It’s the only society on earth where remote-controlled torture of their own children is considered acceptable, and as they continue to debate whether people defending their homes from a brutal invading horde of murderers, torturers and sexual predators should be granted “amnesty” for having had the temerity to attempt to protect their loved ones from harm, I notice that my non-western mail speaks increasingly with one voice: You can’t reason with Americans.
Why, people ask me, do I continue to participate on forums that while they may consider themselves to be somewhat less right wing than Cheney, Rumsfeld et al, are from a distance, fundamentally ideologically indistinguishable from those forums whose stated purpose is to praise the warlords and their barbaric “policies.”
While I myself have frequently pointed out that the self-styled US “opposition” confines its opposition largely to questions of vocabulary, the fact is that in most cases, the same vocabulary is used by the warlords’ champions and critics as well, the most obvious examples being related to the US project to destroy the cradle of civilization, an activity that it is hard to argue is anything but consistent with US’s general opposition to the very concept of civilization, such as referring to people defending their homeland as “insurgents,” and increasingly, anyone who opposes or resists any US policies, regardless of how brutal, how criminal, how contrary to the most basic notions of human decency, much less civilized behavior, as “terrorists.”
I am, as the young folks say, “over it.”
While I recognize that there are a small minority of individuals in the US, as well as US nationals outside of it, who are sincerely in favor of reform, of modernization and advancement, the fact is that these individuals are not only too few to mount any significant reform movement, they are in just as much danger of being kidnapped or exterminated by US “operatives” as any soul whose native land contains a large quantity of Muslims and sand.
While half my mail takes me to task for my futile attempts to reason with Americans, the other half accuses me of hating them.
The former may have a point, the latter is absurd. How can one hate such poor deluded beings? They truly believe that they are manifestly destined to be some sort of ultimate Master Race, to decree to the benighted rest of the world how they can best serve American corporations, which service is considered to be the only reason for anyone, American or not, to exist, and he who is unable to do so should either have the courtesy to take his own life, or submit meekly to having it taken, either through sadistic slow-death domestic policies, or bombs or bullets or any of the grisly methods funded by the taxpayers for the purpose of exterminating “insurgents” and “terrorists” in the crusade lands.
One does not hate the mental patient who believes he is Napoleon, but one would be advised not to provide him with any weaponry, and to make every effort to contain him, to prevent him from doing harm to others, to himself.
And what can we consider the Americans, with the notable exception of those endangered terrorists previously mentioned, but a large population of mental patients?
If one of the better-known warlords appeared tomorrow on CNN and ordered them all to go out onto the front yard and shoot their first born, there would be none of this dilly-dallying and agonizing soul searching a la Abraham. Within hours of the order, American streets would run with the blood of millions of little Isaacs.
Of course, that has not happened, at least not yet, however far too much of the rest of the world is now dealing with the fact that the warlords have ordered their loving subjects to murder THEIR first-born, and their second-born, and the extraordinarily docile and compliant Hosni, Abdullah and ilk notwithstanding, the population of that increasingly endangered rest of the world does not consider the US to be God and they Abraham.
It matters not how deeply ingrained such a notion may be in the hearts of the American corporation devotees, it matters not that to most Americans, any other view is not only impossible, but literally inconceivable. The belief simply has not caught on outside the US and its native overseers around the world.
I am not even sure if calling it a belief is accurate. Perhaps a mental health professional will know the correct term, but religious faith, at least the only kind worth having or discussing, by its very nature DOES question, does recognize the state of non-belief. A person with religious faith will, like Abraham, struggle with concepts, ideas, tenets.
Americans do not struggle or question, neither the notion of themselves as godlike creatures who own and rule the earth, nor that they exist only to make rich men richer, nor the inconsistency of those two precepts.
They just keep prattling on about insurgents and cutting and running and imposing their wills and bringing stability and security to lands they are blowing up, or paying someone to blow up and whether people protecting their children from men with guns sent to kill them should be “pardoned” for their failure to kneel meekly and place their own and their little ones’ heads on the block, murmuring last words of gratitude for the privilege.
That any of this is to say the least, offensive to civilized people, is a file not found. That the US has the inalienable right to invade and occupy any country at any time and slaughter and abuse the occupants right and left is a given.
Though some do object to titling massacres with names like “Iron Fist,” one cannot avoid the drawing room elephant that they do not object, or at least not enough to stop the practice, to paying for the massacre.
One does not feel hate for such people, one feels pity, and sadness, and as one does when near a deathbed, one does not try to reason. One readies one’s funeral clothes, and hopes that the patient will not suffer, and will find the peace that eluded him in life.
Do you take great delight in offending those of us that work to make “America” something better?
Do you take pride in being offensive and rude to your host – Booman Tribune on a site that he pays for?
You are protected within these borders from whatever it was in your homeland that you fled…and yet you persist in being a guest that leaves mess and craps on the carpet?
What exactly is your point?
That steaming, pungent pile of crap lieingon the carpet of our collective living room is our own product. Yes, it’s conisdered impolite by some to point it out, but it bears repeating.
What I read here is that Americans are unable to disabuse ourselves of that exceptionalism manifest in Manifest Destiny that has directed our policies & infected our understanding of ourselves. That those of us who are opposed to this deeply embedded conciousness are largely impotent.Perhaps that’s just my POV super-imposed in DTF’s words, but I doubt I’m far off.
To celebrate the fourth last night, we watched Why We Fight, where Chalmers Johnson points out how resistant Americans are to seeing ourselves as the AGGRESSORS on the world stage that historically we have been, not as the benevlolent force we see ourselves. In what was one of the more terrifying remarks in the documentary, Richard Perle says (& I find it hard to argue with) that Bush has set the foreign policy agenda for years to come & it will be the blueprint for future actions by administrations of either party.
Those of us who see electing Democrats in th ’06 & ’08 as merely the first step in transforming America, not an achievemnet itself, must embrace and learn to HEAR the sort of criticism DTF (in hyperbolic, satiric fashion) delivers here.
It’s in that light that self-examination as a nation is crucial today. Your reaction to DTF here is little different than Bush’s reaction to the European polls showing their belief that the US is more of a danger to world peace than Iran — all Bush could manage in response was to proclaim it absurd. We need to be able to hear the validity of ‘Other’ voices.
Don’t attack the messenger. You’re treading dangerously close here to that old chestnut of xenophobes:
Love it or Leave it.
We can do better than that.
55 Million of us voted against George Bush and his policies and we are mobilizing to politically remove some of his cronies this year.
I believe that DF is nothing but a Republican plant trying to prove to the wingnuts how much “we” as Democrats hate America. Notice that these diaries are never on DailyKos…they’d get flamed as the troll diaries that they are.
So…enough of the bullshit about America being slammed with this pile of steaming stuff…not all of us put it there and millions of us are fighting against it.
DuctapeFatwa = Republican Troll
…although I strongly disagree with much of his take in this particular Diary. I have known enough people on the left – whether s/he is or not – who have held to such views no matter how many countering arguments are raised, that it is no stretch for me to believe that DtF is sincere. Though sincerely wrong.
Hey Sally. He’d be one hell of a troll if he were. I completely think he is heartfelt though.
You have to know in yourself if you are one of the ones who has fought this (dare I say it) fascism. I think you are. You are fighting. DTF isn’t accusing you. At least that’s not the way I read it.
But damn, if collectively American hasn’t fucked up — I don’t know what to say.
Remember that “Forgive Us” Internet page after the election. That was magic.
You are being very very generous.
Someone told me once, if you always apply this rule — you will have less fights. You try to think of a really good motive behind anything that others say or do to you. You stretch. You become very generous. You can usually think of one. And even if you are wrong. You are being naive, say. Well, in the end you win. Because you are a happier person. You’re not going there. Not, you know, getting in the gutter and rolling around.
Just thoughts. Many people I like here. Some of them yelling at one another. Which is okay. But just saying my two cents.
I hate labels as much or more than any and will fight to stop them. IF there was a reasonable chance for debate with Ductape I, like Booman below, would welcome a reasoned and responsible debate. There is no debate here, just hateful statements by DF and no response to reasoned questions.
The diaries have recently been more and more hateful of this country and ALL of us that live here. I just spent two weeks travelling in the rural west and learned a lot. Lessons that we all need to learn but some are unwilling to listen or debate no matter what. This is not the first hatefilled diary by this diarist…and I fear not the last. What s/he has done is once again is created a divisiveness in this community. That I believe is his/her intent.
So…I’ll still call troll…and yes I’ve seen some UID’s at DailyKos down below 10k that have recently surfaced as full fledged trolls. You ask for understanding and generosity…but there is a limit to our patience. To be continuously played the fool by this diarist is like being played a fool by Bushco.
So…a wolf in sheep’s clothing is still a wolf. With apologies to the noble creature – the North American Wolf – for comparing it to a troll.
The dustup about the Mohammed cartoon opened my eyes to Ductape. He went on and on and on about how he as a Muslim was soooo offended and then announced on his own website that he is not a Muslim and how all that just proved how evil we all are (not what a liar he is). He takes true delight in stirring up trouble. He talks about us here as if we are shit under his feet. I have no doubt but that he wrote this attack on the Progressive movement and BoomanTribune just to upset as many people as he can and keep us divided. If his hate filled diaries were meant to inspire meaningful debate, then why does he post them and disappear?
I’m with SallyCat on this one Ductape Fatwa is nothing more than a troll. I’m not fooled by his excess of flowery verbage or his “I’m just a harmless old man” schtick. He can bite me.
He went on and on and on about how he as a Muslim was soooo offended and then announced on his own website that he is not a Muslim and how all that just proved how evil we all are (not what a liar he is).
I don’t believe this is correct. For one thing, it was stark that announced that Ductape was a Muslim. I don’t think he said he wasn’t, but I remember commenting at the time that I had been unaware of that. And that, really, I was still unaware of that because, as far as I could tell, he could also be a Jesuit, a Rabbi, a follower of pre-Christian religions south of the border or any number of things, because he speaks of them all with equal knowledge, respect, love for traditions and for those that use their religion to seek peace and knowledge and so forth. It wouldn’t surprise me if he allowed people to think he was Muslim, in a sort of “I am Sparticus” way…but also wouldn’t surprise me if he was indeed one. I am not sure how much it matters.
I also couldn’t find anyplace on his site where he announced that he wasn’t a Muslim. I believe you may have seen a post where part of it (the part in blockquotes) was a republishing of a Man Eegee post in which he (Man Eegee) proclaimed that he wasn’t even a Muslim, but that he didn’t need to be in order to be offended by the cartoon mess (or something like that).
Of course, I may have missed something both here and at Ductape’s site, and if so, I wish you would point out what. People are, of course, welcome to their opinions on his intentions, sincerity, origins, political views and so on… but I do think calling someone a liar requires a rather high burden of proof and accuracy from the person making the accusation.
I don’t know how many times I have suggested to people that their statements will have so much more impact if they have that link!
And if he is referrring to marked and linked quote by ManEegee, I know Nag will want to apologize to Manito for having suggested that he would ever call any group of blog participants “evil.”
The way that controversy went down it sure as hell DOES matter. I’ve searched for over an hour and read enough of the cartoon crap to last me a lifetime! I can’t find the particular comment Ductape made that made me think he was a Muslim. I do remember reading a comment by him and being surprised that he was Muslim. I also recall talking about him being Muslim privately, so I wasn’t the only one who thought so. I don’t have the inclination to wade through any more. Since I can’t find the smoking gun, I apoligize for calling Ductape a liar. However, if there was a general perception that he was muslim and he did nothing to correct that, in view of the invective that was tossed around, don’t you think that is a little disingenuous?
Here’s where he declares:
“I AM NOT A MUSLIM” scroll down to near the bottom.
Look, it’s hard enough mounting a fight against the Bush government. It’s depressing to feel so helpless. Ductape comes along and tells us we’re no better or different than the extreme right wing. To me, he’s not trying to spark discussion, he’s trying to destroy our hope. Destroy hope, and you destroy the only chance the world has of seeing American Fascism reversed.
So please read more carefully next time.
The link you provide shows very clearly that Man Eegee made the statement “And I am not even Muslim” (in caps). DTF is quoting (reposting, actually) Man Eegee’s diary. You can tell that it’s a repost of Man Eegee’s diary is because DTF states that he is reposting Man Eegee’s post. Not only that but he links to it, just like I’ve done in the quoted passage below.
“ ManEgee has said all this so much better, and my regular readers will be relieved to know, with greater conciseness and brevity than I am capable of even when ordering pizza, that I will take the astonishing and uncharacteristic step of shutting up so you can listen to him.”
Just to be super-Cristal clear, the repost from Man Eegee (which I must say is one of the more brilliant pieces of writing I’ve seen) begins with the words
“Over the past couple of days, I’ve learned a few things about myself:” and continues from there onwards.
Not only that, but DTF then says “Thanks to Man Eegee for permitting this repost” — with yet another link to its initial appearance the previous day on Latino Politico
with you at all. That is not to say out of hand that none occurred, I get a lot of email.
It does seem odd, however, that I would not recall a discussion about religion with you or anyone.
When you repost the link I asked you about above, could you also refresh my memory about these private conversations? Were they by email? private message on another forum? What nicks were we both using?
I would really appreciate it, and you may also feel free to email me at DuctapeFatwa@yahoo.com
As dove has indicated, you were confused and misread that portion of Ductape’s posting, which was actually a repost of something Man Eegee said. I’m also glad that you’ve apologized for calling Ductape a liar.
However, if there was a general perception that he was muslim and he did nothing to correct that, in view of the invective that was tossed around, don’t you think that is a little disingenuous?
No. Mind you, I have no clue whether he is, or is not a Muslim, but I’m sure you noticed in rereading the threads that not only Muslims were very offended by what was posted on the front page. I have been in situations where I have allowed others to assume (if it was able to be assumed) that I was a member of whichever group was being persecuted at the moment, such as gays… I just called that solidarity or standing with someone.
I don’t know enough about Islam to even allow anyone to assume I am a practicer of the religion, but if I did I wouldn’t mind being Sparticus myself.
I find it interesting, though, that so much of the reaction to Ductape and his words seems to be informed by his presumed religion and foreign-ness. Thus you get statements about “Well look at what Muslims do”, when there has been no mention of religion, or the “Love it or leave it, go back where you came from” type stuff, when for all we know he could have been born an Irish Catholic and raised in Milwaukee. And I think that if he had been, and that was well known, that the reaction to his words would be much different. I find that sad.
Look, it’s hard enough mounting a fight against the Bush government. It’s depressing to feel so helpless. Ductape comes along and tells us we’re no better or different than the extreme right wing. To me, he’s not trying to spark discussion, he’s trying to destroy our hope. Destroy hope, and you destroy the only chance the world has of seeing American Fascism reversed.
I don’t think he said that we were no better or different than the extreme right wing. Although some of us (general us, not bootrib us) aren’t, in my view. I think that should be a point of discussion, though, and should be soon… because in order to build a strong enough foundation to move this country away from the path that it is on, there needs to be a level of trust and understanding and acceptance of others that is just not there yet, even on much of the left.
I don’t think he is trying to destroy hope, he speaks with too much love of Americans both where he lives and the people he comes across on the blogs who are doing things to make a difference – that includes most everyone here, I think. But I do understand how some people can read the same thing and take away vastly different things. I take away a need to look deeper at ourselves, our policies, beyond the Iraq occupation, beyond Bush, and beyond just the current crisis.
These little windows are too small for me to make complete, continuous sense, but I hope I got some of what I am trying to say across.
but since I’m sort of involved now, I’ll throw a couple of my thoughts out there for whatever it’s worth. The “I am not a muslim” quote is mine, all mine, as others have mentioned. I stand by everything I wrote that day.
There is a fine line between reading something someone has written on the web at face value and, in some cases, having the ability to give context to the writing due to the interactive history between one and the author.
You, and others who are angry at Ductape’s diary, I suspect, read this piece at a polar opposite mindset than I did. You write, Ductape comes along and tells us we’re no better or different than the extreme right wing.
I didn’t get that at all. Perhaps it’s because I’ve read more of him over the past year. I know that his cryptic style buries his points in descriptive language that is enough to cause one vertigo, but throughout the rantatas, the news links from obscure sources, the occasional hilarity, there is what kansas and others in this thread have mentioned – a plea for a better way.
I didn’t get angry with this post in the sense that I felt targeted, because of this
I think that ‘small minority’ includes the vast majority of people at this blog. I don’t consider you, or anyone who interacts here to be a member of this group he rants about:
Each time I read one of these rants, which are similar to verbal slaps by others like Gilroy or Madman, I am forced to evaluate where my principles lie and challenge myself to grow/learn a new way if need be. I think it’s healthy, and I’m sad to see an increasing mentality of ‘drawing a line in the sand’ by people whom I respect here. We are not always going to agree and the more we all choose to marginalize voices who don’t tow the BlogParty Line, the bigger the echo chamber we’ll create.
I have the utmost respect for everyone here because even though we are only able to communicate via the written word, we manage to do it well most of the time. With respect to your opening about the cartoon issue, I will be happy to talk with anyone about that at anytime. My email address is listed below, and I have a blog that I muddle my way through everyday. I don’t think this is the appropriate thread, but I can respect the fact that perhaps for some this is all just an extension of unresolved feelings.
Thank you and everyone who responded to my angry comments without anger. I truely apologize for going off at Ductape. I get frustrated when reading Ductape’s writings because he so often couches arguments with such intense insults and generalizations. I don’t understand his negative mindset and can never find any hope in his rants. I struggle every day to hold on to hope that we can change. Ductape’s glass is half-full and that’s an attitude I abhore… no constructive suggestions.
Ductape, I was referring to the whole cartoon era of comments. Of course, we never exchanged email and you know that. That whole kerfuffle put me off and smacked of incincerity on the part of a lot of people. I shouldn’t have brought it up. I honestly don’t know why you can’t pose an argument or viewpoint without reverting to those damn generalizations about Americans and the American left/right. So often it seems that you purposely belittle your audience and I don’t know what purpose it serves… you loose me with the first insult every time. It’s your intense negativity that turns me off.
It may be my browser, but I’m not able to see it, and I know with a statement like that you will want to be sure that everyone has the link!
I find the proper response to Ductape is to critique him, not attack him. The very act of critiquing him causes you to internalize the validity of his points (where they exist).
One major critique is with this concept of our post World War Two policies being a natural outgrowth of Manifest Destiny. For me, this is just a manifest misunderstanding, oversimplication, and leads to an inevitably strident anti-American leftist position.
You simply CANNOT ignore what America went through in the 30’s and 40’s, nor that we emerged from that era in a nuclear age. When Eisenhower warned of the military-industrial complex, he did not dispute the requirement for a permanent arms industry. To do so, at that time, would have not only politically unviable, but absurd.
Where America went off the rails was not in engaging in an aggressive global game against the Soviets involving the securing of vital energy resources. It was in so often going on the offensive where our vital interests were not served. In Cuba, in Vietnam, in Angola, in Latin America, now in Iraq, we have acted more in the interests of some very rich men with an economic incentive than we did in securing our freedoms and liberties and those things for others.
And yet, even with all those distractions and misplaced resources, and even immoral policies, we managed to muddle through to the great benefit of anyone suffering under the Nazi or Soviet yoke.
American power is a mixed blessing, currently run amok and losing it’s raison d’être. But to ignore, or to deny, that America’s post world war two posture has secured the blessings of peace, prosperity, and liberty for millions of Koreans, Japanese and Europeans is unfair.
We have made many mistakes, and the same class of men keep repeating them. But we have also done great things.
We do need to read critiques like Ductape’s. But we would be wrong to just agree with them.
…post-WW2 foreign policy was, in my view, an outgrowth of Manifest Destiny. Its supporters even used a juiced up version of the 19th Century propaganda about Manifest Destiny as late as the Reagan era – when Soviet power was clearly waning (although the Neo-Cons, Pentagon and CIA claimed otherwise).
With this exception, however, I agree with your overall take.
I dunno. When I put myself in the place of people like Forrestal, Dulles, Acheson, Marshall, Harriman, Nitze… I just don’t see them thinking Manifest Destiny had one whit to do with why we should set up NATO, the United Nations, establish a new national security apparatus, and aggressively secure our access to energy sources in the Middle East.
They did those things because Stalin looked every bit as dangerous as Hitler, and we had just learned a hard lesson about appeasing Hitler.
Did they abuse that system and enrich themselves in the process? Yes. Did they do it because they though they had some god-given duty to rule the world? I really don’t think so.
I’d agree with your point as far as it goes. But, not to the degree that it explains more than some of the public support for an inventionist policy.
…been in respectful disagreement about this. If you read the works of many of those you cite – which I did four decades ago – all through them runs what we now call American exceptionalism.
This, of course, was not the only factor in the ideology of the strategy they put forth, but it was a factor.
well, whenever we disagree I usually assume I’m wrong. But, I don’t think there is a whole lot of disagreement. Manifest Destiny isn’t a perfect synonym for American Exceptionalism.
I look at it like this. In 1945, given the state of Europe and Japan, given the technological development of Africa and the Islamic world, it was hard not to conclude that America was in an exceptional position, and effectively alone (along with Britain and their commonwealth) in being in a position to resist Stalin (and Mao).
We can debate what the real threat was from communist expansionism. But it’s hard to fault the post war architects for taking precautions.
We agree on most of our analyses about where they went wrong. But, I don’t apologize for the basic diagnosis of the situation done by those architects. America was indispensible at that period in time. I just don’t find post-war American Exceptionalism as offensive as Manifest Destiny.
There is some influence there. But I still think it was a realistic take on the world as it stood at that time.
The idea that Mesopotamia, in 1945, was the height of civilization is wrong. Our decision to create client states in places like Iran made a lot more sense in the immediate aftermath of a battle for the oil fields of Romania and the Caucuses. You may be sensitive to arguments about differential development, but they are not entirely without merit. The devil is in the details. Our moral failings are more in the details than in the underlying rationale. At least, that is how I see it. But those details sure leave a nasty aftertaste. (see Brits and Kashmir, Iraq, Palestine).
…of Iran reinforces what I’m saying. The problem there would have been non-existent if the U.S. had been willing to do what Mossadegh wanted – a fair deal for the oil. The U.S. could have had its bulwark against the USSR and a democratic model in the Middle East. Would have pissed off the Brits, but probably no more than they were pissed after the Shah took over and the U.S. did make a fairer deal with Iran for its oil.
My problem with client stateism and the theory of differential development is that it harkens back to the day of the Declaration of Independence when they put this bit:
An amazing description given the historical record from all the way back to King Philip’s War.
Similar sentiments do we see in descriptions of the Iranians c. 1950, with zero emphasis on “democracy.”
Right. I completely agree that the right thing to do in Iran in 1953 was negotiate a fairer deal, not have a coup. That’s what I mean by ‘the details’. Too often the west acted like mafia dons when dealing with the third world.
There is nothing in a theory of differential development that provides moral cover for acting like Al Capone. There isn’t even any necessary suggestion that a country or culture is morally superior because they have excelled beyond their neighbors technologically. It should be judged with some detachment.
But, in 1945-53, as we worked our way through these things, we need not have seen ourselves as on top of the food chain because of our religion. We could attribute it to our political system, or to chance, luck, and geography.
I sometimes wonder what the world would look like if North Korea had not invaded South Korea. That, and the subsequent Chinese involvement, seems to have set our country on a long tragic overreaction. And a lot of people have been hurt in the process.
But the bottom line is, I don’t think American post-war imperialism was wholly unjustified, largely based on religious reasoning, or racist in nature. It was much more a consequence of the trauma we had been through, the fact that the Eurasian oil fields fell the Soviets, that we lived in a nuclear age, and that Communism appeared totalitarian, threatening and expansionist in that period of time. We didn’t have the luxury to abstain from acting on a global scale, with less powerful nations as pawns in the game. We just didn’t need to do many of the things we did. And many of the things we did, we did because of racist assumptions, or based on legacies of Manifest Destiny.
The history of U.S. imperialism is complex. I just don’t want it to be reduced to some kind of reflexive self-importance or religious/nationalist ideology. That doesn’t do it justice and leads to an inevitably nails-on-chalkboard anti-Americanism that may be suited for some classrooms, but has no place in electoral politics.
I don’t think American post-war imperialism was wholly unjustified, largely based on religious reasoning, or racist in nature.
The Cold War can’t explain Haiti (nor much else in this hemisphere).
Jefferson, while happy the Haitians weakened Napolean for him, was unable to contemplate a newly freed, self-determined nation of blacks, a policy which through many twists & turns has an identifiable continuity right down to today.
leads to an inevitably nails-on-chalkboard anti-Americanism
There you go again! đŸ™‚
Yea, 1953 Iran is a perfect example of the choice between mutual co-operation/respect for sovreignty & exploitation/control.
A later bureaucrat, trapped in that contradiction, was John Wesley Powell who writes, in a candid comment rare for a gov’t official, in his 1873 report to the Commissioner of Indian Affairs: His methods of warfare are such that we cannot cope with him without resorting to means which are repugnant to civilized people . . .”
What about our mucking about in Latin America? What about our proxy wars in Africa? Do you NOT see that a great deal of that was to help protect the interests of moneyed financiers of politicians, hoping to ram our culture (and business models) down people’s throats?
The struggle against Stalin was at least partly a struggle over who would get to strip poor country’s resources first, and a lot of our certainty that we SHOULD do it was rooted in our certainty in our sense of our Exceptional Destiny to remake other people’s worlds into OUR image.
What utter bullshit labeling!
That is the most offensive, condescending dismisal, Booman. I’m not anti-American. I’m a ‘strident’ believer in an American Outrider tradition that would love to see America’s finest dreams realized. That entails a ‘strident’ recognition of the lies & distrotions that we have been fed about our foreign policy. That has the ability to trace an American consciouness from the original colonists, through the 19th C expansion, & 20th C tragedies. I’m just as capable of critiquing Japanese, German, Russian & Chinese immperialism, but I CARE most about America because I’m intimately implicated — it’s all I have to call mine — & I live here.
My background isn’t politics, but the language arts, and I find that critique & dream in the ideals of Jeffersonian democracy and the writings of Tom Paine. Being married to a habeas attorney had given me an intimate appreciation of the unique strength of our Constitution. Dreams & critques found in the works of Melville & Whitman, Hawthorne & Poe, Thoreau & Muir. Found in the poetry of Charles Olson, Robert Duncan, George Oppen, Gary Snyder, Susan Howe, Nathaniel Mackey, Amiel Alcalay & many many others.
It’s a dream found in countless activists in this country: Emma Goldman, the NW wobblies, MLK & Malcolm X, Ed Abbey & thousands of others I’m now neglecting.
To radically critique American foreign policy isn’t to say that there aren’t “good things” about America; that’s a phoney argument that only deflects. How often is Chomsky dismissed as “anti-American?”
While you may reject it, there is credible scholarship that finds a continuity from the Manifest Destiny of the 19th C to today’s form of economic/military imperialism. As I suggested before, the Spanish-American war & its offspring can be seen as the crucial hinge. As Chalmers Johnson expressed it in the doc last night, the increase in military spending after the Soviet colllapse in 1991 put the lie, for him, to much that was hidden behind Cold War rationales.
A similar sense of entitlement through ‘super’-power status led both the US & Soviets to treat the Middle East as its priavte domain, ignoring the valid desires of its peoples & continuing the injustices brought on by the West’s divvying it up post WW I. I find little noble in either parties’ actions.
One of the more treacherous linkages in the American consciousness, soldified in the rhetoric of the Cold War, is the equation of democracy & capitalism. Despite the example of nazi Germany staring us in the face, we all too easily neglect to see that much of what is happening in this country today is the result of an inherent tension between the two. I’m not suggesting that totalitarianism is a natural result of capitalism — any more than it is of a socialist model — but that we ignore that tension at our peril.
Ultimately, I’d like to think that I stand with humanity against injustice of all sorts, from all quarters.
Anti-American my ass!~
If Ductape’s diary isn’t anti-American, then the genre doesn’t exist. But how does one come to these types of conclusions about the nature of American foreign policy? IMO, one does it by anachronisms and oversimplifications. That is what I see as wrong with both this diary and your comment above.
Failing to see the context within which the post-war system was set up is one easy way to see some kind of uninterrupted theme from Wounded Knee to the Philippines to 1953 Iran.
Are there continuities? Yes. You can do scholarship about them. But, it’s shallow to ignore the Depression and the War as stronger explanations for the motivation of American Exceptionalism.
A) you are ascribing positions to me which I have never expressed. sorry if I don’t bother to reply to more of your ad hominem
Failing to see the context is just an aggressive way of saying that you interpret events differently
your description of scholarship you seem barely aware of as “anachronisms and oversimplifications” is baseless. raw assertions can’t change that fact
B)”anti-American leftist position” is, as you well know, standard dismisal rhetoric of all who would prefer to ignore some inconvenient truths & it’s that larger context to which I felt compelled to reply.
It’s dismissive & closes dialogue.
no. it’s just debate.
I haven’t cut off any debate. You are reacting to words that other use to cut off debate.
& you continue to pepper you writings with hot-button phrases from the culture wars (usually employing right-wing themes towards those to your left) that are offensively dismissive. At best, they are disrespectful. I should know better to react, but . . .
they are elements in a larger societal dialogue, way beyond our individual personalities & opinions. I just ran across Howard Zinn’s 4th of July article, where he writes about these issues of patriot/anti-american, manifest destiny & how it has transformed & still informs our sense of our selves today, and traces a line from the 19th C Indian wars through the Phillipines, to our post-war agressions that have little or nothing to do with Cold War politics:
To return for a sec to DTF’s plea to imaginatively reverse roles (& I don’t agree with every word he writes, but find his overall point more important than the over-the-top hyperbole), in a similar vein, here’s Brian Concannon on the US’ opposition to Aristide returning as a private citizen to Haiti:
I contend that you are merely allowing yourself to react in a Pavlovian way, rather than listening to my argument. I am not normally categorized as dismissive. However, I do not agree with your take, nor Ductape’s, nor (ultimately) Meteor Blades’s. You are alone in calling me dismissive in this thread.
Nowhere have I said anything that would contradict Twain.
What I said was that if you do not see the depression and WW Two as essentially redefining elements in American history then you can easily interpret our Cold War policies as mere continuations of religious and racist policies from the 19th-Century and if you do that it will result in usually strident left-wing critiques that do, in fact, parrot Cold War Soviet propaganda.
You can disagree with my argument, but it isn’t a dismissive argument. It’s an argument.
two if’s & one then which, so far as one can tell from the reply, are to characterize & avoid replying to actual content in front of you, as well as positions that don’t need to discount either of the events you cite. Makes a conversation difficult. Not the first time.
Yes, you can postulate postions & rhetoric that parrots Soviet propaganda. But it’s not a reply to positions that I have tried to articulate here in these forums.
Instead of “mere continuation,” try “enabling” on for size in a more nuanced critique.
I have answered everything you have provided without accusing you of bad faith.
What do you want me to say? My argument has been spelled out in the comments. I am critiquing the people you cite, not dismissing them. I do not agree with them and I have stated why I do not agree with them.
I do not agree with them, because they are making an argument that there is something constant in the American character from native american genocide, to slavery, to late 19th/early 20th century imperialism, to the American exceptionalism of the Cold War period, and that that something is manifest destiny and its kinlike ideologies.
And I am arguing that, while there are continuities, postwar American Exceptionalism has a validity that genocide, slavery, and McKinley imperialism lacked. And I don’t believe the architects of the Cold War strategy were primarily motivated by racism, religious/nationalistic hubris or even commerical interests. Those all played a part in their underlying assumptions. But they were primarily concerned with the fact that getting rid of Hitler had left the job imcomplete. Stalin, after all, had a much higher death count and an even deeper contempt for American principles of liberty.
So, what is the issue? That I don’t agree with you?
is that you repeatedly mischaracterize & distort, then argue with a strawman position. Insults like kgb propaganda only add fuel to the frustration.
From your other post, I gather you find such discussion of the American psyche (& there is a deep homegrown movement) impolitic and academic. I most respectfully disagree.
It’s not an insult to say that a particular argument is KGB derived. It’s an insult to say that someone is unknowingly repeating a KGB derived argument. KGB arguments were always based on facts and valid critiques, but done in a myopic and distorted way. Accusing American foreign policy of being one long unbroken string of racist, imperialistic, and rapacious capitalism was the mainstay of Kremlin propaganda. It wasn’t fair then, and it isn’t fair now. And the biggest reason it isn’t fair is because of the failure to acknowledge the existential threat of totalitarianism, economic collapse, the need for energy security, and nuclear weapons.
To the extent that American Exceptionalism is a product of post-World War II circumstances, it is a product of the luck of being placed to pick up the pieces of Britain’s empire. Now I am all in favor of luck, but I am less clear on the relation between luck and virtue–on how one might be supposed to lead to the other.
Some of the post-war actions can be explained as the constraints of strategy, so I am not sure we disagree. Not that I feel a need to.
If the argument is that circumstances created a special role for America, my nagging complaint is that we ought to have filled it better, that our actions would look better, not worse, with the passage of time.
You should check out “Why We Fight.” In it Chalmers Johnson says he tracked with your line of thinking. A true Cold Warrior. Pragmatist. We’re fighting Communism. It’s important. Yada. Yada. Yada.
But after the wall came down (and I was a soldier then, watching on TV), Johnson said he had to start re-examining his position vis a vis the war machine. Because the machine never shut off. The enemy fell, but the machine just kept on going. Found a new enemy. War on Drugs for a while. Then war on Terror. (I paraphrase Johnson, but watch it — and this flipped him — he understood that the machine is what needs to be killed).
And until we stop with this stupid idea that we are somehow responsible for stabilizing all the world by spending half of our huge budget on a mega defense industry. Well, we will always have an enemy. We will make them up by the dozens. But it is all bullshit. And a lot of it is rooted with the ideas you are asserting. That there are some good and honorable reasons for the U.S. to defend its interests. I say that’s crap. There are some good and honorable reasons for Switzerland to defend her interests too. But they’re not bombing the shit out of the world and running secret wars and assassinating leaders. Because somehow they recognize that they are not in charge of the world. I’d say our position is one of absolute fear. We are so afraid of our fellow men and women in the world. We can’t imagine not having a gun (or a nuclear arsenal) at our side to defend ourselves. How many nuclear weapons make us safe? I’ve read some intelligence people who place the chance of a nuclear detonation in the U.S. in the next decade at 50% and say that this is exasperated by our current ineptitude in nuclear non-proliferation.
But it all boils down to this. Is there some evenly applied reason that you think we should have the bomb? And no country we consider dangerous should even consider it? Think of the reaction of the U.S. to the missle tests my North Korea, and then apply that same standard to the United States arms race (and now space based weapons race)? When you are willing to do that. When we are all willing to do that? I think that’s when America is starting to wake up.
Ramble, ramble. This is a really good thread. Some of the thoughts here. Very good stuff. All friends I hope Arctucus, Military Tracy, Meteor Blades, Ductape, Super and DJ and others. Anyway. Off to read more downthread.
BJ-
the topic you raise is too dense for me to deal with here. We created nuclear weapons, and thank god the nazis didn’t do it first. If we can prevent the proliferation of nuclear weapons we should do so. We must understand, however, that we cannot succeed at doing this forever while reserving to the security council members the right to have them and to even plan using them.
It is not exceptionalist to say that it would be catastrophic to mankind for Hitler to have a nuclear weapon, and it is not exceptionalist to say that it is a terrible thing that Pakistan has them, but that it really doesn’t matter so much that France has them. It’s just reality.
Double standard? Yeah. It’s the same double standard that says America is a good place to invest your money and Islamabad is not so good.
Okay. I’ll just use what you just said to make my point. As much of a point as it is.
You say thank god the Nazis didn’t get the bomb first. Different world. Evil. Etc.
I say to you, that this is a value laden judgment. You are placing yourself as the decider of good and evil. You are taking an American role. It is indeed evil to think of Hitler with the bomb first. If you are an American. A Jew. A Britain. Etc., etc. You might even meet some kind of utilitarian threshhold with the Nazi example.
My point is this. Somewhere in the world. Right now. And for the last 60 years, I’d bet. There are people all over the world. They are usually people with dark skin. And they are huddled in shacks without electricity. And sometimes their countries have been bombed. There sons and daughters. And some of them lost relatives to one of two atomic devices we’ve detonated. And some of them have known people who are victims of our death squads that we’ve trained and used as surrogates. All in this continual war we have fought.
And all of them, BooMan. They are all thinking, from their own perspectives. Damn America. What the fuck is wrong with those people. The present version in Iraq and in Iran and in North Korea and many in Afghanistan and Nicaraqua and El Salvador and on and on — they’re question is, “Isn’t this guy Bush evil? And the fuckers that elected him? Aren’t they evil? Because I know evil. And it is burning up my god damn kid. Or taking resources and causing death inducing poverty.” Etc. They all think we are evil. From their point of view.
Who decides? I think the pragmatic answer is that power decides. He who can, will. That he is us. But to not recognize our own role. To ignore our status as empire. To polly-anna the entire issue by saying that we are doing “good.” That is a falsehood. At least as far as I can see it. And that is what Ductape hits on with his diary. At least for me.
We are no better. Our blood is not worth more because we were born in this tribe. We only think that. Because we have been socialized to think that. Evil is fucking relative. To which side of the gun barrel you are on. Don’t you think?
I can’t answer that with a yes or no. I’d only say that I would agree, and I have said so in this thread, that Bush’s actions tend to undermine the legitimacy of American Exceptionalism to a degree previously unimaginable. The further we get from Hitler and Stalin the easier it is to become critical of America for being a big bad bully. Back then, though, we were a blessing to humanity. And we still have all those character traits, seen in this community, that made America the savior of humanity and decency in the mid 20th century. Did we get full of ourselves, overstep our bounds, fall short of our best ideals, etc.? Yes. We all know about Vietnam, we know about the excesses of the Cold War, we know about Iraq, we know that terrorism is used to justify a Cold War military budget and that is largely bunk.
We’re in a bad place today. But we have a lot to be proud about in our past as well as much to be ashamed of. Bush is destroying our that part of our legacy of which we could be proud.
A communicable one, spread by droplet infection, and resistant to every known antibiotic.
đŸ˜‰
Ductape
I await your trumpted departure.
You are very funny.
brilliant.
However, I would offer one addendum. You said:
” Evil is fucking relative. “
Labeling OTHERS as evil is fucking relative.
To me, the whole enlightenment-based experiment we’ve half-heartedly engaged in in this country is based upon the idea that evil might be AVOIDABLE, if we built structures of law and government that PUSH people to debate, argue and confront one another, the better to understand each other, find common ground, see that we all love our children, just as others love theirs. Isn’t that what the whole idea is about? Isn’t that the part of America that people came here to search for? That hope that MAYBE we could approach mutual understanding and freedom and peace the way a curve approaches an asymptote … isn’t that the IDEAL of America?
Sadly, though, a solid majority of us have always prefered to nurture our racism and classism and hate to keep some of us out of the experiment. We say we want to make the rest of the world join us in this experiment, only to fail to listen to them, engage them, debate them … no, we BUY them or BOMB them or EMPOVERISH them.
Evil, in my secular definition, is the refusal to recognize in others our human commonalities … insisting only on differences and fear.
I hope that you aren’t saying that it is wrong to make value judgments, or wrong only for us (and not for the masses), because our superior insights require that we reject the idea of that some views are superior. This would go beyond relativism to a strangely inverted exceptionalism.
Please excuse me for picking on your phrasing here, but these words reflect a paralyzing and inconsistent moral idea that I doubt you endorse.
Who knows what I meant? That was hours ago.
But I think, in context, I meant that I do not like BooMan’s argument that America has been a force for “good” for the last sixty years, when our actions are largely “evil” when looked at from objective or opposition points of view.
This is indeed a fascinating discussion and I do find very interesting. Still, I do find it necessary to respond when you say that:Evil is relative.
I would state that it is not the evil act in itself that is relative, that is universally recognizable by most people independent of race, colour or creed, but rather who is responsible for the evil deeds. When people look at videos of militants cutting of heads of innocent hostages or see pictures of a dead young girl and her Iraqi family massacred by some oversexed guys that just “had to have that pretty girl”, then most people would recognize these acts as evil, but the emphasize is very often not on the action itself, but on the perpetrators. If they are “our guys” so to speak, the action in itself seem to be toned down, yes sometimes even ignored.
My point being that the concept of evil, in my opinion, is not relative, just evaluated a bit different, much depending on the eye of the beholder. When someone is bombed in Iraq or in the US the victims both have the same idea of the action being evil, but they have of course a different opinions of the evildoers because the evildoers are usually not the same people.
I’ll just say this. There are a whole lot of Americans who I talk to week in and week out who might say this about your above examples of death. “Horrible,” in response the the Berg beheading. And, “I really feel bad for the soldiers over there — they’re in such an untenable position,” in response the Haditha and the recent rape charges.
And they wouldn’t even begin to have the thoughts that are expressed in this discussion. Because they are operating completely on a double-standard. Evil is very relative in their minds. Fuck. I spoke to a soldier the other day who told me the only way to win was genocide. And he was ready to do it. And he wasn’t ashamed much. He thought of himself as a true-blue patriot. He is not alone.
Granted, there are Iraqis who would share this exceptionalism. In reverse. That Berg is a part of war and the rapes and murders by the U.S. are terror. And granted there are some that try to judge individual actions. But to ignore or white-wash the widespead existence and manifestations in this last half-century of “American exceptionalism” or the continuation of “manifest destiny” or simply blind American nationalism — it just strikes me as a totally false position. Only a patriot willing to ignore the facts surrounding our foreign policy could claim such a position. It is polly-annish. That is my opinion anyway. And just that.
But why do Muslim militants tend to behead their enemies?
It may have some Quranic significance that I am unaware of, but it is done to shock and offend. It is done to intimidate and terrify. No one like to contemplate having their head sawed off. It’s much more unpleasant to think about than getting shot point blank in the back of the head, or having a 500 lb. bomb land on your house.
That is a part of the calculation for Americans that see beheading a barbaric in a way that losing your temper (or shit) and shooting civilians is not. When you look at Haditha, the motive may have been largely the same. They killed a bunch of people, assuming some of them were responsible for the death of their buddy, but not really caring too much either way, and hoping it would intimidate people into thinking twice before allowing somcone to place a roadside bomb near their house. Intimidation is still a big part of the unspoken motive.
As for the rape and murder and burning of a 15 year old girl and the killing of her family? Well, that will be looked on with horror by nearly 100% of our population. Not too many people are going to be making excuses for that, or looking to try to understand that. Premeditated, unprovoked, rape and mass murder is not something for which any excuse is even available.
Yeah. I can’t imagine an American defacing a body. Like cutting off heads or ears of their enemies. Or genitals. That would be too much.
Yeah they are doing it for shock value. Because they are in a war. Where a fucking bomber or cruise missile can target their fucking houses. That is the nature of war. Neither side is better. Bombing a building where you know a precise number of civilians will die (I’ve heard that there are actual cut-offs for bomb planning missions — so that if you don’t kill x number of civilians — is estimate — you don’t need to even get high-level supervisory sign-off) — that isn’t horrible enough for you. Right. A kid torn apart by large amounts of explosives, in your mind, can be separated out as something morally distinct from a ritual beheading. That, to me, is precisely the exceptionalism that you defend.
And you could not throw a rock in a Division of American Veterans pub without hitting a handful of guys who would take the sides of the soldiers in Haditha or in the rape case. I mean we’ll have to commission a poll or something. But I’ve met them. I’m sure you have too. It is all relative. We can tweak the details. To change the numbers. But in this business of war, I submit to you that there is no universal evil and even less universal good.
As with some things, you and I must just disagree that there is some moral discrepancy between the beheadee and the innocent and horrifyingly missle-fried child.
This is exactly the point DTF made, quite well, I think. I’m not on team America, where we start to make these distinctions. Oh the horror of our captured, beheaded, drilled boys and girls. Not without the exact same outrage for every report of every bombing in Iraq/Pakistan/Afghanistan/Gaza/West Bank. We’re killing kids BooMan. Literally. Your money. And my money. Kids. Can’t you imagine, just for a second, how enraged you would be if Cuba got a bomb and dropped it on your former dog — for any reason you could imagine — good or bad. It would be a crushing blow. That’s what people are feeling around the world due to our policies. Real people. Every bit as real as our pets and our kids. BooMan — I can promise you — if some person dropped a bomb on my kids — I would pledge to do the most henieous acts of violence in revenge. They are precious. And almost every father feels this way. Beheading. My god, if I thought it was the best counter-attack. I’d be there.
I think this is the principle behind the 50% chance that we’re going to get nuked in the next decade. Because we’re building up a pretty big debt in the Karma bank, I think.
What do you expect in a war between a technologically advanced enemy and a bunch of people in a war torn country. They are going to fucking kill you and yours in any way they can. For revenge. For tactical purposes. For propaganda. For media coverage. And that’s going on until we leave or, as my new ranger friend said, until we “kill them all.”
Okay. On to other things today. Of course, I’ll be happy to read any response. But I’ve spent enough time spewing. And if I’m your audience on this one, you can probably put your time to better writing as well.
Stay well. I’m suspecting that you are going to reconsider American-exceptionalism in the next one to five years. Just a prediction. đŸ™‚
I’m a military veteran. Saw combat.
If CBS pointed a camera at those vets and asked them what they thought of kidnapping, rape, and murder? They’d say it’s terrible. What the hell would you expect them to say?
Away from the cameras? It’s a different story. A lot of veterans, especially those who are combat veterans, say it’s war, and what did you expect? Or that it’s tit for tat, an eye for an eye. You’ll hear the sentiment expressed by a lot of veterans that “we” should just “nuke” the entire Middle East (killing hundreds of millions) and take their oil.
I don’t think you can get an honest reaction about the war crimes perpetrated by American soldiers because everybody, veterans included, are mindful of what’s considered “decent”. But their unvarnished opinions lie between the polar opposites of total horror and total absolution.
I don’t hang out at the VFW hall, but I do hang out with veterans from Vietnam on up to my war, Gulf War I, and this is the most common sentiment:
“They shouldn’t have done that, BUT–“
It’s the “but” that’s going to send us all to hell.
I’ve met some hardcore wingnuts, but I don’t know anyone that would justify the premeditated, unprovoked rape and murder of a 15 year old girl, the burning of her body, and the execution of her family. You can go to all the VFW halls you want and I doubt you’ll find anyone who supports it. At most, you’ll find some people that can’t be bothered to give a shit. There is no shortage of those types. Some badly misguided people might attempt to justify it by saying they were under stress and sex deprived. But they are going to very few and very far between. That case is in a category all its own, as far as I am concerned.
Haditha is different. It wasn’t unprovoked, it wasn’t premeditated, and it could, at least in theory, be seen as serving some military purpose (in the same way beheading Nick Berg can be seen to serve some military purpose). It’s still a massacre, it’s still a war crime, it still must be punished severely and must never be justified. But it totally different in nature from the rape/murder.
That’s why some Americans will race to defend the Haditha atrocities, but virtually none will do so for the rapists. The same can be said for some Muslims that will applaud the beheading of Nick Berg but condemn with horror the bombing of mosques.
Sometimes, though Joe, you take this moral equivalency thing too far. All violence is not equivalent. You can’t just look at a situation and say this side killed a child, that side killed a child, they’re no different.
It very much depends on why they are fighting and what they are fighting for. And, when it comes to America, the problem we have is that we have no consensus that we should be fighting at all, nor any clear understanding of what we are fighting for. And from the Iraq side, they are doing a lot more fighting than just against Americans and Brits. They are committing unspeakable violence against each other. So, it pays to ask, what do people want for Iraq? What faction, or side, or sect, or tribe, or general, or coalition, or whatever, actually deserves to prevail? Which one likely will? What should we have to say about it? How much carnage will happen while it is all being sorted out?
You can say that we should pull out and let it sort itself out, and we should have no say. I am not quite to that point. I think we should do what the government asks us to do. If they say leave, we leave. If they say, leave, but stay nearby and leave some advisors and crack teams, we do that.
I think we should help keep their elected government from collapsing for the simple reason that it is the humantarian thing to do at this time. But I also think we are not making progress, and we should withdraw as many troops as the Iraqi government thinks are advisable. Hopefully, all of them.
What I see in Ductape’s argument is a total indifference to the possible humanitarian crisis that could ensue if we unilaterally pull-out of Iraq over the Iraqi government’s objections. I see a total indifference and unwillingness to even discuss what kind of government the Iraqis deserve, and what group or coalition should rule.
That’s dishonest debate and it is false humanitarianism. Is it okay for a Muslim to die when a Muslim does the killing? Is rape, kidnappting, and torture okay when Iraqi does it to Iraqi?
If you care about them then you have to consider these things. If you just care about infidels in your lands, then you are not a humanitarian.
“equivalent.” Even if it was America that killed the child. Even though many Americans may believe strongly that they were fighting to defend America’s life and win the war on terror.
Or to put it in a different perspective, American parents might not be swayed by arguments that their child was killed in order to help America become a righteous Islamic state.
I do not mean to speak for BoJo, but I believe that this is the point he was trying to make.
Your opinion on whether a particular atrocity is justified, has a legitimate military purpose, etc, or the opinion of the fellows at the VFW hall, or the opinion of Paris Hilton, does not matter.
To the victims and their families, the impact on their lives is the same.
That Iraqi mother, that Iraqi father, love their child every bit as much as their American counterparts.
It does not matter how many Americans simply do not think of any of them as human, as more barbaric than Americans could ever be.
Because the Iraqis do not share this view, it does not matter how deeply held and cherished such beliefs may be in how many American hearts.
The reference in an earlier post about the man who said US would have to “kill em all” is not without some truth.
The US must indeed exterminate each and every non-American, and every American who objects to said extermination, in order to end this “divisiveness” and produce a world where all are in agreement that USA is number one, and American lives have more value.
As long as there are people alive who are not Americans, and Americans who do not agree that atrocities and crimes against humanity have “military value,” there will continue to be “divisiveness” and there will continue to be Resistance.
First, on the micro you are just wrong.
It matters a whole lot whether your child dies of cancer, or is hit by a bus, whether the busdriver was a three-time drunk driver, whether your child died peacefully or in pain, etc.
It matters whether your child died fighting on Iwo Jima or whether they died fighting in Vietnam. All of matters. Context matters.
On the macro, if Bush continues his policies we are agreed that it will necessitate the killing of ‘them all’. And that is also another way of saying what I just said on the front-page. American Exceptionalism had merit in the post-war era, but it lost its justification when the Soviet Union collapsed. Terrorism, or Muslims, are not the threat that Russia represented, and they cannot be used as a replacement to justify our budgets and fulfill our corporations’ desires.
We will become as hated as the Soviets, and no amount of violence will make things better.
feel better about it if their child were exploded by an Iranian suicide bomber who believed sincerely that he was doing God’s will as opposed to whether their child were exploded by an Iranian grenade thrower who didn’t really believe Iran should be attacking the US, but was just following orders?
I do not pretend to be an expert on American cultural values, so you might be right.
I am not sure what children dying of illness or accident have to do with the conversation at hand, though. I think a distinction between a death from those causes and one from an act of violence is pretty universal, but again, I am no expert on US culture, by any means, so you can educate me.
of the result of your shallow thinking.
I don’t know how many people in Iraq are fearful of militants, but it is quite high. There are many militias, and each one of them (unless you are allied with them) is a menace. Americans are protecting local government all over the country.
The idea that Iraqis are unable to distinguish between militias with their worst interests at heart, and Americans that are largely trying to keep them safe, is ridiculous. For many Iraqis, the Americans are the prime enemy, for many others, the only source of security.
It matters a great deal to know where each Iraqi stands on matters and also what exactly caused their child’s death.
You whole form of argumentation is hopelessly simplistic.
For example, if we were invaded by Iranians and suddenly the police disappeared and I couldn’t leave the house without worrying about being kidnapped by Mormons, or told to put on a hat by Orthodox Jews, or kidnapped by Presbyterians, or raped by immigrant gangs, or robbed by armed gangs, or tortured by some business rival of my father….
and if the only kind of security around, and the only foreseeable security for the future relied on the continued patrols of the occupying Iranians, then yes, I would understand it a little better if my child was killed accidentally while they fought bad guys.
My scenario is just as realistic as yours. More so, in fact.
I find the notion that “Americans … are largely trying to keep [Iraqis] safe” to require way too much of a leap of faith for my comfort. It would certainly “feel good” to be able to believe it, but our history is littered with actions that are far from well-intentioned.
or the Pentagon and surrounding streets would indeed be stormed.
Americans are not “evil” people, there are no people, who by nature of their nationality are “evil.”
In order to continue to support, in any way, shape or form, the crimes against humanity committed in their name, they MUST believe that the Iraqis are simple, childlike beings, not quite human, who are grateful to the Americans for everything that has been done to them – even killing their children, which, after all, will only occur accidentally in order to protect the good and grateful Iraqis from the bad ones who oppose America’s will, therefore being terrorists.
If enough of them stop believing this, then they will exercise their right to change their warlords for a government, and no effort is spared to prevent any “diviseness” that might lead to a softening of the belief.
had I directed it to someone who is a parent.
You do not yet have children, if I am not mistaken?
I have seen people right here on this blog, people who not only disagree with me, but in their heart of hearts, consider me a subhuman barbaric who they wish dead, say that parenthood changed their views on many many things, changed those views primordially, in ways inexpressibly profound.
Now I have also heard other people say that, people who have never heard of this blog, or blogs in general, even people who are unaware that the internets, or computers exist.
And I have heard people who are extremely erudite, distinguished and accoladed with a list of degrees that would tire one’s hand to type say the same thing.
And I can offer first hand testimony of its truth.
So while you may not be able to tell me about how American parents would feel in the two situations I mentioned, you have, as always, helped me to understand more about American cultural values, which is, after, all, what I asked you to do. đŸ™‚
the fact that I do not have children is not by choice but by repeated tragedy, so I really have little patience for your argument.
with a little one, not so that your views on anything will change, but so you will have the satisfaction and joy of it all.
And I will insert a bit of blatant propaganda here, from my own store of controversial views and agenda.
There are millions of children all over the world, already born, thousands of miles from you, a few hundred yards from you, who for one reason or another, do not have parents.
Though to them you may not pass your DNA, you will pass something much more valuable. What is blood without a heart? đŸ™‚
I am aware of that.
Yeah. I can’t imagine an American defacing a body. Like cutting off heads or ears of their enemies. Or genitals. That would be too much.
You are being ironic, right? This was routine for Americans in Vietnam. (Yeah, the Vietnamese did things too. Not my point.)
I thought I was being sarcastic. But you might call it ironic. đŸ™‚
Why did American settlers scalp Indians?
First, MANY cultures have practices of mutilating the bodies of their enemies, to prevent them from entering the afterlife whole. As for Islam, this is easily googled.
The source cited above, and many others I’ve ready, states:
The argument was made by militants that such practices were pursued as justified retaliation for the mutilation and torture of Iraqi muslims. Many other insurgents criticized them for the beheadings.
I’m not, of course, in anyway excusing this, but this insistance from an American that this kind of barbarism is somehow unique to Iraqis or to Muslims makes me laugh. I’m sure the massacred dead at Sand Creek can take comfort in the assertion that Americans would not do this, or the dead at My Lai, or Haditha, or the corpses dragged through the streets in Afghanistan by American troops …
I’ve been busy beyond belief lately and haven’t had time to even lurk, but now that I have dropped by…my goodness, this is one jaw-dropping thread.
Maybe the comments are such because some are reacting to the author, less than his arguments.
But these comments make my hair stand on end:
But why do Muslim militants tend to behead their enemies?
So it would be OK if they merely shot people on camera?
That is a part of the calculation for Americans that see beheading a barbaric in a way that losing your temper (or shit) and shooting civilians is not.
As if we never had lynchings in this country! So charred penises then were less icky than beheadings now? One can’t blame video since crowds would gather and body parts were traded as toys–thoroughly putting the lie that one was less public than the other. Evil is evil.
I think you’re describing how some Americans may rationalize things; my surprise is that it seems you give it all a pass, given the context of your other comments in this rather breathtaking diary.
I hope I’m wrong about that. I loathe to mention this but I suppose I’m rather surprised at the tenor of the comments, and I’m really surprised at the embrace of “exceptionalism.” Shocked, actually.
I’ll also further say that the discourse brings to mind a passage from Frederick Douglass’ The Meaning of July Fourth for the Negro:
[As an aside, I’d encourage everyone to read Douglass’ address–it shows how some things change and how some things are so wretchedly the same.]
My defense of exceptionalism (as far as it goes…went, really) is now on the front-page.
You and a couple other people seem to have misunderstood my point in the comment you cited. I was explaining why Americans react so strongly to beheadings. Also, why some Muslims choose this method.
My overall point is that it very much matters why you commit an act of violence. If you do it to cover up evidence of your rape, that is one thing. If you do it to liberate Europe from Nazis that is another. Our problem in Iraq is that we don’t agree on why we are doing it, or that doing it is going to lead to anything good. Worse, just stopping doing it will not do anything to stop the violence and may increase it. It’s a real quagmire. We know who to blame, but it’s not so easy to know what to do.
I understand why some Americans react to beheadings in the way that they do and my first thought was that you were trying to explain that. It sickens me, too. Where I part company with this is this notion that is wholly evil only when it happens to Americans (or our friends); and when we can’t BS our way around the evil we do, there is some root cause, or it’s not our fault, or it’s not really as evil as all that.
I have little patience for that. Very little.
And for the assertion that some violence is better than others–that seems to run very close to the neocon notion that Iraq is somehow like WWII. And a propagandized account of WWII, too. Defeating the Nazis was a wholly good thing, but to pretend that was the only reason? And there were a couple of things we obviously agreed with them about, given that German POWs were treated better than black soldiers.
Anyway, I do agree that sometimes you have to fight. If someone broke into my house with intent to harm, degrade and kill me, then hell yeah, I’d do what I’d have to do.
But that’s not Iraq is. At all.
Thanks for that beautiful Douglass quote, and the website it’s hosted on. There’s a ton of great stuff over there, including Leopold Senghor’s 1927 The Negro is the Race Oppressed by All the Imperialists, poet & first president of Senegal, which has the succinct:
What is colonization? To colonize is to rob a people of the right to manage its own affairs as best it can and as it sees fit.
While the means & outward appearance has transformed over the years, the essence remains. — colonialism merely switched vestments.
You’re welcome. I posted excerpts of the speech at Liberal Street Fighter. I hadn’t read the speech in a few years, but I conversation I had with a friend a few weeks ago inspired me to pick it up. And Douglass’ address was just devastating, all these years after I first read it, in how far we have NOT come. The evil that was slavery is gone, and that is obviously good. The greed, avarice and evil that it stems from, and the racism and “Christian” cover it needs for sustenance has yet to be rooted out.
And that asshole Rumsfeld moving onto the plantation where Douglass escaped? I’m disgusted but not at all surprised. Par for the course.
that particular Douglass speech.
Now if I want to mischievously post it, without attribution, into a diary here, I may have to wait up to six weeks.
đŸ˜€
Nevermind Islamabad, that old sawhorse about the US being a great place to invest may be crumbling, according to Mike Whitney in Is Cheney betting on Economic Collapse?
We created nuclear weapons, and thank god the nazis didn’t do it first.
Indeed! The crime against humanity is that we opted to actually use them as a demonstration to the Soviets.
If we can prevent the proliferation of nuclear weapons we should do so. We must understand, however, that we cannot succeed at doing this forever while reserving to the security council members the right to have them and to even plan using them.
A statement I’m happy to fully agree with!
One of the greatest crimes America has ever committed is nuclear proliferation. It may yet end human life on Earth, it is already responsible for unmeasured environmental damage, not to mention genetic damage to humans.
And Americans still don’t get it. This is a perfect example of American Exceptionalism at work.
The Nazis did not get the Bomb. Good. But that was because they didn’t get it: Fortunately, they made the wrong engineering choices and also did not fund their Bomb project vigorously. When Einstein wrote his famous letter, he did not know how things would turn out: Strategically he was right, the Allies could not afford to face an Axis Bomb without effective counter-measures. But in the event he was wrong: By the time the Bomb was finished it was irrelevant to the current war.
Yes, it is time to mention Japan. Americans cling to a delusion–that the Bomb was a necessary part of defeating Japan. It wasn’t. That admitted, we insist that it saved AMERICAN lives, American lives being the measure of everything. But it did not even do that: The implied invasion of Japan by infantry force was a stupid strategy and in fact not one that we were following at the time. Fortunately. The strategy that we were following, and which was working, was cutting supply lines and letting Japanese industry implode. That it was doing. Just an example: The Kamekazi was not running out of pilots, it had not even run out of bombs and planes, but it was running out of fuel to fly them. Japan was ready to surrender on terms, had we been willing to name them.
In truth, the US was already looking ahead to the next war, which was to be nuclear war with the Soviet Union. Planners were divided on the question of whether nuclear war was really practical. Scientists pointed out that America’s nuclear monopoly could not last, so that the war-route would not result in an easy win. The result of trying would be an arms race. Though the scientists proved right (they had only built the bomb, so they knew how technically easy it was, only the logistics are difficult) they were over-ruled and the US launched the arms race. And led it, always. At the time of Kennedy’s famous “missile-gap” speeches the Soviets only had a few liquid fuel rockets. A deterrent, for sure! but in no way a first-strike attack force.
Ironically, the US also launched the Non-Proliferation Treaty. This would have been quite a good treaty, had it been followed. Signatories would get whatever benefits there might be of nuclear energy in exchange for submitting to controls and inspections. In return, the US was to show its good faith by actively seeking to reduce nuclear arsenals, including ITS OWN, and by refraining either to use, or threaten to use its own weapons.
The US violated both of these oblibations under the treaty, nearly from the outset. And still does. Ironically, Iran is, even now, in compliance, for what that is worth. The US is not, and in case I need to spell it out, Bush’s proposed “bunker-buster” bombs are a direct and blatant violation of both the spirit and the letter of Non-Proliferation.
This two-faced attitude is not merely hypocritical (though it is) but has concrete effects. We are now getting used to the idea–implied by the timeline–that North Korea’s entire nuclear program may have been inspired by the impossibility in trusting an American peace. Their Bomb is a RESPONSE to our belligerent and faithless actions. WE are the underlying cause not only of our own nuclear proliferation, but that of others.
Through all this we think we are as innocent as lambs. THAT is American Exceptionalism. It is a delusion which I fear is getting worse, and is probably as much a measure as a cause of America’s impending fate.
Excellent comment. I am no supporter of Kim Jong-Il, but I too have to observe that he and his regime are rational in thinking that they need to develop greater deterrents to a US attack. They have seen how the US acts all over the rest of the world, and they have heard the threats to North Korea.
It would also be good if the Americans had not gotten it either.
And as long as they have it, the world contains over 5 and half billion endangered Jews.
as long as they have it, the world contains over 5 and half billion endangered Jews
This connection has not occurred to most of us. Can you elaborate?
He probably would have deployed it against nations who resisted the imposition of his will, and without regard to religion of the victims.
However, just as a Hitler with access to weaponry of any kind constituted a concrete and urgent threat to Jews anywhere, so does an armed US constitute a concrete and urgent threat to human beings anywhere who oppose its will, and that is a lot of human beings!
The United States has had nuclear weapons in its possession for over 60 years.
Since Hiroshima and Nagasaki, it has not used them against other human beings once–though some loons have advocated their use (recently) and during the time when the USA was the world’s ONLY nuclear power (before the Soviets got The Bomb).
Is that evidence of America’s moral superiority? No, it’s more like it has passed a sanity test, because there have been lunatics like Air Force General Curtis LeMay (the inspiration for the fictional General Jack D. Ripper in “Dr. Strangelove”) and are lunatics like President Richard B. Cheney who have advocate or do advocate the use of nuclear weapons in some fashion.
I would like to see ALL nuclear weapons abolished, everywhere. No nation should have them. But the United States has not used them since its war with Japan. By the by, the atomic attacks on Hiroshima and Nagasaki were no more nor no less a war crime than the Allied firebombings on Dresden, also a defenseless city with a civilian population that was scouraged as an object lesson to The Enemy.
Russia still has nukes, you know. So does China. So does Israel, Pakistan, India and North Korea. The nations most likely to use nuclear weapons against The Enemy at this point are North Korea, and India/Pakistan in their bitter and long-running feud. They are exempt from criticism because they are NOT Americans, I suppose.
While the US has not detonated atomic bombs in warfare since the Second World War, and thus you are completely correct, they have been used as threats at least a dozen times. Threatening also is a violation of NPT.
The times and occasions are various. Even President Carter made threats–in his famous line-in-the-sand speech which was backed by more-directly worded diplomatic messages.
Nixon may be the most famous example, having apparently intending to follow through with action. As he himself describes it, he fully intended to drop nuclear bombs on North Vietnam, but found the political situation in the US was not favorable. As it happens, there were massive anti-war demonstrations in Washington DC in the two weeks proceeding and following his threats to the North Vietnamese, which presumably is what he was alluding to.
Other countries have nukes–for sure! And have made threats too! Yes, it is a worry. But it is not our topic.
When they start proclaiming themselves the divinely appointed policeman of the world, then we should expand our topic to American and ____ (fill in blank) Exceptionalism.
Not only has our government felt it perfectly okay to threaten to use its regular nukes against whomever happens to be part of the latest “axis of evil” but the government has been perfectly okay with using depleted uranium in bombs dropped in Iraq and the Balkans. Those exposed to DU suffer all manner of long-term effects such as cancer, birth defects in their offspring, etc. But they’re just barbarians and we’re “civilized”, so that makes it perfectly okay.
You said it yourself:
EXACTLY my point. There are generals and politicians who want to use nukes, but don’t.
Why? Because there would be an uprising by the American people, that’s why.
Why? Because America would become a pariah in the world if it used nukes, that’s why.
What is true sentiment of the American people–not its small governing elite, the servants of the super-rich, but the PEOPLE–about nuclear weapons?
The ruling class of America is VERY warlike. The ordinary people of America appear to be almost pacifistic when you look at the results of this poll, which show overwhelming support for a total global elimination of the nuclear arsenal.
We will soon be entering a window when the people of America are put to the test: Once military failure is followed by economic implosion, the temptation for the Government to consider nuclear means will increase. Though it is obvious what Bush and Cheney would do, (they would like to use nuclear weapons right now) it is not clear who will be running the government at that time. But it will be a very difficult period.
It sounds like you have there the beginning of an argument these weapons may be safer in some hands than in others.
Is there somewhere on the web that has a comparison chart showing how many times each country has used them?
You are right about the nuclear bombings. The point you make is rarely mentioned. It seems to me the reason why mere considered blockade was ruled out was the threat of Soviet invasion of Japan. The right thing to do may have been to persuade or buy off Stalin somehow.
I also agree about the US selective respect for the Non-Proliferation Treaty, post-Cold War, though I’m not sure it makes a lot of sense to blame the US for flaunting it before that, unless one takes a more sanguine view of the USSR than I do.
Russia had considerable old territorial claims against Japan, and it seems sure that Stalin would have sought to recover them, with or without force. Then there was Japan itself: The Allies divided Germany; would Stalin have wanted to divide Japan?
The US did not want the Soviet Union to turn its attention to Asia. A quick resolution in the East was one way of forstalling that, and dropping the Bomb its chosen method.
As you say, during the Cold War, violation of NPT is not so clear-cut. Except that a close examination shows the US constantly leading the arms race, with massive expenditures, new technologies, and massive deployments. The stated strategy of the US was Mutual Assured Destruction (which the Soviets never accepted), but actions indicate the US never gave up the hope of First Strike.
After the Cold War was America’s opportunity to become a true world leader, by using its power subtly to shape international relations in a more generally benevolent fashion. This did not happen: While I still think this option was theoretically available, the US instead sought to increase its control directly.
The reasons are probably “practical,” that is, the US had already committed itself to the current course. The election of 1980 was the key: Would the US set about redesigning its energy economy–seeking self-sufficiency and what we now call sustainability–or would it continue to depend upon increasing oil until the end? The latter was the choice that the 1980 election ratified, and it was the choice of death, because when oil ends, we end. As we turned the corner of Peak Oil last November, that time is approaching now.
The end of the Cold War would have been a good time to reassess that decision, but people rarely alter their lives when they have the resources and the luxury to do so. Anyway, we didn’t. Having denied we had a habit, we easily slid into the time when the addiction begins to determine all actions. That’s where we are now.
It ends in the morgue.
I can see the slight difference in interpretation one could take with that statement “anti-American leftist position”. You could also use the same rhetorical tactic to label neo-cons as having an “anti-American rightist position” for their stances on everything from war powers to separation of church & state to voting. Their positions in this matter are certainly anti-American in the extreme. And some could argue, if you claim (and I’m not saying you are anymore than Chomsky is, but some do) that America is evil and needs to be destroyed because of some of their evil actions then that could be considered a more anti-American leftist position.
Meh, maybe I’m not making sense.
labeling the neo-cons as “traitors” (& dinosaur P Buchanan has come close, hasn’t he?) were even half as effective at dismissing their analyses as it is when applied (in whatever form: anti-american, unpatriotic, siding with the terr’ists) to Chomsky, Chalmers Johnson, et al.
My objection here is that it’s a rhetorical branding device to label opposing & challenging-to-the-staus-quo views as outside the parameters of reasonable discourse.
Jesus. If I can’t identify an argument as essentially KGB derived without being accused of being dismissive then I give up.
Whether the argument was framed by American or Russian propagandists, it will contain validity and should not just be dismissed. And I don’t dismiss classical Marxist-Leninist-Stalinist arguments. I merely call them leftist anti-American arguments.
There is a natural tension between politics and academics. This is a political blog, not a theoretical and historical seminar. So, things do not line up perfectly, and I acknowledge that. However, there are certain arguments that are anti-American to the extent that anyone promoting them will alienate the vast, vast majority of the electorate. That, in itself, is no reason to shout them down or dismiss them, and I don’t. However, in this case, I think these arguments to be both wrong and impolitic. And I am debating them. Not dismissing them. I never said Ductape’s diary had no validity, did I? I said it should be critiqued and the exercise of critiquing it will help people internalize its value and its salient points. Nonetheless, the KGB couldn’t have done a better job of stirring the heartstrings or people will far left inclinations. It’s still rank propaganda.
doesn’t branding something as “rank propaganda” put it beyond the realm of reasonable consideration?
no. it doesn’t. if that were my initial and only comment in this thread, then it would.
ok, I see.
Mischaracterize, label with a hot-button, & debate a strawman = discussion. Got it.
Can I take this as an ackowledgment that you have no more ammo and you concede the field? Should we take a poll? Go to the judges? Is there an equitable way for us to decide who won this debate? Because you seem to have given up.
I think your argument is unreformed regurgitated (perhaps unwittingly) Soviet propaganda. Does that mean it has no validity? No. Ductape’s argument also has some validity. But it is still propaganda, unfair, and somewhat obnoxious.
But, I made my arguments and did not appeal to strawmen. I merely noted my opinion that your argument could have been written by a KGB agent. Doesn’t mean it couldn’t be true.
I’m done with this anti-fluoridation debate. I gotta eat.
I give up. You win. whatever you want.
you’re a dishonest debater.
I do object to my opinion being first twisted & then described as kgb derived propaganda & you’re being disingenuous that label doesn’t place it outside the parametters of reasonable discourse in today’s USA — it frankly smacks of McCarthyism
I concede nothing Booman — we disagree
& I still maintain that you can never adequately explain two centuries of US domination over Haiti in Cold War terms — nor much else in this hemisphere post WW II
good. cuz I’m hungry. And I can’t continue to respond to non-responsive posts about non-existent strawmen arguments.
So, I’m glad I won.
P.S. I didn’t call your argument KGB propaganda in order to defeat it, I defeated it and then called it KGB propaganda.
I also tend to pick on Pentagon and CIA propaganda. I do it by destroying its basis in fact and then calling it propaganda. Same system, same method, no guru.
Chalmers Johnson, Noam Chomsky, William Engdahl, Martin Luther King, CLR James & a host of other writers & scholars have developed a much more detailed, nuanced critique of America, its foreign & doemstic policies, & its evolving psyche that has nothing to do with the kgb, which in case, you hadn’t noticed, no longer exists. Many of those writers go through detailed critiques of US, Soviet & many other powers’ propaganda campaigns in developing their analyses. You have no leg up on them. It’s home grown & forms the intellectual base of many grass-roots movements for peace, the environment, and racial/social issues. Labeling it as anti-american, obnoxious kgb propaganda is, if you want exchanges labels, McCarthy-like.
Your rhetorical device here has been argumentuum ad abusurduum. It proves nothing. Want to call it a win? Go ahead. It’s the American way.
ah, the sorrows of Haiti . . .
…folks you mention. They have developed a nuanced view, but it is (scathingly) critical of America without including a hatred of Americans.
Oh give it up Meteor Blades. You’re usually the voice of reason, but you got your ass kicked in this debate, in my opinion. Americans are responsible for what America does, including you.
I don’t see that. I usually see MB as a moral compass that is compellimg. This debate is no different. Ass kicked? Hardly.
All Americans are responsible for what America does.
it follows then:
Muslims are responsible for 7/7 and 9/11.
Arabs are responsible for the atrocities in the Sudan.
Muslims are responsible for FGM.
Whites are responsible for Nazis.
Blacks are responsible for the Rwandan genocide.
You see, you and W actually agree on many things. The only difference is which category you hate.
Or are you supporting American exceptionalism? ;->
ALTERNATIVELY:
We are each of us individual humans, who struggle and are responsible for out own choices and lives. There is no original sin, and no original innocence.
I go for option 2. Option 1 is nihilist and hateful.
Your comment is too far down the thread hierarchy for a good debate (notes get too squished). Briefly, however, I am aware of your position, and I think that it is the nihilistic position.
Americans are a national political grouping. You claim an analogy to “Muslims,” “Arabs,” “Whites” and “Blacks.” But none of those are national groupings and none of those are political groupings. Your position is illogical.
You then compare me to “W.” That seems pretty hateful to me.
The rest of your comment is just a string of non sequiturs. Claiming “there is no original sin, and no original innocence” is cute, but it adds nothing to the debate, in my opinion.
I do believe all Americans are personally responsible for all of the crimes of the United States, just as all Germans (including the German Jews) were responsible for the Nazi atrocities. A strict doctrine of collective responsibility is philosophically respectable, even if it offends you.
thanks. that was my point, way back when . . .
To my mind you didn’t win.
the parameters of reasonable discourse. To some, to suggest, as BoJo does a bit upwards in the thread, that an American life does not inherently have a higher value than a non-American life, to suggest that all the people he mentions, the victims, are every bit as human and every bit as valuable, as an American politician, even an American CEO of an American corporation, that America does not know what is best for Iraq, for Poland, for Tuvalo or Tonga, is tantamount to attempting to open a discussion on the subect of the 18th dimension with a being from Flatland.
For others, delving too deeply into this or that event in the past of the US, especially for those who may be experiencing the beginnings of some discomfort, perhaps initially politically motivated, dislike of this politician, admiration for another, but that has somehow begun to undergo a bit of creeping, spawning a creepiness that the new thinker may simply not be emotionally capable of withstanding.
And there is also the delicate question of what is meant by “America.”
Predictably, I will quote from an old blogrant:
Today, I would also add that to be anti-American is to be not business-friendly.
Yes, yes, I know, & shall forever be . . .
America means all those things in your list, which demand acknowledgement
I’m still partial to an American Outrider tradition that will never die. It’s an on-going cultural war over what it means to be an American. Red-baiting is an old, lame tactic that won’t make us go away.
One of my obscure delights is the work of the poet/scholar Susan Howe, who’s done some fascinating work digging around in the early New England colonists’ Captivity Narratives.
Sovereignty, throughout the centuries, is a fascinating concept, both intellectually and as played out in time & space —
still at issue today in the Great Basin’s Western Shoshone lands of the Nevada Test Site & Yucca Mtn depository. An issue US courts have ruled settled, natch, but one given serious hearing at the UN.
Business friendly as a definition of pro-american? well, it all depends on whose business we’re talking about, eh?
I’m going to bed. But I’ve got to write you directly once. You’ve surely ignited an interesting debate.
I’ve been alive a year now. Trying to change something. But I suppose change just comes. You can’t try. You just do. Then something will happen. Good for some. Bad for some.
I’ve gotten so out of step with mainstream American thought, that even one of my own peace team members has suggested that I take time off from that cause.
So I’m a lunatic. But a fan. I know your thoughts are not popular. But I’m glad you said them. And stuck around to talk a little.
I would love to live to see a world without borders. With communities of self-governing people. All concerned with one another. And with the health of our planet. I know it is just a pipe dream. But we lunatics must have our fantasies. I feel very much like Lennie in the American classic “Of Mice and Men.” I need to have a story to look forward to. Something to soothe me. Just a pipe dream to make reality livable for another period of time. So that is mine. No governments in the sense we know them. Just men and women. Caring for themselves. Coming together to address the problems that truly plague them. Leaving behind the imaginary concepts that have so clouded our lives. Economies. Nationalities. Races. Boundaries. Justifications for war.
It ain’t happening. But it is a thought. Like a little rabbit farm.
Goodnight, man.
In the best and noblest sense of the word. A mensch, as they say đŸ™‚
Utopia is a pipe dream. What you describe is civilization, and I do not believe that it is a pipe dream, it is my most heartfelt prayer that your little one will bring her own children into such a world.
Rest well, my brother, I am quite a fan of yours, too.
I notice you have left.
Some people, when they make a big dramatic hateful huff, actually leave for a day or two.
I guess those people are too impaired by their constructionist Western thinking.
Ductape’s post is anti-American. But is it leftist?
Anti-Americanism does not equal leftism. Right-wing nationalist politics in many countries is very anti-American. Leftists criticize priviledged ruling classes. Right-wingers demonize whole peoples and nations.
“If Ductape’s diary isn’t anti-American, then the genre doesn’t exist.”
Huh?
Is this “America” we’ve been seeing since January 21, 2000?
If it isn’t, then how do we explain it? Some sort of unfortunate abberation?
I guess you won’t be satisfied until someone comes out and confesses. Okay. I’ll bite: I’m Anti-American.
There. Happy?
I have to confess: I wasn’t always “anti-American”. It only happened after I started doing what’s now commonly called “connecting the dots”.
I can see for myself what’s going on in the United States and it isn’t unique, or unprecedented and, yes, I’m “anti-” that, all of it.
Ductape actively participates in conservative blogs as so stated in this diary.
Ductape has accused me and other being either a delusional mental patient or a terrorist.
Ductape has refused to respond with a coherent response to Booman’s questions below.
Ductape has repeatedly asserted inflammatory talking points without links or facts.
At no point did I troll rate the comments that I disagreed with.
So – I made an assertion you did not like.
You felt it was necessary to troll rate my comment…because you disagreed with my ‘assertion’.
Feel free…but it puts you in a position of defending assertions not facts.
I fear that you misunderstand Ductape in more ways than one. I don’t think he has ‘admitted’ to particpation in conservative blogs.
To me, this is a commentary on the fact that the ideology of many ‘liberal’ American blogs can seem – viewed from the distance of say the Middle East – just as American exceptionalist or Manifest Destiny-based as the US regime’s. My view of his meaning is reinforced by his following paragraph.
Your remark that “You [Ductape] are protected within these borders from whatever it was in your homeland that you fled…” seems to me to be entirely a supposition about Mr Fatwa’s origins and status and not based on anything I am aware of Ductape ever saying about himself. Personally, I have always assumed Ductape to be an American citizen. Many small clues in his writing over the last couple of years suggest that he was educated in the US, and I would venture to suggest probably also born and bred in your country. I have always read his use of the term ‘Americans’ in the second or third person as an argumentative device. I think Ductape has a sympathy for, a reasonable knowledge of, and probably a number of contacts in the Middle East. I have my own guesses about the reasons for this, but that is not a necessary part of this discussion.
As others have pointed out in the comments, Ductape very clearly acknowledges that there is a small minority of Americans who are actively working to change matters. On my (perhaps poor) reading of his diary you were not branded a delusional mental patient, although the behaviour of the American people viewed as a group certainly was. A not unreasonable characterisation, IMHO, and one which is somewhat endorsed by Militarytracy when she refers to “those in denial and those who cling to some notion of superiority”.
I was frankly staggered at the virulence/vehemence of your comments on this diary, and also Militarytracy’s. Calling Ductape a troll was rather unfair given that he has a long and thoughtful history of contribution to the site and has tried to be personally supportive of other Tribbers.
Ductape has a somewhat quirky way of expressing his views and arguments. But I don’t see his diary as anti-American. Rather I see him as sad about and pitying of the American condition.
bravo
well said.
because most, not all but enough, of Americans are slaves, caged in their own hate, their own apapthy.
It’s not really because of the lack of free press or the lack of will by the Democrat et al leaders… it’s because, for the most part, Americans don’t give a rat’s ass… yet.
Not untill it’s too late, my friend.
Yup. They’re too busy studying the first photos of Shiloh Nouvel Jolie-Pitt.
Well, she is a cute baby:
She is a damned cutie pie! Those ears though……..are those Brads or Angelinas?
Whew!
But it was the Jolie-Pitt that I finally saw.
Most in my country can’t name two Supreme Court Judges, can’t distinguish a Senator from a Congressman and most, sadly, think it’s okay to murder women and children in other lands.
Not ALL mind you. But enough to have fucked this country up bad.
But I’m going to continue doing what I can to wake some of these fuckers upside the head. đŸ™‚
One of my problems with your rhetoric, Ductape, is that you continuously characterize the resistance in Iraq as nothing but the natural and just response to occupation. I haven’t noticed you condemning the atrocities being committed by Iraqis on Iraqis, nor an acknowledgment that the Ba’athist regime is behind the bulk of the anti-American violence (at least from the point of view of financing and organization).
I don’t dispute that Americans hold some unexamined and hubristic beliefs about their right to act as the world’s police force. On the other hand, there has been much good that has come from that opinion, as well as much bad. Just ask the people of Poland what they think about America’s role in liberating their land.
I know you are a propagandist, but you are often just factually wrong.
Here’s a project. What kind of Iraq do you hope to see? One divided into 3 pieces? One with more Sunni participation. One under the arm of a mullah? A ba’athist thug? A Kurd? What do you hope for Iraq?
would be an Iraq, an Afghanistan, et al, free of the invaders.
I understand that to ask what kind of America you would want to see, were the US currently occupied by the armed forces of any foreign nation, would not be a fair question. Apples and oranges, file not found, etc.
Far too much ink and too many keystrokes have, in my opinion, been spent on the impossible task of asking Americans to put themselves in the shoes of its victims.
Most are simply not able to do so. This is the tragedy, this is the fact.
Would that it were only propaganda.
Yes. So, let’s pretend that Iraq was no invaders. The Americans have gone home. What kind of government arrangement do you hope that they will have? How does it differ from what they are attempting to put together now?
to pose that question to you, how would an America under foreign invasion and occupation differ from an America free from same?
I can tell you this much. Were any country to invade and occupy the US, if someone asked me what kind of America I would like to see, I would say that I would like to see one free of the invaders, and invite the person to ask me the same question once that foreign invading horde had been completely vanquished and removed from American soil.
Can you not answer the question?
It doesn’t do to ask me a different question.
If America were invaded, I would wish for a post-invasion America much like the one I grew up in.
Do you wish for an Iraq much like the one they grew up in?
just as I would be able to answer the same question about an America under foreign invasion and occupation.
In such a case, I would be able to answer the question when the invaders were removed from America.
I understand that it is a case of apples and oranges to many Americans, however, to me, it is not.
My opposition to invasion and occupation remains the same regardless of which nation is being invaded and occupied by whichever other nation.
Such a view is naturally considered to be the epitome of radical fanaticism by many in the West. đŸ˜‰
is simply avoidance. You can answer the question right now and you refuse to.
To me, that’s just simple bad faith. I answered your question when you turned around and posed it to me.
in Manifest Destiny, or the new term for it, American Exceptionalism.
I acknowledge that it is strongly ingrained in many Westerners, and especially in many Americans.
However, it is not ingrained in me.
I will repeat, I am opposed to invasion and occupation, regardless of who is invading and occupying whom.
I understand that such a view is offensive to many Americans, and such a blunt expression of it insensitive to their beliefs, and for that I apologize.
However, it would be both dishonest and hypocritical of me to claim that I would answer say what sort of Country A, currently under foreign occupation, that I would like to see, when I would not be able to answer the same question about Country B under a foreign occupation.
In either case, for me, the only answer possible is that I would like to see the afflicted nation free of the invaders, and until it is, that is the extent of my preferences and wishes for that nation, no matter what nation is victim, no matter what nation is invader.
I understand that you oppose the continued occupation of Iraq by American forces. So do I.
I am asking you what kind of country you hope Iraq will be after we leave.
If you cannot answer that question, or at least offer some ideas, then I don’t think we can engage in a debate over Iraq. It also strips you of any high ground you might have.
Are you incapable of articulating any positive vision for the Middle East other than less Western involvement?
is removal of the occupier.
Because I am opposed to invasion and occupation, much in the same way that I am opposed to rape, my wish for the victim is that the invasion, occupation, rape, cease. Until that happens, that is my only wish, the extent of my vision, for the victim.
No matter who the rapist is.
that just reveals the shallowness of your thinking.
Just to take one example, let’s look at Saudi Arabia. Do I think the people of Arabia are being ripped off blind by the royal family? Yes. But, would they be able to form a more equitable government if the royal family suddenly fled to Monaco and Aspen? That is not certain. In the category of “be careful what you wish for” it is not good enough to just hope for a current situation to change. You must consider the consequences.
In Iraq, my only hesitancy about pulling allied troops out, is that it could result in tremendous bloodshed, far worse than what we are currently witnessing. Ultimately, I don’t think we can positively prevent the worst from happening. But I am at least willing to debate it. You aren’t.
Having followed this thread, I’ve got to ask you, BooMan? What is wrong with leaving this question — “What kind of state should Iraq become?” — to the Iraqis. It is not our question to answer. And it is not there question to answer while they are being occupied by a foreign power.
I think that is the legitimate problem that Ductape hits one. It would be my opinion, that the minds of most Americans have a difficult time understanding why they should not be involved in some way with what should happen in Iraq? They are stuck on questions like, “If we leave now, it will be a mess? What about the extremists? Etc.” But the whole point is, that is really an exceptional attitude on our part. We have undertaken to be masters of the globe. Almost all of us. In our attitudes. Just by posint these questions. Who the fuck are we to say a damn thing about Iraq? At least outside of a legitimate use of international law, my answer to that question would be — we are no one to have any say in it — beyond the obvious misuse of our military power.
It is virtually impossible for the vast majority of Americans to conceive of the possibility that they should not be involved in any given country.
I don’t see it as a phenomenon limited to Iraq, or even the Middle East. I think one would run into the same brick wall with any country.
And I think it touches on deeper cultural values.
If someone is raping your sister, and someone else asks, “What career path do you think she should take? What would you like to see her study in school?”
and you reply, well first I would like to see the rapist removed from her person, the man who tells you that you are deliberately avoiding discussing her career plans is also sincere in his beliefs.
People inhabiting the same globe will be involved with each other like it or not, judge it or not, want it or not……the Gods don’t much care but you are all on this rock together and at some point there will be involvement! Sit behind your computer screen a little more and isolate yourself into your own little insane fairyland of unreasonable, unrealistic, ignorant rules of Ductape reality.
and sincere, but by what arrogance should America be the one to decide what any other country sets up as their choice of governance? Do we truly know what is “best” for everyone else in the world?
Although I hold no sympathies with DTF’s comments, I do wonder mightily why it is we think we have the answers to everyones destiny. We do not know their culture, we ignore their history, we really care very little for their people, but we are overly fond of their natural resources. How could we possibly know what is best for any other country? It just doesn’t ring true to me that we have any clue about such things. Our country, for quite some time, has acted like a self-centered teenager. Our government has seemed to be concerned with what “we” want and if we want it then all countries should be overjoyed and accept our way as the best way for them. It does not make a lot of sense, nor does it show any maturity or concern for others outside our boundaries. Not that we are overly concerned with many inside our boundaries. We need an attitude adjustment.
Just my view, and certainly I would be interested in any enlightening answer.
…believe that America is under foreign occupation and has been so for several centuries, including those during which the place has been called the United States. So these hypotheticals don’t stir me much.
While I take a stance “to the left” of Booman‘s on foreign policy, one that does not kowtow to American exceptionalism – which I see as your main complaint in this piece – I agree wholeheartedly with him that you’re dodging a legitimate question. When you grant civilization to the “cradle of civilization” and not to America (deeply flawed as it is), then you are indeed engaging in propaganda.
I make no apologies for a U.S. foreign policy I have opposed in 75% of its aspects almost nonstop since 1964. This does not require me to accept that all foreign critics of U.S. foreign policy are somehow more civilized and more rational. Nor that they are less willing to impose their own brand of truth on their neighbors for whatever interests they claim: ideological, religious, resource-oriented or geo-political.
And my opposition (which has never been about the “incompetence” of the leaders of the current or past wars) certainly does not push me to suggest that the majority of Americans would willingly and unquestioningly put the knife to their first-born on the simple say-so of their government. If you truly believe that, then your reading of the American temperment is as distorted as Dick Cheney’s reading of the Constitution.
regarding the invasion of the Americas and the genocide of the indigenous people.
However, that is my view, and I cannot assume that BooMan shares it. From what I have read of his work, he considers the United States to be a legitimate nation with a legitimate claim to sovreignty.
So if I am to make any attempt to communicate with him at all, it is simple courtesy to make that attempt within the parameters of acknowledgement of his own beliefs, to the extent that I can.
So while I am able, for the sake of argument, to address his question as much as possible from his own perspective, namely, of the US as a legitimate state, and thus say that were the US to be invaded and occupied, my wishes for it would be that the invaders be removed, and would consist, until that removal, of that wish only.
That is the only statement that I can honestly make regarding my wishes for any victim of occupation and invasion, and I can make it honestly according to BooMan’s view, namely that the US is a legitimate state, as well as my own, namely that it is not.
Regarding what mainstream Americans are willing to do to their own, and have done and are doing to their own, I can refer you to the reports of just about any human rights group, your local food bank and homeless shelter, and a large chunk of the low income population of New Orleans that survived a four day long televised example. Not to mention the remote control tortured children. Or the Americans whose labor is valued below the price of medical treatment.
I would suggest that you review all that, and then click here
…was point when many Americans finally broke with Mister Bush and simultaneously had their eyes opened to the Iraq war. You are arguing that the vast majority of Americans are blind and callous to sins of omission and commission by America’s leaders, and that those who aren’t blind and callous are unwilling to do anything about the situation. Not only does this fly in the face of 180 years of political activism in the United States, it goes against political momentum building right now.
Latest poll results I’ve read — and they might not be right on point, but close — put the number of Americans who know Iraq was wrong and want to get out now at right around 53%.
My opinion — any truly independent tribunal (independent of U.S. influence) would find the U.S. violated international law with the invasion of Iraq. As well as for a host of other issues associated with the “war on terror.”
So I’m stuck with the fact that a bare majority — after five years — have even begun to understand the wrongs we’ve committed. And I’d say that is fucking abysmal. I’m ashamed of my country. We re-elected the fuck that did it. Or we let him steal the election — if you are one who believes that. And we didn’t mass on the streets to overthrow an illegitimate, illegal, unethical, immoral government. Seems to me I’ve seen a couple of countries in Eastern Europe who have dusted off illegitimate leadership with people’s uprisings in the not too distant past. So I’m unforgiving of the American position. Ductape is right on it. IMHO.
…was essentially that all but a tiny handful of Americans are unworthy to be called civilized by the rest of the world. Not that the Bush Regime (or previous American administrations) are evil and engaged in immoral activity for greedy reasons – about which you will get no argument from me – but rather that it is Americans in general who are at fault for all this. I’m sorry but that strikes me as half-a-step away from the view that the people who died in the twin towers deserved what they got.
“I’m sorry but that strikes me as half-a-step away from the view that the people who died in the twin towers deserved what they got.”
You miss the point. Most of the world in no way “deserves what it gets”–the damn little that remains when the most powerful have helped themselves.
You and I and the rest of Americans–not to mention the others of the rich and privileged “first world” nations– should rue the day that people started to get “what they deserve”.
Making sure that Americans do not get what they deserve but rather, much, much, much more than what they deserve, is what Bush and Cheney and the neo-cons are all about.
and comparing current shots to photos of Caracas the day after the attempted coup.
Yes, Meteor Blades, and New Orleans is STILL in ruins. It’s scandalous that there isn’t a massive rebuilding effort in New Orleans and the rest of the devastated Gulf Coast towns.
But Americans are OUTRAGED and at this moment, hundreds of thousands of Americans have mobilized in the streets in protest of Bush’s abject failure and refusal to lead the reconstruction of those areas devastated by Hurricane Katrina.
Oh wait, they’re not. Maybe we should stop using that word “outrage”. To quote Inigo Montoya, I do not think that word means what you think it means.
So the political momentum is building against Bush, huh? Hm, my calendar reads June 2006. Six years into the most ruinous presidency in American history and “momentum is building”?
I see. That phrase, “political momentum”? I do not think that phrase means what you think it means.
The Venezuelan protest against the coup of Hugo Chavez
The Mexican silent protest against Fox’s plan to put then Mexico City mayor Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador on trial.
American outrage is such a joke.
They say that a picture is worth a thousand words, and I don’t think anyone can name a number high enough to denote the words that those particular ones are worth.
If it were within my power, every American would have those pictures on his or her desktop, next to the most recent shot from the Washington webcam of their choice, and those without computers, have them on their refrigerators, their bathroom mirrors, carry them in their wallets, and every time they utter or think the word “democracy,” touch those images, and think or utter the word again.
I look at it this way…it is not my position to “hope” for one particular arrangement or another other than for one that Iraqis themselves decide upon free of outside interference.
“Yes. So, let’s pretend that Iraq was no invaders. The Americans have gone home. What kind of government arrangement do you hope that they will have? How does it differ from what they are attempting to put together now?”
link to image:
“Bremer signs over limited sovereignty to Iraq’s interim government, June 28, 2004”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L._Paul_Bremer_III
The above link offers a photo of L. Paul Bremer signing over limited “sovereignty” to “Iraq”. Some Americans are mighty proud of that photo. I’m not among them.
Tell me, how would you like limited sovereignty?
What do you make the odds of Iraqis enjoying “soveriegnty” without the limited part?
What we routinely expect others to endure at our hands, we Americans would never willingly endure from others. THAT is what ‘American exceptionalism’ means.
What would the difference be?, you ask.
“Oceania” wouldn’t be supervising the limited sovereignty, that’s what the difference would be; the most essential, all-important difference.
Americans insist on the right to make their own mistakes for themselves. That right includes violence and all sorts of other foul ups; we don’t apologize for those foul ups. Instead, we reply that, “Nobody’s perfect.”
Others, too, want nothing less.
I could never put myself in their shoes, truly. I can’t even begin to wrap my brain around what it is they go through…
But… I can try to walk beside them in my own shoes.
Iraqi delegates, Veterans for Peace.. I’ve been blessed with being able to meet them, sometimes just briefly, and to listen, and walk with them.
and we won’t be bringing freedom and democracy to these people, and I fight every single day to do what I can to change that. These people have never been nice to each other though and they have murdered and tortured each other for hundreds of years before America was even born in the most barbaric ways. Saddam brought to them a certain kind of peace because they had a common enemy to hate and fight, and now he is gone and they will return to hating and fighting and killing and mutilating and torturing each other with or without us! I prefer without us!
Of course we don’t belong there. And I know that due to so many things I will never be “free” to visit Bagdhad as I’ve always had since I was a little girl. Yes it has horrible places, and people but so does America. There are places here you and I wouldn’t be safe in after hours. We have horrible killers in our land…
But like Iraq and other places, there are beautiful places and friends yet to be met.
Eman taught me many things in our one afternoon… but what sticks out in my mind is that she is just like me. … A human.
Every country has it’s cruelty. We have a “president” who giggled, mocked a woman as he put her to death.
I don’t feel any venom here. I’m actually confused by the anger.
But I love you guys. It hurts to see people I care for upset with each other. But… I’m here to learn. I’m fighting.. but I refuse to fight with anyone here.
Thank you for your soothing words. Everything Barbaric though is not the fault of Americans and I’m sick to death of this bull. Every person is responsible for their actions and their choices! I am 100% responsible for mine. I’m sick to death though of these diaries that portray whomever Ductape believes that he speaks for as hopeless helpless dolls that we stand up and knock down and stand up and knock down. I’ll be responsible for mine but they are responsible for theirs. What is done is done and now a new government lies before them and all they want to do is get out the power drills and drill into the eye sockets of little boys and blow up innocent civilians every single damned day, that’s bullshit and they aren’t innocent!
Tonight thousands of children will die in America because they didn’t have health and dental coverage.
To me that is barbaric. To other countries that is just as barbaric as Saddam.
Forcing raped women to have babies… we could compare and compare all day… but the bottom line is that we need to keep caring and not fight as much. It takes energy from the things that you need to do ((((Tracy))))). (ppssst I gotta run, still on empty, but gotta close up the old apartment)
Actually, that’s a myth. There were intertribal/interclan disputes in Mesopotamia before the British Empire cobbled together a bunch of disparate areas and dubbed it “Iraq”, but I find this notion of “those people” (brown-skinned people, mind you) being the sort who “murdered and tortured each other for hundreds of years before America was even born in the most barbaric ways” racist, to say the least.
Have you ever BEEN to Iraq? I have. It is the CRADLE of civilization–we can trace its civilization back nine millennia at least. The Iraqi people themselves are most hospitable and gracious; Americans would do well to learn from the manners of the average Iraqi. An Arab will welcome a stranger into his home as an honored guest and offer him the best food and drink in his house; such is their culture and their tradition.
As for Western civilization–it was Western civilization that started two genocidal global wars in the 20th century, and if we reach further into the past we find the enslavement of tens of millions of Africans, the Inquisition, and war after war. Not to mention America’s own brutal prison system, its legalization of the death penalty, the US Civil War, and the fact that the US used nuclear weapons on the Japanese. Oh, and let’s not forget the not-so-long-ago American genocide of the Native Americans.
I don’t think any human civilization has much to brag about regarding how noble and enlightened it is. Find me a civilization that doesn’t have blood the pages of its history and I’ll show you a civilization that got wiped out by an aggressor.
the impossible task of asking Americans to put themselves in the shoes of its victims.
Most are simply not able to do so. This is the tragedy, this is the fact.
Would that it were only propaganda.
It seems like such a simple exercise . . .
Can you name a single country anywhere on the planet where most of the people can put themselves in the shoes of their victims?
Just take a drill to the eyes of twelve year old boys and that’s just fine! It’s America’s fault! Bullshit!
Iraqi atrocities. First we have to stop committing ours. When we have stopped, then we can do it.
We will not be able to stop until we leave.
There is a body of knowledge about how to carry out an occupation successfully. Germany at the end of World War II comes to mind. Unfortunately, in Iraq we did none of the things that we already knew were necessary for success.
Its over. An unsuccessful occupation cannot be made successful.
But even after we leave–assuming we only would–we are in a poor position to preach morality. We are after all, the people, who used indescriminate chemical and incendiary weapons (White Phosphorus) on civilian populations (city of Fallujah)and who raped minors as an interrogation technique.
I don’t think people want to hear about morality from us. I don’t think we have much to say.
fine, in fact ought to be worshipped because “the Americans” have done stuff! You couldn’t make sense if you wanted to! People like you make me sick because in order to feel some kind of wierd superiority you “create” a generalized ULTIMATE EVIL and today it’s AMERICA! I wonder why you are so afraid of each person being judged singularly on their own merits and/or wrong doing? Isn’t it about time that someone around here now jumped up and hollered “Darfur”. The despicable Americans are so despicable that they aren’t even saving Darfur by using their disgusting evil bloodlust murdering military to do it!
I don’t see how that conclusion follows from what Gaianne is saying.
Oooooooookay.
afraid of each person being judged singularly on their own merits and/or wrong doing
I am not afraid at all. I wish it would happen. I have never used White Phosphorus on anybody. No guilt, right? Free and clear!
I wish it worked that way. I will, personally, be very lucky if I escape the retribution that is coming.
The America is going down: That is geology and economics. HOW America goes down depends very much on the national impression we have made on the world–and what the world does in response.
Individual buy-outs will be limited.
There is precious little of it to be found on the entire fucking globe! It isn’t just an American deficit these days………it’s a fucking mankind deficit! So Spare Me!
What I hear in your recent posts, Duct, is an increasingly desperate plea for mercy, and it’s as if I hear in your angry words the voices of thousands and thousands of children, women, and men crying out with you to us. I hear desperate pleas of please, stop, think what you’ve done, please, please, don’t keep doing these things to us.
It must be awful to be on the other side of us, looking into our guns and into the faces of our madmen and madwomen.
I know your rants make a lot of people angry, but they don’t piss me off, they make me hear the voices of all the people we frighten. We have become the boogieman that scares the world, only we really are behind the door and under the bed and we really will get you if you don’t watch out.
Thank you Kansas,
That’s what I hear too.
On the other hand, coming to the conclusion you did required you to do a calm, complete reading of his work with an awful lot of reading between the lines.
Frankly, IMO, rants that generalize and lump every, single American into the same group, aren’t conducive to helping people come to the same conclusion you did. What you just wrote is much better, much clearer and could have engendered actual discussion, and maybe even caused people to come together to work for change, instead of simply promoting arguments.
And DTF knows that — which is why he is so infuriating. When he wants to write a simple direct sentence, he can. He just often doesn’t.
with no “between the lines” reading necessary, would most assuredly constitute a violation of the Patriot Act, especially some of its secret provisions, and might even be treason, under those particular statutes.
I would advise loyal Americans to play it safe and refrain from even a complete reading, much less a calm one.
The most advisable strategy would be to read the title, and skim over a few other lines. This technique has stood the test of time, and at least as of this writing I am aware of no one who has carefully followed this guideline being detained indefinitely.
It is not known at this time to what extent the Homeland Security Department is able to accurately monitor the exact number of words written and comprehended, and indeed, if such information were to fall into the hands of, for instance, the New York Times, they would be well advised not to publish it, in order to avoid giving aid and comfort to the enemy and undermining the War on Terror.
ROFLMAO
Thanks for the best belly-laugh I’ve had in days, Ductape.
As for the rest of this colloquy:
See? Who can you reason with?
Not so good with facts. Lots of people here, including me, have posted reasonable responses, well-documented with facts, that disprove every inflammatory assertion Ductape Fatwa has made.
DTF’s response, not surprisingly, has been more quips, more unsupported assertions (i.e., opinions, not facts), or else a serene silence.
Not responding to a fact-based argument is a tell-tale sign that this diarist has not made an argument so much as he has posted a rant. And yes, it is an anti-American rant, but it is one that only stands up if nobody turns a fan on–then it floats away, light and insubstantial as a feather.
since it’s too hard to read between the lines.
DTF reduced to 15 seconds on CNN:
“You are all responsible. That is what democracy and freedom means. You can’t hide from your sins or the sins of your government. The only way to save yourselves is to actually do something to stop the killing and torture and starvation being done in your name.”
That came through loud and clear for me, but then again, I like abstractions and I don’t think myself, my race, or my country are exceptional. Just human, like the rest of us.
I never said I couldn’t read between his lines.
Yeah, I took this sentence: On the other hand, coming to the conclusion you did required you to do a calm, complete reading of his work with an awful lot of reading between the lines. to mean that you hadn’t bothered reading through the lines, or that it was too hard to do so therefore DTF should write clearer sentences. And my point was that it was quite clearly stated for me… but I am not an American and share many of his complaints about the system, inaction, exceptionalism, and whining about how everyone who happens to have a not so kind view of Americans should just be more productive and hope to change minds.
Unfortunately that hasn’t worked in decades and the country just keeps killing more and more people all over the world. So yes, there is a time and a place for words like DTF’s… because so many of them are the daily experience for those under the barrel of the American gun or economic sanctions… they may not be all that worried about offending sensibilities by being really and truly pissed off and calling bullshit.
Nowhere did I say that I didn’t read his piece calmly or completely or read between his lines. I said that coming to the conclusion that Kansas came to required her to do that.
I do think that DTF should write shorter and clearer pieces so that his message will be clearer to those who DON’T read calmly and between the lines and we can have actual conversations about what it is he wants to discuss. And, by the way, DTF is well aware of my love for brevity and directness – I tell him all the time. As far as I know he doesn’t take offense and simply looks upon it as one of my many quirks.
But let me read between your lines.
sound byte form for you then… since it’s too hard to read between the lines.
I took that to mean Mary I’m going to ignore what you actually wrote and imply that you are stupid and lazy.
And
but then again, I like abstractions and I don’t think myself, my race, or my country are exceptional.
I took that to mean Mary, YOU are too stupid to get abstractions and YOU think of yourself, your race or your country as exceptional.
So my understanding of your response is that it misrepresents what I actually wrote and insults me at the same time.
Would I be wrong?
You are free to interpret whatever you’d like from what I wrote. I didn’t say “Mary” at any point in there, nor did I say “stupid” or “lazy” – I said “sound byte form then for those who don’t want to” (which I took to be you as well based on your comment – that doesn’t mean stupid, or lazy, it means a sound byte. Unless of course you think that sound bytes make one stupid and lazy, but that’s your own interpretation, not mine, and not the one I was making).
As far as the last part of my comment, I said I liked abstractions… you know, which is in direct relation to my own distaste for sound bytes and appreciation of DTF’s long posts… my own personal opinion. And I was confirming that I appreciated this particular piece because I don’t think any of those things. No “Mary” in there as far as I can tell. Just a general distaste for the “why can’t you just be nicer”, or “fuck you, how dare you” type of responses on this thread.
So it would appear that we both misread each other as much as we were reading into anything at all.
And that’s one reason I like things to be as direct as possible. It’s so easy to imagine insult when possibly none was intended.
Now, I’m going to happy hour at the froggy bottom. You should come too.
a futile one.
But it is not a plea for America, for the West, to have mercy on its victims, but to have mercy on yourselves.
Good thing you said this, Duct, because I was missing it. I don’t disagree with it, either, now that I finally get it.
barbaric today and preAmercia than America can ever hope to be, thousands and thousands and thousands of years of mass murder, genocide, discrimination, the most barbaric torture I have ever heard of……they invented it! I’m utterly disgustingly sick of your endless bullshit! America has only been around 230 years……..who did you blame for everything before that Ductape? I am calling a Fatwa on your bullshit!
I’ve always seen you and DTF on the same team. My team too. None of us like this bullshit that we’ve most recently become — speaking of our countries policies.
I’ve got my days where I hate America. I’ve got to say it. And DTF puts out the case pretty well. I think he knows we aren’t all lumped in that one place. I don’t think he’s lumping you there. I think we are on the same team.
Just my two cents.
Personal note — I grew up in a pretty ugly place. As I remember you did from earlier writing (powerful writing). My natural inclination, psychologically, is to try to smooth it over and laugh it off. Hope that works here. (And I don’t mean to say that we’re all one big dysfunctional family).
BostonJoe – he is lumping all Americans together. Given many opportunities to say otherwise he has remained silent. I can no longer read his diaries with a spirit of generosity.
Okay. well I won’t force you. đŸ™‚
But he’s damned insightful a whole lot of the time. I think.
at itself….I suppose when people were still in denial about a lot concerning Iraq, then Ductape and I were on the same page. Most of America knows what’s going on now though but is powerless right this moment to stop it other than protesting, and working on elections, and running for office. We are focused on doing that now and we challenge ProWar Democrats like Joe and send money to Ned Lamont and the ass kickings have begun. Ductape hasn’t been able to acknowledge any of this and I don’t think many of us here have time left for this bullshit anymore. We would rather be doing something about it and handing out kudos to those who have stood up and changed things and continue to change things. He shows up here and writes shit that applies to nobody here accept that most of us are Americans…….he’s being an asshole.
MT – I still see you and DTF on the same side. And both of you are with me constantly now.
You have written: Most of America knows what’s going on now though… I wish that were so, but I don’t believe it. Why? In part because Iraq and Afghanistan feel invisible – at least in my real world.
This was on the front page today:
Compare and Contrast
by BooMan
Wed Jul 5th, 2006 at 02:56:40 PM ADT
Whose voice did the world hear?
And that leads me to DTF… what I hear him saying is what the world hears and knows about “Americans.” What does the world’s news have to report on the position of the opposition party? How many mainstream local papers even reported the failed Feingold-Kerry amendment which had a date for withdrawal from Iraq?
And the tensions keep building, don’t they? Afghanistan, Iraq…Palestine and Israel, and Iran. What does the world hear from “America?”
As to DTF hating Americans, I don’t think so. I believe he is trying to warn us – to activate us to do more – because time is running out.
Why would I think this? From his comment in this diary, Understanding America the Exceptional: A Guide for the World’s Perplexed by DuctapeFatwa, Sat Jun 3rd, 2006 at 08:53:01 PM ADT
DTF forces me to open my mind. And you, dear MT, open my heart. And DammitJanet and BostonJoe are showing me what I have to do too. BostonJoe may have called himself the “Accidental Activist.” I consider myself the “Reluctant Activist.”
And I guess we have to keep opposing louder and louder till the whole world hears us…as in Horton Hears a Who, “We are here! We are here!”
I think it’s spelled inciteful.
I wish Ductape would have answered the question about what he would like to see happen in Iraq, instead of sidestepping it repeatedly and ending that line of discussion. Kind of kills the notion (for me anyway) that he posts these weekly missives for much more than creating a drive-by clusterfuck. Why not engage in a discussion, rather than taunting people with repeated non-answers?
But then I’m just a vicious hate-filled American posting pictures of Shiloh Jolie-Pitt anyway. Isn’t Britney having another baby soon?
That is a damn clever play on words. Shakespearean.
I didn’t realize that Ductape’s postings were weekly. Or I would check in regularly. I’d set my Blog-VCR. I think I’m dating myself, as VCRs are almost non-existent now. (Can’t imagine that I lived almost half of my life before even seeing one).
Fact is, I count Ductape as a friend. So it is hard for me to read what he writes as anything but damned insightful commentary. The guy makes points like few others I know personally (or in blogdom). Makes me think. And most of the time, I find his words to ring true.
And who am I to criticize his debating skills? He is often witty. Less than direct. But masterful. Not unlike your “inciteful” quote. A master of humor.
Here is a question for everyone. Well first a paragraph explaining myself, and then a question. I find the Booman Tribune to be one of the only communities of people in the entire world that I’m even in the same ballpark with anymore. I mean — I absolutely feel alienated, in terms of political thought, from just about everyone. Except the people on this blog and some members of the peace community and close family. Beyond those groups, I’d rarely share my thoughts. Especially on politics. So if I’m not alone in feeling this way, that tells me that the Booman Tribune is a pretty left, pretty cool group of people. And if everyone here feels that way, why are they bothered by Ductape’s observations about Americans. He makes an exception for the few who “get it.” I naturally think that he is probably talking about the majority of us in the blog. We all get it. Or at least most of us. That would be my guess. So I guess I don’t even think to be offended by his writing. Because I know he’s not talking to me.
Anyway. Good to see you CG. I know I don’t say hi much. Frankly not finding as much time to hang out in front of computer. But it is good to see you.
Here is to a better world. (Found an incredible new beer here — local — from Battle Creek — Oberon — if you can ever order a long distance ale — fucking great).
I find the Booman Tribune to be one of the only communities of people in the entire world that I’m even in the same ballpark with anymore. I mean — I absolutely feel alienated, in terms of political thought, from just about everyone.
Pretty much describes it for me too.
It reminded me of the old back yard hotdog Democrat get togethers that I used to go to with my grandmother. Being together is so synergistic. At home in Alabama though my friends tend to all be at Booman but I still find voices that speak to me on many many other sites and blogs.
I find the Booman Tribune to be one of the only communities of people in the entire world that I’m even in the same ballpark with anymore. I mean — I absolutely feel alienated, in terms of political thought, from just about everyone.
I have to strongly agree with you here, but is this a good thing politically????????????? If your statement is true, then the logical chance of our collective ideas ever prevailing in a democracy are pretty slim, No???
Maybe we need a benevolent dictatorship with you or someone like you as dictator! Yuh, I like that.
I agree that it is bad for Democracy. That people like us here have been marginalized. Or we have marginalized ourselves. I don’t understand the mechanism well. But I sure as heck feel it has happened.
My own suggestion would not be dictatorship. But I think our government is way too large. Too dominated by entrenched interests. To be subject to change from democratic forces now. I think we need a smaller, more diffuse government. Very democratic. Very localized. Making life decision. Aggregating to address more regional problems on as those problems are understood.
Just my opinion. I could be wrong. Maybe all is well with this system. And BooMan and the Democratic left will ride to our rescue this fall. I’m not holding my breath.
Well, as long as BMT isn’t causing or contributing to the fractiousness that causes us to feel like such a minority, I would have to say this is a good thing for democracy. We need to reflect; we need to share; we need to build. And we need to give each other a hand so that when we walk away from here and face the apathetic and the narrow-minded, we are inspired and effective.
It would be nice to be part of that sure-minded majority. But I’m not going to give in to the apathy nor the flag waving for that comfort. So I’m glad we’re all here, at least.
If DTF incites an audience to find some insight, that’s a good thing.
From what I know of Zen, there are two main schools: Rinzai and Soto. The Rinzai school practitioners find that their guides are much more in their face, leaving them with koans to solve, occasionally whacking ’em upside the head to shock them into awareness. The Soto school is much kinder and gentler. Rinzai fits my temperament I suppose, but I’m also a middle-aged ex-punker, and the urge to mosh to Dead Kennedys tunes never really dies away.
Not sure where this is going other than I see a common thread – the road to enlightenment is not necessarily a pretty or comfortable one; it’s a road we travel on together. Sometimes it just takes some incite to fire up that Harley and roll.
But he’s damned insightful a whole lot of the time. I think.
I think that is very true! If nothing else, some of his explanations and analogys might give us some insight on trying to convince Americans where this country might have done wrong. I am not saying I agree with everything he says or that I think he means to help us here politically, but to listen to his views and thus sharpen our spears in areas he might be correct on is a good thing. In that respect, having his posts here is helpful.
Stand/stay above what might be his intentions, and glean out of his interesting insight what you can to help us in our political way forward!.
That everything that is wrong with the world is America. I had an odd conversation at drinking liberally in Philly with Luam who has spent time and education in Europe. For whatever reason, Tracy has always liked to believe that we are so “behind” European societies and culture in our own social development and maturity…..but it was really refreshing and quite nice to have someone who had a whole lot more European knowledge than I do discuss such things with me. I have worked with a lot of Europeans, and from discussing things with Luam I realized that I wanted to believe a lot of things that aren’t necessarily true. I felt better believing them though because if WE are really at fault I can at least “do something” about that and if truly we were just a young nation and just needed to grow up there was still hope for us. But wanting to believe those things and whether or not those things are really true are not the same thing. I can’t change that we went into Iraq and it wasn’t my choice and when I told everybody what my choice was I discovered that my choice didn’t matter and I had no power to exercise. Just because someone is Muslim though doesn’t automatically lift them above the pale, we have evil Americans and evil Christians and we have evil Muslims too…and we have Muslims who desire and have only conquest and power on their minds too and they don’t care how many of their own children they murder in getting there. I won’t be able to ever have any kind of impact on anything if I live a life half made out of lies because I like how it looks and feels to me. I love Joe, and what you do in real time that focuses on doing instead of pointing fingers and blaming blaming blaming is a gigantic difference.
talking.
In western culture, direct acts of physical violence against others such as various forms of torture, beheadings, gassings etc. are barabaric….because in our cultures when we want to kill or cause someone extreme pain we have “evolved” to use other methods such as bombing with burning chemicals or sound waves that liquidate your lungs, land mines and cluster bombs, and just plain old starving people to death. Of course we are also still quite happy to train our “barbaric” neighbors in torture, a la the “School of the Americas”.
To other cultures, our propensity for killing and maiming indiscriminately from a distance, mechanically, is utterly barbaric and innoble- we don’t even have the courage and the humanity – to look our enemy in the face as we torture and kill them. Yes, humanity, because many other cultures are far more sophisticated than ours in recognising all aspects of the human psyche, rather than trying to deny it and sanitize it by using remote machines.
You really need to read a hell of a lot more European and US history before you make such utterly false statements about historic (or contemporary for that matter) barbarity. Start with the Crusades and work up.
All humans are barbaric – and the more “civilised” we become, the more barbaric and the larger the scale of our barbarism. It just comes in different flavours in different cultures.
We as humans are certainly capable of all manner of violence. Oddly enough it takes some doing to work folks up to do some of the more gross acts of violence, such as torture – either in its old-school flavor or its more sophisticated CIA-developed variant discussed at length in Alfred McCoy’s recent book. All sorts of stress-reducers are needed, such as pumping would-be torturers with propaganda about being part of some “higher cause”, deindividuation (uniforms, hoods, etc. work wonders), and so on. The mechanization of torture and killing have definitely made it way too easy for comfort. We “civilized” folk can think of delivering painful electric shocks via remote control to troubled youth in the abstract, as we think of cluster bombing and so forth in the abstract – we don’t actually have to face what we’re doing.
propoganda like teaching ourselves and our children through over a century of “education” tradition that we are exceptional, for example, and that others are fundamentally “less than” – including many cohabiting the same land as us.
Equally good is to take a place that as a result of both internal and external pressures has been reduced to a place where many just struggle to survive, let along live, and then it’s also much easier to get them to do what you want.
Or just train them as children. I saw a documentary last night on the head of the Ugandan “freedom fighter” movement, the Lords Resistance Army, the one that systematically kidnaps children and forces them to torture and kill their parents, siblings, fellow villagers. The LRA institutionalises and programs children to commit torture and murder so blatantly that it is, in it’s own horrifying way, a fascinating experiment in some of the larger issues we are touching on here.
Of course, most of the time I can’t get past the overwhelming emotions of grief and anger and even hate, and nausea. And that’s also part of the larger problem here. DTF uses emotion to challenge people, to try and drive them beyond the irrational, yelling phrase. As much as I largely agree with his arguments, I have to say that I think he largely fails at convincing people to move from the emotional/irrational response to the point where they can have a rational conversation. especially when you/we/me are all fighting years of subtle programming.
I wouldn’t ask DTF to change his style of writing – that’s his voice. That said, his particular style can be a turnoff to others – especially when he blindsides readers, like he’s succeeded in doing with many with this diary.
I guess the question then becomes how to go about making the same argument and challenge the reader without driving them over some real or imagined edge. I’ll readily admit I’m not the right person to pull off that particular feat if for no other reason than I’m of the wrong temperament.
Part of the challenge is to realize from the get-go that the programming we’ve all received to a greater or lesser degree makes “exceptionalism” part of our self-concept, hence any direct challenge to that programming will often be perceived as an ego threat and folks who feel threatened tend to go into fight-or-flight mode at the drop of a hat.
I’m sure I’d have more to say, but it’s late. I need some sleep. Hope you don’t mind interacting with an “abuser of TU status” – someone’s telling on me. đŸ˜‰
Good night.
Ductape you are such an eloquent writer. You are so filled with hatred and contempt for anything that is American and I just wonder why. Where did you come from? Why did you choose America to live if it is filled with such evil and filth? You have written so beautifully time and again of an idyllic neighborhood in which you live, with neighbors of every color and nationality who bring each other native foods and plant lovely gardens that you like to walk through. Are they not America too?
As one of the tiny minority of Americans (55 million and growing) who genuinely want reform and are repulsed by what the government is doing in our name, I would really be interested in one of your poetic diaries about your homeland. If the U.S. doesn’t turn around soon I may want to move there.
I’ve never heard DTF say it. I’ve only got a guess where he lives. But I think an educated one. But I won’t share it.
I will say that I’m increasingly moved toward emigration. If it were an easy process, I think I’d already be gone. If there were the perfect place waiting with open arms, I’d be there. But it is not easy.
I’m moved to those feelings based largely on America’s inability to hold itself to one standard. We (most of us // not all by a long shot — and if I disagree with DTF anywhere, it is in his belief that there are so few of us dissenters who do not hold a double standard) just seem to have one standard for the world of “terrorists,” or “communists” or you name “them.” And another standard for our state action. DTF’s thoughts track very closely to Noam Chomsky’s IMHO. And that is praiseworthy in my view. Only Chomsky seems to like certain things about the U.S. Credits it largely with freedom of expression, though understands the tyranny of modern mass media. And from DTF, I don’t see him seeing many positive qualities from us as a country.
Anyway. Thought-provoking diary.
Give me your address and I’ll send you $20 and a thank-you note for taking your hatred elsewhere.
Actually, I would bet more like $2000 that you will not post for about a week. And golly it is NO FUN hating people who won’t stand up and notice that dang it you are HATING THEM. Also, you have to have somewhere to vent.
Baaaaaad nasty American.
-redwagon
That ‘caught in the middle’ position is unenviable. And I do not envy you.
It is a problem isn’t it? How does one reason with Americans? Or with Westerners, for that matter – if I have an argument with what you write here it is that you let the `West’ off too lightly. And is there any point in the attempt?
If one does write bluntly and directly – if one speaks honestly (and that, it seems to me, is what you do that with a damn sight more forbearance and grace certainly than I have ever mustered) – the eyes gloss over.
<chorus>
You’re too harsh. You’re generalising (never mind that you have consistently acknowledged those who do resist – what do your words have to do with this?). How mean. How hate-filled. You’re just jealous/don’t understand/are ungrateful/are imagining things because you’re not American /your country’s not top imperial dog /you’re not one of us and why don’t you just go the fuck away back to where you came from, wherever the hell that is.
And if you must stick around, if you won’t crawl back under whatever benighted rock you crawled out from, why aren’t you trying to persuade us? Why aren’t you trying to win our hearts and minds? Don’t you know anger is not productive? Why are you trying to make us feel guilty? Why aren’t you trying to move us?
</chorus>
Well you know what I think about `moving’ people.
You could try being more subtle, I suppose. More `nuanced.’ More understated. Oblique. Get familiar with the metallic taste of blood in your mouth. I did: it was wrong. Inevitably when one makes that attempt (regardless of one’s success or failure, or even what one thinks would constitute success or failure in such an effort) something that matters is lost. And even if it weren’t immoral, it has no use. The degree of `nuance’ and `sophistication’ required would, in time, render one indistinguishable from Mr. Poodle himself. And hasn’t he proved `persuasive’ – such a moderating influence!
Keep writing just as you write. You will — obviously — but still. Sometimes one feels an irrational urge to tell people to do that which they are clearly going to do.
There isn’t anything blunt or direct about this diary…..it’s all generalized mystified hatred of the undefined evil “Westerners”. Being blunt and direct requires a few things like specifics and facts!
That is this diary and every Ductape diary for the last God knows how long!
But then I do have a rather keen appreciation of irony đŸ˜‰
Nice to see you, dove! I haven’t seen you here at Booman since….oh yes, the last time DTF posted one of these.
man, and we start to sound more and more orange each day.
Do you know that dove hasn’t been lurking? and if she hasn’t WHO THE FUCK CARES? Man. You talk about dividing the community and yet can’t see that by remarks such as yours and others in this diary, basically a “with us or against us” mentality, that you are dividing this community. Right in front of your eyes.
Community is not homogenous. Not everyone agrees with each other or has to. A community that does is generally called a cult.
I’m glad DTF is here and making people uncomfortable and stirring debate. It gets pretty boring in the echo chamber or lounge… this is a political/ left wing site right? well, part of that is dealing with people who’s opinions you disagree with.
On this question, I think only Americans, only westerners, can really claim that unenviable position.
I am blessed with freedom from any lifelong inculcations that I belong to a Master Race, that my country is Always Right, at least sort of partly was that time might be.
Nor am I tortured by conflicts regarding crimes against humanity, niggling suspicions that this or that target group might be what if they are just a little bit human after all.
I do not have to struggle with questions to which the answer might destroy me, questions of what my own loved ones have or have not done, questions of whether right and wrong, the Golden Rule, are in conflict with an indoctrinated loyalty to a group of rich men.
I am not plagued by “nuances” when the question is rape, murder, torture, invasion, occupation, child molesting.
Yes, those are moral absolutes, those are lines in the sand that I will neither cross nor make apologies or explanations, or justify by declaring that they have a “military value,” or that they increase revenues.
According to my barbaric, fanatical, radical, rigid, uncompromising,terrorist moral code, all those things are wrong. Regardless of who commits them, regardless of to whom, regardless of who makes the money from it.
So I am far from stuck in the middle. And that is indeed a blessing, and one that I do not take for granted.
And I pray that those who are stuck in the middle will become unstuck, and go ahead and listen to the good that lives in them, that somehow, even the most dedicated and skillful lifelong conditioning has not been able to destroy.
is one that follows the spirit of numerous posts I’ve read from you over the past year. This unabashed defense of human rights is the lens through which I read your diary above. I can see how it could be read in a completely different way, but what would a Ductape diary be without tens of thousands of different facets of perspective to glean from each word?
undermine the war on terror by actually reading the stuff, which is, as I have noted in a previous comment, sure to be a violation of at least six or seven of the secret provisions of the Patriot Act. đŸ˜‰
A while back, someone (here I think) made a post about “single issue” politics, to which I replied that I was all in favor of it, if one’s single issue is human rights, all the others will fall into place like Paris Hilton’s extensions on a good hair day.
But the key to getting people on board with that single issue is a recognition of the humanity of all humans. And that recognition has to be more than an intellectual or superficial thing, it has to be deep, emotional, primordial, more unshakable than Gibraltar, and from the heart, not the head.
While one can certainly argue that some form of “anti-Otherness” may be hard-wired into our genes, so is, in my opinion, that recognition of humanity, even of the Other.
For example, it may be natural for the people of the Pacific Islands to consider themselves the bestest.canoe.makers.ever, and scoff at the regattas of New England, consider those folks’ attempts at boatsmanship absurd, and go “ewww” at the prospect of living next door to them or inviting any of them to their birthday party, it is also natural for them to consider that those tall pink people are tall pink HUMAN laughable boatsmen with whom they prefer not to socialize.
While their sneers at the regattas may come naturally and from the heart, in order to get them to send their sons off to commit atrocities on the residents of Martha’s Vineyard, they must be first convinced that those people are NOT really people – and once that has been done, if it is done well, and consistently over a very long time, getting them to respect the authority of their hearts more than they respect the authority of their King, or talking TV head, will not be an easy task.
Ironically, in order to recognize the humanity of all other humans, the “stuck in the middle” Americans must first recognize their OWN humanity, that they are not a Master Race, but human beings, neither inherently superior or inferior to any other human being.
That is a human right that has been too long denied to them, and the first one they must claim, the first one they must demand be respected.
Yes, this is the core of it. Too bad this wasn’t at the start of this diary–it might have deflected some of the criticism, much of which I think is misguided.
It can be condensed even further. The core principle, as you say, is the Golden Rule. I come to that from a Christian perspective, but that also happens to be explicit at the core of practically every sincere religious and ethical tradition.
Evil means not following the Golden Rule. Really bad evil, like that of American knotheads, means fervently expousing the Golden Rule while violating it with every breath.
I’m really serious about trying to follow that rule in all my dealings, although I am often led astray by “justified anger.”
I have no idea how the United States might ever be led back to the path of goodness, short of major catastrophe. This country is kidnapping and torturing people all around the world every day. As I like to say, what more do you need to know?
and although I and many others have written oceans of words to say it, compared to your sentence, they are superfluous.
For that reason, I don’t really think it would matter what I put at the beginning, middle, or end of my original article. I understand that what is being criticized is not really me, or even my words, which some of my more candid critics have refreshingly and proudly declared that they do not read. đŸ™‚
I could paste in the pages of a telephone directory, and I think the reaction would be the same. Sadly, even if that were not the case, I don’t think that anything I could say, or even your excellent last sentence, can help any of those who are “stuck in the middle.”
The unsticking process is by its very nature a solitary one, and one of the heart, and not the head.
Its good to see you dove – I’ve missed your voice here.
Thanks for pissing me off again DTF. Thanks for causing more internal bleeding. Thanks for reminding me, again, why at this current time, I am ashamed to be an American citizen. Thanks for reminding me that I am, and we are all, complicit, and accountable for the crimes of our leaders, and our countrymen. Thanks for reminding me that being a star debater from Princeton matters none when people are dying. Yeah, that’s pretty fucking blunt, that statement. But for me, and I think for a lot of other people around this world, an illegal invasion is still an illegal invasion, and no amount of dancing will ever change that. And no amount of sacrifice of more lives will turn this mess around. It is for the Iraqi’s, and the Iraqi’s alone, to determine what their future will be. It is a mess because we are there. It is more of a mess under our occupation than it ever was under Saddaams rule. Thank you for acknowledging the few of us who are trting to do something about it. I heard that part loud and clear. And thank you for the concern you express for our safety, lest we be disappeared by our own government for being traitors. I heard that part too.
I could go on and on, but I prefer to boil things down to the essential realities. It is useless to ask what we would wish for Iraq because we have no say left in the matter. It’s been out of our hands since day one. it will be what it will be, regardless of what we think it should be. Hell, we practically handed the place to Iran on a silver platter. And maybe that’s the way it should be.
Dear Super, if we have no say in the matter and it’s been out of our hands since day one (your words) then how are we complicit? I will not wear this hair shirt. Sorry.
This goes to Booman’s question to DTF. What would you wish for Iraq? How does that question apply to the situation today? As if we have any influence over what Iraq will be. We do not. We never did…from day one. Because it was an impossible endeavor.
The German population suffered the consequences of it’s leaders crimes after it’s defeat in WWII because they were German. There was no parsing of good/bad intentions or actions. They all were responsible. Just as we are all responsible as Americans and accountable as Americans for what is done in our names.
But my role in the suffering will be limited because I already did my suffering. Those in denial and those who cling to some notion of superiority today will suffer when the consequences come home. For me though I will experience relief and full healing instead of my daily struggle to heal. I won’t have to fight for it. I will be in a much different place than some other people in the nation. Even today I live my life much differently while many of these crazy Neocon supporters around us continue to drive their huge vehicles and believe falsely that reality will never come for them…….my family chooses to live in that reality, install low voltage lighting, buy the hybrid, grow our garden, love our children and adore our children for their humanity so that they will share that with others when they are adults. My suffering will be much different and blessings will lay strewn on the ground before me when the consequences of these actions are finally undeniable!
I’m sorry Tracy. I know where your heart is. And I’m sorry for taking a swing at Booman and his schooling.
But DTF did acknowledge you, just like he did me and any of the too few who seem to be doing anything about this.
home now, but they have no power Super……they are currently powerless and working very hard to not be so as soon as possible. I fail to see where Ductape acknowledges me in anyway…….he seems to be identical to the “prick sky God” that I grew up with who drew such a narrow path that I had to walk that I had no hope of ever “making it” into heaven because I was sadly just a fucking scumbag human being! That God was such a prick that suddenly in my young adulthood I woke up and realized that I didn’t want to spend eternity with such a fucking prick….it sounded worse than managing to survive on the planet for about 70 years!
Here,
and here,
and here,
and here I think he is saying that even those of us who object are still paying for the massacre with our taxes that buy the bombs, and by paying for our corporate cable tv defense industry propaganda
I noted in my first comment that he pissed me off too Tracy. Because what he says challenges those vestiges of American exceptionalism that are still so deeply ingrained in me. It pisses me off, and I don’t even have a loved one who’s life is being put in danger like you do. So forgive me my presumption that it would piss you off more. Or piss off SallyCat because she is a Veteran. I understand it from both perspectives. And he still pisses me off because I don’t see all military personell as war criminals. But in the strictest sense, if the invasion is illegal, then every soldier is there illegally, whether they want to be or not. And therefore every soldier is part of a criminal invasion of a sovereign nation. And I am paying them. I am buying the equiptment that is doing the killing. And so are you. So are all of us.
Why are you sorry? Sorry to disagree with me? I hope not. I also hope you won’t have to wear that shirt. But you might have to, whether you want to, or not. The same way all of us will. The only way I see for any of us who truly disagree with what our government is doing in our names to be able to claim ourselves free of guilt or responsibility is to become expatriates. Because so long as we live here and pay the taxes that buy the bombs and the bulldozers that are leveling Iraq, we are responsible and accountable.
There is a difference between having no say in the matter of what IRAQI’s do with their country and having an ABSOLUTE say in the matter as to what American’s do, or allow done to theirs… which includes what is being done in Iraq, in your name.
You do have a say in that. It’s called a general walkout and strike. Just as they did in Ukraine. You don’t leave the streets, you don’t go to work, you don’t fill up your gas tank. You just sit, and sing, and refuse to move until your country is given back to you.
That is your option. None have taken it (other than Cindy Sheehan).
It is highly amusing to see people say “well, we’re writing letters and giving money to so-called Dem candidates, we protest every once in a while, what else can we do?” when those actions are the very LEAST you could do, or that has been done when the gov’t takes actions contrary to your wishes.
Actually, the Founders of your country wrote a letter too, but they did much more than that beforehand.
Just saying, this very reflection of American’s unwillingness to give up their lifestyles to change the world (and stop the violence against others on this planet) is probably one of the central points of DTF’s diaries.
blunt. & well put, thank you.
It is your own excellent mind, your own sturdy moral infrastructure, and your noble heart.
I have said that I do not think it is possible for me or anyone else to change someone’s mind about something on a message board.
Now that is arguable, especially depending on the topic, Manito did change my mind about the low sugar orange juice, but I digress…
But I will stand by the implied assertion in my statement that no one’s nature, no one’s essence, is going to be changed by somebody else’s blogrant.
Now there may be other factors going on, that cause the blogrant to trigger some feelings or thoughts about those other things, but while I do not intend to trivialize the power of words, nor the good fortune of those who have been blessed with the gift of word writing, neither have I ever bought into the myth that Harriet Beecher Stowe was the catalyst for the reframing of slavery in the US, though I do not dispute her alleged words to Mr. Lincoln:
“God wrote it. I just took his dictation.”
And I will go further and suggest that every man or woman in that time or this who sincerely opposes slavery, regardless of frame, attire, or nomenclature, opposes it not because they were moved by the words of Ms. Stowe, or Mr. Said, or anybody else, but because God one day caused them to turn their head and look into the eyes of someone who, they realized, was their brother or sister. đŸ˜€
I’m sorry, Harriet Beecher Stowe and Lincoln have what to do with this topic?
Apropos of nothing.
wrote a book called “Uncle Tom’s Cabin.”
The popular and generally retold tale is that her book caused so many people of the American mainstream to change their minds about slavery, which was, at that time, the law of the land, that the book was somehow a catalyst, an influential factor in the reframing of slavery that took place in the US not too long after the book was published.
It was so widely read, and Ms. Stowe became so famous, that subsequent to the official reframing, Ms. Stowe was invited to the White House, to meet personally with Abraham Lincoln, who was president of the US at the time, and who had signed the reframing act.
It was on that occasion that the exchange that I referred to in the earlier post is said to have taken place.
I mentioned the book, and the alleged conversational snippet, in the context of expressing my view on the subject of the role of words vis a vis changes in the attitudes/opinions/beliefs of an individual.
I apologize for not including all that backstory, I was guilty of assuming that because this is a US forum, and the comment referenced an incident that had occurred in the US, that such would not be necessary.
It was, I am afraid, a simple case of my insensitivity to the relationship of many Americans and their history, despite the best efforts of the National Geographic folks and up until recently, “class projects” undertaken in many US high schools and universities, not to mention the occasional TV report on “man in the street” answers to questions along the lines of “with whom did the US fight its war of independence?”
If memory serves me correctly, either last year or the one before, the most popular answer was “Mexico.”
I am NOT ashamed to be an American.
I am proud of much of America’s heritage. America, the birthplace of jazz, rock and roll, the modern cinema, inventor of the Internet and computers, the only nation to put a human being on the Moon. There is much to be proud of in this nation.
And much to be ashamed of, too. Millions living in squalid poverty in the midst of plenty. Racism and sexism and class discrimination abound.
And we have a government that is for sale to the highest bidder. Politicians don’t listen to you unless you have a lot of money.
But I have done all I can do and I am going to keep on fighting with whatever resources I have at hand. I am a “Guardian of Liberty” of the ACLU, which means I send them regular monthly contributions–money the ACLU has used to fight back against the tyranny of the Bush-Cheney presidency. It was the ACLU, after all, who recently won a Supreme Court case that states that Bush broke the law by setting up secret military tribunals for the prisoners in Guantanamo Bay. That victory for the Geneva Conventions, and a blow against institutionalized torture, is something of which I was a small part. We will win this war against the fascists inch by bloody inch if we have to, and even if I knew for a fact we were going to lose, I’d fight them to the last.
is a quote from Arundhati Roy:
“Another world is not only possible, she is on her way. On a quiet day I can hear her breathing.”
I can hear her breathing too. It’s a very hopeful sound… but also a very scary sound. Because, for another world to come, it stands to reason that the current world (as we know it) must either disappear or change, no?
I was against both the Afghanistan and Iraqi invasions and occupations from the beginning. And still am, of course. Both need to end, and end quickly. And although it worries me greatly, some of the people who are being touted as good candidates because they are nominally anti war, or at least anti this war, it’s only right that so much focus, both in energy and in politics (who to vote for and all that) should be on getting this done.
What about after that, though? We are poised to elect a slate of people (if we can even get them elected at all) who, while they may be opposed to the Iraqi occupation, are not in the least opposed to continuing other destructive policies both here and around the world. Policies that we greatly benefit from and indeed count on to continue to lead our lives.
Mind you, I don’t think all that many people are more than slightly aware of them… for some, it’s as if the US is encased in a bubble of some sort… not the bubble of unawareness or uncaring (although that one certainly exists) but a bubble of assumption that we are self contained, and that we have a high standard of living (for some… and getting fewer by the day) because we’ve “earned” it. And not because we’ve got parts of the rest of the world in a hammerlock.
Things we grow here… sugar, corn, wheat, cotton… things we import… cell phone batteries, computer parts, clothing, chocolate, diamonds, coffee (and on and on)… none of this exists in a vacuum. At the other end of the distribution level is quite often despair, poverty and death. Oh, and we can’t forget oil, of course, nor the methods used to ensure it’s continued flow.
I noticed the expressed (and possibly unexpressed) indignation at the thought of Americans willingly killing their children at the instruction of some warlord. Of course not! We love our children… and Americans have respect for human life, too, unlike some other 12th century barbaric part of the world. Where children die daily… for us. Oh, and not just for Americans, of course, they die for others too. We’re special, but not that special. But still, we are more special than some, because we use a huge percentage of the resources. The price of success, and all that.
I know, I know… anti-American leftist propaganda… soon I’ll be suggesting people live in a socialist commune or something! but still, the kids (and their parents) are dead. And dying – some for lack of a 45 cent medication dose.
What do we do, when even as the richest country in the world we can’t (or rather, won’t) feed and clothe and shelter our own poor? Let alone the people (many thousands of miles away, in some cases) who provide for our comfort?
I don’t know… but I think that is something we need to figure out. Ending the occupations is should be just the beginning.
from Narcissistic Victim Syndrome but that never stopped me!
I’ll tell that to the Afghan boy who is at one of our hospitals here without a leg due to Yankee bombs. I’m sure his hatred of America is just narcissim as well.
Goddamnit Tracy, get a grip here.
with their eyes drilled out with power drills by poor poor abused other Iraqis and I’m sure that John Edwards will contact me and tell me that they want me to know that Americans didn’t do that to them, that their own people did!
Goddamnit Spiderleaf, you get a grip here. People are all responsible for their actions in my world and my book and that includes Muslims! I don’t write anybody a blank check these days…….I guess I have grown up! I don’t dance around the house vacuuming in my pearls telling myself we are spreading freedom and democracy and I don’t dance around the house vacuuming in my pearls telling myself that every single Muslim is a beautiful, gentle butterfly and that I am doing my damnedest to save them from a whole nation (down to the very last one of them) of Snidley Whiplashes! Both beliefs are useless bullshit where I am donning a cape and portraying myself the lone hero!
You could for sure do that if Iraq had invaded and was occupying the US. Otherwise your argument is bullshit. Yes people are bad all over the world, but American’s are the ones who invaded another country. Including Afghanistan which polls at the time showed that close to 80% of Americans supported invading even if it meant the deaths of thousands of innocent Afghanis (that was the actual poll question, just read it again last night in Gore Vidal’s “Perpetual War for Perpetual Peace – how we got to be so hated”). So… your comparison of what bad people do vs. the most powerful country on earth, with its citizenry firmly behind it, does inside someone elses country is hogwash Tracy.
And yes, every American who is responsible, some to a lesser, and some to a larger, degree. If it were Canada doing it I would be responsible (and I am for our current Afghan mission to a lesser degree even though I didn’t vote for Harper). And as DTF wrote in one of his comments in this thread – compare the streets of DC in 2000 or 2004 to Caracas after the attempted coup. Or Ukraine. Or any of the Eastern Bloc countries. That is taking action by the populace to determine what is done in their names.
Do I hate all American’s? Nope, not even close. But I do think that all are culpable to some extent and that if you want to change you really do have to hear what the outside world thinks about your country as a whole. And even in Canada the conversation ain’t that much different than the one DTF is having with his Muslim friends. We are scared shitless of you and are terrified that the majority of the population is more concerned about what’s happening on American Idol than they do about the murders happening in their names.
invaded Kuwait, raping, burning, and pillaging?
No, I wasn’t talking about them anymore than I was talking about those nice Americans who invaded Vietnam and Cambodia, Iraq, Afghanistan, Columbia, Panama, (shall I go on?), raping, burning and pillaging.
This is not a rational discussion, and I’m walking away. I suggest you do the same.
Tracy,
Hussein’s conflict with Kuwait was not opposed by the U.S. Our ambassador to Iraq, April Glaspie, told Hussein that our government took no position on it.
and we all know how hussein got his chemical weapon technology and that when he used it on Halabja the U.S. did not protest it.
The important bit from Supersoling’s blockquote:
The US Ambassador to Kuwait, April Glaspie, gave Saddam the O.K. to invade Kuwait if negotiations with that country didn’t work out. Well, not ALL of Kuwait–Glaspie was willing to let Saddam seize PART of Kuwait, the disputed territory. She had not idea that Saddam thought he could take the whole pie and not just a slice. Foolish Saddam!
I was in Kuwait during old Bush’s war, by the way, and there were rapes and looting by Iraqi soldiers among the Kuwaiti civilian population, but they didn’t exactly raze Kuwait City. Not only that, but there were BS stories concocted like the infamous “incubator” story, in which Iraqi soldiers allegedly tossed 300 babies from their incubators onto the floor.
It was a lie. The witness to this alleged “atrocity”? Why, that would be…the daughter of the Kuwaiti ambassador to the United States!
By the way, if the criterion for invading and occupying other countries is that they are run by brutal, murderous dictators, the United States is going to be VERY busy and we’d better expand the size of our army tenfold. There are a LOT of dictators running a LOT of countries in the world.
I’m sure it was entirely a coincidence that Iraq is next door to Iran and that Iraq hold one of the world’s largest reserves of petroleum. Probably never even occurred to Rumsfeld, Cheney, et al.
There is only one question left to ask:
Are you, as an American, doing enough to change the current state of affairs?
If the answer is yes, so be it.
If the answer is no, there’s room for more action.
This isn’t about what kind of country Iraq should become or what would have happened if Hitler had nukes. It’s not about America’s history. This is about the here and now.
This also isn’t about those who are acting to change things. This is about how America, the country, is portrayed on the world stage. This isn’t about whether you, personally, believe in American exceptionalism. This is about how America is perceived to be the new colonial power of the world by those who are not Americans.
And, for those who missed it, this is about a lament, a mourning for a country’s people who have all suffered as a result of a litany of American foreign policy mistakes made in the name of greed and power by those who hold the powerful positions to set those policies. This is about the rest of their countrymen and women being dragged down into the mud as a result of those choices.
This is about a country that has, perhaps, reached a peak from which there ought to be a very careful descent back into some sort of normalcy and, in my opinion, some form of humility.
This isn’t about you. It’s about the perception of your country. And, finally, it’s about a request to step back from the defensiveness for just a moment to perhaps join in that lament – something that is done here on a daily basis anyway. Divorce yourself from the messenger whose writing style and mysteriousness you may not like and see what the actual message is.
I can tell you now that it’s no different than what most of you believe in your hearts. The only difference is your method of expression.
Over half of my country wants its soldiers home now! This is not about the perception of my country, this is bullshit!
Oh, Tracy, I wish this were true.
I wish half of all Americans were horrified that our loved ones are killing and dying for corporate profit. I wish they were streaming into the streets and screaming that it has to stop. I wish half of America would demand that we use our collective wealth to care for each other rather than military conquest.
I wish half of America believed that an act of cruelty is the same no matter who the perpetrator is.
I wish half of America would band together and dismantle our arsenal of offensive weapons with their bare hands. I wish that half of America posted “Not In My Town” signs whenever anyone’s civil rights were being violated. I wish half of America would converge on the UN and pledge to be good citizens of the world instead of the biggest bully on the block. I wish half of America would replace their “God Bless America” stickers with “God Bless Everybody”. I wish half of America stood up in their churches and said that a hungry child has no nationality. I wish that half of America would mob the House and Senate chambers, shouting the rafters loose until those we elected represent the interests of Americans, not multi-national corporations. I wish half of America would sit down tonight and write to every network, every radio station, every newspaper that helped the corrupt Bush administration whip up war fever, holding them to account for their failure to do their job. I wish half of America would plaster every inch of our country with “IMPEACH”.
Some of us are doing some of these things, but it’s not half of America, not by a long chalk. If it were, the nightmare would be over.
…as a citizen, as a military veteran, and as a human being is the fact that the objection most people in the United States have isn’t towards WAR, but towards a LOSING WAR.
In other words, if the scourging of Fallujah, in which Bush ordered the U.S. Marines to evacuate and raze that Iraqi city, had been successful in suppressing the Iraqi resistance, the vast majority of my fellow citizens would have no problem with the US occupation of Iraq. They wouldn’t ask questions, nor would they want other people to ask them on their behalf.
Americans hate to be on the losing team. If Bush’s brutal, murderous tactics were working in Iraq, most Americans would support them. Iraqi lives don’t mean a damned thing to them.
That’s what scares me. I look around at my neighbors, at the people I see on the streeets, standing in line for the movies, dining at the other table at the restaurant, and I think, If Bush’s plans were working in Iraq, they’d let him kill as many people as he wanted.
Yes, most Americans want the troops home, because it’s clear that the United States cannot “win” in Iraq (which means that the Iraqis would quietly submit to colonial rule and stop killing Americans, as well as each other). But if Bush killed 100,000 Iraqis and achieved “victory”, I think that most though not all of my fellow citizens would approve. I remember all too well MY war, the old man Bush’s war against Iraq–very few Americans killed, and thousands upon thousands of Iraqis slaughtered.
We got parades and everybody waved their little flags and cheered. Old man Bush’s approval ratings went into the 90s (for awhile).
If the war waged by Bush’s little boy had been done the same way, with 100,000 or 200,000 or even half a million Iraqis killed, and 100 or 200 Americans dead, Bush would be on top of the world right now.
And that’s the sad and depressing truth of it.
Public opinion polls now indicate that a clear majority of the American people no longer support the war in Iraq, 59% want to pull out immediately or on a definitive timetable
Courtesy of Counterpunch from mid June!
As for our murderous hideous troops 72% of U.S. Troops Want Out of Iraq Within One Year, I can’t imagine why they want to leave because they believe so firmly in everything BuchCo is about and they are having such a grand time raping and pillaging and murdering without accountability!
I can’t help asking myself who seems to want to believe groupthink bullshit rhetoric right this minute in time!
that the biggest motivation in the sentiment that we should get oout of Iraq is the American causalties, at least for the majority, followed by the lack of a clear “win” ahead. Sad fact is that unless there are significant American casualties, the larger American public doesn’t give much of a shit who we bomb, invade, or offer “peace-keeping” protection to.
I’m afraid that 59% figure would facture significantly if they were asked about the current occupation of Afghanistan. Of course, it’s largely British & Canadian soldiers dieing in that country these days.
Interesting that the US troop figure favoring withdrawal is so much greater than the general public. I suspect they realise better than the general public just how hopeless the situation is, and naturally don’t appreciate having a bullseye on their heads.
There was barely a peep except from “anti-american leftists” during & after the US sponsored coup in Haiti, nor when UN “peace-keepers” both passively watched & actively assisted the murders of Aristide supporters in the poor ghettoes by the Haitian police.
You judge this this way……..does it cross your mind that perhaps you have already made up your mind and America sucks and has no hope of ever being anything other than sucking to you? No matter what ever happens and no matter what any American any place ever does they can only hope to suck in your book. Could that be the problem here?
that sort of nihilihism would leave one with nothing to live for. Literally. As I stated above, I cherish America’s finest dreams, ideals & apsirations. I still have the perhaps naive belief that we can achieve real, effective societal change over the long run, if not in my lifetime. I don’t believe America “sucks;” I believe we have had an oppressive, overly-dominant foreign policy enforced thorugh economic warfare & backed by military might. I believe that we have many problems we have great difficulty facing. One of the tasks of progressives & artists is to hold up a mirror to society, no matter what the resistance to seeing that image.
The question, “Do a majority of Americans (civilians and troops) want the United States out of Iraq?” has been answered, Tracy.
The answer is “Maybe”.
Here’s a poll question and the answer to it. The answer is not exactly a resounding “yes” to troop withdrawal:
Here’s another question from that same poll and the response:
But let’s say for the sake of argument that the answer to the question to “should the US get out of Iraq?” was a resounding “yes, and right now!”. That’s still not a complete answer.
We have to dig deeper than that. My own sense of it is that if Bush’s occupation of Iraq was going well (meaning that the American occupation force had managed to keep things quiet there), most Americans would support the colonization of Iraq. It wouldn’t mater that the “peace” was enforced by a Saddam-like brutal puppet regime, or that our troops might have to kill 100,000 Iraqis to “pacify” the country–SUCCESS is all that matters, and that success is measured purely in American terms.
Americans want to get out of Iraq because we’re not getting what we wanted. We’re not getting cheaper oil and the Iraqis are not cooperating with the occupation. To their credit, a majority of the public and the troops are more realistic than Bush and Cheney and want to get the hell out of Dodge. They can see the occupation isn’t going any place good and want to fold up the tents and go somewhere else.
That does NOT mean that anybody has learned any real lessons from this disaster. America didn’t learn a damned thing from the much more scatching disaster of Vietnam and it sure as hell hasn’t learned anything from this botched experiment in direct colonial rule.
I base my “sense” of things on my reading of people I talk to, what I observe in the rest of the country, and from the answer to THIS poll question:
Looks like the people answering this poll are pretty much split evenly on the question of whether or not the US did the right thing to to invade and occupy Iraq. I infer from this response that most people’s objection isn’t to the invasion and occupation of Iraq; their objection is that Bush and Cheney bungled the annexation of the colony of Iraq.
Poll question I wanted asked and answered:
“Would you support the continued occupation of Iraq if the United States military could totally suppress the Iraqi resistance/insurgency?”
The question, “Do a majority of Americans (civilians and troops) want the United States out of Iraq?” has been answered, Tracy.
The answer is “Maybe”.
Here’s a poll question and the answer to it. The answer is not exactly a resounding “yes” to troop withdrawal:
Here’s another question from that same poll and the response:
And then there’s this one:
I don’t know where you got the 59% figure you cited, Tracy, but it doesn’t match up with the Pew Center poll I’ve posted that shows only 45% definitely want to bring the troops home “as soon as possible”.
But let’s say for the sake of argument that the answer to the question to “should the US get out of Iraq?” was a resounding “yes, and right now!”. That’s still not a complete answer.
We have to dig deeper than that. My own sense of it is that if Bush’s occupation of Iraq was going well (meaning that the American occupation force had managed to keep things quiet there), most Americans would support the colonization of Iraq. It wouldn’t mater that the “peace” was enforced by a Saddam-like brutal puppet regime, or that our troops might have to kill 100,000 Iraqis to “pacify” the country–SUCCESS is all that matters, and that success is measured purely in American terms.
Americans want to get out of Iraq because we’re not getting what we wanted. We’re not getting cheaper oil and the Iraqis are not cooperating with the occupation. To their credit, a majority of the public and the troops are more realistic than Bush and Cheney and want to get the hell out of Dodge. They can see the occupation isn’t going any place good and want to fold up the tents and go somewhere else.
That does NOT mean that anybody has learned any real lessons from this disaster. America didn’t learn a damned thing from the much more scatching disaster of Vietnam and it sure as hell hasn’t learned anything from this botched experiment in direct colonial rule.
I base my “sense” of things on my reading of people I talk to, what I observe in the rest of the country, and from the answer to THIS poll question:
Looks like the people answering this poll are pretty much split evenly on the question of whether or not the US did the right thing to to invade and occupy Iraq. I infer from this response that most people’s objection isn’t to the invasion and occupation of Iraq; their objection is that Bush and Cheney bungled the annexation of the colony of Iraq.
Poll question I wanted asked and answered:
“Would you support the continued occupation of Iraq if the United States military could totally suppress the Iraqi resistance/insurgency?”
The second one is the complete one. I don’t know how I screwed THIS up. Maybe Booman will do us all a favor and delete post numero uno?
Tracy, I’m not attacking you.
I’m saying that opinions on a poll are not the same as action.
You have personally taken great risk to stand up for what you believe in. I admire you tremendously for that.
I do not have the same admiration for most of the 59% who say they want immediate pullout or a timetable, but have not done anything to make it happen. They don’t deserve the level of respect I have for you, because they may care, but they don’t care enough to make a difference.
Some of us are going to have to go to jail: some will be court martialed, some will hunger strike, some will die.
Until the 59% take some concerted action, even if it’s just writing a single letter each, the few activists like you will pay the price of conscience alone. And you’ll pay a higher price than necessary, because a huge number of people expressing opposition can do so at less risk than a brave few who have to escalate their protest in order to capture national attention.
I did misunderstand. Action is where the real power lies to, of that I have no doubt any longer……but I used to – I really did think that no matter what I did it didn’t matter. Granted, it has taken awhile trying different things also getting to stuff that does really work. Meeting with each other also works in a strange way and it is very energizing and pretty soon people are “doing stuff” when 1+1 happens. So here’s to doing stuff ;), and if it takes other people awhile longer to catch on so be it I suppose one day at a time. It is kind of hard to not want to go do stuff when everybody who does go ends up having a really good time and bonding with others during these lonely dark days.
… for saying what I’ve wanted to say since I started reading this thread. I couldn’t quite find the right words. This is one of those comments where I wish there was a Super-4 rating to hand out. I don’t think we all agree 100% (if we could get past the style and to the intangible substance), but I’m damned proud of everyone here who is willing to disagree.
What an interesting “debate”. Ultimately, all the arguing about “America’s” 19th century Manifest Destiny doctrine and its post-World War Two imperialism amount to not much–in the very LONG sweep of history.
I’m an “American” and not an “anti-American”. I criticize “America” because I want this place to be better. The US is a wealthy nation that squanders both its material wealth and its Enlightenment heritage granted to us from our Founders.
But to the nations outside our borders, in the very long run, the United States is irrelevant.
Look at our “backyard” of Latin America. The Mexicans are having a fierce Presidential contest–over alleged vote fraud!–with the leftist candidate vowing to fight in court because he’s been defrauded. In other Latin American nations, leftist candidates and parties are resurgent, after being suppressed for decades by Uncle Sam.
The Latin Americans are doing all this without scarcely a glance at the United States. They’re not afraid of us any longer. The Bolivians and Venezuelans, for example, are ruled by leftist presidents who openly defy the United States. Not so long ago, Reagan waged a proxy war on Nicaragua for daring to be independent, and Nixon engineered a coup in Chile. Now the United States is largely a spectator, rather than an actor, in what used to be its unchallenged “sphere of influence”.
The “American” military giant is unable to suppress a colonial rebellion in Iraq. The Iraqis are NOT the Viet Cong; they don’t have millions of guerrilla warriors and thousands of square miles of jungle to conceal their weapons and troops…and yet the United States is hanging on in Iraq by its fingernails. The US is also unable to check the rising power of Iran in the Arabian Peninsula, and the growing influence of China in world affairs.
History is moving past “America” because the United States put itself on the wrong side of history.
I first became aware of politics in a very real way in 1980, when I turned 18 and voted in my first presidential election. In the intervening 26 years, I have seen my nation become a spiritually poorer place, a nation that is a curiosity because it is a magnet for immigrants from every corner of the globe, and yet is willfully ignorant of other cultures.
I’m travelling to England this summer, and I’ve been reading a lot of British history. You know, less than a hundred years ago, everybody talked about the British Empire, because the British ruled half the globe. At the dawn of the First World War, the sun never set on the British Empire.
Thirty-five years later, all that remained of the Empire was scraps and bones. What the First World War and the Depression weakened, the Second World War destroyed.
The power of the United States could have been used as a power for good in the world, but more often than not, it has been used to reinforce an authoritarian status quo. Dr. Martin Luther King said it best in his April 4, 1967 speech, “Beyond Vietnam”:
My reading of Kevin Phillips’ book “American Theocracy” leads me to the conclusion that the US empire will be going the way of the Brit empire within our lifetimes.
And at that point, the United States will have a choice: end its militarism and invest the money on scientific research, education, and health care, or become a heavily-armed banana republic. (Just think of us as North Korea without the kimchi and Stalinist-era uniforms.)
It frightens me to think that in a few decades, the sole bargaining chip of the United States may be the fact that we possess nuclear weapons. I had always hoped for better for us.
The mighty American military machine can’t even control a third-rate guerrilla resistance in Iraq. Bush’s government is so desperate to show its “power” that Bush and Cheney have seriously contemplated using nuclear weapons against Iran.
It doesn’t have to be this way. The United States doesn’t have to slide backwards into a sort of corporate feudalism; it can move forward and become an enlightened partner in world affairs, investing its fortune not in weapons of war but in economic development in the poorer nations of the world, as well as economic development at home (New Orleans is STILL in ruins, you know!).
What worries me more than anything else is that the American people haven’t learned a DAMNED thing from Iraq. Most people say, “If only we had–” and then proceed to theorize about how Bush could have managed his colonial conquest better.
Such analyses are ALWAYS wrong because they start with the false premise that the United States had any practical reason or theoretical right to invade and conquer Iraq in the first damned place.
All I’ve learned from the American occupation of Iraq is that most of my fellow Americans haven’t learned anything.
That means we’ll do it again. You know, the Iranians are fully capable of running a couple hundred thousand troops over the border and taking southern Iraq this weekend if they want. Sooner or later, somebody’s going to teach the United States a lesson that nobody will forget. What will happen at home when that happens frightens the hell out of me. Americans don’t like to lose, and the inevitable puncturing of our inflated self-image as ten feet tall and bulletproof is going to be hard on all of us.
The bigger they are, the harder they fall.
As jaded a cynic as I am, I keep thinking to the road the Brits, as well as the Dutch and Spaniards before them have traveled after their empires crumbled; post-imperial life has had its bumps for all of those societies, but in fits and starts to be sure they’ve emerged as mostly much more civilized and democratic places. I take some comfort in that, if not for my lifetime perhaps for my kids. The potential is definitely there for whatever becomes of the US to actually emerge into something resembling a civilized and democratic nation.
I don’t think the political entity known as the “United States” will remain “united” in its post-imperial era. The only thing keeping the “United States” together now is the threat of a common enemy (Communists, terrorists, Islamofascists, yadda yadda). Remove that, and what have we got?
You’re left with a federation of states geographically larger than Europe, more or less sharing a common language but not much else. The economic and cultural interests of California, for example, are very much different from those of the states of the old Confederacy. Not only that, but as most of us are aware, the “blue” states are economically subsidizing the “red” states, a situation that is tenable only so long as everybody agrees that’s a good thing. Regional self-interest will ultimately overcome a sense of national destiny, particularly when the only unifying theme is “band together to conquer foreigners”.
I think the United States is going to become the Untied States, and maybe within our lifetimes (depends on how well we take care of ourselves!). I already feel like a foreigner when I visit other parts of the country, and the further I go from California (especially in the Deep South), the more I’m aware of the vast political, cultural, and economic divides that are present, and growing, in the “United” States. There are divisions within larger states, as well–there’s been talk of breaking California into two halves, Northern and Southern (you have to live here to know what THAT’S all about).
So we will not all move in the same direction, but rather drift towards our regional destinies. If you are following what is happening in Spain and the United Kingdom, different regions in those much smaller countries are moving towards autonomy. The Scots are making noises about self-rule, as are the Welsh; in Spain, Catalonia is now autonomous and the Spaniards are looking into granting the same status to the Basque region as well.
Can’t happen here?
Spain has 194,000 square miles of territory.
California has 158,000 square miles of territory.
Texas has 268,000 square miles of territory.
In Europe, you know what they’d call Texas or California? They’d call them “nations”. And that’s what they may well be some day in the not so distant future.
My dad’s been saying something like that for a while. I think there’s something to that. Some regional splits are a distinct possibility, as well as an increased assertiveness of indigenous nations in demanding some return of their land.
You will scare the Natavist. Why do you think they want us “reconquistadores” out.
That is why the keep talking about Mexifornia or Texas going back to Mexico
If you look back over history, there has been, over the last few centuries, a definite shift away from the traditional feudal societies – where the purpose of both citizen and state is to enrich the king and his friends to a more modern view, that the purpose of the state is to provide a benefit for the citizens, and the purpose of the citizens is to prosper, and therefore be part of a more prosperous state.
And to one degree or another, most of the world has taken some steps in that direction. Many times these steps are foiled by US business interests, notably in the Middle East, but also in Latin America, in Africa, Asia.
Europe has been permitted a very generous amount of autonomy, and this has proven to be a good strategy – they are now quite loathe to lose it – and thus cannot be counted on to help with the Resistance although ironically it is toward where they are now that many people would like to see their nation move!
While the rest of the world has, as best it can under its varied circumstances, been moving in that more modern, forward direction, the US has been moving steadily back, so that today the US is essentially a re-framed feudal state, transitioning itself toward a single industry, namely that of population reduction.
Again the US finds itself at odds with the world as the world increasingly thinks more in terms of population preservation.
As the world leader in the premature and unecessary ending of life by a cornucopia of means, the United States today finds itself at the pinnacle it sought, namely the entity on the planet, Enemy Number One of human life itself!
I do not think that many Americans understand that if anyone were supposed to be made safer by this, it was never intended to be them!
…I rarely hear anti-American sentiments openly expressed by Europeans in any nation.
I often hear criticism of the US government’s “external policy” as one Russian man phrased it (I like that, “external policy” rather than “foreign policy”), but those devilishly sophisticated Europeans are always quick to say that they don’t think the American people are not a bad sort and that they either have visited the US and enjoyed their visit or else wished very much to visit (especially New York and San Francisco, our two ambassadors to outsiders).
The perception of Americans by outsiders is much more sophisticated than the portrayal in this diary. Most Europeans do understand, for example, that the US government is only partly open to democratic influence, that our corporate-owned media makes it difficult to press through dissenting points of view (when’s the last time you saw Noam Chomsky being interviewed on CNN or anywhere else?), and that our political system is DESIGNED to be unwieldy and not easily shifted. They also understand that Bush/Cheney are a very different crew from those who have come before them–true political radicals devoted to the upending of the American systen of checks and balances.
That’s not to excuse the responsibility that we, the people, have to change our system. It is OUR system and there ARE mechanisms for change–but many people are just not ready to make the leap.
As President Al Gore said in a recent interview:
The American people have been given a choice between three options:
I think #3 is largely a forlorn hope. #1, to me, creates as many problems as it solves. #2 is the only solution that makes sense, and even that involves so much turmoil that most people would have to be a lot more desperate than they are right now.
Quite honestly, most people are “conservatives” because they prefer the status quo to change. The devil you know is preferable to the devil you don’t…
This posting makes sense…..real sense and reassures me that Europeans are as intelligent I always knew they were. Thank you once again for sharing it in the midst of this diary that for me is mostly bullshit. We have had many different presidents and administrations…..some worse than others but none that sucked as badly as this one. We are going to need all the encouragement we can get to get rid of these bastards and see justice done because I don’t think they intend to make it easy for us to do this!
I actually said, that I can determine, I am always aware that what the writer writes and what the reader needs to read may have their differences, and I am more than accustomed to people making replies to me that to the casual observer, might appear to be non-sequiturs, in truth they represent the expression of a very real need on the part of the responder, and reading the actual text of my words will by necessity occupy a distant place on the priorities list, if it has one at all.
I have often pointed out that should the US government do anything that is morally and culturally unacceptable, for example requiring exotic dancing classes for teenaged girls, or allocating 200 million dollars to provide survival and living wage job training for low income single mothers, it would be a matter of days, more likely hours, before not only Washington itself, but the surrounding area for a 200 mile radius, would be filled with tens of millions of outraged Americans.
I do not see the American mainstream as passive or timorous. On the contrary, in such an instance, I am confident that they would lose no time in exercising their constitutional right to change their government in the most direct and immediate way possible.
Fuckin’ A “my reply relates to something”.
DTF’s point, or part of it, is that the rest of the world has given up “reasoning” with Americans.
It ain’t so. The Europeans are dealing with Bush and Cheney because they have to, but believe me, they would have been very happy to have seen Kerry get elected. W
Why? Because Kerry’s a reasonable man. You can talk to him and know that he’s got a mind and a heart.
Most Europeans who want to talk politics with me want to learn more about the American system, which appears rather Byzantine to them (and to me, too). Most Europeans, for example, don’t understand how much power individual state governments have in our system and how strongly regional the United States is and always has been.
I have never been approached by a European as someone who is an unreasonable idiot.
Most Europeans are NOT anti-American. Every year I reassure Americans who are nervous about traveling in Europe (particularly France!) or elsewhere in the world that they are NOT going to get pelted with rotten fruit. And the reverse is true–a Parisian could take his vacation in Biloxi, Mississippi and not get called a “cheese-eating surrender monkey” once. Most Americans may know less about the Europeans than they do about us, but that doesn’t mean that people have given up on each other.
To say otherwise seems to be to be not anti-American, but profoundly MISANTHROPIC.
What kind of government do you want to see after the occupation?
What kind of government do you want after the Republican occupation of America?
I thinks the DTF overgeneralizes about Americans. But one does take his point.
As far as other countries are concerned, DTF might have this right:
I do not see the Democratic Party establishment standing in the way of this. In fact the attacks from Democrats on the “blogs” signals this. And there seem to be too many divisions on “the left” right now to even hope to wrest control of even one house of Congress from Republicans.
Who the fuck are they asshole? And why is this diary on the recommended list of Booman Tribune with 230 comments and counting? Do my fellow progressives actually think they have to defend themselves from this hate speech?
This first paragraph explains why I don’t read Duck Tape Fatwa’s diaries, and didn’t read beyond the first paragraph.
“The DTF is an asshole” and its variations (“troll”, Republican operative”) have already been used way too many times earlier, and like that old game “pull my finger” it got old in a hurry.
Jeez. God forbid anyone actually question what’s in that kool-aid we’ve been drinkin’ since grade school. More “fun” I guess to pile up on this week’s scapegoat. Not productive, but “fun”, apparently.
The hell? Ductape Fatwa was the one who threw out the unsupported assertion that Americans torture their children by remote. Why the fuck are you attacking mythmother for it? Because she’s not joining in the “Oh, insult me next, DF!” love-fest?
times that I didn’t even bother to put a link.
I have to monitor other screens for a while now, but I will find a link for you tomorrow.
And again, I apologize. I watch so much TV news, I forget that there are some folks who don’t watch it at all.
Sorry, not going to cut it. Not only do you have to produce evidence that it’s happening, but to support your downright insulting and hostile claim, you must prove that American society as a whole endorses it.
Otherwise, you’re just spouting off random inflammatory nonsense.
Not that this should surprise anyone…
link
There are others, but since I had mentioned CNN, and I know that it is considered “reliable” by many mainstream Americans, I will just go with the CNN one.
Also, this particular link contains comments, some for, and some against, however, obviously it is acceptable since it has not been forcibly stopped by law enforcement, or the proverbial hordes of outraged citizens.
For example, should a school institute a program that involved having the students engage in sexual behavior, I am sure that even you will agree that within hours of this being known, there would be immediate intervention by law enforcement, both to stop the activity, and to control those hordes!
I an sorry if you will be disappointed that it is not something I made up. Next time, I will try to make something up, and be sure to mark it as especially for you! đŸ™‚
Dr. Israel says Antwone’s violent episodes dropped from 5,000 a week to none after he was placed on the GED device.
Surely that is justification enough for giving Antwone electric shocks. Let’s say he sleeps for 8 hours a day. That was 45 “violent episodes” every hour he was awake. Holy fuck. Someone must be exaggerating here. The kid was getting a “bee sting/pin prick/parade of pins” every 1.3 minutes? I’m sure electric shocks are good for you…
Sorry, no evidence yet that this is something that a significant portion of American society approves of. In other words, your first paragraph is still (of course) inflammatory, unsupported flamebait of the finest caliber.
You claim:
Yes, and do you know why? That’s because America has something called “due process” and “rule of law”. You appear to be totally unfamiliar with these concepts, so I’ll explain them to you briefly. The idea is that, to ensure that all are treated equally, even the most obviously reprehensible criminal deserves his day in court. Mob violence of the kind you advocate is discouraged because, while it may shut down operations like this quickly, it can also lead to innocent deaths, unnecessary destruction, and the like. Instead, all alleged wrongs are fed through the same “Justice system”, in which “judges” and “juries” employ something called “the law”, a written body of rules, rather than their individual judgement to determine the rightness or wrongness of a situation and appropriate punishment as specified by the written laws.
While it may be quite a shock to you, in most of the world, governments tend to refrain from sending in armed law enforcement officers at the slightest provocation. Especially not in a situation like this, where rash action could lead to considerable injury to the children involved.
The whole system operates on the assumption that it is better to let a few guilty people go free than unjustly and harshly punish an innocent. So while it may take some time for a situation like this to be remedied, it will eventually be dealt with.
Now, leaving aside the inane babbling of distant, faceless Internet commentators, the wheels of justice are already grinding in this case. A woman has filed suit against the Centre. A likely response will be athorough investigation of its dealings and practices. If it is found to be within the law, it will be allowed to return to operation until the legislature sees fit to amend the law. (Which, in this case, will probably be damn fast) If it is found to be illegal, the children will be moved and the operators punished.
I also notice you conveniently failed to link to a follow-up story that provides evidence against your assertion that Americans in general approve of this. I’m sure it was a simple oversight, and could not possibly have been intentional. Not only did the New York commission openly condemn the school’s practices, but the Massachusetts legislature is taking action to ban the school’s practices. No, they haven’t stopped things immediately. The investigators appear to be taking their time, presumably to ensure that they have an airtight case, with proper, legally-obtained chains of evidence, rather than supposition and hastily-developed conclusions.
Sure as hell doesn’t sound like “obivously acceptable” to me. Maybe you need to stop staring at those screens of yours and do a bit of in-depth research for a change?
Though I’m still amazed that you are actually advocating “justice” by mobs of vigilantes.
“mobs of vigilantes” in either the original post or any comments.
Now regarding research on the subject of what is acceptable or not to a particular society, XicanoPwr has done some very accessible research on that topic.
You will pardon me for not responding to your ad hominem comments, please don’t take it personally, it is not intended as a value judgment, merely a personal preference. However, I can assure you that you will find no shortage of eager participants in the “flaming” and “insult wars” – it is very popular all over the internets!
And it was certainly not my intention to make any insinuations about what your wishes might be should your own child be subjected to whatever “techniques” the authorities might deem best.
I will suggest that if you wish to mount an argument, you have a better chance arguing that US society has made good choices, as opposed to arguing that the choices they have made are imaginary. But again, that is going to be a question of individual personal preference.
So you’re saying that a horde of outraged citizens can stop something like this peacefully, without breaking the law? If so, how? Protesting will not be effective. (And, generally, is not effective, and never has been, except as a placebo for real change) Or are you suggesting that they should take your route – watch the screens, pontificate, and write hateful screeds about how their culture is horrible for not stopping this?
I’ve yet to see you provide any evidence at all that American society in general supports this activity. Note that you must provide positive evidence and demonstrate that it is supported, rather than waving your arms at a lack of evidence of opposition in your carefully-selected source material. All my research has turned up significant opposition to it. Rather than engaging in spectacular but ultimately useless demonstrations or the mob violence you advocate above, the opponents are working through the judicial and legislative systems to get this abomination shut down and prevent others from starting similar institutions.
The difference between their approach and yours is that theirs works, while yours just makes for good footage for conservative TV about the crazy libruls. I’m sorry that you don’t approve of the people who care about this issue taking effective steps to stop it.
Oh, and trying to claim that I’d send my child to one of these places? Low. Very low. And totally unsupported by anything in any of my posts, but that’s no surprise.
US society in general has made no choices here. US society, in general, has never chosen George W. Bush as its President. US society has chosen to, in both cases, fight the corruption and evil through the system instead of casting the system aside in a violent, bloody, and ineffectual revolution.
I know you’re very disappointed by this, but you seem to dislike effective measures in general, because they’re hard and take time. Oh well.
change their government. Just like the Venezuelans. You are correct, there are some countries where it would be illegal, and I suppose you could argue that today in the US, it would violate some secret provision of the Patriot Act.
It would certainly have been illegal in Germany in the 1930s, and it would be illegal in North Korea today.
Yes, I am disappointed that the number of Americans who are sincerely in favor of reform and modernization is so small.
I wish the American people had made different choices, in the past, as well as today.
I would also imagine that in colonial India protesting the actions of the British Empire would have not passed legal muster.
Thankfully there are whole books out there that go into various forms of nonviolent action, and which delineate the successes that can be achieved. I in particular recommend Gene Sharp’s three-volume work on the Politics of Nonviolent Action. I recall North Dakota Democrat also has a link to a similar, but much briefer and more readable book.
Actually, I think you’ll find that the number of Americans in favour of reform and modernization is quite high. They merely see no problem with the actual mechanics of their system of government which are, when people play by the rules, quite effective.
The problem is that the American people as a whole are dealing with a small group of people who (quite flagrantly) do not play by the rules. The strategies of this small group involve isolating a large amount of Americans (with divisive rhetoric, claims that the system cannot be fixed, and the like) and convincing them that the system does not work. To defeat them without becoming them, the American people have to defeat them within the system, which requires the usual tedious but effective process of amassing evidence, demonstrating harm, and the like. Most do this by working to elect truly progressive candidates, get the disaffected involved in the system again, and pushing election reform.
(Of course, there are a few batshit insane Americans, like kos, that believe that the current government is legitimate. They’re well outside the mainstream in that respect.)
All that slow and sure and incremental and one day maybe your human rights will be respected if you just send this rich man some more money?
How’s it working for the Iraqis?
How’s it working for the people of Palestine? of Afghanistan?
How’s it working for the Americans whose labor is valued at a smaller sum than the price of survival?
All those Americans whose income is insufficient to purchase medical treatment? housing?
How’s it working for the kidnap victims in the various US torture camps?
What would you want the people of Iran to do, if they ruled the world, and your child had been seized?
How much money would you suggest that they send to wealthy Iranian corporate reps? Should they send the money monthly? weekly? For how many years?
How’s it working out? I don’t know, ask me in ten years. The thing you seem to be deliberately ignoring is that productive change cannot be accomplished overnight. The only way to change these things immediately would be an armed revolution, and you do not want to deal with the kind of America that would produce. Working through the system takes time, but can produce positive results.
Your unseemly obsession with speed troubles me. The only reasonable conclusions are that you are either ignorant, or want the kind of America that a violent revolution would lead to.
Thanks for the link.
God, I missed this. Not totally happy to have to know about it either!
Okay everybody, give it up!
SOME Americans are utterly depraved.
MOST Americans don’t care.
Some and most is not ALL, and yes, we do count ourselves among the remainder in that ALL.
So, the authorities may well shut it down. I certainly HOPE SO.
Is this really something to brag about? SWEET JESUS!
Okay, we can stop griping about DTF and get back to being activists. We certainly have enough to do . . .
Why not take one of these instead? You’ll be so much happier.
Feed a pack of those to Mr. Fatwa and then call me when you’ve got something intelligent to say. I’m not going to sit back and politely let some fool with delusions of academic grandeur insult the war the American left has been fighting for the past forty years. And really, that’s all this diary amounts to – insulting the American left.
Aside from Martin, I’ve seen almost no real intelligent defense of American exceptionalism. Just insults and vitriol.
The pill of chilling awaits you. Take it. Blow out yer hole. Whatever turns you on.
Defend American Exceptionalism? Why should we? We don’t believe in it. We don’t agree with it. We don’t support it. Why do we have to fight it? Why are we, despite spending our lives, money, and time fighting it, told that we’re just as bad as the people we’re fighting, and unworthy of admission into the civilized world? DF insults us by tarring us with the same brush as the enemies we’re fighting, and does nothing productive except tarnish the image of the progressive movement and divide it in infighting and pointless argument.
So far, I’ve seen zero evidence to support the hypothesis that SallyCat’s wrong, and plenty to support it. But maybe you’ve popped one too many “chill pills” to care, eh?
I’d also like to call Booman’s attention to an abuse of “Trusted User” powers by Mr. Benjamin, who appears to have gone on a retaliatory zero-rating spree in an attempt to shout down legitimate discussion.
As you troll rated me first, I’m merely giving payback.
Payback’s a bitch, eh?
Sorry, not the way it works. I was legitimately discussing the substance of DF’s argument. You responded with image-spam, an attempt to cut off debate, and a personal attack. That is worth a 0 rating. You then proceeded to zero-rate my entire argument. That is borderline abuse. If you then go on to zero-rate all my comments, that is definite abuse.
But hey, I can play this game just as well as you can.
Or maybe you need to start popping even more chill pills? Blood pressure going up a bit there, Jimmy? Heart racing a bit? Giving in to those good old-fashioned American violent urges?
Uh-huh. Don’t dish out advice if you can’t take it.
That’s a new one. You’re having to do some mental gymnastics to justify yourself there, boy.
See ya in the funny pages.
Yup, image spam. Term used to denote posters who, lacking the ability to make an intelligent contribution, simply post a large image to insult another poster or attempt to derail the thread of discussion. Typical examples are the “pancake bunny” or “O RLY” owl. The massive “chill pill” insult/personal attack that you’ve been throwing up whenever someone questions DF qualifies quite nicely. Unless you’re going to deny that you made such a post, you’ve engaged in image spam.
If you find basic reasoning to be mental gymnastics, no wonder you need to resort to such tactics… But hey, if you want to keep abusing your TU status, don’t let me stop you.
Whenever DTF is questioned or challenged? Wow. That’s news to me. I guess I’d be posting up quite a heap of those things if that were actually the case. Guess you’re the only one seeing all those pills, right? Gotcha.
Gotta love the humor impaired.
And as far as “shouting down legit discussion” – let’s just say pkb.
Wanna keep playing?
whether we agree with it or not. That is up to us as individuals. However, we should not try living in some cosseted cocoon.
I write this as an American living abroad who has to frequently face up to questioning about what we are doing and sometimes open hostility. I have personally never found this to be a bad thing even if I do not always agree with what I am confronted with. We should also remember that by reelecting King George after his crimes were well known we showed that we as a people, through our political and constitutional framework which we claim to be superior to others, endorsed what he was doing.
I’m James and I’m a recovering American exceptionalist. I’ve been clean since March 19, 2003. The main event of that date was what shook me out of that haze, perhaps more powerfully than ever before. I’ve been in and out of recovery before, and I cannot promise that I’ll remain in recovery, but what does help is seeing how those who remain addicted to exceptionalism act when confronted with the consequences of exceptionalism. It ain’t pretty, and in that sense I think DTF has struck a chord: you can’t reason with an addict when they’ve got the jones goin’ down. Gotta hit rock bottom first.
So it goes.
One day at a time.