I asked TTR for his thoughts on something I had written. I am putting the thing that I wrote (slightly altered) into this posting to make it easier to access and to get any other thoughts on the subject.
Assume that there is a parent who tells his daughter that she is incompetent, that she is never going to amount to anything and that she is inferior. It seems to me that most Americans would call that guy a bad parent. Similarly, if it was a teacher with a student and the teacher said the same sort of things to the student then that teacher would be labeled as being a bad teacher. And the same would be true if it were a peer with a peer relationship. The berating peer would be labeled as being a bad peer. The same label would apply if it were two parents berating one child or one parent berating two children. In fact, one million parents saying that sort of stuff to one million children would still get the one million parents labeled as being bad parents. And the same label would be used if it were one million teachers or one million peers doing the berating. In all cases, regardless of the number of people involved, the berating group would be labeled by Americans as being bad.
Now, it is known that America has some sort of a relationship with the Iraqis and that relationship is something like that of a parent to a child, or like a teacher to a student, or like a peer to a peer relationship. And, inexplicably, millions of Americans have no problem at all saying, directly or indirectly, that the Iraqis are incompetent, that they are never going to amount to anything and that the Iraqis are inferior.
What are your thoughts on this?
| | | |
|
|
n.
It really doesn’t take much these days, given the size of the U.S. population, to reach a number in the millions. If you start with only half of the citizens and then confine things to 2 percent of those people you come up with a number around three million.
But whatever the actual number is your point is that your perception of things is different from mine and you believe that the number of “bad” attitude people is far lower than where I put the number.
The reason for my high number is that over the past few years I have encountered so many people who use the phrase “they are not like us” in a negative way that implies that the “they”, the Iraqis, are inferior. I have also heard it used countless times in the media in the same sort of way. The odd thing about it is that both sides do it, not just the people who are against the war but the people who are for the war do it as well.
Now the reason I wrote the thing in the first place is that TTR used a rare phrase. He wrote, “I believe in the Iraqi people.” I don’t know how often you come across such a phrase but for me it is a rare occurrence. I am far more likely to encounter phrases that are either neutral or negative and “they are not like us” is that kind of phrase. It can be used as a neutral statement of the facts but it is also very easy to put a negative tone in with it.
Try saying both phrases and try turning each into something negative with tone alone. It is very easy to turn the “not like us” phrase into an insult directed at the “they”. But with the “believe” phrase it is not that easy because it is a strictly positive phrase and trying to turn that phrase into a negative implies that the speaker of the phrase has been insulted, not the people being referred to in the phrase.
So for me one question is how does a person who uses a strictly positive phrase view what I wrote? Another is how do his thoughts differ from the norm?
At those times when all around you mope
the best way for you to find how to cope
is for you to figure out how to recognize hope.
Just a few thoughts from an old dope.
OY
What are your thoughts on this?" (old yankee above) ....
HELLO.
After reading your post a few times, reading the comments, and your replies, this old 'dope' could only come up with this in comment:
"Millions of people are have no problem saying they watched the Anna Nicole 'news' stories on t.v. .... For DAYS on end."
I guess, in seriousness, I would first have to know what exactly those who find the Iraqis, ''inferior'', mean by that specific word? Inferior, how?
People like to make 'blanket' statements and then it seems, these days, people argue forever about them. Instead, of FIRST defining the argument. Just MY dope thoughts. GRIN.
I've read a few of your blog pieces .... You make many insightful thoughts and comments. MUCH appreciated.
My best to you and yours,
TallPockets.
There are millions of Americans who couldn't even find Iraq on a map of the world. They know nothing of the people, their religion, or their culture. Their statement, therefore, is without substance.
I think with all of the technology today most Americans would be able to find Iraq. All that you have to do these days is tell your smart car that that was were you going. With a smart G.P.S. equipped car and enough toll money I think that most Americans would be able to drive from the Midwestern U.S. to Iraq in just a few hours. I’ve never actually mapped out the trip myself and my car is quite stupid so I am not completely certain about the actual drive time and I don’t know if it takes any longer during iceberg season.
For me, I am less concerned about people’s knowledge about the Iraqis and more concerned about their attitudes towards the Iraqis. Because if you start with a “bad” attitude even if you gain more knowledge you will put a slant in with it that just reinforces the attitude.
It may be that most of what I perceive as being a “bad” attitude is just a part of the American superiority thing. That whole “greatest nation on earth, super power, saved the world in World War II, great victor in the cold war” sort of thing. It feels different than that to me, much more negative. And I wonder how many Americans with a “bad” attitude it would take to have a measurable negative effect. (yes, yes. only one if he is president.)
I just wonder what it would feel like to be an Iraqi and have a sizable chunk of the people on the planet believe that you and your countrymen have little to no chance of ever making your democracy work and making something of yourselves.
It’s got to be pretty discouraging.
Thanks for your thoughts,
Old Yankee
light...dark...
ebb.....flow....
to teach , to be taught
when you are taught, you can teach.
if we presume to be teachers.
then we must agree.... we are being taught.
what we think, becomes who we are
thought takes form and manifests....
what do you want to create?
with your thoughts?
with your words?....
i will send out my prelude...and
write it on the wind....a
wish....
a song ......
choose love.....
the ravened one who soars so free.
On wind she writes with feathered wing
Her breath a prelude.
The thought does cling.
She strokes me with a touch so kind,
her image etched upon my mind.
to teach
to learn
her breath to word
she loves
and sings
this magic bird
The one of two she comes for me.
She comes to set my spirit free.
Old Yankee
just takes a little to feel fed.
when nothing else describes the mood...
it is
my spirits...
favorite food.
sweet dreams...dear poet.
(Candy is dandy but liquor is quicker" - Ogden Nash)
WINK
My best to you and yours on this SUNDAY of days,
TallPockets.
And have you thought about how the “liquor is quicker” idea could mess up your campaign?
There you are at the big rally, the press is there and your new first lady, who is drunk as a skunk, starts making a scene and falls flat on her face. The headlines shout the news all about it and then your first lady starts pointing the finger at you.
“TallPockets got me drunk!” is her claim.
The tabloids start running stories from other women with their claims. And soon comes the picture of the love child, whether real or fabricated, the little baby with the diaper pulled up to his armpits.
“Look! Look!” they all scream, “See how tall the pockets on that diaper are!”
You better stick with the candy.
Then you could start your campaign in Hershey, Pennsylvania.
Old Yankee
Right now I don’t have a lot of time to visit any new homes but I did stop by and I saw that you have three. Which one are you suggesting that I visit when I have the time?
Old Yankee
The U.S. already went into Iraq and took out a government and it hasn’t been a stunning success so far so I don’t think that trying to take out another government in Iraq is the best way to go. It would also call into question our goal of an independent Iraq. Of course it would be nice if the U.S., as a whole, could decide on what our goals in Iraq actually are.
I’ve read some of the things that you have written Joram and you are coming at the Iraq Problem like a problem solver and trying to be sensible about it all. You’re coming at it with a sort of World War II approach, which isn’t a bad way to come at it, but you are going to run into all sorts of walls because that’s more like what the first Iraq war was similar to. That first war was a military type of war whereas Iraq Part Two is a psychological issues war.
This time we went into Iraq to fix the psychological problems of the United States; we went in there to deal with our fears and other national psychological issues. This Iraq war looks like it is mostly about the Cold War and Vietnam. That’s the stuff underlying the whole mess. We went in there to win the Vietnam War by repeating history and trying to get it right this time. At this point Iraq has very little to do with it because this is a psychological problem within the United States and Americans are bound and determined to lose the Vietnam War once and for all.
You, Joram, are trying to be sensible in a problem solving way and that’s not a bad thing but people both for and against this war don’t want Iraq to turn into a success. They want it to continue to be a failure.
They don’t want to fix the problem; they want to continue to be able to vent and complain about it and use Iraq as a psychological metaphor for Vietnam so that it will validate their beliefs.
Old Yankee