Look on my works, ye mighty, and despair!
A survey released yesterday found that
the most common view is that tensions between Muslims and westerners arise from “conflicts about political power and interests” - endorsed by 52% overall.
These results hold true in almost all the countries polled, “Western” and “Muslim” alike (the notable exception being Indonesia), and the results in the US are particularly striking:
Twice as many Americans believe that Muslim and Western cultures can find common ground than say that violent conflict is inevitable. A large majority (64%) feels the two cultures can find areas of agreement while just 31 percent believe that violence is inevitable. Nearly half (49%) of Americans believe the tensions between Islam and the West result from conflicts about political power and interests, yet a significant number (38%) also say that these tensions arise from “differences in religion and culture.� Asked whether fundamental differences or the intolerance of minorities was the main cause of current tensions between Islam and the West, nearly three-quarters (73%) of Americans blame intolerant minorities, whether on both sides (54%), Muslim (12%) or Western (7%). Only 17 percent say that “fundamental differences� between the two are responsible.
This is important to remember, especially given the fact that if one believes the media, one could easily come up with a distinctly different impression of public opinion.
Mark Steyn:
Why did Bosnia collapse into the worst slaughter in Europe since World War Two? In the thirty years before the meltdown, Bosnian Serbs had declined from 43 percent to 31 percent of the population, while Bosnian Muslims had increased from 26 percent to 44 percent. In a democratic age, you can’t buck demography—except through civil war. The Serbs figured that out—as other Continentals will in the years ahead: if you can’t outbreed the enemy, cull ’em. The problem that Europe faces is that Bosnia’s demographic profile is now the model for the entire continent.
Kleiman then comments:
[L]et’s call it by its real name: Steyn is justifying genocide, both retrospectively in Bosnia and prospectively in the rest of Europe. […]
Is there any reason Mark Steyn should not now be treated as a pariah, and confer pariah status on whoever deals with him? Lie down with dogs, get up with fleas. Or have we fallen so far that a call for genocide is all in a day’s work?
Mark Steyn, beloved of Michelle Malkin, Fox News, and [< ahref ="http://www.newscorp.com">some assholes who rented] the New York Historical Society [meeting room], calling for pre-emptive genocide - and he’s not alone. The Sadly, No! post reads like an issue of Eliminationism Fancy magazine, quoting prominent wingnuts citing the Punic Wars, the Boer War and the for-God’s-sake Mau-Mau Uprising as models for a solution to the “Muslim problem.”
But MrWonderful, in the comments at S,N!, has the very good news:
And–don’t shoot me, I’m just the messenger–this will never end.
There will never be a clearcut, indisputable “victory� over “our enemies,� and every period of quiescence or downturn will just prompt these loons to warn that “they’ve gotten smarter� and “are planning something truly monstrous.�
He’s talking about the right-wing lunatic fringe, but the truth is, this attitude is exactly what the White House has been aiming for. That the poll shows the majority of Americans disagreeing with the no-hope assessment doesn’t change the fact that we’re countenancing a leadership which takes it as read.
And why shouldn’t they? As evidenced in Amanda’s recent flareup, and the fact that Mark Steyn appears on television outside of a Confederate Flag-draped cable access studio, the media will cover any right-wing opinion, no matter how fringe. If Beverly LaHaye said tomorrow morning that global warming was caused by the noxious fumes which come from the amniotic fluid of aborted fetuses, at the very least it’d be a “some people say” on Tucker Carlson by tomorrow evening. But the terrorism survey? You know, the one that says most Americans think that the “Islamist menace” is kind of a crock of shit? Barely a blip on the national media radar screen.
So if I’m one of the 83% that realizes that terrorism isn’t about “fundamental differences”, but not one of the .3% wise enough to read Auguste smart bloggers on a regular basis, I may start to think that I’m in the minority. After all, I’m a layperson. I don’t know that at least a plurality of the Muslim world agrees with my assessment of the situation - which means that taken together, we outnumber the culture warriors approximately two to one. But if there’s one notable trait of the last fifteen years of politics, it’s the strange inability of a diffuse majority to restrain a concentrated minority from pursuing a destructive path.
The poll numbers indicate that there’s no way the talking heads should be able to get away with framing this as a clash of cultures, an epic struggle between two worlds. A culture clash requires the members of the culture to be invested, and the majority of the members of both culture are not invested in hating the other side for their very existence. But, suicidally hubristic that they are, frame it they do. And, as MrWonderful notes, it is by its very design an unescapable frame. The Steyns and Reynoldses of the world see but one way to avoid the extinction of our culture, and that is total extinguishment of their culture.
I’m not sure Bush sees it that way, or his defenders in the government. But the right-wing politicians know that to maintain support for the war they have to at least hint that they see it that way, and every time they do, they’re inundated with approval from the wingnuts through the media. After awhile, it doesn’t matter what the politicians believe: They’re past the point of no return. To say, now, that this Islamofascist threat they’ve been touting can be solved by diplomatic and political means - as most of the world believes - would be both to admit they were wrong, and to see the desertion of their hardcore defenders, which coincidentally are they only defenders they have left.
So Bush will go on, and Steyn will go on, and the media will go on pretending that either of them are even remotely in tune with the American people. And we’ll all go merrily on our way, pretending, borrowing $200 million a day and squandering good will until we have defended ourself right into financial or geopolitical ruin.
Nothing beside remains. Round the decay
Of that colossal Wreck, boundless and bare
The lone and level sands stretch far away.
50 Responses to “Don’t Let America Stop You From Destroying America”
Leave a comment
Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>
Well, at least we know that most of the rest of the country isn’t in fact batshit insane.
Hurm.
It’s nice to know there’s a pretty smart majority.
damnedyankee,
Yeah, only the majority of folks in power within the beltway are batshit insane. Unfortunately, they only listen to each other and not the folks who are capable of stringing together more than a single thought. They appear only able to think and operate in soundbites.
Auguste, you wonderful, Alan Moore-loving nerd.
“Well, at least we know that most of the rest of the country isn’t in fact batshit insane.”
Oh ye of too much faith.
This is my general assumption, that people are generally smarter than they look, and that they are keeping their heads down in fear. It’s the SNAFU principle–communication is only possible between equals, because in a hierarchy the underlings will tell the higher-ups only what they think they want to hear.
Thanks, Mark Foxwell, now two of my favorite books have been referenced in the same post.
You know, it’s funny. Being from Canada, we frequently make jokes up here of which the Americans are the target. But when asked about actual true feelings, most Canadians will say that Americans in general are actually all right, it’s the leadership that confuses the hell out of us. Certainly amongst my friends.
So that there study confirms what I’ve long suspected; the current leadership of the US makes the rest of you folks look bad. I guess it’s kind of like the ecumenical movement.
Most people don’t know that there are large contingents in most of the world’s major religion that seek to find some common ground and have a nice, civil inter-faith dialogue.
It’s been going on for quite some time (late 1800s, at the latest as far as actual organizations dedicated to the purpose goes). We’re out there, but don’t get the big press. Not so exciting as Hindus hating Muslims and Christians hating Muslims and everybody hating the Jews.
And everybody in the press likes to demonstrate how stupid Americans are by holding up the worst examples (sometimes in the leadership) when by and large, most are reasonably smart people. Stupid mass media.
The current “leadership” and their frothing followers get all the airtime. The rest of us are scared out of our wits. I hope Canada’s prepared for an immigration surge if things get too bad here. I’ve got my eye on Montreal.
But if there’s one notable trait of the last fifteen years of politics, it’s the strange inability of a diffuse majority to restrain a concentrated minority from pursuing a destructive path.
…which brings to mind the words of another prescient 19th century poet (ok, 19th-20th century)
“The best lack all convictions, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity.”
Would someone please explain to a dumb little Canadian why those crazy people are still in power? It’s obvious the large percetage of Americans don’t want them there. Bush, to the eyes of most canadians I know think he’s psychotic, or just evil.
Oh…we are always up for a little more immigration. We have lots of land! It’s a bit chilly but we have great coffee!
The smiley ‘acid’ face on his jacket is confusing me.
Actually I think it’s more acurate to say it’s disturbing me.
ahem. accurate.
Being from Canada, we frequently make jokes up here of which the Americans are the target.
Heh. Like most Canadians I frequently mutter imprecations about “bloody Americans” while I watch the news and my husband rolls his eyes. “At least we make good spouses,” he’ll say.
Besides, when I think of where Mark Steyn comes from, I can’t be too smug about anything.
doremi, it’s an oblique reference to an imperfect analogy from “literature.”
I’m not sure if I’m more encouraged or depressed by this. Yay, America’s not as stupid as I’ve been fearing, but that non-stupidity doesn’t seem likely to make much difference if it hasn’t already.
Would someone please explain to a dumb little Canadian why those crazy people are still in power? It’s obvious the large percetage of Americans don’t want them there. Bush, to the eyes of most canadians I know think he’s psychotic, or just evil
Money.
This has been another installment of Short Answers to Complicated Questions.
Alan? If you read this blog, Auguste is sorry. We’ll punish him ourselves and make sure he only lifts from hack writers like Bendis from now on.
It’s an appropriate analogy, but you lifted it badly, Auguste. The bloodstained button means The Comedian, an immoral nihilist, is dead, tossed out an upper-story window by a gorgeous super-mensch who is secretly an aggrandizing psychopath trying to conquer the world.
And we all know Dick Cheney isn’t smashed into a bloody pulp in a gutter somewhere.
… I hadn’t read the end of Watchmen.
And Nixon serves 4 terms as president.
What’s your problem?
Don’t worry, Numad. Nothing ever ends…
oops.
Might the implication be that Dubya—while not exactly gorgeous nor (I hope) the ubermensch—is in the process of enacting a similarly foolish and destructive plan?(Alas, I never thought very highly of Watchmen’s plot, at least.)
Hey kids–enough of this grown up stuff. Let the grownups deal with it. We got other things to do.
I want you all to come with me to Never Never land where we can continue in our gleeful nihilistic behaviour and tear down everything that might be real or true. Fantasy and anarchy are our playgrounds. All this thinking is giving me a headache. Come on let’s play.
It’s an appropriate analogy, but you lifted it badly, Auguste. The bloodstained button means The Comedian, an immoral nihilist, is dead, tossed out an upper-story window by a gorgeous super-mensch who is secretly an aggrandizing psychopath trying to conquer the world.
Well, you’re right, except for me the more enduring image was the reprise of it, and my intention was: It means that the non-name schlub who works for the pseudo-fascist New Frontiersman is about to pull Rorschach’s diary off the crank pile, effectively ruining the aggrandizing psychopath’s plan to bring peace and harmony to the world by means of slaughter. That a peace brought about in this way will, inasmuch as it even exists, be invariably destroyed by the smallest of infractions was my basic formulation.
I referred to the analogy as imperfect mainly because if it were 100% relatable, I’d have to subscribe to a “Loose Change”/Bush Knew view of 9/11, which I don’t.
Oh, and if I’d figured out a way to put Veidt on Bush’s lapel, I would have, just to make it more obvious.
LOL. You give Shrub too much credit, Auguste. At least Veidt was easy on the eyes, and a super genius, as well as a self made man and a fantastically successful business tycoon; alas, W is none of these.
BTW, Blake is amoral rather than immoral; he knows rules exist, but he just ignores them. Sorta like Shrub.
A movie’s in the works, like it has been for the past decade. I think it would be better to let the Cartoon Network make it an extended series for Adult Swim, like they did recently for Hellboy, but if live action it must be, then George Clooney would be a great Blake. Now, if they could get Toby Maguire for Rorschah…
“What’s your problem?”
Oh well.
Isn’t there a 20-year-limit on spoiler warnings?
Actually, I’ve always pictured Ron Howard as Rorschach.
Although I’d love to see Brad Pitt have a go at it, based solely on his pitch-perfect performance in 12 Monkeys.
I guess Kevin Spacey as Rorschach would be too obvious. Maybe Nite Owl?
But the more pressing questions, I think, are who should play Silk SPectre, and also will Dr. Manhattan be obliged to wear pants?
But if there’s one notable trait of the last fifteen years of politics, it’s the strange inability of a diffuse majority to restrain a concentrated minority from pursuing a destructive path.
Are you sure you didn’t mean “the last fifteen centuries of politcs” there? Although that’s still a rather conservative estimate… I’m pretty sure there was no shortage of Romans sitting round in bath-houses going “WTF? We’re invading Carthage now?”
It was ever thus, and the core business of politcs is maintaining exactly that state of affairs.
On a non-political note, could anyone identify the quoted verse at the end of the article? Sounds very familiar, but I can’t place it.
At the end of Auguste’s post, scott? It’s from PB Shelley’s poem “Ozymandias.”
Y’all are just entirely too smart. Or you’ve been reading much better material than I.
[snark]I think y’all are being just mean to ol’ Dubya. Don’t you know that this war in Iraq is akin to our very own Revolutionary War? George W. is just like the first George W., didn’t you know? He is! He said so! [/snark]
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/02/19/politics/main2492403.shtml
(Please note in the comments that the wingnuts are not the only people plagued by THE ALL CAPS PEOPLE!!!11!!)
The Islamist menace is a real threat. Arguing otherwise more or less empowers the neo-cons. Besides (primarily) working against the dangerous foreign policy of the US, anti-war westerners position in regard to fighting Islamism should be to build (critical) support of progressive forces in Muslim countries such as trade unions and workers organizations, womens groups, some leftist formations, etc. They (or “we”) absolutely shouldn’t support sectarian killers like the Iraqi Resistance and Hezbollah , which parts of the anti-war movement’s leadership in fact do support (particularly in England).
Some some examples might be US Labor against the War solidarity with Iraqi trade unionists or supporting feminists like RAWA in Afghanistan.
Voting for democrats will not end this war. Pulling the troops out means ceding the most important oil region in the world to unknown and probably very chaotic situation. They won’t leave unless their made too.
I know I left the real thread topic here somewhere . .
The Islamist menace is a real threat. Arguing otherwise more or less empowers the neo-cons.
The first step in sanity is to stop using language like “The Islamist menace”. It’s as stupid the melodramatic “Infidel” crap the terrorists use.
Did anyone say terrorism is no threat at all? No. It’s about grasping the true scale of this threat as opposed to the inflated concept being used to justify undemocratic policies.
Terrorism for every cause has been a part of life for over a century. The “if we don’t fight them there, they will follow us home” is bullshit.
Just as the Haymarket bomb led to the hangings of men who weren’t even there and legitimized massive crackdowns on labor in Chicago, The Holy Day of American Fear been used to justify an imperial presidency.
Or consider how the overreaction to Columbine has led to policies which are far more likely to result in more difficulties for misfit teens than actual security.
The Aryan Nation is also a real threat, and pulls of contract murders and runs crime groups from within maximum security prisons. If you count the number of planned/executed plots with terroristic elements, they’re a more consistently active threat.
Yet we don’t go around constantly bringing up Oklahoma City this menace to alter our entire domestic policy towards disaffected white guys or militias. Part of it is a double standard, part of it is a a legitimate “there will always be crazies and you don’t beat them by acting crazy” attitude.
Yes, one needs to guard against the threat, but no, one doesn’t guard by adopting the attitudes of the intolerant minority which is at the root of it.
Mark Steyn, beloved of Michelle Malkin, Fox News, and the New York Historical Society
Hey, be fair. The reception was held AT the New York Historical Society, not BY it.
Sorry to use your snark for seriousness, Christina, but that comparison is correct on at least one count. Part of why we were able to win the simplified-explanation Revolutionary War is that we were guerrillas fighting an army used to conventional battle, and we were fighting on our own land, which 1) was more familiar to us, and 2) meant more to us, what with it being our home and all.
Funny how the first George W didn’t go down in history as an “insurgent,” though…
Zuzu: Noted and corrected. My sincerest apologies to the NYHS and my utter lack of surprise to find out who was really behind the award.
defenestrated,
My snarks usually do have a bite behind them somewhere.
And it’s this stuff: “And as we work to advance the cause of freedom around the world, we remember that the father of our country believed that the freedoms we secured in our revolution were not meant for Americans alone.â€? is where he gets those people who are too busy or too lazy to look at the disconnect between what he’s saying and what he’s doing. I suspect that it’s statements like this that keep people on the bandwagon–we’re not killing innocent Iraqis, we’re bringing them freedom and to do so we must destroy the Islamofascists who want to keep freedom from them.
Unfortunately, the (various and sundry) ironies of Christofascists bringing freedom to (predominantly) brown people at the point of a gun seems to escape them.
Never mind what George Washington would’ve actually thought about this kind of meddling.
Do they seriously just not teach American history nowadays? How do we have so many people who don’t understand the principles this country was really founded upon? (see also: church & state)
Dear Flung From a Window,
Our esteemed Topiary-in-Chief maintained a more or less solid C average at Yale. I don’t know for certain about the rest of his academic career, but I’d be surprised if it weren’t much the same. He may genuinely not know much American history.
This excuse does not apply to the advisors and speechwriters that surround him, who tend to be nerdy people who got good grades in school.
Warmly,
Moira
Moira, you’re right, but this has been bugging me a lot recently as more broadly applied to things like “America is a christian nation” and “the founding fathers were devout christians,” etc. getting a pass from the media. It just seems like so much of the justification for right-wing positions is based on the complete reversal of historical fact/defiance of the Constitution - and not on some esoteric legalese basis, but at the level of stuff that’s taught in middle school - that it just makes my head hurt. Someone commented recently in a different thread about how our miserable school systems result in an extremely pliable public, and I guess we’re just seeing that in action.
Softdog– Islamists have helped to bring civil war to Iraq. Islamists have brought Palestine and Lebanon to the edge of civil war. Islamists in Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Somalia and afghanistan are all significant threats. I’m not sure why menace is an inaccurate assessment. Islamism presents a very real threat to dragging the world into a wide scale war.
Oddly enough, one of my co-workers, (and fellow comic fan) said he saw Ron Howard as Rorsch too. Must be the red hair (though Howard doesn’t have much of it any more) Personally, I always thought Howard much too mellow and laid back for that part; you need somebody with a laserlike gaze and unnerving intensity, and Maguire has that (one reason I didn’t think he was right for Peter Parker).
I don’t see anybody as Silk Spectre One, now that Lucille Ball is dead. For Silk Spectre Two, how about Patricia Richardson? She certainly has the looks, and she has the wry intelligence too.
Never mind; that part will probably go to Anne Hathaway. (if they film it in the next decade or so,)
There’s a major problem, as I see it, with anyone famous playing Rorschach, unless they’re going to abandon a minor but important plot point. Otherwise, the audience will be
SPOILER WARNING
sitting there wondering “Say, why did they hire Jake Gyllenhaal to play some guy holding an ‘End is Nigh’ sign?”
LOL. Too true, Auguste. Another reason why animation would be a better bet than live action.