TOTALITARIANISM TODAY
Friday, December 13, 2002
The linguist speaks.
The latest from Noam Chomsky, as he attempts to analyze the "Bushies". Meanwhile, Bruce Conover explains why he thinks Bush is a sociopath. I am more inclined to agree with Chomsky.
Thursday, December 12, 2002
The cracked opposition.
It is natural that Democrats feel slightly underwhelmed by the range of options open to them in the electoral arena, especially when the party in opposition has proven to be anything but. The lack of opposition from mainstream political parties is disheartening, as it tends to buttress skeptical claims about politicians, powerlust, and Randolph Bourne's warnings. One of the reasons Democrats are unable to unite against the war in Iraq is that many are of two minds on the issue. For example, a poll released the first week of December showed 40% of Democrats oppose a war in Iraq.
In "The Liberal Quandary over Iraq", George Packer speaks to leftist public intellectuals in the hopes of piecing together some makeshift consensus on the issue. Packer thinks the Left's problems with taking an anti-war position began with the recent humanitarianization of war under the Clinton administration.
The history goes back 10
years, when a war broke out in the middle of Europe. This
war changed the way many American liberals, particularly
liberal intellectuals, saw their country. Bosnia turned
these liberals into hawks. People who from Vietnam on had
never met an American military involvement they liked were
now calling for U.S. air strikes to defend a multiethnic
democracy against Serbian ethnic aggression. Suddenly the
model was no longer Vietnam, it was World War II -- armed
American power was all that stood in the way of genocide.
Without the cold war to distort the debate, and with the
inspiring example of the East bloc revolutions of 1989
still fresh, a number of liberal intellectuals in this
country had a new idea. These writers and academics wanted
to use American military power to serve goals like human
rights and democracy -- especially when it was clear that
nobody else would do it.
The argument that has broken out among these liberal hawks over Iraq is as fierce in its way as anything since Vietnam. This time the argument is taking place not just between people but within them.... What makes the agony over Iraq particularly intense is the new role of conservatives. Members of the Bush administration who had nothing but contempt for human rights talk until the day before yesterday have grabbed the banner of democracy and are waving it on behalf of the long-suffering Iraqi people. For liberal hawks, this is painful to watch.
Mark Leonard makes a similar argument for the European Left in the UK Observer.
In this strange interlude, with everyone waiting for war,
I've had extended conversations with a number of these
Bosnian-generation liberal intellectuals -- the ones who
have done the most thinking and writing about how American
power can be turned to good ends as well as bad, who don't
see human rights and democracy as idealistic delusions, and
who are struggling to figure out Iraq..... This Bosnian generation of liberal hawks is a minority within a minority... Oddly enough, President Bush needs them, too. The one level on which he hasn't even tried to make a case is the level of ideas. These liberal hawks could give a voice to his war aims, which he has largely kept to himself. They could make the case for war to suspicious Europeans and to wavering fellow Americans. They might even be able to explain the connection between Iraq and the war on terrorism. But first they would need to resolve their arguments with one another and themselves.
Human-rights author Michael Ignatieff told Packer that "this one" would be "really difficult". To hear this from one of the decade's most consistent and staunch supporters of humanitarian intervetion is daunting. On Igantieff's view, however, Iraq falls under a different rubric. "I am having real trouble with this because it's not clear to me that containment has failed," Ignatieff told Packer.
Ignatieff is not alone in his belief that containment still works in Iraq. Among other scholars, analysts, and citizens who support a continued containment strategy in Iraq: Mike Hersh, US Air Force Brigadier Gen. Bob DuLaney, Marty Jezer, Polly Toynbee, Charles Davis of the National Catholic Reporter, and many other foreign policy specialists, whom I will not embarass by linking.
As it is, the policy of containment in Iraq must be re-evaluated. Well-written and knowledgeable debates like this one ought to be encouraged by Congressman, who should admit they know more about cell phone laws than the political history and manuveurings of the Iraqi government. Rather than embarass itself by supporting an arguably fallacious war, the Left should look to its first principles for guidance. Then again, I suppose the Right would interject, "Principles? But they never had any of those." Shrug.
Thursday, December 12, 2002
Let's talk about Turkey.
Robert D. Kaplan on whether the Turkish model of politics can "save Islam".
Thursday, December 12, 2002
I could never be this type of heroine.
Michael Stuart begins his short story, "The Romantic Heroine", with these words:
It was the classic American love story. I was lying on the floor in a shooting gallery in Brooklyn, having collapsed onto my back when my dose of smack kicked in. Better than sex, so they say.
Clearly, the level of my "uncoolness" is much greater than I thought possible. How did smack become the classic foreplay? Even summoning my Byronic propensity to appreciate the exceedingly dramatic doesn't help me romanticize heroin. Oh, that I might be one of "those girls".
Thursday, December 12, 2002
James Sallis speaks about his work.
When James Sallis explains his anomie in "Get Along Home", I am inclined to believe him. His style, while often convoluted, still manages to sat accessible to the modern, atrophied mind. In an interview with Richard Marshall, Sallis notes that,"We live our lives forward and try to understand them backwards. Literary commentary is much the same. There's forever the assumption, generally unwarranted, that the writer has some master plan." For Sallis, however, the central plan is lacking. he approaches the craft much as he approaches, well, a buffet:
It's more like this huge buffet table heaped with all kinds of food: shellfish, cold cuts, fruit, eight or nine cheeses, hors d'oeuvres, a smoked ham, chafing dishes of vegetables, soups. Both as reader and as writer you walk around it, taking what you want. What you need.
His poem, "Second Generation", puts me in my father's shoes, allowing me to decipher that strange expression lining his face when he gazes at me sometimes. Must parents feel our confusions second-hand? Are we fools to think that there has ever been a point in trying to hide behind our various incarnations?
I thought of you as I drove through
the war, face turned from the train's window
beyond which lay bodies steaming from their wounds
in the chill of morning.
I thought how you worked to build a life
of borrowed habits, half-forgotten turns: preserves
taken from others' shelves. How you were forever
at rehearsal, trying on these new skins and masks,
trying out turns of phrase: head tilted just so,
hands held thus. How even now you go on studying
these strange people, this race, this species
among which you do not fit and will never belong.
Thursday, December 12, 2002
Taking open-coding seriously.
This week John Sulston is being awarded the Nobel Prize, with Sydney Brenner and H. Robert Horvitz, for discoveries about the genetic regulation of organ development and programmed cell death. Sulston is also noted for his
pioneering work on the human genome. In the December issue of Le Monde Diplomatique,
he writes about his battle to make the entire sequence of the genome public despite all the commercial attemps to patent it.
Thursday, December 12, 2002
Immigration lawyer convicted of conspiracy, fraud and money laundering.
Samuel G. Kooritzky, the owner of an immigration-law firm that filed thousands of work-permit applications with false information and phony signatures was convicted by a federal jury yesterday convicted on all 57 counts of conspiracy, fraud and money laundering.
He faces a probable prison sentence of eight to 10 years and may also forfeit as much as $2.5 million, part of what authorities believe he made in the scheme.
The illegal immigrants, who paid the firm up to $20,000 each, were unaware of the fraud by Capital Law Centers in the green card application process.
Thursday, December 12, 2002
Dynamite.
Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, designated by People as one of the 50 sexiest men in America, will join Chairman of the Joint
Chiefs of Staff, General Richard Meyers, in lighting the Pentagon Child Development Center Holiday Tree Friday, Dec. 13, at 4 p.m. The tree is located behind the Pentagon North Parking Entrance, adjacent to the Child Development Center. For those of you seeking some explosive fun, this might be the ticket.
Thursday, December 12, 2002
"A Poem" by Nichita Stanescu
Stanescu is one of my favorite Romanian poets, and the translation robs the poem of something. However, I cannot resist making him available.
Tell me, if I caught you one day
and kissed the sole of your foot,
wouldn't you limp a little then,
afraid to crush my kiss?
Thursday, December 12, 2002
Protesting too much.
In a mondo bizarro twist of fates, Mike Hume, editor of Spiked, reviews the writings of Leon Trotsky for The New Statesman. Funny how Hume begins the very first line by offering a weak disclaimer, and then reminding us that he was "always staunchly anti-Stalinist". Lest anyone forget, as we are so wont to do, Lenin was as much of a monster as Stalin-- he knew when he laid the ground bricks for the Soviet state that totalitarianism would be the only way to achieve the bright goal of communism in Russia. Read Trotsky, learn his views, but don't fall prey to the assumption that historical or dialectical materialism by any other name would be sweeter.
Communist visionaries have trampled too many corpses in their battle to "make the world free for communism". I hope that Bush remembers, no matter how stunning the view from up here, no matter how just the vision, that the means take to an end can, if bloody enough, taint and delegitimize the end itself.
Thursday, December 12, 2002
Hitchens starts talking sense again.
From his article on imperialism released two days ago:
But nowadays, if you consult the writings of the conservative and neoconservative penseurs, you will see that they are beginning to relish that very word. "Empire—Sure! Why not?" A good deal of this obviously comes from the sense of moral exaltation that followed Sept. 11. There's nothing like the feeling of being in the right and of proclaiming firmness of purpose. And a revulsion from atrocity and nihilism seems to provide all the moral backup that is required. It was precisely this set of emotions that Rudyard Kipling set out not to celebrate, as some people imagine, but to oppose. He thought it was hubris, and he thought it would end in tears. Of course there is always some massacre somewhere or some hostage in vile captivity with which to arouse opinion. And of course it's often true that the language of blunt force is the only intelligible one. But self-righteousness in history usually supplies its own punishment, and a nation forgets this at its own peril.
Thursday, December 12, 2002
The most wonderful time of the year.
Thursday, December 12, 2002
Betcha my Hitchcok's better than yours.
Musician Robyn Hitchcock does the honors of writing for Slate's "Diary" today. The new Soft Boys CD makes my mind.
Thursday, December 12, 2002
Romanian relations with the Bush administration.
News from the BBC tickles:
Two other EU hopefuls, Romania and Bulgaria, are
expected to be given 2007 as their goal for membership.
Apparently, NATO accession does make a difference, as only this summer, Eurocrats were berating the Romanian government for signing a bilateral treat with the US that exempts American soldiers from ICC prosecution on Romanian territory.
Perhaps the significance of the Romanian-American alliance should be re-considered in light of geostrategy, given the impending war on Iraq. A remark by President Bush in a visit to Romania last month reveals the configuration of military cooperation to come.
Speaking before a crowd of tens of thousands here in Romania's capital, Mr. Bush said that because they had seen "the face of evil" in their former ruler, Nicolae Ceausescu, "the people of Romania know that dictators must never be appeased or ignored. They must be opposed."
Romanians must ask themselves to what extent the costs of getting in bed with Bush outweigh the economic benefits.
Thursday, December 12, 2002
A few memorable definitions from Ambrose Bierce's Devil's Dictionary.
Justice: A commodity which in a more or less adulterated condition the State sells to the citizen as a reward for his allegiance, taxes, and personal service.
Patriotism: Combustible rubbish ready to the torch of anyone ambitious to illuminate his name.
Alliance: In international politics, the union of two thieves who have their hands so deeply inserted in each other's pockets that they cannot seperately plunder a third.
Boundary: In political geography, an imaginary line between two nations, seperating the imaginary rights of one from the imaginary rights of the other.
Defenceless: Unable to attack.
Diplomacy: The patriotic art of lying for one's country.
Destiny: A tyrant's authority for crime and a fool's excuse for failure.
Thursday, December 12, 2002
Raymond Carver.
I'm delighted by Raymond Carver's short "Vitamins". A.O. Scott looks at Carver's poetry for the New York Review of Books. In light of his talent, the New York Times devoted a page to reviews of his work.
Wednesday, December 11, 2002
Link carefully, comrades.
This article warns that linking can trigger a variety of legal claims, ranging from libel, invasion of privacy, trademark infringement, copyright infringement, etc. If these claims are proven, then linkers pay the damages.
That means paying, for example, for libel's harm to the target's reputation; the emotional harm from invasion of privacy; or the lost royalties from copyright or trademark infringement.
What are the theories under which linkers can be liable? Linkers should be wary when it comes to any area of law that allows for contributory, vicarious, or "aiding and abetting" liability; imposes liability on republishers or disseminators of information, as well as original publishers; or simply is vague about who the "publisher" is in the first place. And unfortunately, that describes many areas of law.
For instance, in the libel context, the general rule is that "Republication of a libel does not diminish liability." That means that, for libel purposes, linking and posting are effectively very similar. The rule is counterintuitive - by comparison, most people feel that repeating gossip is less blameworthy than initiating it - but it is the law.
To take another example, copyright law forbids vicarious or contributory infringement. That is the reason that the music industry was able to go after Napster for infringement that was actually done by its users.
In the Napster lawsuit, Napster was held to have contributed to users' infringement by creating an environment in which it could easily occur. It was also held to be vicariously responsible for that infringement, apparently on the theory that by hosting the infringement, it was an infringer too.
If we must play by the rules, then I'll go ahead and tell everyone-- I will never take any legal action against anyone for linking to anything on this site. Consider this a contract. Print and keep it, if you are feeling paranoid. Thank God I don't have that kind of time on my hands.
Wednesday, December 11, 2002
Glum.
David Ross puts the pieces of the puzzle together to explain precisely why the Bush administration is hell-and-brimstone bent on deposing Saddam. Bush recently made clear that the might use nuclear bombs to deal with Iraq. I really don't think that setting a precedent by nuking the Middle East will increase American security.
Wednesday, December 11, 2002
Why the Democrats did not dissent in the last election.
In Progressivism in America, Arthur Ekirch analyzed the relationship between progressive thinking, progressive policy, and World War I. What follows is a particularly insightful passage:
The war made partners of government and business, and the individual caught up in the rising tide of nationalism and patriotism could offer only feeble protest. Because the new role of the state was subjected to less criticism in wartime, the Progressives and reformers could indulge themselves in the illusion of success and power. War offered the supreme example of the classless national state, with country above party and all particular or individual loyalties. Thus the Progressive exhortations of sacrifice and duty, of social justice at home, were easily translated into a crusade to make democracy and peace, and indeed all desired values, open to the rest of the world.
In arguing the case for a more positive national state and government, American progressives, like the social democrats in Europe, confused ends and means and were reduced finally to accepting war as the best way to institute social change and reform. From their original revolt against corporate power and the old formalistic absolutisms in thought, the Progressives now had turned to the new Leviathan of the modern warfare state.
The neoconservatives emerged from this cauldron as staunch supporters of both warfare and welfare states, in other words, they emerged as status statists. This is not the first time in US history that Republicrats and Demicans walk, talk, and taste the same. It is the nature of the beast.
