The Democrats' Gamble

The Boston Globe reports:

WASHINGTON -- Senior Democrats are increasingly confident that they have blocked Republicans plans for historic breakthroughs in legislation under GOP control of the White House and Congress, declaring that the Democratic strategy of unified opposition to major items on the leadership agenda has succeeded in turning Republicans against themselves.

Democratic leaders say the focus on opposition, rather than on their own legislative proposals, has allowed them to hold up President Bush's plans to remake Social Security. They are honing a message that highlights what they portray as Republican abuses of power, and say their new level of party discipline is forcing Republicans to wrestle with their own divisions over judicial confirmations, foreign affairs, and taxing and spending.

Read the whole thing here.

Now I ask you -- is this something to be proud of? I think not. Maybe it makes political sense -- the Democrats are in such a state that their only realistic hope of gaining ground is to divide the Republicans -- but as a matter of governance, it's pathetic, and if the public decides that the Democrats are to be held to account for their obstructionism, then they will be in real trouble.

.

Indonesia -- Good News in the War on Terror

A major strategic concern in the War on Terror has been Southeast Asia. There have emerged in recent years in the Philippines, in Malaysia, and in Indonesia, strong Muslim radical movements that have in various ways and to varying degrees organized opposition to their national governments, non-Muslim minorities, and the West, particularly the United States.

Some strategists have argued that US gains in the Middle East were more than offset by the emergence of this strongly anti-American radical Muslim movement in Southeast Asia and have predicted that the future center of the war against terror will be in that region.

The US response to the tsunami disaster was one of the great humanitarian efforts of modern times. US forces decended immediately on the region, dispensing aid rather than bullets. The UN and other NGO's were marginalized and clearly incapable of dealing with disaster on such a scale. It was the US, and the Australians, who stood in the forefront, dispensing food, drinking water, money, and medical care to local populations. This magnificent effort has had an effect, altering the political culture of the region.

James Dunnigan at the Strategy Page reports that "peace" has broken out in Indonesia. He writes:

April 10, 2005: The large and dramatic U.S. Navy relief effort in Aceh also delivered a lot of good will for the United States, and reduced the appeal of Islamic radicalism. Islamic terrorists were never very popular in the first place, and several years of arrests, bloody terror attacks and news of Islamic terrorist activities elsewhere in the world have further tarnished their image. Thus there is less religious violence. Even the separatist rebels in Aceh are pushing for a negotiated settlement. The separatists are also Islamic conservatives, and can see which way public opinion is blowing.

Read it here.

Slowly but surely the rest of the world is beginning to realize that when Dubya talked about "compassionate conservatism" he meant it.

Academia -- A hard rain's a'gonna fall....

I have blogged several times in recent months about the irresponsibility of academic institutions and rising levels of customer dissatisfaction in the general public as costs soar and the quality of education declines. Glenn Reynolds, the Instapundit, links to a WaPo article making essentially the same points.

Hey, Profs, Come Back to Earth
By Steven Roy Goodman
Sunday, April 10, 2005; Page B01

College admissions decisions now arriving across the country by e-mail and snail mail are generating the annual excitement they always do. But that momentary thrill is only masking a new reality about college in America.

With faculty and administrations leading the way, political correctness and posturing -- from both the left and right -- is reaching dizzying heights in the land of the ivory tower. And rising right along with it is the frustration of middle-class parents, who are growing increasingly resentful of paying sky-high tuition for colleges they see offering their kids a menu of questionable courses and politically absurd campus climates that detract from the quality of a university education....

[T]he sheer number of outlandish political controversies at universities across the country, coupled with escalating fees, is alienating parents from the very institutions they have been supporting through tax and tuition dollars.

Read the whole thing here.

Reynolds, who teaches at a State institution, expresses the opinion that the worst problems are occurring at our leading private institutions and hopes that their decline might benefit the State schools. [read him here].

I doubt it.

Having taught at State schools for more than a quarter of a century I can testify that the problems are by no means confined to the elite institutions. Faculty and administrative irresponsibility are rampant at all levels, and though costs are less at State institutions, they are still high enough to be oppressive to middle-class families who aren't eligible for most financial aid. And as for the elite universities declining -- don't count on it. They are selling prestige, not education, and there are always people willing to buy that at any price.

The WaPo article closes with a wise observation:

Maybe we can learn from recent campus incidents. Maybe we can ask ourselves what we would like our universities to actually do. Maybe university communities can engage in real soul-searching to figure out how they can benefit both their students and the country in ways that the broader public can support.

If they don't at least try, the university as an institution may have seen the heyday of its influence.

I have long been telling anyone who will listen that academia, from top to bottom, is in a perilous state. There will be a reckoning, and it will come soon. The current situation cannot last long.

As the Post recognizes, we desperately need a national dialogue on education. Just what as a society do we want from our educational institutions, and what price are we willing to pay to get it? This applies not only to higher, but also to K-12 education.

The Churchill Affair has brought these concerns into the public arena. Now is an excellent opportunity for us to have just such a debate. Let the games begin...

The Mainstream Media and Religion

On Saturday I posted comments by David Meadows at Cronaca regarding the ways in which the New York Times botched its coverage of John Paul II's funeral, revealing the paper's total lack of understanding of things religious. [here] Here is another commentary -- this time from the Arkansas Democrat Gazette -- that broadens that critique to include the entire mainstream media. Excerpts follow:

Whenever Old Media get within 40 cubits of anything to do with religion, they just don’t get it.

My point exactly...,

The other day, we tuned in to CBS and saw Harry Smith & Co. on the morning show. Harry was LIVE in Vatican City, and he was—you guessed it—amazed at the outpouring of emotion and the crowds that just keep coming....

As Orrin Judd pointed out the MSM is continually being surprised that common people care about things that just aren't on their radar. The cognitive dissonance encounters with popular religion evoke must be uncomforting.

Things will be so much simpler once this whole Pope story is over and all those strange people go home to their prayer books and Ten Commandment refrigerator magnets. Then the TV cameras can go back to covering Important Issues like sex, politics, sex, race, sex, and the celebrity of the hour. Or quarter-hour. Like, say, Michael Jackson and his trial. Now that, the Old Media get.

Actually, this better describes the cable tabloid channels [other than FOX] than the broadcast news channels, although there is some truth there, especially as regards their endless obsession with politics.

Maybe there’s something in the air over Washington and New York that paralyzes the brain cells that have anything to do with belief, faith, awe, wonder, reverence, inner transformation, religious imagination or whatever term you prefer. Instead, all of that is reduced to a cloud of gaseous condescension, which barely disguises the mod commentator’s irritation at having to discuss such matters at all.

The basic problem is that the old guys who produce and present the news on the major media outlets were trained and grew up in a rigorously secular elitist environment that was contemptuous of popular religion and other manifestations of the emotional side of life. They just don't have a template into which they can plug people like Ronald Reagan, John Paul II, or George W. Bush. The key here is that people who are supposed to give informed opinion, are themselves spectacularly uninformed and are flailing around trying to fit this new information into their old templates. That's what gives rise to this kind of incoherence:

The Old Media are having some trouble figuring out what to do with John Paul II’s legacy. Lionize him as John Paul the Great? Patronize him as a simple, grandfatherly type? Give him the Reagan Treatment, that is, steer clear of too-direct criticism in deference to his long, slow decline? Skewer him as an anti-woman, anti-choice, ultraconservative, close-minded old so-and-so ? Or claim him as one of their own who opposed war and favored the minimum wage?

Failing to find a suitable template they often revert to simple dismissal or denigation.

Without any decent answers even from their Vatican Analysts, the Old Media are reduced to stirring old resentments. They "analyze" a pope the way a skeptic would analyze a magician’s tricks. Here is a tidbit from Hanna Rosin’s "news analysis" in the Washington Post, the burden of which was that John Paul II was, well, overrated:

"To the Catholics who felt betrayed by how little [John Paul II] changed the church, his popularity was a kind of trick, the thing that most reminded them of the gap between what he appeared to be and what he was."

Here we see one of the most basic forms of incomprehension. It simply never occurs to these people that the Roman Catholic Church is a global institution and as its head the Pope is not so narrowly obsessed with American upper middle class opinion as are they.

Well, you get the idea.... Read the whole thing here.

And on a beautiful weekend afternoon, after a long miserable winter, the crowds of people from all over the world are back. Spring has finally sprung.

So are the trees... 

Spring at the harbor. The bulbs are blooming! 

OK, Now DeLay is in Trouble

Accusations have been swirling around House Majority Leader Tom DeLay [R-Texas] for several weeks now. This has been generally understood in the idiot press as an obvious and somewhat cynical attempt by Democrats to repeat their successful demonization of Newt Gingrich and to drive an effective antagonist from his position of power.

Liberals have said, so what, DeLay is a bad guy and deserves to go. Conservatives have argued that DeLay, however sleazy he seems, is only doing what everyone on Capitol Hill does. And there's the problem.

The correct point of comparison to what is going on here is not the destruction of Newt Gingrich, but Gingrich's triumph in 1994. The Republicans came to power after forty years wandering in the wilderness by convincing the country that the Democratic leadership in Congress was irredeemably corrupt.

Republicans were the party that was going to clean up the Augean Stables of Capitol Hill. They've had a decade in power now and haven't done so. Now Democrats are on the offensive, charging that the Republican leadership is corrupt and using DeLay as their prime evidence of corruption. They are doing to DeLay what Gingrich did to Jim Wright, the Democratic Speaker of the House who was forced to resign in 1989 amidst charges of corruption. That was the springboard for escalating charges that culminated in the Republican takeover of the House five years later. Now the Democrats hope to replicate Gingrich's triumph.

But Republicans, unlike Democrats, are always quick to eat their own. They will respond to Democrat charges of corruption by simply jettisoning the targets of those accusations. DeLay will go down, and the Democrats will dance on his grave, and the idiot press will rejoice, but the damage will be limited by the fact that the rest of the Republican leadership will have effectively distanced themselves from the former Majority Leader.

The signal that the Republicans consider DeLay to be expendable was issued by Rick Santorum, a member of the Senate leadership from Pennsylvania. AP reports Santorum as saying:

...embattled House Majority Leader Tom DeLay needs to answer questions about his ethics and "let the people then judge for themselves."

Read the article here.

Santorum's refusal to speak up in defense of DeLay [although he did say that he was not aware that DeLay had broken any laws] is significant. Santorum's credentials with the party's right wing [DeLay's base of support] are impeccable and his passiveness signals that the right is quite willing to wash their hands of the embattled Majority Leader. They all understand that Wright, not Gingrich, is the correct analog for DeLay and they are determined to keep the taint attached to his name from spreading to the rest of the Republican leadership. They will do to DeLay just what they did to Gingrich and Livingstone before him.

So DeLay stands alone against his accusers, enjoying protection from neither the House leadership, the White House, nor his conservative base. He is now..., what is the phrase? Oh yeah..., "twisting slowly..., slowly in the wind."

Dead Celebrities for Sale

Who owns Albert Einstein? You would be surprised -- or perhaps not.

Last week Corbis, a company created by Bill Gates, purchased the Richman agency which owns the rights to the images of more than fifty deceased celebrities including Albert Einstein.

According to the Guardian the images now owned by Gates through Corbis include, in addition to Einstein, Sigmund Freud, Mae West, the Wright brothers, Gypsy Rose Lee, Steve McQueen, Basil Rathbone and Boris Karloff, Gloria Swanson, Rudolf Valentino, the Marx Brothers, Isaac Asimov, and numerous other cultural icons.

Read the whole thing here.

Rogueclassicist Nails the NY Times

David Meadows (the Rogueclassicist) has a terrific critical response to the NYT account of the Holy Father's funeral on blog, Cronaca. I reproduce it here.

The Pope's funeral and the New York Times

Such an event, but what happened with the Times' lead article this morning? The piece reads like a paper by an undergraduate who slept through Christianity 101:

The coffin was placed on a large ornate rug and a liturgical text [which one?] was placed on it and opened. At the side of the coffin was a statue of Jesus on the cross bleeding from his thorns [that's known as a "crucifix", boys]. . .

Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger of Germany, dean of the college of cardinals, who delivered the sermon, spoke first after crossing himself [quelle surprise]. He sang in Latin from a holy book [now that's reporting] held up by an assistant and read the confession of sins that begins the Catholic Mass. . .

Some 35 minutes after the funeral began, a young priest in red vestments sang the gospel in Latin ["the gospel"? -- the writers use the word liberally to denote anything Christianish that they can't quite pin down].

This illustrates a real problem at the NYT -- their total incomprehension of matters of faith, and in particular Christian faith. [A friend of mine who is a distinguished physicist tells me that they don't comprehend science very well either.] Middlebrow stuff like what you see in the NYT or on PBS confers the illusion of understanding rather than the substance.

Ukraine -- Promoting the Democratic Revolution

Noting President Bush's support for Ukraine's entry into NATO and the WTO the Washington Times writes:

Mr. Bush's support... helps make clear how the world's superpower believes a budding democracy should be rewarded.... In some parts of the Caucasus, such as Armenia, Azerbaijan and Belarus, Mr. Bush's position could resonate strongly. Those countries can aspire to eventual NATO membership should the people launch their own successful democratic revolutions.

Mr. Bush's endorsement of Ukraine entering NATO and the WTO comes at a particularly propitious time. The peaceful, democratic revolutions in Georgia and Ukraine are having a global impact, and could particularly affect the Caucasus and Central Asia.

Those who would like to argue that President Bush has had little to do with the spread of liberalism through much of the world must recognize that the administration has had a consistent diplomatic and economic policy of promoting and providing incentives to liberal reform and that such a policy is not without consequences. Bush deserves far more credit than he usually is given [though not as much as his most ardent supporters would claim].

Free Trade and Economic Liberalization in the Middle East

There has been a lot of comment on Middle Eastern affairs in the blogosphere -- most of it has focused narrowly on political and military affairs. The region's economies have excited relatively little comment, except in the precincts of the far left where everything is viewed as a capitalist conspiracy.

Economic development has long been a crucial aspect of Bush's Middle Eastern policy. Time and again he has reiterated his belief that political liberalization must be accompanied by economic liberalization.

Two years ago the Bush administration launched an ambitious plan to create a Middle East free trade zone. The President described it in these words:

Across the globe, free markets and trade have helped defeat poverty, and taught
men and women the habits of liberty. So I propose the establishment of a
U.S.-Middle East free trade area within a decade, to bring the Middle East into
an expanding circle of opportunity, to provide hope for the people who live in
that region." [Proposed Middle East Initiatives White House Fact Sheet, May 9,
2003]

Bush proposed a series of "graduated steps" to be taken toward this goal. These included:

-- Help reforming countries become members of the World Trade Organization;

-- Negotiate Bilateral Investment Treaties and Trade and Investment Framework Agreements with governments determined to improve their trade and investment regimes;

-- Complete our negotiations on a free trade agreement with Morocco by the end of this year;

-- Launch, in consultation with Congress, new bilateral free trade agreements with governments committed to high standards and comprehensive trade liberalization;
and

-- Provide assistance to build trade capacity and expansion so countries can benefit from integration into the global trading system.

In addition the US would work to promote economic liberalization within Middle Eastern states.
Again there were a number of concrete proposals, including:

-- Establish a Middle East finance facility to help small- and medium-sized businesses gain access to capital and generate jobs;

-- Reform commercial codes, improve the climate for trade and investment, and strengthen property rights through a new initiative for commercial law in cooperation with U.S. and Middle Eastern law schools and jurists, and business-to-business contacts; and

-- Promote transparency in public finances, help countries fight corruption, and support financial sector reforms based on international best practices.

Other proposals dealt with support for improving education, expanding women's rights, judicial reform, and other aspects of a liberal civil society.

Two years later this ambitious policy is beginning to show results.

Evelyn Iritani, writing recently in the LA Times, noted:

A U.S.-Morocco free-trade agreement, expected to take effect by early summer, will lower or eliminate tariffs on 95% of consumer and industrial products shipped between the two countries....

In Morocco and across the Middle East, freer trade is gaining traction.

Eager for more business with America, the region's governments are slashing tariffs, reducing red tape and strengthening intellectual property laws and labor protections. These measures are boosting trade in textiles and apparel, farm goods and machinery.

[T]he Bush administration has negotiated trade pacts with Bahrain and Morocco, and this month launched negotiations with the United Arab Emirates and Oman. Congress has yet to approve the Bahrain deal.

The U.S. also signed a deal with Egypt that created industrial zones in which goods produced with Israeli components could be exported to the U.S. duty-free. The U.S. already had trade pacts with Jordan and Israel. The Palestinian Authority is included in the Israeli agreement.

Saudi Arabia and Lebanon are taking steps to liberalize their economies so they can join the WTO.

Iraq... has also begun the WTO application process, which the U.S. supports as a way to bolster Iraq's reconstruction.

Under pressure from Europe, the Bush administration has agreed to drop its opposition to Iran's WTO membership with the hopes of persuading that government to abandon a nuclear enrichment program.

Algeria, Yemen and Libya also are taking steps to join the WTO.

This wave of economic reform is no less important than the much more heavily publicized political changes that have been sweeping through the region. There is a long way to go. The combined regional GNP is less than that of Spain. There are severe demographic and political problems that discourage investment in the region. But there is also burgeoning hope.

The Bush administration has wisely been negotiating bilateral agreements that reward countries that take concrete steps toward political and economic liberalization. This provides incentives for other countries to fall into line. Slowly, but surely, the "expanding circle of opportunity" is coming into being. As Bush has frequently noted, this is the work of generations and won't be accomplished overnight, but it is surely coming.

Kyrgyzstan update -- limits of reform?

The "democratic revolution" in Kyrgyzstan, which looks more and more like a simple coup, is hitting some snags.

The Financial Times reports:

Kyrgyzstan's parliament failed for the fourth day to finalise the resignation of ousted President Askar Akayev, heightening concern about security in the republic.

"[We are] still concerned about developments here," said Alojz Peterle, a special envoy for the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE). "We think the situation has improved but is still unstable."
....
Delayed rehabilitation of Felix Kulov, a key opposition figure imprisoned during the final years of the Akayev regime, was also undermining stability.

There's a lot going on here under the surface. If the "democratic revolution" had really been a popular uprising, as in Georgia or Ukraine, the political maneuvering we now see and the continued threat of "instability" would not be taking place. Once again we are seeing the limits of democratic reform.

Lebanon update -- another small step toward resolution

Jerusalem Post reports:

Hizbullah claimed it would be ready to discuss conditional disarmament if Israel withdrew from a disputed border area, the group's deputy leader Sheikh Naim Qassim said in Britain's Financial Times on Friday.

The leader mentioned a potential alternative for Hizbullah fighters to become a kind of "reservist army", coordinating activities with the Lebanese authorities, the Financial Times said.

But he stipulated that talks could not take place while Israel remained in the Shebaa Farms area, a tiny disputed border area between Lebanon, and Israel's Golan Heights, Reuters reported.

This is an improvement over the previous refusal to disarm. Now they're discussing face-saving gestures and a potential role for Hizbullah in a united, free Lebanon. There's a long way to go, but the journey of a thousand miles... whatever.

Porn or post-feminist critique of the obsession with beauty? We report, you decide.

[Reuters photo] Italian/American artist, Vanessa Beecroft [clothed in a gray overcoat], staged an exhibition of 100 naked women in Berlin's Neue Nationalgalerie. Famed as "the artworld's current excuse for softcore peeping" Beecroft's previous work featured "young, slim, naked, partly shaved - and beautiful" women. This time, though, she included a heterogeneous mix of women of various ages and physical conditions. She will soon be presenting more naked women in Toronto and Paris.

This raises a couple of questions. Why should we take this stuff seriously -- it's getting really tired by now? And, why do women feel that taking their clothes off is a political statement?

Read about it here.

Kaus on the Democrats' Dilemma

Mickey Kaus over at Slate has a very perceptive analysis of the institutional problems facing the Democratic Party. In response to Bill Bradley's NYT editorial calling for Democrats to work within their constituent institutions to generate new ideas or new ways to sell old ideas Kaus writes:

The problem, of course, is that the Democratic party's most stable institutional elements are also its most problematic elements: 1) unions; 2) the civil rights and Latino lobbies; 3) the senior lobby (AARP); 4) institutional feminists (NOW); 5) trial lawyers; 6) Iowa-caucus style "progressives;" and 7) Hollywood emoters.

These constituent elements of the Democrat coalition work to block any solution to national problems that would threaten their own interests, leaving the Democrats unable to respond effectively to a wide range of national issues.

Such issues are:

competitiveness, for example, or public education, or entitlement reform. If the Dems' permanent institutional base is what gets to "develop" and "hone" the ideas to be adopted by the party's presidential nominee, then the Democrats will in perpetuity be the party of union work rules, lousy teachers, mediocre schools, protectionism, racial preferences, unaffordable entitlements, amnesty for illegals and offensive rap lyrics! That winning collection gets you, what, 35%?

What the Democrats need, he argues, is a candidate willing to tell the party's institutional base to "shove it" and to fashion an appealing platform that ignores their interests.

It sounds good. Certainly the Democrats have been paralyzed by their core constituencies in recent elections, but I would argue that Kaus's prescription is unrealistic.

He looks for a decisive leader who can stand up to core constituencies and win, but the only examples he can cite are Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton.

These are the only two Democrats to win the Presidency since the Vietnam era, but their willingness to trample on traditional Democrat constituencies was by no means the key to their success. Both men benefited from Republican crackups. Carter was elected in the wake of Watergate and Ross Perot opened the gates for Clinton's entry into the White House. Remember, Clinton won in 1992 with only 43% of the popular vote.

And, if you look at the popular vote totals Democrats have not done markedly worse playing to their base than they did repudiating it. Al Gore and John Kerry achieved numbers pretty much the same as Bill Clinton's best effort and within a percentage point or two of Jimmy Carter.

No, the problem with the Democratic Party is structural, not institutional or ideological. Since WWII only two Democrats have won a majority of the popular vote and both times the elections were conducted under abnormal conditions [following the assassination of JFK and in the wake of Watergate]. The Democrats' best, perhaps their only, chance in 2008 is to hold their base and to hope for a Republican crackup [which is a very real possibility as Dubya tramples willy-nilly over his constituents' interests].

Note: this says nothing about 2006 where the Democrats stand an excellent chance of picking up a few seats in Congress.

John Paul II, some final thoughts

One remarkable thing about the funeral observances for Pope John Paul II is the immense and unexpected outpouring of public affection for this man. It seems to have come as a complete surprise to political, media, and religious elites, all of whom seem to have only gradually awakened to the scale of the phenomenon and then played "catch up" as they sought to cope with the situation.

Roman and Vatican officials confess that they were completely unprepared for the crowds of millions that showed up to say farewell to John Paul. We were treated to the spectacle of the British royal family dithering as to whether or not to postpone Chuck and Camilla's wedding while leftists who abhorred John Paul's politics castigated the royals for their insensitivity. Chuck eventually caved and went personally to Rome. What else could he do, given the public mood?

And there was unseemly and public squabbling within the American political elite over who was to be included in the official delegation as politicians recognized the value of being seen there. Media types marveled at the size of the viewing audience for the Pope's funeral, which was estimated at two billion people. Islamic radicals denounced the scope of coverage in the Arab media. The whole thing became a spectacle that transcended anything we have seen to date.

Is this due simply to the emergence of an integrated global media network -- something equivalent to the worldwide impact of Diana's death or the "Rose" and "Orange" revolutions in Georgia and Ukraine [to consider the ridiculous and the sublime aspects of the phenomenon]?

Or is it testimony to the powerful and personal effect John Paul's life and works has had on people around the world?

Or is it a manifestation of a global revival of religious sentiment -- something that western secular elites find uncomfortable to contemplate?

Or what?

I would welcome anyone's thoughts on the matter.

Mongolia Protests

Just when it seems that the democracy imperative is winding down, it reappears in the most interesting places. For the second time in three weeks there have been protest marches in Mongolia.

AP reports:

About 2,000 people staged a peaceful protest Thursday outside Mongolia's parliament, demanding that the government resign and accusing lawmakers of corruption. A leader of the parliament reportedly said lawmakers would consider the demands.

It was the second protest in three weeks by activists who say they were inspired in part by events in Kyrgyzstan, where demonstrators forced the Central Asian republic's president from power.

The makeup of the protest is interesting:

The marchers included teachers, shopkeepers, unemployed workers and homeless people. They accuse parliament speaker Nambariin Enkhbayar, a former prime minister, of embezzlement and say graft is to blame for Mongolia's chronic poverty.

They also want the government to create a mechanism for voters to recall elected officials accused of corruption and to end the ban on protests outside parliament.

Read the whole thing here.

Here as in other former Soviet dependencies we see the lower and middle classes uniting against a corrupt elite that has monopolized political power since the breakup of the Soviet empire. This protest, involving only about 2,000 marchers, is much smaller than the one a few weeks ago and the reform impulse seems to be waning here, but dissatisfaction with the current regime is widespread and long-standing. There have been several protests in the past few years over land reform and political representation and in the past the government has made minor concessions. I doubt that there will be a revolution in Mongolia, but some progress toward truly representative government might result from the current round of protests.

Hamas Bids for Legitimacy

An interesting transformation is taking place with regard to Hamas [the Palestinian-based terrorist organization]. The Daily Star reports:

We are currently witnessing the historic transformation of Hamas from a popular movement based on armed struggle and opposition to the established Palestinian order. Hamas has managed to firmly place itself within that order in a bid to confirm its position, power and legitimacy both inside Palestinian society and outside.

What is more, this emerging drive for legitimacy is in part rooted within the organization's history. Advocates for the new direction portray it as,

the unfolding of a four-point doctrine laid down by assassinated Hamas leader Sheikh Ahmed Yassin some two years ago....

The four points consist of:

1) implementation of a ceasefire, whether formal or not.

2) a bid, through the ballot box, to take a share of political power on the internal Palestinian scene, while distancing itself explicitly from the Oslo Accords.

3) to challenge other Palestinian factions' - read Fateh's - dominance over Palestinian political legitimacy.

4) the implicit acknowledgement of the PLO's 1988 decision to endorse the two-state solution, i.e., a Palestinian state on all territory occupied in 1967, with East Jerusalem as its capital, and a solution to the issue of refugees to be found according to international law based on UN General Assembly Resolution 194.

Ignore the fourth point for now. What is far more important at this time is the fact that Hamas has abandoned the armed struggle for more conventional political action, and that it is seriously challenging al Fateh in the electoral arena. A normal Palestinian polity is beginning to emerge out of the welter of violence and factionalism that characterized Arafat's years of leadership and that is a welcome step, albeit a small one, in the right direction.

Read the story here.

Zimbabwe -- ineffectual protests after the election

AP reports:

HARARE, Zimbabwe - Zimbabwe's embattled opposition on Sunday demanded new parliamentary elections under a different constitution, saying voting can never be free and fair under the current legislative framework....

Citing major inconsistencies in the results, opposition leader Morgan Tsvangirai maintained Sunday that his Movement for Democratic Change, or MDC, won 94 of Parliament's 120 elected seats, and not the 41 announced by electoral officials. MDC officials did not specify how they calculated the figure.

Read it here.

The Guardian meanwhile reports on Sokwanele, a "pro-democracy" movement, committed to non-violent protest that is trying to promote a "peaceful uprising" on the model of Ukraine.

Read it here [lots of links to sources on Zimbabwe here].

But post-election protests have not been peaceful, nor have they been very effective.

AFP reports:

HARARE (AFP) - Police in Zimbabwe went on high alert after youths took to the streets in Harare to urge Zimbabweans to reject the outcome of elections overwhelmingly won by President Robert Mubage's party....

Police said groups of supporters of the opposition Movement for Democratic Change (MDC) stoned shops and assaulted passers-by in Harare on Monday to protest the results from elections their party said were rigged....

This provoked an ominous response from Mugabe's thugs:

"The police... will not tolerate any acts of violence and will use resources at its disposal to ensure that there is peace and security for everyone on the country."

Read it here.

We have seen the not inconsiderable "resources" used by Zimbabwe's police in the past. Things do not bode well for the protesters, peaceful and otherwise.

Let us hope cooler heads prevail.

Satellite Images from Google

CNN reports:

Online search engine leader Google Inc. has unveiled a new feature that will enable its users to zoom in on homes and businesses using satellite images, an advance that may raise privacy concerns as well as intensify the competitive pressures on its rivals.

The satellite technology, which Google began offering late Monday at http://maps.google.com/, is part of the package that the Mountain View-based company acquired when it bought digital map maker Keyhole Corp. for an undisclosed amount nearly six months ago....

The satellite maps could unnerve some people, even as the technology impresses others. That's because the Keyhole technology is designed to provide close-up perspective of specific addresses.

Of course there are the usual paranoid mouthings from the extremes of left and right, especially since Keyhole used to have government ties, but I see no way in which this compromises individual liberties to a greater extent than they already have been eroded by the existence of the internet.

I think its cool.

Iraq Update -- moving toward a conclusion

NYT reports:

BAGHDAD, Iraq, April 5 - Iraq's major political parties agreed this evening to appoint a president and two vice presidents at a meeting of the national assembly on Wednesday, according to a senior assembly leader, breaking a two-month deadlock in negotiations to form a new government.

The main Shiite and Kurdish political blocs have agreed to name Jalal Talabani, a Kurdish leader, as president; Adel Abdul Mahdi, a prominent Shiite Arab politician, as vice president; and Sheik Ghazi al-Yawar, the Sunni Arab president of the interim government, as the other vice president, said Hussein al-Shahristani, a vice speaker of the assembly.

Read the whole thing here.

This is a major step toward creating a functioning interim government, but there is still much to do. These three men will jointly choose a prime minister who will then form a government which will have to be approved by the assembly. Progress is being made.

The investment ceremony will be tomorrow, and it will be staged in full view of Saddam Hussein.

AP reports:

Ousted dictator Saddam Hussein will be able to watch from his Baghdad jail cell as Iraq's newly elected parliament chooses a new president Wednesday....

"This is a very important session because this is the first time in Iraq's history that the president and his deputies are elected in a legitimate and democratic way by the Iraqi people," he said. "That's why the Iraqi government thought it would be beneficial that the former dictator see this unique process."

Read it here.

And the population is increasingly rallying to the emerging interim government.

AP reports:

MARIAM FAM

BAGHDAD, Iraq - U.S. and Iraqi officials say they have seen an increase in calls tipping off authorities in recent weeks, and officials say it's a sign the country's fledgling security forces are winning the trust of citizens, turning them against the insurgency.

The growing willingness of Iraqis to cooperate with officials is perhaps also a testimony to the insurgency's own mistakes, which have cost it the sympathy of some. Many say they simply are tired of violence that has overshadowed their lives or claimed people they love.

In a sign the phenomenon is gathering momentum, some Iraqis told The Associated Press that when they called in information, they were told others already had reported the same incident.

Read the whole thing here.

Some of the shift in public attitudes is apparently due to a TV series that features taped confessions of captured terrorists.

I blogged these programs here and here.

Itis good to see that they are having an effect.

Archaeology? Pornography? We report, you decide

Let's take a peek and see what those wacky archaeologists are up to now. When we last looked in they were busy building fake stonehenges and dolmens to wow the tourists [all in the interests of "science" mind you].

Now comes news that a team of German archaeologists has found an 8 cm long clay statuette of the lower half of a man.

Dated from 7200 years ago it is, they claim, " the oldest male clay figurine ever discovered in the world." They named it "Adonis."

But Adonis was not alone. They also found fragments of a female statuette of similar size. And what is most interesting -- both figures seem to be bent forward at the waist.

There are several ways this evidence could be interpreted -- naturally the archaeologists zoomed straight to the one that would garner the most headlines and called in the press. They claim that the two figurines should be positioned so that the male is standing behind and bent over the female, thus creating the, "the oldest pornographic scene in the world."

And, lest you think that there is no scientific importance to the find, we are told that it "shatters the belief that sex was a taboo subject in that era [the neolithic]."

What arrant nonsense!

All human societies impose some taboos on sex. It might be kin related, age related, gender related, class related, race related, or whatever. The point is, sex taboos in some form or other exist in all societies. There has never been any reason to believe that all sex was taboo in neolithic times, but it is almost certain that some sex was. The statues, if they are rightly interpreted as a couple...well..., coupling, prove nothing with regard to sex taboos.

But they do have some other significance. Much has been made by feminist scholars of the existence of several naked female figurines from the neolithic period and the absence of any male counterparts. These "venuses" have been linked to fertility rituals, quite reasonably, but some writers have spun wild fantasies about an "old European" matriarchy that represented an alternative to later patriarchal cultures (presumably introduced by Indo-European invaders).

The existence of Adonis, an unquestionably male figure, from that period means that the matriarchy thesis is weakened, since in part it rests on the assumption that only female forms were depicted. And, if the two figures indeed are copulating, as the "scientists" suggest, it strengthens the identification of naked figurines with fertility rituals.

So, the find in Saxony is indeed significant and should be recognized as such. But true to form, the "scientists" involved are quick to proclaim the finding of the world's "oldest pornographic scene." Sex, you see, sells!

Read the whole thing here.

ps: I'm leaving aside the entire question [which is huge] of projecting modern concepts such as pornography onto past cultures. It's a problem historians have to deal with constantly. Archaeologists, however, seem to find it less problematic.

For another take on this story by a Cambridge archaeologist visit Athena here.

In the Spring an Old Man's Fancy Lightly Turns to Thoughts of... Baseball

This is how I spent my day -- how about you? Opening Day at Camden Yards. Orioles beat Oakland 4-0. Sweeeeet!

Zimbabwe -- The Limits of Reform

And so it ends....

News 24 (South Africa) reports:

Harare - Zimbabwe's southern African neighbours on Sunday endorsed elections that handed a massive victory to President Robert Mugabe's ruling party, saying they reflected "the will of the people."

An 11-country observer mission from the Southern African Development Community (SADC) brushed aside opposition complaints of irregularities in a quarter of the constituencies, citing a lack of proof.

Read it here.

And:

The WaPo reports:

By Craig Timberg
Washington Post Foreign Service
MondayApril 4, 2005

HARARE, Zimbabwe, April 3 -- Zimbabwe's opposition leader, Morgan Tsvangirai, ruled out organizing demonstrations against what he called the "fraudulent" results of last week's parliamentary elections, saying his party could not mount a protest large enough to force President Robert Mugabe from power.

Read it here.

Many in the blogosphere are enraged at this, but it was to be expected.

Mugabe, despite his many crimes and the incompetence of his regime, is still remembered in Zimbabwe as an anti-colonialist warrior hero. Moreover he has strong tribal support. His campaign of expropriating white land holdings, while economically disastrous, has been politically popular. And, he successfully played the race card throughout the election, arguing that the reformers would restore white supremacy. What is more, these charges resonated with a South African leadership that has strong memories of apartheid.

And, of course, he has shown himself in the past to be utterly ruthless in dealing with dissent. This seems to have intimidated his opponents to some extent.

This nut was just too hard to crack and the democratic reform imperative reached its limits in Zimbabwe, as it earlier did in Belorus and might be doing in Kyrgyzstan.

UPDATE:

Some people seem to be having trouble accepting that reform has limits. As in this site, linked by Instapundit.

Heather Hurlburt blames the media, including the blogosphere, for focusing insufficient attention on the suffering of the Zimbabwe people. As an example she cites Charlayne Hunter Galt on NPR. She concludes by blaming people in the media who credit President Bush with fostering democracy for ignoring the long struggles of people in Georgia, Zimbabwe and Lebanon.

She seems to feel that if only the western media could focus on the problems of the area the political will to solve them would emerge and all would be set right. This, I would argue, is naive.

1) She is contradicting herself -- first she implies that President Bush has not played a major role in promoting democracy throughout the world, preferring to credit the long struggles of the people themselves. But now, she argues that political will in the West, as exemplified by President Bush, is the crucial missing ingredient.

2) She romanticizes "the people" of Zimbabwe. Politics throughout the region is complex -- pitting tribe against tribe, race against race, and urban populations against those in rural areas. In this fractured climate there is no coherent, deeply felt, and widely accepted imperative for democratic change. The last such movement in the region was the campaign against apartheid in South Africa, the memory of which benefits Mugabe, not his opponents.

3) She recognizes that "Mugabe still enjoys almost-mythic status for leading guerrilla forces in Zimbabwe's war of liberation and sheltering South African ANC members during apartheid," but fails to appreciate the importance of that observation. Mugabe is a national hero who cannot be easily displaced. He may disgust us, and the white remnant in Zimbabwe, but his popularity, especially in rural areas, is undisputable. Throughout the campaign Mugabe ruthlessly, and sometimes ludicrously, played the race card. Because of the racial history of that region, the ploy, however ridiculous it seemed to western observers, worked. The rural constituencies turned out to vote for the man who fought white supremacy.

So it is not the fault of the western media, or even of the democratic leadership which suffered a failure of nerve, but the simple fact that a broad popular movement for real democracy just didn't materialize.

Another criticism, also linked by Instapundit, comes from Heather's colleague at Democracy Arsenal, Suzanne Nossel.

She calls for the Bush Administration to step up and demand new elections. Otherwise, she argues, the opportunity for democratic reform will have passed. Read it here.

I hate to tell you this, Suzanne. It had already passed by Sunday, if in fact it had ever existed. And there is little that the US can realistically do to change that.

What leverage the US can have in this situation I fail to see. Are we going to impose more sanctions on a people already suffering in extremis? Mugabe has regional support and that's all he needs and he can safely ignore demands for reform emanating from Washington and London.

AND THERE'S THIS:

The Christian Science Monitor explains:

Why Zimbabwe Is Not Ukraine

[A]part from the predetermined election and the yearnings of a suppressed people, the ingredients that allowed peaceful, democratic change in Ukraine are largely absent in Zimbabwe.

Viktor Yushchenko, who suffered near-fatal dioxin poisoning in his campaign to unseat Ukraine's corrupt and authoritarian president, had the support of masses of protesters. But those were healthy, well-fed masses. In Zimbabwe, half the country is on the verge of acute hunger, and the official HIV infection rate is 27 percent.

Mr. Yushchenko also had the backing of key institutions. The judiciary ruled in favor of a new election, and Ukraine's security forces refused to turn their guns on fellow citizens.

Zimbabwe's courts have yet to take up the opposition's legal challenges to the 2002 election, and its leader has been quite willing to allow violence against the opposition. Meanwhile, Zimbabwe has been given a whitewash by election monitors and neighbors.

Read it here.

Lebanon Update --

The view from Lebanon is far more optimistic:

While the world's attention has been focused elsewhere things are moving toward a resolution in Lebanon.

By Inal Ersan

DAMASCUS (Reuters) - Syria has promised to withdraw all its forces from Lebanon by April 30 and will let a United Nations team verify the pullout, a U.N. envoy said Sunday....

"The declaration... is a decisive positive development in the Lebanese crisis," opposition member of parliament Nassib Lahoud said. "We hope that it opens a new chapter in the Lebanese-Syrian relations marked by the highest level of cooperation between two independent states."
....
Dozens of Syrian military trucks and some tanks on transporters rolled out of Lebanon Sunday, witnesses said.

They said troops had evacuated seven positions in and round the village of Anjar close to the border. But the Syrian intelligence headquarters in the village and a large army base in an ancient castle were still manned by Syrian personnel.

A Lebanese-Syrian military committee met in Beirut and Damascus in the past few days to agree on the withdrawal timetable and Lebanese army chief General Michel Suleiman met Assad in Damascus Saturday.

Sounds good, but note that the UN is involved [which cannot be a good thing -- they are not so hot at enforcing much of anything] and that the intelligence HQ is still functioning.

Read the whole thing here.

And Lebanese security forces are beginning to assert themselves against the Syrians.

BEIRUT: Lebanese police on Saturday chased and detained two Syrian policemen said to be close to the son of a former Syrian security chief in Lebanon, according to reports Sunday. The Mansourieh police mounted the chase as a dark blue Mitsubishi four-wheel-drive vehicle with smoked windows sped across the roundabout of Mkalles before dawn, stopping it at Beirut's Cola residential district.

Tinted car glass has been prohibited by the Lebanese authorities since the Syrian military and intelligence evacuation of Lebanon got underway three weeks ago. Such cars were mainly used by Syrian intelligence officers in Beirut and the rest of Lebanon....

Read about it here.

and

Lebanese troops took over a key Syrian checkpoint on the Beirut-Damascus highway on Monday and the Syrians, now committed to leaving Lebanon by April 30, prepared to abandon a nearby intelligence building.

This is important because there was concern that Syria might try to maintain military and intelligence forces in the Bekaa Valley. Now those forces are leaving.

Meanwhile pressure on Syria continues to mount.

The EU has stated that it will not sign a promised aid and trade pact with Syria until all forces are withdrawn from Lebanon....

and,

President Bush warned Syrian-backed leaders in Lebanon on Monday against postponing next month's elections, and demanded that Syrian troops and security forces fully withdraw from the country. "It's important for this election to take place on time," Bush said of the parliamentary poll due in May....

Hat tip, Ya Libnan [your one-stop shopping for daily Lebanon updates].

Now the question is -- what will Hizbollah do?

Tony at Across the Bay has a few ideas.

He notes that with the Syrian withdrawal Hizbollah's position is greatly weakened and writes:

it behooves Hizbullah to start an honest reconciliation with the rest of Lebanon, and stop playing the game of double-talk: claiming an above the fray nationalist stature, while simultaneously playing a specifically Shiite card (with all the elements of the Lebanese Shiite narrative). No one is buying it anymore....

Regarding the defiant rhetoric of Hizbollah's leader he writes:

Nasrallah is famous for this rhetoric, especially when everyone knows the outcome! It's a bid to score a cheap point, for free! The thing is that this is so tired and obvious, I don't know who he thinks he's kidding, except for those in the Shiite community who actually believe this kind of rhetoric....

At this stage, the Lebanese attitude is "whatever, as long as you'll eventually disarm!"

Tony's analysis and his links to a number of other commentators are here.

So Syria is withdrawing and without its major sponsor Hizbollah has little choice other than to cooperate, if only grudgingly.

Still, Iran has some influence with Hizbollah, and there is potential there for trouble. Whatever the situation, though, things for the moment seem to be moving toward a peaceful resolution and for that we can give thanks.

Stay tuned....

Dutch Archaeologists Create Dolmen

First the Kiwis, now the Dutch.... Those Wacky Archaeologists!

A couple of months ago New Zealand archaeologists finished construction on their own version of Stonehenge. [read about it here]. Now this news out of the Netherlands:

Archaeologists have spent two months working on a life-size model of a dolmen or hunebed for the new Hunebedcentrum in Borger (province of Drenthe), which will open its doors to the public in April 2005. The dolmen is a lifesize replica of dolmen D26, which was the last dolmen to be excavated by archaeologists in the Netherlands.

The reconstruction in the new museum shows what the dolmen would have looked like when it was built, around 3400 BC. The large grey stones were covered with earth and grass. Inside the burial chamber visitors can smell the odour of decay, see human bones and gifts for the dead. The reconstruction will be the centrepiece in the museum's exhibition about dolmens.

If you don't have an authentic spectacular artifact to show the public, make one yourselves. And don't forget to spice it up with the odor of human remanins and a few bones here and there. After all, the name of the game in archaeology is public relations, not science.

Read about it here.

Workers at top of damaged tower. Note the commanding view of the surrounding area. [yahoo news photo]

The Great Mosque and Spiral Tower in Samarra. Original of photo at http://oi.uchicago.edu/OI/IS/SANDERS/PHOTOS/arch_site_photos.html. The tower is of obvious military importance because it commands a view of the surrounding countryside.  

BBC reports:

The spiral minaret, in the town of Samarra, is more than 1,000 years old.

Police say insurgents blew up the top section of the 52m (162ft) Malwiya tower, which had been used by US soldiers as a lookout position.

That's right -- the insurgents attacked a holy site and damaged it. What is the reaction?

A senior government official told the BBC the Americans should have ensured it was properly protected.

Iraqi antiquities officials have asked for compensation after the walls of an ancient palace in Samarra occupied by the Americans were cracked.

Coalition troops have been heavily criticised for earlier damage done to the ancient site of Babylon which was taken over as a military base.

That's right. Iraqi "insurgents" destroy things and the US is blamed.

Read the whole thing here.

Omar at Iraq the Model has something to say on the subject. He writes:

I am wondering here, why are historic sites like this minaret still being used for military purposes?

Shouldn't the concerned Iraqi institutions do their job in taking care of these sites which constitute the historic fortune of this country? Or are we going to keep weeping and whining after each similar incident without doing anything to stop such saddening incident from happening again?

Read the whole thing here.

David over at Cronaca [one of the best blogs on the net -- check it out regularly] puts the whole thing into perspective. He asks:

Is this another case of American indifference towards the cultural treasures of other lands? I would reserve judgment, especially given how vital the outpost aloft has been in the pacification of the surrounding area... and the lack of heavy weapons among the insurgent forces. For there is a real dilemma here: occupy it, risking superficial small arms and RPG damage to the masonry (keeping in mind that the minaret might remain a target even if not occupied, since it would have to be guarded to prevent reoccupation by the insurgents), or vacate it and prolong the fighting, increasing not only loss of life, but also damage to the rest of the fabric of the ancient city. Nor does international law give much guidance, for the Geneva Conventions set out rules for wars between nations, fought by regular forces; civil wars and insurgencies fought by irregulars obeying no rules at all are a very grey area.

He goes on to cite disapprovingly denunciations from a number of scholars to the effect that the US bears responsibility for the destruction of antiquities and then quotes James Davila who warns:

We scholars should be very careful lest we end up calling for protection of cultural properties at the expense of letting people get killed by terrorists. That is not a public face we want to wear.

And he also quotes Alexander Joffee who depicts the arguments raised by scholars against US occupation of the minaret as "ranging from the legalistic to the sophomoric and ultimately to outright sympathy with fascists and sadists...."

He concludes that there are no easy choices and that the knee-jerk criticism of American troops by scholars discredits the field of archaeology.

Read the whole thing here and also here.

I should also point out that US forces abandoned their positions on the tower two weeks before it was attacked.

Video Games that Shoot Back -- "Hey, shooting people is fun."

By Frank Walker
April 3, 2005
The Sun-Herald

A combat simulator developed for the US military that "shoots" back, delivering an electric shock strong enough to knock down players, could be the next big thing for home-computer games.

A Texas-based company, VirTra Systems, is selling the combat simulator to military and police forces around the world. Its spokesman, Steve Haag, said Australian armed forces had expressed an interest in getting one.

Players enter a platform with a 360-degree screen that shows scenarios such as freeing hostages, street gun fights, taking out suicide bombers and team attacks on enemy positions.

And VirTra takes the simulations a step further by enabling the computer game to "shoot back".

If a player fails to kill an enemy in time and the enemy is able to shoot back, the simulator delivers a powerful electric shock through the player's hips. You definitely know you have been hit," Mr Haag said. "It has the same power as a stun gun. It knocks you down.

"You have to continue to work through the pain and keep on fighting, as that is what you need to do - to keep on fighting even when wounded.

Read the whole thing here. [registration required]

You just knew that this sort of thing was inevitable. I wonder what's next.

Wasn't this in a James Bond flick a few years ago? Yeah, it was.

Get ready for the lawsuits; they're coming.

The Holy Father is Gone

A great man passed from us today. He, as much as any of his contemporaries on the world stage, understood and had the courage to confront forcefully the enormous challenges we have faced in our lifetimes. He got all the big things right. That was his job. He did it well. Whatever problems I have with the institution of the papacy and the traditions of the Church, I honor the man and mourn his passing. My prayers go with him. He will be missed....

Sin City -- Shocked! Shocked!

Getting old does not necessarily mean losing touch with mainstream culture, but it does impose a certain barrier to understanding. As we age we move first toward and then away from the mean of human experience. I now occupy a position somewhere on the "long tail" of the demographic charts and the world I remember is not the one that informs the perceptions of most Americans.

This was brought home to me again yesterday. "She Who Shall Not Be Named" and I accompanied a friend to see Sin City. Since I have some modest credentials as a "film scholar" the others looked to me for critical opinions. I was trying to be polite and consequently muttered some vague things about style and CGI and how nice it was to see Mickey Rourke back in action (I fondly remember his early work in Diner and Angel Heart), and how much I loved the noir genre, and how much Rutger Hauer is coming to resemble Rod Steiger. But beneath the polite amenities I was deeply disturbed -- not so much by the film itself, but by the audience reaction.

Sin City is one of the most unrelentingly violent, sadistic, nihilistic, and brutal films you will ever see. The fact that all this is contained in a magnificently stylish and dynamic package does not alter the fact that this film wallows in human degradation. It is an all-out assault on our humanity. It features murder, torture, cannibalism, vivisection and worse. It's view of humanity is unrelentingly bleak. Beneath the stylish surface it is an unredeemably vile and loathsome thing.

And several people in the audience loved every moment of it. They cheered and laughed at some of the most gruesome scenes, and as they wandered out of the theatre they babbled on joyfully about it, recounting some of its most vicious moments. They scared the hell out of me.

These were not children. They were twenty- and thirty-something adults. The movie obviously touched something in them that I found incomprehensible and repulsive. I was shocked and disturbed. There was a profound gulf in sensibility between me and them.

This was not the first time something like this had happened. A couple of years ago I screened, for a college-age audience, a film by Tony Scott [Ridley's idiot brother] titled True Romance. Some students had requested that it be shown in order to complete the "Tarentino Cycle," [though he was just the screenwriter]. There are two shocking scenes in it -- one distinguished by its over the top racism [which did shock the kids] and the other by its over the top misnogynistic violence [which thrilled them]. When James Gandolfini sadistically brutalized Patricia Arquette the male students went wild -- laughing and joking and cheering him on. The women in the audience sat silent till the end when they cheered Patricia's revenge.

I was shocked by their reaction. At the time I rationalized it by remembering that they were teenagers and therefore by definition marginal. For them stylized violence is trangressive, a way of violiating the rules of a culture that excludes them from meaningful adult roles.

But yesterday's audience was comprised of adults -- young to middle-aged with just a few of us old fogeys in attendance. Granted it was an afternoon performance [one of the joys of retirement is that you can do things during work hours] and these guys [the audience was overwhelmingly male] should have been at work. Maybe the marginalization thesis works for them too, but I fear not. I could test that by attending an evening performance, but I have no wish to subject myself to Sin City again.

So which is it? Are we dealing with a generational divide in which young to middle-aged adults respond favorably to things my generation despises? Or is it simply a case of marginal young men striking back at a society that cares little for them and their problems?

Scanning reviews doesn't resolve the question. They have been generally favorable and many critics admit to a guilty fascination with Sin City and its inhabitants. It could be argued that most reviewers are young to middle-aged and therefore reflect a generation's sensibility. But there is also the fact that the critical community subscribes to a methodology that distances themselves from the mainstream culture and consciously opens itself to transgressive material. Thus a really old guy like Roger Ebert can enthusiastically endorse this pile of .....

I don't know the answer. Do you?

Zimbabwe Update -- Bad News for the Opposition

By Manoah Esipisu

HARARE (Reuters) - President Robert Mugabe's party seized the two-thirds parliamentary majority it needs to change Zimbabwe's constitution Saturday, clinching an election which both the opposition and western powers said was rigged.

Official results announced Saturday showed Mugabe's ZANU-PF party winning 71 of the 120 contested seats against 39 for the opposition Movement for Democratic Change (MDC).

With the president appointing 30 additional members of the 150-seat parliament, ZANU-PF now has the two-thirds majority that Mugabe had set as a major election goal.

With a two-thirds majority Mugabe will be able to amend the constitution as he likes.

Analysts say [ZANU-PF] could use its majority to push through
constitutional changes to protect Mugabe from the kind of prosecutions that have
plagued some other African leaders when they stepped down. Mugabe is due to
retire in 2008.

Read the whole thing here.

So far the opposition's response has been pathetic.

The outspoken Roman Catholic Archbishop of Bulawayo, Pius Ncube, said some Zimbabweans were praying for Mugabe to die. “Since the man (Mugabe) will not go on his own, some people are praying that God will take him. Mugabe has shown himself to be heartless and has left people with no option. There is nothing wrong with that. Of course it is up to God,” the Archbishop told SW Radio Africa.

He said it was not something he did regularly, but he had at some time in the past also prayed for Mugabe’s death - when he looked at the suffering of the people.

This is the guy who was trying to organize a "people power" protest. If this is the kind of leadership the opposition is counting on they have no hope of either overthrowing Mugabe or enlisting serious international support.

Read it here.

The Globe and Mail reports that the opposition is undecided as to its response.

Harare — Zimbabwe's opposition has categorically rejected election results that gave the ruling ZANU-PF another majority in parliament, but hesitated yesterday to say what it plans to do about it, leaving many supporters frustrated....

"We're waiting for word from Tsvangirai. If he gives the word, we will go to the streets," [one man] said in the early evening. "But up to now he hasn't said anything. If he calls us, we will go — although there is some risk [to] life. But he hasn't called."

The inaction was particularly frustrating for a group of 257 women, many of them elderly, others with young babies on their backs, who were arrested Thursday night at a prayer vigil for change in central Harare.

Many, who belong to Women of Zimbabwe Arise (WOZA, which means "come forward" in Shona), were badly beaten by police before being hauled off to jail. [These are the women pictured below.]
....
Mr. Tsvangirai said the opposition had a plan, although he refused to say what it was.
....
[B]y fumbling through the day, MDC appeared to be squandering a prime moment to move, with a rare group of international observers and journalists ready to record their moves.

The MDC leader is in a difficult position. He has already once been charged with treason, and faced the death penalty had he been convicted; the government would be delighted with another such opportunity to try him, should he speak urgently of revolution.

It was clear yesterday that the MDC is still finding its feet as a national movement; it looked badly organized. And Mr. Tsvangirai has always committed himself to peaceful, democratic change, even as he draws a constituency of frustrated and angry young people.

Indecision, frustration, wishing their opponents would just die..., this does not sound promising. In the absence of a clear agenda, strong leadership, and effective organization, and faced by a ruler determined to keep his position, the democratic reform imperative grinds to a halt.

Read about it here.

Publius pundit disagrees with my assessment. He thinks there is still plenty of time to launch a people power revolt. He writes:

Tsvangirai needs to make a decision, and he probably has until the end of the weekend to do it. The protest shouldn’t be called before the entire results are announced, and certainly not after all of the journalists leave. I have a feelings if the story of the year from Africa breaks, they won’t mind risking being expelled from the country. And even if they don’t, then we have great bloggers like Sokwanele,
who is putting out a report on the electoral fraud tomorrow.

Most importantly, however, the protests need to be called before these same able and willing people who want to do something about their grave situation give up hope. Mugabe’s coup over the constitution has to be stopped. Tsvangirai needs to realize that this is bigger than his own life, stand up, and say, “Enough!”

Read it here.

Sorry, I just don't have that much faith in the power of bloggerdom to stimulate political change. And, I don't feel that I have the right, sitting here in a comfortable living room overlooking the harbor, to demand that someone like Tsvangirai sacrifice his own life for abstract principles.

In the heady early days of the democratic revolution it might have seemed that all things would be possible, but I am too old and have seen too many failed "springs" to believe that. Eventually, the democratic movements would run up against determined resistance and the reform imperative would reach its limits. We are beginning to see those limits emerge now.

AND THEN THERE'S THIS!

2005-04-02) -- U.S. Secretary of State Condaleezza Rice today congratulated Robert Mugabe on winning this week's free and fair presidential elections to continue his 25-year rule of Zimbabwe.

"Under Mr. Mugabe's leadership," said Secretary Rice in a written statement, "Zimbabwe has become a recognized world leader in unemployment (70%), inflation(~620%) and HIV adult prevalence rate (33.7%). Thanks to this popular, legally-reelected, leader, the average lifespan of a Zimbabwean has gone from 61 years to 34 years in just the past 15 years, making his nation one of the most rapidly-youthful in the world."

Secretary Rice hailed Mr. Mugabe's leadership as "a textbook case which will be studied in universities around the world for years to come."

In addition to his legal reelection, the 81-year-old Mr. Mugabe's party this week legally won approximately 70 seats in the 150-seat legislature, and he legally will appoint an additional 30 legislators, giving him the two-thirds majority needed legally to re-write the constitution to allow him legally to hand-pick his successor.

As a reelection gift, U.S. Ambassador Joseph Sullivan presented Mr. Mugabe with a bound copy of President George Bush's second inaugural address with this excerpt engraved on the cover.

"All who live in tyranny and hopelessness can know: the United States will not
ignore your oppression, or excuse your oppressors. When you stand for your
liberty, we will stand with you."

RELAX! It's not real. It's just Scott Ott over at Scrappleface having some fun. Check out his blog here. Read it regularly -- I do.

Hmmm..., "rapidly youthful," gotta remember that one.

Another Small Step in Iraq

AP Reports:

By Sinan Salaheddin,

BAGHDAD, Iraq - Influential Sunni Muslim clerics who once condemned Iraqi security force members as traitors made a surprise turnaround Friday and encouraged citizens to join the nascent police and army.

If heeded, the announcement could strengthen the image of the officers and soldiers trying to take over the fight against the Sunni-led insurgency....

It seemed to be a recognition by the Sunni minority, which dominated under former dictator Saddam Hussein, that Iraq's interim government is slowly retaking control of the nation and paving the way for a U.S. withdrawal.

That, at least, is hopeful. This isn't.

Negotiations continued over who will lead the newly elected National Assembly, as Kurdish leader Jalal Talabani and Abdel-Aziz al-Hakim, head of the Shiite-led United Iraqi Alliance, talked about speeding up the formation of Iraq's new government.

The two discussed the possibility of formally naming Talabani as Iraq's president Sunday during a parliamentary session, said al-Hakim's son and political adviser, Mohsen Abdel-Aziz al-Hakim.

"We're running out of time," he said. "The delay is not in our interest."

Indeed. This is the most important procedural hurdle facing the interim leadership at present. Little else can be done until it is settled.

Read the article here.

Neat Stuff Alert! Segway Polo

From the NYT:

When Alex Ko and his companions took up polo, they made some subtle changes to the sport once enjoyed by ancient Mongol warriors, who are said to have played with the severed heads of their enemies.

Ko and his friends opted for a 6-inch-diameter Nerf ball.

And instead of horses, they chose to ride Segways, the self-balancing transportation devices first developed as a short-distance alternative to the automobile.

"It's similar to real polo," Ko said, "but without the manure.

Read the whole thing here.

Polo without manure --- who'da thunk!

Zimbabwean Protest Babes. MDC supporters gather at Africa Unity Square in Harare for overnight prayers. The women were arrested later by Zimbabwe police. [AFP photo] 

Zimbabwe Update -- And So It Begins...

FOX News reports that the MDC [opposition] has begun to challenge the results of yesterday's election in Zimbabwe.

HARARE, Zimbabwe — With results starting to trickle in Friday, Zimbabwe's opposition leader accused the government of trying to steal the parliamentary election and urged people to defend their vote.

Morgan Tsvangirai's opposition party, Movement for Democratic Change, won 31 of the first 39 seats declared Friday, but said inconsistencies in the
results were a sign of things to come and it now expects to lose seats overall in the 150-seat parliament.

"The government has fraudulently, once again, betrayed the people," Tsvangirai said at a news conference. "We believe the people of Zimbabwe must defend their vote and their right to free and fair elections."

Before the election MDC officials were talking about staging a Ukraine-style mass protest if there were irregularities in the voting. According to The Scotsman, Mr Mr Tsvangirai somewhat cryptically said, "In previous elections there had been an attempt to use the legal route when results were disputed. We are not going to pursue that." [here]

If such demonstrations take place there will be violence, and lots of it. Zimbabwe is not Ukraine.

The Washington Times doubts that violence will ensue. It sums up the situation thusly:

Full results from the election were not expected until late Friday, or possibly even Saturday. But here seemed little doubt that Mugabe would chalk up yet another victory, that the opposition and international monitors would angrily criticize the conduct of the election and the preceding campaign, and that the president of Zimbabwe would just ignore them as he has done so often before.

Either way we are seeing in Zimbabwe, as last week in Belorus, the limits of democratic reform. Just as in Belorus an authoritarian government has mobilized its resources effectively to intimidate the opposition and will most likely survive the challenge. Despite the claims of enthusiasts like Michael [Excitable] Ledeen, people power is by no means irresistable.

Stay tuned....

UPDATE:

Mora y Leon has a superb roundup of stories on the Zimbabwe elections over at Publius Pundit. Check it out here.

UPDATE:

Reuters reports:

By Stella Mapenzauswa

HARARE (Reuters) - Zimbabwe President Robert Mugabe'sruling party won parliamentary elections on Friday, tighteninghis grip on power, but the opposition said it had been cheated for the third time in five years....

The MDC, which emerged from the labor movement to becomethe most potent challenge to Mugabe since independence fromBritain in 1980, was likely to see its parliamentrepresentation drop from the current 51 seats, analysts said.

MDC leader Morgan Tsvangirai hinted his supporters mighttake to the streets to express their outrage, saying the partyhad given up on legal challenges after unsuccessfully battling results in both 2000 and 2002 it said were also rigged....

Party officials said the MDC leadership would consider itsoptions and issue a statement on Saturday....

"We are extremely disappointed by the results as they havecome out. As we have always complained, it is very clear to usthat this is yet another stolen election," MDCSecretary-General Welshman Ncube told Reuters.

Britain, Zimbabwe's former colonial master and frequentcritic of Mugabe, joined Western powers including the UnitedStates, the European Union, Germany and Australia which have already labeled the poll a travesty."

Mugabe has yet again denied ordinary Zimbabweans a free and fair opportunity to vote, further prolonging the political and economic crisis he has inflicted on their country," Foreign Minister Jack Straw said in a statement.

"Some say this is about Africa versus the West. It is not. It is about democracy versus dictatorship," he said.

Read it here.

Well, now the ball is MDC's court. What comes next? Here's a hint:

The Times reports:

“ZIMBABWEANS have to be willing to risk their own lives for freedom,” said the Archbishop, as the faces of Nelson Mandela, Martin Luther King Jr and Gandhi
stared down from his office wall behind him.

“They need to fill up the streets, stop traffic, and bring the country to a halt,” he told The Times shortly before Mr Mugabe’s victory in the election held on Thursday was announced last night.

Pius Ncube, the Catholic Archbishop of Bulawayo, is his country’s most ardent critic of President Mugabe. He has called for a peaceful uprising to unseat Zimbabwe’s veteran leader if the ruling Zanu(PF) party won....

His call for people power has resonated in the international community, which has witnessed the recent outbursts of democracy in Eastern Europe and the Middle East. But the Archbishop, 58, is not sure whether his countrymen have it within them to rise up in a similar way.

Read it here.

Will it happen? Stay tuned....

The Limits of Democratic Reform -- Pakistan and Uganda

Democratic reform is spreading rapidly around the globe, appearing in unlikely places. Most of the world's attention has been focused on the Middle East and states that were once part of the Soviet empire. There destabilization of authoritarian regimes has not threatened, and may actually have advanced, American interests. But now democratic reform threatens the stability of regimes that are important to our national interests. As a result the administration is going to have to make some very hard choices.

One of the touchiest issues centers on the authoritarian government of General Pervez Musharraf in Pakistan. In recent days the nation has been shaken by strikes, demonstrations and riots protesting the system of representation in the government, unemployment, unpopular public works projects, and the like. The welter of violence involves ethnic groups, unions, radical Islamists, and of course university students. The government has taken strong, and sometimes violent, measures to restore order.

Read about the disturbances here and here.

Just this week a US State Department report "denounced Pakistan for a 'poor' human rights record, a military-dominated political system and corrupt judiciary."

But Pakistan is a nuclear power in a volatile relationship with another nuclear power, India, and its cooperation is essential to the US war on terror. We have strong reasons to preserve the stability of Musharraf's regime.

As AFP notes:

Perhaps more than any other country, Pakistan highlights the challenges facing President George W. Bush's administration as it tries to square its drive for global democracy with its strategic needs in the war on terror.

How has the US responded? -- with ambiguity and incoherence.

Witness this. When asked about the State Department report condemning Pakistan,

The US ambassador to Pakistan Ryan C Crocker has said that there is no dictatorship in Pakistan and President Musharraf is taking Pakistan towards democracy in spite of being in the uniform.

While talking to senior representatives of the media here the US ambassador said that Pakistan is an open society where the media is free.

Democracy does not only mean free and fair elections but it is also the name of stable institutions and President Musharraf is stabilizing every institution in the country, The News quoted Crocker as saying. (ANI)

HUH? Now that's an interesting take.

Read the whole thing here.

Just two weeks ago Condi Rice,

praised Pakistan’s progress in instituting democratic reforms leading to elections in 2007 and its cooperation in the war on terrorism...

The top U.S. diplomat gave no indication that she pressed President Gen. Pervez Musharraf, who seized power in a 1999 coup, about giving up his control of the armed forces, a longstanding U.S. demand.

Asked about Musharraf’s status, Rice declined to answer, focusing instead on the country’s move toward reform.

Tricksy, tricksy... Read the whole thing here.

Two points to make here:

1) Many commentators have tried to cast Bush as an "idealist" who disdains the compromises urged by the "realists." Obviously that is not the case with regard to Pakistan. Bush is far more of a pragmatist than most pundits are willing to admit.

2) Despite the obvious abuses, Musharraf has made considerable strides toward democratizing Pakistan, a fact emphasized by Secretary Rice. Too much pressure could be counter-productive.

And then there is Uganda, a US ally with considerable oil resources.

There, an attempt to extend the term of office of current President Yoweri Museveni has given rise to a protest movement, Force For Change.

Publius links to an account of a recent demonstration:

Kampala - Ugandan police used water cannons and tear gas to break up an opposition demonstration on Thursday, engaging in running battles with marchers protesting efforts to extend the president’s tenure...

After the initial confrontation on Thursday, the protesters used concrete blocks to try to barricade Kampala’s main street. They waved banners reading, “Museveni Go,” “Respect the Constitution” and “United States Save Us.”

Interesting that last line. Eh?

Read the whole thing here.

No response yet from Washington, and given Uganda's strategic importance, I wouldn't hold my breath....

Stay tuned.