- Home
- About Us
- Contributors
- Departments
- Topics
- Back Issues
- Weekly Archives
- AmSpecBlog
- Subscribe
- Newsletter
- Advertise
- Donate
- Contact Us
- Daily Digest
- Templeton Essays
At Large
Post-Colonialist Chic
It's sad but not surprising that even now, after the terrible political price that she and the administration she has so loyally served have paid for their delusion, Condoleezza Rice still doesn't "get it" -- to use the highly intelligent Barack Obama's favorite put-down. Interviewed in Sunday's New York Times Magazine about the international challenges about to be taken on by the incoming Obama administration, she echoed the Bush administration line of 2003, as if she had learned nothing from the Iraq adventure. "I've seen too many peoples dismissed as not ready for self-government," she told the Times's interviewer. "First it was Asians, and then Latin Americans and Africans were there for a while. I know for a while black Americans were, too. I've seen it said, well, you know: They're illiterate; how could they vote? And then you see in Afghanistan people line up for long, long lines. Because somehow they know that making a choice matters."
Oh dear, oh dear. You could understand this kind of thing coming from the Obamites, with their limited experience of those parts of the world disinclined to "stand together" with their well-meaning selves, but not from someone whose reputation will be bound up with that of the Iraq war for as long as she has a reputation. Can she really suppose that conservative dissenters thought the Iraqis or the Afghans unready for self-government because they were illiterate? Far from it! They could all have been as erudite as Secretary Rice, but they were unready because they had nothing of the political or civic culture necessary for a self-governing democracy to grow in. The native tribal honor culture, typical of much of the Arab and Islamic world, had simply been suppressed for the best part of half a century by a tyrannical central government seeking to impose upon it an alien ideology imported from the West. Once that government was removed, Iraq simply reverted to the sort of tribalism and war-lordism that even now is making a mockery of the Afghan people's sense that "choice matters."
This is not to take away from the real progress that has been made -- in both countries, though more now in Iraq than Afghanistan -- in acclimating a form of Western-style democracy to such inhospitable conditions. That democracy may even survive our departure as Barack Obama makes a dash for the exits. But at what a cost has such progress come! You'd think that by now Secretary Rice would at least be ready to acknowledge that it wasn't simply a matter of setting people free to follow their native yearnings for democracy and so to recognize some of the consequences of dealing with tribal-style honor cultures which produce the kind of war-lordism we are seeing in Afghanistan and -- still -- parts of Iraq as naturally as a bramble produces blackberries. A few words about such consequences might even have been welcomed by the President-elect. Unlikely, but possible.
Yet perhaps we shouldn't read too much into this interview. If Secretary Rice has learned anything from the last six years, she wouldn't be the diplomat I take her to be had she chosen to announce the fact in the pages of the New York Times. For in such matters the media culture is far more blinkered by an out-dated ideology than the Bush administration could ever be. Just consider the following report in Saturday's Washington Post, which shows that its author, Stephanie McCrummen, had the Congolese civil war all figured out well before it -- or at least the current version of it -- ever started. "As panicked thousands have abandoned villages across eastern Congo in recent months," she writes, "the scale of looting that has followed has been massive, a crime reflecting the predatory culture pervading Congo since the Belgian colonizers perfected it decades ago."
Mind you, this is ostensibly a news article: a report from the front. Yet it insists on giving the now-official left-wing diagnosis of anything that is regrettable or dismaying or horrible or deadly in the developing world as part of the legacy of "colonialism." At some level, the media parrots who have picked up such a "post-colonial" bromide must know its untruth as well as they know that of their own oft-reiterated "objectivity." Otherwise, they wouldn't have to keep repeating it. Otherwise they wouldn't have insist that war-lordism and the absence of civic institutions and order was a product of European "imperialists" and "colonialists" instead of being, as the wicked colonialists themselves had no difficulty in seeing, the conditions prevailing both before and after the European presence -- and the conditions that the European presence was intended, in part, to suppress.
That's the part that routinely gets left out in the media accounts, just as the Bush administration's noble but naïve belief in the powers of democracy to Westernize a resolutely tribal culture routinely gets left out of media accounts of the Iraq war. The media, otherwise supposed to be the champions of "nuance," like having clear-cut heroes and villains too much, and President Bush has made them a splendid villain. Like his intervention in Iraq for most of its first four years, the Europeans (especially the Belgians) may have done a poor job of introducing Western-style civility to tribal cultures -- though it is hard to see how they could have done a better one by never having attempted such a thing in the first place -- but it is absurd to blame them for the actions of today's warlords when they have been gone for almost half a century.
Comments
Leave a Comment
- Obama's Vision Through History
- Breaking Fast With Bill Safire
- Barney and Friends
Are you in a mob?
The Democrats say Obamacare opponents are a mob. Are they right?
Participating in this survey will subscribe you to the American Spectator email newsletter. You may unsubscribe at any time.
Daphne Kenward| 11.18.08 @ 10:26AM
It's wonderfull to see people like Ms Rice strutting on the world stage, I am sure it is a priviledge for her. Only 48 years ago Black people were fighting to use the same toilet as a white person.
So 48 years later, after Malcolm X, Martin luther King, I had a dream speech, and was both later Murdered for dreaming of a free America. The good that has come from it is that those of us with courage keep the fight alive. 1948 a new state was born and a new group of peoples freedom was stolen, the Palestinian people, their struggle was born, and still goes on today. Many in America is not really intuned with what really goes on because they are a Semetic people not Zionist. They same way Blacks were ignored beaten and killed in the streets based on colour of skin. There is a new group being killed based on Religion. Many people say we live in a free world but that would seem to be based on whose world you are living in, you can have the fantasy world which is the vast majority of the American idea of what the world is. Or if you live in the real world and ask questions because you want to understand what or why that would be the world of progress and change which is what America needs.
Questions that should be asked is why having had Racial hatred in America and knowing how distructive it is, why would you then go on to support Religious hatred, in Palestine?.
If Religious hatred was the cause of the WAR in Germany, hatred of another group and that was distructive, why are the people who were its victims carring out the same levels of hatred against another group because of their Religion?. Though the war in Germany against the rest of Europe did not last as long as the one in Palestine, people were against Nazism because it affected them in other parts of Europe, it's fair to say that the irony is simple most of Europe supports Israel against Palestine, but when the crime affected them they thought it was a bad idea. The logic behing that seems that as long as it does not affect me I don't care what Israel does.
But lets check it again, we are worried about Terrorist Attacks, why? because what was largely a Palestinian problem is now becoming a worldwide problem, its like having a fire started instead of trying to put it out, it's been left to spread. Like the soar that has been allowed to fester.
The thing I liked about the American problem, even though Martin Luther King was murdered for seeing a problem, and lost his life for facing it, the good thing was others saw the problems too and realise it was too big to be egnored, which takes us to where we are today, 2008 and the first elected Black or mixed race President.
What could have happend if instead of supporting Religious hatred in Palestine Jews against Muslims, it was handled differently, instead of Terrorism we would be speaking of trade and progress.
During the time of Colonial India, there was Indues and Muslims, in the end it became a two state solution Pakistan was born. But lets look at where Pakistan is, on the border of Afganistan, Afganistan on the border on the other side of Iran, Iran on the otherside of Iraq, and we could go on. Before the American and British lead invasion in 1953 of Iran and the 1948 creation of a Zionist stated in the mids of the Arab world or one might say the Islamic world it was relatively stable, in 5 years the most unstable place on earth was born, and remains so to this day, most realistic people would say well what caused it, how did we manage to create such a huge problem.
I would say it's a Religious war between Zionism, Muslims and Christians. Started by the Christians without thinking, putting Zionist in to live with Muslims, the Christians themselves throughout History could not live with the Jewish Zionist themselves Expelled them several times out of parts of Europe. The British wanted them as far away as possible from Euproe as they could get them, put them after the 2nd world way by agreement with people who were Zionist living in Germany and America to give them a state, they did not want to live there themselves so Hitler was told if they don't leave to go to the state of Israel they must be put in internment camps which is how they arrived in these camps in the first place. The rich and powerful wanted a state and to have a state people had to live there. The Muslims realise that they now have a group of people that Europe did'nt want living in their area, reacted to this, and it has caused resentments to this day. Many people now concludes that Religion is one of the most devisive thing on earth, it does nothing to unite it divides people one against another. Nowhere more obvious than in the Middle East.
When the Europeans decided to put the Zionist in Isreael, no one was thinking how important this area was, because the oil rich area did not have to supply so many cars and wheels of industry as it does today. Now the Muslims are indanger not only by the Zionist but also the Christians as well. The problem is how will this problem gets solved.
Make people less dependant on Oil, then what does the Oil rich area sell to have an economy, they have nothing else, they have not invested in any thing, because they never had to but the time is coming when they have no choice but to engage in new technology. One such country has realised that, Iran, the Zionist have reported that Iran is persuing Nuclear WMD, not true, if new source of energy is where the west is going and oil has to be refined in America, it would make sense to persue clean energy as well so they will not have to rely on foreign Refineries to refine oil and then ship it back to Iran, Iran is the only country in all of the middle East who is Persuing this because it makes sense for the future.
I know and am convince that all in high places in America and Israel know that, but why would these people still want to keep attacking Arab countries, not only do they have huge resources in oil, they also have huge reserves of money, which the Zionist want and they want to set up a Central Banking system in Iraq and Iran which would help America pay off its Huge Debt to the rest of the world by stealing the reserve of money to prop up America which is a failing economy the only thing that stands between America succeding Was Iraq and Iran, Libia and a few other places in the Middle East. They were asked at first to comply with their demands but the Government realise this is by way of theft and it would not benefit their country, Iraq was attacked, then Iran Libbia was to be attacked too, when they saw what happend to Iraq they backed down, All the countries that were AXIS of EVIL were countries who refused ZIONIST Central Banks in their countries, with the exception of North Korea who had a Nuclear Programme which is whythey negoitated with North Korea. North Korea had huge demands from America because they had no oil food, they have only been safe from Zionst due to keeping out foreigners. All the countries who have a Central Zionist Banks began to fail across the globe no Bank in the Arab world has failed, because they saw the Zionist coming. They want to keep attacking these people it's all about money. For people like Ms Rice from her Black roots of opressive policies on Black people claim not to understand or more to the point it is not about the justice of free thinking people but to pretend what is real is irrelevant.
Alan Brooks| 11.18.08 @ 11:31AM
Despite what "Daphne Kenward" (not a very Arabic name, huh?) writes, this is a first rate piece, grandly encompassing the blame-America, blame the19th century, ax-grinders.
If we're going to blame the19th century imperialists, why not blame the hunter gatherers?
The ax-grinding derives from Marxism's notion of primitive communism; noble savage-types are noble because Marx and postmarxist scribblers said so.
But, funny, give the savages modern weapons and they become less noble and more savage. Now, whose fault is that-- our imperialist fault, or the fault of the weapons?
I mean, you don't want to blame the savages, do you?
Because maybe they aren't savages, they are bleating lambs of Gandhian innocence and all we have to do is leave them alone and everything is sweet, the would-be savages behaving like nuns at a convent picnic.
Daphne Kenward| 11.18.08 @ 2:32PM
Alan Brooks.
Why would you need to be an Arab to know what is going on in the world?. Discussing how America is supporting Israel blindly is what is worring, they also suppoer Pakistan a state also with Nuclear bombs and both Israel and Pakistan comes under the same unbrella, unstable. In my view Israel is perhaps more so, because they use Mossad which operates in the USA and other parts of Europe carring out treeor attacks leaving evidence for it to look as if it is Muslims. So even if every single muslim was got rid of they would simply start on another group. It would be far better to just expose them. They spy on Americans. why if they are your friends why are they spying on every body in Amereica. People in A,erica is giving up their rights because Israel say so. While they mainatin their right to tap your phone, give up your rights.
1939 Albert Einstein, addressed (FRD) the Germans had been working on Uranium hoping to develope the atomic bomb. The knowledge of Otto Hatin discovered how to split Uranium atom. Eventually the Americans had it, the British had most of Europe has it, now India Pakistan Israel, Russia. How do you keep knowledge safe. What needs to happen is all these Bombs needs to be demantled.
It would take more than a Savage to use a Nuclear Bomb. But having said that it was used on the people of Japan 9th of August Nagaski B-29 killing 75'000 people in one go, by the United States. So when you use the word saveges you had better check you History book to be careful you are not speaking about your self.
Ray| 11.18.08 @ 3:14PM
Daphne Kenward,
I don't remember Israel invading Arab countries, like what the Arab countries did to Israel in the 50's, 60's, and 70's, do you? I didn't see Israel sending in terrorists to murder civilians with guns and bombs, and even suicide bombers, like Palestinians did in the 70's 80's 90' and 2000's, did you? I also didn't see the Israelis shrapnel laced launching missiles into Palestinians territories every day like we saw for well over a year, did you? So, just who is the actual aggressors here, the Palestinians and the rest of the Arab world who are trying to destroy Israel and steal their lands, or the Israeli's who are only trying to protect their ancestral homelands and their very lives from those who, like Hitler, wish to obliterate them completely?
Daphne Kenward| 11.18.08 @ 6:33PM
These Ashkenazi Jews were never a part of the middle east. These Zionist have fooled the American people and all of Europe, these people comes from Russia who adopted the religion and have used it to kill even the original Jewish people, and Millions of Palestinian people women and childern young and old these are blood thirsty imposters who wants to take over the world. Hitler was 1/2 Ashkenazi Jew who helped to Mass murder over 1 million people in Joseph Mengele's Eugenics experiments which was suported By George Bush Great Granfather, who also has this conection. These people are a blood thirsty people that has no life as sacred.
Steve B| 11.18.08 @ 6:37PM
My children's late godmother, an Englishwoman who married a KGB defector after WWII, late in life reflected on the British Empire and determined that the whole enterprise had been a mistake, "because we lost so many fine young men attempting to civilize people who cannot be civilized."
J Tailor| 11.18.08 @ 8:25PM
Mr Bowman --
Your argue that the Post writer (who is, you suggest, part of a wider liberal network involving the Times and -- I presume -- "left wing" academia) wrongly attributes the "predatory culture" of Congo back to the Belgian colonial period.
It may be true that some intellectuals have carried the critique of colonialism too far and that sometimes this critique has actually gotten in the way of our understanding of problems in Africa and other colonized parts of the world.
The example you site, however, is not a good one. First of all, the Post writer sounds like he is doing a good job to me, and I the peculiar ferocity of Belgian colonialism is well documented. The Belgians cultivated and rewarded aggression in Congo and the consequences contribute to their "predatory culture."
A persistent American fantasy -- particularly among so-called conservatives -- is that individuals and peoples sort of float around as free, rational, autonomous entities that are completely unconditioned by the past or by what surrounds them. But this is not the case -- or at least it certainly is not the case in countries that withstood for decades the corruption, oppression, and humiliation of colonial rule.
Your larger point about the Iraq War suggests you would acknowledge my larger point. You point out that Iraq doesn't have the requisite political culture to develop a democracy over night, and the way is long and hard. You might also have pointed out that Iraqi society is clan oriented -- people loyalties are to cousins, not to ideas like "liberty" or "one man, one vote."
I did not support the war but I pray for its success.
Daphne Kenward| 11.19.08 @ 6:21AM
The thing I find facinating, it proves the mind set of the people that respond to the issues raised.
Not one is rational enough to agree that the Palistinian people have a right to live in peace in their country, not one person think these people are humans and have a right to be happy and live in peace and the persuit of freedom and happiness
Not a single one.
Now that having real all the alegations some have called me a Hitler supporter, some say I must be a David Duke supporter, having been accused of such false alegations I looked up this guy I had never heard of. His views I respect, from what I have read so far.
None of the people who wrote to condem me have even bothered to check what I have said, why? because these people are the problem they are not the solution, they are a part of the problem.
For example if what the Zionist Ashkenazi Jews who are not really Jews but a member of a Satanistic group spoken of in the Bible, who describes Christ Mother as a Prostitute, so by my conclusion none of them are Christians, none of them are Muslims, which leave me one conclusion alone. It was a good expiriment. It proves my fear the level of hatred for none Zionist and paints a grimmer picture for the future. I can only conclude as God help us all.
David| 11.19.08 @ 2:50PM
Hey folks, it is useless to try and argue historical or current facts with Daphne. Her mindless diatribes are everywhere.
That said, the most disturbing thing to me about Bush and the Arab or Islamic world have been his appointments to certain positions in his administration. The Arabs and Muslims believe women are second-class citizens. So what does Bush do? He appointed Condi Rice as Secretary of State, and then appointed Karen Hughes to the newly created position of liaison to the Islamic world. That didn't make any sense to me. I am sure the Muslims didn't appreciate it too much either.
Daphne Kenward| 11.19.08 @ 5:55PM
David.
Thanks for the compliment. AhAh. I really will never understand you people, what difference did it make when Colin Powell was secetary of state during George Bush first term, till Colin Powell realised, after he was given a drawing of a CoCa Cola factory that was aledged to be a Chemical and biological plant, he was on every Television Station on planet earth showing his evidence, of his Chemical and biological factory, after it was discovered to be a Coke factory he looked like a real fool. For some one these right wing Nazi would wish was mad my memory is great. Ms Rice god a Job got her money thank you very much and good bye. Powell was made a fool of and resigned. Thinking of it now I have to laugh.