Blogger Mencius notices something extraordinary: We find among the most perspicacious American commentators something extraordinary, an awareness of reality which approaches actual moral consciousness. The power conservatives at Powerline, for instance, write:Hillary Clinton "knifed Mubarrak in the back" (sic), agreed, but is she an arsonist? Or is she a Nietzschean heroine kicking down a dying man and embracing inevitable change?My guess is that Arab dictatorships, like autocracies elsewhere, will prove surprisingly brittle once they are challenged. What the current unrest will lead to is anyone's guess, but there is no reason to think that more popular input will lead to friendlier regimes. Instead, we may see more Irans and Gazas. Be that as it may, there is a certain relief in seeing the dam finally break and the ossified, archaic, anti-free enterprise ruling elites of the Arab world come tumbling down.Here is the true arsonist's logic, approaching real mens rea - almost, but not quite, a conscience.
Mens rea is awareness that an action would result in death. The dancing star quote is from Friedrich Nietzsche.
PS: I didnt find Mencius's quote in Powerline, maybe they deleted it. Instead, I found intelligent political comment:
An Egyptian government in which the key players are the Muslim Brotherhood and El Baradei would be a terrible development for us; for Egypt, perhaps a catastrophic one. Some are now arguing that the MB is a relatively benign force to which we should not be opposed. Andy McCarthy explains in detail why we should fear the Muslim Brotherhood--the organization that has spawned most of today's terrorist groups--but really, all you need to know is the Brotherhood's motto:To end and start my working day, a quote from the local press:
Allah is our objective, the Prophet is our leader, the Koran is our law, Jihad is our way, and dying in the way of Allah is our highest hope. Allahu akbar!
That pretty well sums it up.
El Baradei, meanwhile, has a long history of anti-American activism. He was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize, which is often repeated in the press as though it were a good thing. As is so often the case in recent years, El Baradei's prize was a reward for sticking his finger in America's eye... the Norwegian Parlament's Nobel Peace Prize has become a badge of infamy...
התגובה האמריקנית למהומות במצרים הוכיחה כי לוושינגטון אין בעיה להתנער גם מבת ברית ותיקה כמו קהיר. בקרוב אצלנו?Translation: The American reaction to the riots in Egypt proves that Washington has no difficulty in shaking off a longtime ally like Cairo. Are we the next in line?
14 comments:
Mencius sounds like a schizophrenic - I'm not quite sure what the hell he's talking about. We all know that whoever comes next is not likely to be good for America. Dictators sow the ground with salt and nothing fertile springs from it after they are gone. But still, Mubarrak is beyond saving, probably. Mencius's analogies are all messed up - the US doesn't want to burn Egypt down - the Egyptians are doing this themselves and the US doesn't have a fire hose that is long enough to reach so we can only watch the fires burn on CNN and wish them good luck which we know they aren't probably going to get. Not only is the "church" made of wood, but the last dictator has been pouring gasoline on the floor so all it takes is a stray match, a vegetable vendor, to set the thing ablaze - not our fault, except maybe for enabling the dictator for far too long.
K
K
Mencius talks about comentators's "relief in seeing the dam finally break and the ossified, archaic, etc.", which proves their guilty mind. He didnt say Ms Clinton caused the riots, he says that she knifed a friend in need.
The Israelis should keep their nerves as by the cunning of history this may turn out be to Israel's benefit. The way I see it the starving and jobless Arab masses are not going to win wars with the one country that has the ability to ride out the coming resource wars. A lot of the street cachet that Hamas and the MB have is due to their free food and medical programmes. But the money for this comes from the Saudis and the Gulf Arabs who do not wish to see Mubarak go. This accounts for the relative aimlessness of the revolution so far. The MB are much better at talking bullshit than delivering on anything practical. The cynic in me says that dictators like Mubarak was the best that Arabs are capable of. Anything else is downhill. Spengler has put it much than I can.
The 'wisdom' of Mencius is like the profundity one experiences when drinking. It comes from getting stoned.
As for shaking off an ally, Obama has so far proved better than I expected - he is not REALLY an African-American in the traditional Jesse Jackson / anti-Semitic sense, he just plays one on TV. He is surrounded by Jews as his most trusted advisors.
I just read a book written by someone who left Cuba as a little boy - he describes the exact same process - his upper class family so anxious to get rid of the dictator Batista and then when Castro comes he is 1000 times worse and they flee for their lives, all material goods left behind. But what does this mean? That we should therefore keep dictators in place forever? Support them no matter what, even after their people say, "no mas"?
K
It means that social armony and stability is far better than everything. That is the message of the Chinese Communist Party and it is true. I am starting to be a conservative.
...or a Chinese Communist?
I understand and even sympathize somewhat. The Chinese show that evolution is possible - this is the same Party that killed millions and now they have become somewhat better, arguably even good rulers (if economic success is the yardstick) without the pain of yet another revolution.
My father, having experienced instability first hand, was also very wary of regime change. He always quoted the Biblical passage about the new king who knew not Joseph in his Yiddish accented Hebrew. His name was Joseph too so he took it personally. As Mencius says, we have seen this movie before - the glow on the horizon is not the bright shining future but the bonfire that will consume all.
But some revolutions have good outcomes - think of the American revolution or the Haganah pushing the British out of Palestine, of Moses leading the Jews out of Egypt. If revolution is never permissible, then no progress is possible and the N. Koreans must suffer forever under the rule of the Kim family and we would still be making bricks for the Pharoah. I think the American founding fathers (borrowing from Locke) had it right - revolution is a natural right of man but, because of the severe risks involved, is to be undertaken only in the most severe circumstances, when the ruler has broken his pact with his people to protect and serve them - as the Chinese say, when he has lost the mandate of Heaven. It's like a risky surgical operation that one only undertakes because the current situation is unbearable and should not be done without the most serious and careful deliberation. The opinions either way of well (and ill) wishing friends and bystanders should have little weight in such decisions because they will not pay the price for an unfavorable outcome. It is for the Egyptian people to decide if Mubarrak falls in the category of the unbearable but then again Egyptian mobs are not known for their careful consideration.
K
Re: Powerline - I like and respect this blog, but keep in mind that they are very conservative so that anyone to the left of say Dick Cheney is anathema to them. So naturally they do not like Baradei. But there is a big difference between crazy Islamists like the MB and a Westernized liberal like el Baradei. It is not right to put them both in the same boat.
If we take it as a given (for the sake of argument, but I happen to believe it is true) that Mubarrak is toast, then the US should be looking to support (keeping in mind that the open blessing of the US may be more of a curse than a help) modernizing pro-Western forces in Egypt. The only thing that would satisfy Powerline is if they made Avigdor Lieberman their president and that's not going to happen. so we should be looking for the best we can get and we could do a lot worse than el Baradei. Not that el Baradei has the cojones to take and keep power - at best he is like a Kerensky.
K
K
Remind me how long Kerensky lasted and what came after him?
I think you know already. BTW, in the movie "Reds" the part of Kerensky was played by Kerensky's grandson. Kerensky himself outlived Lenin by almost half a century.
K
Yes, Kerensky's only problem was finding a cemetery that would agree to bury him.
IHTG - Was he a Reform Jew?
The Orthodox Church blamed him for overthrowing the Czar and paving the way for Godless Marxism. Whatever comes next in Egypt it will not be Godless - Arab Socialism is a spent force.
K
Islamism without the bread and butter provided by unearned oil, jizya and Western guilt is no great shakes either, as the Egyptians will learn in due time.
Post a Comment