Judge Sotomayor's now famous statement about the
ability of white men to understand non-white women
was not about race at all. It was all about life experience,
and its relevance to the judicial process. The whole
speech (and it's a long one) is about equality and impar-
tiality and how difficult those are to maintain, by judges
or anyone else.
Of course we are all shaped by our life experiences. How
could we not? Our views are as well. What she was talk-
ing about was how as a Puerto Rican child growing up in
poverty, she had a better understanding of those circum-
stances than someone raised in privilege and power. She
should have stated it that way instead of referring to race,
because that makes people crazy. She woke up the luna-
tic fringe. The crazies are like a pack of dogs that smell
red meat.
Racism is a belief that a particular group of people just by
virtue of belonging to that group makes them superior to
all people of some other group. Judge Sotomayor's whole
speech rejected any hint of that. She shouldn't have men-
tioned color, because that's not what she meant.
What she said: "I would hope (didn't say it would happen)
that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her exper-
ience would more often than not (not always) reach a better
conclusion than a white male who hasn't lived that life."
(Emphasis and parentheses mine). She, for sure, should
have eliminated "white male" and substituted "someone"
instead. It wouldn't have changed her meaning, but it
would have gotten her off the hook.
In the very next paragraph she proved her point by adding:
"Let us not forget that wise men like Oliver Wendell Holmes
and Justice Cardozo voted on cases which upheld both sex
and race discrimination in our society. Until 1972, no Su-
preme Court case ever upheld the claim of a woman in a
gender discrimination case." What was their problem?
They simply had no understanding of the plight of victims
of discrimination! "No understanding" is another term for
"ignorance." Discrimination is always the result of ignor-
ance.
What I have just shown is that judges are not always
totally objective. If they were, they would always agree
on everything! They have all the same facts, and the same
law to interpret. But they perceive (see) facts differently.
What one judge sees as relevant, another doesn't see at
all, or discounts. Judge Sotomayor's whole lecture (to a
Latino law symposium) was about the long struggle of
minorities and women for fairness and understanding
and opportunity. It is more than ironic that her words
now have her again facing this struggle personally.
Saturday, May 30, 2009
Thursday, May 28, 2009
DANGEROUSLY MISINFORMED
"Everything you think you know about Iran is
wrong," says Fareed Zakaria in the 6/1/09 issue
of Newsweek. His cover story is a must-read
for anyone concerned about our dealings with
that pivotal country. Diplomatic improvement
there could get their cooperation helping with
Hezbollah and Hamas and Palestinian issues. No-
thing of importance will be done with those issues
without dealing with Hamas and Hezbollah. Well,
probably nothing good is going to happen anyway,
as long as Israel makes and controls our foreign
policy.
But just maybe, with accurate knowledge of Iran and
its fears and factions and legitimate needs, we can
avoid going to war there, in spite of Israel's and our
neo-cons demanding otherwise. Fareed shoots down,
one by one, many of the prevailing myths popular in
our media and among the pundits about Iran. And
ignorance, remember, is not bliss: it's deadly. It got us
into Iraq, where seven years later we still have 140,00
troops and 150,000 contract employees at still a horri-
fic cost in lives and dollars.
The killing goes on there. Nothing has been settled after
all this time and blood. The Surge was tactically a success
because the Sunnis went along with it. But it failed in its
purpose strategically. The main underlying issues remain
unsolved, and the fighting to settle them will surely resume
when we leave. No one who is at all knowledgeable of the
history and the people there, whether Iraqi or outsider,
doubts that hostilities will again escalate upon our exit.
And this time the Kurds will be drawn into it in a way
that they have avoided heretofore. So its all for nought:
we destroyed that country, its infrastructure, its social
fabric, its culture and cohesion. Humpty dumpty won't
and can't put it back together again. Only another Sad-
dam can do that!
The question now is whether we'll repeat the same kind
of ignorant mistake with Iran. Israel, who urged us to
attack Saddam on the mistaken notion the he had nukes,
now wants us to do the same with Iran for the same reason.
Fareed skillfully marshals facts to show why that isn't
necessary. He points out that there is a big debate going
on in Iran about whether to make nuclear weapons or not.
We are helping the hard-liners by threatening Iran and
trying to force them, by sanctions, to stop their efforts.
That not only won't work, but its both ignorant and stupid.
(Yes, you can be both, as we were in Iraq.) They may not
even want the bomb, says Fareed. We need an all-out
diplomatic effort to find out from them what they do want,
and whether we can make real progress in that direction.
Iranians are not suicidal, says Fareed. And they are not
fanatics, says Mohamed Elbaradei, who has spent a lot of
time there with Irani officials. He is head of the Inter-
national Atomic Energy Agency. He also says that there
is no military solution to the nuke issue. You can't bomb
the knowledge of Iranian scientists. Elbaradei says of
Iran's leadership: ". . . you do see a lot of infighting
among them. And part of it is about who is going to get
credit for finally breaking out of this 30 years of fighting
and confrontation with the United States. Everybody is
positioning himself to be the national hero who would
finally put Iran back on the world map as part of the
mainstream. They are not like the stereotyped fanatics
bent on destroying everybody around them. They are
not!"
There are a number of misunderstanding in this country
about Ahmadinejad and his role in Iranian policy. He
doesn't make policy. The country is run by the Mullahs.
Ahmadinejad doesn't control the military, or make mili-
tary decisions. He doesn't make foreign policy or control
it either. He has some influence on domestic policy. He
is a spokesperson for his government, but an uncontrolled
one. He's a loose canon, often at odds and disliked by the
Mullahs. He's a rabble rouser, and popular with the poor
and the working class. They make up the majority, na-
turally. Most Iranians don't agree with his holocaust de-
nial, or his vicious hatred of Israel. It's absolutely false
though, to say (as many Americans do on TV) that he
has threatened to destroy Israel. He hasn't. And he
couldn't if he wanted to. (As I have already explained,
he doesn't have the power.) What he has said is that he
wants God to destroy Israel! And he prays to that end.
And being a devoutly religious person, believing God is
just, he believes God will do as he asks.
I'll plan to return later to this discussion of Iran. Let me
know what you think about it.
jgoodwin004@centurytel.net
wrong," says Fareed Zakaria in the 6/1/09 issue
of Newsweek. His cover story is a must-read
for anyone concerned about our dealings with
that pivotal country. Diplomatic improvement
there could get their cooperation helping with
Hezbollah and Hamas and Palestinian issues. No-
thing of importance will be done with those issues
without dealing with Hamas and Hezbollah. Well,
probably nothing good is going to happen anyway,
as long as Israel makes and controls our foreign
policy.
But just maybe, with accurate knowledge of Iran and
its fears and factions and legitimate needs, we can
avoid going to war there, in spite of Israel's and our
neo-cons demanding otherwise. Fareed shoots down,
one by one, many of the prevailing myths popular in
our media and among the pundits about Iran. And
ignorance, remember, is not bliss: it's deadly. It got us
into Iraq, where seven years later we still have 140,00
troops and 150,000 contract employees at still a horri-
fic cost in lives and dollars.
The killing goes on there. Nothing has been settled after
all this time and blood. The Surge was tactically a success
because the Sunnis went along with it. But it failed in its
purpose strategically. The main underlying issues remain
unsolved, and the fighting to settle them will surely resume
when we leave. No one who is at all knowledgeable of the
history and the people there, whether Iraqi or outsider,
doubts that hostilities will again escalate upon our exit.
And this time the Kurds will be drawn into it in a way
that they have avoided heretofore. So its all for nought:
we destroyed that country, its infrastructure, its social
fabric, its culture and cohesion. Humpty dumpty won't
and can't put it back together again. Only another Sad-
dam can do that!
The question now is whether we'll repeat the same kind
of ignorant mistake with Iran. Israel, who urged us to
attack Saddam on the mistaken notion the he had nukes,
now wants us to do the same with Iran for the same reason.
Fareed skillfully marshals facts to show why that isn't
necessary. He points out that there is a big debate going
on in Iran about whether to make nuclear weapons or not.
We are helping the hard-liners by threatening Iran and
trying to force them, by sanctions, to stop their efforts.
That not only won't work, but its both ignorant and stupid.
(Yes, you can be both, as we were in Iraq.) They may not
even want the bomb, says Fareed. We need an all-out
diplomatic effort to find out from them what they do want,
and whether we can make real progress in that direction.
Iranians are not suicidal, says Fareed. And they are not
fanatics, says Mohamed Elbaradei, who has spent a lot of
time there with Irani officials. He is head of the Inter-
national Atomic Energy Agency. He also says that there
is no military solution to the nuke issue. You can't bomb
the knowledge of Iranian scientists. Elbaradei says of
Iran's leadership: ". . . you do see a lot of infighting
among them. And part of it is about who is going to get
credit for finally breaking out of this 30 years of fighting
and confrontation with the United States. Everybody is
positioning himself to be the national hero who would
finally put Iran back on the world map as part of the
mainstream. They are not like the stereotyped fanatics
bent on destroying everybody around them. They are
not!"
There are a number of misunderstanding in this country
about Ahmadinejad and his role in Iranian policy. He
doesn't make policy. The country is run by the Mullahs.
Ahmadinejad doesn't control the military, or make mili-
tary decisions. He doesn't make foreign policy or control
it either. He has some influence on domestic policy. He
is a spokesperson for his government, but an uncontrolled
one. He's a loose canon, often at odds and disliked by the
Mullahs. He's a rabble rouser, and popular with the poor
and the working class. They make up the majority, na-
turally. Most Iranians don't agree with his holocaust de-
nial, or his vicious hatred of Israel. It's absolutely false
though, to say (as many Americans do on TV) that he
has threatened to destroy Israel. He hasn't. And he
couldn't if he wanted to. (As I have already explained,
he doesn't have the power.) What he has said is that he
wants God to destroy Israel! And he prays to that end.
And being a devoutly religious person, believing God is
just, he believes God will do as he asks.
I'll plan to return later to this discussion of Iran. Let me
know what you think about it.
jgoodwin004@centurytel.net
Saturday, May 23, 2009
REZA ASLAN ON "COSMIC WAR"
In my last blog I reintroduced Reza Aslan, author of
No God But God, the best book on Islam available in
English, and probably the best in any language! Why
is it so good? Because the history of the religion is
there, warts and all, along with clear explanations of
the main doctrines. Aslan, an American Muslim born
in Iran, has studied the main writings of Islam in Arabic.
While I won't say that no non-Muslim can fully under-
stand that religion, I will say that Muslims fully edu-
cated in their faith are in a better position to under-
stand it than any non-Muslim. In other words, the
view from inside is different (and better) than the
view from outside the circle of belief. That would be
the case, I believe, with any religion.
Now Reza Aslan (RA) has brought his profound under-
standing of his faith, with its rich variety of peoples and
teachings, to a discussion of the clashes going on between
Muslims and the West. The result is a second brilliant
effort as valuable as the first. Jim Wallis says of this
new book, How to Win a Cosmic War, "Aslan makes the
case that the War on Terror is an unwinnable one, pre-
cisely because it is the wrong war to fight. A war between
religions, a battle between good and evil, a 'cosmic war,'
fails to address the underlying social and political roots
of conflict and terror. For people of faith and all those
concerned with peace in our world, Aslan's exacting prose
and depth of discernment create an enticing and neces-
sary read."
While RA discusses the origins of Christian "cosmic war"
teachings in the Crusades, and the lasting effects on Mus-
lims of those Crusades (and Mr. Bush's unfortunate use
of that poison term after 9/11), his most valuable insights
are into Jihadism, its history and spread and appeal to
certain kinds of Muslim youth that are culturally adrift.
He points out that: "According to a 2006 poll by the Pew
Global Attitudes Project, 70% of Egyptians, 70% of Indo-
nesians, 73% of Pakistanis, 85% of Jordanians, and 88%
of Turks (all U. S. allies, by the way) have an unfavorable
view of the U. S. If the War on Terror is an ideological
battle for the hearts and minds of Muslims, there should
no longer be any question that the battle has been lost."
(Emphasis mine.)
Jerry Falwell proudly proclaimed God to be "prowar."
That's the Old Testament God of Israel, of course, not the
"God is love" of the new. Pres. Bush, following 9/11, re-
peatedly said it is America's task to "rid the world of evil."
That's Cosmic War talk. He said further that "America is
the hope of all mankind . . . the light that shines in dark-
ness . . ." in other words, America is the light of the world.
The same as Jesus!
RA explains further: "The concept of cosmic war, which in
its simplest expression refers to the belief that God is
actively engaged in human conflicts on behalf of one side
against the other, is deeply engrained in the Hebrew Bible.
'God is a man of war' (Exodus 15:3). In 1 Sam. God orders
Saul to attack the Amalekites and "utterly destroy all that
they have; do not spare them, but kill both man and woman,
child and infant, ox and sheep, camel and donkey." A simi-
lar fate was ordered for Achan, his wife and children and
their children. (Josh. 6:21)"
Folks, the world didn't change on 9/11. Nothing changed
in China, or India, or Africa, or S. America. Nothing really
changed in the Israel/Palestine conflict, or the Kashmir
stand-off between India and Pakistan. What changed was
our awareness of the world, our recognition of hatred
against us (not entirely unearned), and our feeling of
vulnerability. Our fear made us over-react, just as bin
Laden expected and planned. "This battle is not between
al Qaida and the U. S.," he said, This is a battle of Mus-
lims against the global Crusaders." He wants it to be, and
sees it as, a cosmic war. RA's answer to how do you win
a cosmic war? Don't fight it! Deal patiently and intelli-
gently with the real issues that divide us. This not a
"clash of civilizations." That's hogwash, and he explains
why. Military force is necessary to protect us, but it
cannot solve the specific issues we have in various parts
of the world. We can't make friends by killing children,
said Pres. Karzai of Afghanistan the other day. It can't
be done! Or by terrorizing Pakistanis with our drones
that strike without warning both friend and foe.
I urge you to read Aslan's book. Here's what Bernard
Avishai, author of The Hebrew Republic said about it:
"How to Win a Cosmic War hovers confidently over a
vast historical terrain, landing where it must to explore
how common and terrible apocalytic thinking is -- how
it plagues every religious tradition, every inspired na-
tionalism, and cannot be defeated with brute force, upon
which it thrives. This is a unique primer for pragmatic
leaders whose patient enlightenment is the real antidote
to terror."
No God But God, the best book on Islam available in
English, and probably the best in any language! Why
is it so good? Because the history of the religion is
there, warts and all, along with clear explanations of
the main doctrines. Aslan, an American Muslim born
in Iran, has studied the main writings of Islam in Arabic.
While I won't say that no non-Muslim can fully under-
stand that religion, I will say that Muslims fully edu-
cated in their faith are in a better position to under-
stand it than any non-Muslim. In other words, the
view from inside is different (and better) than the
view from outside the circle of belief. That would be
the case, I believe, with any religion.
Now Reza Aslan (RA) has brought his profound under-
standing of his faith, with its rich variety of peoples and
teachings, to a discussion of the clashes going on between
Muslims and the West. The result is a second brilliant
effort as valuable as the first. Jim Wallis says of this
new book, How to Win a Cosmic War, "Aslan makes the
case that the War on Terror is an unwinnable one, pre-
cisely because it is the wrong war to fight. A war between
religions, a battle between good and evil, a 'cosmic war,'
fails to address the underlying social and political roots
of conflict and terror. For people of faith and all those
concerned with peace in our world, Aslan's exacting prose
and depth of discernment create an enticing and neces-
sary read."
While RA discusses the origins of Christian "cosmic war"
teachings in the Crusades, and the lasting effects on Mus-
lims of those Crusades (and Mr. Bush's unfortunate use
of that poison term after 9/11), his most valuable insights
are into Jihadism, its history and spread and appeal to
certain kinds of Muslim youth that are culturally adrift.
He points out that: "According to a 2006 poll by the Pew
Global Attitudes Project, 70% of Egyptians, 70% of Indo-
nesians, 73% of Pakistanis, 85% of Jordanians, and 88%
of Turks (all U. S. allies, by the way) have an unfavorable
view of the U. S. If the War on Terror is an ideological
battle for the hearts and minds of Muslims, there should
no longer be any question that the battle has been lost."
(Emphasis mine.)
Jerry Falwell proudly proclaimed God to be "prowar."
That's the Old Testament God of Israel, of course, not the
"God is love" of the new. Pres. Bush, following 9/11, re-
peatedly said it is America's task to "rid the world of evil."
That's Cosmic War talk. He said further that "America is
the hope of all mankind . . . the light that shines in dark-
ness . . ." in other words, America is the light of the world.
The same as Jesus!
RA explains further: "The concept of cosmic war, which in
its simplest expression refers to the belief that God is
actively engaged in human conflicts on behalf of one side
against the other, is deeply engrained in the Hebrew Bible.
'God is a man of war' (Exodus 15:3). In 1 Sam. God orders
Saul to attack the Amalekites and "utterly destroy all that
they have; do not spare them, but kill both man and woman,
child and infant, ox and sheep, camel and donkey." A simi-
lar fate was ordered for Achan, his wife and children and
their children. (Josh. 6:21)"
Folks, the world didn't change on 9/11. Nothing changed
in China, or India, or Africa, or S. America. Nothing really
changed in the Israel/Palestine conflict, or the Kashmir
stand-off between India and Pakistan. What changed was
our awareness of the world, our recognition of hatred
against us (not entirely unearned), and our feeling of
vulnerability. Our fear made us over-react, just as bin
Laden expected and planned. "This battle is not between
al Qaida and the U. S.," he said, This is a battle of Mus-
lims against the global Crusaders." He wants it to be, and
sees it as, a cosmic war. RA's answer to how do you win
a cosmic war? Don't fight it! Deal patiently and intelli-
gently with the real issues that divide us. This not a
"clash of civilizations." That's hogwash, and he explains
why. Military force is necessary to protect us, but it
cannot solve the specific issues we have in various parts
of the world. We can't make friends by killing children,
said Pres. Karzai of Afghanistan the other day. It can't
be done! Or by terrorizing Pakistanis with our drones
that strike without warning both friend and foe.
I urge you to read Aslan's book. Here's what Bernard
Avishai, author of The Hebrew Republic said about it:
"How to Win a Cosmic War hovers confidently over a
vast historical terrain, landing where it must to explore
how common and terrible apocalytic thinking is -- how
it plagues every religious tradition, every inspired na-
tionalism, and cannot be defeated with brute force, upon
which it thrives. This is a unique primer for pragmatic
leaders whose patient enlightenment is the real antidote
to terror."
Wednesday, May 20, 2009
GREAT BOOK!
Reza Aslan, whose blockbuster book on Islam (No
God but God) has been translated into thirteen
languages has written an equally valuable analysis
of the foolishly named and foolishly fought "War on
Terror." The new book is titled How to Win a Cos-
mic War, and it's dynamite! In it he explains what
a "cosmis war" is and how it is based in misunder-
standings and wrong interpretations of the three
Bible-based monotheisms.
The author is a professor of religious studies, and
thoroughly trained in all three faiths that he dis-
cusses so ably. He skillfully reviews the histories
of these three, along with their basic teachings as
they apply to the "cosmic war" theme. Prof. Aslan
is an American Muslim, born in Iran and educated
in the U. S. (from age 10). He is fluent in Arabic
and Farsi, and at home in the Old Testament in its
original Hebrew.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)