Today were two articles in the NY Times' Op-Ed discussing the recent outbreak of anti-American feelings in the Middle East, dealing heavily with the "Innocence of Muslims" video. The first article uses Salman Rushdie and the laughter associated with the Newsweek cover 'Muslim Rage' to point out why we really need to simply stand our ground:
The Satanic Video
While another article points out why the US needs to become accustomed to the fact of its status as a declining empire:
America's Inevitable Retreat From the Middle East
I agree with the idea that the US should not apologize for its culture - I actually agreed with what Romney said, that we should stand for our way of life. Unfortunately, he said it with crappy rhetoric and the worst timing possible. Freedom of Speech is one of the best defenses against tyranny, and we should not give it up, or turn our backs on it, simply because some people get pissed off by it. Obama's response was diplomatic, to be sure, but I would have liked it to include a small explanation about how American society functions - and that the government cannot (and absolutely should not) shut down freedom of expression, even if the persons in question are idiots.
The second article was inevitable - since 9/11, everyone has enjoyed pointing out that the American Empire is on its way towards collapse. This has included me on occasion, I admit. It definitely includes everyone in the Univ. of Toronto History Department - which is rather amusing, given how much Canada benefits from American imperialism, but I digress. The author makes a comparison between the evacuation of Saigon in 1975 with the US' withdrawal from Libya - except it doesn't work. The US retreated from Vietnam because there was no strategic reason to be there, except stop the "spread of Communism" - which by then we had realized was never going to be the case. Vietnam had no economic benefit to require an American presence - while the Middle East definitely does. That was why we went into Iraq, and why we will continue to maintain a visible presence in the Middle East for decades to come, with the accompanying cost. The author is right, however, in stating that the US has really screwed up in the Muslim world during the past 20 years, and clearly pointed out the folly of following colonialist imperialism in a post-colonial world.
What I like about Obama in regards to foreign policy is his willingness to follow different models to enable American success - but those different models should not include apologies for free speech or other protected American rights.
Salman Rushdie really put it best when he was on the Daily Show last week - the US needs to stand up for its intellectuals and artists, regardless of how good (or bad) they are. Further, John Oliver made a funny point that the Muslim world is the same today as Christianity was 600 years ago - the latter got out of it eventually, and the former will do the same. We may never see Mohammed depicted on a box of Wheaties or in a sliced tomato, but every religion gets a sense of humor eventually. We just have to be patient, stand up for ourselves when necessary, and cooperate - while never forgetting that we forged an American Empire for a damn good reason.
"The Satanic Video" was written by Bill Keller, and published by the New York Times. "America's Inevitable Retreat From the Middle East" was written by Pankay Mishra and also published by the NYT.
Showing posts with label free speech. Show all posts
Showing posts with label free speech. Show all posts
24 September 2012
The Declining American Empire?
Labels:
culture war,
free speech,
humor,
Middle East,
NYT,
tolerance
Location:
Toronto, ON, Canada
17 July 2012
Denis Leary: Prophet?
U.S. Priority on Illegal Drugs Debated As Pill Use Rises
The stats are staggering - in the US, cocaine was used by 1.5 million people, and heroin by 220,000 - but over 7 million people abused prescription drugs in the past year. While this hardly qualifies as a staggering fact, the release of this new data came at the same time when many outspoken officials on both sides of the debate have condemned the War on Drugs as a failure. The article quotes NJ governor Christie as agreeing with this statement, and even Pat Robertson, who as symbol of morality (for better or for worse) has condemned the prosecution of small amounts of marijuana, and has even joined the campaign to have it treated like alcohol. Further, the newly elected president of Mexico has clearly stated that his priority will be social treatment, rather than new efforts at law enforcement; he has further stated that he dislikes the US' strategy of ending drug use through enforcement, rather than looking at their own problem.
For me, the article allowed the formation of an image in my mind - specifically, will I see the day where there is no longer a War on Drugs? I don't think it's coincidental that so many voices have joined together to condemn this war, which has so little benefit - and if anything, is only encouraging the problem.
Finally, the tagline to this post is a reference to Leary's routine regarding legal drug use - in No Cure for Cancer, he jokes about how one can abuse legal drugs and get as good as, or in some cases, a better high off the legal stuff than you can on the illegal - and it's far easier to obtain, to boot. Further, I think the number the article quotes regarding the abuse of prescription drugs is lower than it is in actuality; does that number include the abuse of drugs like ritalin and adderall, which is becoming increasingly prevalent among students, as described by a recent NYT article?
We should simply end this War, and accept the consequences of that decision. I think it is possible to transition to an actually free society, where people can utilize whatever substances they like, as people use alcohol and tobacco now - with the caveat of a high tax on your pleasure. The abuse of prescription drugs is just as bad as abusing heroin, cocaine, or marijuana; the only difference is that drug companies have legitimate representatives and lobbyists in Congress.
Article written by Damien Cave & Michael S. Schmidt; published by the New York Times.
The stats are staggering - in the US, cocaine was used by 1.5 million people, and heroin by 220,000 - but over 7 million people abused prescription drugs in the past year. While this hardly qualifies as a staggering fact, the release of this new data came at the same time when many outspoken officials on both sides of the debate have condemned the War on Drugs as a failure. The article quotes NJ governor Christie as agreeing with this statement, and even Pat Robertson, who as symbol of morality (for better or for worse) has condemned the prosecution of small amounts of marijuana, and has even joined the campaign to have it treated like alcohol. Further, the newly elected president of Mexico has clearly stated that his priority will be social treatment, rather than new efforts at law enforcement; he has further stated that he dislikes the US' strategy of ending drug use through enforcement, rather than looking at their own problem.
For me, the article allowed the formation of an image in my mind - specifically, will I see the day where there is no longer a War on Drugs? I don't think it's coincidental that so many voices have joined together to condemn this war, which has so little benefit - and if anything, is only encouraging the problem.
Finally, the tagline to this post is a reference to Leary's routine regarding legal drug use - in No Cure for Cancer, he jokes about how one can abuse legal drugs and get as good as, or in some cases, a better high off the legal stuff than you can on the illegal - and it's far easier to obtain, to boot. Further, I think the number the article quotes regarding the abuse of prescription drugs is lower than it is in actuality; does that number include the abuse of drugs like ritalin and adderall, which is becoming increasingly prevalent among students, as described by a recent NYT article?
We should simply end this War, and accept the consequences of that decision. I think it is possible to transition to an actually free society, where people can utilize whatever substances they like, as people use alcohol and tobacco now - with the caveat of a high tax on your pleasure. The abuse of prescription drugs is just as bad as abusing heroin, cocaine, or marijuana; the only difference is that drug companies have legitimate representatives and lobbyists in Congress.
Article written by Damien Cave & Michael S. Schmidt; published by the New York Times.
Labels:
culture war,
drugs,
forgiveness,
free speech,
humor,
legacies,
NYT,
politics,
US,
War on Drugs
Location:
Kraków, Poland
13 July 2012
On Being Offended
Jim Norton On Offending People, Apologizing To Steve Martin & Why He Likes Westboro Baptist Church
I hate the culture of being offended that is developing in the States, and exists full-blown in Canada. It's stifling our discussions and our creativity. Which is why I love quotes like this:
"Here’s what being offended is, it’s a phony sense of empowerment. People have lost this ability to go, “Wow, I didn’t like that, that bothered me. I won’t watch that again.” People have lost the ability to just not like something and walk away. People now feel that if they object to something, nobody else should enjoy it either. It’s because we’ve seen enough people say they’re sorry, we’ve seen enough people fired where people now feel that, “if I’m offended, I voice my offense, people have to listen to me.”
It’s a really weird self-centered attention-seeking device people use. So I never buy the offense. … I think 90% of it is a lie. People say, “I don’t like stereotypes.” Bullshit. You don’t like negative stereotypes. People don’t mind positive stereotypes. People don’t mind positive assumptions. It’s only negative assumptions about them. So their outrage is so arbitrary. And I’m embarrassed for us as a free society that we actually want people punished for saying things we don’t like. The liberals are bad and the conservatives are bad. The liberals say things like “Well, that’s homophobic, that’s racist.” And the conservatives say things like, “You’re attacking our religion. You’re attacking family values.” Both sides are equally fraudulent when it comes to supporting unpopular speech. It’s easy to support popular speech. We’re supposed to stick up for things that do bother people. The rest of us are supposed to rally around and defend people’s rights to say what they want to say. That’s why I like the Westboro Baptist Church. I think they’re repulsive people. I think their message is repulsive. But I think they are good for society because it shows exactly what we will tolerate in a free-thinking society. Even pigs like that, and they are pigs."
Walking Away is a concept which is rapidly disappearing, as is supporting free speech in all its forms, even when you don't like it; especially when you don't like it. Hence why Canada and the UK don't have free speech, and the US is losing it, if it hasn't lost it already.
Article courtesy of Fark.com; Interview was between Jim Norton and Carol Hartsell, and published by the Huffington Post.
I hate the culture of being offended that is developing in the States, and exists full-blown in Canada. It's stifling our discussions and our creativity. Which is why I love quotes like this:
"Here’s what being offended is, it’s a phony sense of empowerment. People have lost this ability to go, “Wow, I didn’t like that, that bothered me. I won’t watch that again.” People have lost the ability to just not like something and walk away. People now feel that if they object to something, nobody else should enjoy it either. It’s because we’ve seen enough people say they’re sorry, we’ve seen enough people fired where people now feel that, “if I’m offended, I voice my offense, people have to listen to me.”
It’s a really weird self-centered attention-seeking device people use. So I never buy the offense. … I think 90% of it is a lie. People say, “I don’t like stereotypes.” Bullshit. You don’t like negative stereotypes. People don’t mind positive stereotypes. People don’t mind positive assumptions. It’s only negative assumptions about them. So their outrage is so arbitrary. And I’m embarrassed for us as a free society that we actually want people punished for saying things we don’t like. The liberals are bad and the conservatives are bad. The liberals say things like “Well, that’s homophobic, that’s racist.” And the conservatives say things like, “You’re attacking our religion. You’re attacking family values.” Both sides are equally fraudulent when it comes to supporting unpopular speech. It’s easy to support popular speech. We’re supposed to stick up for things that do bother people. The rest of us are supposed to rally around and defend people’s rights to say what they want to say. That’s why I like the Westboro Baptist Church. I think they’re repulsive people. I think their message is repulsive. But I think they are good for society because it shows exactly what we will tolerate in a free-thinking society. Even pigs like that, and they are pigs."
Walking Away is a concept which is rapidly disappearing, as is supporting free speech in all its forms, even when you don't like it; especially when you don't like it. Hence why Canada and the UK don't have free speech, and the US is losing it, if it hasn't lost it already.
Article courtesy of Fark.com; Interview was between Jim Norton and Carol Hartsell, and published by the Huffington Post.
Labels:
culture,
culture war,
free speech,
George Carlin,
Huffington,
humor,
Jim Norton,
kvetching,
politics,
racism,
tolerance
Location:
Kraków, Poland
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)