it collectively attributes negative characteristics to a group based on race, religion, and national origin. whether or not it is "racist," it seems clear that if almost any other protected group were substituted for "middle-eastern" in this essay, it would have been clearly "racist" and unfit for polite discourse, regardless of truth or objectivity. obviously there is extreme anti-Western sentiment and fanatical hatred - but that is overbroad: it is not anti-Western, it is anti-American. it is not, apparently, "all" cultures, only American culture. if, as this essay argues, "they" are driven to destroy strip malls and subways built in opposition to the koran, then why not target any of the western European countries? why not target Japan, Australia, Canada? despite amazing levels of technological achievement and scientific success, "they" do not burn Japanese flags in the street. one could not imagine a city more technologically advanced than Tokyo, yet "they" do not blow up Japanese embassies, as "they" should, were this premise valid.
I disagree. If the analysis 's based on objective factors and material measures, then it's not racist or taboo speech, anywhere. It's not racist to say that Africa suffers especially badly from the global AIDS epidemic and that most African countries are a mess. The same or similar analyses might be cited by those arguing for aid or other policies. Historically, it has been anti-Western - especially anti-Christian during the early years of Islam, just because the countries of Christendom were the main countries in the way of Muslim expansion during the golden age of Islam. Since the US became recognized as the world's economic and military leader, Muslim anger and resentment previous focused on Europe was transferred to America - though America also became the focus of reformist forces in the Islamic world, repeating the historical pattern. Several high-profile plots and acts have targeted non-American Westerners - such as the Bali nightclub bombings most recently. Very high-profile plots in Britain and France - including a famous incident that targeted the Eiffel Tower - have been broken up. In previous years, there were bombings and attacks of various sorts throughout the world, sometimes at targets associated mainly with America or Israel, sometimes not. Singling out Japan is an obvious red herring. The country's involvement in the Middle East has never had much of a profile there, at least compared to that of the Western nations. I believe it mainly has consisted of sending money and selling products. Anyway, Den Beste is not offering up some simplistic formula, but rather offering a broad description of tendencies that have been discussed in much greater detail elsewhere, both within the Islamic world and outside of it. Historically, as I said, the West has been the Islamic world's focus, for good geopolitical and cultural-historical reasons. For centuries, the Muslims despised Westerners (Christendom) as their obvious inferiors, for what seemed to be good reasons. Beginning around the 15th Century, the situation began to change. Since then, there's been intense conflict in the Islamic world over how to cope - with a wide range of options having been explored. We happen to be living during a period when an extreme anti-Western strain (total rejection of Western/modern influences, dreams of eventual victory over and conversion of the infidel lands) has attained unusual prominence. If you're really interested in reaching a better understanding, I suggest you read Bernard Lewis's scholarly work on the subject. His book WHAT WENT WRONG? (written prior to 9/11) goes into extensive, fascinating detail on how the Islamic world has self-consciously sought to answer that question ever since the fact that something had gone very wrong became obvious to many Muslims.
that does not go as far as the essay did -- this is not an appropriate topic for discussion here, but suffice to say that a politician should be very careful tying AIDS rates to cultural and religious factors. without doubt. I still offer that the hatred directed toward the US is larger by orders of magnitude. I would like to be wrong on this. Exactly. but that is not what the essay said, that wasn't the thrust of the argument: this says nothing about involvement. everything attributed here to the US is equally attributable to Japan (or Australia or Canada) it seems that that is exactly what he is doing - offering more of the ridiculous nonsense they doled out as an explanation for 9/11, that frustrated, underevolved, mindless 'ay-rabs' are lashing out against the stars-n-stripes, to punish the infidels for their bowling alleys, hot dogs, and strip clubs. perhaps that dismissiveness and disregard for motive indicates something more substantial. certainly - and you've laid out many of them -- as opposed to the simplistic 'inferior ay-rab fanatics' argument of the essay - that type of arrogant, dismissive thinking will not solve this problem in the long term, no matter how many bombs or spy satellites or photo playing cards are used.
KymarFye, You're wasting your time. They think throwing out the "r" word silences all debate. Must be a real shock to leave university and actually have to defend one's opinions.
American girls and American guys Will always stand up and salute, we'll always recognize When we see Ole Glory Flyin Theres alot of men dead so we can sleep in peace At night when we lay down our head... My daddy served in the Army when he lost his right eye But he flew our flag out in our yard til the day that he died He wanted my mother, my brother, my sister and me To grow up and live happy in the land of the free Now this nation that I love has fallen under attack A mighty sucker punch came flyin in from somewhere in the back Soon as we can see clearly through our big black eye Man, we lit up your world like the Fourth of July!! Hey Uncle Sam put your name, at the top of his list!! And the Statue of Liberty started shaking her fist And the eagle will fly and it's gonna be hell When you hear Mother Freedom start ringing her bell It'll feel like the whole wide world is raining down on you Oh brought to you, Courtesy of the Red, White, and Blue Justice will be served and the battle will rage This big dog will fight when you rattle his cage You'll be sorry that you messed with the U S of A Cause we'll put a boot in your ass Its the American Way Hey Uncle Sam put your name at the top of his list And the Statue of Liberty started shaking her fist And the eagle will fly and its gonna be hell When you hear Mother Freedom start ringing her bell It'll feel like the whole wide world is raining down on you Brought to you Courtesy of, The Red White and Blue!! Oh my Red, White, and Blue Oh my Red, White, and Blue Oh my Red, White, and Blue Oh my Red, White, and Blue!!! i salute you armed forces! !!
I think that ypur obviously exaggerated caricature is unfair to Den Beste, and to Americans more generally: Without a doubt, there were and are many moronic bigots, and boosterism and aggressive outrage as in the song that LongShot so helpfully, ahem, quoted above are natural, but, from the top down, reaction to 9/11 and more lately to Iraq has been, in my opinion, much more typically characterized by respect for and earnest interest in the Arab world and its sensitivities - alongside a committed response to its deficits and dangers. When I think of Bush speaking today to Arab-Americans in Michigan, or of the way that American (and British) Soldiers and Marines have conducted themselves with Iraqi civilians (the vast majority not firing at them), then I think your description qualifies much more clearly as an example of prejudice and unreasoning use of stereotypes - or as, you later put it, "arrogant, dismissive thinking." Please don't bother bringing up Jerry Falwell, Franklin Graham, or other marginal figures, or the occasional message board crank - they're the exception, not the rule, by far, and there are at least as many equally foul and excessive voices coming from the other side. I have no doubt also that someone more interested in scoring some pointless point than in gaining a larger understanding can come up with some photo of an Iraqi victim or a prisoner at Gitmo, along with some stupid jibe. When you consider what's been thrown at us, and is continually thrown up at us, from the Arab world, from Europe, and from anti-warriors inside America, the overall reaction from Americans and from the Administration has been comparatively calm and rational - marked much more by seriousness of purpose and tempered idealism than by blind emotionalism or racial scapegoating.
How cruel of you to publicly demean msfe/wild's heroes! You know what this means, don't you? The Mother of all cut-and-paste sessions will commence in short order.
Very good article Kymar. Very objective and empirical, I liked how they use the word victim as being a sort of dead casualty as if the word "victim" doesn't mean the kind that has to go through weeks without water or electricity or the one that lost a loved one, the one who suffers psychologically, or the one who gets cancer from depleted uranium. In that sense, victims can easily amount to one million, but I guess they were more interested in finding that one german guy who would find something to say against the German government. The fact and the issue is not whether or not the coalition was "lucky" enough not to create too many direct casualties. The issue is whether the war was warranted in the first place, creating mass international dissention, dire economic consequences and put the stability of the world at stake. This is what's important. NOT WHETHER OR NOT it happened to be a profitable trade. Now on a more objective note: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/2991995.stm