Really nice essay. I don’ t dislike Trump as much, but this has terrific tone, especially re McMullen.

Really nice essay. I don’ t dislike Trump as much, but this has terrific tone, especially re McMullen.

Really nice essay. I don’ t dislike Trump as much, but this has terrific tone, especially re McMullen.

I wrote a few weeks ago that Trump was probably kind of an Eisenhower Republican. Ike carried New York by 20 points when Trump was 10 years old. I don’t think that’s a bad thing; prefer Ike to many in today’s GOP. But it probably is somewhat “corporatist”.

@Jack Ross, on Teddy Kennedy’s inevitability. Never happened. Teddy was the overweight brother who cheated on his Spanish exam, and well, “Teddy on the bridge” as Abbie Hoffman used to call him. Never perceived as inevitable. In the late 70’s, when Carter seemed vulnerable and the left was looking for an alternative, I remember an activist friend (Jim Chapin–you might know of him) and tried to talk Teddy up for me. “He’s really not so bad” was the first line of the sale.
I think Teddy eventually grew up, grew closer to the Kennedy average in terms of political ability, and became an effective, far more than average, liberal senator. But that was after his presidential ambitions were finished.

@Rob,
Well I can’t speak for Africa, where Christians are a fairly recent phenomenon (apart from the European ones). Certainly bad in the Mideast now. Far better before we invaded Iraq (Christians played important roles in Saddam’s government). In Syria, Christians very pro-Assad. Is that why the neocons, McCain, etc, hate Assad so much?

@Ping Lin
The key word is “happily”. Almost all American presidents in the past fifty years have had difficulties with Israel, and strong domestic political pressures to treat Israel as a special friend. At some point the balance shifts, where the hassle of maintaining the special relationship outweighs the pressures which can be exerted by the Israel lobby. We’re getting closer to the tipping point. Especially as it becomes clear that there is no “peace process”–the supposed existence of which gave the United States plausible talking points with the Arab and Muslim world. If you follow the debate in Israel, you will find Israelis realize the special relationship is ending too.

FWIW, here is a copy of an email from Josh Block of ‘The Israel Project”, taking credit for pushing the Senate vote against Iran’s choice for ambassador:

“Monday night, the Senate voted unanimously to ban Iran’s pick for UN ambassador, Hamid Aboutalebi, from entering the United States. Why?

Because the person Iran’s Supreme Leader and his “moderate” government want to send to New York as their top diplomat is no diplomat at all – he is part of the terrorist group that attacked and overran our embassy in Tehran in 1979 and took our people hostage for 444 days.

By acting quickly and getting the facts about the disturbing Iranian move and this person’s history into the media, TIP was able to help set the stage for Monday’s Senate action.

Ambassadors of terror have no place in negotiations, let alone on American soil. Granting Aboutalebi a visa would have been an insult to the American hostages, their families, and the diplomatic process. We’ve always known Iran’s real feelings – what lies behind the smiles and the deception – and so does Congress. Will you join us in applauding the Senate for protecting us from this menace in Tehran?

Sign TIP’s card, thanking Congress for denying Aboutalebi’s visa to enter the U.S.!

The Iranian government’s choice of a terrorist and key conspirator in the U.S. embassy takeover has escalated tensions between the Islamic Republic and the U.S., and could result in the unraveling of nuclear talks between Iran and the P5+1.

You know Iran can’t be trusted to act in good faith – and this vile insult to America shows as much. TIP has been working to get out the facts about Iran’s true motives – and stop this terror ambassador from ever setting foot in the U.S. – and this week, Congress heard our voices.
Now it’s time for them to hear your voices.

Thank Congress for standing up against terrorism and keeping Iranian terrorists away from American shores: Sign TIP’s card here.

Thank you for your support”

Treech,
I perhaps should have written “native Russian speakers”, but most people understood that “Russian speakers” has become a kind of shorthand code for Ukrainians who identify culturally with Russia.
My estimate is that the agreement arrived at with European foreign ministers which called for Yanukovich to step down in a few months would have been followed. Ukraine can’t survive without foreign subsidies, and no one would have been willing to subsidize an illegal regime.

It’s been pointed out to me that the “golden toilet” in Yanokovich’s palace was a myth. I heard the story not from the Western media, but from a not especially political Ukranian woman we know– so it’s the kind of truthy fact which has real resonance. http://www.buzzfeed.com/rachelzarrell/the-picture-of-a-gold-toilet-is-not-from-the-ukrainian-presi

@Willliam Dalton.
Some well informed people (at the lunch yesterday, for example) do speak of partition as a possible option. Right now I think everyone of any official standing, Russian, European, Ukrainian etc rejects the idea and speaks of the country’s territorial integrity. I suppose that could change. But right now, no one is pushing it.

Marko,
Appreciate your comments re David Dinkins. I didn’t trash him in my post; and his deep love of tennis a boon for New York.

@Aaron Gross, RadicalCenter2016, I agree with your comments. But most people though the Quibya massacre excessive at the time, as do I. Israel’s problem with “infiltrators” then was part of the aftermath of the ethnic cleansings of 1948, in that the infiltrators were more often than not people returning to their own towns, or retaliating against those Israelis who now inhabited them. There were Israelis, and many others who proposed an actual peace settlement, involving some refugee compensation and repatriation (details up for negotiation) but Ben Gurion rejected this.

@NB. Yes, I know the talking points. The retort is the “far more influential” AAUP also opposed the boycott of South Africa. Whatever. My point is that things are changing–I don’t expect American university profs to liberate the Palestinians. But their are signs of aroused consciousness everywhere, in the churches, at the Democratic convention, and now here–at this major American academic body.

@GOM, yes I paused over using the word racist, cognizant of its often brain numbing associations. But I thought the most apt comparison was to the Vietnam era generals, who often deployed the “Orientals doesn’t care deeply about human life” meme to justify ever more indiscriminate use of American airpower, etc. And that seems racist to me, in much the same way.

It would be nice if Paul showed some signs of engaging with experienced and knowledgable realists and non-interventionists (not necessarily the same). There are many in Washington, including those who write here and several other publications, eg. The National Interest. I’ve not heard of any contacts between Paul’s staff and them, indeed the contrary.

I love this post. I took a BASIC course in 1974 in the summer. It was fun and challenging and in its demands similar to chess, but when the opportunity came to drop it and go to Europe, I took it.

@Aaron Gross–You have a good memory. But I saw TAC at the beginning as kind of a necessary coalition between realists and paleos. I sort of supported Gulf War I, though was less enthusiastic by the time it was over. One turning point: Robert Tucker’s essay in the (Irving Kristol published!) National Interest, bemoaning the slaughter of the Iraqi Republican Guard by the USAF on Just War grounds.

@German_reader:

Yes, mine was an over-hasty formulation. You are right about Huntington. I used it as a kind of short hand, because so often he is blamed or credited with encouraging that narrative. Of course his book urged the US to be wary of being drawn into civilizational conflicts that weren’t critical to us.

@balconesfault
Good point. I would go with option B, inconsequential, but probably add “relatively” as a qualifier. Relative to the New Deal, the civil rights revolution, much Progressive era legislation.

@Sheldon, Here is a link to an reuters article saying rouhani was misquoted. http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/08/02/us-iran-israel-idUSBRE9710GN20130802?feedType=RSS&feedName=Iran&virtualBrandChannel=10209&utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter&dlvrit=59365

It wouldn’t surprise me if his actual words were altered to make him seem somewhat more “fanatic”– and then of course the more radical words would be broadcast endlessly till everyone knew them by heart.

Agree, great Dalton comment!

I think academia is more free from political correctness than non-academia. Ask Jason Richwine, among others.

” . . . the war party . . .

This reference is most offensive if it is intended to refer to the republican party”

Not intended by me. Many Democrats are fully subscribed members, and many are passive fellow travelers.

@Aaron,
Yes, I’m listening. I’m not focusing hard, it’s Saturday night. But I have a clear image in my mind of girls like this, in junior high ((before I went to private school) and their parents, and cultural matrix which sort of sustained them. A generation ago, they might not have gone to church regularly, but they knew people who did, and sometimes did themselves. They knew church (and the lessons they might have learned there) were probably good ones, even if they didn’tmuch toe the line. Ditto prime time TV. Ditto every other cultural message. There are various neoconservative arguments about how the sixties were bad culturally for blacks (Myron Magnet) and I think they’re probably relevant for this “cohort” too.

@KW– Yes, you’re right. Thanks. Also four of the did time in juvenile detentions centers and were out a few years before 2002.

@byrresheim
Good point. TAC wrote a lot about Iraqi Christians in its first year, a community one of the war’s victims. And Syria’s too.

Well, I kind of knew Rene Ricard in the 70’s, at least we had mutual friends, and I recall vividly many of his mordantly humorous comments.

@T Sledge
http://original.antiwar.com/avnery/2011/06/12/netanyahu-stupid-like-a-fox/

The link above describes how the Israeli army has dealt with unarmed demonstrators. Snipers. And then more snipers to shoot those who come to care for the wounded. It’s a pretty effective way of ensuring that peaceful demonstrations don’t remain peaceful.

@Aaron Gross: Here, for starters: http://www.salon.com/2010/08/05/foxman_mosque_happened/
But I acknowledge that Foxman is not the most egregious example. Also, appreciate your ever careful/critical reading.

Does Sarah Palin look to you like she often imbibes Big Gulps or buys food at 7-Eleven? Do you by chance suspect that, on the contrary, she devotes significantly more time than you and I do to the upkeep of her physical appearance and sedulously monitors her daily caloric intake?

Good, funny point. Liked the Freedom reference too–somewhat to my surprise, the novel’s not overrated.

@Mario,
Thanks for the informative link.

I kept rereading the sentence that “were it not for Tony Blair’s encouragement, it is far from certain that GWB would have invaded Iraq.” So Blair, the leader of the once great empire now on its last legs, was the one who may have actually caused the war?

I could have phrased it better, but I meant that if Blair had actively and publicly opposed the war (the way Chirac did) it might well have made a significant difference–or at least made Bush more inclined to listen to his Dad, Scowcroft, etc, as opposed to Cheney, Rummie and their gang.

I could have added to the post this story

http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/comment/2013/02/ted-cruz-sees-red-not-crimson-at-harvard.html?mobify=0

from the New Yorker, which relates how Ted Cruz gave a speech two years ago claiming there were twelve communists seeking to overthrow the government on the Harvard Law School faculty. Like I said, second time as farce.

@Jim Atherton.
Sigh. Many things I’m tempted to say, about Evola, TAC and its detractors, even pedanticism. One is that the more I read, the more I sense my flippant judgements were probably correct. Another is that one of the outstanding aspects of Stern’s book was its insight into a broader phenomenon, its capacity to illuminate patterns across a certain kind of thought, pertaining even to those not particularly mentioned.

The politics of cultural despair came out more than forty years ago. Putting the paleo in paleocon I guess.

More than fifty, actually. It was Fritz Stern’s first book, based on his dissertation; he was a professor and major mentor of mine. It’s a study of three intellectual predecessors of Nazism from different periods, radical conservatives, an attempt to understand what for many of his generation was the central intellectual problem: how could the most advanced European nation descend to barbarism? It’s an extremely rich, beautifully written book– and I think still explains a lot. It occurs to me I could have used that title to head my post on Auster, it would fit him well.

Thanks to commenters for the clarifications on Evola, whose biography and work I really don’t know. But I have sensed (correctly it seems) that there is small vogue for him on the Right now, which led me to put him in the fascisant (perhaps more than fascist) class of Euro-intellectual. Brasillach I know more about. My knowledge of this field is quite dated, rooted mainly in readings of “The Politics of Cultural Despair” and related works in graduate school, some time ago. I know I should get around to reading Alain de Benoist, for instance, but never seem to have time.

Good link re Christianization and Asian-American vote.

And unfortunately, God’s blessing on America will leave with it.

How do you know?

@T Sledge.
I feel I should elaborate, because it’s an interesting subject. I think the Palestinians have internalized the strategy you suggest– much of their “resistance” is simply trying to hang on in the land of their immediate ancestors. But the Israelis get this, and much of their strategy is to hamper Palestinian normal life so as to make it intolerable, encourage emigration. A kind of slow-motion and “peaceful” ethnic cleansing strategy, using the tools of bureaucracy as much as violence. On the valuable mondoweiss website, there is regular news account, “Today in Palestine” or something, which records many of the countless day to day small battles around this theme.

@Michael Moore,
THE Michael Moore?
@T. Sledge, A fair amount of that is going on. And the great preponderance of Palestinian resistance is non-violent, though the “rockets” and AK 47’s get all the attention. A lot of the Palestinian population “in camps” are outside of both Israel and the occupied territories, having been forced to flee and not allowed back. But if you follow what is going on day to day, especially in the West Bank, a great deal of the maneuvering involves Israeli efforts to acquire land without Palestinians, and Palestinian efforts to not allow that to happen. The leaders of neither people are blind to the possibilities you sketch out.

@Aaron Gross,
I thought the maybe, just maybe qualified things sufficiently. Honestly not sure who I’d vote for, Meretz most likely, but conceivably Labor, Balad, Da’am, I don’t know. I wish I could vote, and as an American taxpayer (and a DC resident yet), ought to have a right to on the no taxation without representation principle.

Sad to say, the Huff, Giff and Kyle Rote Giants couldn’t beat an average Big 10 team today.

What a challenging post. Having considered myself a conservative dissident for quite a while, it’s hard to adjust to what may be the truth–that my views are those of a moderate Republican, something like a David Frum with (unFrumlike) realist foreign policy positions. But yes, intelligent people meeting in boardrooms would come up with better candidates than Gingrich, Bachman and Cain, or indeed any of them save Paul and Huntsman. The fact is that Limbaugh-Fox axis has created a kind of extremist and ignorant conservativism at the base, and there isn’t any easy way around that.

http://andrewsullivan.thedailybeast.com/2012/12/the-neocons-rally-against-hagel.html

Really terrific Andrew Sullivan post on the Wa Po edit.

Sorry. If you supported Obama twice for president can you really still be a Republican?

Good question. Would have supported Hagel, had he been the nominee, or, probably, Ron Paul. But I’m one of those Republicans repulsed by the neocon foreign policy. Not sure how many of us there are.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y58njT2oXfE&feature=youtu.be

I may blog about this later, but this short animated video by JVP is really well done, worth watching.

@Max, It is not at all an attack on Israel’s right to exist. It could be construed as an attack on Israel’s occupation of the West Bank, and the conditions West Bank Palestinians are subjected to, though that it not the main thrust of the piece.

@Noah172–appreciate the helpful, informative comment. The subject needs more fleshing out. But in a way, an electorate with more relatively poor immigrants will tend more Democratic no matter what the GOP says or does. And as you imply, Dems are often more informed and more restrictionist than Republicans.

I actually think Romney has been a good campaigner the past month. His sound bites seem forceful, his voice good, and of course he “looks” like a President. But why should the white working class vote for a financial type like him? At least half, apparently, find his being white insufficient reason.

@reflectionephemeral
very smart comment

@NRF–I’m assuming that some significant fraction of the undecided are not just low information voters, but people who would have supported a Bloomberg led third party — perhaps the heirs of John Anderson voters.

I would count Justin and Phil Giraldi as Obama votes. And how can there be a vote for the Hapsburg Emperor and it not be Zmirak?

@Thomas Meehan,
Yes you’re right, Mossadegh voted in by the Parliament. Thanks for the correction. To pronounce on the machinations of the next few years would take a more able Iranian Constitional scholar than I. But I suppose it does provide a precedent of sorts for sanctions, producing unrest, leading to regime change.
I wasn’t particularly expressing outrage over the successful CIA plotting versus Mossadegh, more reporting the Iranian outrage, which was/is deeply felt and understandable.

Yeah, he’s better off saying he knows how to read a balance sheet and leave it at that. “Harvesting” companies developed by someone else –and apt phrase he once used to explain Bain’s work to investors– probably wouldn’t go over so well.

@Ben, sorry, my lazy formulation and you’re right. But I’d point out that a much greater preponderance of the Jewish community was liberal in those days–at least in terms of the relevant issues. They were New Dealers, supporters of civil rights, overwhelmingly opposed to the Vietnam war. Neoconservativism had not yet been created, though of course the sentiments it tapped into were latent. So you are left with a relative handful of Jewish rightwingers, Roy Cohn sorts, plus, I suppose many of the ultra-orthodox.

I’m in baseball heaven– a Yankee and Giants fan since childhood, plus the Nats for good measure. I’m even enjoying the commercials. The one where the couple is squabbling over who get to record their shows– cause the TV only handles one recording. And the woman complains that she feels the TV is watching her walk around naked. And he says “At least someone gets to see you walk around naked.” It’s a variation of the Elvis Costello line, from “A Good Year for the Roses.” Anyway, I thought so.

@ Red Phillips, I was comparing League of the South to SDS, perhaps radical would have been a better word. . Not sure what who or what would be an exact parallel: David Duke has remained more extremist than Ayers, after Ayers surfaced and became eventually a successful Chicago left-liberal, family man and (I think I’ve heard) little league coach. Like you said, millions of Americans considered themselves Marxist, (especially during the 60’s) and are simply liberals now. Of course, a quite few went fairly far to the right (Horowitz, Jared Taylor). I think extremism may be more a personality type than a political position.

I was surprised he didn’t the Pletka advice–to mask the neocon arguments under a pillowful of internationalist platitudes. Pletka is smart enough to know how unpopular her views are these days.

I stayed with a CIA officer I am sort of related to (and whom Phil knows) in Rome a few times in the late 70’s and early eighties. The era of the Moro kidnapping, the Red Brigades, etc. Lot of terrorism. He was never armed, lived in a normal apartment, had his calling card on the door with a dueling pistol.

@Ken Hoop,
Of course I’ve visited and met with Palestinians. I’ve written about the trips both here and elsewhere, you can google if interested. That wasn’t the subject here.

The New Republic is certainly not exclusively neocon, and publishes a lot that is definitely not. But Eli Lake– whose work I’ve seen for years in many venues–definitely fits the bill! As for AEI, its transformation over twenty-five years from an eclectic but broady Republican leaning think tank into a hard core neocon shop–at least in its foreign policy–is one of the saddest things to happen in conservative intellectual life.

@hetzer I think we have some idea of intention, both from what Wick wrote above, and from the more detailed exploration given here, http://thelede.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/09/24/interviewing-egypts-islamist-president-answers-to-reader-questions/?ref=world&ref=middleeast by Kirpatrick and Erlanger, the Times’ correspondents–especially in response to the first question.
I think Morsi understands that his administration can’t possible succeed in conflict with the Copts, who form a substantial percentage of Egypt’s educated and professional classes. But a lot depends on events, of course, and I don’t doubt that a lot of people voted for Morsi who don’t have a trace of religious pluralism in their bones.

Really great post. Alas, no Eisenhowers in the GOP any more.
Maybe no Nixons either.

To German Reader,
No, my intention is more nuanced. I don’t know what should be done about the Euro, and I certainly don’t think Germans are still Nazis and shouldn’t be trusted. But just as we in America can’t possibly understand Israeli attitudes without reference to the Holocaust, it helps to remember that other nations have their scars from World War II as well. There are more than occasional historical references to Russia’s, and Poland’s– but the Greek history is seldom written about here–and never in this context. . It helps in understanding why the Euro mess is difficult.

Re, his poor taste in courses:
I don’t think any high quality private club would want to put up with a presidential entourage four or five times a month. It was different obviously in the 50’s, when Ike could play the National and Augusta without disrupting the places. Also, I don’t think Obama is especially good at golf yet, and it usually takes time to appreciate what makes a good course–besides of course natural beauty. if you’re still working on not duffing the ball, such factors as hole variety, the nuances of the types of shots you can hit, don’t come into play.

Dan, An extremely lucid essay — much to chew over. I think a great deal of the issue can be explained by the fact that those who used to be “elite” Protestants began to disbelieve. They valued their religious institutions and many of the moral teachings passed on through them to hold them together for a generation or two, but after the mainline churches couldn’t exert that much moral authority in pews filled with casually churchgoing non-believers. And being a Protestant clergyman became no longer particularly important or prestigious–at least in comparison to what it used to be. That obviously raised the cultural clout of what you call “purer Protestantism.”
I think in many ways liberal Protestantism lives on in other forms– multiculturalism being one of them –but that’s another subject. All this helped galvanize what you call “purer Protestantism”.
But this is quite an outstanding piece — fuel for much further explortation.

Because I’m not sure how much of “committed to empire” is conviction, how much a go-along attitude because that’s where the power in the GOP resides. And now he’s in a position to do more than go-along. And is certainly smart, capable of thinking for himself. I think if a hue and cry is raised about his neocon ties (and his pending meeting with Sheldon Adelson, he might at least think about these issues, instead of just signing off on what the neocons want.

Thanks for the pushback guys. I haven’t really followed Ryan’s career closely, and take some clues from the neocon aversion to Zoellick. But Romney could have chosen Marco Rubio. The Ryan selection gives me some hope that all is not over in the GOP, which is generally by default attitude. Let’s see how he does on the national stage. He clearly is a smart man– which opens up some possibilities for wisdom.

Thanks for a very interesting post. Though I once had a lot of Clash records, I haven’t kept up. Curious as to whether any of the extremist bands are good, either with lyrics or music. I doubt it– but the general theme of whites being marginalized is both sufficiently powerful and taboo that it would be an interesting market to serve.

@Dana Dlott:
Dana Dlott! I mentioned you the other day, as I’m sharing a summer sublet apartment with a Columbia chemistry grad student.

I think the goal is to get the US to do what Israel can’t do itself.

Where does their money come from?

@Dave Dutcher
“I’m not sure why paleocons are cheering a leftist faction of the Presbyterian church acting like leftists to advance an idea which is anathema to mainstream conservatives who often do agree with points paleos make otherwise. Is an anti-israel outlook something paleos really should embrace, or flows from a Burkean/Kirkean conservativism?”

My answer: while I can’t speak for paleocons (and consider myself more a moderately conservative “realist”) I think the present relationship between the US and Israel is damaging to both countries: for the US, because it drags us into conflicts (Iraq, Iran) that are damaging to our national interests, and for Israel because it allows the state to ignore peace overtures and move into an unsustainable situation where they are ruling over a hostile and occupied population.
Also, having made two visits to the region, I find the occupation morally wrong, –much as I believe I would have found apartheid in South Africa or segregation in the American south morally wrong. No, it doesn’t comprise all of Israel, but the entire state is implicated in it. I think it’s time for American Christians to begin to speak up about this, as they are paying with their blood, treasure, and reputation. Does that answer your question?

@tbraton
I’m fine with federalism, but think it’s a hard line to sell in a campaign, where simplicity is king.

@Mark Hammell: Perhaps you will give us regular updates. Also interested in the conversation, whether “CLIMATE CHANGE” as you put comes up in the evacuation centers, or not. Agree that overdevelopment is a contributing factor.

@Sheldon
It’s a funny joke, I’ve heard it long ago and many times–though not regarding me.

Patrick,
I haven’t met a Palestinian who believes that every descendant of those cleansed in ’48 is going to return to Israel. But they all do have a legitimate claim to have been wronged–rather like Holocaust survivors. I don’t think you can conceive of an end to the conflict without somehow acknowledging and dealing with those claims.

Interesting.  I’m not much for GOP talking points any more, but for me, Warren’t use of Native American affirmative action levers to enhance her career really does speak to her character.  I (and perhaps millions  of other WASPs) can point to some remote Indian forebears– but the idea of using them to secure a Harvard post really would never, ever have occurred. 

Eve, Damsels in Distress played in DC for what, one weekend? I missed it.  Playing at three theaters in NYC.  I think Whit Stillman an important director, but apparently not enough feel the same way. 

Had been paying zero attention to this story before hearing a lot about on the radio this morning. Kudos to Clark, and the commenters, for nuanced, informative discussion.

@Selvar–I agree.

@B Wooster

The Code Pink protests focused on the Iran war and the occupation in roughly equal measure.

Nice one Dennis. It was, indeed, thoroughly repulsive. I was out in the street with Code Pink, chanting slogans and annoying AIPAC delegates. The evening before, we tried to shame the Congressmen going into the AIPAC gala by yelling “Shame on You, Represent America” but clearly they ignored our advice.

Curious about NR’s overtures to Jeb Bush, whether they are getting anywhere. Bush in his second term may have improved the impression he left, and his refusal to go in for the anti-Muslim bigotry now rampant in the GOP makes him seem like a grown-up. Which makes me think that Jeb is the one possible GOP candidate who might be a favorite going in. Gingrich, the Huckster, Michelle Bachman–it’s becoming a party of crazy people! Of course I’d support Ron Paul, but Mya (above) is mostly right.

You saw the Eric Zemmour case, I imagine. I find it pretty shocking. (But you can’t blame it on Protestantism!)

He can go to Israel. Really.
http://www.israeltoday.co.il/NewsItem/tabid/178/nid/22668/Default.aspx

To BP– I didn’t write anything about the peace treaty. Of course Egypt is going to keep it. Helping with the Gaza blockade another matter.
Here’s a nice link from a good Israel blog:
http://972mag.com/inside-the-military-repression-of-nabi-saleh-part-one/

Hey SavedbyGrace, I go to church and I don’t hear the rap about “prophecied Kingdom of God” and “final confrontation”. It sounds like a reverse side of some kind of wierdo Islamic extremism. Do I go to the wrong church?

Not much coverage, but not much backtracking or apology either. He’s youngish, a new senator, and probably hard to shut up. He doesn’t need the lobby for fundraising, and as Kentucky Republican can probably win forever. It’s a little terrifying for them. Would be nice if his actual statement was more informed, instead of: we’re funding “an arms race” between Israel and Islamists (Mubarak’s Egypt).

I saw it on Al Jazeera around 11 am, eastern time.

Has anyone seen the footage of the protesters fighting the cops, and then arranging a “timeout” for afternoon prayers? It’s one of the most stunning news videos I’ve ever seen.

A “humiliation”! Sort of like Netanyahu inflicted on Obama?

There’s not much evidence that Muslim Brotherhood participation in govt would make Egypt an Al Qaeda base. The MB has been fighting a political battle against Al Qaeda and terrorism for a generation now. Al Qaeda is a really fringe movement of Muslim politics.

Of course Michael is right, it’s not going to be a liberal democracy either.

We should point out that the reason the United States has been subsidizing the Mubarak dictatorship for thirty years is because Egypt made a separate peace with Israel, and left the Palestinians to fend for themselves. Sadat tried to avoid this–the record of Camp David is revealing and moving on this–but ultimately capitulated to the pressures brought on him. For his pains he was assassinated, as he might have known would happen.

This is a genuine social revolution, nothing like Iraq. Egyptians are 90 percent Muslim, why shouldn’t the Muslim Brotherhood play a role in government? The pillars of US domination of the region are cracking. It was bound to happen sooner or later– our policy of putting Israel’s interests ahead of everyone else’s, including our own, was bound to crumble on its own absurdity sooner or later. Just happening sooner than most people thought.

I should add it’s the busboys and poets at 14th and V; there are others too.

Thanks for everyone’s comments, and reading through a long piece in an era of shortened attention spans and wikileaks. Even though I now read tons of stuff about this subject, when you begin researching you find out that there are serious academics who are way, way ahead of you. So there always appears some danger of making a complete fool of oneself.

Good for Newsweek, and you. Andrew Sullivan has a post pointing to recent polls showing that support for Iran’s nuclear program has gone up past 50 percent among the people (not the rulers) in Arab countries. Turkey (most democratic Middle East country) is hardly pushing for war on Iran.

He has no chance, right? At least we can hope that Rand Paul is dissimulating for the sake of winning election.

Very gracefully done, Michael.

Norweigian shooter,
The boundaries would be roughly those delineated by the Israeli Labor Party, which would mean no willingness to engage Hamas, a great fear of things like the Goldstone Report (not shared by a lot of people at the conference) and a reluctance to engage with people –Palestinians mostly but not only them– who might hope for a realistic and just peace, but don’t necessarily have to preface everything they say with “I love Israel”. Also a reluctance to countenance American diplomatic pressure on Israel, (diminishing of aid, UN vetos, etc) that is the only way anything is going to happen.
Conservative perhaps an inapt word , but I meant close to AIPAC like status quo, in the defining the limits of how America should deal with the region. J Street faces the contradiction between wanting change and peace and being unwilling to back the kinds of things (a re-evaluation of American support for Israel) that might bring it about, for fear of losing its pro-Israel bona fides. I sympathize with the difficulties of the choices. The only one I strongly object to is the throwing of Steve Walt and John Mearsheimer off the bus.

Aaron,
The US is now involved in two major wars in the Mideast, and is contemplating another one. It seems to me much wiser to address the core underlying issues diplomatically (and Israel’s displacement of the Palestinians is certainly a major, probably the major one,) than to keep fighting the wars, which will bankrupt us. That was pretty clear to all of us when we started TAC.

Responding to Jack Tracey,
I supported Obama primarily because, after Bush, I thought our foreign policy needed a dramatic reset, and because I didn’t (and don’t) want a war with Iran. I wrote about that in TAC, and you can look it up in our endorsements issue. And because on certain issues, like immigration, McCain was no more conservative than Obama–probably less so in practice. I don’t see Obama as a radical. He’s given the key financial posts in his administration to Wall Street connected neoliberals, much to the chagrin of the Left. As for black people and their behavior–I think everyone should be on their best behavior. Given the nature of things, Obama’s popularity is more affected by black people’s behavior than say Bush’s would be by white people’s behavior. That’s unfortunate, but true.

Yes, when I read Walt’s post, the only thing I could think of was “Kraftwerk” which ain’t bad, but ain’t rock and roll. When my wife and I spent a year in France (a long time ago) we were pondering this question, and her answer was that the problem was French rhymed poorly (too many words end in the AY sound) which impoverished the lyrical basis of song-writing. Just a thought.

Bill,
To answer you requires longer than I have to spend, and a full answer requires some acknowledgement that an Islamist irredentist government in Gaza did not just appear overnight and begin firing rockets at Israel. The inhabitants of Gaza, are, of course refugees and their descendants from the part of the former Palestinian mandate– which is now Israel. There has to be some acknowledgement and compensation for their displacement. Had their been that — a genuine Palestinian state and some kind of general solution to the refugee problem–Hamas wouldn’t be relevant and popular or even exist. The organization, remember, was originially funded by Israel as an alternative to the nationalist PLO. Anyway, that’s the beginning of my answer: more generally, I think the only long term solution to Israel’s security dilemma it to try to make peace with the Arabs–both the Palestinians and the neighboring states, rather than continually fighting them. There’s a decisive majority of the Arab world that wants to co-exist with Israel, but Israel wants no part of it. It seems to prefer “peace” on its own terms–expanded West Bank settlements, apartheid conditions on the West Bank, the encirclement of Bethlehem. Not surprisingly, it’s not acceptable.

I would think Iran would be very cautious about being drawn into anything–that’s certainly their pattern. I’d love to know what Obama, Hillary and Jim Jones are saying privately to one another. Jones strikes me as no fool, while Obama will do what’s best for Obama.

Norquist actually is very smart, and has been a frequent target for smearing by “national security conservatives”- that last a new euphemism, I suppose. His obsession with taxes can seem kind of reductive, but he has realized from the beginning the Iraq and the wished for subsequent wars were not in America’s interest. He has kept quiet about it, for Republican loyalty sake. I wonder if he will continue to.

Paul, I’ve read enough to realize that the question of who used the chem weapons is too technical for me to have a really good opinion on in a reasonable amount of time. But one thing always made me skeptical, from the beginning: why would Assad want to take the risk of using chemical weapons when he was already winning the war, and when there were so many observers around? That defies elementary logic, to me. That’s the key point which tilts me towards the VIPS position.

Well, the younger one had received scholarships at more or less the best schools in Boston–a peculiar way of telling him he doesn’t belong here.

They may have felt a kind of psychic homelessness– common to millions of immigrants through the ages. But it takes the internet and jihadism to translate that into terrorism.

“Jewish oligarchs” didn’t found the John Birch Society and the Cato Institute.

I agree with your critique, but it’s a really good speech. I got a lump in my throat watching it–not a reaction I ever have with politicians. He believes what he’s saying, uses fresh imagery, etc.

Count me a little surprised a New York jury wouldn’t object to this, or at least lay down some obstacles. You can’t fill the pool with Islamophobes and Likudniks.

How many jobs does the PA provide for bureaucrats of various stripe? I would guess it’s the largest employer on the West Bank by far. Would international donors still fund it if it disbanded itself? Would Israel be able block transfer of international funds to a non PA “civil rights movement”. I don’t know the answers, but I suspect they may a big incentive for the PA to keep on as it’s been doing.

TAC is run by, and has writing for it, many of the same people who were involved when I (along with Pat and Taki) started it in 2002. Ron Unz’s views are certainly eclectic, but he is (like all of us) pretty much of an anti-Iraq war conservative, and by no means a liberal.

Why should I, a middle aged white male, support a candidate willing to fight a war for Israel’s interests? Curiously enough, the black man was the better patriot.

Why should I, a middle aged white male, vote for candidate who would have America fight wars for Israel’s benefit.  The black candidate was the greater patriot.