Politics As Such
John Tester took on Conrad Burns in an hour long debate this morning and handled him quite well. Conrad said, and I quote "goodness gracious sakes alive" on five separate occasions. He is less coherant than George Bush and he has beady eyes and a bad haircut. He's got nothing but folksy -republican-speak-cliches and he's done. Tester has to pander to the tighter border, traditional marriage, anti-flag burning "moderates"of Montana but the Spectacle imposes certain demands.
Im thinking of the relation between American political exceptionalism and Christian exceptionalism, how the amalgamation of the two has led us into what I believe to be a deep, existential, imperial crisis. David Rieff, in his Nation review of Elizabeth Borgwardt's A New Deal For The World and Michael Mandelbaums The Case For Goliath states this simple truth:"What liberal idealists and neoconservatives share is a view that the United States has a mission to reshape the world in it's image." This same theme is echoed by the religious right in their claims that God holds America in some special favor. The proof? Look at all the cool shit we got, look at all the power we got, He must love us best.
Here's a little thought experiment. Say black Africans had colonized North America, or anybody for that matter, Chinese or Peruvians. They instead of white Europeans had stumbled on a continent incredibly rich in natural resources, surrounded by water, and inhabited by a few natives poorly armed and unable to defend their territory. How much wealth might they have been able to extract in a short period of time,(especially if they had imported slaves to do the back breaking labor) how much power would they have ended up with after Europe decimated itself with catastrophic War? Would God have shed his Grace on them? Or is it just Christians so blessedly empowered?
So what doth I protest, some thinks a bit to much? Is it the idea of one set having a "mission" to change the rest? (after all, Im a revolutionary socialist with my own agenda) or is it the "image" with which I find disfavor ? Sure I want to change the world but reject the idea of vangaurdism in all it's forms, missionary , imperial, and otherwise.
posted by troutsky @ 7:14 PM
10 comments
10 Comments:
He is less coherant than George Bush and he has beady eyes and a bad haircut.
To be fair, Tester ain't exactly a walking advertisement for great barbering either. And, at least in the photos on his web site, he's kind of squinty-eyed. Thankfully, this is a U.S. Senate race, and not the Miss Montana contest -- though Tester would still be my pick in either competition!
P.S. I saw that Raise Montana gathered enough signatures to put the minimum raise increase on the ballot. Good work!
Tester is a big hero at Daily Kos.
The ones with the least mold the world in my image, is the old line conservatives. They want a fence around this country.
To me vanguard is a neutral term.
I watched a little of that on Cspan. Burns reminds me of this old farmer I used to work for. Scary
I still don't see the problem with defending one's borders. Open borders are suicidal, especially when one lives in "God's country"--people sure do like coming here.
This same theme is echoed by the religious right in their claims that God holds America in some special favor. The proof? Look at all the cool shit we got, look at all the power we got, He must love us best.
I get a kick out of this. The "City of God" is not of this world; the New Testament did away with the "people set apart" notion of the Old; and the book of Job discredited the idea that people who have nice stuff are loved by God and vice versa.
Still, I don't think anyone else could have done what the good old white Christians did with America. Call it a hunch, but I think the fact that parts Africa is still practicing slavery and female circumcision yet exists gives credence to the hypothesis that Africa would not have given us the internet.
More unpleasantly, blacks in Africa have an average IQ of 15-30 points lower than whites. I don't know why this may be, but it is a fact. Take this one up with God; I've no answers.
"Call it a hunch, but I think the fact that parts Africa is still practicing slavery and female circumcision yet exists gives credence to the hypothesis that Africa would not have given us the internet."
Well...we have people who reject Darwin in favor of the Virgin Mary, and we got the Internet going, so? Your supposition is not even a hunch - it's plain prejudice. You have absolutely no way of even planning a test to evaluate your conjecture.
"More unpleasantly, blacks in Africa have an average IQ of 15-30 points lower than whites. I don't know why this may be, but it is a fact. Take this one up with God; I've no answers."
C'mon. Is their IQ lower than whites' in Africa, or whites here? And who cares? What does IQ measure? It measures the presences of a quality we call intelligence as we conceive of it here and now. Pygmies score low on IQ tests, but they have lots of intelligence necessary for their environment. And why think that intelligence CAN be measured in this way? I guess you like to read Charles Murray.
As for God, I've never gotten any answers from he/she/it.
Testers barber has become a huge deal in this election,huge. This is not a good thing.Yet symbolic in some way I can't quite get a grip on.
Minimum wage might be the wedge for this coming election,speaks right to the heart.
Renegade, maybe it is the terminology itself which is an issue ,like so much linguistically these days.I just finished reading a powerful argument against vanguard as it relates to the jihadist mindset.[must read: Afflicted Powers by the Retort Collective]
"I don't think anyone but white Christians could have done with this country.." Are we talking about the genocide and slavery along with those great IQs? How good is this IQ data anyway? Conrad Burns definately brings our racial average down.Are you suggesting a wall around Montana? Keep them pesky canucks outa here.
Well...we have people who reject Darwin in favor of the Virgin Mary, and we got the Internet going, so? Your supposition is not even a hunch - it's plain prejudice. You have absolutely no way of even planning a test to evaluate your conjecture.
If I had to choose, I'd reject Darwin in favor of the Virgin Mary, although I'd rather keep selective thoughts from the former while keeping the latter as my Holy Mother.
I'm merely suggesting that the tremendous amount of acheivement produced by the Western world and the embarrasing absence of something similar by Africans cannot simply be dismissed. Christianity has been an influential force in human history, compelling men to climb to new heights.
C'mon. Is their IQ lower than whites' in Africa, or whites here? And who cares? What does IQ measure? It measures the presences of a quality we call intelligence as we conceive of it here and now. Pygmies score low on IQ tests, but they have lots of intelligence necessary for their environment. And why think that intelligence CAN be measured in this way? I guess you like to read Charles Murray.
It's only one other possible explanation for the discrepency between the two civilizations. I think it's pertinent to the conversation, especially in light of the barbarism of much of Africa.
Are we talking about the genocide and slavery along with those great IQs?
Africans sold their brethren to whites as slaves. Moreover, white Christians ended slavery whereas some Africans still practice it. Further, genocide continues on that continent.
Genocide still exists in the U.S. as well. We have just dressed it up better so it isn't as obvious. How many are living in poverty in this country? What do we do to eliminate it - try to cut welfare programs. The U.S. is also one of the largest slave holders to currently exist. Sure there aren't slaves on plantations anymore, but we own them nonetheless. Through the IMF and WTO this country enslaves many countries, crushing them with debt. Some might argue that we are forgiving their debt, but that comes with stipulations like cutting their social programs. Canceling debt does nothing to help solve the problems of how countries accumulated the debts to begin with. This is neo-slavery.
As for the Wiser Man's comments on the Western World's achievements and Africa's ostensible lack there-of; I would point out that those new heights we have climbed to have also brought with them enormous problems - global warming and the such. Can we fix these sorts of problems with our elevated IQs or merely articulate an eloquent reason for avoiding said problems. Finally, Tester's hair might not be what we should focus on, but it certainly shatters some of the typical stereotypes. He phsyically appears to be your stereotypical conservative farmer. When I look at the guy I immediately think of a no non-sense dude. This sense of identity really throws off the right wingers who have traditionally framed themselves as strong and like to portray the progressives as patsies.
" Say black Africans... instead of white Europeans had stumbled on a continent incredibly rich in natural resources, surrounded by water, and inhabited by a few natives poorly armed and unable to defend their territory."
Umm... they did. It's called "Africa". They never developed the technology or institutions to turn the Earth's most resource-rich continent into a wealthy, modern society, why would you think they would get anywhere with the second most resource-rich continent?
Europeans did not get rich and powerful by colonizing the world- they expanded across the world because they were rich and powerful. When Columbus reached the Indies, bear in mind the crucial thing here- he was coming from a nation that was *already* far wealthier and far more powerful than the Arawaks could imagine.
So what you really meant to say was "Say black Africans had developed the same level of civilization and technology as Europeans..." But you see, this begs the question, WHY did they not? What unique thing enabled Europeans to do this?
Ben
John,
To claim that genocide still exists within the U.S. is to water down the word so substantially as to devoid it of any meaning, unless you're willing to discuss the abortion holocaust, in which case we would agree.
Moreover, to mention poverty within America is all but a non-sequiter. Yes, there are poor people in this country, and no, I don't deal with the "poor" within the confines of my admitedly smug suburban existence. But a quick look at, say, Guatemala, makes our poor look wealthy by comparison.
Of course, I'm guessing that you would say that this is our fault, too. I'm skeptical of capitalism, but it has brought benefits, and not just to the wealthy. Were it not for capitalism, we wouldn't have money in government coffers with which we could debate the morality and merits of not spending on welfare.
Post a Comment
<< Home