Joseph Nye on the Future of Soft Power and Public Diplomacy

Soft power scholar Joseph Nye discusses the new challenges faced by public diplomacy practitioners in the modern global information environment.
He recently published an essay reflecting on these topics as part of a special edition of the Hague Journal of Diplomacy titled, "Debating Public Diplomacy: Now and Next." More: www.uscpublicdiplomacy.org/st...

[@jokowidiawati2751]

Hay guys, im from tegal.. Actually im living in remote area in Indonesia, we are poor country and we have expensive education here.. So thanks youtube for posting this great information!🖖

[@ramelmamedov547]

Thank you sir its always thrilling to try to read and get into your ideas. Tried to buy your books in Russia, but it seems only Amazon sells them in my case. And thats over my budget. But i've made it to the parts and pieces of your works so generally i've got the ideas you share. i think future is in hands those people who are fond of ideas like public diplomacy and soft power. As it is said engage people into what you are doing you'll be successful.

[@mehmetcelik6026]

SO...is soft power an element of public diplomacy? or public diplomacy is an element of soft power? Which is more comprehensive? superior?

[@ashviv2774]

Perceptive comments by the coiner of the term but, sadly, who is listening? Nye once wrote that in an age of information 'attention rather than information becomes the scarce resource'. The occupant of the White House has no trouble getting attention. The voices of reason find it much harder.

[@user-uw1iy7yn1x]

Very fine video

[@rafedkarim4595]

God bless America

[@resul8777]

👎🏻

[@joem0088]

The problem with Professor Joseph Nye's soft power approach to geopolitics is that it is not a poltical neutral theory but a US (or Western) theory. In this view the US and by extension the West cannot accept a state without a liberal democracy such as China. The psychological state of "I'm OK, you're OK" is not allowed. Under this "you're not OK" is a pile of accusations as regards behavior, ideology ... and some unsaid such as historic grudge (Korean War, China's role in Vietnam war), that China is not white, not a Christian civilisation etc. This attitude to China means all the soft tool or hard tool serve the state of craft of dominance. The "not OK" China cannot be allowed to have much influence or primacy. For this reason whatever diplomacy or militray posture, is just posturing. The underlying tension is always there. The only solution to true peaceful co-existence is to accept the others ideology, not as eternal but as something necessary this decade, this age, and give up the America Exceptionalism of knowing it all, being in possession of the "End of History" political system. The world can see very well that America's system has limitations from the way it limps from crisis to crisis, losing war after war, from its excessive current carbon emission per capita to cumulative emissions. America simply has to understand that if the whole world live the way it lives, the planet would be long dead, and there would be no one to outsource the dirty jobs to.

[@eleonoraformatoneeszczepan8807]

... 7 replies.

[@eleonoraformatoneeszczepan8807]

Short version: Significance of the US Constitution: in the US; outside the US. Significance of other parts of the world having their own constitution: to that part of the world; to the US. Significance of a Constitution in cohesion, flexibility, peace, competition, being kept accountable: from an internal point of view; from an external point of view. Examples: - an oath is taken (by US military) to "support and defend the Constitution of the United States" - framers of the Constitution of Australia were influenced significantly by the Constitution of the USA. -"The constitutions of a number of other countries were also considered at the constitutional conventions, ... "In substance, ... , the Australian Constitution was drafted at the 1891 Convention." - if EU invested in coming up with their own Constitution. - the ability to converse with others based on their own constitution - it looks like, it seems like, it sounds like, it feels like ... based on the (your) constitution, this is inconsistent or is consistent or ... e.t.c. - the ability to converse with others based on your own constitution - it looks like, it seems like, it sounds like, it feels like ... based on the (our) constitution, this is inconsistent or is consistent or ... e.t.c. Crimea doesn't sort of look like a voice box, entrance to the larynx in a mouth? .................... Example: Part of a conversation on fb: A reply: Rubbish, If you want to live in a society, don't risk being a "typhoid Mary"! That ain't rocket science! , "Rubbish, If you want to live in a society, don't risk being a "typhoid Mary"! That ain't rocket science!" ... that came from? The reply: Eleonora Formato It didn't need to "come from" anywhere. Society can and must protect itself from those who would intentionally harm it! People who plant bombs, and people who spread killer viruses are but 2 examples! A reply: Eleonora Formato It was a response to just this rubbish! "end up in camps of enforced medical procedures and being medicated, or to end up in the alternative camp of elimination" , that hasn't happened in history? ... how do people spread killer viruses? A reply: "Eleonora Formato Not getting vaccinated, not social distancing, not covering their faces when coughing or sneezing ... etc, etc,!" , not getting vaccinated, is on a similar level to people who plant bombs? , almost sounds like it is seen or treated as if like terrorism or a terrorist? ... also, seems a bit authoritarian. ... this is part of the Australian Constitution .... Chapter 1: The Parliament: Part V: Powers of the Parliament. Section 51 "... subject to this Constitution, ... to make laws for the peace, order, and good government of the Commonwealth ... "; and, (xxiiiA) "... medical ... (but not so as to authorize any form of civil conscription)" (Australian Parliament House, website) and, ... this is part of the Australian Constitution .... Chapter V: The States Section 116 ("Commonwealth not to legislate in respect of religion") "The Commonwealth shall not make any law for establishing any religion, or for imposing any religious observance, or for prohibiting the free exercise of any religion, and no religious test shall be required as a qualification for any office or public trust under the Commonwealth." (Australian Parliament House, website) (While it isn't the US Constitution, and an oath is taken to "support and defend the Constitution of the United States", this is part of the Australian Constitution .... )

[@eleonoraformatoneeszczepan8807]

A conversation, from where a part of a conversation on fb is in the example above: Comment deleted? ... ... (on yt:various) A conversation on fb: From (written in) a comment section elsewhere: (yes, an Aussie in Australia). In remembrance, of who we are, for where we've come from, and for where we are going, as a democracy, because this is Australia, and with respect, we are Australians, and because: Anzacs or their offspring, wouldn't purposefully contribute to creating a climate or environment where it possible for the erosion of democracy and the separation of powers between the legislature(parliament), executive(administration and enforcement), and judiciary(due process), would they; and, Stolen generation(s) or their offspring, wouldn't purposefully contribute to creating a climate or environment where it possible for a sort of generation stolen to be happening on current generations, would they; and so too, WWII survivors or their offspring wouldn't purposefully contribute to creating a climate or environment where it possible for current generations to either end up in camps of enforced medical procedures and being medicated, or to end up in the alternative camp of elimination, or to be told all generations the same and then all individually tested and told where their differences make them best placed to be positioned for the betterment, sake and showcase of all being the same, would they; and so too, .... , would they; and so too, .... , would they; and so too, .... , would they; and so too, etc. Stay well. Peace. Eleonora Formato née Szczepanowski South Australia How can procedural fairness be maintained and how is 'silence' achievable in court, if unable to secure representation and without giving up the legal presumption that, as an adult, you can make your own decisions from choices? Life is full of unexpected surprises. If, "people are entitled to the best defence they can get, these days, that usually means the best defence they can afford", does that mean that if the best defence a person can get isn't very good, then, their entitlement is limited to a defence that isn't very good? Is that then not a judgement, a determination that a person who does not know any better, is entitled to defence that isn't very good? AIso, does that mean there is a correlation between quality of defence and quantity of the monetary value sought for time, i.e. rate, and proportional to total monetary quantity available over time? If so, the amount sought for defence would be representational of quality, and for the purposes of defence, it would not then matter if a person is eligible for legal aid, as a fixed total amount available for a given rate would not be competitive with an amount available over an indetermined amount of time greater than could be afforded by legal aid at the same rate. A reply: Rubbish, If you want to live in a society, don't risk being a "typhoid Mary"! That ain't rocket science! , "Rubbish, If you want to live in a society, don't risk being a "typhoid Mary"! That ain't rocket science!" ... that came from? The reply: Eleonora Formato It didn't need to "come from" anywhere. Society can and must protect itself from those who would intentionally harm it! People who plant bombs, and people who spread killer viruses are but 2 examples! A reply: Eleonora Formato It was a response to just this rubbish! "end up in camps of enforced medical procedures and being medicated, or to end up in the alternative camp of elimination" , that hasn't happened in history? ... how do people spread killer viruses? A reply: "Eleonora Formato Not getting vaccinated, not social distancing, not covering their faces when coughing or sneezing ... etc, etc,!" , not getting vaccinated, is on a similar level to people who plant bombs? , almost sounds like it is seen or treated as if like terrorism or a terrorist? ... also, seems a bit authoritarian. Today, in this modern era, it would seem to be about keeping covid, a virus, a foreign entity, out of the body, yet, there are those injected with a foreign entity; those who are infected by a foreign entity; those who naturally were infected with a foreign entity; and those who are not infected. It seems, that as long as some insist all must be injected to be vaccinated, and with ongoing regular booster shots (or else!), that there are again, two classes of citizens: citizens paying to be infected with an injection, to be given a first-class status, with all the rest, citizens infected and not infected, being given a second-class status. Part V: Powers of the Parliament. Section 51 "... subject to this Constitution, ... to make laws for the peace, order, and good government of the Commonwealth ... "; and, (xxiiiA) "... medical ... (but not so as to authorize any form of civil conscription)" (Australian Parliament House, website) Stanford University Lecture 17. Professor Robert Sapolsky 1:29:00 min ... "one of those dark horrible chapters in the history of science, another realm of legally enforced psycho surgery ... " 1:30:29 min ... "people subjected ... because, they were argumentative, because they as teenagers didn't listen to their parents, they didn't listen to their teachers, thousands of cases of these ... " If it is valid, as it seems it is suggested, that just about everyone needs to be vaccinated, for the good of others, or, it is not unacceptable to use as a singular criteria, of some sort of success to do with covid, in insisting most if not all be vaccinated, how is it then not valid to have a lockdown, without regard to context, of just about everyone, for the good of others, or, it not unacceptable to use that same or a singular criteria for lockdowns, in general? It seems like: All are as if in a 'preventative detention' not for punshmiment, but for fear of being humans with immune systems vulnerable to re-offending indefinitely with infections and transmission of COVID, under a control order necessitating getting a 'jab' in the arm, vaccinated, prohibiting associations, visiting certain places, activities, ownerships, etc; or, All are as if slaves awaiting to receive a vaccine ticket ' jab', in the arm, to be contractually bound by terms and conditions on accepting that vaccine ticket to freedom, but not indefinitely, and not unlike personal'property on a lease that cannot be held indefinitely, needing to renew regularly; and, It does not seem unreasonable under those circumstances to foresee potential doors opening for opportunities of ease for coercion, undue influence, exploitation, blackmail, harassment in supply of consumer goods and services, sale of a vaccine as if a body part by a destitute person, etc.? It may sound like, when it comes to COVID the issue is a question of vaccination, one of education, in science, statistics and seriousness of outcome, or convictions, however, it seems like the issue is confusion around duty of care and causation. It looks like the consensus is, that the extent to which being vaccinated eliminates transmission, is uncertain, therefore, a civic duty argument for being vaccinated to minimise transmission, to eliminate causation as a factor with certainty, seems moot, and as a precautionary burden, not the most pragmatic. If on the other hand, the idea of vaccination is to provide, at a lower intensity, an immune response to give a memory for the body on how to deal with a virus if it should encounter it again, then, perhaps, it is that the government ought to have a duty of care to make vaccinations available and accessible, with and through educational information, however, it sounds like it is as if the body has no memory if there is a variation of the virus, and, there are new variations of the virus each season, then, on balancing competing beneficial outcomes, it may not be of social utility to expect that COVID vaccinations ought to be available, taken or made to be taken, by all? A reply: "Eleonora Formato None of that has anything to do with the medical stuff that I was responding to you about. Nothing at all!" , nothing at all?

[@eleonoraformatoneeszczepan8807]

Yin and Yang? ... ☯️ TCM ... five elements ... sheng and ko? ... 13:10 min ... (Sorry, I'm not sure I'm listening properly.) It sounds like a possible discussion about an imbalance in power, either by a result of control, an excess in relation to either a deficiency, neutrality, or another excess yet that is deficient by contrast, or, by a result of nurturing, a deficiency in relation to either an excess, neutrality, or another deficiency yet that is in excess by contrast? "John Mearsheimer: Great power politics on Ukraine" (CGTN)

[@eleonoraformatoneeszczepan8807]

Some perspective, perhaps, or not? Minimum distance between Britain and Europe: 20 miles (32 km) ... ? Minimum distance between Taiwan and China: 81 miles (130 km) ... ? How did Germany go with taking over Britain in WWII? From a yin/yang perspective (this might not be correct): How much effort would be needed to 'take Taiwan', how much would it weaken China, and, how much hostility would it bring to China (direct or indirect: destructive), say compared with making a decision that, even though Taiwan is important, China is in a position to not need to take over Taiwan, with China being strong enough to be a nurturing ally, and, the goodwill that would bring to China? How much effort would it take China (with US support) to, say, "liberate" North Korea, over land, a place that relatively is seen as extremly deficient in maintaing humans-rights when compared to China, and so, in that context, would South Korea prefer, to border North Korea or to border China, and, while some may question motives, how much goodwill would be brought to China, if (with US support) North Korea were liberated and instead of being kept by China, North Korea allowed to heal with South Korea? How much effort would it take China to find a solution to an expanding desert and possible dehydration, rehabilitating the desert with edible grasses and trees, while providing an opportunity to take pressure off of some of the cities, providing opportunities for improved health, livibility, ... e.t.c. ... Example: "Town planners on a 'crusade' against TB could help us to redesign our cities post-COVID - ABC News" www.abc.net.au/news/2021-08-25/what-planning-lessons-during-tb-outbreak-teach-us-about-covid19/100348914

[@eleonoraformatoneeszczepan8807]

...

[@eleonoraformatoneeszczepan8807]

3:45 min ... "two-way conversation ... " 3:57 min ... "how to reach that ... audience in ways that are different ... " 4:18 min ... 4:23 min ... what sort of target?

[@eleonoraformatoneeszczepan8807]

There's also a ted talk that says isolation is a dream killer or something like that, and Harvard has researched something not dissimilar over a long term, as in, like 80 years. So, what a good idea, to reach out, and, in that spirit, would it be ridiculous if ... I feel like going, what the hey ... Would it be ridiculous if somebody who knows Tim Adey, facilitated contact? Kind regards, Eleonora Would it be ridiculous if a person who is able to contact Tim Adey, facilitated contact? Kind regards, Eleonora (... the last truly trustworthy person I remember, although I could be wrong in my assessment (it is based on memory from mid 2017) ... ) Or, Would it be ridiculous if a person who is able to contact someone trustworthy and knowledgeable facilitated contact, so that I have a person to talk with ... ? Is that too much to ask?

[@eleonoraformatoneeszczepan8807]

How about legal aid? Or, are they in the pockets of aged care facility builders/owners? Did you know, that there a cultures in Australia, where it is ok for a guy to instantly move on from a marriage to partner up with another person, yet, it is isn't ok for the woman to move on, and if a mother, until maybe their child or children are grown up, and, it acceptable for the guy to not really bare responsibility, but, for his parents to when it comes to the children, and to a certain extent, the woman? How can a woman move on in a community like that, when resources aren't there to be able to move on? .... (hint: a shelter or legal service for women is not the answer.) ... what sort of lawyer insists you as an adult agree to live somewhere, in property owned by your husband's parents, when you don't want to in a family matter ... ? Apparently, facilities make their money when people move on, not when people buy in, so the higher the turn over rate, the higher the profit. How confident are you investing in a family home building company, who leaves the mother of their child/grandchild, homeless? Are they an award winning business? (HIA/MBA ... ? ... Housing Industry Association/Master Builders Association ... ?) How confident are you in decision making, in a family law firm, who in their professional ethical reasoning are ok with a party not having the means for a lawyer when the other party or parties have the means for those lawyers?

[@eleonoraformatoneeszczepan8807]

Strikes? Where are the gentlemen in the world? ... if a surname of a senior associate is the same, as a surname of the spouse of an extended family like member employed by a business of a family and whose career is also involved in their spouse's industry, and, with the same surname of a high ranking police officer who is the father of the spouse - that might not seem like a situation to make sure there is no conflict of interest? ... especially when it looks like a senior associate replies to correspondence of another solicitor - sign, authentication, verification of identity, signature of who? and that might not seem like ethical infrastructures not necessarily in place, like Chinese walls? ... and, when communication screened by a personal assistant and a solicitor in another department involved - that might not seem like an ... employer locking out an employee, primary and or secondary boycott, third party target? ... what do I know though ... it might not be correct. Procedure? ... that's a different story, and while not substantive and law does not concern itself with trifles, if as if like the sum of micro-aggressions, procedural fairness/due process, perverting the course of justice/the administration of the law/denial of natural justice ... obstruction ... then, it could be quite serious ... judicial review ... ... misconstrued? Perhaps, if the construct in form, is not contiguous or literal and the context not littoral, it could still be said adjacent, and in priniciple, adjective? ... partnership law ... legal firms ... have maintained access to courts of equity ... ... so ... in family law ... ? What about in accounting, goodwill? ... branding value? ... a car's a car ... right?

[@eleonoraformatoneeszczepan8807]

It seems like the following might be not irrelevant though, regardless of whether it is a federal or state level issue ....... ... legal capacity ... legal incapacity ... legal disability ... disability ... impairment ... substitute decision-making ... supported decision making ... supportive attorney ... general and or enduring power of attorney ... plenary guardian ... (conservatorship) ... guardianship and administration ... public advocate ... I had lawyers in court argue that I needed a legal guardian to make decisions for me, instead of me, because I have a physical disability, as that according to the argument meant I had a legal disability which meant legal incapacity which meant not having capacity, as any adult over eighteen would, to make decisions which were legally binding. I was and still am self-represented and something I would not be able to do if I did not have the capacity to do so, although, that capacity dose not mean I have the skills and know how (competence) of a solicitor, team of solicitors, or a barrister with thirty years experience and at the top of their field of specialisation. It seems like it is not unreasonable to forsee how, with an aging population and or people young or old with disabilities, play on words and general understanding or not, and various other factors like house titles and nursing home fees, services (honeypots) and such forth (droit de suit, patents, dividends, e.t.c.), that it could result in many not retaining their legal capacity and also therefore their right to make any decision with authority regarding their own life as an individual, or, to vote? Please tell me I am not correct. Distinguish: competence from capacity, and, disability from legal disability/incapacity. Examples: A person under the age of 18, may not necessarily have a mental disability however, have a legal disability. A person may have a disability or impairment, yet not the absence of capacity to make decisions for themselves, and it unlawful in the context of several areas to discriminate against them. A person in a personal relationship or in employment, who is a carer for an adult or child who is frail, or vulnerable or has a disability, might have the competencies to give personal support and yet, in their role as a carer, may or may not also have the capacity of a guardian to make decisions or sign contracts. A lawyer might have the competence to be a lawyer but incompetent or negligent or show a transient derangement of understanding and not encountered in normal persons, sort of like a person with an injured or damaged "frontal cortex" not being capable of "stopping a course of action that's no longer relevant" ... ? (In addition: an example; a lion is a cat, but, a cat is not necessarily a lion. a lion is a mammal, but, a mammal is not necessarily a lion. a person is a mammal, but, a person (literally) is not a lion or a cat, and yet, a person, a lion, a cat, are all mammals. Although, as a literary term/poetic licence ... not to be taken literally as it is creative ... a person might be referred to as a cat or lion ... ) How can procedural fairness be maintained and how is 'silence' achievable in court, if unable to secure representation and without giving up the legal presumption that, as an adult, you can make your own decisions from choices? Life is full of unexpected surprises. If, "people are entitled to the best defence they can get, these days, that usually means the best defence they can afford", does that mean that if the best defence a person can get isn't very good, then, their entitlement is limited to a defence that isn't very good? Is that then not a judgement, a determination that a person who does not know any better, is entitled to defence that isn't very good? AIso, does that mean there is a correlation between quality of defence and quantity of the monetary value sought for time, i.e. rate, and proportional to total monetary quantity available over time? If so, the amount sought for defence would be representational of quality, and for the purposes of defence, it would not then matter if a person is eligible for legal aid, as a fixed total amount available for a given rate would not be competitive with an amount available over an indetermined amount of time greater than could be afforded by legal aid at the same rate. From (written in) a comment section elsewhere: (yes, an Aussie in Australia). In remembrance, of who we are, for where we've come from, and for where we are going, as a democracy, because this is Australia, and with respect, we are Australians, and because: Anzacs or their offspring, wouldn't purposefully contribute to creating a climate or environment where it possible for the erosion of democracy and the separation of powers between the legislature(parliament), executive(administration and enforcement), and judiciary(due process), would they; and, Stolen generation(s) or their offspring, wouldn't purposefully contribute to creating a climate or environment where it possible for a sort of generation stolen to be happening on current generations, would they; and so too, WWII survivors or their offspring wouldn't purposefully contribute to creating a climate or environment where it possible for current generations to either end up in camps of enforced medical procedures and being medicated, or to end up in the alternative camp of elimination, or to be told all generations the same and then all individually tested and told where their differences make them best placed to be positioned for the betterment, sake and showcase of all being the same, would they; and so too, .... , would they; and so too, .... , would they; and so too, .... , would they; and so too, etc. Stay well. Peace. Eleonora Formato née Szczepanowski South Australia

[@MariaKatsikovordou]

Melania is Trump's soft power :)

[@paulrussell1207]

God help us lol

[@resul8777]

@@paulrussell1207 🤦🏻