The confluence of ideas and interests

This week, we were assigned to look at international incidents and examine whether ideas or interests prevailed in foreign policy decisions. Yet, in most of the presentations (including my own) there was no clear demarcation of ideas and interests. In almost every foreign policy decision, the two were simply intertwined.

For my presentation, I examined the Bay of Pigs invasion of Cuba in 1961. While financial interests played a large stake, the anti-Communist ideology of the time was without a doubt a primary motivation. The need to fight communism was an idealistic one, yet national security in this regard would represent a main interest. The two simply cannot be treated as completely separate goals in this regard.

For this reason, I really enjoyed the Laffey and Weldes article this week and how they treat ideas as symbolic technologies. While I enjoyed the Keohane article as well, I disagree that ideas and interests can be completely separated and analyzed as separate entities. Ideas, as the underpin of our thoughts and behavior, shape our interests in ways that we don't even realize. Professor Jackson illustrates this well in his lecture with his suit metaphor. Our day-to-day decisions aren't necessarily conscious thoughts, but a combination of everything in our environment that we've ever experienced. Our lives and experiences are shaped by the ideas that we have been exposed to, and thus, help mold our interests.

I sought to understand the confluence of ideas and interests while working on my presentation this week. I wanted to understand what had ushered in the "Red Scare" in 1950s-60s United States, aside from the obvious political reasons. What caused the mass hysteria that persecuted US citizens and created a climate of fear? This panic squashed free speech, civil liberties, and marked a large shift to the right in America, a shift that still exists today. Clearly, ideas are quite powerful, but does a difference in them signal a threat? The madness of the Red Scare would signify that even ideas are enough to cause a national security panic, which then becomes a very real material interest. Ideas and interests cannot be separated in policy decisions, as they are two sides of the same coin.