A Bewildered Conscience Blindly Groping for Clarity : Dissent is the Only Response to Manufactured Realities
This documentary takes its bearings from an interview with distinguished scholar, public intellectual and political activist, Edward W. Said (1935-2003), branching out into a broader discussion of his work, which can above all be interpreted as a sustained effort to undermine, challenge and unmask the distorted, one-sided and outright bigoted portrayal of so-called ‘Orientals’, Middle Easterners, Muslims, Iranians, Arabs etc..., in the standard repertoire of much Western mainstream media coverage of the region.
From Fox News, to 24 and even Disney’s Aladdin, a self-consistent set of vague generalizations about the Middle East and the peoples who inhabit the region have become normalized to the point whereby racist stereotypes and pervasive discrimination against peoples of Middle Eastern origin is virtually ‘officially sanctioned’. Said’s work is an attempt to unveil how this regulated system of knowledge production vis-à-vis the Orient, integral to European imperialism in the 19th and 20th centuries, attempts to obscure vested political and socio-economic interests by presenting itself as an ‘impartial’ and ‘objective’ body of knowledge.
To this day Orientalist discourse remains deeply entrenched within the way politicians, movies, and the media represent and discuss the region. The recent alliance between some anthropologists of the Middle East and the US military establishment is no accident, because the latter demands (as did Napoleon upon his invasion of Egypt in 1798) a set of principles, ideas and concepts upon which to draw, so they are better equipped to subjugate and control the indigenous population. It is in this way that imperialism and faux-science have come to mutually reinforce and support one another.
Part 1:
Part 2:
Part 3:
Part 4:
Recently by sadegh | Comments | Date |
---|---|---|
Optimism and Nightmares | 2 | Jun 18, 2009 |
The Quest for Authenticity | 6 | Mar 18, 2009 |
Thirty Years On | 39 | Feb 01, 2009 |
Person | About | Day |
---|---|---|
نسرین ستوده: زندانی روز | Dec 04 | |
Saeed Malekpour: Prisoner of the day | Lawyer says death sentence suspended | Dec 03 |
Majid Tavakoli: Prisoner of the day | Iterview with mother | Dec 02 |
احسان نراقی: جامعه شناس و نویسنده ۱۳۰۵-۱۳۹۱ | Dec 02 | |
Nasrin Sotoudeh: Prisoner of the day | 46 days on hunger strike | Dec 01 |
Nasrin Sotoudeh: Graffiti | In Barcelona | Nov 30 |
گوهر عشقی: مادر ستار بهشتی | Nov 30 | |
Abdollah Momeni: Prisoner of the day | Activist denied leave and family visits for 1.5 years | Nov 30 |
محمد کلالی: یکی از حمله کنندگان به سفارت ایران در برلین | Nov 29 | |
Habibollah Golparipour: Prisoner of the day | Kurdish Activist on Death Row | Nov 28 |
Instead of such childish ranting...
by Zion on Wed Jul 02, 2008 03:13 PM PDT... Maybe you all should take a look at this instead. This is how the real thing looks like:
//iranian.com/main/blog/asghar-taragheh/why-i...
(Funny how some of it is so similar to the rantings of some people here. Very revealing.)
Though it is more honest. Zionists not Jews, eh? Iranian Jews are seen differently in your regime, right?
Very revealing indeed.
How is 'race' still in
by sadegh on Wed Jul 02, 2008 01:12 PM PDTHow is 'race' still in play???? The original settlers genocidal murder of the native Indians saw to it that the indigenous people of the Americas were virtually wiped out, ah, but the federal government gave them some casinos so that makes up for it all!!! African-Americans (enslvaved for 300 years) and Hispanics (also wronged in the imperialist wars of aggression against Mexico) might also take exception to being included in you idiotic definition of 'race'...Well done, you just keep proving you're an imbecile, and as for murder we have in on paper and scrupulosly documented that numerous US presidents and their cohorts authorized murder, bombings of innocents, torture, weapons sales, support of murderous dictators, and all the rest, just stop embarrassing yourself...the Trial of Henry Kissinger is merely one example of many in which the American government's crimes against humanity are thoroughly documented. And no I am not a bigot - YOU ARE THE BIGOT - I never made any generalizations or mention of the American people, I criticized American government policy - BIG DIFFERENCE!!! It is very simple but you obviously aren't too bright and have a hard time distinguishing between apples and oranges.
Ba Arezu-ye Movafaghiat, Sadegh
Sadegh pt 2
by programmer craig on Wed Jul 02, 2008 12:10 PM PDTI TAKE ISSUE WITH THE CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY COMMITTED BY CONSECUTIVE
AMERICAN ADMINISTRATIONS. I NEVER SAID ANYTHING AGAINST AMERICANS AS A
PEOPLE
When you tell obvious and offensive lies about our country and our history, you are very much insulting our people. You've even gone so far as false accusations of murder. How much worse could you possibly get?
(WHO ARE NOT EVEN A RACE!!!!!)
I suppose I should have said "bigotry" then? Would that have made you happy? But I think "racism" works, because unless you also intended your demeaning comments for Iranian Americans, then race is still in play. Now please stop commenting at me. the only reason I'm still following this thread at akll is there have been a few commenters(like Bijan) who've made some very insightful contributions to the discussion.
PG STOP YOUR LIES AND
by sadegh on Wed Jul 02, 2008 11:43 AM PDTPG STOP YOUR LIES AND DEFAMATION!!!
YOU ARE THE RACIST DEFENDING REAGAN'S SUPPORT OF APARTHEID. YOU ARE THE RACIST DEFENDING APARTHEID IN ISRAEL.
I TAKE ISSUE WITH THE CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY COMMITTED BY CONSECUTIVE AMERICAN ADMINISTRATIONS. I NEVER SAID ANYTHING AGAINST AMERICANS AS A PEOPLE (WHO ARE NOT EVEN A RACE!!!!!) AND NEVER EVEN MENTIONED AMERICANS AS A PEOPLE IN ANY OF MY POSTS SO STOP LYING. IT IS DISHONEST AND COMPLETELY BASELESS. YOU'RE A DISGRACE.
Ba Arezu-ye Movafaghiat, Sadegh
Sadegh...
by programmer craig on Wed Jul 02, 2008 11:28 AM PDTSadegh, please leave me out of your comments from now on. I stopped responding to you several days ago when it became apparrent that you were unwilling to defend your positions, and instead engaged in irrelevant and semantic distractions, like this one. I questioned you about a few specifics in regards to racism in the media and colonizaion/exploitation that you accused the US of doing. And you came back with a bunch of completely unrelated stuff, like this item re: South Africa.
In fact, the laundry list of "misconduct" by the US that you trotted out has convinced me that you yourself are a racist. Your disgust for Americans is clear. And it's irrationale, since you justify it with dishonest and demeaning accusations against Americans. Tell me, what else can I call that but racism? Even your one sided attempts to portray the West as being racist, are racist - because you refuse to talk about how Iranians portray other cultures. You remind me of some of the leaders in the black power movement who lace their "white people are racist" rants with over-the-top ethnic slurs against whites, Jews and latinos.
If you aren't a racist, then I urge you to examine your behavior and think about how you are being percieved.
Sadegh, I read your blog
by Monda on Wed Jul 02, 2008 07:12 AM PDTin haste, but being a graduate student myself, as soon as I find more time would like to read on your intersubjectivity material with more attention. Thanks for the references. Keep up with good work!
Yes it's a shame and about time Mandela is off the terrorist list!
PG: Shame on Ronald Reagan for Supporting S Africa Apartheid
by sadegh on Wed Jul 02, 2008 04:25 AM PDTUS President George W Bush has signed a bill removing Nelson Mandela and South African leaders from the US terror watch list, officials say.
Mr Mandela and ANC party members will now be able to visit the US without a waiver from the secretary of state.
The African National Congress (ANC) was designated as a terrorist organisation by South Africa's old apartheid regime.
A US senator said the new legislation was a step towards removing the "shame of dishonouring this great leader".
//news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7484517.stm
Ba Arezu-ye Movafaghiat, Sadegh
Finally, it's hardly a
by sadegh on Tue Jul 01, 2008 12:25 PM PDTFinally, it's hardly a surprise that these people who accuse Said of ethnocentrism and who have obviously never read a page of his work don't know that SAID'S FINAL WORK WAS ON THE SUBJECT OF HUMANISM - HUMANISM AND DEMOCRATIC CRITICISM. His Memoir Out of Place, also powerfully deals with the theme of being an exile and not truly belonging anywhere. Iranian exiles should be able to a large extent empathize...Accusing Said of ethnocentrism could not be farther from the truth...
Ba Arezu-ye Movafaghiat, Sadegh
You are most welcome Monda.
by sadegh on Tue Jul 01, 2008 11:08 AM PDTYou are most welcome Monda. I have actually written quite a bit of stuff on the notion of intersubjectivity in both Heidegger, Husserl and French philosophers Jean-Luc Nancy and Sartre on my blog. You might find them of interest though you might also find them incredibly boring...
//www.eterazonline.com/2008/03/jean-luc-nancy-mytho-poiesis-and.html
//www.eterazonline.com/2008/05/hell-is-other-people-or-jean-paul.html
//www.eterazonline.com/2008/03/heidegger-through-ecstatic-temporality.html
And Zion 'it doesn't make me happy' it just happens to be the fact of the matter. Unlike you I don't structure facts and selectively appropriate spurious evidence in order to defend the indefensible...
Ba Arezu-ye Movafaghiat, Sadegh
Compliment
by Zion on Tue Jul 01, 2008 10:18 AM PDTDear Bijan,
I wasn't serious. It was meant as a compliment. You are a very intelligent and erudite person.
Sadegh,
Whaever makes you happy buddy. Seriously though, can't you even comprehend the meaning of simple English sentences?
Intersubjectivity
by Monda on Tue Jul 01, 2008 10:06 AM PDTrelates to the field of psychodynamic, and focuses on our consciousness about what the other provokes in us.
Again, thank you Sadegh for the great educational links you have offered here.
Dear Zion
by Bijan A M on Tue Jul 01, 2008 05:22 AM PDTFor the record, I swear to my life and the lives of my family that every word that I have posted is truth and sincere to my heart. I, never, ever had any intention to fool anyone. I am well educated (in technical and math fields) but have read very very little reading outside of the technical field. It took me a while to compose my last post but I promise you nothing in there was based on reading any specific book or publication. It was just an expression of opinion built in nearly 60 years of life experience in different parts of the world and dealing with peoples of different culture and religion. I am sincerely sorry if I unintentionally have given the impression of fooling anyone. Regards, Bijan
Dear Bijan, thank you for
by sadegh on Tue Jul 01, 2008 05:07 AM PDTDear Bijan, thank you for your thoughtful response...Just one point, Said doesn't reckon there to be anything conspiratorial about the process - it was part and parcel of the Enlightenment ideal, in which it was believed a 'scientific' discourse could be founded in virtually every field of enquiry. This is what Nietzsche would later call the 'will to know'. In many instances, if not the vast majority, there was a genuine desire 'to know' the Orient, which as I said often accompanied colonialism. The reason why it is not seen as alien or prejudicial is exactly because it is not conspiratorial, the vague generalizations and preconceptions have been naturalized to such an extent that nobody even gives them a second thought.
And Zion, you believe you're 'racially' linked to the 'chosen people', and I'm the racist? What a joke...And as anyone can tell you, you started slandering and insulting people well before anybody returned fire...Don't be resentful because your arguments are feeble and everyone sees right through you.
Ba Arezu-ye Movafaghiat, Sadegh
Dear Bijan
by Zion on Tue Jul 01, 2008 12:33 AM PDTI'm sure by now that you are a very very well informed, well read and knowledgeable person. Here is to you fooling us like this for a long time to come!
Haha!
by Zion on Mon Jun 30, 2008 09:45 PM PDTI am so glad you posted you last comments Sadegh and Mehdi-Palang. It shows so clearly how pathetically bankrupt you are. Who is throwing childish personal insults and attacks now? LOL.
campus Watch is pro-Israel only in as much as it tries to give voice to frustrated students and scholars alike who want to speak out against such clear ideologically motivated demonization of Israel in Western academia. It is a website in a free society. Pro Israel? Even so, why do you consider this to be a crime? How come the blatan pro-palestinian agenda of Islamists and leftists professors who abiuse their position of power in classrooms just natural, but anything said in defense of Israel is a crime? How more blatantly biased and ideologically brainwashed can you get?
I have tried nothing of the sort you imply. Everyone can read and see for themselves. I have nowhere passed any judgement on Arabs, or Arab Persian relation at all. I merely stated what is behind Said's agenda. If you feel threatened by a factual statement by the bigotry in one intellectual's agenda and approach and his arab chauvinism, that has nothing to do with me. Also you better stop treating everyone here as idiots. They can read for themselves and don't need the likes of you to interpret for them what I am saying. This only shows you have no answer to the very legitimate and relevant points I made. Nohing. Zero. Nada.
It's good for everyone to witness this, as well as your cliche anti-semitic attacks and parroting of the usual anti-semitic nonsense about the genealogy of Ashkenazi Jews. let alone that it is completely irrelevant to this discussion Mr. scholar, it is rubbish, Even if that was the case would not matter. Judaism is open to conversion. Anyone converting even today has full rights to the ancestral jewish homeland of Eretz Israel. And my dear, how many times must this come up? I am not religious. I have stated my views on religous practice very clearly many times. When are you lot going to comprehend something so clear?
It is always a pleasure to see the mask fall despite all the effort to hide behind pseudo-scholarly covers once you are challenged and debated.
Always a pleasure.
Wow....
by Bijan A M on Mon Jun 30, 2008 09:16 PM PDTI am definitely out of my league in this crowd. Way above my head…..Many thanks for all the posts that I found educational one way or the other. I wish I had the time and the brain to keep up with the vast amount of information in such a short time. Being almost 60 years old I feel like a freshman sitting in a post-doctoral class in a subject that fascinates me but I have had no schooling in. Having said that, I dare to raise my hand and embarrass myself by asking permission to speak about what I understand about the subject. As a non-historian and someone with limited to no academic background in social or cultural studies I have come to believe that Industrial revolution is the father of what has been referred to by many as modern colonialism. Industrial revolution created a discontinuity in development of civilization and created a gap between the West and East in that regard. This gap grew at an accelerating pace until such time that the revolution began spreading around the globe and thereby slowing the growth of such gap and eventually shrinking it. Early on it was industrialization’s hunger for resources (mineral, agricultural, labor, etc…) that sent the west around the globe scrambling to feed the new born giant.
In my opinion there has been no conspiracy to enslave the nations. Colonialists have capitalized on colonialized’s lack of appreciation for the value of their resources. They have followed the natural instinct to obtain what they need to feed their giant for the least cost (or no cost). Some will argue this is exploitation and some would not automatically call this a morally corrupt behavior. The corruption in morality begins when the colonizer develops a sense of ownership of the resources and refuses to recognize the legitimate demands of the host nation by force or otherwise. Naturally the industrialized nation will develop (out of arrogance) a sense of superiority because of their rapid advancement in science which afforded them a more satisfying (healthier, more comfortable) quality of life. However, in my opinion it is far fetched to call this sense of superiority, racism.
I am by no means criticizing Mr Said’s view points as I have not studied his thesis in any depth. Based on superficial knowledge that I have gathered by reading comments on this thread and viewing a few interviews I find myself disagreeing with some of Mr. Said’s interpretations. I find it hard to accept that the west and US in particular, systematically, and conspiratorially belittle the Orient (Arabs and muslims in particular) to the point of racism.
To suggest that US media, by design, demonizes the arabs, muslims and/or people of middle east, in my opinion is misrepresentation of facts. One can state that just as matter of personal opinion but to defend it as fact by producing misleading evidence is dishonest.
I have lived in the US for nearly 35 years and have concluded that there is no conspiracy in media to promote one theory versus another. The primary driver for most is profit. There is no agenda to demonize a certain group, no matter what. People have the choice of not-for-profit media (NPR, CSPAN for example) to get their news and analysis. As for Dr. Said’s position with regard to the Israel-Palestine issue, it looks like I have a lot of reading to do beyond this thread.
I can certainly appreciate any criticism of Israel within the framework of her right to peaceful existence and defense of her citizens. There is no denying of the power of AIPAC lobby within the politics of US. But, that in itself should not condemn US as racist anti-arab, anti-muslim “Orientalist”. I promise to be a good student and do some reading next time before posting.
Many thanks again to every one specially Sadegh, Zion, palang, adfsd, Craig,…...
Regards,
Bijan
Thank you Sadegh
by Mehdi-Palang on Mon Jun 30, 2008 07:31 PM PDTThank you for shedding light onto such a relevant topic! I thank you for all of the time that you have taken to write such thoughtful responses.
Your statement "The irony of course as far as Zion is concerned is that the Palestinians are far more likely to be the descendants of the ancient Hebrews than are any Ashkenazi Jews who look like Europeans.." must be stinging to the likes of Zion.
and to programmer craig..
"The west doesn't ahve a good attitude towards the middle east. Deal with it. The middle east doesn't have a good attitude towards the west, either, in case you didn't notice?"
The middle east didn't have any problems with the "west" until the west brought war/oil-exploitative policies/colonialism into our region. And in Iran people don't stereotype Christians in any demeaning way because Christianity IS A native religion. That's right, we (middle-easterners) had Christianity long before Rome (or the "West") had it. In Iran there isn't any organized campaign to mischaracterize Europeans/US citizens as evil or repulsive, because we see them as people (human beings). I challenge you to find evidence that states contrary.
From Wikipedia: Campus
by sadegh on Mon Jun 30, 2008 05:45 PM PDTFrom Wikipedia:
Campus Watch is an organisation which "reviews and critiques Middle East studies in North America with an aim to improving them."[1] It is a project of the Middle East Forum, an American, neoconservative[2][3][4][5][6][7], pro-Israel think tank. It is based in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, U.S. and was founded in 2002 by Daniel Pipes. It is currently headed by Winfield Myers.[8]
No one doubts that Campus Watch is a pro-Israeli neoconservative organization. And look who is defending it, astonishingly a pro-Israeli neoconservative called Zion. Is anyone seriously surprised??? Also Zion as an Israeli and religious fanatic who calls for an attack on my country please do not invoke the name of "Iranians inside Iran rotting under thei islamist over lords". It is just obscene and particularly so since you are exploiting the oppression suffered by Iranians at the hands of the present regime in order to score petty points. It's actually disgusting.
I hope everyone can see through Zion's abhorrent strategy. He has clearly hit upon some Iranians inclination to bear racial prejudices against Arabs and ceaselessly tries to stress some kind of metaphysical enmity between Iranians and Arabs so that as Iranians we feel nothing for those who suffer due to their 'race'. I am not saying these take priority over Iran's own very real and devastating political issues, but Zion because of his own deep-rooted racism is attempting to manipulate some Iranians' prejudices in order that they feel nothing on a human level. The irony of course as far as Zion is concerned is that the Palestinians are far more likely to be the descendants of the ancient Hebrews than are any Ashkenazi Jews who look like Europeans and spoke European languages before their ancenstors emigrated to Israel - many were in all probability converts with little to no connection to the ancient land they claim as a birthright. It is actually supporting the anti-Semitic claim to say that they were descendants of the ancient Hebrews since it implies that they were 'racially different' and 'not Europeans' after all. This is all racist nonsense predicated on 18th and 19th century theories of race and eugenics which have long been discredited.
I didn't just adduce Electronic Intifada, there are several links, one of which is from the American Conservative.
Ba Arezu-ye Movafaghiat, Sadegh
programme craig
by Niloufar Parsi on Mon Jun 30, 2008 05:22 PM PDTBrilliant negation of history in almost every single line you wrote!
Oh lets just take Iraq:
Your version of history would have a benevolent Mr. Bush bomb the living daylight out of Iraq every day for over 6 years, destroy all its functioning infrastructure, create 2 million refugees, 2 million internally displaced people, 1 million widows plus all their children who together with other children are out of school at over 70% of the time; have little access to the most basic services such as safe drinking water, all of this you would imagine as a favour to a friend, a new Germany.
You would describe the brutal military subjugation of a country into 'inviting' foreign firms to take over its natural resources, its only remaining source of immediate wealth after 6 years of utter destruction, as the hand of the market working freely.
You would describe this carnage, this ruthless barbarity, this ferocious greed, as some great partnership bestowed on a troublesome public.
But then you would as you were an active part of that carnage. You need to justify yourself and the actions of all those like you, past and present. Sorry to mess with your therapy kid.
Peace!
PG et al...
by sadegh on Mon Jun 30, 2008 05:03 PM PDTBy your lights the Nazi occupation of Vichy France was on the right track. Thanks for elucidating that for us...
Ba Arezu-ye Movafaghiat, Sadegh
Electronic intifada is a
by adfsd (not verified) on Mon Jun 30, 2008 03:46 PM PDTElectronic intifada is a reliable source??? perhaps for the Jiahdist and their allies. What a joke.
I think Bijan A. M. is smart enought to sift through biased info on both sides of the isle
PC: Do not waste your time with NP and Sadegh!
Niloufar Parsi
by programmer craig on Mon Jun 30, 2008 03:10 PM PDTSadegh is absolutely right.
If you say so :D
Reagan (and he was not the only one) was indeed complicit in murder and
dictatorships in...
Latin American
Yes. In a Cold War setting. Which is what you guys keep neglecting to mention. But that isn't the topic under discussion. The topic was colonization and economic exploitation.
Lebanon
No. I was there. We murdered NOBODY. We never even fired on anybody unless they had fired on us first. This is an outright lie. Unless you want to blame us for what Phalangists did? But what was done to lebanese christians before that? Who assassinated Gemayal? The US? That's when everything really came unravelled.
Indonesia
WTF? Are you confusing the US and the UK or something?
Palestine
Not even gonna go there.
Afghanistan
You talking about when we helped teh Muj drive out the Soviets? And so? That was bad, now? And did we colonize Afghanistan aftrewards?
Iraq
This one has been discussed to death. Give it a rest.
Egypt
Who assassinated Sadat? The US? Pretty sure that was the Muslim Brotherhood, no? Or are you on some other tangent?
and the Apartheid government in South Africa
Nonsense.
- though this is not an exhaustive list.
If you need help with your list, I can help you with that. I can come up with a couple dozen countries the US actually DID actively intervene in, off the top of my head. But again, that isn't the topic of discussion. Unless you want to try to make me justify every action the US has taken in teh last 50 years. That might be interesting, but it's not what we were talking about.
Iraq is indeed a text book example of colonialism and the exact
opposite of what international laws exist in order to protect countries
from such colonial misadventures...
Got a link? I've actually raed, word for word, the relevant treaties several times and I can think of no such laws... perhaps you are mis-applying the text of some other treaty that does not relate to wartime scenarios? You wouldn't be the first to think that boilerplate diplomatic treaties were in effect during wars, but that's not correct. The diplomatic treaties go out the window during wars. Diplomatic treaties are for peacetime only. There is a whole other set of treaties that govern the conduct of wars, such as the Hague conventions and the geneva Conventions.
- the installation of a puppet
government
Nice slogan. Do you think there is any truth to it? You think the current government in Iraq is one the US would have chosen? I've been on the ground witha rifle in my hands and helped keep US installed dictators in power, personally (I didn't like it much) and I'm here to tell you reagan would have installed a more pro-US version of Saddam and he would have had US troops out of Iraq back in 2003/2004 and iraq would be a peaceful (if unhappy) land today.
50 planned military bases
We don't even have enough troops in the US military to man 50 bases. lol. Whatever you are using to definbe "base" it isn't the definition I use. Firebases, maybe.But firebases are temporary defensive positions. And whatever kinds of bases teh US is building/has built, there's no implication that we plan on staying there. We're building them because we need them. When we leave Iraq (next year most likely) they will be turned over to the Iraqis.
control of Iraqi air space
Somebody has to control Iraqi airspace, right? Or do you just want teh US to leave Iraq a failed state that is incapable of even defending itself? Like we did with Afghanistan when the Soviets pulled out? Why would you want that?
immunity from Iraqi law for lawless American military personnel and
mercinaries
Boiletrplate status of forces agreement. Done by treaty. US has the same kind of agreement with every country where US troops are stationed or deployed. Always been that way. Nothing unusual about that. Except for the fact that Iraq is such a violent and lawless place, right now.
the exploitation of oil fields (finalised as of today),
the myriad of construction contracts given out to (stolen by) Betchtel,
Halliburton, Blackwater etc.
Now you are going off on a tangent. Do you think Iran was a British colony, back in the days when the Brits got themselves all the oil monopolies there? I'm not really qualified to comment on this one. This is nothing to do with the military or with colonization. This goes to support my earlier claim that economic exploitation doesn't require military occupation, anymore. Neither teh US nor Britain had a military presence in iran during the Shah's rule.
The Brits behaved in a very similar manner in their colonies, especially India. Now they just hang on to Uncle Sam's skirt.
You just like to tell somebody whose family has lived from the beginning in the only British colony to ever successfully throw off British rule by force about how the Brit's treated their colonies, eh? lol.
You need to brush up on your history.
I'll get right on it! I guess the testimony of my own lying eyes isn't good enough, I need to read some history books instead. Which versions should I look for?
Peace!
Yeah, we all want it. Or so we say.
Jonathan
by programmer craig on Mon Jun 30, 2008 02:37 PM PDTHow is Latin America the US's backyard? Saying that it is implies
that the US holds some kind of ownership over it.
Not ownership. Strategic interest. For the same reason that Eastern Europe is the backyard of the Russians. And why they get so edgy about US ties to countries such as Poland. Is it that hard to understand?
Why isn't the US the
backyard of Latin America??
It is. We're neighbors. Ask the several million latinos who cross the border every year whether they think of the US as their backyard, eh? lol. I've known more than a few Miexicans over the years who think that the Southwestern United States is still part of Mexico.
[and you said colonialism ended 50 years ago, lol]
The Monroe Doctrine is a lot older than 50 years. And the US did "colonize" parts of latin America in the distant past. Hell, we took Arizona, texas, california and New mexico away from Mexico and made them part of the United States. That's WAY beyond colonization, right? But that was ~150 years ago.
We're talking about the recent past, and I'm still waiting for somebody to name the country in latin America that the US "colonized" lately.
and another thing, just because the US is occupying Iraq and its oil
doesn't mean that we (the US oil-consumers) are going to see a discount
in prices. Your statement REALLY illuminates your ignorance to how the
oil market works. Why don't you look up the profits of the world's
large oil companies over the past 5 years. (they're going up)
And most of them are not American companies. They are capitalizing on the short supply of oil and the high demand for it. taht's what companies do. Are you telling me that an international consortium of oil companies conspired to cause the US to invade Iarq? Even if that was so, who is doing the colonization in that scenanrio? Global capitalists? Isn't that the point I was trying to make earlier? It is NO LONGER necessary to physically occupy a country in order to exploit it.
GO BACK TO YOUR FOXS NEWS!!!
Go back to your Noam Chomsky :P
Really?
by Zion on Mon Jun 30, 2008 02:13 PM PDTNiloufar and Sadegh,
So was the allied occupation of Germany after WWII also a classic text book example of colonialism? The US established military bases all over Germany, persecuted former German officials, declared laws and prohibited certain stuff, and all German politicians ever since were close friends to the US and Britain alliance. Puppets?
Is this also the case for Japan? South Korea? Hong Kong?... :-)
Jonathan,
How is it that all your pundits agree that Iraq is Iran's backyard and Iran has natural rights to interfere?
programmer craig
by Niloufar Parsi on Mon Jun 30, 2008 02:07 PM PDTSadegh is absolutely right.
Reagan (and he was not the only one) was indeed complicit in murder and dictatorships in Latin American, Lebanon, Indonesia, Palestine, Afghanistan, Iraq, Egypt, and the Apartheid government in South Africa - though this is not an exhaustive list.
The ANC is still on the US terror list. That makes Nelson Mandela a criminal in the drugged-up eyes of the US government, and this has Condi Rice running around in shame. Reagan specifically called Mandela a terrorist.
Iraq is indeed a text book example of colonialism and the exact opposite of what international laws exist in order to protect countries from such colonial misadventures - the installation of a puppet government, 50 planned military bases, control of Iraqi air space, immunity from Iraqi law for lawless American military personnel and mercinaries, the exploitation of oil fields (finalised as of today), the myriad of construction contracts given out to (stolen by) Betchtel, Halliburton, Blackwater etc.
The Brits behaved in a very similar manner in their colonies, especially India. Now they just hang on to Uncle Sam's skirt.
You need to brush up on your history.
Peace!
Oh Yes, the NeoCon Campus Watch! LOL
by Zion on Mon Jun 30, 2008 02:06 PM PDTWhat a bankrupt bunch of losers you bunch are!. Won't you ever get tired of the usual nonsense?
McCArthyist? Such rubbish. Campus Watch is just a website has no legal or authoritative power. It is not a government organization to enforce anything. It is just a website which has managed to break the ivory tower monopoly of the ideologues who have been exploiting their academic positions of power over students and the reputation it brings in media and elsewhere. It is a breath of fresh air, a demand for accountability in the free market of ideas sense of the word, and more than anything else, it provides a venue for students to speak out. After all, the only position of power in this context is between the professor and the hapless students whose careers and grades depend on answering the right way and in line with the agenda of their over politicized professors. I wonder why someone should cry out against freedom of speech and of criticism in a public medium like the internet?
You only prove your shaky bankrupt positions with such childish attacks and rants of conspiracy. It is actually quite funny to view some of the hilarious reactions of these Edward Said disciples and wannabes , like this one by the always funny Hamid Dabashi that I have linked to before:
//www.columbia.edu/cu/news/clips/2005/01/27/s...
//www.danielpipes.org/article/2255
It's a classic!
See also:
//www.danielpipes.org/article/2496
//www.danielpipes.org/article/476
Responses
by Zion on Mon Jun 30, 2008 09:24 PM PDTSaid is a literary expert who has engaged in literary criticism and comparative literary studies. Fine, If he was engaged in a serious honest scholarly work on comparative literary study of Western (literary) texts on the Arab world (which is not the entire "Orient"), there would be no reason to object, but he wouldn't have such devout follower activists either. The reality is, he uses all of this literary comparative studies to establish a political theory about the conduct of the West in its entirety and for all times, and to use it as a platform for his specific agenda, the palestinian cause which unlike you he has never denied. Even in your own videos he clearly states that his main motive was the palestinian issue. That is precisely what he is trying to accuse the Western oriental studies of. After all Orientalists, the real scholars, were also working on cultural studies, roots and heritage of the lands of the Orient, and Said's main point is that these studies were done with the motive of more effective colonization, that is with a specific political agenda.
The charge applies to him much more than generations of scholars from various countries and backgrounds. The truth is Orientalism has done a great service in understanding cultures and historical heritage of the East. It were the Orienalists who read the Egyptian hieroglyphs and re-constructed the forgotten religion, world view and cultural practices of the Egyptians. The same goes for Babylon, Sumeria, and of course Persia herself. The entire Persian history that you know today is the result of the labor of western Orientalists. Otherwise you would have been left with little more than the usual vague fairy tales and myths of an unknown past.
Said's and your own line of argumentation is muddled. Orientalist scientific studies is one thing, the literary depiction of the East something completely different, the media portrayal of the Eastern man something different again. It is like bundling serous physics and mathematics papers of the first half of the 20th century that brought us the atomic age together with the way science fiction and spy stories depict the atomic age in literature, and the way it is portrayed in media, B movies and cartoon super-heroes and use the whole package to get out any convenient theory you like for your particular political agenda. Takes one to know and invent one, I guess.
That is why all your analysis of British economical colonial practice in Egypt has objectively very little to do with "Orientalism" , unless you buy into this whole mumbled ideology in the first place.
Then we get to the by now routine declaration of "atheism". So what? I never said he was a believing muslim or Christian. The point was clear, and I can understand why you want to shove aside and not address it. The point was this: If you claim to be studying in depth what might be behind the basic Western outlook of the East that might have tainted, to some degree, as a side factor beside many other things, the entire intellectual, political and economic basis of the East-West relation to this day, then you start with the Greeks, because that is where the rift has taken place and the foundation for all such possible effects was laid. To say his interest was more the industrial age colonization (of Arabs) is to concede to what I said. Like it or not. It is not a matter of sparse greek and biblical texts. It is a matter of agenda.
No matter what resources there are, an honest in depth study of the Western idea of the "orient" would have focused on the Greeks.
You also refused to answer the other point I raised. Namely that the Orient is different from Arab world. It includes Persia, India, China, South east Asia, Japan. Yet Said basically uses the Orient and Arab world interchangeably. He could have called his "studies", Arab depiction in the West, but then, that would have included two sides and it would have immediately made it clear that not all the fault can be put on the West, that maybe some of this literary depiction has to do with real tenets in the Arab world. It would have brought the obvious related study of how the West is depicted in the Arab world. Only by christening it "Orientalism", was he able to single out the West and portray it as essentially at odds with everybody else.
That is in line with his overall agenda. To completely ignore that colonial practices, like the example you mentioned, have little relevance to the East-West divide and the way they view each other. That Soviet Union or Czarist russia practiced very similar measures regarding both their Asian and European satellite states. That perhaps the most colonial and economically parasitic empire had been the Arab-Islamic Califate, who used to drain its colonies with out itself producing anything economically. He deliberately failed to mention any of this because it drills a hole right through his main "thesis". That is also partly the reason why he does not study the origins of the West-East rift. You have unfortunately proved to have nothing to say in these regards, so you just skip them. Understandable.
Media depiction of the revolution: This is how the media works in any situation, inside US, Europe or elsewhere. The images were troubling because the situation on the ground was troubling. After all they were burning flags, they were wearing black and forcing it on the women as well, they did take over the US embassy by force, they did chant death to this and that, they did engage in wide spread executions. This was an ideological revolution. The media portrayed it the usual way, sensationalist and on real time without sophisticated scholarly analysis. This is media's modus operandi. It has nothing to do with "orientalism", but it was something Said could take advantage of to promote his nonsense yet again and as usual it just happened to be in favor of the Islamic revolutionaries as well. What a surprise! ( The irony is, this aspect of media sensationalism is what terrorist and Islamic terrorists in particular know and take advantage of, terrorism without the publicity goes nowhere. Nowhere has this resource been exploited better than for the palestinian cause. )
And let me ask you this, as a fellow "oriental", what did he do to raise awareness to the oppression inside Iran? Did he care? Why should he give a damn about Iranians inside Iran rotting under thei islamist over lords, it can't be blamed on the Orientalists, can it? It does not involve Arabs, does it? Was not his business, was it? His only focus was the Arab Palestinian one and anyone who was useful there was a de facto ally, didn't need to be additionally harassed for what they were doing to their own people while the Evil Orientalists were already portraying them badly and inhumanly.
Finally Sadegh, I fully understand your refusal to debate. You have nothing relevant to say, no real argument to give. That is what you have to resort to name calling and the usual Zionist-bashing stuff.
Just pathetic.
to craig programmer...
by Johnathan (not verified) on Mon Jun 30, 2008 01:06 PM PDTJust listen to your statement ... "latin america is our (USA) backyard"
How is Latin America the US's backyard? Saying that it is implies that the US holds some kind of ownership over it. Why isn't the US the backyard of Latin America??
(no seriously tell me why!)
[and you said colonialism ended 50 years ago, lol]
and another thing, just because the US is occupying Iraq and its oil doesn't mean that we (the US oil-consumers) are going to see a discount in prices. Your statement REALLY illuminates your ignorance to how the oil market works. Why don't you look up the profits of the world's large oil companies over the past 5 years. (they're going up)
GO BACK TO YOUR FOXS NEWS!!!
sadegh
by programmer craig on Mon Jun 30, 2008 12:45 PM PDTSeriously, I have to ask, what have you been smoking? How about March
2003!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
You think the US went into Iraq for oil? lol. The price of oil ha stripled since we invaded Iraq. And you accuse ME of being on drugs? Do you ever use your brain at all, or do you just repeat the same old propaganda slogans without ever considering that they might be untrue?
That is not including Reagan's
complicity and support for the mass murder and dictatorships in Latin
American
Why not mention communist involement in Latin America? The USSR knew very well taht when they meddled in Latin America that they were shitting in our backyard and that we'd do something about it. How is it OUR fault? Are you having trouble switching on that brain of yours again?
And what does that have to do with colonization, anyway? Why do you change the topic? Whcih latin american country do you think the US colonized in the 1980s?
Lebanon
I happen to have been in Lebanon in 1983, and the way I remember it, it was YOUR country that was responsible for all the mass murder and terrorism, not mine.
And furthermore, your country is STILL responsible for casing so much pain and misery in Lebanon. To this day. Maybe the IRI is as backwards in their thinking as you are, since they seem to be doing a pretty good job of trying to colonize lebanon by force of arms.
Indonesia and the Apartheid government in South
Africa.
Indonesia? South Africa? Where the hell is that coming from? lol. I don't even know how to respond to that. The Phillipines used to be a US territory, why not base your arguments on that? Confess. You don't actually know a damn thing about US history, do you?
Iraq is text book example of colonialism
Really? Is taht Iranian textbooks you've been reading? The Iranians I've worked with over the years seem pretty well educated, but maybe they went to US schools, eh?
I'll cut my reply short here because I don't want to go from sarcastic to abusive, but I'll sign off with saying I've rarely seen anyone string together so many outright lies about my country in one comment, and I've been active on Arab blogs for 4 or 5 years. You really take the cake.
Bijan and Everyone else please be wary of Neocon Campus Watch
by sadegh on Mon Jun 30, 2008 12:08 PM PDTDear Bijan in the interest of full disclosure you should know that Campus Watch is a McCarthyite organization run by arch-neo con Daniel Pipes. It's purpose is to serve the official Israeli and neocon agenda and picture of the Middle East and its history. It has notoriously harrassed and harangued academics all to the end of controlling the content of Middle Eastern studies in Northern America. They have even with the help of affliated organizations sent individuals and advised Jewish students to monitor the content of their professors' lectures and report back. Please see the case of Professor Joseph Massad.
//www.thenation.com/doc/20021125/mcneil
//electronicintifada.net/v2/article3296.shtml
Don't take my word for it look their organization up. They even put out a WATCHLIST of academics working on the Middle East. Please be wary...since this MacCarthyite organization is trying to ensure Israeli and neocon propaganda replaces historical fact...They have no respect for academic freedom and desire their mythological retelling of history be the ONLY interpretation of history available - all so they are able to justify current Israeli aggression...
Some links for your perusal:
//electronicintifada.net/v2/article714.shtml
//www.normanfinkelstein.com/article.php?pg=11&ar=1051
//www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2002/09/28/MN227890.DTL
//www.amconmag.com/2004_02_02/article.html
//www.adc.org/index.php?id=1142
//socialtext.dukejournals.org/cgi/reprint/21/2_75/125.pdf
//www.thenation.com/doc/20040510/press
Ba Arezu-ye Movafaghiat, Sadegh
Also Mehdi, thanks so much for the links...