Arab Spring: Arabs surprise the world, don't hate our freedoms

[bush_cheney2004]

.....Back to the basic point, I don't see Western democracy and freedom as universal ideals that will resonate widely in the Arab/Muslim world. That is why they will, in my view, remain inferior societies. Unless they change, of course.

Yes...such change (social, political, religious, etc.) will determine how successful a move to "democracy and freedom" will be, and it will be at a different pace depending on the country and economic conditions. Canada and the USA were not paragons of liberal democracy early on either....far from it.

[Bob]

ok, so we have at least narrowed down the Obama quote/statement reference... now bold/colour highlighted above. As you state, that quote has you interpreting Obama as labeling opinions held, like yours as you self-describe and attach to this quote, as "racist". You've extended upon that Obama racist labeling to now include an Obama implication of "bigotry". It would seem clear that the only possible interpretative phrasing in the statement centers on the words, "rejecting the lie". In your assessment, you are attaching, to Obama, racist and bigotry labeling over his having used the words, "rejecting the lie". Have I understood and captured this correctly?

dense? The context wasn't your stated universality; clearly, Obama's several references to "some" (races, religions and ethnicities), in relation to Arab Spring, didn't imply universality. Obama was very pointedly clear, unlike yourself. You've also 'moved the goal posts' in terms of extending upon Obama's generalized reference to "democracy", to imply it inherently means, "Western democracy". Obama spoke, 'to the lie'... you presume to speak, "for the liars". Obama did not speak, "to the liars", nor presume upon, "liar motivations". You double-down on your earlier suggestions that Obama is labeling practitioners of the lie as, "racist and bigoted" (with you now adding "prejudiced" to the mix). Apparently, in your world, the foundation of that expressed lie couldn't simply reflect upon any of the mixed-bag grouping of misunderstanding, misinterpretation, mistakes, misconceptions, disagreement, error, etc.. Rather, you extend upon Obama's own intent/motivation to imply he is labeling, "the liars" (yourself by self-attachment), as "racist, bigoted, prejudiced", for rejecting the lie. Accordingly, I interpret you are mistaken on several fronts... that you misunderstand, misinterpret and misconceive... not just Obama.

This has got to be one of the most absurd posts I have ever read of MLW. I mean that. Here you are, with Obama's statements as plain as day, trying to misrespresent them for the clear purpose of - disagreeing with me. Obama specifically didn't mention Arabs/Muslims in order to imply universality of democracy. If Obama didn't believe in the universality of democracy (and he does), then he would have specifically mentioned the Arabs/Muslims.

Obama's message was clear - democracy is a universal ideal that the Arab/Muslims are trying to achieve via the "Arab Spring", and that those of us who are skeptical, or outright reject, this concept of democracy's universal appeal across all cultures/societies/ethnicity are prejudiced liars.

[eyeball]

Yes...such change (social, political, religious, etc.) will determine how successful a move to "democracy and freedom" will be, and it will be at a different pace depending on the country and economic conditions. Canada and the USA were not paragons of liberal democracy early on either....far from it.

It's a shame this insight couldn't have prevailed back when we thought diddling with Iran's nascent democracy in 1953 was a good idea.

If there is but one moment in time I'd like to go back and change it would be that one.

It put the Arab Spring in the ice-box for at least 50 years and turned the Shining Beacon of Democracy into the Dark Tower of Mordor.

Like I said, it's a real shame.

[Jack Weber]

Almost a year ago I first came to this forum and posted in response to what I thought was a one-sided portrayal by jbg slamming Arabs as lazy and corrupt while praising Jews as the leaders of innovation. Coincidentally this exactly mirrors the official Israeli Department of Education policy of doing the same thing portraying the Arabs as "refugees, primitive farmers and terrorists. You never see a Palestinian child or doctor or teacher or engineer or modern farmer."

I debated with Jbg that Israeli success is a direct result of its free and democratic society which the Arabs have been prevented from having. To which Jbg replied:

Others got involved including the an obvious Ann Coulter disciple, DogOnPorch, who aped her line "we should invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity."

Oh what a difference a year makes. Jbg, and even I, could never have predicted that the Arabs would do exactly what jbg said they would never do overthrowing their "corrupt and oppressive garbage". Some peacefully like in Egypt and Tunisia others still bravely paying for their rights in blood in Syria and Libya.

Has the Arab Spring changed anyone's opinion that Arabs want corrupt regimes?

While I definately applaud the overthrow of oppresive totalitarian regimes,I'm still skeptical of some burgeoning representative democracy in the region...

[bush_cheney2004]

It's a shame this insight couldn't have prevailed back when we thought diddling with Iran's nascent democracy in 1953 was a good idea.

Wouldn't matter...I'm sure you would find some other "diddling" to bitch about as the gravest action of the 20th century. Why not Chile and ATT instead?

[waldo]

The youth are delivering a powerful rebuke to dictatorship, and rejecting the lie that some races, religions and ethnicities do not desire democracy

ok, so we have at least narrowed down the Obama quote/statement reference... now bold/colour highlighted above. As you state, that quote has you interpreting Obama as labeling opinions held, like yours as you self-describe and attach to this quote, as "racist". You've extended upon that Obama racist labeling to now include an Obama implication of "bigotry". It would seem clear that the only possible interpretative phrasing in the statement centers on the words, "rejecting the lie". In your assessment, you are attaching, to Obama, racist and bigotry labeling over his having used the words, "rejecting the lie". Have I understood and captured this correctly?

Are you that dense? Clearly Obama implied that it is a bigoted position to reject the assertion that democracy is a universal ideal. Arabs/Muslims don't seem to have any desire to have Western democracy. They want Islamism. So, according to Obama, I'm a "liar". And why else would I lie unless I was, of course, a hater of Muslims (prejudiced, racist, bigoted, etc)?

Why is it taking so many posts for you to understand this? My point is incredibly simple.

dense? The context wasn't your stated universality; clearly, Obama's several references to "some" (races, religions and ethnicities), in relation to Arab Spring, didn't imply universality. Obama was very pointedly clear, unlike yourself. You've also 'moved the goal posts' in terms of extending upon Obama's generalized reference to "democracy", to imply it inherently means, "Western democracy". Obama spoke, 'to the lie'... you presume to speak, "for the liars". Obama did not speak, "to the liars", nor presume upon, "liar motivations". You double-down on your earlier suggestions that Obama is labeling practitioners of the lie as, "racist and bigoted" (with you now adding "prejudiced" to the mix). Apparently, in your world, the foundation of that expressed lie couldn't simply reflect upon any of the mixed-bag grouping of misunderstanding, misinterpretation, mistakes, misconceptions, disagreement, error, etc.. Rather, you extend upon Obama's own intent/motivation to imply he is labeling, "the liars" (yourself by self-attachment), as "racist, bigoted, prejudiced", for rejecting the lie. Accordingly, I interpret you are mistaken on several fronts... that you misunderstand, misinterpret and misconceive... not just Obama.

This has got to be one of the most absurd posts I have ever read of MLW. I mean that. Here you are, with Obama's statements as plain as day, trying to misrespresent them for the clear purpose of - disagreeing with me. Obama specifically didn't mention Arabs/Muslims in order to imply universality of democracy. If Obama didn't believe in the universality of democracy (and he does), then he would have specifically mentioned the Arabs/Muslims. Obama's message was clear - democracy is a universal ideal that the Arab/Muslims are trying to achieve via the "Arab Spring", and that those of us who are skeptical, or outright reject, this concept of democracy's universal appeal across all cultures/societies/ethnicity are prejudiced liars.

no - you're the one misrepresenting Obama's statement. I note you've dropped your earlier attachment to a "Western democracy" specificity... clearly, that stumble needs to be smoothed over to fit your universal narrative, hey? Yes, Obama's message was clear. He spoke, 'to the lie', not to 'the liars or their motivations'. He spoke to the lie some hold to... that some Arabs/Muslims do not desire democracy. A lie most certainly can be predicated upon a mistake, a misunderstanding, a misconception, a misinterpretation. It's quite telling that you feel a willingness to project racism, bigotry and prejudice upon yourself in order to do the same to Obama.

[eyeball]

Wouldn't matter...I'm sure you would find some other "diddling" to bitch about as the gravest action of the 20th century. Why not Chile and ATT instead?

Chile as well, not just instead.

It's pretty clear that geopolitical diddling by super-powers should be amongst the gravest crimes against humanity that a government and people can commit, especially in light of the long-term damage it causes.

[bush_cheney2004]

It's pretty clear that geopolitical diddling by super-powers should be amongst the gravest crimes against humanity that a government and people can commit, especially in light of the long-term damage it causes.

Oh, I doubt that, starting with colonialism and the subjugation of aboriginals on a far larger and lasting scale. Iran and its Shah would be "mice nuts" in comparison.

[eyeball]

Oh, I doubt that, starting with colonialism and the subjugation of aboriginals on a far larger and lasting scale. Iran and its Shah would be "mice nuts" in comparison.

I'm pretty certain a mouse and an elephant would both agree that having their testicles crushed feels just as bad in comparison.

[bush_cheney2004]

I'm pretty certain a mouse and an elephant would both agree that having their testicles crushed feels just as bad in comparison.

Yeah, especially when the mouse use to have the "nuts" of Persia and the associated history as a "super power". Some mouse!

[eyeball]

Yeah, especially when the mouse use to have the "nuts" of Persia and the associated history as a "super power". Some mouse!

Just goes to show how every single super-power in history sooner or later bites off more than it can chew.

Looks like later is now in the case of your's.

[bush_cheney2004]

Just goes to show how every single super-power in history sooner or later bites off more than it can chew.

Looks like later is now in the case of your's.

You would know far better than I...just ask your "queen".

[eyeball]

You would know far better than I...

How do you explain that?

[bush_cheney2004]

How do you explain that?

Your queen's "empire" is now just a very large collection of hat boxes.

[eyeball]

Your queen's "empire" is now just a very large collection of hat boxes.

Okay, but I thought you were going to explain how I know better than you that your country has bitten off more than it can chew.

[bush_cheney2004]

Okay, but I thought you were going to explain how I know better than you that your country has bitten off more than it can chew.

You do...my country never wasted so much time and resources for hat boxes.

[eyeball]

You do...my country never wasted so much time and resources for hat boxes.

Nonetheless your country still wasted them.

[bush_cheney2004]

Nonetheless your country still wasted them.

It's our choice, just as it was for your former empire. Oh, wasn't it grand!

[eyeball]

It's our choice, just as it was for your former empire. Oh, wasn't it grand!

If you say so, there's not that much to write home about though that isn't just a rinse and repeat of similarly imperial choices.

Enjoy your moment.

[Guest American Woman]

From what I've read, some moderate Muslims are concerned that radical Muslims are going to come in and fill the voids created by the "Arab Spring."

[GostHacked]

From what I've read, some moderate Muslims are concerned that radical Muslims are going to come in and fill the voids created by the "Arab Spring."

That's been a concern since all this stuff started late last year.

[DogOnPorch]

From what I've read, some moderate Muslims are concerned that radical Muslims are going to come in and fill the voids created by the "Arab Spring."

Apparently true as this sweetheart lets us know in no uncertain terms.

Dr. Salah Sultan, a member of Yusuf al-Qaradawi's International Union of Muslim Scholars (IUMS) and the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, declared on al-Jazeera that the IUMS would restore the fatwa they issued in 1994, which stated that "every Zionist who enters Egypt--tourist or not--should be killed."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fKWO05YzsVw

A 'Doctor', eh? Must have forgotten his Hippocratic Oath...

Edited September 27, 2011 by DogOnPorch

[Post To The Left]

The usual myopic leftists, believing that inside every Muslim is a progressive liberal waiting to jump out, are pretending to understand the motivations behind the recent tensions misleadingly labeled as the "Arab Spring". As if all these people running through the streets are informed by deep desires for democracy, pluralism, freedom, and liberty.

Let's see how things develop before you folks pretend to understand Arabic/Islamic societies. These are deeply religious, conservative, anti-gay, anti-dissent, largely uneducated, and highly indoctrinated societies. Their heroes are not Western political philosophers who advocated for freedom, but figures of conquest like Muhammad and Ataturk.

You have a point in that it is really too early to tell how the successful revolutions, where the oppressive dictator was overthrown, will turn out. All we have now is Tunisia with the election results for a 217 seat Constituent Assembly breaking down like this:

Ennahda - 90 seats - Basically the same party as muslim AK Party in democratic Turkey

Congress for the Republic - 30 seats - centre-left secular

Democratic Forum for Labour and Liberties - 21 - centre-left secular

Popular Petition - 19 - A party built around a Tunisian Ted Turner and his media empire

Progressive Democratic Party - 17 - secular liberal

The Initiative - 5 - The old guard, the supporters of the former dictator

Edited October 28, 2011 by Post To The Left

[GostHacked]

From what I've read, some moderate Muslims are concerned that radical Muslims are going to come in and fill the voids created by the "Arab Spring."

That is a real concern I think as well. Regardless of what anyone thinks of these dictators, they did prevent the tribes from clashing with each other for the most part. Take that away and it's a perfect storm for civil unrest. Radicals who were kept in check by these dictators now can run free and cause all sorts of problems.

[eyeball]

That is a real concern I think as well. Regardless of what anyone thinks of these dictators, they did prevent the tribes from clashing with each other for the most part. Take that away and it's a perfect storm for civil unrest. Radicals who were kept in check by these dictators now can run free and cause all sorts of problems.

I think it's always been inevitable that many if not most of the tribes and peoples in the artificial nations created by western imperialism would one day more or less return to their historic configurations once left to their own devices. This process should have been allowed to unfold decades ago when there were far fewer people and lots of natural resources to develop meaningful economies with afterwards.

Now that many of these countries are teeming with millions and millions of more people and their natural capital has mostly been plundered and exported away you can add the perfect earthquake to that perfect storm. Is it still really a wonder why there are so many more radicalized people than before?