Wednesday, August 27, 2003

More on the tensions in the conflict. Posted here Wednesday, August 27, 2003 at 10:24:14 PM     I don't know the answer but the symptom may be understood by noticing that the positions laid out are so full and complex that there is no hope for order or guidance. The idea of cross cultural communication implies that there are two. But as i see it, and just posted, it is three. (I am clearer here than there, so  am learning as I go)   Christian west vs Islam Modernism vs Islam and Modernism vs the Christian west.   Each of us is torn apart by these divisions.   And if we add modernism is equated with globalization, which is really localization of ownership in ever smaller number of "centers" such as NY, London, ... well, which side are we on?   Because Bush is a polarizer, a reaction prone bully, the tension side rather than the dialog side predominates.   But perhaps underlying realities (population, Pakistan, poverty, procrastination) are so bad that conflict is all too likely.   Maybe the reality is, if there really is a big war, we would all rather be in New Zealand. Ouch. So we are caught between peace and flight, not the hard work - that Dan and others point to, of really understanding this monster and being prepared to fight- in the way that Tom Paine, Ben Franklin, and such would understand it.   The problem is, with each passing week, the world is changing faster than we are. ********

Islam and modernization:Two divisive issues at the same time Posted here Wednesday, August 27, 2003 at 10:06:07 PM       If we take the view that we have a struggle of modernism vs traditionalism, then the technocrats want us to agree that the "correct" side and adequate definition of modernism is free markets and globalization. Yet we know that the major problem is economic exploiation that then gets mixed up with religious history. Those who take the free market view assume that working on dialog among the faiths will have as the outcome a support for free market pespectives. But that is exactly what the faiths are against, because of the deep inequalities created among populations and destruction of faith based world views. the apparent conflict of christian/secular west vs islam is overlaid with another struggle of faith based vs free market world views.  Try to locate yourself on both of these dimensions and see how much tension you carry within. I  found this article by Stanley Hoffman very helpful, as he takes Friedman and Fukuyama as indicators of a failed argument. failed because of simplstic assumptions.   ********

Unintended consequences:Blair and the use of computers "no paper trail" Posted here Wednesday, August 27, 2003 at 9:22:31 PM     Not being able to use a computer has some consequences, or rather, being able to do so makes you more vulnerable. Because Blair is who he is, every reference to him at the inquiry has been pored over and examined in magnified detail, sometimes extravagantly so. But the evidence, including Geoff Hoon's, has not yet placed Blair himself at many meetings that discussed the Iraq dossier, Andrew Gilligan's broadcasts or what to do about Dr David Kelly. Blair himself has not left much of a paper trail - not least because, like Alastair Campbell, he is computer illiterate. Strange but true. ********

Bush and Iraq and destiny Posted here Wednesday, August 27, 2003 at 8:17:47 PM     I read somewhere today that Iraq is the defining moment for the next twentyfive years. Unless of course somethng else comes along, like the breakup of the United States, or nuclear war in Pakistan. The longer view, the 400 years since the reformation and the breakup of Catholic Europe. 500 years since the rise of europe, a phase that may be over. Long term climatic reversals. Population and revisiting Malthus. The trashing of individual personality by markets, making value equals cost The reason Iraq is so important is because the US response comes directly out of Bush's character, the bully, scared and reactive, the lack of a vision of anything else. He does not know culture, people, traditions. The instincts of the president under pressure are detrminative. Bush's character has had a profound impact, starting on 911, when it was all he had to react from.   ********

Poll in Iraq Posted here Wednesday, August 27, 2003 at 6:37:42 PM     In London Some perspective on the situation in Iraq: UK's Channel 4 News and the Spectator have commissioned the first comprehensive independent survey in Baghdad since the conflict. According to an article on channel4.com summarizing the results, "Two in three fear being attacked in the street. Most think we went to war to grab Iraq's oil. Yet despite these deep concerns, only a minority oppose the Americans and British invasion, and as few as one in eight want the invaders to leave the country straight away." Comment: the polls say that most iraqi's are less upset than the press makes out. Suggests that the US will hold on, which means a long protracted aftermath. All could become more complicated if itt turns out that the key rogue state is Pakistan, which looks likely.   ********