Today’s progressives are different from the people that lived during The Progressive Era but we share much in common with our forebears. Consider this description:
Progressives did not agree on a single agenda. They disagreed vehemently in their attitudes toward such subjects as immigration restriction and prohibition of alcohol. They were a diverse lot that included Republicans and Democrats, Protestants, Catholics, and Jews, and urban and rural reformers. Women’s organizations stood at the forefront of the social reforms and policy innovations during the Progressive era…
…For the most part, Progressives were urban and college-educated, including journalists, academics, teachers, doctors, and nurses, as well as many business people.
Uniting these various reform movements stemmed from a preoccupation with the elimination of corruption and waste and an emphasis on efficiency, science, and professional expertise as the best ways to solve social problems. A book published in 1913, Benjamin Parker De Witt’s The Progressive Movement, argued that three tendencies underlay progressive reforms: the desire to eliminate political corruption, the impulse to make government more efficient and effective, and a belief that government should “relieve social and economic distress.” Progressives wanted to apply the techniques of systematization, rationalization, and bureaucratic administrative control developed by business to problems posed by the city and industry.
Today’s progressives, like the old ones, do not share a single agenda. We are still made up of liberal Protestants, Catholics, and Jews, and skewed toward the female gender. We are still dominated by the urban, the college-educated, and the professional ranks. What’s changed is mainly related to larger demographic and living-style changes that have occurred over the last century. For example, we’re less urban now because we have suburbs and exurbs that house hordes of college-educated professionals. Yet, our movement is more inclusive of urban and immigrant organizations because of the decline of machine politics and the rise of sophisticated community organizations in our cities. Many of our new immigrant communities are neither Christian nor Jewish, and progressives are increasingly secular in orientation (including toleration and the embrace of the Gay Community). The Hispanic population has exploded and trends heavily Democratic. And blacks now enjoy full voting and citizenship rights and form the backbone of the progressive movement.
Another difference is that the modern progressive movement is almost totally devoid of support from members of the Republican Party. The modern progressive movement can best be understood ideologically as a mixture of center-left Democrats, left and far-left Democrats, and elements of Greens and non-aligned far-left independents (whose participation is heavily dependent on mini-cycles and message/personality). Insofar as the new progressive movement involves Republicans, they are no longer Republicans. They have been driven out over the modern GOP’s social conservatism, opposition to science-based policy/efficient government, lack of respect for civil liberties, corruption, and/or their foreign adventurism.
The modern progressive movement is more diverse in every way from the prior one. It has more geographic scope, involves a wider array of ethnicities, races, and religions, and brings together rather than separating the urban community. And, yet, very few elected politicians in Washington represent progressive values as they are daily expressed in everything from the Blogosphere to black/Hispanic radio, to college newspapers. Our lack of representation actually unites us and helps keep some of our internal divisions hidden…at least, most of the time.
For, while progressives are united in opposing corruption and supporting good government in the interest of relieving social and economic distress, we have many differences. I often separate progressives into two subcategories: Academic Progressives and Urban Progressives. The reason I do this is to highlight our differences. Most people do not actually belong in just one camp, but life-experience counts for a lot.
In the broadest terms, Academic Progressives differ from Urban Progressives in the urgency and focus of their approach. Academics like to devise long-term strategies for ameliorating social ills. Perhaps because they like to develop positive slippery-slopes, they are always on the watch-out for negative slippery slopes. Academics are hyper-vigilant about separation of church and state (e.g., on school choice and faith-based charities), while Urban Progressives are more willing to accept any help they can get regardless of potential long-term consequences.
Because Urban Progressives work in their communities and face first-hand the day-to-day problems of the poor and dispossessed, they tend to have lower expectations (less idealistic) and focus on pragmatic solutions that solve problems in the very short-term. Urban Progressives might organize protests and petitions to keep the recreation centers and libraries open. Academic Progressives are more likely to explore ways to improve the stability of the city budget so that we don’t face cyclical pressure to close public pools and libraries.
There can be surprises, too. Urban Progressives are concerned about police brutality, racial profiling, the war on drugs, and the availability of guns. But they’re more concerned about crime and the lack of police protection against thugs in their neighborhoods. As a general matter, Urban Progressives are tougher on crime than Academic Progressives. They are more likely to see the necessity of gun ownership, for example, because the police cannot (or will not) protect them from home intrusion. They are less likely to oppose Stop and Frisk laws than Academics who are concerned with the slippery slope impact on civil liberties.
All these things are relative and averages, but there are real differences between progressives. Even something as simple as the rescue of Captain Richard Phillips from pirates can split progressives. Someone told me today that I’m a right-winger because I applaud the job our Navy SEALS did and have no sympathy for the three pirates who were killed in the process. And I am constantly reminded that a small but significant percentage of the Academic Progressive Left actually does fit the negative stereotypes (Blame America First) and distrusts power to such a degree that they could never actually wield it.
But we have entered a new progressive era and we will be increasing our political power on the Left for some time. We won’t agree on everything, but we’ll agree on enough to maintain a coherent and stable left-leaning governing majority on the Congressional level. Progressives that understand power and respect and desire power will do well. Progressives that do not understand, respect, or desire power will remain, by necessity, outside critiquers who always
insist they hold the only true progressive values.
Contrary to what some progressive like to think, we live in a real world, with real dangers. Not all problems can be cured with idealogical purity. Reading progressive blogs I sometimes get a feeling some of the posters are not all that different in ‘moral certitude’ than ‘wingers’.
It is possible to be proud of America, and Americans without being evil or jingoistic.
It is possible to love your country, but not necessarily like everything it does.
nalbar
I think there is a very small part, although it may seem larger as they tend to be the most vocal and follow politics very closely.
And I don’t think the characterization ‘blame America first’ is accurate, but it’s more of an empathy thing…ie, seeing the USA as others might, and being much more willing to see and acknowledge shortcomings. Also, I think progressives- by nature- tend to identify and side with underdogs and the oppressed, hence the rationalizing of the actions of the pirates.
Here’s a MyDD piece that concludes:
Needless to say, he never built much of any predicate for Somalia’s problems being caused by the United States. Europe? Maybe. The Soviet Union? Possibly. Regardless, it’s all our fault. And, of course, the people that drew the maps that created Somalia in 1885. They were Americans…not!
I see your point, but I think this is a very small but very vocal minority of progressives as a whole, perhaps very overrepresented in the blogosphere.
At least I hope so 🙂
Jeebus.
Here’s Susie Madrak at Crooks & Liars:
Overrepresented? Sure. I said ‘small, but significant.’
I noticed a lot of comments like this at various blogs over the last several days. (Mostly from reader comments and not as featured posts.)
I assumed that this represents a very small minority, figuring that of maybe 100 progressives, a small minority of them are blog connected, even less blog active, and even less have these views. Dunno.
No. It’s much more widespread. It’s still a small minority but they have a big megaphone.
ugh.
But you can’t deny the role the US has played that has contributed to the continuing failed state-ness of Somalia, and that THAT is a major contributor to getting people to take up piracy.
Here
and
Here
The US is not the sum of the problem here, but we have not helped and we have often hurt, though I don’t think there are any easy answers.
No, I do deny that.
I think the United States was briefly allied with the Somali government during the Cold War and we tried to help them in 1992 with some humanitarian aid. The place is very hard to govern. It’s not our fault. About the only blame I can place on America is that we sold them weapons that were later used in their civil war. We did nothing to promote piracy. He haven’t had any interest in keeping Somalia a failed state, and we’re right to consider its current state as a security threat to the whole world.
I never said we wanted to keep Somalia as a failed state, so don’t put words in my mouth. But the policies we have pursued have had the effect of making the situation worse and at times, impeding what progress there is.
What do intentions have to do with that?
if you look hard enough you can blame the United States for anything and everything. And sometimes we are directly to blame. But in Somalia? It’s a very strained argument. There is a long line of Brits, Italians, Soviets, and Somalis ahead of us that can take blame first.
I agree with your take completely but didn’t the US military support Ethopia with aid in the most recent conflict?
Yes:
Look at the “new way forward” banking plan promoted by OpenLeft and FDL and similar and you will see that the “academic left” is not really about much change in the status quo at all. They are about: we need more regulations and people like us doing the regulating.
An Inconvenient opinion, apparently:
Beyond Pirate Rescue: What’s Really Happening in Somalia?
by Valtin [Subscribe]
Share this on Twitter – Beyond Pirate Rescue: What’s Really Happening in Somalia? Mon Apr 13, 2009 at 11:16:03 AM PDT
The dramatic rescue of Captain Richard Phillips from Somali pirates made for smash headlines in the U.S. and around the world, but is not the first such dramatic rescue from pirates in these waters. The French had dramatic video footage of one of their captures.
What has not been covered in the news, obsessed with GOP hopes for Obama’s first big failure, and Democrats patriotic triumphalism, is that the U.S. has played a big role in plunging Somalia into the chaos that has allowed piracy to take hold there, and that it’s an open question how the Obama administration will deal with the bigger picture.
This diary is an attempt to cover these two issues.
Valtin’s diary :: ::
No one wants to see an innocent man be killed or held hostage, so it was with some satisfaction that most heard of the rescue of the sea captain who had offered himself up as hostage for the safety of his crew.
But this kind of small scale human drama is dwarfed by the reality of what has been happening in Somalia for almost two decades now. I don’t know why large-scale human drama doesn’t play as well in the U.S. media, but I suspect it is because when it serves U.S. interests to exploit a tragedy, headlines are rolled out.
When the tragedy, such as the millions of refugees created by the U.S. invasion and occupation of Iraq, is politically inconvenient, the headlines are mysteriously absent.
An Inconvient Fact: The U.S. Helped Create the Conditions for Piracy
From Times Online (a conservative UK newspaper — emphases added — H/T Chris Floyd):
Years of violence, neglect and misguided policies have left Somalia one of the most dangerous countries and a breeding ground for the pirates attacking one of the world’s busiest shipping routes.
Today the northeast area of the country, including Puntland, has been carved up by warlords who finance themselves by drug and gun running.
This is also the heartland of the pirates, whose main backers are linked to the Western-backed government. Radical Islamists control much of the south, including the key port of Kismayo and the porous border area with Kenya, a staunch Western ally.
This has realised a Western nightmare, which was supposed to have been destroyed by Ethiopia’s American-backed invasion of Somalia two years ago in support of a puppet government created by the international community.
That alliance spanned the spectrum from extreme radicals to moderate, devout Muslims.
The latter were in charge.
Everyone – except Pentagon planners, it seems – knew that Somalia had never proved fertile territory for Saudi-style radical Islam. However, indiscriminate bombing of civilian areas by Ethiopia, Somalia’s historic enemy, with huge casualties, put an end to that.
The Islamists were driven out, the moderates went into exile and the hardliners took control of the south with a popular powerbase beyond their wildest dreams.
Approximately 20,000 have died, and almost two million people have been displaced in this senseless civil war, prompted in part by the U.S., and certainly a proxy war with numerous players (the U.S., Ethiopia, various Arab states, Eritrea, even North Korea!, as we shall see).
So while I’m glad this sea captain was rescued, I don’t look at the U.S. government as some sort of savior.
And I certainly am not angry at Somalians, who did not ask for the rule of warlords, pirates, and hardline Islamists in a fractured state ruling over them. Many have fled for the refugee camps already.
The Huffington Post published an article yesterday by Joanne Offer, IRC information officer in Nairobi, describing the miserable conditions in which a quarter-million Somalian refugees are living in the overcrowded Dadaab camp in eastern Kenya.
Dr. Vincent Kahi, the IRC’s health coordinator, described a cholera outbreak: “To date, the number of cases . . . has been small — just 26 — and we have managed to contain the outbreak, but resources in the camps remain massively overstretched and provide ideal conditions for diseases like cholera to keep coming back. All [aid] agencies in Dadaab are doing their best, but the sheer number of people in such a small space and in an area with water scarcity is a recipe for future problems.”
While I do not blame Obama — and please note this, readers who may think I’m trashing Obama — such facts mute any enthusiasm I have over this latest military show.
Again, I’m glad an innocent man was saved, but I’m sick of the U.S. media, who makes a huge thing because it’s an American life, but barely makes a peep over what U.S. policy in the region has wrought in past years, and to the miserable suffering of the people in the region.
Convergent Evidence of U.S. Duplicity in Somalia
Those touting the U.S. raid as some sort of Entebbe, i.e., a military action that will make others think twice about messing with the big, bad United States, just don’t get it.
Even U.S. Naval Forces Central Command chief Vice Adm. Bill Gortney stated after the rescue, “This could escalate violence in this part of the world, no question about it.”
Other pirates in the region are quoted as making violent threats, but the real truth is that the pirates already understand that the U.S. will intervene in their region at will, as in the backing the Ethiopian invasion of their country to overthrow their government.
Does anyone really think that this one incident will significantly change their consciousness of what the U.S. can do?
A commenter in another diary called Somalia “a pawn of foreign interests and paranoia”? I’d say so. The former includes the United States, and their paranoia is well-earned.
From an article in The Progressive in Dec. 2008:
Alas, there are no good guys in this war. Ethiopian President Meles Zenawi is a nasty piece of work. He has been a darling of the United States ever since the Clinton Administration’s time, when he was hailed as being part of the “African renaissance.”
The war on terror has drawn Zenawi, a Christian leader of a religiously mixed but Christian-dominated country, closer to the Bush Administration. African renaissance man or not, he has been ruthless in his exercise of power.
For instance, Ethiopian security forces killed nearly fifty people in November 2005 in a crackdown on protests. They also arrested thousands, including politicians, journalists, and activists.
U.S. policy in Somalia is born out of desperation.
The United States abandoned Somalia after its failed mission in the early 1990s, and looked the other way as the country was mired in anarchy for the next decade. It was only recently that the Bush Administration, frightened by Islamic fundamentalism, began a dubious policy of handing out cash to Somali warlords as a way to check the Islamist militias….
The human toll of the invasion is increasing day by day.
Plus, the U.S. backing for the invasion will add to its unpopularity on the continent and in the Middle East. The African Union and the Arab League have called for Ethiopia to pull out, as have Kenya and Djibouti.
The United States should firmly add its voice, and instead of backing military adventures should invest in the Somali peace process as a way of staving off the Islamist threat.
The Ethiopian invasion of Somalia had full U.S. military backing. So you see, the Somalis have already tasted what U.S. military power can do. From coverage in Wired:
Citing the possibility that the Islamic Courts government was harboring terrorists, the Pentagon ordered gunships, fighters and warships to attack targets in Somalia, paving the way for Ethiopian tanks to sweep south, destroying Somalia’s first relatively stable government in 15 years.
What Somalia was left with is starvation, tribal infighting, a brutal Ethiopian occupation and, ironically, a genuine Islamic insurgency where before there was only a suspicion of one….
Even the European Union warned the U.S. that bombing Somali towns “only escalates violence,” as it purportedly goes after Al Qaeda Islamists.
Oh, and here’s another example of U.S. duplicity and cynicism in the region that will blow your mind, from the NY Times in April 2007:
By MICHAEL R. GORDON and MARK MAZZETTI
WASHINGTON, April 7 — Three months after the United States successfully pressed the United Nations to impose strict sanctions on North Korea because of the country’s nuclear test, Bush administration officials allowed Ethiopia to complete a secret arms purchase from the North, in what appears to be a violation of the restrictions, according to senior American officials.
The United States allowed the arms delivery to go through in January in part because Ethiopia was in the midst of a military offensive against Islamic militias inside Somalia, a campaign that aided the American policy of combating religious extremists in the Horn of Africa.
Obama and Somalia
What of President Obama’s policy towards Somalia? One sea rescue does not make a foreign policy.
When he was running for president, Obama stated that he wanted “a coherent strategy for stabilizing Somalia.”
Writing at Foreign Policy in Focus earlier this year, Francis Njubi Nesbitt described the situation for the new Obama administration (emphasis in original):
Among the litany of booby traps left by the Bush administration for the Obama team, Somalia could be one of the most complicated and bizarre….
The Obama administration, if Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s confirmation hearing is any indication, also views the Horn of Africa in the context of terrorism.
Nevertheless, Obama has also talked of his preference for diplomatic solutions. Somalia would be an ideal place to test his diplomacy.
Nesbitt described the particulars of the Ethiopian invasion, providing readers here with yet another description of the situation, the better for us to form an opinion of what has occurred in that part of the world.
Ethiopia’s invasion of Somalia in December 2006, backed by the United States, sparked an Islamist resistance that led to thousands of civilian deaths, displaced over a million people, and depopulated the capital, Mogadishu.
But instead of focusing on the aftermath of this crisis and helping foster a peace process, the United States, European Union, and other international actors are engaged in the more dramatic and media-friendly anti-piracy campaign….
While the pirates attract the lion’s share of world attention, the Islamist militias are gaining ground and are sure to control the whole country once Ethiopia withdraws its troops.
The conflict has spread to other parts of the region, with suicide bombings in the formerly stable Somaliland and Puntland regions, piracy in international waters, and cross-border kidnappings in Kenya.
U.S. and EU actions and policies since 2001 were supposed to prevent this kind of chaos. By treating Somalia and the region as a battle-zone in the “war on terror,” however, the international community has made things worse….
Nesbett describes U.S. policy in the Bush years as “obdurate and counterproductive.” The CIA backed the warlords, “setting the stage” for the rise of the “Islamic Courts”, which in turn stoked the invasion of Ethiopia, in the name of the “war on terror.” As we can see, even the North Koreans got into the act.
What a concoction of cynicism, ignorance, misdealing, and big power politics, with the Somali people the innocent victims! The media talk about piracy and dramatic sea rescues does not change the situation in that part of the world.
In fact, if the chaos in Somalia, stirred up by the U.S. and Ethiopia, had not spilled into the world’s sea lanes, then we most likely would not be talking about Somalia at all right now.
I can’t take much from Obama’s sign-off on the rescue of Capt. Phillips. I think the U.S. couldn’t afford to let the captain of a U.S.-flagged ship (a rare enough thing in itself) be held hostage or killed.
But what now of Somalia? Most likely it will slip off the front pages, and the excited recommended diaries at Daily Kos, and back into its state of forgotten misery, a pawn in the U.S. perpetual war on terror.
Nesbitt ends his article hopefully. I don’t share his sense of hope, but will end here, too, because at the moment, even desperate hope may be all we have.
Obama’s pledge to change the Bush administration’s belligerent and counterproductive policies could have far-reaching consequences for the region as a whole.
Also posted at Invictus
Tags: Somalia, Ethiopia, piracy, Richard Phillips, U.S. war on terror, war on terror, refugees, Barack Obama, Recommended (all tags) :: Add/Edit Tags to this Diary :: Previous Tag Versions
Tags
Add keywords that describe this Diary (required). Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips – Search For Tags – Browse For Tags
You must enter at least one Tag for this Diary Entry:
The irony is that often those best equipped to wield power are scared of power and reluctant to wield it.
a lot of what you say is accurate, but this:
…has a lot of of problematic statements to unpack. A lot.
Actually, it’s not a question of more concerned about one or the other, but a balancing act. In Philly, for example, the system has been out of whack for years: we have neighborhoods that, thanks to Bush-era cuts, are patrolled by cops in cars who don’t know the residents. As a result, when an incident occurs if the cops bother to show up at all, there is more likely to be brutality because the cops don’t know anyone: both are due to the lack of community presence. Urban progressives like my neighbors and me want police protection against thugs, but not in the sense of a monolithic police state.
That may be true among wealthy white progressives in neighborhoods far away from the poor, but among urban progressives who live in the neighborhoods targeted by stop and frisk, the opposite is true. We see stop-and-frisk as a police state tactic that will encourage racial profiling, target young black men indiscriminately, and breed distrust between the community and the cops.
In short, you are oversimplifying.
true. it would be a very long essay if i didn’t.
but that’s okay because we have a comments section to get into more detail.
Let me get this straight . . . Liberals that don’t want to go around the world starting wars are academic wimps that will never have power so they should stfu, or something . . . .
Okay. Not a particularly novel argument (I seem to remember a good number of conservative Democrats and right-wingers mocking those opposed to Iraq war as being appeasing cowards that can never have power in America)
But I think you and Obama will discover the trappings of the super-warrior fighter killing the bad guys and laying down some justice will only get you so far. It’s not a win-win for you and your man Obama–just ask Bush the dangers of mindless militarism to one’s political fortunes.
Your killing and wars will not bring about your stated goals of peace in the Horn of Africa. It might bring Obama a small bump in the polls, and all these noxesistant people that were waiting for Obama to prove he’s not a secret communist and is willing to use the military can relax. Yes, the media game of making sure our leader will order assasinations and military assaults is alive and well. And you and Obama have secret chubbies over this. how convenient. If we don’t share in your childish death fantasies than we’re not “serious” enough liberals and the real adults will never let us near real power because we’re not smart enough to use military power just cause we can and to show the world we’re not pussies.
That’s all this is. You are puffing your chest out and you want to kill you some bad guys and you will use the very American political tool of claiming those that don’t want war are pussies. It doesn’t matter that your and your warmongering ilk are almost always wrong. You need the history book dude. You’re clueless.
It’s disgusting. And Obama (and this country) will fail if Obama takes the military bait to start conflicts throughout the World.
American empire as we know it is over. Whether you and Obama like that or not. You might have a couple of media coups up your sleeves. Democrats always like putting on the codpiece and playing commander and I’m sure Obama thinks he’s a big man now and he loves everyone feeling his muscles and telling him how tough he looks. As you apparantly do. Do you feel like a tough guy? Jumping around in joy over an assasination. Did you dream about it? Or is it simple political opportunism for you? You see your chance for your man to look tough and this is your way of getting back at all those liberals that were saying mean things about Obama’s “bipartisanship” (really his conservativism).
Is Matt Yglesias a big progressive pussy unlike you, the tough guy? http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2009-04-14/the-war-on-piracy/ Do you and your urban tough guys that like guns plan on prosecuting a war in Somalia? Do you know how many people died there? Via U.S. guns and weapons and from the hands of U.S. military? Are you going to be the tough guy and go fight in Somalia?
“Let me get this straight . . . Liberals that don’t want to go around the world starting wars are academic wimps that will never have power so they should stfu, or something . . . .”
That’s so wrong, you deserve some sort of commendation.
What do you think this is all about?
Bush and military wanted to be able to declare the whole world a war zone.
The legal justification for America’s actions in Somalia 2 years ago was that 3 terrorists were responsible for the bombings in Kenya so we had to support a war (involving thousands of deaths) to bring these 3 dudes “to justice”. It was subterfuge for the real agenda which was to get involved in the affairs of Somalia and prevent the Islamic Courts movement from taking over the country. It was a bullshit legal justification for starting and participating in a pretty good sized war.
Most of America was blissfully unaware because the pussy Democrats in Congress didn’t want to look like pussies so they didn’t say anything as our country waged a probably illegal action in Somalia.
Now, we hear we have to send the military in because of pirates.
To me, on its face, it appears the military is once again seeking justification for a wider war in the region that has nothiing or little to do with piracy.
Maybe it is in the U.S. interest to wage war on Somalia. I tend to think not.
But the U.S. Congress should declare war on Somalia if that is the case.
We don’t need more bullshit wars for unstated hidden reasons. Especially when the political dynamic is a Democrat politician trying to seize on the popularity of a president at war who appears to like the game of going after the evildoers . . .
what is it all about? Hostage rescue. Why are you turning into the Third World War. A man was kidnapped and held for ransom. He was freed. End of story. He didn’t kidnap himself you know.
Because I see where this is going. It will be the justification for a greater military adventure in the region. It’s the military’s way of asserting it’s power over Obama.
Crime happens throughout the world and throughout history. Declaring war on crime will not work.
This is simply a way for the military and the U.S. to assert it’s ability to act throughout the world. We were like kids at the State Fair shooting gallery last time. Truckloads of Somalis were wiped out 2 years and where did it get us? Do we as a country really know enough to support a warlord over a Islamic fighter in Somalia? Haven’t we learned that we don’t know enough to pick sides in this battle and our bombs and death and destruction always make it worse?
We are always told that it is heroic actions of the noble Navy sniper (or whatever) that will save us. Then as we start wiping out whole villages or start dropping bombs on the “bad” guys it all goes to hell.
Don’t fall for trick.
Pirates are bad. Crime is bad. But this is about a bigger military prescense in the area. That is not good for America. And you guys trying to sucker the U.S. into a wider war are the real un-American traitors. You would have the World in smoking ruins as you cling to your silly sniper fantasies. Did you dream about pulling the trigger yourself?
give me a break.
The whole world is clamoring for some solution to the piracy problem. And in the whole wide range of American projection of power, nothing has more legitimacy as our role in securing safe shipping lanes. Working with the Chinese and European nations, we will find a way to make the Suez trip safe for shipping. And we should do that or we’re worth a damn as a world power.
It’s by far the least offensive aspect of our power.
Yes. Using our Navy to ensure free passage of ships is relatively more benign than dropping bombs on the country.
That’s why I am concerned this will be used as JUSTIFICATION for greater uses of power, namely, the reintroduction of a U.S. sponsored war on the country. My God man, we helped kill tens of thousands of people in this country a few years ago. I know that no other country in the World matches the U.S. when it comes to starting wars but I find it bizarre how we’ve collectively blocked out the fact we helped kill a bunch of people in a war there. And it didn’t work. It made things worse. But you warmongers go completely batshit crazy at anyone that suggests the U.S. shouldn’t go to war and deliver all this invective. Frankly, what seems crazy is to always be so willing to use military force and to mock those that disagree with you when you’ve been wrong.
But now that your man is commander codpiece you’re playing the tough guy right-winger game of accusing people of being pussies. I’m sick of the tough guy routine and you calling those opposed to senseless and illegal death and destruction pussies, or whatever pejoritive you come up with to mock liberal opposition to more war. This country is doomed as a going concern when the powers-that-be are so willing to engage in deceitful trickery to wage war. The Democrats are not capable of enough change. It’s so easy to goad them into war. It doesn’t look good and Obama is already goaded into a greater war in Afghanistan. There will be more war.
And now the military itself is claiming the need to attack. You are aware the military wants to attack Somalia again? And the right-wingers are doing their part and calling the Democrats pussies.
And you and Obama are doing your part. You will take the bait, like the coward Democrats always do, and take military action because it will make you look like a tough guy and only the “crazy left” will oppose this military action. You are gleefully taking on the crazy pussies on the left. You go girl. You will probably win the political battle as only the pussy left (which, btw, I bet will include a good 1/3 of the American people when hostilities start up again) will not support your war. But I would not count on your political victory lasting for long (in 2002 Bush was about the strongest looking President ever).
And, the rest of the World will tire of America’s wars. We may be there right now. Yeah, they might be okay with the occasional summary pirate execution (and I don’t know the international law of piracy but I bet the media is purposely misinforming its readers into believing whatever America does is legal and America has the legal right to summarily execute all suspected pirates–I don’t know what the law is necessarily–and I don’t care—but I bet international law applies and not American law and I also bet that the rest of the World isn’t as interested in a legal system where the cops execute the criminals on the spot. In fact, I don’t see the rest of the World adopting our criminal policies in any respect–if anything, they are running away from our justice system because it is horribly corrupt and unjust.).
But the World is probably not as eager to wage war on Somalia as you and our media portray them to be. True, the rest of the World did look the other way a couple of years ago as we killed thousands of these subhuman black Muslim scum. But that military action didn’t seem to do the trick. Maybe if we go kill another 20,000 of these poor black teenagers then we will teach these cockroaches a lesson not to mess with the U.S. of fucking A and vote for a government that is acceptable to the United States.
Yeah bitch. We are a nation of snipers ready to rain down justice on your evildoer black teenage asses. It’s the only thing they understand, hear? A bullet through their subhuman noggin is the only way to learn them a lesson. Evidently 20,000 of these cockroaches had to learn the hard way and we will deliver the same message to the next 20,000 poor cockroaches that fill the void. Hear our righteous fury as we smoke tens of thousands of darky black teenagers. Yeah! And America will be totally ignorant of the bad aspects of laying waste to a country, because they are mostly Muslim and America never does wrong and our Christian God wants us to smoke some dark Muslims. And our president is black and “liberal” so you pansy lefties that are bleeding hearts can suck it. Would a black liberal unjustly kill so many fellow black Muslims? Ha! It’s like a get out of jail free card. He can smoke as many African “thugs” as he likes. No way the liberals will be able to convince the World we should care about these subhumans in that hellhole of a country. We’re bringin’ Democracy and Justice to Somalia at the point of a gun and for their own good.
But go ahead and live in your Washington-based bubble that the world is clamoring for a war in Somalia. That’s what you’re saying whether you admit it or not. That’s the game being played here. You are setting up a political dynamic where, if Obama doesn’t approve acts of war against Somalia, he is a pussy. And only the best country in the world with the best assasins (er, snipers), and the best Navy is up for the job. America must act, doncha know.
And you’re helping this sickness Booman.
And while you do all this you chide the left for not being sufficiently martial . . . . it’s sickening.
Liberals need to wake up and realize that Obama and his fellow complicit Democrats are not on their side. You are not on liberals’ side.
There are fundamental differences that we cannot paper over. You and Obama will mindlessly support more death and destruction. I refuse to take part in your sick and immoral death fantasies. Unfortunately, you will drag this entire country down with you because it’s the only political game you know. Killing people to make them into Democrats or Christians, or God knows what. Tell me what good bombing pickup trucks filled with 17 year old poor black “cockroaches” will do for our national security?
If the world is tiring of America’s killings, how do they feel about the French killing of Somalis the day earlier?
I don’t know. You tell me. I imagine the rest of the World sees it as a pretty minor issue, and probably related to the greater global issues facing the world–like the wars going on and the World economic depression. It’s not like piracy is new.
And this may be news to you but I don’t think the rest of the world shares the odd U.S. view that French is synonymous with pussy. After all, I’ve seen my Horatio Hornblower and I know the French were once a formidable naval force. So I imagine the French want to hang on to that heritage and they are probably tough policemen and naval dudes. I remember one French teacher that talked of the tough dudes he saw through his work on barges in France and he used to tell us of harsh French attidutes towards minorities and immigrants (negative) and that they have tough police. Remember, they are a civil law country and they don’t have the same rights that we have here. Plus, weren’t the French one of the last European states to get rid of capital punishment? And the French Foreign Legion are not known for being wimps, that I know of.
So, in short, I don’t think the rest of the World thinks much of your French zinger (if the French did it . . . . then). Plus, I don’t know much about policing the seas. I would have to learn more. But I don’t trust you John Wayne wannabes on what the right thing to do is. . . Shooting first and getting tough on crime has been a moral abomination in the United States and I know the rest of the World is running AWAY from our criminal justice system. The United States is one of only about what, 5?, states that use capital punishment. Iran and China are in that group. Same with North Korea. We are not the beacon of democracy you want us to be.
Plus, this is really about the military demanding permission to act in theaters throughout the World and giving us very amorphous and not compelling reasons to bomb countries. They want a blank check to bomb whatever they want and to summarily execute whomever they want. They already have demanded, and Obama gave them permission, to hold without trial or charges or any rights watsover, anyone Obama and the military deem a threat.
You tell me a pretty story of some Navy Stud Sniper that heroically shot some teenage pirate . . . and that sounds great and all . . .. .
but next thing I know is we (the United States) are bombing villages and killing tens of thousands of people in Somalia for who knows why .
When did I say that I thought the French were “pussies”? By the way, using “pussy” as an insult is both rude and sexist.
You made the claim that the rest of the world was tired of US violence as exhibited in our response to the armed kidnapping of a US civilian. Since just before the US killed those Somalis, the French commandos killed a bunch of Somalis and one of their own citizens in a shoot out with another group of Somali pirates, I wanted to see how that fit into your theory.
Yes. I use pussy because that is the epithet used against those of us who refuse to mindlessly cheer on military and police adventures.
I use such base words and imagery because we are all acting on such base and childish impulses and we are all doing very ugly things. I fear we may kill another 20,000 souls and no one here in America will even know about it because it’s just a bunch of dirt poor black Muslim teenagers. Really, why do you think our first war there was forgotten so quickly? You don’t get more of a wasted life than a dirt poor black muslim boy. Of course, when we do notice, we all cheer on his asasination and condemn him for being a cockroach and daring to be dumb enough to pick up a gun and stand up to the might U.S. Navy. We don’t even recognize that thousands of his brother were mowed down 3 years ago.
I believe this boils down to very childish tendencies in our ruling and media elite; basically it’s like George Carlin observed: war is all about guys in a field waving their dicks. And this is Obama and Booman and all the other centrist Democrats taking the first opportunity to wave their dicks around to show they aren’t pussies.
I have no idea why piracy has now captured our collective attention. I guess people like the romance of sea and war. Hey, I enjoyed Master and Commander and Horatio Hormblower too.
The French tactics resulted in the one hostage fatality, no? So it seems this is one anecdotal piece of evidence against aggressive policing. I prefer Horatio’s techniques . . . he was much more sporting and an officer and a gentlemen. And I’m sure he gave fair trials before the executions. Plus, I have seen enough of America’s tough on crime policies to know they generally suck. We imprison more people than any other nation–on Earth. We do it in an arbitrary and racially biased way, as well. So if the French did it once without success and America is the lone country to be arguing for it then I can pretty safely assume it’s a bad idea.
p.s. I used to peruse a sailing periodical, “Horizens” I think it was, that had some interesting personal stories of people that cruise the World and have come across pirates.
Calm down. Try learning something:
There’s your poor, brown, Muslim innocents for you. Next time they attack a U.S. ship and hold Americans hostage maybe we can figure out how to give them a nice trial before they even release their captives.
You obviously aren’t getting the whole picture.
You need to put these stories in context and look at the big picture. Matt Yglesias is a good place to start. Or is he part of the Left that simply blames America first and needs to stfu and let the big boys rule?
Here’s a good start on at least acknowledging the other side, which you haven’t done, as you’ve simply hurled macho invective at anyone that dares stand up for this subhuman scum that you want to exterminate, the Somali pirate: http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/20090414_for_the_pirates_its_about_fish_not_guns/
Why is there now piracy off Somalia? If you listen to the pirates, it is retaliation against the piracy of the international fishing industry. Their story is that they were peaceful fishermen until industrial fishing vessels, mainly from Asia, began raiding their waters and sweeping up all the fish, mainly tuna, that provided their principal exports. (Other Somalian exports at the time included cattle, goats, hide products, skins, bananas and clarified butter–ghee).
They had no government to speak of to defend them, or go to the International Courts to protest about their stolen fish. Somalia’s independence in 1960 had been followed by territorial and irredentist struggles with most of Somalia’s neighbors. There was war with Ethiopia and then Kenya between 1964 and 1967. Then there was a “revolutionary” military coup, and the Cold War being fought by the mighty U.S.S.R. and U.S. in the region brought a pro-Soviet regime–until Moscow supported Ethiopia against a Somalian invasion of Ogaden in Ethiopia. The Somalians found a new backer in the United States.
. . . .
American diplomats today are reported to be keen to take over from the military in putting order back into the world. Why not a big international effort to get an EU, U.N. or NATO-policed agreement governing who can fish in Somalian waters, along with one more try to put together a provisional government? And how about an agreement by the big countries and Somalia’s neighbors to keep their hands off and to let the Somalians be Muslim fundamentalists if that is what they want. And a big international fund set up by the world’s principal shipping companies to help the Somalians get back into the export business?”
OMG!
Do you think anyone would give two fucks if Somali fishermen decided to defend the fishing in their 12-mile territorial waters? This idea that people stealing their fish led logically and justifiably to them becoming pirates is just insulting to my intelligence.
And, so what? How did that ‘knowledge’ help Captain Phillips or the people responsible for rescuing him alive?
How many times do I have to tell you that I am celebrating a rescue well done and not that people died as a result?
I really have no problem with using deadly force against pirates but it’s not like I’m calling for their villages to be napalmed, which is what Thomas Jefferson did in his day.
Your first problem is that you are confusing me with Rush Limbaugh. I do not use “pussy” as a pejorative. I don’t think the French are particularly wimpy – they seem to me to be the same cold blooded killers as everyone else. And I didn’t cheer the killing of those somali kids. I cheered the rescue of the American captain: who was, after all, a civilian who was kidnapped by armed thugs who threatened to kill him. When you are ready to do me the courtesy of reading what I say instead of angrily conflating me with whatever right wing nutbag you have in mind, we might could have a discussion.
Actually, he has apparently mistaken himself for Rush Limbaugh.
dude, I can’t believe all the bullshit you are spewing. Where am I calling for new wars and accusing people of being too anti-martial?
Just because you think something might happen in the future is no excuse to just make shit up and put it in my mouth.
Because being righteously angry is its own reward.
the shit is ridiculous.
The SEALS killing three pirates are suddenly a proxy for every bully that ever pushed him down on the playground or something.
And what’s with the obsession with their color and religion? Who gives a shit, they’re fucking pirates.
Because color and religion play a big part of it. We went to war in a country and were 20,000 people died and most Americans aren’t even aware of this. If this was a white person’s country it would be different. But racism is not unique to America.
And btw booman, I wasn’t pushed around. If anything, I was physically aggressive. But mostly in an athletic way; I didn’t bully other kids (besides my brothers a little bit, like typewriter torture). And I always had a sense of fairness. I was the one kid that never joined the crowd just because the crowd was doing something–like piling on the weak. I remember when I first became aware of peer pressure–it seemed like all the kids in class decided to call this one girl “dorky”, or whatever the word was back then (she was also called smelly). But I never went along with it. I didn’t agree and I saw so many kids claim not to like her (and they probably played with her the year before) just to be cool.
color and religion play NO part in it because they were FUCKING PIRATES holding an American citizen hostage at gunpoint, beating him, and threatening to kill him.
Color and religion are integral parts of this conversation, such as it is.
One man’s looting is another man saving his family in a time of crisis. Remember the images of black people “looting” during Katrina while white people where “carrying” items from a store .
James Wolcott describes this concept much better than I could:
http://www.vanityfair.com/online/wolcott/2009/04/in-a-drivelly-press-release.html
give it up.
It’s about allies.
In your very piece you claim to be allied with progressives. I just don’t see it.
An ally would not mock his allies that disagree with him on this issue as being the Blame America First group.
With this type of statement you ally yourself not only with the likes of Glen Beck and other keyboard commados . . . but you perpetuate the whole rotted system that any argument for mercy or understanding or patience or peace is met with complete and utter hostility and is literally shouted down as not being serious.
Yes. It’s only piracy now but this is how America deals with all matters of war or policing. The violent bullies call everyone else pussies and the moderate “liberals” cave-in and go beat someone weak up so they can prove they have big dicks and are not, in fact, pussies.
And you are once again shooting your supposed allies on your left while you coddle and perpetuate they vile coming from the right.
you gotta understand that you’re not my ally. If I follow your advice I’m looking at a country run by Mitt Romney and Mike Huckabee. Sorry, but I’m not interested. I don’t want Democrats going around saying dumb-ass shit and trashing their country without ever given an ounce of credit for anything. So, don’t be a Democrat and don’t vote for them. But don’t try to claim the mantle of progressivism for yourself because I’m not letting you have it.
I think I’ve got it figured out. To prevent the country from being ruled by Mitt Romney and Mike Huckabee you’re going to act like them and cater to their fears and desires while you trash the people that are actually more aligned with your stated political views.
So I think we’re agreed where the rub is. I’m glad you’re admitting that appeasing right wing nutjobs is more important to you than working with those to the left of you.
yeah, because I agree with Romney and Huckabee about what? That it’s permissible to shoot pirates that are holding your people hostage? Do you ever listen to yourself?
And no one is saying you have to agree with everything those to the left of you say.
Allies do not necessarily agree on everything.
But it’s clear that you (and coincidentally, Obama) have made an effort to make allies with those to the right of you and while at the same time largely ignoring and mocking those to the left of you.
And p.s., you may be many things, but “progressive” you are not. I don’t like that term anyway but it’s totally intellectually dishonest for you to hitch Obama, a centrist to right-leaning Democrat, is a “progressive”. It robs the word of meaning. You will do to ‘progressive’ what the right did to ‘socialism’ and ‘free markets’, they robbed them of any meaning. You’re hijacking that word but you can have it. It’s only a word and words change and that’s a pretty crappy word. I’ll have liberal thank you very much.
But I think the point that some of us have reached is that we don’t particularly think that what you are saying is “leftist” not to mention sensible or rational. “Leftism” as a cult identity is not too interesting.
oh, it’s leftist. But the left goes all the way out to totalitarian Maoism, Stalinism, and Khmer Rougism. There’s lots of room on the Left for crazy-ass batshit lunacy. And I don’t consider it it my interests to be associated with them because it only confirms the worst stereotypes about the Left. Some of us really do want to steal your guns, curtail free speech, and create some creative destruction of the international financial system. Some of us really do see America is the primary source of misery in the world. And there are two points about that. One might agree about some of these things to a certain point and still not see it is as politically helpful or viable to run on that platform. Or, one might be totally opposed to some of those things and see them as just as misguided and dangerous as anything offered by the far right.
I think SFHawkguy has legitimate observations and criticism on many subjects, but a political ally? Not hardly.
Goodness gracious. I suppose when the cops arrest a gang member for a shooting downtown, I should understand that to be an excuse for genocide of minorities?
Killing kidnappers is assassination?
I’m collecting quite a list of STUPID LEFTIST remarks. Maybe I’ll make a little book for the holidays filled with these canards. The righties will buy them in droves. $$$$$
I have no idea what happened on that boat. I really don’t care. I know enough to be suspect of the story put out by the military. Some heroic sniper [legally] used deadly force to stop an illegal action. Great.
I’m refering to your not-to-hidden glee in sending a bullet into another human because it makes your man look like a tough guy.
And I’m referring to your glee in taking on the crazy left. You get them tough guy. You ever killed another human being? Even if it is legally justified?
You’ve just been waiting for your chicken hawk in chief to be able to bring in the guns and start shooting so you can battle the pussy peåçenik left and show that Obama is as American as American pie and the sweet justice of a sniper’s bullet ripping through some subhuman beast on the horn of that subhuman continent. Kill all of America’s enemies. That will surely get the heat off of Obama and we can all forget our collective problems as we breeze in and smoke these thugs. You in?
Write your foolish book about the “stupid left”. I can tell this is where you’ve been heading. You, the real men on the left, will distract the country from its real problems as you and the rest of the tough guys go smoke you some evildoers.
Did you see how we smoked that Somalia scum 2 years ago. It was like a video game. Stupid Muslims riding around like big fat targets that we SMOKED . . .;
Tough guy. How’d that turn out? Or, are you urban progressives too touigh to get involved in un-American debates about war with us peacenik pussies? You know that America will support you as you smoke you some black African Muslim scum? Go for it. It will be a cheap political win for you.
Big man taking on the pussy left. You tell them how silly they are for not realizing that we can sniper assasinate our way out of our problems. Pussies on the left don’t realize the power of a sniper assasian–or as Booman would have it–a super-partirot hero gunfighter bringin’ American justice to the World.
You show us silly lefties. Write your silly book,
Your problem is much deeper than pirate killing.
It seems that you see it as unseemly for Americans to celebrate the successful rescue of one of our citizens because the price was the loss of life for three poor brown Muslims. You are putting a whole lot of your personal issues on me where they do not belong. I don’t care if you personally are a pussy. I didn’t say that you were. I’m just glad that Captain Phillips is safe and sound and that we had a bit of good luck. Politically, it is helpful to the degree that being decisive, lucky, and successful confers benefits on any leader. But the feel-good part of this is that Phillips was rescued unharmed, not that people got killed in the process.
Just like coming out strongly supporting the police for getting tough with “thugs” who ever they might be – rather than discuss why the US incarcerates a larger percentage of its citizens than the rest of the world, “land of the free” indeed. Oops there I go with the America-blaming, I guess that’s only because we have a bunch of thugs who need to learn their place.
None so blind as those who will not see. But at least boo can feel good about not being a limp-writsted hippie and or being soft on crime. Just another useful idiot for the prison and military industries.
we incarcerate more people because of the drug war, which I oppose.
So what do you think all these new cops will be doing? Drug crimes are easy to prove and boost arrest and conviction statistics with far less work than a burglary investigation. So call for more and more cops but it won’t help a thing, and eventually it will be turned against you – because the dirty little secret is everything is illegal these days and the system is mostly there to get money out of people in fines and tickets to pay for all the “thugs” you want to throw in jail.
Don’t forget to invest in Corrections Corp of America – the more cops hired the more their profits will go up. You can’t address the ballooning prison and jail population by hiring more cops. The fact is there are enough cops out there to protect you from thugs but they are too busy pulling pople over for driving on suspended licenses or DUIs or just sitting at a speed trap because these activities MAKE MONEY for government. Coming out to your house because you don’t like the look of those black teenagers across the street just wastes the police’s time and money.
I’m going to go way out on a limb and guess that you have never lived or worked in the inner city like I have. Here’s a picture of reality for you.
link
I actually work in criminal law, so I know what all these cops do. No matter how many you hire they will still go for the money and non-violent crimes becuas ethat’s in the best intrests of the system. If you think the government is going to devote significant resources to this sort thing . . .well all I can say you have a bit to learn about how police departments actually use the resources they have.
Investigating violent crime is time consuming, difficult and expensive usually with no payout for government at the end. That’s why police are unresponsive to black on black crime. Better to focus on the money making activities – where I work they just hired on a bunch of new cops, to focus on taffic enforcement.
Whatever larger point you are trying to make I hope you are not trying to suggest that lawabiding people that live in crime-ridden neighborhoods don’t have the right to expect the communities to be better policed.
So now we’re STUPID, too?
Fascinating, how quickly the “gloves come off” over other people’s opinions. I guess we really “hit a nerve,” for some people. Tough shit. That’s how that goes.
Progressives that understand power and respect and desire power will do well. Progressives that do not understand, respect, or desire power will remain, by necessity, outside critiquers who always insist they hold the only true progressive values.
Very well stated.
Let’s include an observation. Barack Obama clearly belongs in the first group listed above but used superior political skill to convince the second group that he was “one of them.”
Ergo, as time goes on, and history tends to write itself, there will be more and more of a reckoning of sorts as more and more of the folks in the second group become more and more aware that Barack Obama is not “one of them.”
I consider Obama to be a progressive, and you see signs of it all the time, including most recently his bold action inre Cuba.
But he’s not where I want him to be on civil liberties. It’s a huge problem that won’t go away.
Implying that someone is mentally unstable because they disagree with you is a cheap shot. Be that as it may-do kidnappers usually kill their victims when they demand ransom?
I know little about the mentality or motives of kidnappers-while so many others seem to know so much-however, wrong though I may be, I thought that exchanging the hostage for money was the dynamic involved.
A significant percentage of us are none of the above. There are a bunch of other religions in the mix, some of which lean heavily left, and of course, the biggest (and fastest-growing) non-Judaeo-Christian faction would be non-religious people.
As far as the pirates go, I don’t frankly give a shit. As soon as you pick up a gun and use it to compel behavior, you have left the arena of civilized discourse and are, as far as I’m concerned, a fair target for anyone else with a gun. Those who use violence or the threat of violence to achieve their ends are in no position to complain when someone else uses violence to thwart them. And in the case of four guys with light arms engaging in a standoff with the US Navy, well, let’s just say they earned their Darwin Awards just as surely as the folks at Waco and Ruby Ridge did with their hopeless standoffs. It doesn’t matter who’s right or wrong if one of the participants is unable to grasp simple matters of cause and effect.
The Somali pirates were all teenagers, weren’t they? There are violent, armed, and dangerous kids everywhere. Not just in Somalia.
No one works harder than law enforcement in dealing with violent and armed kids especially during hostage situations. Perhaps these kids were just not seen as being worth the time or the trouble.
yes, it appears that the kidnappers were all 19 or younger. Youth might explain their recklessness. Imagine thinking that you can outsmart the US Navy while they tow you in an out-of-gas motorboat and wind up with $6 million in cash.
As of late, I can’t help but notice an argument with regard to the teenaged Somalia pirates that compares them to the “cop-killer.”
In our system of jurisprudence, each case is decided on its own merits-not on someone else’s.
No one was killed or injured, except the perpetrators. Comparing this incident to the incident of the cop killings is just plain ludicrous. This argument is based entirely on hyperbole-and hyperbole alone-because the comparison is ridiculous and inapproriate.
There is literally nothing to base this so called “comparison” on. It’s nothing but a pretty arrogant attempt to bully and/or sway. That’s it. Nothing more. It’s a supremely stupid argument to make, and has no basis whatsoever in reality. People really do need to stop licking Barack Obama’s kneecaps as a form of “thank-you.” It’s not that pretty a picture.
I find it deeply disturbing-as well-that the deaths of these pirates have caused such a burst of patriotism.
To demonstrate such glee over death, is as unpatriotic as unpatriotic can be.
The US flag is a worldwide symbol of democracy-not death. The two should nver be confused. It’s actually an insult-to do so.
However, I see no reason for this newborn patriotism to be wasted. Perhaps those who feel such fervor, would consider putting on a uniform and serving a tour of duty in either Iraq or Afghanistan.
I’m sure our poor, over-extended military-with sky high suicide rates-would welcome the respite.
That way, all that new-found patriotism would not be going to waste-while these “patriots” valiantly patrol the internet from behind the safety of their keyboards.