Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2002 10:29:49 -0800 (PST)
From: Wolf Factory <wolf_factory-AT-yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Chomsky vs. Hitchens


My recollection of the article is that it was only
amis who accused Chomsky of being anti-American not
Hitchens. The latter is upset with Chomsky for not
denouncing Bin Laden and Milosevic strongly enough.
W.F.

--- Anita Palathingal <palata01-AT-yahoo.com> wrote:
> I fully agree -- Hitchens and Amis branding Chomsky
> as
> anti-American and not thinking that "America is a
> good
> idea" is astoundingly reactionary and shallow. No
> one,
> including Chomsky, is discounting the horror of
> Sept.
> 11. That is not the point that Chomsky is making,
> but
> the two of them have missed it. 
>   Chomsky is not saying that "the US is not a good
> idea". He is simply re-stating what it takes for the
> U.S. to stay at the front of the pack, namely an
> interventionist policy based on self-interest --
> which, post-September 11, has not changed, and hence
> does not become the best policy to "fight
> terrorism". 
> 
> --- Wolf Factory <wolf_factory-AT-yahoo.com> wrote:
> > 
> > I think there are no winners in the Chomsky vs.
> > Hitchens debate. The two men are approaching the
> > same
> > problem from different sides. Hitchens wants the
> US
> > to
> > support human rights issues and to confront
> > #bullies#
> > like Milosevic and Bin Laden. Chomsky, on the
> other
> > hand, knows that US interventionist policies can
> > itself lead to slaughter and a worsening of
> > conditions
> > for the very people the US claims to be helping.
> > Hitchens, is also sensitive to that but he
> believes
> > the US can be changed. It can be made to take
> moral
> > stands. 
> > 
> > The ousting of Milosevic, which Hitchens I am sure
> > celebrated, was not a certain outcome of the war.
> > The
> > fact it happened should not lead us to believe
> that
> > all future American interventions will have a
> > similar
> > #happy# outcome. I think Afghanistan will now
> serve
> > as
> > a test case. What will become of this country?
> Will
> > it
> > lapse into a pre-Talaban state of tribal warfare
> and
> > lawlessness or will it finally, against all odds,
> > flourish? 
> > 
> > The same question can be extended to Iraq. All the
> > analysis being offered by #experts# at the moment
> > regarding what constitutes a good outcome from a
> > future Gulf War III, has taken no account of the
> > Iraqi
> > people, their history and their needs. 
> > 
> > This is ultimately the sticking point in
> supporting
> > American interventionism. It is always driven by
> the
> > narrow interests of the US. James Rubin, the
> former
> > US
> > assistant secretary of state, wrote a lengthy
> > article
> > in the weekend edition of FT (March 9/10)
> outlining
> > the kind of advice, president Bush might be
> > receiving
> > at the moment regarding Iraq. He writes #Defense
> > believes a military option can achieve a regime
> > change
> > with acceptable costs and risks #. The costs and
> > risks
> > he is referring to are those to be incurred by the
> > US
> > and its allies who will wage the war campaign. The
> > costs and risks to the Iraqi people and the damage
> > to
> > the infrastructure of the country (which is still
> > devastated from the previous war) are not even on
> > his
> > radar screen. Furthermore, he is very clear about
> > what
> > a victory in Iraq will achieve: #in conjunction
> with
> > Turkey and Israel, [Iraq will] create a triangle
> of
> > stability in the Arab world#. In other words, let
> > the
> > human rights violators unite! This triangular
> > bulwark
> > is clearly intended for the benefit of Iran. Will
> > Iraqis be willing to be manipulated in this way? 
> > 
> > This is why, although I understand and to a
> certain
> > extent sympathize with the Hitchens/ Rushdie
> stance,
> > I
> > fail to see how a superpower like the US can ever
> be
> > persuaded to take into account the interests of
> the
> > people whose fate it decides through its all too
> > often
> > self-centered foreign policies. Furthermore,
> > violence
> > against the Muslim world does not strike me as the
> > best way of getting rid of what Hitchens describes
> > as
> > #Islamic fascism#. Rather, a real encouragement of
> > democracy and the support for secular opposition
> > groups (which incidentally the US helped to
> > obliterate
> > in Iraq during the cold war on account of their
> > leftist or communist leanings) might be a more
> > fruitful course of action. The change in the
> Islamic
> > world can only come from within. 
> > 
> > Final note: Amis comes off as an idiot in the
> > article.
> > He doesnt have the subtlety, intellect or depth of
> > feeling of Rushdie or Hitchens. His claim that
> > Chomsky
> > suffers from anti-Americanism can only be
> described
> > as ignorant at best or deeply malicious at worst. 
> 
> > 
> > --- Salil Tripathi <salil61-AT-hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > From this week's The New Statesman (London):
> > > 
> > > Cover story - George W Bush's unlikely
> bedfellows
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Cover story
> > > 
> > > 
> > > John Lloyd
> > > Monday 11th March 2002
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Who would have expected Hitchens, Amis and
> Rushdie
> > > to support a Republican 
> > > president in a war? But John Lloyd finds sense
> and
> > > logic in their stand
> > > 
> > > "I had," said Martin Amis, "been a bit more
> > cautious
> > > about the war to begin 
> > > with. I thought that the old response, with the
> > > cruise missiles operation, 
> > > was not right. I thought it should be more of a
> > > financial and an 
> > > intelligence operation. But it now seems to me
> > that
> > > a show of force was 
> > > necessary."
> > > 
> > > Prominent writers, such as Christopher Hitchens
> > and
> > > Salman Rushdie, have 
> > > shocked some sections of the European left by
> > their
> > > stance on 11 September 
> > > and on the events that followed it. The shock is
> > all
> > > the greater because, 
> > > like Amis, they come from a left generation that
> > > bitterly opposed US 
> > > intervention, overt and covert, in such
> countries
> > as
> > > Vietnam and Chile. Much 
> > > of the intellectual left in Europe cleaves to a
> > view
> > > of America as the 
> 
=== message truncated ==

===="All the wolves in the wolf factory paused at noon, 
for a moment of silence."
........from laughing Gravy by John Ashbery.
---------------------------------------------------------
Looking for something good and original to read?
Check out: http://homepages.nildram.co.uk/~simmers/

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Sports - live college hoops coverage
http://sports.yahoo.com/


     --- from list postcolonial-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---