Category Archives: America

Subsidizing “Freedom” for the Arab Street

America, Democracy, Foreign Aid, Foreign Policy, Government, Islam, Middle East, Military

“We are not part of the picture” [in Libya], Ehud Barack told Greta van Susteren, who recounted to him the familiar war-for-Israel-and-oil accusations circulating in some Arab quarters vis-a-vis the offensive in Libya. This, even as the US commits itself to furthering the whims of the seething Arab Street—whoever it comprises, wherever it is, and whatever it wants. American warriors, in arms and in armchairs, seem to believe that repeating the word “rebel” enough times will transform the shady ragtag factions we are fighting for as a princess’s kiss transforms a toad.

Ehud Barack, Israel’s Minister of Defense and Deputy Prime Minister (bio information), has politely applauded NATO and the US for rescuing the Libyans, but he also expresses a conscious thought about the feel-good operation, the kind of thought that will never be floated stateside:

“It’s up to the Arab people to struggle for their rights; to change regime or impose corrections and new procedures in their internal political life.”

My sentiments exactly:

If indeed we’re subsidizing “freedom” for [the Libyans] and are fighting their battles—then we’ve also increased their impotence and diminished their initiative. Subsidize individuals because you believe they are helpless—and you’ll get more learned helplessness.

Besides, what are these people? Wards of the American state? Whatever happened to fighting your own revolutions?

UPDATE II: ‘Un-American Revolutions’ (Un-American America)

America, Democracy, Founding Fathers, History, Islam, Liberty, Middle East, Nationhood, Political Philosophy

Having grown up in the Middle East, and lived through a war or two, I’m not optimistic about the outcomes of a democratic revolution in the region. I said as much in “Media’s Sickening Sentimentality On Egypt” (HERE). That’s why I mocked (in 2005) the continual comparisons Bush and his gang used to make between “the carnage in Iraq and the constitutional cramps of early America; between the feuding Mohammedans and the followers of John Locke and Baron de Montesquieu.”

Niall Ferguson, writing in Newsweek, also thinks that the slobbering will soon give way to an uneasy silence:

“Time and again, Americans have hailed revolutions, only to fall strangely silent as those same revolutions proceeded to devour not only their own children but many other people’s too. In each case the body count was in the millions.

So as you watch revolution sweeping through the Arab world (and potentially beyond), remember these three things about non-American revolutions:

* They take years to unfold. It may have seemed like glad confident morning in 1789, 1917, and 1949. Four years later it was darkness at noon.

* They begin by challenging an existing political order, but the more violence is needed to achieve that end, the more the initiative passes to men of violence—Robespierre, Stalin, and the supremely callous Mao himself.

* Because neighboring countries feel challenged by the revolution, internal violence is soon followed by external violence, either because the revolution is genuinely threatened by foreigners (as in the French and Russian cases) or because it suits the revolutionaries to blame an external threat for domestic problems (as when China intervened in the Korean War).

To which an American might reply: yes, but was all this not true of our revolution too? …”

Read “Un-American Revolutions.”

UPDATE I (Mar. 6): Regular readers should know better than to attribute my quoting of Ferguson to an ideological affinity for his neoconservatism. Hell, Myron, as a man with a particularly critical and curious mind, don’t you get sick of tinny ideologues who mouth-off opinion without reference to the facts of history? I like deductions that cleave to facts. Ferguson is a good source of information. The article is cited for its juxtaposition of the American and The Other Revolutions. These contrasts demand Derb-worthy pessimism, not silly, happy faces. A lot of people refuse to ever cast aspersions on Thomas Jefferson’s blind spot: France. As much as I revere him, Jefferson was somewhat enamored of the “Revolution in France,” Edmund Burke’s precise, and derisive, characterization.

UPDATE II (Mar. 7): UN-AMERICAN AMERICA. Right you are Nebojsa. Vox writes: “Americans themselves do not even enjoy the democratic freedoms which their leaders are claiming to support elsewhere.” Which is exactly the point I belabored in “Frankly, My Dear Egyptians, I Don’t Give a Damn,” over a month ago:

“The ‘planners’ society’ I inhabit is ‘dominated by a bureaucratic elite.’ This unnatural elite, ‘manages its people’s principal concerns, directs their industry, regulates the descent of property, and subdivides their inheritances. … Thus it every day renders the exercise of the free agency of man less useful and less frequent.'”

“What remains of the rights to property and self-ownership in the soft tyranny that is the USA is regulated and taxed to the hilt. When they travel, Americans are routinely patted down, and irradiated with photons like meat in a packaging plant. In contravention of their naturally licit rights, many thousands of my compatriots languish in prisons for ingesting unapproved substances, or for violating information socialism laws (so-called insider trading infractions). Others are hounded by democratically elected despots for daring to form militia (as many Egyptians have recently done) in order to repel the trespassers who traipse across their homesteads on our country’s Southern border, killing their cattle and imperiling their kin.”

BESIDES:

“More often than not, Americans who yearn for the freedoms their forbears bequeathed to them are labeled demented and dangerous. I’ve yet to hear liberty deprived peoples the world over stand-up for the tea-party patriots. When they do — I’ll gladly galvanize on their behalf.”

BASICALLY, when Egyptians and Libyans stand up for my tea-party rights, I’ll love them and their freedoms back.

UPDATE II: Egypt In Economic Context (‘A Wave of Global Inflation’)

America, Economy, Foreign Aid, Foreign Policy, Inflation, Middle East, Neoconservatism, Republicans

Speaking of boobs (http://barelyablog.com/?p=33995), Dana Perino, the Heidi Klum of the commentariat, wishes Iraq on the Egyptians. Perino, who was once a spokesperson to Bush, a man who was barely able to speak, prattled to a reserved Megyn Kelly on Fox News about the upheaval in Egypt.

Mentioning her boss’ achievements in Iraq made Ms. Mindless glow with pride. She pointed out that the bliss in Baghdad was brought about in response to the democratic urges of the Iraqis—yes, this was murder with majority approval, an American majority (http://www.ilanamercer.com/phprunner/public_article_list_view.php?editid1=363.) Perino also implied that glorious Iraq is a product of a well-thought out philosophy.

Airheads aside, serious analysts—the kind who also live in the region or visit it on occasion—say Iraq “is looking a lot like Lebanon,” violent and balkanized beyond repair. Its few remaining Christians are being systematically exterminated.

Perino gave another shout-out of sorts to Iranian interests. Without being asked, she dredged up the Gaza-strip elections her boss had agitated for and got, back in the day. If you recall, those gave us Hamas.

Another day, another dullard.

Even John Bolton, who’ll take any position in opposition to Obama’s less bellicose foreign policy, seemed to agree with the restraint of the State Department’s response to the riots roiling Egypt.

Contrast Bolton’s unusual retrain with the American Enterprise Institute’s formulaic demand that “President Obama’s administration … assert the U.S. government’s role as the preeminent defender of freedom in the world. … Now is not the time for equivocation.”

Ditto the Weekly Standard. The folks there hanker after a time “when the Bush White House was feeling its oats with victories for the freedom agenda in Iraq and then Lebanon.”

That’s the neoconservative parallel universe for you.

In response to Bush pressure, “Mubarak pushed back with the 2005 parliamentary elections when he awarded the Muslim Brotherhood some 20 percent of the seats—if you want democracy, the Egyptian president seemed to be warning the White House, I’ll stick Osama bin Laden’s friends in parliament.”

Justin Raimondo, at Antiwar.com (for which I once wrote a bi-weekly column), puts “the revolutionary wave now sweeping the world” in the context of catastrophic economic policies and attendant realities. This wave will not spare the US, despite “the myth of ‘American exceptionalism,’ which supposedly anoints us with a special destiny and gives us the right to order the world according to our uniquely acquired position of preeminence.”

Coming to a neighborhood near you?

UPDATE I: You bet. In Egypt, “The government must approve the formation of political parties, effectively assuring its monopoly on political power.” (Via Infoplease.com ) More to the point: “the country’s inefficient state-run industries, its bloated public sector, and its large military investments resulted in inflation, unemployment, a severe trade deficit, and heavy public debt.”

State-caused poverty and the attendant lack of opportunities are likely the catalysts that have sent Egyptians into the streets.

The emphasis, in the US, exclusively on politics and on Egypt’s democracy deficit is myopic. Nevertheless, this focus allows DC’s chattering classes to forget that we too, albeit to a lesser extent, are over-leveraged. Our moocher and looter classes might also riot once they can no longer live out the life to which they are accustomed.

UPDATE II (Jan. 29): “A Wave of Global Inflation” is the tipping point for Egypt. Jerry Bowyer, author of “Free Market Capitalist’s Survival Guide,” agrees about the role of inflation and the attendant spike in the prices of basic necessities in the crisis in Egypt.

UPDATE III: Why Do WASP Societies Wither? South Africa As A Case Study

America, Foreign Policy, Israel, Multiculturalism, Nationhood, Political Correctness, South-Africa, The West

“Why Do WASP Societies Wither? South Africa As A Case Study” was the title of my address to the 3rd Annual Meeting of the HL Mencken Club, on October 23, 2010. It is now up on VDARE.COM. (http://www.vdare.com/mercer/110126_south_africa.htm) Here is an excerpt:

“… Often called ‘The White Tribe of Africa’, Afrikaners are perhaps the toughest tribe in Africa. They had a 350-year history on the Continent—as long as their American cousins have been in North America. Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, creator of the Sherlock Holmes character, dubbed the modern Boer ‘the most formidable antagonist who ever crossed the path of Imperial Britain.’

So why is it that the Afrikaners, unlike their Israeli allies, failed to endure as a nation-state? Why did the modern Boer burn bright for a relatively short while, and then, despite superior military prowess, simply, as Hermann Giliomee put it in a 1997 journal article, ‘surrender without defeat’?

I earlier mentioned General Viljoen, the former Chief of the South African Defense Force. ‘You and I and our men can take this country in an afternoon’, Viljoen famously said to the Army Chief, General George Meiring, as President De Klerk was preparing to cave into ANC demands, forgoing all checks and balances for South Africa’s Boer, British and Zulu minorities.

Why on earth did the formidable SADF capitulate to Mandela’s ragtag ANC? And the very same people, in the very same spirit, went on to dismantle the six nuclear devices they had built at Pelindaba, west of Pretoria.

Why did the Afrikaner give up his birthright for a mess of pottage?

Since it all makes so little sense, my conclusions are more philosophical than factual” …

The complete address, “Why Do WASP Societies Wither? South Africa As A Case Study,” is now on VDARE.COM.

UPDATE I (Jan. 27): To “Sioux”: This address is hardly about race. Only crazy, race-obsessed people would construe it thus.

UPDATE II: JIM was not man enough to post his comment to the blog, so I will do it for him. It’s the “nudge nudge, wink wink” “Jewy” angle I’ve come to expect:

“Why no mention of Slovo and his handiwork behind the scenes that led to the collapse of SA? LOL, no need to answer that one.”

Joe Slovo is mentioned in the actual book with derision. There are many other culprits one doesn’t mention in an address lasting half an hour, and no allotted Q & A time.

“The Characters” chosen for the address were ones that inspired me; the “Culprits” selected comport with an analysis that focused on major, international movers-and-shakers that brought South Africa to it political knees. This reader implies that because I’m Jewish, I chose not to focus my address on a relatively minor figure in the grand scheme of things.

UPDATE III: From my address: “… as President De Klerk was preparing to cave into ANC demands, forgoing all checks and balances for South Africa’s Boer, British and Zulu minorities … ” For the idiots and ignoramuses who are blinded by race and ignorant of the South African landscape: who do the “Freepers,” who removed this address from their generally tedious threads, think the aforementioned Zulus are? Whites? One of my heroes (“Characters”) in this address is the Zulu chief Dr. Mangosuthu Gatsha Buthelezi, a conservative gentleman who wanted—and deserved—self-determination for his people. He got the deracinated communists of the ANC to call his lords and masters!