From World War I to Operation Desert Storm, American policymakers have repeatedly invoked the 'lessons of history' as they contemplated taking their nation to war. Do these historical analogies actually shape policy, or are they primarily tools of political justification? Yuen Foong Khong argues that leaders use analogies not merely to justify policies but also to perform specific cognitive and information-processing tasks essential to political decision-making. Khong identifies what these tasks are and shows how they can be used to explain the U.S. decision to intervene in Vietnam. Relying on interviews with senior officials and on recently declassified documents, the author demonstrates with a precision not attained by previous studies that the three most important analogies of the Vietnam era - Korea, Munich, and Dien Bien Phu - can account for America's Vietnam choices. A special contribution is the author's use of cognitive social psychology to support his argument about how humans analogize and to explain why policymakers often use analogies poorly.
具体描述
读后感
评分
评分
评分
评分
用户评价
有些事后诸葛的味道…
评分这学期IR阅读里我最喜欢的一个理论
评分这学期IR阅读里我最喜欢的一个理论
评分有些事后诸葛的味道…
评分这学期IR阅读里我最喜欢的一个理论
相关图书
本站所有内容均为互联网搜索引擎提供的公开搜索信息，本站不存储任何数据与内容，任何内容与数据均与本站无关，如有需要请联系相关搜索引擎包括但不限于百度，google,bing,sogou 等
© 2025 book.quotespace.org All Rights Reserved. 小美书屋 版权所有