14 August 2004 - Saturday
The further adventures of Them
According to the Associated Press, They have some interesting opinions of Fahrenheit 9/11.
Michael Moore's "Fahrenheit 9/11" is provoking strong Arab reaction. Kuwait banned it, Jordan tried to cut it, Syria has not decided, and Saudi commentators are denouncing it. . . .Take note, conservatives: America sometimes benefits from censorship in repressive regimes, and some Arabs (understandably) view Michael Moore as a symbol of liberty. | Posted by Wilson at 13:31 Central | TrackBackFor Radwan Rizk, a 47-year-old Lebanese gym owner, the message was double-edged: Moore's presentation shook his idea of American democracy, yet reinforced it, too.
"I hope that we can come to a point where we can criticize our own governments the way he did — freely," Rizk said. . . .
Sulaiman al-Hattlan, a U.S.-educated Saudi columnist for the Al-Watan newspaper, said Moore lacked objectivity, and made too much of the U.S. Saudi relationship.
"The movie is using the Saudis as scapegoats for domestic, political issues in the U.S.," he said.
Still, al-Hattlan enjoyed "Fahrenheit 9/11."
"In every Arab country we need one Michael Moore or more," he said.
| Report submitted to the Power Desk
Regarding the "take note, conservatives" - and I'm just curious. How would you define yourself, Wilson? Are you a libertarian? Liberal? I have a hard time telling (which is probably a good thing)
The thoughts of Bill on 16 August 2004 - 16:16 Central+ + + + +
I dislike the liberal/conservative designation, because it doesn't really tell me anything. Half the time liberals are the ones fighting to keep the status quo, which nullifies the meaning of the label. I suppose I would seem liberal on some issues, but "liberals" wouldn't care to claim me on many of those issues either.
"Libertarian" works better to describe me, in any case. But libertarianism is a notoriously broad movement, with some adherents in both major parties. I know of some who will vote for Bush, some who will vote for Kerry, some who will vote for Badnarik, and some who will spoil their ballots this November.
It would be difficult for anybody to predict my opinions by reading the opinions of anybody else. I consider that a good thing. I guess the term "libertarian" is a pretty good way to explain why I take the positions I take, but it might not tell you as much about which positions I take; furthermore, my reasons for being libertarian differ from many people's.
The thoughts of Wilson on 16 August 2004 - 16:55 Central+ + + + +
Wilson, your last comment there could have easily come from Peter Saint-Andre. Maybe I have pointed him out to you before? Don't remember. Anyway, you ought to read some of his essays. I've enjoyed hearing a fresh perspective on some issues. He used to be quite active in the Denver libertarian groups (and still speaks at a few of them), but he, like you, doesn't feel that any label fits him correctly. I agree, that is a good thing.
The thoughts of eliot on 16 August 2004 - 19:41 Central+ + + + +
Labels never quite fit correctly. They do have their uses, if you want to communicate in kind of a broad-brush way what you believe. But Liberal and Conservative are too general these days. One almost has to get more specific - like "I'm a social conservative and a fiscal moderate", etc . . .
I like your definition of yourself, Wilson - I'd say that fits pretty well from what I know of you (which is, of course, not much). And I will say that you are very consistent.
+ + + + +
(You must preview your comment before posting it)
Heck, I view Michael Moore as a symbol of liberty. We've been discussing on our blog the ridiculousness of liberal/left claims of censorship and crushing of dissent in America - as if.
The thoughts of Bill on 16 August 2004 - 16:14 Central+ + + + +