I was thinking about that as I read those earlier comments. For all Clinton's faults, and there are many, during his tenure the US was a progressive, hopeful, innovative place. All that came to a screeching halt with Bush v Gore and the fevered dreams of the PNAC and neocon hegemonists. Whatever technological edge we might have gained in the 90s, we have squandered since then. Now it seems the only sphere in which we truly excel is in bigger and more expensive ways to kill people and blow things up.
And I would argue that one of the cornerstones of the information age and the knowledge economy often overlooked is the growth of open source software and technology, the iconic example being the rise of Linux as a viable alternative to the Microsoft borg. And I think it is no accident that Linux itself is the brainchild of Linus Torvalds, an unassuming Finn. I suspect even a casual inspection of the pool of significant contributors to Linux, KDE, and GNOME, as well as the amazing pool of follow-on products and programs, would reveal the enormous contributions made by European coders and advocates. Somewhere in cyberspace, the ghost of de Chardin is smiling.
Forget Bill Clinton's era. The real breaking steps were done before Microsoft, and were largely helped by DARPA. the real action happened from the late 50's to the early 70's, in a progressively liberalised US. Do you know what SF means? - until late 60 meant Science Fiction. - beginning from late 60 became to be Speculative Fiction (engineers and scientists are highly respected, but the us entered an age of mysticism, with drugs contributing a little to that, but SAT scores were already decreasing since 1963)
I sorry for german universities. since they are so bad, compared to english and american ones, i guess people graduating from that must have real problems in creating gadgets that anyone else may buy.
Tell you what, i am going to create the best university in the world. i will buy the best young brains, and then claim that there is a trace-element in the water that makes people smarter, errr, innovative.
Finally: People who believe in mirages should not be selected as guides.
For all Clinton's faults, and there are many, during his tenure the US was a progressive, hopeful, innovative place. All that came to a screeching halt with Bush v Gore and the fevered dreams of the PNAC and neocon hegemonists. Whatever technological edge we might have gained in the 90s, we have squandered since then. Now it seems the only sphere in which we truly excel is in bigger and more expensive ways to kill people and blow things up.
When he says in either case is he betraying that the interview was made before the end of the primary season, maybe much earlier? However, it must have been already after Obama was well ahead of Clinton. Or maybe he means whether the Demsocrats or the Republicans win (given the comment about McCain also changing the way things are done).
The first time I read this I thought that "the great friends of the US Administration in Spain" meant American officials in Spain, but clearly he means Aznar's people in the Spanish opposition party PP which--interestingly--he doesn't name at various points of the interview even though clearly he refers to them.
And note the accusation of incompetence of the Bush administration. He's not so shocked about the ideology, but about the sloppy execution. When the capital development of a country becomes a by-product of the activities of a casino, the job is likely to be ill-done. — John M. Keynes
