RE: Re: Re: Query on Anti-Colonial Revolts
Crucible of Empire: The Spanish-American War appeared on PBS. I thought it was great, especially for PBS. to purchase, go to www.greatprojects.com\store mbs Do you know of any movies of significance, be they documentaries or fictions, on the following subjects: the Sepoy Rebellion; the Mahdi Revolt; the Spanish-American War/the Philippines-American War; the Boxer Rebellion; and any other non-Marxist but anti-colonial revolts rebellions? -- Yoshie
RE: No recognition for Enduring Freedom!
American representatives overwhelmed those of every other country at the inauguration ceremony. There was General Tommy Franks - who might have expected a victor ludorum after vanquishing the Taliban - this reminds me of a proposal that I think still is relevant: following the lead of ancient Roman emperors, US Presidents to add titles to their names to indicate their victorie: Ronald Grenadacus Reagan, George Panamacus Bush, Bill Sudanicus Clinton, Dubya Afghanistanicus Bush... One problem is that last on the list wouldn't be able to spell his own name. JD
Re: RE: No recognition for Enduring Freedom!
following the lead of ancient Roman emperors, US Presidents to add titles to their names to indicate their victorie: Ronald Grenadacus Reagan, George Panamacus Bush, Bill Sudanicus Clinton, Dubya Afghanistanicus Bush... One problem is that last on the list wouldn't be able to spell his own name. JD I don't think the emperrors did this much; it was the victious generals of the Repubic, like Scipio Africanus, so honored for defeating the Carthaginians. It wouldn't be a middle name, anyway. ANd as for the Shrub, ignorance and illteracy have never held him back, maybe the opposite. I think, in fact, that it's a backlash--lots of people are sympathetic to the Shrub precisely because he's unininterested, not too bright, and not very well-informed--sort of like them. So making fun of him for being a moron, as opposed to despising his politics, is probably a political mistake. jks _ Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com
Re: Re: RE: No recognition for Enduring Freedom!
Justin Schwartz wrote: lots of people are sympathetic to the Shrub precisely because he's unininterested, not too bright, and not very well-informed--sort of like them. So making fun of him for being a moron, as opposed to despising his politics, is probably a political mistake. I keep remembering Eisenhower's years, when everyone had a ball mocking his clumsy rhetoric and suggesting he wasn't too bright. It was a hoax, a rather deliberate one. It is particularly unwise to try to estimate intelligence on the basis of someone's command of language: that can be very deceptive. It is quite possible for highly intelligent people to be consistent bumblers in their speaking and writing. Never underestimate an enemy. Carrol
Re: Re: Re: RE: No recognition for Enduring Freedom!
Carrol says: I keep remembering Eisenhower's years, when everyone had a ball mocking his clumsy rhetoric and suggesting he wasn't too bright. It was a hoax, a rather deliberate one. It is particularly unwise to try to estimate intelligence on the basis of someone's command of language: that can be very deceptive. It is quite possible for highly intelligent people to be consistent bumblers in their speaking and writing. Never underestimate an enemy. Carrol's point is good. With Ike, though, there was a lot of evidence that he was no fool. He'd done a superb job as CiC of the Western allied forces in WWII, and was a tolerable prez of Columbia. Even his command of language wasn't so awful. He wrote Crusade in Europe, no doubt with some help, but it's readable. There is no evidence that theShrub has ever even read a book. Imagining him writing one is beyond my capacity. And there is a fair amount of evidence that he's been a failure at everything he has put his handto. However, and this is key, he's surrounded with very smart and dangerous people who seem, so far, to be able to submerge their differences enough to act in a fairly coherent manner. Moreover, as the examples of Reagan and indeed Lyndon Johnson or Harry Truman show, analytical intelligence is not necesasry for political success. Or, closer to home, Carrol, our own Richard M. Daley, Da Mayor (the dad of the current boss). Or, to range further afield, there is one Josip Dzuglishvili, aka Stalin, and there is Adolph Hitler. These were all superb politicians. None of them had anything like what one would consider to be the sort of brains foe which professors or lawyers are rewarded. It didn't matter. Now, the Shrub (so far) isn't in their league. But people can learn. Truman did. Before he had greatness thrust upon him, he was a low grade machine hack, picked for precisely that reason. He became the architect of the first cold war, and from his point of view, did a fabulous job. Who can tell about the Shrub? But he's off toa good start. We can't deny he's handled this situation very well. jks _ Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com
Re: RE: Re: Re: Query on Anti-Colonial Revolts
From: Max Sawicky [EMAIL PROTECTED] Crucible of Empire: The Spanish-American War appeared on PBS. I thought it was great, especially for PBS. to purchase, go to www.greatprojects.com\store mbs The S-A War, just like the splendid little war now in progress, put the US public in quite a feisty mood. PBS rebroadcast another interesting documentary recently on Coney Island in its turn-of-the-century heyday. The documentary, by Ric Burns, noted how the S-A war influenced popular fantasies. One web site that draws on the same material Burns used notes: Americans have always loved violence and at the turn of the century they received it in a different form. Instead of seeing hundreds of people die in a film they went to Coney and watched as an entire city got swept away by a wall of water or saw Mount Vesuvius shower death upon the people of Pompeii. ... [Coney Island] shows like 'War of the Worlds' also gave Americans that feeling of pride, a feeling of what they thought their new country was going to become. In this show the naval forces of Germany, France, Britain and Spain sailed together into Manhattan. Then, [Battle of Manila Bay hero] Admiral [George] Dewey's fleet sailed out and sank every one of the sixty boats which had come to threaten American independence. See http://history.amusement-parks.com/users/adamsandy/coneyhist1.htm Carl _ Join the worlds largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. http://www.hotmail.com
Washington's man to be installed as Afghan prime minister
Washington's man to be installed as Afghan prime minister By Peter Symonds 22 December 2001 The new Afghan interim administration headed by Hamid Karzai is due to be sworn into office in Kabul today. While UN officials are withholding details of the two-hour ceremony for security reasons, it promises to be a low-key affair. To be held in the Interior Ministry auditorium, it will be attended by the 30-member cabinet, UN Special Representative Lakhdar Brahimi, US special envoy James Dobbins and a handful of other UN officials and diplomats, including the foreign ministers of Iran and Pakistan. While neither US President Bush nor any senior member of his administration will preside, the entire affair bears an unmistakable American imprint. The new regime was cobbled together at a UN-sponsored meeting of Afghani factions in Germany in early December. The UN Security Council had already set out a detailed framework-all that was left for the Afghani groups was to haggle over positions. But, as several reports last week indicated, even the selection of personnel was the subject of pressure and bullying, from Washington in particular. According to an article in the New York Times last weekend, The new government's first challenge is to be not perceived as a lackey of America. As the newspaper goes on to explain, there is good reason why Karzai and his ministers should be seen as US puppets. A Western diplomat confirmed this week that delegates in Bonn chose a different leader, Abdul Sattar Sirat, to head the interim government. Pressure from American and United Nations officials resulted in the naming of Mr Karzai and the selection of ministerial positions. 'The result is that a lot of people feel that Karzai is a US imposition,' the diplomat said. 'Depending on how he plays his cards, that could be a problem'. An American diplomat, who attended the Bonn talks, attempted to rebut the claim, pointing out that others also regarded Karzai favourably. But he did not deny the allegation that Washington had overruled the choice of Sirat, nor Karzai's close links to the US, going back to the 1980s. Karzai ran the office of Sebghatullah Mojadeddi, the leader of one of the US-backed Mujaheddin groups fighting the pro-Soviet regime, and undoubtedly liased with CIA and other US officials. Several of Karzai's brothers and a sister run restaurant businesses in the US and have in the past provided funds for his political activities in Pakistan and Afghanistan. Qayum Karzai, who has a master's degree in political science, has decided to leave his restaurants to return to Afghanistan to unofficially advise his brother on the nuts and bolts of running a government. As one US newspaper noted, Qayum is familiar with Washington's diplomatic and legislative circles after years of pleading for American notice for the Afghan cause. Karzai is a Pashtun tribal leader, head of the Popalzai clan of the Durrani tribe, and a close supporter of the exiled Afghani king Zahir Shah. He made a special point of visiting the monarch in Rome this week for lengthy discussions before his installation as interim prime minister. Karzai also met with Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi who has offered to send Italian troops as part of the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) and promised to help build a private TV station in Afghanistan. Even before his formal installation, Karzai has clearly demonstrated that he will fall into line with US wishes. At the time of the Bonn conference, he was in southern Afghanistan using his tribal ties to negotiate the surrender of Kandahar. Part of the deal was an amnesty for Taliban leader Mullah Mohammed Omar, if he promised to renounce terrorism. But the offer brought a swift rebuke from US Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld who warned: To the extent that our goals are frustrated and opposed, we would prefer to work with other people. Karzai abruptly changed his tune. The incident raises another aspect of Karzai's political career. Like other Pashtun leaders, he supported the Taliban, when the movement first emerged in 1994, as a means of challenging the government headed by Burhanuddin Rabbani, an ethnic Tajik. Karzai had served as deputy foreign minister in Rabbani's administration but resigned when it became evident that the Mojadeddi faction had no political clout. As late as September 2000, Karzai told the Atlantic Monthly: The Taliban were good, honest people. They were connected to the madrassas [Islamic schools] in Quetta and Peshawar, and were my friends from the jihad against the Soviets. They came to me in May 1994, saying, 'Hamid, we must do something about the situation in Kandahar. It is unbearable.' I had no reservations about helping them. I had a lot of money and weapons left over from the jihad. I also helped them with political legitimacy. Karzai claimed in the interview to have had his doubts about the Taliban as early as September 1994 when the hidden hand of Pakistani
Afghan facts?
Peter Symonds: A Western diplomat confirmed this week that delegates in Bonn chose a different leader, Abdul Sattar Sirat, to head the interim government. Pressure from American and United Nations officials resulted in the naming of Mr Karzai and the selection of ministerial positions. 'The result is that a lot of people feel that Karzai is a US imposition, ' the diplomat said. 'Depending on how he plays his cards, that could be a problem' Karl: If this report is reliable we get a glimpse of the degree to which this interim government in Afghanistan is a stooge of imperialism. Symonds reports too that the Security Council determined the overall structure of the government too. Figures for the number of Taliban POWs are being given as at about 7000. However these figures may not be reliable as they are provided by a US source and not by the Red Cross or some more independent body. It must be remembered that the figures for the WTC were conveniently exaggerated to double what they were. There are still no estimates as to the number of casualties suffered by the Taliban and the Opposition forces. As I have said before the so called war in Afghanistan has been rather extraordinary. The public are informed that there had been fierce fighting. Yet we have almost no knowledge of the casualties. In a sense ways we don't really know who this war. Part of the problem is the role played by the commercial print and broadcasting media. It simply follows the US line largely failing to engage in any independent investigation or reporting of its own --despite its greater resources. Even journalists such as Pilger and Fisk merely engage in commentary. They don't engage in any independent investigation. Consequently there liberal outpourings don't really amount to much in a context in which facts are king. An anti war campaign must make the demand for the facts a key demand in its campaign. - PS Sonia Shah wrote: While outrage over the Taleban's requirement that Afghan women wear a head-to-toe veil continues, a new comprehensive study shows that the majority of Afghan women consider the Taleban's dress codes a non-issue, and many choose to wear the burqa or chadari whether the Taleban decrees it or not. Karl Carlile Be free to visit the web site of the Global Communist Group at http://homepage.eircom.net/~beprepared/
After Doha
http://www.hinduonnet.com WTO Beyond Doha Following the fourth ministerial conference of the World Trade Organisation, the focus shifts to implementation issues. SUKUMAR MURALIDHARAN SINCE the fourth ministerial conference of the World Trade Organisation in Doha in November, the prospects of a new round of negotiations on a framework for global trade have hinged on the resolution of a singular anomaly. WTO negotiations typically follow the 'single undertaking' format, in the sense that a gamut of agreements are concluded as part of a package that must be accepted or rejected in their totality. Once the deal is clinched, there are no piecemeal options available. Yet the U.S., as the most influential voice within the WTO, has to surmount a major legislative hurdle to participate meaningfully in this single undertaking process. Under the U.S. Constitution, Congress retains the ultimate power to regulate external trade and could amend any deal that is reached within the WTO. This power of amendment can be surrendered under a specific clause of the Trade Promotion Authority Act, through the grant of 'fast track' authority to the President. Once so authorised, the President can conclude bilateral and multilateral trade deals on the understanding that Congress will either accept or reject these in totality, and not press for piecemeal changes. Fast track authority was a top legislative priority for the George Bush administration which took office in January. But Congress, facing a multitude of sectional demands and the looming prospect of an economic slowdown, was in a truculent mood. The House of Representatives was scheduled to take up the legislation prior to the Doha conference, but postponed a vote. On December 6, following a week of hectic lobbying by the administration, the House approved fast track authority by the narrowest of margins. The bill will now go to the Senate, where approval is virtually assured by prevalent supportive attitudes towards trade liberalisation. But the mood that was manifested in the House provides certain indications of the U.S.' likely priorities in the next round of trade negotiations. Despite the intense efforts of the U.S. administration and the moral halo of the war effort it is pursuing in Afghanistan, the vote in the House seemed a lost cause till the very last gasp. Representatives from the States of North Carolina and South Carolina, where textile interests have a substantial influence, were insistent that they would not allow the fast track vote to pass. They were joined by legislators from States where citrus farming and steel manufacture are of crucial economic importance. These largely conservative States tend to have Republican legislators who were under pressure from the Republican President and his floor managers in the House for a favourable vote. Leading the charge against the grant of fast track authority were Democratic legislators concerned about the overall impact of multilateral trade agreements on employment. In the picturesque phrase of a Democratic member of the House, for the people fast track authority would only mean a bullet train to the unemployment line. Environment pressure groups constituted another strong lobby that opposed the fast track authority. Between them the labour and environment lobbies have ensured that there is a powerful constituency within the U.S. to push for the inclusion of these factors in the global trade negotiations process. This is an outcome that India and all other developing countries had firmly opposed. And though the ministerial declaration in Doha was ambiguous on this point, the recent vote in the U.S. might be the prelude to the furtive introduction of these elements into the WTO agenda. Two legislators from the textile States made the final difference in the fast track vote. One reserved his counsel till the end, determined to cast a favourable vote only if it was indispensable to ensure victory for the administration. Another changed his vote from 'no' to 'yes' just when Democratic members, sensing victory, were clamouring that the gavel be brought down and the proceedings be declared closed. The final outcome was 215 votes in favour and 214 against. One of the key clauses that members from South Carolina and North Carolina inscribed into the bill mandates that garment imports from certain Caribbean and Latin American countries be made from fabric finished and dyed in the U.S. The lobbying that was mounted by textile interests provides an interesting retrospect on the U.S. stance in Doha, when among the developed countries it alone chose to block an outcome favourable for developing country exporters. In August this year, before terrorism became central to U.S. policy, a group of Senators had addressed a letter to U.S. Trade Representative Robert Zoellick, insisting that no further concessions be granted in textiles and clothing, beyond those already agreed in the Uruguay Round. The hardline
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Query on Anti-Colonial Revolts
didn't get the dvd for lagaan yet (i think lagaan is expected to be
nominated for an oscar?), but this review in the latest on line
economic and political weekly
http://epw.org.in/showArticles.php?root=2001leaf=12filename=3798filetype=html
may suggest why it has such appeal.
__
My aim in this section has been to show that 'Lagaan', by eliminating
any reference to the 'parasitic' role of the raja/taluqdar and other
indigenous dominant groups, ends up posing -even when dealing with
only subaltern agency without any overt linkages to questions of the
'nation'- the question in terms of a homogenised 'us' ('Indians')
versus 'them' (English colonisers) and thus becomes easy fodder for
nationalist mythologies. As Aijaz Ahmad argues in another context,
if the motivating force of history...is neither class formation and
class struggle nor the multiplicities of intersecting conflicts based
upon class, gender, nation, race, region, and so on, but the unitary
'experience' of national oppression... then what else can we narrate
but that national oppression? [Ahmad 1992:102]. The result is not
only that the 'nation' becomes the legitimate community, but also
that the imagined 'nation' becomes
the mask worn by the ruling classes to cover their face of
exploitation. Thus the nationalist rhetoric here could be seen as a
strategy employed by the ruling coalition led by the bourgeoisie to
overcome the crisis of legitimacy which it is facing in the present
[Lele 1995 and Desai 1999]. It also contributes to the myth of a
benign and benevolent traditional order, which was only interrupted
by 'modernity' represented by the colonial state.22 That is
why it is imperative to recover the silences of the 'fiction' that
'Lagaan' portrays.
_
rb
Re: RE: Re: Re: Query on Anti-Colonial Revolts
Actually the John (aka 'General') Milius' versions of Teddy Roosevelt's view of colonial conflict in The 'Wind and the Lion' and 'Rough Riders' are amusing as mass mystifications. (and of course the Soviet use of Cuban mercenaries to invade Colorado in 'Red Dawn' helps signal that end of irony stuff, given events at Columbine). Their significance is a bit more about the Republicanism of Hollywood production deals and unfortunately require quite a bit of ideological reframing, but do say something about graduates of the USC film school. Ann - Original Message - From: Max Sawicky [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, December 23, 2001 10:36 AM Subject: [PEN-L:20886] RE: Re: Re: Query on Anti-Colonial Revolts Crucible of Empire: The Spanish-American War appeared on PBS. I thought it was great, especially for PBS. to purchase, go to www.greatprojects.com\store mbs Do you know of any movies of significance, be they documentaries or fictions, on the following subjects: the Sepoy Rebellion; the Mahdi Revolt; the Spanish-American War/the Philippines-American War; the Boxer Rebellion; and any other non-Marxist but anti-colonial revolts rebellions? -- Yoshie
Bush's plan to increasing growth
The Bushies are planning to follow more of the Boskin commission plan for lowering the estimates of inflation and increasing growth. http://www.nytimes.com/2001/12/23/business/yourmoney/23INDE.html Any coments, Dave R.? -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
