Your view assumes that those with dying regrets lack much critical analysis. That they espouse these regrets without having critically considered the alternatives. That no one has said to them 'oh you had a comfortable life, quit complaining' or 'if you hadn't worked, you wouldn't have had such a comfortable retirement'.
I suspect they have been told this over and over. And I suspect that they have thought critically about those regrets.
I guess I'm concerned about your quick dismissal of their potential wisdom.
Even if his view assumes that, wouldn't assuming otherwise be also wrong? Why should we think that most people dying have carefully analyzed their entire life, and even if they did, why should we assume they are correct?
Well, it happens but rarely does it happen exclusively in the West where there is a lot at stake. (Would be interested in counterexamples)
International law, as an attempt to tame excesses of diplomacy, is something that has lifted up the West. It's brought order and prosperity. This move is yet another jenga brick taken out of the liberal West, thereby weakening the EU. The EU really needs to bother...
The very important difference being that these countries did not explicitly say: "We will break international law". You might think that's a technicality but in international law that's really an important distinction.
I mean I did explicitly say the West vs the West. And self-determination is definitely a special case so none of these apply.
Again, the US vs the West?
I'd be surprised if its never happened. But the ensuing uproar is part of the politics - It's an extra hurdle for countries in a political maneuver. And a broadly positive hurdle.
This is a cursory criticism but this seems to be suggesting that journalists who, say, specialise in Middle Eastern politics talk to other journalists who specialise in Middle Eastern politics than others. And that’s supposed to be surprising/vaguely interesting?
Ah I'm so glad you posted this! I've been trying to articulate a rejection of cycnism so it's perfect to have the opposite case presented!
I know it is semantics but it's important. You say "it's not cynicism", "it's just the truth". Cynicism is the belief that everyone is almost entirely self-interested. It squeezes out the possibility of altruism and generosity. Its sort of irrelevant whether it's the truth. So you are cynical.
Love that you've found some joy out of being at peace with your worldview.
I see it as the emergence of post modernism in popular culture. People don't feel comfortable claiming knowledge of some 'truth' - relativism is too ingrained. You could say it derives from kindness and a desire not to impose nor offend; or (if you're Pascal Bruckner etc) an underconfidence in ourselves, our enlightenment.
Obviously, I'm extrapolating like crazy. But start to notice the 'my truth' qualifications - everyone does it now.
Most NFTS are selling for under a couple thousand. Even over many editions, the millions figure is not common.