Red light, green light
The WSJ asks whether the Obama administration, having agreed to participating in the preparations for the Durban Conference, otherwise known as the World Conference against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance, will attend the Conference itself. The previous conference, held in 2001, was criticized for attempting to equate Zionism with racism. These controversies ultimately led to the withdrawal of the US and Israeli delegations. As a consequence of this kerfuffle, the 2001 Durban Conference maintained its general tone but modified the final language into something less confrontational. Wikipedia notes:
In the end, the Conference delegates voted to reject the language that implicitly accused Israel of racism, and the document actually published contained no such language.
Several countries were unhappy with the final text’s approach to the subject, but all for different reasons. Syria and Iran were unhappy because their demands for the language about racism and Israel had been rejected by the Conference, the latter continuing its insistence that Israel was a racist state. Australia was unhappy with the process, observing that “far too much of the time at the conference [had been] consumed by bitter divisive exchanges on issues which have done nothing to advance the cause of combating racism”. Canada was also unhappy.[10]
The language of the final text was carefully drafted for balance. The word “diaspora” is used four times, and solely to refer to the African Diaspora. The document is at pains to main a cohesive identity for everyone of African heritage as a victim of slavery, even including those who may have more European than African ancestors. The “victim” or “victims” of racism and slavery (the two words occurring 90 times in the document) are defined in only the most general geographic terms.
Given this background, it was inevitable that Durban II would generate even more controversy. Reuters reported that the Obama administration had decided it would play, although the extent to which it would participate remained nebulous.
WASHINGTON, Feb 17 (Reuters) – In a break from Bush administration policy, the United States is participating in planning sessions for a U.N. conference on racism despite concerns the meeting will be used to criticize Israel. … “If you are not engaged, you don’t have a voice,” State Department spokesman Gordon Duguid said on Tuesday.
“We wanted to put forward our view and see if there is some way we can make the document a better document than it appears it is going to be,” he said. “That does not mean, however, that we will take part in future meetings or indeed in the conference itself.”
The State Department will have its work cut for it if it wants to change Durban II’s thrust. The WSJ describes exactly what it intends to achieve:
As for what this Review Conference is supposed to achieve, some clues are provided in the latest draft of the so-called Outcome Document. Israel’s “racial policies” are a major theme, as is “the plight of Palestinian refugees and other inhabitants of the Arab occupied territories,” meaning Israel itself. Under debate, however, is whether to include a line that the Holocaust “resulted in the murder of one third of the Jewish people.” Presumably Iran objects.
The draft also calls “on states to develop, and where appropriate to incorporate, permissible limitations on the exercise of the right to freedom of expression into national legislation.” Yes, you read that right. The transparent purpose is to criminalize all criticism of Islam, a.k.a. “Islamophobia.” There is also a not-so-sly effort to extract reparations for the long-banned trans-Atlantic slave trade: States that “have not yet condemned, apologized and paid reparations” for the trade are urged “to do so at the earliest.”
What happens next bears close watching. Perhaps the biggest problem the US has to overcome is that the “World Conference against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance” is, as constituted, a malign project. Despite the Australian and Canadian participation, the general direction of the Conference has not changed. If anything it has gotten worse. By participating, the US puts itself in the position of a man entering a casino determined not to gamble; or a person visiting a saloon to prove he can order a glass of milk; or perhaps that of an individual who enters a house of ill-repute in order to convince the inmates to amend their ways. It may happen, but there’s a saying in these cases: the House Always Wins. If you are opposed an activity on principle, don’t accept simply quibble on the details. Unless of course, the problem lies only in the details.
As I understand it Canada is NOT participating in Durban II. I’ll try to verify.
Confirmed: http://w01.international.gc.ca/MinPub/Publication.aspx?isRedirect=True&Language=E&publication_id=385786&docnumber=16
Released 23/01/08.
This is double speak run the limit.
The inmates are drafting the charter.
It’s projection run wild.
47 months to go…
My molars may not make it.
This kind of stuff just makes me sick
Why do we have to notice
The ravings of a lunatic
It’s quite beneath the POTUS
To even think of having one
Of our guys in attendance
Who’d sit there staring down the gun
Of apology and penance
As once again the guys who hate
The Jews and all the rest
Of lettered men who to this date
Comprise the civ’lized West
The Arab slavers who once sold
The negroes that they caught
Continue now, so we are told
The slave trade that we fought
And now the Arab slavers
Want us all to bend the knee
And distribute money favors
To descendants we set free
To top it off, not satisfied
This rotten scurr’lous crew
Attempt to have it ratified
The killing of the Jew
I think the real issue here is the extent to which self-appointed organizations can create either law or compelling persuasion without any sort of democratic grounding. NGOs and regimes like Syria or Iran for example, are of dubious legitimacy. Yet they are participants, even the ringleaders, in an international attempt to “legislate” the behavior of third parties. Where did they get this power? This issue isn’t confined to racism or reparations. That is only its most egregious form. Whether on climate or social mores, organization like this have created an lawmaking process that is unaccountable. Moreover, they are imputing to themselves the power to tax. Suppose “reparations” became a Human Right, where does it end? Can Filipinos sold to slavery to the Moluccas apply? Can Europeans who were captured as slaves apply? Can Robert Mugabe’s population apply to regimes like his for recompense? Can the people of Darfur apply to the UN for compensation for the suffering occasioned by UN inaction?
No. Because they’re not represented directly at places like Durban.
Although this issue has been represented as an anti-semitic enterprise, it goes deeper than that. This is an irregular proceeding that is taking place outside the constitutional structures of states. Outside the control of voters, except at so many removes that there is barely a connection. I know it will be argued that the states have to “agree” but in the nature of things, these international bullying sessions are an exercise in shakedowns and blackmail.
The solution here is to reform the UN and to put a stop all these nonsensical conferences on climate, racism, human rights, etc which impose huge costs on the taxpayers of the world and are run, moreover, by the worst violators in the issues they purport to care so much about. If the UN really wants to do something it should host a conference calling for the stop to shakedowns like Durban. It’s a waste of money and an abomination.
Today it is Israel. Tomorrow it will be some other cause. And that next imposition will be all the more legitimate because of precedent. Where does Durban II gets its legitimacy? From previous conferences. It’s not Durban II people should be concerned about. It’s Durban III.
But, Richard. They all believe that money is a virtual object. It doesn’t really exist. Therefor it may be spent ad infinitum. They do not “work” for a living and as such do not have a concept of intrinsic value. It is beneath them. They are busy solving the problems of MANKIND! How dare you suggest that they show a modicum of decency and thrift!
Jim
“The solution here is to reform the UN and to put a stop all these nonsensical conferences on climate, racism, human rights, etc which impose huge costs on the taxpayers of the world and are run, moreover, by the worst violators in the issues they purport to care so much about.”
The solution is not to reform but to disband.
The UN is outdated in today’s global communication superhighways. These people are superfluous to our needs.
Jim
“…the US puts itself in the position of a man entering a casino determined not to gamble…”
It’s worse than that. By even participating at all the US is putting itself in the position of Louie in Casablanca, being “shocked, shocked that there is gambling going on here” as he pockets his winnings. Even if we don’t everyone will assume we did while professing innocence.
Don’t mud wrestle with a pig. You both get dirty and the pig likes it.
JF Sanders,
The US cannot disband the UN. We can only defund, withdraw and evict.
And, we might prosecute to the fullest extent those criminals involved in Oil for Food. Put’em in Gitmo.
“…defund, withdraw and evict.”
If only!
For a brief, and harrowing, look into the life of the sort of NGO, leftist, liberal ilk please go to the link and see the highlights of the Wife Swap episode with Stephen Fowler. Nasty fellow. Folks, this is what they think of us. They detest us, and don’t think we should have any input as they jet around making rules that we are expected to obey. I am sure the level of contempt that nasty fellow showed to the middle class Middle American woman is echoed in the halls of the UN conferences. Watch the video and prepare to be stunned. Check out his ‘Tree Hugger” and “Sustainability” tee shirts.
Here’s the link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B-1mtKQlDes&NR=1
As far as I am concerned, Durban II or Durban III or Durban XXX will be inherently imperialistic exercises because the very languages they use (whether English, French, Chinese, Arabic, Spanish, Portuguese, et cetera) will be languages of imperialism. If they truly oppose imperialism, perhaps they should all use Estonian, Huron, Geez, or Welsh.
As it is, I find it utterly distasteful to put the proud Ibo descendants of slave dealers in the same category as Dinka slaves in Khartoum as equally victims of slavery. Moreover, not all slaves in the West Indies or the American colonies were of African origin. Brazilian slavers would hunt for Indians in the Brazilian interior, while English colonies often bought captives from Indian intertribal wars as slaves. While we are at it, perhaps we shouldn’t forget that the Saudi Kingdom had an openly flourishing slave markets into the 1950′s!
So, any Durban conference that makes no reference to any slave trade other than Middle Passage cannot be anything other than RACIST.
It’s good to see the Fowler imbroglio make its way into the mainstream. Don’t tell anyone, but my wife and I watch the show on occasion. Even though she is a liberal (give it time, we’ve only been married a year!) she was incredibly upset by Mr. Fowler’s behavior. As were most of the people that saw.
Most liberals don’t think like he does, but it doesn’t matter. This type is the loudest, most obnoxious type at any party. They bully people into accepting their world view – they will shut up and let you get on with the party when you acquiesce.
Defund Withdraw Evict
Bumper sticker, T-shirt worthy. That is how revolutions are won.
Like most leftists the UN want to go through motions that make them feel good about what they feel they need to be about. Perhaps Team O can send AG Holder to talk down to all of us that thought we were past such stupid shit. How do you move beyond something that keeps getting shoved into your face? Or maybe we could send the entire 41 or so members of the Congressional Black Caucus Foundation to Durban in order to further elaborate on exactly how they have been discriminated upon all along the way to their current positions of power.
The wiki on Fowler has been deleted 4 times, twice this week.
My bad, 3 times.
As the WSJ mentions (or maybe it was some other article) this may be big O’s first test, as predicted by big B. O may not hate Israel but a bunch of his appointees do. Going to these pre-Durban meetings is a fool’s errand. Going to the actual meeting will brand the attendees as anti-semites.
W, you are right that all of these intl orgs attended by representatives of non-democratic countries are inherently non-democratic. Who cares what Iran or Libya or Russia, for that matter, say about human rights? These countries don’t believe in human rights and all their public statements are, by definition, propaganda. Big O believes in discussion so I guess discussion is what we’ll get.
I’ll be embarrassed to be an American if the US actually attends the anti-semite fest.
Wretchard, you ask who gives NGOs and places like Syria power?
It’s the elite in Western governments that use them as allies of convenience for things they want to do:
1. Make Israel an illegitimate state.
2. Require limits on “anti-Islamic” speech, used to limit pretty much ALL speech, getting around that pesky First Amendment.
3. Require “reparations” to African nations by America, lots of money to be made.
Of course, Obama is behind this, he’s whole-heartedly wanting this, because as a Pro-Muslim it fits his world view. He has also of course mis-read the US population. In a deep recession, giving corrupt, failed African states lots of US money from taxpayers is laughable. Let alone letting Saudi Arabia and Pakistan tell us what we can and cannot say in our own nation.
From the “first Muslim President” that’s a disaster. But then Obama is a foreigner, essentially, having no connection and little affection for the American people, traditions, or much of anything but hothouse anti-American politics.
The document is at pains to main a cohesive identity for everyone of African heritage as a victim of slavery
But, no doubt, omits Islam as the main driver of African slavery. I’m sure it also forgets to mention the estimated 1+ million Europeans enslaved by Muslims, along with countless Hindus.
There is also a not-so-sly effort to extract reparations for the long-banned trans-Atlantic slave trade
It also, I’m sure, omits Islamic countries as targets for paying reparations.
At any party I hosted, this Fowler turd would have at a minimum a fat lip, about 53 nanosecs into that act. Maybe a little longer, if I were a guest. He’s obviously never had a good thrashing by an insulted redneck.
Islam remains the world’s largest slaver, cept now they’re mostly just women. Right Gloria?
I have some tees: “Islam free your slaves”
and “Help Jihadis Meet Their Maker”
“Weaponize Freedom – Inflict Democracy” is my fav.
The rise of the NGOs is a recent problem. Until after WW-II the only non-faith based charities were Hospitals, Universities, the Red Cross, Children’s Aid, Settlement Houses and the SPCA. They all had specific tasks that they could be held to. Religious establishments performed similar tasks and missionary work. The rise of NGOs is directly tied I postulate to the rise of the income tax. First Rockefeller and Ford, then everyone seeking to shelter their legacy, formed foundations to hold their money in trust and distribute it in accordance with their wishes. That last restraint quickly proved to be a weak reed as left wing professionals took over the legacy foundations. These became enormous jobs programs for children of the elites, supplementing trust fund income, staffing Boards and administering projects, and employing armies of the PhDs that were churned out in the post war years. All this without the burden of having to actually teach or produce results. They did however keep busy investigating or creating problems both domestic and foreign. The hold on the taxpayer as a second source of funding was nurtured by the practice of using these NGOs as job banks for otherwise unemployed Democratic staffers and politicians during temporary Republican episodes.
It is only natural that the vast armies of the somewhat Westernized semi-college educated elites that arose following decolonization would want to get on this gravy train. It certainly offered a better prospect than trying to run an honest newspaper, teach, administer the civil service or run a business in their home countries. Trying any of those activities could get you killed.
Add museums, zoos and gardens to my charity list.
Add museums, zoos and gardens to my charity list.
I’d rather have zoos than the NGOs. When dangerous apes or tigers get lose from the zoo, they may maul an unfortunate person or two, but eventually somebody shoots them, keeping the rampage relatively short. Nobody shoots the damn NGO beasts, they just keep piling up victims.
And Whiskey is right, these bastard agencies are fostered by mendacious politicians (c.f. Obama, Barack for the latest incarnation) who use them as tools of convenience to further their power-consolidation agenday.
Don’t you think it’s cute how the Arabs keep trying to get the UN to do their dirty work for them? Now they’re obsessing about free speech and you just *know* that sooner rather than later one of the Middle East countries (or its bought-off proxy) will introduce just such limiting rules onto the floor of the United Nations itself.
Why oh why does America have to remain part of this zoo-circus? It just makes everyone involved think that if they can only get enough votes world-wide they can *force* America to do whatever dumb damned thing they want us to do.
5. wretchard:
Where did they get this power?
We give it by NOT calling them out and nipping it in the bud. I agree with many other posters: Defund Withdraw Evict.
The UN would not last long if we defund. Plus, the bad actors who have the most to gain, Middle Eastern Thugocracies, would waste valuable treasure propping up an organization that has no real authority and certainly no teeth without the US military. Kill it now.
Geoffgo @ 9
Life @ 15
“Defund, Withdraw, Evict”
Bumper sticker, T-shirt worthy. That is how revolutions are won.”
Shouldn’t that read “Withdraw, Manumit, Defund.”
I think images of WMD displayed against the motiff of Slavery would help define and clearly establish the point.
RE the UN: There is one half-measure we should try before America “withdraws, evicts, defunds” (WED).
We should try to cement together a formal “Caucus of the Democracies” in the body, first. This will have the effect of highlighting the undemocratic nature of our detractors in the body, and, the net wealth, foreign admits to colleges, and immigration to this caucus’ nations will stand in stark contrast to all the other autocratic ones.
Last, if it’s done correctly, I think the American “democrats” will find that their natural allies in the global Progressive movement are the undemocratic regimes in the majority at the UN, and not democratic nation-states, like America, Iraq or Chile.
(Incidently, this is why I doubt that the Democrats will ever undertake this effort.)
This should shake the Dem’s awake, if anything will. And if it doesn’t, then we can always WED. I think it’s worth a try, this caucus building, if only to draw the Left’s dogmaticians out of their hiding places among America’s “democratic” party. Without a herd to hide in here in America, the Left’s “humanist” camouflage will lose its effectiveness.
Oops! It’s Defund, Withdraw, Evict, or DWE.
I butchered your new logo, guys. Sorry.
steveaz,
Your re-arrangement of the letters has merit.
The by-invite-only Coalition of Democracies is the natural outcome of our announcement of UN-DEW, no?
I think the land under the UN HQ is too valuable to support its current use.
Move the whole operation to say the Maldives. The scam would die in a week. We’d have to pay the Maldivians a pot full of money to take them, but it would be worth it.
But wait, the Maldives is too nice a place and the people seem to be nonirritating.
I know! Sudan. Perfect. Just their kind of folks.
A “human rights” conference chaired by Libya and having the likes of Iran and Cuba on its board. What could possible go wrong?
Seriously, my proposal for the last 7 years has been for the UN to be moved to Governor’s Island in NY harbor. The southern two thirds of the island is an area larger than the current UN HQ and can be cleared. The Northern third contains some sites that should be preserved as a museum and some structures that could be reactivated to provide security for the UN and the city. Some could be let out for Missions or similar functions. Current plans to turn the island into a park are a wasteful boondoggle. An additional benefit of the plan is that in its new location the UN would always be within site of the WTC.
I found the Fowler video sad but amusing. I have spend my adult life with highly intelligent people who USE their intelligence as part of work and play.
I was also director on our graduate program at Virginia Tech some years ago. I have read lots of grad applications along with their GRE’s. The grad student we had with highest scores was a retired Navy junior officer who was promoted from Chief Petty Officer almost against his will. He was one of the more intelligent and insightful man that I have ever known and I know a LOT of famous academics and successful businessmen and lawyers. This Fowler is a lower class Brit who lies about his intelligence. He is a mean cunning man. Did you see how his wife reacted to his bullshit?
I have never watched that show because I can not fathom how any couple would be willing to do that for any amount of money. But I have shied away from publicity when I could have had it.
The analogy with NGO’s is weak. As has been stated here they are people who see themselves as world leaders independent of accountability except for their paymasters.
The best examples for me are the Meretz and Peace Now gang in Israeli politics. I am sure that they have first class tickets to get our of Israel when the Arabs attack but they don’t seem to realized that their will not be planes to take them out when it happens.
A year ag o I was flying back home via Chicago from Brussels. I had an aisle Business Class set and the young man who set next to me by the window was upgraded by his NGO, a global warming gang. I was wearing by CMU sweatshirt which I usually wear on international flights to keep me warm when I sleep. I like to talk to my seat mate after we board and during the meal before I go to sleep. This young man, 27 years of age, was flying to California after his meetings. He told me that he had a BS and MS in some sort of eco biology from Stanford. I told him that I have a Ph.D. from Stanford (1963) and a BS and MS in math from CMU. That impressed him as his Stanford degrees. He had no idea who I was other than the degrees and my name.
I now a number of worthless turkeys who have various degrees from Stanfor and CMU and Harvard etc. It is not the degree that confers respect, it is ones accomplishments. this guy seems to have had none. Shades of our supreme sort of Muslim leader.
Don’t you think the French would simply *love* to have the UN relocate to Paris? It would make them feel important in the world again, they could force everyone to speak Froggish, and the Arabs already mostly live there a lot any way so it would be handy for them. Maybe they could level their fractious Muslim banelieus to make room for a new UN building with lots of streets around it wide enough for illegal diplomatic parking.
Isn’t there an island just off the coast of N.Africa that is about to slide off into the ocean? And I agree that DWE is the actual steps but disband was what came to mind. Maybe we could turn the building into a homeless shelter.
Oh, I was told by a nice Albanian contractor who grew up and lived in the former Yugoslavia that you had rights under Tito and he would uphold those rights as well! You could speak out against him it was your right to do so. And it was also your right to die for it as well…
Jim
I still like “Withdraw, Manumit, Defund.” It has the appeal of appealing to everybody.
The chance to withdraw (from anything)should simply thrill those who missed the chance to get out of Iraq the topic of freeing slaves (even though it is only to end our own slavery to a miserable and less than useful organization) would satisfy Eric Holden, the De-funding would sate those who don’t wish to be beholden to the dollar.
WMD! its the way to be,
Like the President’s welfare plan,
Woman don’t need no man,
Man don’t need no plan,
Just WMD.
Yeah, I know. Sigh, needs work.
Withdraw, Manumit and De-fund it,
We could WED, get in Bed, or ignore it,
There just ain’t no way,
To reform it today,
Just Withdraw, Manumit and De-fund it.
You could say evict but I think the positive act of freeing ourselves from such an odius anchor on Humanity is a much more appealing and positive way to view it.
Just get done with it.
Is this the Stephen Fowler thread?
For shame. Look for another caricature. The woman in that video IS obese and she’s got quite the mouth on her – the kind that enjoys embarassing other people as much as Fowler seems indifferent to it. Another nasty little post-modern dichotomy – which is worse the sh^t sandwich or the pissy martini-et?
Slade, Fowler is a Brit being objectionable to an American — in essence, by putting down the woman, he’s putting down EVERYone in America who’s overweight. I can’t believe you’re on his side simply because the woman is zaftig. If you’re not a racist, you’re certainly a fatist and that’s equally stupid and short-sighted.
NahnCee, what’s stupid and short-sighted is reducing wretchard’s attempts to contextualize events into a bigger picture without populating the stage with lowest common denominator steroetypes. I must assume that I am not the only reader of this site who notices the backhanded contempt emanating from The Dark Side leftie who occasionally slips in with a rhetorical shiv. More often than not, the cut is dull but the point is made – with me – that the gravity and seriousness of the oppositional view is being marginalized by the extremity of the rhetoric and the cartoon quality of the sterotypes. Looks to me like psychops is experimenting with video soundbites.
As far as being a fatist is concerned, guilty. I don’t fly much anymore but last few trips were like walking through some Fellini hell of truly and seriously fat slobs dressed in their finest neon spandex. The issue is not giving a rat’s @ss about appearance. Stupid and short-sighted.
I assume that’s enough of this little kerfluffle tiff. I’ve got duties to attend to. The snotty transnational Euroweenie that hates all things Yank? I understand. I just don’t see this Fowler character as the poster boy. That kind of sterotypical for the microphone/cameras behavior should be politely ignored – never dignified with a legitimate response.
(My main point was that the woman enjoyed the baiting while he seemed indifferent to it – which is worse? There is no right answer. The mere fact of the question says it all about our “post-modern” world view.)
And that’s enough of that.
Slade #43:
“…Fellini hell of truly and seriouslr fat slobs dressed in their finest neon spandex…”
Truly and seriously nasty rant.
You should have your mouth washed out with Clorox.
Slade #43:
Spel chek notwithstanding, that stuff has no place on a site like this. None.
I’m 5’11″, 182 lbs. Benchpress 240, roadraced motorcycles till age 60; skied since age 10. Who the hell are you with that hatred of large women?
And furthermore …
You’re out of line CB. Way out of line. Stop it.
Right. Outta line. Screw the fat slobs.
I had intended to make a somewhat trite observation about the parallel between the NGO/Durban thing and the Imperial Judiciary in Canada.
The Supreme Court here is appointed essentially in secret and has, as a result, been loaded with the usual progressive suspects.
A judge is supposed to be a clever clerk. Take the facts, filter them through the law and out comes a result; the classic legal syllogism.
Problem is, the facts are now being put through the filter of the progressive mind with the predictable result,legislation from the bench by the new class of Progressive Unaccountables.
One of the women recently appointed had written a paper about the fact that the world had grown so complex it was “unfair to leave the entire burden of lawmaking on the legislature”. (I quote from memory)
When I went to Law School the Canadian Supreme Court was so dull, stodgy and conservative as to put you to sleep trying to read their constitutional stuff.
Ain’t the same any more.
slade – I forgot to mention sexist as well as fatist. I just think it would be a better world if you could get together with the rest of us to kick this supercilious Brit (and his Bambi bimbo wife) in the kneecaps until he goes back to where he came from. We don’t need him here, we don’t want him here, and he brings nothing to the party of making America a better place to live.
Personally I’d rather see a well-fed world with some bulging spandex than a bunch of heroin-chic models staggering down the runway with their knobby spines sticking out and being told *that* is what I should aspire to look like. I think there are *so* many other things to fight about that the truly subjective opinion of who or what is fat is just a dumb thing to disagree over.
Fowler is foul not because he called her fat, but because he came to the United States and spat in the eye of our culture. In that aspect, he’s every bit as much of a terrorist as Mohammad Atta taking advantage of American culture to try to kill us. Fatosity is a side issue to that bottom line, and fat WOMEN in particular is an eye-brow-lifting charge to make.
I’m not sure what this has to do with Durbin, but really – when you see someone waving about a prejudiced red flag like you have done, someone else(s) are bound to charge.
Musashi says:
You can win with a long weapon, and yet you can also win with a short weapon. In short, the Way of the Ichi school is the spirit of winning, whatever the weapon and whatever its size.
I brought up Fowler because I thought he represented the sort of elitist, snobbish, clique that tends to run these NGO’s and have a deep resentment for all things American. I’m sure that the producers of that show coach their contestants to go a little over the top. But the level of insults to this woman’s intelligence, and by proxy, to the intelligence of Americans in flyover country was astounding. Fowler and his ilk were the audience for Obama’s famous “bitter gun clinging religious small town folk” remarks. Usually these types try to hide the depth of their contempt, but sometimes the mask slips, as it did in this case. Just thought it was worth of pointing out.
What Fowler shows is a lack of compassion, and no sense of decency or decorum. I happen to believe that while there may be some truly idealistic and good people in these NGO’s, most sooner or later, end up like Fowler. How much do they truly care for the poor slobs they claim they are trying to help? Or do they just look down on them and feel free to order them around? How much did the communists care for the worker? I have read several news stories about NGO employees raping local girls. How common is that?
I think this is an important point. If the majority of leftist NGO types think that the poor and downtrodden they claim to be trying to help are unintelligent and uncultured then their prescription for the lot of the poor will be to deprive them of freedom, and provide them with the merest level of survival. They might be inclined to set them up in camps where they will be expected to live for decades, being provided just enough sustenance to keep them somewhat quiet and enslaved to their handouts, but not enough to stamp out the sullen resentment their subjects feel. Oh wait… that sounds familiar….
elby
The problem with that thesis is that – my view of course – the antagonism expressed in that video is essentially a gender divide and not a sovereign divide. And lest you object, I remind you of whiskey’s women and the generally accepted thesis that men test out higher in IQ than women (a phenomenon not unnoticed by Summers). We’re on very dicey ground here and I personally prefer the high ground over Jerry Springer.**
**Just as an irrelevant sidenote, Jerry Springer started his career in public TV as a serious contender to Phil Donahue. I may be the only person who remembers his first three (?) shows. The guy was seriously smart. Then the ratings came in. Bye bye Phil.
– FDA Approves Depressant Drug For The Annoyingly Cheerful –
Obama announces plans to weatherize nation’s borders to cut energy cost.
No, it seems to me that it was an elitist/common man divide. Furthermore, there was no need for Fowler to insult the woman continuously, for sport. It shows a meanness that is very revealing. You have not answered my point that this is how the elite view the common man (us), and how that point of view leads in short order to loss of freedom for the common man (us).
Fowler quotes from the show: “you can read? I didn’t know you could read.”
“Agenda? That’s a very big word for you.”
“You speak two languages, broken English and redneck.”
“I earn more in a day than you do in a year.”
I am sure that Fowler’s friends probably find him a warm and witty man, and fun to be around. But we are not judged by how we treat our equals or betters, but how we treat those below us. How we treat the waiter or the cleaning lady, or a woman who comes to stay in your house for a week or two.
The premise of the show is to take two families that are opposites and swap the wives. Neat freaks swap with slobs. Exercise fanitics with couch potatoes. The guest wife lives according to the host family’s ways for a week and then the host family must live according to the guest wives rules for a week. It makes for some drama as there is resistance, angry outbursts, and tears. But in the end each family admits to having learned a thing or two. The slobs start picking up after themselves and the neat freaks ease up a little. But the Fowler family learned nothing from their guest wife. And what was she trying to teach them? To spend more time with their kids and not drive them so hard. I find it interesting that the liberal elite cannot, will not, learn anything from someone just because that person is a middle class average American.
A revealing window into the mind of the liberal elites. The cannot and will not learn from those who are from certain regions of the country, did not go to the right schools, don’t spend hours a day on their appearance, and speak with a different accent.
Is this the mindset of every liberal person? NO. But I believe it is the mindset of George Soros, Maurice Strong and many others like them. The ones in charge hate us bitter clingers.
Fowler quotes from the show: “you can read? I didn’t know you could read.”
“Agenda? That’s a very big word for you.”
“You speak two languages, broken English and redneck.”
“I earn more in a day than you do in a year.”
You see grand ideological divide.
I see ignorant DVD script.
It’s just not serious.
And I’m done.
You can question whether Fowler put on an act for a trite show. But do you question whether there are liberal elites with his worldview? I don’t. I think they are rife in academia, government, NGO’s and the media. I think it strikes to the heart of the leftist/conservative ideological divide. It is fundamentally how we view other people.
I can understand that a highly intelligent person might find the company of an uneducated average person tiresome. I have a degree in mathematics and physics and have done graduate level work in neuroscience. But I have spent most of my life dealing with those who haven’t the slightest clue about these high level subjects. Sure, its frustrating that nobody gets my math jokes. “That’s not a lemma, its a dilemma.” Ha Ha. Okay, so my math jokes are lame and the cognitively average aren’t missing anything. But I can have a great conversation with all sorts of people. I learn a lot from waiters, bus drivers and janitors.
This is the fundamentally American point of view: that the ordinary folk have dignity and have inalienable rights. That they don’t need to be told what to do. That they can figure out life for themselves, and no, the results won’t always be perfect. The fat woman with bad skin and poor taste in clothes is a human being. Not perfect, but none of us are. Intelligence and beauty are overrated anyway. You might not want invite her to any of your parties, but you would treat her decently wouldn’t you? You would think that she has a right to her own views, tastes and yes, her own failures, wouldn’t you?
Years ago, for a few months, I worked as a cashier at WalMart. Once I was taking too long to give change to a man and he loudly and obnoxiously counted it out for me. He assumed I was inadequate for the job because of my blue smock. Wrong assumption, and what does that say about the level of discernment, intelligence and decency of that sneering customer? We can all learn things from the average Joe. And I don’t mean PhD’s driving taxies either.
Sure, I have plumbed the depths of quantum mechanics, been thrilled by abstract algebra(okay, I’m weird) and mapped out neural networks. But I am no better than the plumbers, waiters and truck drivers. That is the quintessentially American world view. This is in stark contrast to the elitist, snobbish, European view that sneers at ‘bourgesois values’ and has a ready insult for those beneath their social status. And thinks that those ordinary folk need to be ordered about by their betters.
slade – do you have an explanation for the foul children repeating what they’ve been taught? Mouthing what they’ve heard Bimbo Mommy and Brit Daddy saying over the kitchen table in the morning? Did the “producers” somehow arrange for the kids to be brainwashed enough to “play along”, too?
You said a seriously stupid thing and you’ve been frantically backpedalling ever since. Once you start to hide behind Jerry Springer — comparing the rest of us to Springer’s audience — then you’re showing the same spiteful snide towards American flyover country as this British bozo.
You can either fess up to being an egocentric male chauvenist pig yourself, and promise to try to reform, or allow the rest of us to understand that about you and in the future remember it’s your mindset as we read your comments on other issues.
Q: What’s purple and commutes?
A: An Abelian grape.
#56 elby
That was a good post; I agree and it gives me hope that lot’s of Americans think like that.
BUDDHA told this parable: A traveler, fleeing a tiger who was
chasing him, ran till he came to the edge of a cliff. There he
caught hold of a thick vine, and swung himself over the edge.
Above him the tiger snarled. Below him he heard another snarl, and
behold, there was another tiger, peering up at him. The vine
suspended him midway between two tigers.
Two mice, a white mouse and a black mouse, began to gnaw at the
vine. He could see they were quickly eating it through. Then in
front of him on the cliffside he saw a luscious bunch of grapes.
Holding onto the vine with one hand, he reached and picked a grape
with the other.
How delicious!
– The Vision of the Anointed -
Self-Congratulation as a Basis for Social Policy
Thomas Sowell
From Publishers Weekly
In this broadside against the received wisdom of America’s elite liberal intelligentsia, noted conservative Sowell, a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution, offers some strenuous arguments as well as fuzzy generalizations. Thus, his attacks on the war on poverty, sex education and criminal justice policies forged in the 1960s counter some slippery rhetoric by their defenders, yet his suggestion that these policies exacerbated things is questionable. Sowell deconstructs how statistics can be distorted to prove assumptions (that lack of prenatal care is the cause of black infant mortality) and gleefully skewers “Teflon prophets” such as John Kenneth Galbraith (who said that big companies are immune from the market) and Paul Ehrlich (who said starvation loomed).
While “the anointed” favor explanations that exempt individuals from personal responsibility and seek painless solutions, those with the “tragic vision” see policies as trade-offs. Sowell scores his targets for disdaining their opponents, but this book also invokes caricature-these days, many of “the anointed” are less unreconstructed than he assumes.
—
Obama, Pelosi, and company are doing a fine job of proving just how wrong Publisher’s Weekly is!
Nancy Lobotamy visits Pope.
Headline:
Dope Meets Pope
Pope says “Nope”
- Miller Caller
You said a seriously stupid thing and you’ve been frantically backpedalling ever since. NahnCee
No and no. I don’t do “backpedal”.
But that is the single dumbest post you have ever written.
Shut up.
Elby – you are pious and condescending. And there is no way I can explain it to you but it has something to do with respect for people who have personal pride, which neither player in that video displayed, and you aren’t within spitting distance of it.
Slade, you haven’t answered any of my points. Do you or do you not find that the left in this country stoops to mean viscious personal attacks on their opponents intelligence, education, or culture? Do you or do you not think that this tendency leads to a statist totalitatrian mindset that would gleefully deprive the masses of their freedom?
The left’s main attacks against the right are based on our supposed stupidity. For how long was Bush called a chimp, and the village idiot? Sarah Palin was raked over the same coals, as a stupid bumpkin who went to third rate state schools. This has been going on and on for years. The left has an intelligence fetish, for sure. Their arguements rapidly descend to the ad hominem. They are saying, loudly and clearly, ‘dont’t listen to the uncultured, uneducated stupid bumpkins from podunk little towns. Listen to us, follow us, do as we say, because we are smart, cool, eat the right things, went to the right schools, travel internationally, and are just better than you!” I mean Slade, have you missed that entire meme?
I’m not the only one at BC who calls into question the rank elitism of the left. I just thought that fellow was a particularly vile specimen of it.
RE Backpedaling: I made the point twice that the woman’s psychological profile was equally if not more suspect than the man’s because she enjoyed the baiting game, in fact actively played to the camera, whereas he seemed indifferent to it, which seemed to reflect a less than scintillating penumbra surrounding post-modern culture that led to the Springer comments. In my world that’s called logical thinking. Not readily available to a self-righteous sack of seaweed.
And by elby’s standard, one would have to give a pass to any sack of sh^t walking down the street as long as s/he was average, common, and uneducated. Can’t be – you know – elitist – or anything – like having standards. But the standards that the superior, rare, and educated person applies to his own life need not apply elsewhere. In my world that’s elitism writ large.
The snotty transnational Euroweenie that hates all things Yank? I understand. I just don’t see this Fowler character as the poster boy. That kind of sterotypical for the microphone/cameras behavior should be politely ignored – never dignified with a legitimate response.
elby – I acknowledged the stereotype in @44 above. I don’t disagree with the “meme” – I just don’t find it particularly compelling nor would I elevate what is essentially bad TV into an ideological stormgate. I’m repeating myself for the last time – such rhetorical tricks marginalize the position of the right. If you’re not stupid, then there’s a very simple solution that doesn’t involve Fowler or his swapped wife – don’t act like it.
And really this is very very trite.
“And by elby’s standard, one would have to give a pass to any sack of sh^t walking down the street as long as s/he was average, common, and uneducated.”
I posit that the uneducated sacks of sh*t have done far far less harm to the world than those “superior, rare and educated” people.
While I would tend to come down more on the Elby/Nahn-cee side of this “debate”, there seems to be some serious confusion on both sides here as to the actual nature of so-called “reality” TV.
NahnCee, elby – Give it a rest already. Why do you even watch this guy? And exactly who else do you imagine his audience is?
And why so personal? (and over what, I might add – a lousy TV show)
~ “You can either fess up to being an egocentric male chauvenist pig yourself, and promise to try to reform, or allow the rest of us to understand that about you and in the future remember it’s your mindset as we read your comments on other issues.”
Oh please. Get a grip on yourself. You don’t speak for everyone.