What a miserable secretary of state, up to his neck in denial. And how unfriendly to Israel he is to retract his frank, genuine and friendly warning merely for fear of the lobby. Now millions of ignorant Americans, viewers of Fox News and its ilk, know that Israel is in no risk of becoming an apartheid state. They believe the power of Hamas and the sophistication of Qassam rocket pose an existential danger to Israel .
The naysayers can find countless differences between the apartheid of Pretoria and that of Jerusalem. Pretoria’s was openly racist and anchored in law; Jerusalem’s is denied and repressed, hidden beneath a heavy cloak of propaganda and messianic religious faith. But the result is the same. Some South Africans who lived under the system of segregation say that their apartheid was worse. I know South Africans who say that the version in…
View original post 759 more words
In the past, when a conservative faction like the one “led” by George W. Bush behaved too aggressively outright, the “antidote” was for a “softer” liberal faction to come into power, gain popularity and give the false impression that they have made things right again only by padding all the brutality with lip-service to humanitarianism. This is the way it was in India during British occupation. However, nearing the end of Britain’s rule in India, we also began seeing problems that false-liberalism couldn’t fix.
Right now, Obama and the liberals are showing us they may be the more aggressive and less honest faction in reality. The current conservatives aren’t going to be any “softer.”
Again, it’ll be interesting to see what transpires from here on out.
(Amy Chua had no problem expounding on this conservative-liberal pendulum-swing that accompanies the demise of a hegemon in her book “Day of Empire.” Ironically (and perhaps not so ironically,) Chua herself is archetypal of this type of fake-liberalism and intellectualism. She only discussed this scenario in relation to British India and made absolutely no mention of any US imperialistic crimes in the same book. How will she discuss this problem for contemporary Western society when she is a part of the problem herself?
See: The Daily Servant of Power: Amy Chua)
In the past, someone like Samantha Power would not have been judged for her crimes until long after her death.
John Stuart Mill supported the British raping of India for humanitarian reasons · arguing that the Indian people were no better than animals and, thus, required hegemonic subordination in order to be helped and civilized.
Nowadays, an interesting dynamic has emerged where the intellectual class, whose biological niche is to give humanitarian precedence for ruthless imperialism, are being judged in their current era by a rising faction of independents from different sectors of society (including more honest sectors of academia itself.) It’ll be interesting to see where things go from here as a result.
Today’s servant of power is:
Russia and China’s mindless development that doesn’t take its people into account is always a hot topic for Western media outlets that are pawns within our system of mindless growth and consumption.
And what is with all the phony ignorance, questioning, and surprise at 3:28 like she had no information about the mall coming in and like she didn’t review her script right before hand to figure out what she was supposed to ask?