Keeping the blogosphere posted on the goings on of the world of submarines since late 2004... and mocking and belittling general foolishness wherever it may be found. Idaho's first and foremost submarine blog. (If you don't like something on this blog, please E-mail me; don't call me at home.)

Monday, January 24, 2005

Jane Fonda School of "Effective Protest"

Not much new news on the submarine front today, so I thought I'd discuss something that's been bothering me for quite a while: the apparent belief among the anti-American left that one cannot effectively protest American policy/culture/existance without actively supporting the other side. We saw this first and most famously when Jane Fonda felt the need to go to North Vietnam and make propaganda appearances for them during the Vietnam War. We've seen this continue through the Global War on Terror, whether in Afghanistan or the Iraqi theater. Ignoring complete moonbats like Ramsey Clark and Noam Chomsky, the need to actively support our enemies is alive and well in many corners of America. An example I found today comes from Sterling Johnson, political science professor at Central Michigan University. In this article, Johnson describes the terrorists fighting Coalition Forces in Iraq as "freedom fighters":

"Sterling Johnson, political science professor, said he hesitates to even use the term “elections” for the new Iraqi government.
“Elections have to be planned and of course not even the war was adequately planned, which is why it’s hard to conceive of the Iraqi elections being planned,” he said.
"The upcoming elections are largely based on the myth that the United States can export democracy, Johnson said. He said that has about as little credence as the old Soviet belief that they could export revolution.
“Major Iraqi candidates are of question of legitimacy in the eyes of their own people. I think they’re largely seen as Western stooges,” he said. “This is why their freedom fighters are resistant because they’re doing all they can to preclude a peaceful polling process.”

Of course, it appears that Johnson is only taking the lead of one of the left's favorite moonbats, Michael Moore, who described the terrorists as "Minutemen" last year.

I for one do not have a problem with Americans objecting to their government's policies. However, in this new world, where the only method our enemies have of winning the war is to have their allies get us to quit fighting (as I discussed in the comments section of this post), I do have a problem with the frequent lionization heaped on these protestors by the press. Should we outlaw such press coverage? No, clearly we can't. The only method we have of protesting these protestors is to vote with our wallets and remote controls.

Update 1447 25 Jan: Greyhawk at Mudville Gazette lets moonbat Ramsey Clark mock himself with his own words.


Anonymous Anonymous said...

It is apparent to me the CMU professors quoted in your referenced article all have Major degrees in the obvious. That being that ethnic minorities behave in their own self interest. The professors seem to feel that the elections will result a rise in violence by the minority Sunni/Baathist groups. With this in mind I see a contradiction in the first professor’s reasoning. Professor John Robertson said:

“Sunni Arab complaints that the ongoing violence and lack of security, which have mostly plagued the Sunni-dominated areas, rendered the elections unfair and interests under-represented.”

Aren’t the Sunni’s complaining about the violence not the elections? It sounds to me that they just want to be fairly represented and are rejecting violence. But somehow either the professor or the reporter sees this as proof of an upcoming failure, that ethnic hostility didn’t exist or was subdued in the currently lawless Sunni triangle, and that the elections are the match that will light that fuse.

Professor Sterling Johnson’s analysis is in need of some polishing also. He says the War was not adequately planned. But somehow there were relatively few coalition casualties, the Iraqi economy didn’t collapse, one million refugees didn’t happen.

The professor referring to the Terrorists and Baathist as “Freedom Fighters” is a classic example of “moral equivalence”, detaching any context of terriost’s actions and beliefs from our own. This is probably the result of a mind fermented in the political correct thinking of the left of center American academia. (Submarine humor on: On half-way night the good professor would probably be the first one in line with a boathook and foul weather gear ready to retrieve the mail buoy at 300 feet. > off) .

I’m new to blogs but as far as I can see the MSM is going to have an increasingly hard time competing. I for one am tied the left worlds coriolis effect (Spin) – Inertial Navigation term. It's the interaction, a blog world conversation, that feed media can’t easily replicate.

Rigging for ultra quite.

1/24/2005 9:52 PM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

"as little credence as the old Soviet belief that they could export revolution"... uhh, Mr. Johnson, they DID export revolution for a long while: Vietnam, Cuba, Nicaragua were just a few of the SUCCESSFUL revolutions, meanwhile they were less succesful revolutions in other countries.

They ultimately failed not because they couldn't "export revolution", but because they couldn't sustain the revolutions based on a flawed idiology.

1/25/2005 1:02 PM

Blogger Bubblehead said...

I have a new post up on the top with another idiotarian spouting off; this one's not a professor, but it still makes you wonder what's being taught in school nowadays, and how little it must relate to the real world.

1/25/2005 1:30 PM


Post a Comment

<< Home