I am utterly amazed at the recklessness of the Republican Congressional delegation. They have just reinforced a traditional complaint about democracies in theory, a theory which so far has not been salient to the situation. The question is; can a democracy be trusted diplomatically? Obviously any democracy or republic needs to negotiate via representatives vetted by the people's representatives. I can think of nothing more irresponsible to a nation's foreign policy than to declare  negotiations and treaties achieved during one administration may be undone by a new administration. This creates a terrible precedent, a bridge too far that neither Democratic or Republican executives have dared breach.  Democratic Republics are at a disadvantage in diplomacy because frequently popular will becomes a brake on diplomatic action. This is essential before an agreement but once under took we must honor our obligations under international law. I find it odd that the Republicans of late shows such contempt for international agreements. They are mentioned in the Constitution specifically as being the law of the land. They are an essential part of international relations and the USA benefits greatly from international accords yet some Republican politicians act like they exist only to restrain the sheer awesomeness of America. This is profoundly childish. The Republicans will regret what they have done to the executive next time they elect another President, especially if he/she thinks they need to be a 'unitary executive' or some jabbery pokery'.

The current opposition to a nuclear deal with Iran is strange. Ever since the Iranian people deposed the US backed Shah Iran has been treated as an illegitimate country. This is absurd. Look at a map. Iran is a large country with a 4000 year history. How could they not be a major regional player? Look at the USA. Nowhere near the Middle East. Yet USA conservatives insist we should be the strongest player in the Middle east. See a problem? Iran has endorsed a nuclear free Middle East. Israel, which has a nuclear weapons program refused to endorse it and the USA vetoed this sensible proposition. The only reason is the far fetched ( to the rest of  world)  idea that Iran cannot be trusted with a nuclear weapon but Israel can ( to say nothing of the USA, which is the only country to have used one in war) and this must be because Jews and Christians are good and Muslims bad. Iran calling for the destruction of Israel is really no different than the US calling for a regime change in Iran. Obviously when Iran calls for the destruction of Israel they are not talking about physically destroying the Levant. Racism is not the proper term for the attitude towards Iran, but it is close. Iran cannot be a legitimate player in the region while a country descended from European immigrants ( Israel) or the USA ( same) is held to be legit. How can this be anything but the anti Muslim prejudice that is the greatest recruiting tool for Daesh ( ISIS). If anyone has a claim to be a legitimate nuclear power in the region it is Iran. Not the USA. Not Israel.

If Greece is supposed to pay for all its debts the USA should have paid for the French and Indian war and not rebelled against Britain. I have been saying Germany needs to pay ALL its 20th century debt but really if Greece is supposed to pay its debts there is no legitimate reason for the US to have declared independence from Britain. The US needs to pay Britain, Germany needs to pay Ftrance reparations. What is good for the goose....

 If you are proud of actual accomplishments does that lead to a deficit of pride? Do we require chauvinistic myths to be in good mental health? There is a kind of parallel to Calvinism in which our good works can never be enough to win us a place in heaven. There are experiments that show optimistic people are healthier but also way more optimistic about outcomes that is warrented. Pessimists get closer to the truth but are more miserable. Could humans need a mythology which allows them unearned pride? The corollary is the great question; can we handle the truth? Totalitarian regimes seek to control every aspect of culture because they are sure only a unified people can do big things. Could this be part of the enduring appeal of conservatism? Having to actually accomplish this to have a sense of pride is much harder and success can be stymied despite the best, most determined work by the individual. Sometimes the good one does is not even apparent during ones lifetime. Existentialism is really hard and that is why a mythology based sense of self may be so comforting. In the 1960's people understood this and tried to create a new American paradigm, a progressive mythology. Culture does not take grafts well but the legacy of this attempt accounts for much of our best instincts today. We must realize it is difficult to get people to give up something in exchange for nothing. A new American mythology needs to return to our cultural front burner. The cheap thrills of jingoistic patriotism are a powerful enemy but without fighting we will only watch things get worse.