Arab Spring, Round 2

[Viking]

Why?  Couple of articles he wrote back during the Iraq war and something about Obama.  Something about him being a Muslim.

Was that the article in which he argued that Muslims would view him as Muslim because his dad was, it goes through the father's side, and you don't get to choose?  I know there was an article like that, don't know if that was by Pipes.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/sep/7/obama-i-have-never-been-a-muslim/?page=all

Pipes is a bit nutty on this issue and both says that he can be seen as a muslim AND suggests that he might at some point behaved as a muslim.

Then again, the other crazy thing he thinks is that we should support Assad because Assad is losing. He is an intelligent and well read man. He does have an interesting take on the mind of the mid-eastern muslim.

[CountDeMoney]

To preserve the legacy of the Arab Spring, some general needs to take charge of the situation, marginalize Muslim Brotherhood, and bring some order for the next few decades.

I really dislike this most annoying characteristic of late, where US foreign policy no longer supports military strongmen in really goofy uniforms anymore.  It worked so well for so long.

Democracy ain't for everybody, goddammit.  And it's not always in our best interests for certain nations to have it.   Would've thought people figured that out with Iraq already.

[DGuller]

To preserve the legacy of the Arab Spring, some general needs to take charge of the situation, marginalize Muslim Brotherhood, and bring some order for the next few decades.

I really dislike this most annoying characteristic of late, where US foreign policy no longer supports military strongmen in really goofy uniforms anymore.  It worked so well for so long.

Democracy ain't for everybody, goddammit.  And it's not always in our best interests for certain nations to have it.   Would've thought people figured that out with Iraq already.

The last couple of years have definitely made Russians seem just a little wiser compared to Americans.  We all know it was by accident, their ideology of promoting evil throughout the world can sometimes coincide with optimal pragmatic solutions, but still. 

[Admiral Yi]

Could be, again why?

I'm trying to figure out if Pipes is an Islamaphobe.

[Razgovory]

Could be, again why?

I'm trying to figure out if Pipes is an Islamaphobe.

There are probably more direct and profitable avenues then asking me what he thinks of Obama.

[Admiral Yi]

There are probably more direct and profitable avenues then asking me what he thinks of Obama.

Such as asking what writings of his you've read?

[Razgovory]

There are probably more direct and profitable avenues then asking me what he thinks of Obama.

Such as asking what writings of his you've read?

Such as reading them yourself.  His name popped up a lot back during the war.  I remembered him as part of the neo-conservative crowd, and I remember the Obama thing.

[Admiral Yi]

This way takes a lot less effort.

[Sheilbh]

There's no tradition of open government, free press, rule of law or much else like that. Historically the Arab world's had government by glowing press release. Given that people are right to suspect that there's something else going on behind the scenes. Not only that but many Arab leaders routinely lie to their people. The conspiracy may be wrong, but given that the alternative is the version peddled by interested politicians and media, the mindset makes a lot of sense and is often, probably, closer to the truth than the official version.

I imagine there's something similar in Hungary with what's motivating Fidesz or with the more corrupt bits of Italy.

To use the Turkish example Viking mentioned. In a thread we had a while ago about some Turkey-Israel spat I mentioned that many Turks I read thought that it wasn't a real argument but a deliberate sideshow. Their view was based on the fact that Erdogan had been pushing for the new constitution. First of all he tried to get the support of the ultra-nationalists and failed. So he turned to the Kurds. The government was negotiating with Ocalan and the minutes of those negotiations were leaked to the Turkish media. Within hours of that happening and making front page news, the government started a row with the Israelis. The (predominately secular) Turkish view was that Erdogan was using his country's foreign policy to distract domestic attention from a controversial issue (negotiating with Ocalan) that would strengthen his hand.

To me that actually seems plausible. When I posted it, I was told it was an example of my soft-headedness towards Islamists, because I suggested there may be another motivation than simple antipathy to Israel, even though what I was suggesting is hardly positive for Erdogan.

Sheilbh is a contrarian.  Film at 23:00.

I don't think it's contrarian to think it's understandable that people in dictatorships, or with a history of living under dictatorships have a conspiratorial view of politics. I think it'd be mental if they didn't, everywhere with a petty despot would be like North Korea.

[Admiral Yi]

Shelf: that's a reasonable defense of why Ay-rabs are prone to conspiracy theories; that's the non-controversial part of your post.

The sticky part is where you said the conspiracy theories are as accurate as anything else going.  That's blatantly not true.

[Sheilbh]

The sticky part is where you said the conspiracy theories are as accurate as anything else going.  That's blatantly not true.

Well for most people in the Arab world they are. There's the conspiracies that people talk about over coffee, just like people in the West do over a beer. Then there's a few vaguely independent, vaguely free private media groups or the state media.

I think the conspiracies are, for most people, as accurate as anything else going. That's part of the reason there are conspiracies.

[Viking]

The sticky part is where you said the conspiracy theories are as accurate as anything else going.  That's blatantly not true.

Well for most people in the Arab world they are. There's the conspiracies that people talk about over coffee, just like people in the West do over a beer. Then there's a few vaguely independent, vaguely free private media groups or the state media.

I think the conspiracies are, for most people, as accurate as anything else going. That's part of the reason there are conspiracies.

There are conspiracies. Members of the government conspire with members of the army and the judiciary to steal money from the state all the time. Religious nutjobs conspire with each other in caves in afghanistan to fly planes into buildings.

The mistake that shelf is making is to consider the conspiracy THEORIES reasonable despite them being fucking crazy and thus concluding that the people are reasonable despite them believing in crazy conspiracy theories and deciding that since these people really are reasonable they don't mean when they say batshit crazy violent evil things based on conspiracy theories.

I think in shelf's view of the world, and I think he'll agree with me that this is his world view, most if not all conflicts can be resolved by reasonable people from each side negotiating in good faith. So he postulates that "the other" is reasonable to sustain that world view.

A Conspiracy Theory is NOT a reasoned analysis or guess about what the true underlying mechanics are for the motivations of powerful people. They are backward defenses of conclusions that are not supported by facts. "You" know the j00s did it so you find an explanation for how they are responsible for the price of bread in Alexandria going up 10%. The more convoluted the explanation is and the more facts not in evidence must be assumed the crazier you are.

The Aaronovich thesis is just the above, that they justify prejudice and protect highly valued ideas and beliefs from question. The Pipes thesis is that these people actually believe this shit. Given that pipes is one of "these people who actually  believes this shit" I'm inclined to believe him just like I'm inclined to appreciate the take on salafism that fundamentalist christians have and the take on wahhabism that literalist christians have.

[jimmy olsen]

The sticky part is where you said the conspiracy theories are as accurate as anything else going.  That's blatantly not true.

Well for most people in the Arab world they are. There's the conspiracies that people talk about over coffee, just like people in the West do over a beer. Then there's a few vaguely independent, vaguely free private media groups or the state media.

I think the conspiracies are, for most people, as accurate as anything else going. That's part of the reason there are conspiracies.

Who cares what most people think? There is such a thing as objective facts. And conspiracy theories are almost without exception untrue.

Now, from a pragmatic policy perspective one is forced to care about what people believe and how that will color their reaction to your plans, but from the way you write it seems you are going far beyond that to assert that if people believe it, it's reality.

[Viking]

The sticky part is where you said the conspiracy theories are as accurate as anything else going.  That's blatantly not true.

Well for most people in the Arab world they are. There's the conspiracies that people talk about over coffee, just like people in the West do over a beer. Then there's a few vaguely independent, vaguely free private media groups or the state media.

I think the conspiracies are, for most people, as accurate as anything else going. That's part of the reason there are conspiracies.

Who cares what most people think? There is such a thing as objective facts. And conspiracy theories are almost without exception untrue.

Now, from a pragmatic policy perspective one is forced to care about what people believe and how that will color their reaction to your plans, but from the way you write it seems you are going for beyond that to assert that if people believe it, it's reality.

It's either that or he thinks that they are true.

[Tamas]

what Sheilbh refers to does exists under censored press obviously, but it is important to distinguish between trying to decipher what is behind heavily censored press content, and coming up with utter lunatic bullshit. Bullshit, might I add, that is usually fuelled by the regime itself.

if I was to believe Sheilbh, I should need to consider the local conteo that the EU is after Orban so that they could colonise us, valid. oh and colonise us for the Jews if you really go down to ground level "salt of the earth" theories