Snippet. RTWT
...Imagine then if China, as it easily could, were to double its GDP in the next eight or nine years, and, taking advantage of a parallel increase in gains per capita, double the defense share of GDP. It would then have (PPP) defense outlays roughly equivalent to ours. China, however, moves with great deliberation, and many signs suggest that it is aiming for parity in 20 or more years time and in synchrony with advances in technology and military doctrine.
China is at risk if, as is its wont periodically, it runs off the rails into civil war, anarchy, or revolution. But the true counter-revolutionary import of the 11th Party Congress reforms of 1978 is that, unlike the former Soviet Union, China is making its transition to the free market in careful strides so as not to be forced backwards. Though neither ideal nor democratic, its incremental economic and policy choices are carefully calibrated, redolent of compromise, and configured for the survival and stability of the state. And the more time that passes, the more the development of its internal markets will protect its now mercantile economy from the gyrations of world markets.
With its new economic resources China has embarked upon a military traverse from reliance upon mass to devotion to quality, with stress upon war in space, the oceans, and the ether--three areas of unquestioned American superiority. China is establishing its own space- based assets and developing the means to counter others. It would neutralize American strategic superiority as the aging U.S. arsenal is reduced and it augments its own. Its submarine program is directed to the deployment of its strategic force and denial of successively greater bands of the Pacific--eventually reaching far out into blue water--to the safe transit of American fleets. It sees America's advantage in informational warfare both as something to be copied and as a weak link that, by countermeasure, can be shattered. In short, it harbors major ambitions.
Continued on Page 49
Posted by: Mrs. Davis ||
12/13/2004 9:08:00 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
It will be interesting to see the 'careful strides' the Central Committee takes when the first really nasty recession hits.
Posted by: Don ||
12/13/2004 10:09 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Mark Helprin is unduly alarmist at times, but I am glad he has put the finger on the biggest threat on the horizon - not Islam, but China.
#4
ZF - I'd say they are equal, yet different threats. China's been facilitating Islam against the west as a weapon
Posted by: Frank G ||
12/13/2004 10:23 Comments ||
Top||
#5
The whole WoT, Afghanistan and Iraq are just sidelights to what China and the US have been preparing some 20 years for. However, there is a new angle: India. Ironically, China and India are shoulder to shoulder, both have exploding and unbalanced populations, and both are "2nd tier" and vying for a bigger piece of the pie--quite possibly at the expense of the other. Much of India's defense expenditure is going to defend against China--they see Pakistan as a gnat, correctly or not. And China, seeking alliance, has tried to court Pakistan, only to be nudged out by the US; whereas India is technologically supported by of all nations, Israel. There is some interesting stuff in the works right now.
#6
US + Israel + India + Japan + Australia. Perhaps one day a more democratic Russia added as well. That's a pretty good basis for an alliance that can keep China off-balance.
#7
Imagine then if China, as it easily could, were to double its GDP in the next eight or nine years
Nope. Not gonna happen. China is booming bigtime right now. It's growing too fast. In a few years, it'll all come crashing down, and then they'll have unrest which will set them back a good bit. My guess is some time after the 2008 Beijing Olypmics.
There's so much opportunity here, it's crazy. Think dotcom boom circa 1997. It's stupidly easy to go in with nothing but a drawing on a napkin, and emerge with a fully-developed product. All you need are buyers and some cash.
#8
All the advances in China should lead to unmet expectations when the bubble bursts....
Posted by: Frank G ||
12/13/2004 11:05 Comments ||
Top||
#9
Everyone should take economic data from China with a huge grain of salt. The odds that the data hasw been manipulated are near 100%.
Most observers, at least here in Rantbug, feel that China is riding an unsustainable economic bubble. How and when it bursts is debatable, but it surely will.
At the present rate of growth as stated by the IMF (9%+), China will double its GDP within a decade. I remain unconvinced that a growth level of 9% is sustainable for that long. Just two years ago the growth rate was nearer 30%. The central government has monkeyed with some interest rates, and tried to limit growth. The decline is more correctly due to lack of demand and the yuan's tie to the dollar. The reports of dozens of empty office buildings in cities could not be happening if the economy is growing 9% per annum.
The reality is more likely that the Chinese economy is already in recession. Power shortages, turnabout to a food importer, and trade deficits with every country but the United States suggest an economy that is not growing as the central government portrays. An unusually bad winter this year, or crop failures next summer in the U.S. and Australia, or China's debtors asking for payment in a currency other than the dollar...
Two, three years tops, China has a problem [my fearless prediction] Move against Taiwan by 2007. Russian incursions 2008 or 2009 [depending on who's running for President in the U.S.] Between then and now, reimposition of central government controls and consequential unrest from ethnic minorities and capitalist regions in SE China.
#10
CS: Power shortages, turnabout to a food importer, and trade deficits with every country but the United States suggest an economy that is not growing as the central government portrays.
The power shortages have to do with booming demand for subsidized energy that the government is reluctant to fill because, well, it's subsidized, i.e. there's a cost to the government. China is importing food - primarily grains - because its farmers are turning to cash crop farming - fruits and vegetables are much more profitable and are becoming a big factor in the produce export business, competing with traditional exporters in a big way. The trade deficits have to do with the fact that China* is importing inputs from a lot of countries, and assembling them for re-export.
* Not the Chinese government, but a large array of domestic and foreign manufacturers.
#11
lex: What strategy do you recommend, ZF? Which China analysts/experts do you read?
I think Uncle Sam needs to keep its strategic arsenal ready, continue research on and deployment of missile defense systems, keep its conventional arsenal up-to-date (yes, that includes the F-22) and match China's military expansion. Still, China is far away. Even if it kicks off any hostilities, American involvement remains largely optional. I think it might be instructive to use East Asia as a test case of what happens when Uncle Sam stays on the sidelines. (I personally think it might be interesting to see what would happen if we zeroed out the defense budget and let our friendly foreign neighbors protect us from external threats).
#12
Chuck, power shortages are a way of life in every high-growth emerging market economy. If anything they're a sign of economic health. I wouldn't be surprised if China's opaque banking sector is riddled with bad debts, but I doubt that China's economic growth is heavily dependent on cheap credits or foreign capital inflows, so I can't envisage an 1998-style meltdown anytime soon.
As to "Russian incursions", you've got it backwards. Putin cannot project much power, military or political, in the Russian Far East, which is basically a set of independent fiefdoms run by kleptocratic "governors" who are at one and the same time the main employer, lawgiver, media owner, judge jury executioner etc. It's very likely that most of the regions east of Irkutsk will be Chinese vassal states within a generation. Already, more and more Russians are teaching themselves Chinese in order to survive economically in border regions.
#13
lex: Which China analysts/experts do you read?
Arthur Waldron, John Tkacik and Gerald Segal (deceased) are some of the China-watchers I've read. The national security issues in relation to China are the same ones that we had to deal with in relation to the Soviet Union. Chinese history (examined skeptically) is also useful as a indicator of future Chinese behavior - the Chinese are said to use historical interactions as a guide for current strategic and diplomatic issues. (John King Fairbank and Jonathan Spence have written creditable accounts of Chinese history). To put their hagiographies in context, think of China as a kind of Roman empire that never expired. The Germans merely dreamed of a thousand year Reich. The Chinese have lived it.
#14
[My fearless prediction] As China's economy grows and her people get wealthier they start demanding more and more political freedom. China eventually moves towards Democracy as Taiwan and South Korea did. As she grows wealthier the nation starts to be less beligerant and blustering and more calculating.
There is no war with Taiwan because its very bad for business and the chance of losing (and losing face) is far too high.
There is no war with Russia because Russia has oil and mineral wealth, two things China's industry will need as it expands. Close trade relations with Russia means China doesn't need a massive surface fleet to secure her trade routes (and she doesn't have to depend upon the US to do so either).
#15
Thanks, ZF. Have Fairbanks' book and will read it. RE security strategies what do you think of Jophn Mearsheimer's "offshore balancer" approach for us?
#16
If an editor's reading this, they may want to correct the thread title, especially if the article was written by Mark Helprin rather than Mark Halperin; this may not sound like much, but you're not just misspelling Helprin's name; there's a Mark Halperin out there who's a political hack.
Posted by: Phil Fraering ||
12/13/2004 13:28 Comments ||
Top||
#17
lex: Yes, I meant Chinese incursions into Russia, not the other way around.
Power shortages are not just signs of a growth economy, or places like Haiti wouldn't have them. Power shotrages are a sign that the societal infrastructure needed for growth is failing to match growth. If you don't have enough power, you have zero growth, sooner or later.
Zhang: When your trade deficit is oil, wheat and rice, basic metals like copper, you have the same problem that pre-war Japan had. As for food exports, China is competing against other countries in the region who have discovered the same thing, Vietnam and India to name two. I just don't believe China will grow based upon agricultural exports in a competitive market. There are still too many inefficiencies in the general Chinese economy.
rjschwarz: We did these scenarios not too long ago. I generated a couple of ways that China could take Taiwan relatively easily.
China can easily take the resources that Russia has, even if Russia goes nuclear. If China spends a hundred million people to take Eastern Siberia, so what? From their perspective, it's cheap.
China is building a massive fleet, and not just to threaten Taiwan. Remember that from the Chinese point of view Japan, Korea, the Phillipines, and Southeast Asia are all Chinese by history and tradition. In Peking, China is three thousand years old. A decade is nothing.
#18
China could take Taiwan in a decade, not now, and I doubt it would be easy. Add to that the West inability to look the other way and allow it to happen. Sanctions, disinvestment, and the death of the Chinese economy would be the result.
I'm betting that success makes these things to painful for them to accept considering they might have to destroy Taiwan to take it over.
#19
Depends on time horizons. Immediate threat is Iran, Syria, and NoKo. Three to five year threat is the ChiComs. The Japanese and Aussies will throw sand in their gears for a while.
Posted by: Capt America ||
12/13/2004 16:40 Comments ||
Top||
#20
Depends on who's President. Some are bought good. If Hillary wins in '08, I predict an invasion in '09. I think there's enough Chinese in NYC to let the ChiComs know not to try if Rudy wins.
Posted by: Mrs. Davis ||
12/13/2004 16:46 Comments ||
Top||
#21
The Chinese banking system is riddled with bad debts. Financial crises occur precisely because they are not anticipated. China will have a 1997 type crisis for the usual reasons - overbuilding the wrong things, condos, golf courses, airports, etc. My prediction is the crisis will hit in 2005 and will be substantially over by the end of 2006. Longer term China will be a great power and as someone said 'Great powers don't have friends. They only have interests."
#22
You don't build truly great wealth without free markets. You can't have truly free markets without free people and the rule of law. China will have a good run for a while. Then the Chicoms will hit a wall because the feedback mechanisms in the economy are fundamentally impaired and the distortions will become overwhelming. They will either emerge from that crisis a better, more free nation, or they will retreat to statism and restriction of liberty.
I'd recommend firearms and long periods of incarceration for any survivors, myself...
Despite recent successes in preventing terrorist attacks in Europe, threats from radical Islamists are real, serious and long-term, according to the European Union's chief anti-terrorist coordinator. Closer cooperation and exchange of intelligence between the European Union's intelligence services have thwarted nearly a dozen terrorist attacks since 9/11. The most recent success was upsetting a plot by Ansar al-Islam, a group affiliated with al-Qaida, to kill Iraq's interim Prime Minister Iyad Allawi during his visit to Berlin last month. In addition to the Islamist threat, Geert De Vries, the EU's top anti-terrorism man, speaking to United Press International in his office in the European Union headquarters in Brussels, said that Europeans should not ignore risks from "classic terrorism" — Europe's home-grown terrorist groups, such as the Basque's ETA. A recent spate of bomb attacks across Spain was claimed by ETA, the Basque separatist organization.
We don't ignore the "classic" terror orgs here, but they're so overshadowed by the turbans that they become almost negligable. Plus, the lessons learned fighting the turbans apply just as well to the "classics," who've pretty much ceased to be a real threat; John Kerry would probably describe them as "irritants" or something.
Radical European Muslims who volunteered to fight the U.S. invasion of Iraq and who are now reported to be heading back to their respective countries may pose a more imminent risk, however.
I just said that, didn't I?
This is raising concerns that the former jihadis — now armed with hardened combat experience — may become members of active or sleeper cells upon which al-Qaida or its affiliates could call on for future terrorist operations in Europe. Claude Moniquet — of the European Strategic Intelligence and Security Center in Brussels, who monitors Islamist terrorism — worries the Europeans are not adequately prepared to handle this new crisis.
I doubt they are, in Belchium. The Netherlands are picking up speed on it, and the French and German intel services have been on the case for quite a while. The Swiss are also doing good work, when it suits their peculiar chocolate purposes...
#2
Let's differentiate education (good) from indoctrination (bad), K?
Stop teaching hate, Jooo Lies, and Islam in your schools - unless you want us to treat it as we should: a barbaric superstitious bloodthirsty world-domination ideology cult - eminently worthy of extermination.
Start teaching health and hygiene, for crying out loud - Hint: what hole you put it in does matter. History - the truthful variety - for motivation, and yeah, the West / Great Satan did invent all that shit you love and depend on. Mathematics (so you can begin to live up to the hype), physics so you can understand cause & effect, general science so you can finally discard the moon cult & djinn BS, literature so you can see that you don't have to live as barbarians, etc. We'll save PCBS 101 for when you're ready to complete the cycle and self-destruct.
#3
Radical European Muslims who volunteered to fight the U.S. invasion of Iraq and who are now reported to be heading back to their respective countries
I guess that means that we've offically won in Iraq. I wonder where they will initiate the next battle?
#4
From the article I'm unable to figure out who needs to be educated.
Do we need to educate radical Islamics in the premise of moderate Islam (I think the author might be getting at this)?
or do we need to educate law enforcement officials about the specific individuals who will be returning from the middle east (maybe the author meant that)?
or do we need to educate the kaft community on what the radical Islamic people believe (don't they know that already)?
#5
Antoine Sfeir, editor of a French publication specializing in Arab affairs, conducted a survey of several thousand young French Muslims. He was surprised to learn that despite their claims of adhering to a strict form of Islam, most were unable to name the five pillars of Islam, the basic tenets of the religion.
So these people don't know the five pillars of Islam. Big deal. The Islamozoids doing the inciting would be fools to demand that the foot soldiers doing the dirty work be fully knowledgable in Islam's nuts and bolts (and let's face it, these less-than-enlightened folk would definitely be doing the dying on behalf of the clerics). As long as these young, French Muslim suckers^H^H^H^H^H^H^H recruits believe in the cause, then that's good enough, which is usually independent of whether they've been "educated" or not.
VIEW FROM THE LEFT
- Harley Sorensen, Special to SF Gate
Today let us take the sad, sordid case of one George W. Bush. Our president. Love him or hate him, it was he and he alone who decided that our mighty armies should travel to Iraq and kill tens of thousands of people, most of whom were guilty of nothing more than being there. Like egomaniacal rulers forever, dating back to the cave, Mr. Bush demonized the people he wanted to kill. They have "weapons of mass destruction," he asserted. Yeah, like we don't. Like India doesn't. Like Israel doesn't. Like Pakistan doesn't. Like China doesn't. Like Russia doesn't. Why don't we invade them? Or ourselves?
It turned out the Iraqis didn't have those terrible weapons. But, the Iraqis are evil, Mr. Bush asserted. Well, at least their leader was, so, by extension, they all were. And, by gosh and by golly, they might have harbored terrorists at one time or another.
Quickly now, name a country that harbored the Sept. 11 terrorists! Ah, that was too easy. You got it right away. The answer: the United States of America. That's who sheltered the 19 terrorists before their attacks on Manhattan and Washington. That's where those terrorists worked and played, ate and slept, plotted and rehearsed right up to that tragic day. The U.S. of A. But, willing to overlook all that, and with a leader as esteemed and honest and clear-eyed as Mr. Bush, thousands of young men and women, eager to serve their country and save us from the Iraqi monsters, rushed to the recruiting offices to join up.
Continued on Page 49
#1
Margaret Murray,and those like her are being called up from the ready reserve.If they had taken a lump sum instead of an anuity,they would not have been called up.But this article falls way short of the truth.In fact,it sucks.
Very Interesting exposition of what it took to take down Dascle.
Guess what it took? Bringing down a newspaper. Read it all. Fascinating, as well as instructive...
Patrick Lalley, the Argus Leader's assistant managing editor, acknowledges that the blogs had an impact on how his paper covered the Senate race. They certainly got under the skin of some of the paper's executives. Randell Beck, executive editor of the Argus Leader, called some of the bloggers work "crap" and said they represented an organized effort by conservatives to discredit his paper. In July, he explained to readers that "true believers of one stripe or another, no longer content to merely bore spouses and neighbors with their nutty opinions, can now spew forth on their own blogs, thereby playing a pivotal role in creating the polarized climate that dominates debate on nearly every national issue. If Hitler were alive today, he'd have his own blog"...
The blogs and other alternative media outlets became the tail wagging the media dog. "Argus Leader reporters said the pressure from the blogs increased until a 'siege mentality' took over at the paper, according to one source. Complaints flooded the paper's office," National Journal's John Stanton reported.
The paper's readers also began to take notice of the range of coverage available on the blogs that mysteriously didn't show up in their local paper. "The Argus Leader often doesn't present the whole picture in its political coverage," Wendy Otheim, a teacher from Hartford, S.D., wrote the paper in October. "A multitude of blog sites make for interesting reading. Don't be held a captive audience to the Argus Leader." To its credit, the paper ran Ms. Otheim's letter.
Posted by: badanov ||
12/13/2004 6:52:23 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
"true believers of one stripe or another, no longer content to merely bore spouses and neighbors with their nutty opinions..."
Nice attempt at equivocation, Mr. Beck.
"playing a pivotal role in creating the polarized climate that dominates debate on nearly every national issue."
Which means your 'professional media' really ought to work harder at providing information, and not just regurgitating handed-in talking points.
"...If Hitler were alive today, he'd have his own blog"...
#4
The Wall Street Journal has its own blog (Best of the Web at OpinionJournal.com). It's very highly rated, too. Why can't the clever people at the Argus Leader do the same?
#5
the Argus spent all their time, and David Krantz's effots at trying to keep Daschle in office. When, as a news media, you spend all your time trying to suppress news and spin what's left, you don't have time to run a blog...
buh-bye, Tom Thumb
Posted by: Frank G ||
12/13/2004 14:34 Comments ||
Top||
Salama Nimat, an Arab journalist writing from Washington for the London-based Al-Hayat, is shocked and awed to realize that the first two free and general elections in the whole history of the Arab nation will happen in January, "in Iraq, under the auspices of the American occupation, and in Palestine, under the auspices of the Israeli occupation". Makes him feel almost warm and fuzzy towards Western imperialism.
He is the latest of several prominent Arab journalists bold enough to point at the obvious. He is so indiscreet as to mention that the only places in the Arab world where the press and media are truly free are now -- Iraq and Palestine. (Though the truth is Palestinian media are under the thumb of the Palestinian Authority.) Which is why he must file his articles from a considerable distance.
As one of my own Arab correspondents put it, "If one has been occupied for some time by the Saud family, or the Assad family, or the Mubarak family, let alone the Hussein family, one begins rather to envy the sort of people who get to be occupied by the Bush family." (He is far from alone, but the fact I cannot use his name, without imperilling his life, suggests he is a long way from power.)
The new voices are muted, and while there are not yet demonstrations, as on the streets of Kiev, demanding free, honest, and general elections in Riyadh, Damascus, Cairo and elsewhere, I do nevertheless sense a changing tone in even state-controlled Arab media. Call it a new curiosity about what democracy might entail. I cannot quantify it, but I can smell it.
The thing itself ("democracy") is frankly a Western export, and has been accepted as an import from the West -- in Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, and no w all along that Pacific Rim. It was carried in their baggage by the British to India, and by Europe's Jews to the Levant. The Americans airlifted it to Afghanistan recently. It is presently pushing and shoving across the Steppes. Yet even where it is imposed, it is warmly welcomed. (See Afghanistan.) There is no question it is in demand.
Why, then, are we only interested in whether Ukrainians may vote freely? Why aren't we equally engaged -- emotionally, intellectually, and morally -- when freedom, independence, and democracy are at issue in many other countries?
I will tell you, but you won't like the answer. It is because the Ukrainians are white people, and the other candidates for democratization are yellow and brown. This is especially so in Western Europe, and nowhere more than in France: where the whole idea of spreading democracy beyond "our common European home" is characteristically met with anti-American sneering.
Even the Ukrainians depended on quick thinking and response from the Bush administration to build international pressure. From Europe, they could only expect "mediators". For the people struggling to make or preserve democratic gains, in more exotic climes, it's the Bush administration or nothing. There is no huge Western media uproar about Zimbabwe, for instance.
Or about Taiwan, where the election for the Legislative Yuan is taking place today, in which there is a good chance the "Pan-Green" coalition, which wants a free and independent Taiwan, may edge out the "Pan-Blue" coalition, consisting of the descendents of the old Kuomintang, whose leaders increasingly advocate appeasement of, and political integration with, mainland China.
There are spooky resemblances to the situation in Ukraine. The incumbent President, Chen Shui-bian, is the Yushchenko of this piece, himself a moderate bourgeois politician trying to gain what independence he can for his country against constant Chinese threats. His rival, Lien Chan, who leads the Pan-Blue, is the Yanukovich -- prepared to serve Beijing's interests, even by stirring up domestic ethnic divisions that Beijing may exploit. The Putin of the piece is Hu Jintao, the Chinese President who is prepared to throw around his weight quite crudely to intimidate Taiwan, demanding subservience.
In the time since I last wrote about this issue, the Red Chinese have added at least another hundred surface-to-surface missiles on the other side of the Taiwan Strait, pointed at the island's cities and infrastucture. It is a very crude weight, indeed.
But do we care about this? Not that I've heard.
Posted by: tipper ||
12/13/2004 3:24:50 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Help me out here. Didn't Bahrain have an election under their new constitutional monarchy two years ago? Are the Bahraini Arabs? Did the constitutional monarchy in Bahrain provide a democratic election? I keep reading about these 'firsts' but no one mentions Bahrain, either to debunk the claim of a fair constitutional election or to confirm it. Mebbe I missed something (that happens).
The Parliament has 40 members elected in single-seat constituencies for a four year term. No parties are allowed in Bahrain. According to Rulers in parliamentary elections at 24 october 2002 the moderate Sunni Islamists and independents win 16 of 40 seats. Turnout is 53.2%. In a second round held on October 31, the independents win 12 seats and the Islamists 9. The secular representatives or independents secure a total of 21 of the 40 seats.
#3
That's over simplifying it a bit Sobiesky. Quasi-parties are allowed in Bahrain, they exist but under a different name as "political party" translated into Arabic has some objectionable connotations to Islamists - go figure. Anyway. The biggest "party" in Bahrain along with 3 others boycotted the elections in 2002 due to their objection to the new constitution released by the King on Feb 14, 2002. They want to go back to the 1973 constitution as it gives more freedoms, allows for only one elected house (rather than one elected and one appointed as in 2002) and gives MPs quite a lot of power. All of these were curtailed in the 2002 constitution.
So by boycotting the election and acting freely, this should have demonstrated to any observer that yes we do have democracy here. It might not be the best shining example, but for more than 50% of the people it's good enough to base development on, and that is what is happening now.
When you say "not shi'a and not women" I don't get your meaning. If you suggest that Shi'as didn't vote then that's a half truth. I did and I am a Shi'a. The Al-Wefaq didn't and they are the biggest shi'a political party, but even some of them voted. As for women who constitute slightly higher than 50% of the registered voters, it is unfortunate that they didn't elect a single woman to the post. That hopefully will change in the future, and various organisations are working toward that end.
The Political Parties law by the way is looking like it's getting the approval of the parliament into law possibly this session or the next, but it is certainly being discussed by both the boycotters as well as participating "political societies". You're right though, it is extremely important for the further development of political life to have legal political parties under whichever name people call them.
Quana, yes Bahrainis are Arabs - mainly! As an island that has been the crossroads of various civilisations, we are quite a mix. For the most part the Bahrainis are Arabs, yet some descended from Persia, others from India and Pakistan and various other points around the world.
The elections of 2002 were internationally observed and there were no "shenanigans" as far as the observers were concerned. And none of the opposition raised objections either. They did however accuse the government of coersion (every voter had to show his passport at the polling station and once voted they stamp the back of the passport - this drove some people to vote even though they didn't want to, but again most of those just screwed up the ballot paper and deposited in the box rather than mark a candidate's name).
So yes, the story is not finished yet, we have an awful long way to go and politics being politics there is always going to be give and take. At least it is semi-working, and that is much better than it used to be in the 80s and 90s. Heck, if it was even as bad as 10% of how it was then, I would be most definitely rotting in prison for what I write!
Lastly, tipper, democracy is not exclusive to skin-colour. That remark was racist to say the very least and is unbecoming of a discussion such as this.
#4
I don't think Tipper was being racist but was pointing out that other people - especially the Europeans - are racist and that is why they don't care about spreading democracy to the brown and yellow nations outside the Euro club.
#6
Hello Mahmood and thank you for your comments. I haven't seen you commenting here before! I understand your concerns regarding Tipper's post but I'm quite sure Tip is not a racist.
The racism here is the assertion by the academic and cultural "elites" (not necessarily all located in Europe, but many of them are) that it's ok for the middle eastern, african, and south asian peoples to live under brutal hereditary thugocracies "because that's how 'they' are, poor brutes."
#7
What's strange here is that the supposedly "progressive" westerners who always proclaim their concern for human rights are the ones most firmly opposed to the spread of liberal democracy in the middle east. It's Bush and the neo-conservatives who are the liberal revolutionaries today.
#8
If one has been occupied for some time by the Saud family, or the Assad family, or the Mubarak family, let alone the Hussein family, one begins rather to envy the sort of people who get to be occupied by the Bush family."
As Glenn would say, Heh!
Great piece. Interesting post Mahmood. Your English is outstanding.
#9
Mamood
tipper didn't make the comment that offended you -
Mike Warren did (Tipper is posting Warren's comment). I think Warren made this comment based on his discussion with his Arab co workers and customers (I have some Arab co workers and they do anything possible to avoid working for a black woman supervisor).
#10
Very cool: a thoughtful correspondent from Bahrain. And Shia, to boot! Welcome, Mahmood. I look forward to more intelligent commentary to inform my understanding of a part of the world where my husband once worked, but where I have never been.
#12
Mahmood wrote some very funny posts some months ago about the arrival of Formula One racing, and the Bahrainis randomly wandering onto and over the track. I sent those posts off to a few non-bloggy friends who are F-1 fans...
#1
This from page 2,damn near broke my surprise meter:"...Oman's Sultan Qaboos has donated land for the construction of several Catholic and Protestant churches and Hindu temples. Oman is not a Western democracy, but that is just the point: It is an Islamic state, whose recognition of Israel would furnish a stunning rebuff to Saudi Arabia and Iran, both of which claim to be more Islamic than any other Muslim society, and both of which are dominated in reality by Islamist ideology rather than Muslim faith, law, and tradition."Could it be possable we are seeing a fundimental change in Islam,think I will reserve judgement for awhile yet.
Even though I've been a member of the "Liberal Hollywood Elite" for 15 years, I have never been invited to an orgy. And this article is your formal notice you want an invite, right?
Instead, I get invited to roughly three dozen charity events a year. Last Monday night, for example, I attended a dinner in which the Hollywood community raised $1.2 million for the Los Angeles Free Clinic. Week after week, people in this community put so much time and effort toward sharing their good fortune. I can think of no other industry that gives more.
Why, then, do so many conservatives hold us in the same esteem as the proprietor of the local porn shop? Are our morals and values so different from the rest of America? I believe "Hollywood" is more like middle America than many people imagine. Then you need to rent a pickup truck and go driving the 'middle America' if you think Hollywood is just like middle America.
I'm from Illinois (blue state), and my wife of 12 years is from Texas (red state). We have three children, two dogs and a picket fence. This was a typical weekend for us: Saturday, we went to our kids' soccer games (one loss, one tie). Saturday night we took the kids to see a movie (The Incredibles). Sunday, we went to a child's birthday party. Sunday night, we had dinner at home. Highlight of the weekend: My 6-year-old son scored a goal, his second ever. Lowlight: A bad magician. (Note: We didn't see Sean Penn or Michael Moore even once.)
You may have noticed there was no mention of church or Temple. I was raised Jewish, my wife was raised Catholic. Though we respect each other's heritage, and while many of our friends are deeply religious, we have chosen to focus on our similarities, not our differences. We teach our children compassion, charity, honesty and the benefits of hard work. We teach them to help those who aren't as lucky as they are. I am confident that they will go into the world with good morals and strong family values. But based on what? What Mom and Dad sez? How will that help when you and wifey are gone, dja think of that? Where is their moral center?
Friends in the Midwest often ask me what it's like to raise a family in Los Angeles. I say it's just like where they are, but warmer and with more traffic. I also tell them people here seem a bit more tolerant of those who are different. That's not what I hear. I have heard from the left as well as the east coast how we in 'flyover country' are a buncha pickup driving Jesus Freaks.
My wife and I are friends with several gay couples, many of whom have been together for 20-plus years. While I can joke that that's a rare accomplishment even for heterosexual couples here, in fact, many people have been together that long. What puzzles me, though, is why Britney Spears can get drunk and then married for 55 hours in Vegas and have more rights than a successful, loving gay couple who have been together for a quarter century. Because Britney chose a heterosexual partner, she gets her marriage recognized by the state. And all your gay couples/friends have to do is to find love in a heterosexual partner and their marriage too can be sanctified..
I feel lucky to work in Hollywood. I have also worked very hard. But I never forget that so many people in this world, in this country, work just as hard, even harder, yet are barely making ends meet. That's why, despite knowing his tax plan would have cost me a lot, I voted for Sen. John Kerry. Why doesn't that surprise me?
Expecting universal agreement at a dinner party just before the election, I voiced this view rather passionately, only to learn that half of the room was voting for President Bush. Huh? In liberal Hollywood? Is it warm in here? Pass the salt.
But what about the accusation that Hollywood is trying to advance its liberal agenda? Well, the fact is, while the creative community admittedly leans left, Hollywood has become a corporate town. Middle America may only see celebrities, but the real power here lies with the heads of studios and networks. In the old days, studio and network presidents answered to no one. Today, they report to corporate boards and shareholders — not exactly a bunch of lefties. Nice spin. A lot of people who read this rag will buy that. Those who won't understand regardless of who reports to whom, liberals are advancing a leftist agenda in American culture and you are part of that. As long as the corporate element is making money, employees can advocate child sacrifice and the corporate element won't even raise an eyebrow.
But wait. If they're so conservative, why did every studio in town pass on Mel Gibson's The Passion of the Christ? Is it because they're all liberal Jews controlling the media, or because they thought the film would bomb? Ask them today if they would have financed Passion knowing then what they know now, and you'll see enough green lights to make Hollywood look like a Christmas tree. Again, more nice spin. The facts, however are quite a bit more mundane. The Passion of the Christ was passed on because Hollywood is anti-Christian. Sure, the equalizer now is the success of the film, but its success hightlights by stark contrast how deeply prejudiced the left is, including those in Hollywood.
The point is, this town can't be summed up with one ideology. To label and dismiss us, to vilify us, is to wrongly assume that politically there exists an "us." In fact, we are just a group of very different people, most of us trying to raise our families, joined by the desire to grab an audience. Yeah, those gay couples trying to raise a family, I know what you mean.
It pains me that our nation is so divided. So, during the next four years, I'm going to try to better understand the so-called Christian Right that views Hollywood as the enemy. Much like in my marriage, I'm going to focus on our similarities, because I believe, from the bottom of my heart, that if we try, we can find common ground. God, I sound like such a liberal. You can try to understand the 'Christian Right' all you want. You have missed the point. People voted Dubya in because the alternative was a relaxation of security; the alternative was another leftist president, following Clinton's legacy: ignoring terrorism until it is just too late.
Posted by: badanov ||
12/13/2004 7:51:29 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
I have never been invited to an orgy.
That's why he's pissed.
#2
Iâm going to try to better understand the so-called Christian Right
He should start by dropping the "so-called" insult.
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
12/13/2004 9:19 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Steven Levitan is an Emmy Award-winning writer and executive producer of television comedies. He created the long-running NBC series Just Shoot Me and is developing two series for next fall. None of this impresses his wife and kids in the least.
Or me, either.
Ask them today if they would have financed Passion knowing then what they know now, and youâll see enough green lights to make Hollywood look like a Christmas tree.
We're supposed to be impressed that greed kicks in where there are no principles people are willing to stand up for?
Pfeh. This guy is self-satirizing.
Posted by: too true ||
12/13/2004 9:24 Comments ||
Top||
#4
I am reminded of a comedian's routine about how a gang-banger behaves when he's outside of his 'hood: overly polite, even ingratiating, and with very precise English.
#5
"Free Clinic" sounds so high and mighty. Let's see what they actually do:
1) Free showers for the homeless. I don't think any homeless actually take them up on that.
2) HIV testing for gays. Well that was an obvious one.
3) Legal advice for illegal aliens and juvenile hooligans, so they can avoid jail and continue to break the law.
4) Women's Health. STD cures and abortion referrals.
5) Dental care. Well, no argument here.
6) Integrative medicine. Chinese herbs and yoga. These are treatments for real disorders? Hello, placebo effect!
Pretty much every page on their site has HIV status emphasized. Some people are more equal than others, eh?
Volunteers needed: Attorneys, law students, every single dental specialty (well I take back the positive statement about dental services...evidently they don't have enough dentists, and the openings are for 3-hour shifts), Spanish translators, and assorted admin staff.
Job opening: Grant writer. Well, that was obvious...the Hollywood types aren't getting the bills paid, they need more free money. Job requirement: "Willingness to commit to the philosophy and goals of The Los Angeles Free Clinic." I wonder how those apocryphal Bush voters would fit in here.
In short, this clinic, while admirable, panders to the liberal leanings of its elitist Hollywood sponsors, and mostly dispenses treatments that adhere to their liberal views.
#6
We teach our children compassion, charity, honesty and the benefits of hard work. We teach them to help those who aren't as lucky as they are.
Well, which is it? Do they benefit from the wages of hard work or the whims of fortune? These kids are likely to be every bit as confused as their old man.
#12
Not all are nuts. Roger Simon's cool, an ex-liberal, OSacr-winning screenwriter and part-time blogger. He's also friends with Charles Johnson. Check out his site: www.rogerlsimon.com
#14
Apparently, a surprising number of the younger creatives are conservative and Republican. They keep silent in order to be able to have careers, but it will be quite interesting in that part of the world within twenty years. As for the orgies, it isn't the 1920's any more, or the '60s, or the 80's. Nowadays, I imagine they are small, private affairs, with carefully picked guest lists -- people like us who are least likely to be infected with an unamusing disease, or to have spouses who would object to the activities.
#15
A largely unoticed trend is that Hollywood now gets most of its movie revenue from outside the USA and the TV industry is going down the same path. Hollywood is merely reflecting the prejudices of its market.
Posted by: Mrs. Davis ||
12/13/2004 17:44 Comments ||
Top||
#18
The other aspect of Hollywood is that most of their revenue derives from an audience of subliterate teenagers and uneducated young adults.
They're out of touch with normal people because very few of them create works that normal people over the age of 22 have any interest in. Films for intelligent adults are a dying business. What struck Hollywood types about both F911 and the Passion was that these movies were bringing into the theaters millions of adults who had not attended a movie in years.
#20
What struck Hollywood types about both F911 and the Passion was that these movies were bringing into the theaters millions of adults who had not attended a movie in years.
Heh, I haven't been to the local theaters in years myself, and neither one of these was compelling enough to cause me to break my streak. :)
#21
Not that either F911 or that SM fetish romp, The Passion, were aimed at intelligent adults
that was the single most unintelligent thing I've heard - classing them in the same sentence and disparaging Christians and their history. Nice job, even for an atheist
Posted by: Frank G ||
12/13/2004 18:47 Comments ||
Top||
#22
The Passion is obscene. A smut flick. An embarrassment to Christians, and intellectually dishonest as well: note how Mikey, er, Mel lied about removing his anti-jewish insertion that recalled the blood libel. He removed only the subtitle, not the aramaic spoken words, which means that every foreign distributor is free to retain the blood libel portion, whether it be subtitled in arabic or polish or russian or whatever.
#23
Here's a surefire growth industry: an integrated production and distribution chain featuring both low-budget paranoid lefty agitprop crap and low-budget obscene funamentalist Opus Dei crap. Huge margins and a lock on the over-25 true believer market.
Posted by: Frank G ||
12/13/2004 18:57 Comments ||
Top||
#25
Smut's smut, Frank. Sorry. Anyone who would expose his children to Mel's obscene gorefest is sick. As are most of the Opus Dei wackos who apparently inspired his, uh, "vision"
#26
I would not show the "Passion" to children, and I don't think any rational mind holds Jews today responsible for Roman and Rabbi political decisions 2000 yrs ago - this thread was run endlessly when the movie came out. As I noted at the time, Jews didn't kill Jesus, we all did, and it was his chosen fate to die - for all of us. The blood libel canard is available for anyone who wants to not understand the message - in fact Gibson is one of the hands in the movie nailing Jesus to the cross, to demonstrate that we all did it. Arabs, et al, will use anything they desire to for their own ends, or is Mel responsible for the "Protocols of the Elders of Zion"? It's obvious you and I won't agree on this, sounds like you have some issues I can't help you with...sorry
Posted by: Frank G ||
12/13/2004 19:14 Comments ||
Top||
#27
btw - I didn't mean that last part to sound snarky....unusual for me, I know...
Posted by: Frank G ||
12/13/2004 19:16 Comments ||
Top||
#28
Smut's smut, Frank.
Wow.
Iâve seen more graphic depictions of the crucifixion than the one Mel produced -- but I wouldnât call those depictions âsmutâ either. The New Testament record is fairly clear that Christ went through mockeries of trials before the Sanhedrin, Herod, and the Roman Governor. The record also is clear that Christ suffered beatings and insult along the way, including a severe scourging that Governor Pilate appeared to have hoped would appease Christâs enemies. In the end, Christ suffered a Roman crucifixion. Extra-biblical sources concur that Christ lived, drew a following, and was crucified by the Romans. The only real historical question is what happened to Christâs body thereafter.
To call any portrayal of Christâs suffering as âsmutâ is to equate blood sacrifice with depictions of prurient sexual gratification. You canât argue that Melâs depiction is anything but accurate as far as the historical record of Christâs suffering goes. Beating, scourging and crucifixion do have the results Mel depicts.
As for the blood libel charge, argue with the writers of the New Testament (who were Jewish) not with Mel. The words that were put in the movie by Mel are what the New Testament says some Jewish leaders were saying at the time. THE NEW TESTAMENT DOESNâT SAY THAT GOD OR THE CHURCH TOOK THEM UP ON THE OFFER. If the blood libel doctrine were correct, then was Christâs suffering a willing propitiation, or just the bad breaks that some race should now be cursed for? I donât doubt that some people (using the name of âChrist,â even) have claimed that the Jews are subject to blood libel, but those are the same types as supported the Inquisition. The Biblical doctrines condemn anyone who would claim a blood libel on the Jews.
The Christians revere Christâs voluntary suffering -- believing that Christ did not have to undergo the suffering, but chose to suffer as a blood sacrifice to erase the sins of the repentant. Christâs suffering is revered as an example of true selfless devotion, and as a challenge to how we should all live to help others.
#29
If my info is correct that the blood libel does not occur in all of the Gospels, only one of them, then why did Mel put it in? More to the point, he agreed with his critics that it was deeply offensive and inflammatory and said he would remove it.
But he lied. He left the scene and removed only the English subtitles. So every foreign jew-basher can not only watch the scene but also read subtitles that are now totally up to the discretion of shall we say less "sensitive" distributors in the middle east and Eastern Europe. Disgusting.
#30
Look, dude, if you find deathporn entertaining, then by all means go for it. But Mel's clearly a liar and an opportunist-- not just for his blood libel lies and shenanigans but also by pretending the Pope endorsed his project when Mel has consistently voiced his scorn for the Pope's "liberalism". In my book Mel's merely the right-wing version of MikeyBoy. Pox on 'em both.
#31
clearly you and your "deathporn" will never be reconciled with my view. No skin off my fore, as Master Fred sez. You're not going to change your opinion and I certainly have better to do.
Posted by: Frank G ||
12/13/2004 19:55 Comments ||
Top||
#32
So every foreign jew-basher can not only watch the scene but also read subtitles that are now totally up to the discretion of shall we say less "sensitive" distributors in the middle east and Eastern Europe. Disgusting.
Ridiculous! Those who hate the Jews will do so at any provocation, and even without provocation. You may as well urge the suppression of the whole New Testament -- including the other variations of the gospels, because they can be misread as well. Frankly, the New Testament is much more supportive of Jews and the Jewish religion than you imagine. For the longest time, Christianity was considered by many to be simply one of the sects of Judaism.
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.
