POLITICS JANUARY 25, 2012
-
Read Later
READ LATERAvailable only to subscribers. SUBSCRIBE TODAY
-
Listen
ARTICLE AUDIO
- Font Size
Exactly one year ago today, I stood in front of the Lawyers Syndicate in downtown Cairo and watched as a few thousand protesters suddenly streamed into the area from the north, overwhelmed Egypt’s notoriously violent riot police, and pushed onward towards Tahrir Square. That mile-long march, which culminated with the protesters bursting through a human chain of officers and seizing the Square, was the most inspiring thing that I’ve ever witnessed, and it remains so. Long presumed to be politically passive, ordinary Egyptians bravely amassed with one simple demand: That decades of dictatorship had to end. When Hosni Mubarak resigned eighteen tumultuous days later, the Arab Spring had bloomed.
Or so we wanted to believe. The reality of the past twelve months, however, has undone whatever high hopes one might have held. Egypt is now headed for radical theocratic, rather than liberal democratic, rule. And a befuddled Obama administration has failed to do anything to stop the coming disaster.
IT IS TEMPTING to believe that things might have turned out differently had Washington worked harder to bolster the young revolutionaries who seemingly exemplified America’s own liberal values when they took to the streets last January. These brave activists, after all, had won America’s hearts to the tune of an 82-percent approval rating at the height of the revolt, and their photogenic faces carried the promise of a more democratic, friendly Egypt.
But the activists were never who we hoped they were. Far from being liberal, their ranks were largely comprised of Nasserists, revolutionary socialists, and Muslim Brotherhood youths—an alliance of convenience for opposing Mubarak and, later, for denouncing the U.S.
Thus, when Secretary of State Hillary Clinton visited Egypt in March 2011, a group of leading activists refused to meet with her. They also turned out to be intolerant conspiracy theorists: When classically Cairoesque rumors that a “Jewish Masonic” ceremony was to be held at the pyramids on November 11, the April 6th Youth Movement’s Democratic Front declared that this non-existent event should be prohibited. “We are committed to the achievements of the revolution, which emphasized freedom,” they said in a statement. “But freedom is not absolute freedom, and … it is constrained by the regulations and beliefs of the Egyptian people, who do not accept that these celebrations be protected in the wake of the revolution.”
Not that the revolutionaries were the horse to bet on anyway. Their continued reliance on street protests following Mubarak’s ouster angered the wider Egyptian public, which desperately wanted a return to normalcy. In late October—only one day before the registration deadline—they finally formed an electoral coalition, the Revolution Continues Alliance (RCA), to compete in parliamentary elections, but it was too late. The RCA won merely 2.35 percent of the parliamentary seats, and will play a minimal role in shaping Egypt’s political future. Meanwhile, Islamist parties captured nearly 70 percent of the vote by tapping into the Egyptian public’s religious sentiments and using their well-established social services networks to turn out supporters.
The Obama administration, however, had already pegged its hopes on the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces (SCAF), which took power after Mubarak’s resignation with Washington’s approval—and reasonably so. After all, the military’s historic relations with Washington and its widespread support among the Egyptian public seemed to make it the ideal partner for shepherding Egypt toward a stable, democratic future.
But there were early signs that the SCAF was far more concerned about stability than it was interested in democracy. Last spring, as sectarian violence rose considerably, the military hesitated to interfere in domestic strife for fear of inciting a backlash. It also granted a platform to radical Salafists, splashing their images across the front pages of Egypt’s state-run press and hosting them on state-run news shows. Shortly thereafter, encouraged by their reception, the Salafists began organizing politically—emerging from the elections eight months later as Egypt’s second most dominant political force.
Then, when a sluggish transition towards civilian rule catalyzed new Tahrir Square protests in the autumn, the military unleashed an unprecedented crackdown, entirely abdicating whatever democratic credentials it could once lay claim to. Between October and December, the military killed at least 80 demonstrators and wounded hundreds, deploying armored military vehicles, snipers, and weapons-grade teargas again its own people, and manipulating the state-run media to incite civilians to take up arms against protesters. Meanwhile, the SCAF subjected at least 12,000 Egyptians to military trials and, in late December, stormed the offices of seventeen pro-democratic NGOs, many of which are U.S.-funded.
As the SCAF’s repressive rule has undermined its legitimacy both within Egypt and abroad, the Obama administration has looked increasingly to the Muslim Brotherhood as a potential partner. Thus, administration’s policy of “limited contacts” with the Muslim Brotherhood, which it announced in June, expanded to diplomatic meetings with the organization in October, and Deputy Secretary of State William Burns met with the Brotherhood’s political leaders in January. The Brotherhood, the thinking goes, won a 47 percent plurality in the recent parliamentary elections, and Washington’s interests are hardly served by having hostile relations with Egypt’s legitimately elected leaders. This argument, however, is only half right: While Washington should maintain open lines of communication with the Brotherhood, it should have no illusions about the Brotherhood’s willingness to act as a partner on key American interests.
In this vein, the Brotherhood’s leaders have said repeatedly that the organization intends to put the Camp David Accords to a referendum—a strategy that it apparently believes will enable it to sink Egypt’s peace treaty with Israel while escaping the blame. Brotherhood leaders have additionally called for banning bikinis, beach bathing, and alcohol despite the fact that these are essential elements to Egypt’s tourism industry, which comprises roughly ten percent of Egypt’s stagnating economy. The organization also supports new legislation that would limit foreign funding of NGOs, thereby undercutting Washington’s ability to aid pro-democratic organizations. Finally, and perhaps most consequentially, the Brotherhood intends to establish the sharia as the principal source of Egyptian legislation and criminalize criticism of Islamic law, thereby rendering Christians and secularists unequal citizens.
INDEED, ONE YEAR after Egypt’s heroic revolt, Washington has no heroes in Cairo, only headaches. But rather than confronting those headaches, the Obama administration has consistently chosen the path of least resistance. Thus, the SCAF’s raids on U.S.-funded NGOs has not put a halt to the $1.3 billion in military aid that Washington sends to Cairo, and the Muslim Brotherhood’s blatant stances against key U.S. interests have gone unchecked. According to Brotherhood political leader Essam El-Erian, when the Deputy Secretary of State visited the organization’s Cairo headquarters in mid-January, the Camp David Accords weren’t even mentioned.
Perhaps the administration is betting that recently reported negotiations between the SCAF and Muslim Brotherhood will yield an agreement that satisfies both parties and, at the very least, promotes domestic tranquility. If so, it would be a telling indicator of where things stand: a year after the ebullience of Tahrir, an alliance between military autocrats and radical theocrats is viewed, sadly, as a best-case scenario.
Eric Trager is the Ira Weiner Fellow at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy.
49 comments
"....an alliance between military autocrats and radical theocrats is viewed, sadly, as a best-case scenario...." Only in the Arab world would this be seen as a revolution instead of what it is: a reactionary coup d'état.
- arnon
January 25, 2012 at 12:09am
arnon you coward old fart, your brainless one liners are full of your puke crap.
- JAIMECHUCH
January 25, 2012 at 1:54am
Change is coming even in a society as conservative as Egypt. When you visit Egypt you meet many extraordinary young women. That is where change is being incubated. In twenty or thirty years Egypt and the rest of the middle east will be far more democratic and progressive than we can imagine now. Things take time. We are still grappling with issues that plagued us in 1776.
- paskunac
January 25, 2012 at 7:25am
Lots of political groups campaign one way and govern another. Until we see how Egypt's government actually governs, it is too early to draw any sensible conclusions about the success or failure of its revolution. Chances are, like most revolutions, including our own, it will be a success in some ways and a disappointment in others.
- DC Spence
January 25, 2012 at 7:31am
DC, you must believe in miracles. Do you really expect the Muslim Brotherhood to govern democratically?
- arnon
January 25, 2012 at 8:29am
Good arnon you coward old fart, you are now behaving. Still your one liners are full of your pucking crap.
- JAIMECHUCH
January 25, 2012 at 9:43am
The cynically realist side of me says Arnon is probably right, and his judgement on this (as in so many other things related to the region) is probably on target. But I'm still not ready to start tolling the death-bell for real democracy and equality to at least begin to flourish in even the most unlikely places (I'm looking at you, Burma). And Paskunac brings up a great point; from Iran across the ME and N Africa, it seems like we're hearing more and more every day about courageous, progressive-minded women unafraid to challenge the social order to affect positive change. One hopes they'll find continued success, and with it will come an end to the antisemitism, bigotry, and hate that have so long characterized the radical islamists that threaten both Israel and western democratic society.
- Tristan
January 25, 2012 at 9:47am
Little Jaime Chuchu needs to take his one note childish whistle and stuff it up his ass. Go home little Chuchu. Grownups are having a conversation.
- arnon
January 25, 2012 at 9:53am
DC Spence--the argument that radical fanatics will govern differently from they way they have campaigned for power once they face the actual heavy responsibilities of governing--that argument was made about Hamas too not so long ago (and about Hitler, for that matter). So that argument is simply too weak historically to be very soothing to those of us who are worried now.
- ProfEthan
January 25, 2012 at 10:09am
arnon you are a coward old fart. Your one liners are full of crap. Brainless puking crap.
- JAIMECHUCH
January 25, 2012 at 10:11am
The Facebook crowd against fanatic, experienced revolutionaries uniting with a ruthless military. Howard Cosell might have phrased it thusly: "Down goes Facebook!"
- magboy47.
January 25, 2012 at 10:14am
Tristan. I disagree with you about arnon. He is very ignorant about the Middle East. His one liners that are idiotic are followed by insulting that shows his psychiatric problems. He is very negative towards opinions by others. Likewise he should be treated accordingly until he behaves with respect to others. Egypt's improvements will take time. Unfortunately the head of the Muslim Brotherhood has returned to Egypt and kept giving speeches that are virulently anti Israel virulently antisemitic. We have to condemned such outrages. Hopes for peaceful improvements are fine but if these extreme islamists are not confronted violence will happen pretty soon. We already saw some instances in Egypt against the Israelis, against the Christians. Sadat made peace with Israel because he wanted to stop the spilling of blood of Egyptians. A peaceful cold peace existed with Israel for the next 30 years. However Mubarak did not restrained the hatred that Muslims kept teaching their people. if the islamists now controlling Egypt want to resume violence, Israel will defend itself, and there will be war. Of course the military will restrain the Islamists. Anyhow the Islamists are virulently anti Israel virulently anti Jew. Being nice to them has not worked. To Islamists that is a sign of weakness a sign or surrender. It is up to them to redirect their energy to build a middle class dedicated to industry and commerce, to better the dismal conditions of the Egyptian people. The same applies to other Muslim countries. .
- JAIMECHUCH
January 25, 2012 at 10:41am
Paskunac, wishful thinking I'm afraid. 40, 50, 60 years ago there were also "many extraordinary young women" (and men) in the Arab mideast. Monarchs were deposed, an Arab secular nationalism was on the rise promising to educate and liberate all, Christian Arabs were still players, etc. But here we are two generations later. A new cadre of young "photogenic" (Trager's words) activists whose political values are a little closer to ours shines for a moment. But only for a moment. So yes, things do take time. The question is: how much time? Or why do you think 20 years? Why not 100? And in the meantime, as the Egypt's populations doubles (by 2060), upriver Ethiopia takes more of its rightful share of the Blue Nile -- the source of >90% of Egypt's fresh water, the economy continues to tank . . . How long can we wait till these extraordinary young women (and men) are able to somehow, miraculously, take control and even more miraculously, turn things around? As I said, wishful thinking.
- awein
January 25, 2012 at 10:43am
On my recent vacation to North Baltimore I became friends with the manager of the motel. He was egyptian by name of Mustafa. Our conversations on the Israeli Arab conflicts ensued. I told him of my concerns that Muslims were teaching hatred towards Israel and the Jews, which he did not denied. I also told him that Israelis and Jews do not teach hatred . He did not say a thing. But from then on we never discussed again the Israeli Arab problems. We have remained very good friends. He is Muslim I am Jewish. Those that advocate friendliness have to confront and stop the hatred indulged by Muslims. I do not see any other approach helping peace with Muslims until they stop this continuous teaching of hatred to their people.
- JAIMECHUCH
January 25, 2012 at 10:56am
DC Spence "Lots of political groups campaign one way and govern another." Do you think the KKK party if elected would govern differently when in office?
- arnon
January 25, 2012 at 11:09am
I am not interested in getting into a mud slinging contest with the little chuchu boy with his scatological mouth. The idea that one can be "brave" or cowardly on these forums is as ridiculous as he is.
- arnon
January 25, 2012 at 11:11am
Curious to know if there were articles of this sort in the British press in 1849, castigating the government for failing to control outcomes in France the previous year. After the broad-based, hopeful revolution that overthrew Louis Philippe February 1848, April of that year brought a conservative National Assembly, based largley on the votes of bourgeouis and rural voters, and barely representing the interests of the urban proletariat. That in turn led to a bitter revolt in Paris in June that was brutally suppressed by the French army -- and which eventually led to the election of Louis Napoleon Bonaparte as President of the Republican in November, thereby elevating the nephew of Britain's great adversary 40 years ago to the leadership of France. Louis Napoleon ended up dissolving the National Assembly and taking power in a coup as Emperor Napoleon II two years later, and his Empire had a fraught relationship with Britain (sometimes as allies, sometimes as adversaries, though never coming to blows) for the next 18 years until its fall in 1870. Just some historical perspective for those trying to make sense of Egypt today.
- wildboy
January 25, 2012 at 11:13am
"Sadat made peace with Israel because he wanted to stop the spilling of blood of Egyptians." What bullshit, Sadat made peace for many reasons, mostly economic, he wanted to get foreign aid from the US. Not "spilling blood of Egyptians was a very minor concern if it was a concern at all. chuchu doesn't know what he hell he is yelping about. He gets his talking points from somewhere but doesn't seem understand them.
- arnon
January 25, 2012 at 11:16am
arnon I know you have a psychiatric problem of trying to put down people. Either you were mistreated during you youth, or are too lonely, or your companion mistreats you. But in this forum, or any other, you have to behave in a polite respectful manner. The other bloggers you have insulted usually ignore you. That is really the proper approach. But usually when you are insecure and weak you try to bring attention to your persona by insulting. It is a sign of cowardliness, it is a sign of senility. it is a sign of insecurity. I really feel sorry for you.
- JAIMECHUCH
January 25, 2012 at 11:29am
arnon There you go again. You are a bitter person. Really. You see the world in such a negative that confirms my analysis of your persona. now you are putting down Sadat. Do not be that bitter. Believe me will make you sick, perhaps a heart attack. Maybe you should try Yoga or Budhism. Or maybe masturbation. Stop being a creep. It is not good for your health.
- JAIMECHUCH
January 25, 2012 at 11:40am
If anyone at TNR is moderating this or any other forum on the website, please ban JAIMECHUCH from posting any further comments on it. The combination of personal invective (most of it completely unprompted) and incoherent ramblings should be more than sufficient grounds for it.
- wildboy
January 25, 2012 at 12:09pm
I second wildboy's post. Chuch (chucu) adds nothing to the discussion.
- arnon
January 25, 2012 at 12:45pm
wildboy. You are a bigot and not accept anti liberal neofascist arguments. I had a previous arguments with you. I would gladly welcome a third party analysis of your bigoted blogs against the rational arguments of mine. arnon should be analyzed also. It is an insult that arnon a bitter insulting individual should join forces with neofascists like wildboy which I have indicated has to be domesticated. Why their antagonism because I have labelled Obama as the Jobless President. As for wildboy, this is not a forum to be exclusively for Obama lovers. Of course arnon is just an anti Muslim bitter bigot. If moderators take action then they will get rid of people like wild boy and arnon. These characters indulge on insulting Martin Peretz personally, since they can not argue intelligently thus they resort to personal attacks. They are doing the same with me. The New Republic will not allow takeover of the site by these Obama radicals, anti Muslim bigots. They have damaged the site to an extent that TNR has lost readers in droves. There it goes that dictatorial places do not allow free discussion. If you are unable to discuss freely, resort to personal insults and banning. Sorry picture of individuals like wildboy (to be domesticated) and arnon the coward old bitter ignorant. Mediocre individuals feel safer in hiding.
- JAIMECHUCH
January 25, 2012 at 1:27pm
There's a kid across my street, he's in 8th grade, called Jamie. Hmmm.... And to defend Mr. Peretz and then rail on anti-Muslim bigots is quite humorous.
- tmmats
January 25, 2012 at 2:08pm
"You are a bigot and not accept anti liberal neofascist arguments. I had a previous arguments with you." if jaime chuchu thinks that wildboy is a "neofascist" (hard to tell from his syntax) he is in worse shape than I thought.
- arnon
January 25, 2012 at 2:25pm
Sadat made peace with Israel because it got him back the Sinai without shedding one drop of blood, it got him hefty American money bags and American sponsorship and he knew he was making a good deal as there was no way he could take back the Sinai by sticking to war. He was a pragmatist. The Ikhwan are true believers.
- noga1
January 25, 2012 at 3:12pm
tmmats all consonants. BTW the spelling is Jaime which is Spanish for James. No harm done. Now for bitter arnon, I made his day since everybody but everybody ignores him, he doesn't know the difference between Middle East or middle ass. His latest bitterness was to attack Sadat the great Egyptian leader assassinated by the Muslim Brotherhood, with consequences of producing 30 years of dictatorship under Mubarak. Yes Martin Peretz, like me, wants success for the Arab Spring, and the Muslims. Success that will bring peace, prosperity and the good life so dearly needed by the Muslim population. We want elimination of hatred and violence. That is why Martin Peretz reports accurate information. Because loving peace an prosperity is good for Israel and everybody else. We don't want bitter obnoxious individuals attacking these deeds. We don't want the arnons of this world spilling poisonous degrading posts. And when it happens we will correct them.
- JAIMECHUCH
January 25, 2012 at 3:28pm
noga 1. You are correct. Sadat meant well for his people. Sadly he became a martyr. But he brought peace. And for how the Sinai produces business read this report http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4178744,00.html Hamas has Prohibited the sales of "imported" Egyptian cars in Gaza. The Bedouins keep stealing cars from Egyptians living in Sinai. the cars are then smuggled into Gaza through the tunnels. Not to worry, it appears that the cars are disassembled, smuggled through the tunnels, and reassembled and sold in Gaza. The tunnels are quite busy with business for the Sinai Bedouins. They never had it so good.
- JAIMECHUCH
January 25, 2012 at 3:42pm
The Egyptians were clients of the Soviet Union. They provided arms and economic assistant to Gamal Abdel Nasser which died and Sadat took over. The Russians kept making trouble. The arms given to Egyptians were obsolete WWII equipment. During the Yom Kippur war initially Sadat succeeded into defeating the Israelis initially, but then Sharon took over pushing back the Egyptians and encircling the Egyptian army, at which point the Russians were going to intervene and attack Israel, however Nixon stopped them. Sadat eventually got rid of the Russians and became friendly with the USA. As for Israel, Golda Meir and labor lost the elections that brought Likud into power with Menachem Begin. As always accused for being extreme right, Begin brought the Sephardics into the mainstream, and made peace with Sadat and the Egyptians. And Netanyauh belongs to that party, and is very popular in Israel. But is ostracized by the left in the USA.
- JAIMECHUCH
January 25, 2012 at 4:07pm
Interesting line of comment, some ridiculous. As for Egypt and the MB, there is a longish history of factional conflict within MB so it is early days for seeing which will dominate in the coming months. What scares me are the Salafists who could easily ally themselves with the extreme factions of the MB and really change the landscape. As for the US, I do not see that we have any right to interfere, although I know that some will call that naive. If we are seen to interfere, that could only boomerang in unpleasant ways (as it had before).
- choward
January 25, 2012 at 5:22pm
Happy Birthday to the Doomed Revolution! makes a pretty good album title.
- ironyroad
January 25, 2012 at 5:50pm
"...As for the US, I do not see that we have any right to interfere, " I'm not sure anyone urged interference. But there is a difference between non-interference and the kind of statements we get from this administration that the MB are "moderate' and can be reasoned with. It is very strange. Like a teacher trying to integrate an incalcitrant pupil into the class by praising him as a good kid, hoping that the praise alone will act as an incentive to stop throwing tantrums and bully the other kids.
- noga1
January 25, 2012 at 6:06pm
Often a successful approach (note: often does not mean always).
- ironyroad
January 25, 2012 at 8:21pm
It works in your classes, does it, ironyroad? Often the problem with recalcitrant pupils is organic and no amount of goodwill is going to achieve anything. A different kind of intervention is called for. It would be a great day when diplomacy could develop the equivalent of Ritalin for such nations who suffer from ADD and other mental disorders that prevent them from functioning within the norm.
- noga1
January 25, 2012 at 8:49pm
Inspired in part by "If anyone at TNR is moderating this or any other forum on the website, please ban XXXXX XXXXXX from posting any further comments on it. The combination of personal invective (most of it completely unprompted) and incoherent ramblings should be more than sufficient grounds for it." [Note: in case this proposal in particular or my comments in general irritate and offend you, after the first one, just skip right by the rest.] 1 of 5. Although at the moment I am not lacking in air, water, food, clothing, shelter, transportation, etc. and my health is fairly good despite a few aches and pains not surprising in my age, my financial resources are limited, so the cost of my subscription to TNR is an expense I have to evaluate with care. Why do I continue this modest expense? As far as I can tell, it is to be informed, to be entertained, and to amuse myself, both by reading and by spouting forth in the unlikely fancy that my participation might do the same for others. I do not speak languages such as Hebrew, Arabic, Farsi, Turkish, and I have not traveled in the countries where these languages are spoken. I do not know why these countries seem to be some of the most conflict-ridden ones in a conflict-ridden world.
- skahn
January 25, 2012 at 10:24pm
2/5 I have known and communicated with many people in the United States from these countries, and quite a few of whom identified themselves as Jews, Muslims, Hindus, and Buddhists (as well as Christians, of course, as well as a few other groups such as Jains, Sikhs, etc.) Most of these people knew that my ancestors were Jews, and I can't remember any of them threatening, criticizing, insulting me. (I don't think I am naïve in this regard, however; I am quite aware that there are plenty of people in this world who would happily attack or kill me because of my last name or what I just wrote.) My guess is that most of the people reading here prefer peace over conflict, felicity over suffering, sufficiency over deprivation, healthfulness over illness. Although it's unlikely that posting comments at TNR will make the world a better, even so, it might a bit, and a basic ingredient would seem to be to model the behavior you would like to see others engage in, such as respect, courtesy, tolerance, etc. (even though such amiability may reduce most of the fun of the for those of us who come to to TNR for Mixed Martial Verbal Arts Combat).
- skahn
January 25, 2012 at 10:25pm
3/5 As today is my birthday, I've decided to offer TNR and myself a birthday present. When I was a young codger, two of my favorite works of literature were Shirley Jackson's famous short story, “The Lottery,” and William Golding's novel, Lord of the Flies.. Both of these works deal thematically with the human need for sacrifices and scapegoats. [Parenthetically, just to get everybody in the correct frame of mind for what I will offer, I will say that a) I consider the supernatural aspects of the Jesus Christ story as absurd; b) the non-supernatural events recorded in the Gospel of Jesus may or may not have much relation to actual events; c) people and groups such as Thomas Jefferson and the Unitarian Church seem to regard a non-supernatural deistic account of Jesus as inspiring; d) that latter (non-supernatural Jesus story) does not much inspire me.]
- skahn
January 25, 2012 at 10:28pm
4/5 Anyway, here is my proposal: 1) TNR create a new [free] account, screen name, and persona for me. 2) This new account in name, personality, and persona be carefully designed to be as irritating, offensive, and grating as possible. Perhaps call it Glen Blecch, Soul Brother Herman Caine Mutiny, Figgy Newton Grungegrich, Rocky Saintorum, Donald Troll, Rant Pawl, or Mutt Rumney; though I am sure anyone reading this can do better. Perhaps in honor of Lord of the Flies in my new identity I should be screen-named, “Piggy” though perhaps it would be trying too hard to name me “Piggy Gruntrich” or some such. 3) A long tradition of Internet Trolling is pretending to be someone of the opposite sex, so I could even cast myself as one of the four Horsewomen of the Apocalypse: choosing among Surly Pronghorn, Muscly Breakmen, Kaily Baily Hurtyourson, and Curty Fightinyourarena, or if we want to stick with a classic story, I could be Tessie Hutchinson in honor of http://www.classicshorts.com/stories/lotry.html 4) Once this new account is created I will do everything I can to offend, both in TNR discussion postings and by disrupting world peace and progress and promoting war, prejudice, violence, and generally feeding and petting the four Horsemen of the Apocalypse.
- skahn
January 25, 2012 at 10:31pm
5/5 Looking over today's posts in this discussion thread, some are boringly sensible and informative, but we have quite a few classic flames. Aron has dissed me a few times (though not recently). As far as I know, Jaime has never taken a whack at me. In any case, as a long time participant in Internet forums and discussions going back to original unmoderated all the insults short of libel Newsgroups all you can post buffet troll dining, it is hard to hurt my feelings. (Mainly because aside from general unsociopathic tepidly altruistic “I wish you no painful harm” temperance, I don't really give a sh*t) about you or what you think of me.) So in return for a free subscription to TNR under my new name (whatever it turns out to be) I can become the official scapegoat of THE NEW REPUBLIC, the person to blame for everything from war in the Middle East to italic tags that won't turn off.
- skahn
January 25, 2012 at 10:33pm
sKahn, I agree with you. You are wasting your time here. Go do something more productive or at least fun than subscribe to a magazine that reports on countries you think totally irrational and that should not exist. Surely you owe yourself a respite from all this silly melodrama. You endless complaints about religion has become your own religions, and very tedious religion it is.
- arnon
January 25, 2012 at 10:39pm
Thank you, Arnon. Let's see, JamieChuch addressed you as follows: "I know you have a psychiatric problem of trying to put down people." Let's see: "countries I think totally irrational ... should not exist." Just out of curiosity where have I ever said such a thing? "Endless complaints about religion..." Where have I ever complained about religion? Some people believe (probably in greater numbers). Some people don't. I am not the only one. What I believe is that people who believe and don't believe should try to live in peace and toleration and cooperation, and should try to make this world we actually live in as pleasant, kind, compassionate, caring, and successful as we can. Most of the religious people I know and most of the secular people I know seem to act on this value. The historical person I admire the most was Roger Williams, who was a fervent Calvinist zealot, but also a good governor, a good linguist, a good businessman, and probably one of the ten greatest contributors to what makes America a great country. By the way, Arnon, what do you believe as far as religion and values go? This is not a snarky comment or a hidden insult, but simply a genuine and curious question. Just for the heck of it, try providing a straightforward and courteous reply.
- skahn
January 26, 2012 at 12:57am
skahn. You wrote: " I do not know why these countries seem to be the most conflict-ridden ones in a conflict ridden world". arnon interpreted as follows: " Go do something more productive or at least fun than subscribe to a magazine that reports on countries you think totally irrational and that should not exist " skahn you wrote about supernatural or non-supernatural Jesus Christ , the Gospel of Jesus, Thomas Jefferson, the Unitarian Church...and the absurdity of supernatural Jesus...non supernatural deistic account of Jesus "does not inspire me" Thus, then arnon: "your endless complaints about religion has become your own religions, and very tedious religion it is". At any rate skahn happy birthday.
- JAIMECHUCH
January 26, 2012 at 2:41am
skahn "Thank you, Arnon. Let's see, JamieChuch addressed you as follows: "I know you have a psychiatric problem of trying to put down people."" You pretend that you are being polite, yet you embrace Chuchu with his scatological mouth. You are also wrong: my psychological problem, if that is what it is, is that I have a compulsion to praise. Unfortunately neither chuchu nor you deserve praise. Certainly not for your attacks on me indirectly and directly. "Let's see: "countries I think totally irrational ... should not exist." Just out of curiosity where have I ever said such a thing?" The implications of what you said, are clear enough even if you state it covertly. Here is one example: SKahn: "I do not speak languages such as Hebrew, Arabic, Farsi, Turkish, and I have not traveled in the countries where these languages are spoken. I do not know why these countries seem to be some of the most conflict-ridden ones in a conflict-ridden world." You then say "Endless complaints about religion..." Where have I ever complained about religion?" You never stop, it's all over your posts. However, you are either being deliberately disingenuous or don't understand what you write. "By the way, Arnon, what do you believe as far as religion and values go? This is not a snarky comment or a hidden insult, but simply a genuine and curious question." Not "a snarky comment?" Give me a break. You are incapable of making a direct and honest statement. In any case, I don't have religious values, btw. I am neither against religion nor for it. I also don't have a compulsion to tell the world a hundred times a day as you do that "my ancestors" were Jewish but I am a "non-believer,” as you do. You also seem to have "psychological" need to declare that you don't know if you should stay at TNR or not. Whether you stay here or go makes no difference to me, SKahn.
- arnon
January 26, 2012 at 8:56am
When I wrote the above to SKahn, I hadn't read Mr. Chuch' reply to him. I wish I had as I would have worded my reply differently.
- arnon
January 26, 2012 at 9:33am
An old expression I am fond of is "Race to the bottom." Originally, I think it applies to competition between countries and states for industries. For example, a state such as South Carolina may try to lure a company such as Boeing (well established in Washington state where i live) to build factories there by providing workers willing to work for less, fewer restrictions on environmental regulations, etc. At some point the winner hits rock bottom but keeps drilling down. I think the term also applies to Internet arguments and "flame wars." As far as Jamie Church goes, his last words to me are "Happy Birthday." Try as I might, I cannot think of anything to complain to him about. As far as Mr. Arnon goes, I beliee i have said in the past that I find many of his comments (aside from the ones addressed to me) as intelligent, informative, and interesting. However, in my case, I think he is racing me to the bottom. When I was young and in school, I was not an athlete and seldom did well in foot races. It may be that he is raciing me to the bottom (at least in this discussion thread) and I think I should step aside and let him win. You may have the final comment. I will read it carefully and try to learn from it. Use it well.
- skahn
January 26, 2012 at 3:35pm
This thread ends with a whimper not a bang.
- basman
January 26, 2012 at 6:17pm
BANG!
- dsimon
January 26, 2012 at 9:12pm
Whimper.
- basman
January 26, 2012 at 9:26pm
Sniffle.
- ironyroad
January 27, 2012 at 1:03am