Two cyberfriends, both of whom are well educated, cultured and delightful people with a sense of humor are scaring the bejeezuz out of me. They're both about the same age and both are retired teachers. Each lives in a socialist society and in general is satisfied with that way of life.Jude, a kiwi, who for the record likes Americans and America, but can do without the hippies that littered the country during the 60's many of whom stayed on. She likes the security provided by socialism.
In her words: Socialism seems to me to be a good thing. I live in a socialist country. We have a pretty good welfare system (which originated in Germany) which I think is a good thing in a country which is only good at growing grass and is situated on the edge of the Southern Ocean.
Read her whole blog, Jude, the Obscure. She's a wonderful writer and I think could do well writing a book of her life at least for starters. It's difficult to imagine that kiwis will elect any government that would change the course of the New Zealand ship of state, so unless there would be a cataclysm of unimagined proportions, I see no help for us there.
Monix is a Brit. I've been reading some British blogs lately and am surprised at the just-below-the-surface resentment of Americans and America. This surprised me.
Anyway, she blogged about the London bombings at Random Distractions and as I had some thoughts about her post and the bombings, I directed her attention to my blog. My thoughts in a post below.
Not to prolong the debate, I'll just say, that we do understand each other. It's that neither of us approves of the others reaction to and identification of terrorism and socialism. We're against them both. If Monix is a typical British voter, I don't think we can look for much help there either.
Bummer!
27 comments:
It's about time you got around to blogging, erp! Welcome to the blogosphere.
I too am puzzled by the tepid reaction over in Britain. After my row with Brit I haven't posted anything on Islam, but I will be soon. But it seems that the English are using the USA as a model of how not to handle their terror problem, as if we are a nation of ranting, lynching bigots. I'd say that the US is the safest and best place in the world to be a Muslim right now.
I'd say the US is the best place in the whole world, period end of story.
Duck, I don't know what your row with Brit was about, neither do I know why you all split off from the Bros. It's not anything like the fun it used to be without you all.
I found Brit and the other non-Americans, Ali being the exception, were very touchy about even the most jocular remark about them, but poured on the ugly American nonsense pretty heavy.
Of course Jude likes Socialism, she's in the winning demographic. She may also be correct that it's less dysfunctional in a nation that doesn't depend on being a technical or economic leader.
It's not so much that people left BrosJudd, it's that, in many cases, they were cast out.
Apparently a little too much fun was being had.
Oro, cast out?
AOG, Duck, and Skipper, at least, had their comments heavily edited without their being a note to that effect, and others were banned outright.
For whatever reason, Orrin began to find opposition irritating.
"their" = "there"
Using your new blog to insult one of its few potential readers is odd behaviour. When that user is my mother, it is behaviour some distance beyond the pale.
Since there are no other knights in shining armour in this sorry place, I suppose I must wearily pick up the lance for one last Quixotic sally.
Erp, your Sherlockian detection of "ugly American nonsense" in my postings is what psychologists might call 'projection'. Actually, what I find ugly is ignorance, bigotry and racism, even when spouted by Americans, ugly or not.
I would say that refusing to see "Arab" doctors, comparing the Muslim Council of Britain to the IRA and even having a pop at the poor old Maoris (for goodness sake) qualifies on all three counts.
Spitting the full gobful of verbiose bile that rises in my throat on this particular blog would be like taking the sledgehammer to the proverbial nut, and clearly absurd. I will give you this credit, however: you are one hell of a nut.
Brit, Luckily this blog is not required reading and I apologize if anything I said offended your mother or anyone else.
The recent unpleasantness in London demonstrated that my decision a long time ago not to see Arab doctors was prescient.
Terrorists? I don't differentiate between them whether they be Irish or Islamic.
One needn't be a Sherlock nor a Freud to see the chip on your shoulder.
Maori's? I take it that those who live among them know more about them than we do.
Hiya erp - it seems the best posts are always those which raise the ire of centre/left/moderate/christian/vegetarian/dogooder/pc/softbellied liberal/tree huggers.
What is the winning demographic that I am in?
Brit - you could get your teeth re-arranged for referring to takata whenua as 'poor old maoris'. They are not into that sort of patronising speech any more. It's sort of like saying 'poor old Arab' to your doctor.
I must say I am gobsmacked that after all this time and all we have written on so many issues that any of you would start hurling charges of anti-Americanism at us. Or see anti-Americanism as tied to how we believe Muslim immigrants should be received in our own countries.
But it seems that the English are using the USA as a model of how not to handle their terror problem, as if we are a nation of ranting, lynching bigots.
Could you link us to anyone outside the frothing left that is saying anything like that, Duck?
Also, based on my not inconsiderable experience as an international political junkie specializing in the Anglosphere, the vast majority of folks who label the U.S. as a nation of ranting, lynching bigots are American. I'm in New England right now and encountering a strain of BDS far more virulent than anything at home. Projection?
Peter, I'm confused. My observations about the Ugly American syndrome applies to Brits, not Canadians. We've traveled extensively in Canada and had a great time, especially away from the eastern cities which are part of the New England mind set.
The example that Monix used in her post about an anecdote at an air show is typical. Who knows if the depiction is accurate or if the interview actually took place. In any case, it sounds like a put on to me, but that isn't the point. The point is that too many are ready to accept it as gospel and as another example of blood thirsty yanks.
And the question about whether Americans have traveled outside the country (millions of us have) and if we haven't, well then, we haven't tasted of the superior culture, is ridiculous. How many Brits have traveled in the US at all, or if they have traveled here have traveled widely enough to know what they're talking about. Not many yet they can maintain that we're yahoos and cowboys who want to settle things with guns instead of diplomacy.
There are many other examples, our fast food low-brow culture is resented, yet Brits stand in line to buy it. Have we sent the marines across the pond to force them at gun point to eat Big Macs?
I won't speak for others, but my concern about how other countries handle their Moslem community is that what happens in our partner countries affects us, especially when the 3,000 mile border between us has always been more a line on a map than a barrier to traffic.
If the UK wants to turn itself inside out rather than offend a respected Moslem group, fine with me, but the title on this post isn't hyperbole. I'm terrified that a pandering lefty PM in the UK well empower the terrorists to ply their trade here and if a Dem is elected and starts pandering, we'll have bombings here as well.
I believe the timing of the London bombings was to test Brown's mettle. He proved as weak as expected and it's a given that the newly elected president here, no matter who it will be, will be similarly tested.
PS: Comparing Islamic terrorists with the IRA seems to have caused a major eruption and lots of insults, but so far nobody has explained to me how they differ. The IRA and Moslems both aided the Germans during the WW2 and the IRA have been and may still be training terrorists in Libya and elsewhere in the Middle East.
Rabid BDS in New England? Not a news flash.
Erp:
Monix is my mother.
You compared the Muslim Council of Britain to the IRA. The Muslim Council of Britain do not represent terrorists. Merely clicking on the link from your own blog will take you to a story in which the MCB strongly condemn the terrorist actions.
Try this one on their official website.
You are unable or unwilling to distinguish between Islamist terrorists and Muslims. The importance of maintaining this distinction was precisely the crux of the fallout at the Daily Duck. It had sweet FA to do with anti-Americanism.
On another post above Jude the Obscure writes: "Muslims are silly little brown men who are convinced they are smart enough to take over Western civilisation."
Instead of condemning this crude and pathetic racism, you applaud it.
The best that can be said of you is that you are appallingly ignorant.
Look, if you folks insist on refighting Bunker Hill, there isn't much I can do, although I am tempted to sentence you all to a hundred hours together with a Canadian mediator who did postgraduate work in conflict resolution. We have our own indigenous brands of torture.
May I respectively suggest you (Brits and Yanks) have all forgotten we are in the realm of arguing principles and ideas with pixils and are blind to the individual and national characters behind those ideas? It is a particularly American characteristic to reduce the most mundane of issues to declarations of first principle and to argue at that level. My favourite example was how Skipper hijacked a hundred comment thread in insisting telemarketers violated his constitutional property rights rather than just being a damn nuisance that needed regulating to prevent exploitation and excess. I agree with Brit that some of the comments about Muslims of late are beyond the pale, but I suspect those who advance them just assume we all know they are held by big-hearted, generous people who don't mean it all as literally as it sounds. Americans often remind me of 17th century judges who insist on applying the full, literal severity of the criminal law, but who are such suckers for a good sob story that they commute most sentences. Frankly, you just don't do muddle and I blame too much classical architecture. If you had more of our irrational, meandering Gothic masterpieces, you would understand us better.
erp, one of the things that all Anglospheric countries have is a firm belief that their country is best. There isn't a Canadian, Aussie or Kiwi of any political stripe who doesn't feel he or she won the lottery of life, and it has very little to do with what you call socialism. Even Brit is on record as declaring England the greatest country in the world. Quaint, but you know Brit. Be careful not to see anti-Americanism in every argument or every statement of national pride from your friend. The Brits, Brit and monix all deserve better than what you are throwing.
As I appear to have become a subject of discussion I feel I should make some kind of response.
I am not, nor ever have been, anti-American.
Erp has totally misjudged my intention in quoting the passage from Sandy Balfour's (a South African, BTW) book. I used it to illustrate how nations who apparantly speak the same language actually understand them in different ways, because of the difference in culture, history and experience - and, dare I say it here - sense of humour.
Don't you call me a crude, pathetic racist Brit! At least not until you have mid-eastern and 'poor old maori' relations! Then we will be on equal ground. It seems throwing the word racist at anyone who doesn't agree with you is now the last refuge of a scoundrel.
Monix, that quote from Sandy Balfour can apply equally to terrorists. I believe they even boast about the same thing - but just using different tactics. As for your remark about 'nations who (sic) apparantly (sic) speak the same language...' having misunderstandings - that is just your deconstructionist BS. I think we understand each other very well.
Maureen, I am posting the email I sent you above, so others who have indicated interest in this subject may understand the questions.
I think you're a charming intelligent person and am/was pleased to be among your cyber-friends. Your eclectic postings are always pleasant surprises and I've enjoyed our humorous sallies on topics as far apart as clothes pins/pegs and orthodonture.
You are most welcome to drop by or email me if the notion strikes you to "talk" about interesting things you've run across in your readings.
To all the commenters below. I have stated my opinion and I stand by my remarks. Everyone else I presume stands by theirs.
Jude the obscure: As for your remark about 'nations who (sic) apparantly (sic) speak the same language...' having misunderstandings - that is just your deconstructionist BS.
Typos and grammatical errors occur in the best circles and merda taurorum animas conturbit.
Welcome aboard, erp.
Mo(ther) Nix(on): your son seems awfully cranky today. Maybe you need to put him down for his nap.
So this is where everyone has gone to.
For the record, Erp, I think you have misconstrued Monix's intent with the Balfour post. After I read it a second time with Monix's explanation, she obviously wasn't endorsing Balfour's knee-jerk anti-Americanism. I read it the same way you did on the first pass, and that is why I posted what I did above.
I am tempted to sentence you all to a hundred hours together with a Canadian mediator who did postgraduate work in conflict resolution. We have our own indigenous brands of torture.
Not conflict resolution!! You sadist!
btw, I've tried to post a more thoughtful (than my previous) analysis of the Muslim question vis a vis England and America and would welcome thoughtful comments, if you're all not totally burned out on the topic.
I'm not burned out on the subject as I have six grandchildren whose health and happiness are my primary concern and I couldn't care less about the feelings of so-called moderate Islamic organizations or, indeed, anyone or anything else on the face of the earth.
The British must either cease to exist or rise up like the free citizens of the modern seat of democracy they are and demand all residents of their Isles obey the law of the land with no exceptions.
My email to Maureen explained what I mean by anti-Americanism. It is not overt and I very much doubt that she and other well meaning people are even aware of it. Brit, however, by his totally over-the-top outburst reveals the chip on his shoulder for all to see.
Nothing I like better than reasoned discourse which allows people with widely/wildly different and divergent views to express themselves in an open forum with comments addressed only to the ideas not the person and it has surprised me that those whom I thought reasonable debaters would resort to name calling in their ardor to defend the indefensible.
My views insulted no one and I think I've explained them as well as I can, so I'll follow the advice of one of our greatest capitalists, Henry Ford, by ending with a saying attributed to him, Don't complain and Don't Explain.
Let's see, you insult my country generally, my Muslim friends and colleagues indirectly and my mother personally. And all in one post - pretty good going, Erp; what do you do for an encore?
So I wouldn't say my outburst was too far over the top, all things considered.
The nastiest I said was that you are appallingly ignorant. When you compare the MCB to the IRA, merely because it's got the word 'Muslim' in its name, when your own link points to an unequivocal condemnation of terrorism by the MCB, then yes, 'appallingly ignorant' seems not unreasonable. It's either that or something worse.
It all depends what you think this blogging rubbish is for. If it's a case of "I've stated my opinion and I stand by my remarks" then good luck and goodbye. If you're at all interested in chipping away at some of that ignorance, then I look forward to the series of glenties that may have already commenced with your latest post.
Finally - there's a time for being measured, and there's a time for coming down as hard as this preposterous medium of pseudonyms and pixels allows.
When I see ugly and crude, I throw ugly and crude back, if the point is important enough and it's the only way to make it.
That's because I'm not into...
...appeasement.
O, being powerful perforce means using that power judiciously and exerting almost superhuman patience and endurance. It's similar to many large and strong men I've known who exhibit great gentleness in the face of goading from weaker men, but at some point, even their patience will be taxed.
In the same way, we, the people, will excuse a lot and deflect blows with less than our total power, but push us a little too much and even the most pacific pacifist, will react and demand the enemy be destroyed.
I have no problem with that nor using whatever weapons needed to do the job, my concern is for my grandchildren and other innocents who may be in the line of fire.
Should there be an attack on the homeland like the recent one in London, our reaction won't be our president, no matter who he or she may be, and the media assuring Moslems that we understand that not all of them are terrorists, so those, especially religious leaders, who decry the actions of their co-religionists here and abroad, better speak up loud and clear now, or we can't be blamed for thinking they all support random killing of innocents either implicitly or explicitly.
Post a Comment