It was a great slogan, because it linked the people in the parks to the people watching at home, suggesting a kind of class struggle that even class-averse Americans could support.
Then he delivered the punch line: "The demilitarization of Europe — where large swaths of the general public and political class are averse to military force and the risks that go with it — has gone from a blessing in the 20th century to an impediment to achieving real security and lasting peace in the 21st century".
U.S. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates was scathing about Europe in a recent speech: "The demilitarization of Europe — where large swaths of the general public and political class are averse to military force and the risks that go with it — has gone from a blessing in the 20th century to an impediment to achieving real security and lasting peace in the 21st".
And in a sane universe, these numbers would put to rest the nonstop talk about how Obama's emphasis on inequality, Wall Street lack of accountability, economic fairness and the need for the rich to pay more in taxes is only about playing to the Dem base, and risks alienating the "class warfare" averse middle of the country.
One would think; and yet, in February, Secretary of Defense Gates complained that The demilitarization of Europe — where large swaths of the general public and political class are averse to military force and the risks that go with it — has gone from a blessing in the 20th century to an impediment to achieving real security and lasting peace in the 21st century.
At that time mortgage lending was nonexistent and the middle class was averse to borrowing to buy a house.
In the proposed model, on the basis of travelers' risk attitudes toward network uncertainty, all travelers are categorized into three classes: risk-averse travelers, risk-prone travelers, and risk-neutral travelers.
I'm not sure how or when this reckless idea popped into my middle-class, risk-averse brain.
I grew up indoors, my inner-city working-class family being extremely averse to the outside.
Suppose that 70% of voters are self-interested and cast votes according to their ideal points (r R ⁎=1 for the rich, r M ⁎=3, and r P ⁎=8 for the middle-class and poor voters, respectively), while 30% of voters in all income classes are slightly averse to inequality in the sense that they prefer redistribution at one increment above the respective ideal points of self-interested voters.
(One supply-side guru compared Slobodan Milosevic to Abraham Lincoln. Another said that American upper-class women "are averse to science and technology and baffled by it"). While their other preposterous ideas went nowhere, the equally preposterous notion of supply-side economics took the political system by storm.
