Wednesday, May 24, 2006
Washed Away
Some libertarians are so committed to their vision of a society of atomistic individuals that they go far beyond calls for a minimal state, or even the abolition of the state. They sink into a something very near hatred for the society in which they were raised, its customs, language and symbols become anathema to them. As example.
What underlies this sanctimonious campaign on behalf of learning English has very little to do with immigrants respecting the language and culture of the lands to which they are moving. It has more to do with maintaining the collective political and social identity that is rapidly collapsing throughout America and Europe. The world is becoming decentralized, and nothing reflects this more than the variety of languages with which people speak to one another in society. The idea that such processes can be resisted by forcing everyone to speak in one tongue is, like the "war on terror," an expression of efforts to rebuild sand castles whose foundations are being washed away by incoming tides. Butler Shaffer Time hack -- 06:11 PM, May 23
Note here we are not speaking about the state. We are talking about American society and American culture. Shaffer cannot bear the fact that people identify with one another based on language, custom, tradition, heritage, and for better or worse, physical appearance. He is especially outrages that people that look like him, speak his language, share his way of life do so.
He seems not to mind the collective action of migrants from the south.
What underlies this sanctimonious campaign on behalf of learning English has very little to do with immigrants respecting the language and culture of the lands to which they are moving. It has more to do with maintaining the collective political and social identity that is rapidly collapsing throughout America and Europe. The world is becoming decentralized, and nothing reflects this more than the variety of languages with which people speak to one another in society. The idea that such processes can be resisted by forcing everyone to speak in one tongue is, like the "war on terror," an expression of efforts to rebuild sand castles whose foundations are being washed away by incoming tides. Butler Shaffer Time hack -- 06:11 PM, May 23
Note here we are not speaking about the state. We are talking about American society and American culture. Shaffer cannot bear the fact that people identify with one another based on language, custom, tradition, heritage, and for better or worse, physical appearance. He is especially outrages that people that look like him, speak his language, share his way of life do so.
He seems not to mind the collective action of migrants from the south.
Wednesday, May 03, 2006
Some Dicatorships are More Equal than Others
Vladimir Putin and Hugo Chavez can buy off their publics with generous subsidies and ignore Western pressure while sabotaging democratic developments from Central America to Central Asia.
It seems to me that Max Boot is confusing'democracy' with 'neoliberal'. Hugo Chavez was elected, survived a coup due to popular support, and (I believe) has been reelected. Putin was electedc, and facing a country whose assets were sold off in a corrupt privatization, which faces a demographic collapse, and whose true major export is prostitutes, is taking tough steps to save his nation. Neither of these guys are pursuing the neoliberal course, but so what?
Max wants to coordinate with China (?!) to make sure it constructs a less "gas guzzling" infrastructure. Good luck on that, buddy -- China does what it wants. But the internal inconsistancy is stunning. China is a democracy? Why is China's party dictatorship, nationalism, and total control of the media otay with ol' Max but Putin and Chavez are the devil incarnate?
Moreover, why does anyone even care what Max Boot thinks. Is it the uncanny accuracy of his predictions on the Iraq war? (Is that his really name? I am beginning to suspect "Max Boot" is an elaborate hoax, a characature is the neoliberal/neoconservative dvoika that passes for "foreign policy strategy" in our great nation.)
It seems to me that Max Boot is confusing'democracy' with 'neoliberal'. Hugo Chavez was elected, survived a coup due to popular support, and (I believe) has been reelected. Putin was electedc, and facing a country whose assets were sold off in a corrupt privatization, which faces a demographic collapse, and whose true major export is prostitutes, is taking tough steps to save his nation. Neither of these guys are pursuing the neoliberal course, but so what?
Max wants to coordinate with China (?!) to make sure it constructs a less "gas guzzling" infrastructure. Good luck on that, buddy -- China does what it wants. But the internal inconsistancy is stunning. China is a democracy? Why is China's party dictatorship, nationalism, and total control of the media otay with ol' Max but Putin and Chavez are the devil incarnate?
Moreover, why does anyone even care what Max Boot thinks. Is it the uncanny accuracy of his predictions on the Iraq war? (Is that his really name? I am beginning to suspect "Max Boot" is an elaborate hoax, a characature is the neoliberal/neoconservative dvoika that passes for "foreign policy strategy" in our great nation.)
