid that when the pursuit of American supremacy fails – as it is bound to fail – the vision of a global open society will also be abandoned. That is why it is so important to distinguish between them.

[toadspittle]

He's right. Bush is not supporting a global open society.

He's also not supporting communism, fascism, or Zoroastrianism.

I don't see what the debate is.

Because open society is an abstract idea, I shall proceed from the abstract and general to the concrete and particular. The concept of "open society" was developed by philosopher Karl R. Popper, whose book "Open Society and Its Enemies" argued that totalitarian ideologies – such as communism and fascism – posed a threat to an open society because they claimed to have found the final solution.

I think Bush et al would argue that the "great experiment" in American democracy is over, and that we now have a working system. They aren't interested in trying a new system.

The ultimate truth is beyond human reach. Those who say they are in possession of it are making a false claim, and they can enforce it only by coercion and repression. So Popper derived the principles of freedom and democracy – the same principles that President Bush championed in his February speech on Iraq – from the recognition that we may be wrong.

I would say nearly every fundamentalist (including Mr. Bush) would disagree with this statement. My guess is he's as likely to say that the American Way is wrong as he is to say that Jesus is not the son of God and Savior of mankind.