Reply
Fri 23 Apr, 2004 12:01 am
A week or so ago I started noticing how Americans are starting to patronize Iraqis in ways I'd not foreseen.
The Iraqis need to be "taught" what freedom is, goes some of the claims.
Analogies are made in which they are called, teenagers, children and other diminuitives.
It's creeping into a lot of political commentary both here on A2K and in the media.
I for one, think this is a sad manifestation of hubris. The "liberated" now need to be "taught" to appreciate the liberty by some reckoning.
It's damn sad when my compatriots do this. I can think of no uglier manifestation of American culture than this.
To me it's worse than when Americans are obnoxious and plain rude because I see respectful and educated people espousing such notions. I see blogs that purport* to be written by Iraqi citizens spewing this line.
It takes a special kind of national arrogance and a sense of cultural superiority that is off-putting to me.
I think it will become more and more common as the transition approaches.
"The Iraqi's need to learn to appreciate the freedom we invaded them to bring."
* I know of two very popular blogs that are obstensibly written by Iraqis that I've discovered are not what they appear through means I don't wish to disclose.
Edit: corrected typo
This is the mind set of colonialism. Read anything by Kipling
I started a thread on this very thing, Craven. I have never patronized anyone, to my knowledge. It's like a dismissal.
Acquiunk, Perhaps Kipling does come across as patronizing in his work, but the short story, "Without Benefit of Clergy" depicts him differently. One must consider the day and time in which he wrote. To many of that era, Mark Twain may have seemed patronizing.
As for the Iraqis, I think that freedom is best observed and not taught.
I think it is an attitude of "democratic" societies, as well. I would, in fact, call it a conceit. After 1991, for many years, it was fashionable for those who wished to appear to be in the know to suggest that the Russians "weren't ready for democracy," that they "preferred a strong leader." Such notions play into the hands of the autocratice. China has long exploited the political rectitude claptrap by saying thaty they have no tradition of participation in government by the people, and that, therefore, western societies should not criticize and apply their standards in judgments of the Chinese polity.
A long view of history shows that the Russians have often had weak leadership, and that there have been many instances of Chinese rulers who established their legitimacy through the support of "village elders" acting in place of the collapsed bureaucracy during the decline of a dynasty.
In the end, oversimplistic statements about what any particular people are capable of in forming a political system for their society are worth just exactly as much as you paid for them.
Craven:
The Brits used this sort of language to describe Indo-Asians during the years they occupied India -- their "jewel in the crown."
Bush and Cheney's imperial style occupation of Iraq is really no different.
This makes it an easier sell to "Joe Public," as Bush dismissively described the American public who must foot the bill for Iraq to the tune of nearly $5 billion a month, as well as sacrifice their sons and daughters for Haliburton.
Honey, these neocons had better get a grip on history.
Iraq had universities long before the Mayflower sailed. This psuedo-manifest destiny crap is a laugh!
Too bad they are still using the same textbooks...
McGentrix wrote:Too bad they are still using the same textbooks...
... like Bremer, I doubt this strongly - or am I wrong and that above is exactly the reason why former Baathists professors now can teach again at Iraquian universities?
I meant from " long before the Mayflower sailed"...
Well, April showers bring May flowers.
(sorry, another irresistible impulse)
McGentrix wrote:Too bad they are still using the same textbooks...
Have you seen the textbooks they are using in some American universities these days? Not too taxing.
oh. Your response read to me that you thought I meant that they were using pre-war books, not pre-civilization books.
yeah, and they had universities in pre-civilized society, which is one of main characteristics of universities - actually, they simply cannot exist in civilization
good old american arrogancy and ignorancy
McGentrix wrote:oh. Your response read to me that you thought I meant that they were using pre-war books, not pre-civilization books.
Yes, sorry, McG, sorry, I always forget that the US-Americans invented civilisation.
I thought everyone knew that.
If we had left it up to the Europeans or asians, we would still be dying from the plague and living in fiefdoms.
Stumble It!
Tweet This
Bookmark on Delicious
Share on Facebook
Share on MySpace