President-elect Lincoln had been traveling to his scheduled inauguration by a long circuitous railroad journey from Springfield. A million or so Americans had glimpsed a top hat parting a sea of humanity, or seen a bearded man wave from the back of a speeding train, or waved to him on a balcony in a downtown hotel, and felt a connection to their government.
But on this day, he had to reverse his open-air approach, and indulge in a most un-Lincolnesque deception. He canceled his planned appearances, and allowed himself to be whisked unceremoniously into Washington on a series of secret trains and carriages. He agreed to this plan only after revelations from different sources confirmed that the threat of assassination at Baltimore was real. The indignity of this final day undid some of the good work he had done, but it was necessary. As deeply as he believed in democratic institutions, he needed to survive this trip in order to save them.
Lincoln had been receiving death threats since he won the election in 1860, but the threats received in Baltimore seemed too ominous to ignore. His trip from Baltimore to DC was covert and unscheduled. Private detective Allan Pinkerton supervised Lincoln's security detail. Pinkerton's coded nickname was 'Plums' and Lincoln's was 'Nuts'.
After arrival in DC, Pinkerton sent a message back to his superiors: Plums arrived here with Nuts this morning all right.
Couldn't have, he's a Trunk. Don't we know only such vile threats are made by Trunks against Donks, women, children, fluffy bunnies, unicorns, and rainbows. The Media says so. /sarc off
[al-Hayat] Husam Itani
The Arab revolutions are leading salvation projects towards further unfeasibility, as the slogan of the Civil State raised by the Egyptians clearly indicates that those raising it no longer tolerate any talk about a religious state.
The same applies to all the earthly heavens that were promised by utopian ideologies of different sources and backgrounds. The new Arab revolutions have put an end to the illusions of the Aflaqist and Qadaffyst unions founded on utopian Pan-Arab ideologies, or at least have postponed them indefinitely. Likewise, the revolutions have upended whatever remains of the actual or potential leverage enjoyed by Islamist movements, especially in their Jihadist facet.
After millions of people erupted into the streets in Tunisia, Egypt, Libya, Yemen and Bahrain, the conspiratorial-subversive mind fell in a deep predicament. Who will believe after this that a small clique with limited education and imagination could indeed induce change towards the better for the Arab people? Who will believe in the utopia that this clique will be calling for, after seeing history being made by the shouts and actions of the crowds?
More importantly, history proved once again that it chooses its own surprising path. Here are the regimes that have started to take shape in Tunisia and Egypt, featuring coalitions that cannot be otherwise tolerated by ideological governments carrying absolute salvation projects. And here are these new regimes announcing that the Arabs -- or at least the Tunisian and Egyptian people -- have relinquished the impossible utopia in favor of the possible national state, and that the two people among other Arab populations will no longer await the realization of this utopia and will instead move toward the accomplishment of a feasible political, social and economic project, capable of realizing the minimum level of requirements of a decent living for the Tunisians and the Egyptians.
These facts bring back to mind a study by American critic Fredric Jameson entitled "Progress Versus Utopia." Although the study focuses on the role of utopia in various literary and narrative works by clarifying the obstacles hindering humanity's progress, and the role of science fiction in conveying the contradictions of the present in a futuristic light - while relying on literary critique rather than political philosophy --, one can conclude that realistic progress often contradicts utopian ideologies, whether those embracing humanity as a whole or those related to a specific group.
Moreover, also based on Jameson's writings, the utopian project is a "promises-making machine." This means that the high level of political realism will automatically lead to the collapse of utopian ideas, as currently being witnessed in Egypt and Tunisia.
On the opposite end of the expressions traditionally used to describe the political practices of the youths - by saying for example they are romantic and staged in complete disregard of objective facts on the ground -, we are seeing in Tunisia and Egypt something that shows political craftsmanship in terms of the management of realities on the ground and the recognition of and coexistence with differences of opinions and beliefs. Also on the opposite end of vagaries hostile to politics and politicians, which accuse the latter of being "involved in filthy tricks" (as it was said by Wael Ghonim in an angry statement), the majority of the young activists involved in public affairs are aware of basic concepts related, for example, to the balances of internal and external powers, and the importance of avoiding positions dictated by the wishes and desires drawn up by the ideological mind.
The youths have replaced the utopian project with another feasible one, thus showing a maturity exceeding that of many pretending to be young and rushing to reap the fruits of change.
Posted by: Fred ||
02/27/2011 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[11127 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
So the author sees the uprisings as practical, rather than ideological? More like, "more-for-me" freedom than "we're not holy enough" revolts?
It'd be nice, if the people can keep the power-grabbers at bay.
Posted by: Bobby ||
02/27/2011 9:55 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Moreover, also based on Jameson's writings, the utopian project is a "promises-making machine."
O'Bumble?
Posted by: Old Patriot ||
02/27/2011 14:20 Comments ||
Top||
[Asharq al-Aswat] The above title is not meant to arouse excitement, nor is this a joke currently doing the rounds, but rather this is a proposal put forward by former Mossad chief Efraim Halevy, who has called on Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to open a dialogue with Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi. Halevy proposed this after al-Qaradawi gave his most recent Friday sermon in Cairo, and perhaps even after al-Qaradawi issued a fatwa calling on the people of Libya to kill Colonel Qadaffy.
It seems that the Israelis believe that al-Qaradawi has become a decision-maker in Egypt and the Arab world, believing that he has become the Supreme Guide of the [Sunni] Islamic world. This plays down or indeed ignores the reality of the situation, and the Moslem Brüderbund long ago clarified their position with regards to dealing with Israel, and they only use Israel to mobilize the Arab street, or blackmail Arab regimes, including the former Egyptian regime. Therefore, how can we explain the Moslem Brüderbund's statements following the ousting of the Hosni Mubarak regime? Commenting on the Camp David Agreement, one Moslem Brüderbund group member stated that there is no disagreement, or criticism of the peace agreement between Egypt and Israel [on the part of the Moslem Brüderbund]. This agreement has been signed and so it is binding. This was the public position of the Moslem Brüderbund after Mubarak stepped down, and this of course, is nothing more than political hypocrisy.
If the Israelis believe that Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi's sermon last Friday in Egypt was evidence of his influence and popularity then they are mistakenly reading the situation in the country, for he is merely jumping on the bandwagon, and this is something that many components of Egyptian society are aware of. Whereas if the former Mossad chief's call for dialogue with Sheikh al-Qaradawi is based upon the Sheikh's fatwa calling for the death of Colonel Muammar Qadaffy ... dictator of Libya since 1969. From 1972, when he relinquished the title of prime minister, he has been accorded the honorifics Guide of the First of September Great Revolution of the Socialist People's Libyan Arab Jamahiriya or Brotherly Leader and Guide of the Revolution. With the death of Omar Bongo of Gabon on 8 June 2009, he became the longest serving of all current non-royal national leaders. He is also the longest-serving ruler of Libya since Tripoli became an Ottoman province in 1551. When Chairman Mao was all the rage and millions of people were flashing his Little Red Book, Qadaffy came out with his own Little Green Book, which didn't do as well. Qadaffy's instability has been an inspiration to the Arab world and to Africa, which he would like to rule... , then this is also impulsive, for what positions has al-Qaradawi taken against Qadaffy over the past decade? For Qadaffy has been a friend of Sheikh al-Qaradawi, and indeed the Al Jizz television channel, over the years. Through a simple search of the YouTube video-sharing website, one will find that the Qatari Al Jizz television channel is the Arab television channel which most broadcasts Qadaffy's speeches and interviews. This is something that Al Jizz has done for a long period of time; granting Qadaffy air-time to attack whoever he wants, and say whatever he likes. Where was Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi during this period, especially as Colonel Qadaffy is not a new member of the dictator's club, but has ruled Libya for 42 years?
Of course, what has happened in the past does not mean that we reject the issue of Israel opening dialogue with Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi, for first and foremost this is up to him, and he is in the best position to decide this for himself. Rather, what is meant by this article is to clarify the situation for the readers, for it seems that the disciples of the Moslem Brüderbund and the students of Sheikh al-Qaradawi, have become bolder these days, especially after what happened in Egypt, and following the fatwa of their Sheikh calling for the liquidation of Qadaffy. They consider this [the liquidation of Qadaffy] to be a moral act, as if the law imposed upon the Arab world is a life for a life, and a crime for a crime! It is as there are no courts where the accused can be brought to justice, whether we are talking about ordinary people or leaders. We have never heard of cases being brought to court giving people permission to kill somebody, this is a completely new and unprecedented issue!
Posted by: Fred ||
02/27/2011 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[11124 views]
Top|| File under:
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
Colonel Muammar Qadaffy
