Once upon a time there was a US presidential candidate that could not name three out of four heads of state. The significance of this lies in that he was not asked whether he knew who was running the Federated States of Micronesia. He was asked about four states
making headlines.

This candidate- yes, George W. Bush- went on to become president, where his ignorance and lack of interest in the fields of economics and foreign affairs facilitated his manipulation by ideologues. During his presidency a deep knowledge of history, politics and even military doctrines was replaced by prayer and the conviction that “ideas matter.”

That ideas matter is an insight on which his ally Tony Blair elaborated after leaving office. Thank you for that, Tony.

By the end of the W. Bush presidency, American forces were engaged in two foreign wars that, at the time, could be described as stalemates. This is what ignorance does. It facilitates messes.

On top of that, a free market hawk like the Secretary of the Treasury, Henry Paulson, was running around Washington DC trying to convince members of Congress to socialize the financial system. Thank you for that, Hank.

Not that I disagree with Hank on this. On the contrary, when a free market hawk and a self-described free market White House see the necessity of government intervention in the economy, then the argument over whether government has a role in the economy is settled.

But today’s headlines feature Herman Cain, who, among other things, actually referred
generically to Central Asian states as “Ubeki-beki-beki-beki-stan-stan.” He could have named a real state in the region to make his point. But sadly, that is the point. He does not know any.

Cain also declared that he considers China a military threat since “they’ve indicated that they’re trying to develop a nuclear capability.”

It should trouble Republicans that this man is actually ahead in the polls.

Has the Republican base ever heard of Jon Huntsman? The Republican establishment (psst, these are the people who believe in knowing things) has, and Huntsman is aware of things like China having nuclear weapons since 1964.  Considering how Romney is perceived by the base, why is Cain the viable alternative and not Huntsman?

Maybe it’s because Huntsman knows things- the more people know, the less naïve they are, and the harder it is to manipulate them. OK, so Huntsman has no chance of winning the nomination. And Romney? Well, being governor of one of the most progressive states in the Union seems to be hurting his chances with the base.

Since ignorance is fashionable again, I wonder if we should be getting ready for more economic and military disasters.