Egypt and the Lessons of History

The resignation on Friday of Egypt's President Hosni Mubarek confirms at least three of the great lessons of history--and human behavior. Lesson the first: the forces of reaction are often at their most virulent and loudest insistence immediately before they collapse in the face of true popular sentiment. Less than a day before Mubarek officially resigned, he said he wasn't going to go--at least, not before the scheduled elections in September.

This leads directly to point the second: people in the know should keep their mouths shut. CIA Director Leon Panetta told a Congressional committee on Thursday that Mubarek would be leaving on Thursday night. In his speech Thursday night, as has been noted, Mubarek said he was not going. I suspect Mubarek's original plan was to announce his resignation on Thursday night, but once the word got out about Panetta's testimony, Mubarek decided he did not want to leave with even a whiff of a hint that he was going at the behest of the United States. I'm willing to bet (and I do not gamble) that Mubarek would confirm, if asked, that if Panetta had kept his mouth shut, Mubarek would in fact have announced his resignation on Thursday night, instead of denying it Thursday and waiting until Friday to make it. The man held a lot of power for a long time; he has his pride. I do not have to agree with him or with his policies to understand why he'd not want to be seen as jumping instantly on the heels of some American governmental official saying "jump."

Point the third: supporting dictators who are friendly to American foreign policy objectives, just because they are friendly to American foreign policy objectives, is NOT a wise idea. That the "Egyptian Revolution" has so far been mostly peaceful is more a matter of luck than design, for we weren't so much supportive of Mubarek as we were of Egypt's peaceful coexistence with Israel. We've been giving Egypt a lot of foreign and military aid and training (as has much of western Europe) in exchange for Egypt's maintaining the peace treaty with Israel--which came in under Anwar Sadat. Mubarek, of course, took power upon Sadat's assassination, and it's lucky for us that he saw the wisdom in Sadat's having signed the peace treaty in the first place.

To say that this change in Egypt is bad for America is to make many unwarranted assumptions, and even to fly in the face of America's long-term and oft-stated foreign policy goal of making real representative democracy the world-wide norm for governments. One of the things the radical right never seems to grasp is that genuine representative democracy is not ONLY for "people who think like we do and who agree with us." The radical right usually expresses itself on this score by telling capital-D Democrats to "love it or leave it" (or whatever the 21st century equivalent of that sentiment is). What the radial right doesn't seem to understand is that true representative democracy is risky--because it means that there's a real chance that people who DON'T think "just like us" can come to power. The beauty of real, American-style representative democracy is that EVERYBODY involved, even those who don't "think just like us" agrees that the system works, and that even when out of power, those who don't "think like us" still participate, that elections are held regularly, and that transitions of power are peaceful . . . and that the pendulum will swing in both directions as long as we all agree that the system works and that we ALL have a vital interest in maintaining the system. After all, "We the People" ARE the government in this system, and if a genuine majority says it wants something, it should have it.

I wish Egypt well. Recent events there and in Tunisia may mark the beginning of something wonderful for the entire world.

OMG Moments of the Week

FREE hit counter and Internet traffic statistics from freestats.com

From the ridiculous to the sublime:

OMG moment the first (the ridiculous): Mattel, for a few decades now, has made and marketed a series of dolls based on the popular (to pre-teen girls, anyway) "American Girl" series. Fair enough. But within the past week or so, Mattel made a HUGE mistake, because it has put itself in a no-win situation. It has released for sale one "Gwen," the latest American Girl . . . and she's homeless.

Mattel says the doll will teach "valuable lessons about life." Given the general response, I beg to differ. The doll costs $95, an irony apparently completely lost on Mattel. Advocates for the homeless and for battered women are offended by the concept of a company making profit off the worst miseries of others. And the girls to whom the doll is marketed have totally missed Mattel's putative point. On the American Girl website, the girls are posting complaints that Gwen doesn't have accessories or other outfits.

OMG!!!!!

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

OMG moment the second (the sublime): I awoke this morning to the news that President Obama has been awarded this year's Nobel Peace Prize, largely for the change in tone he has bought to world affairs, his focus on engagement, consensus, and getting rid of nuclear weapons. He's the 4th American president to be given the award (and the 3rd to receive it while still in office). The Nobel Committee has acknowledged that the award this year is based more on aspirations than on actual accomplishments, but it's their award, and they can give it to whomever they please.

It was a total shock, however, given the list of other worthy candidates, such as past winner Aung San Suu Kyi, who has been using the power of the bully pulpit for decades now to encourage a peaceful change in government in Burma (Myanmar) despite being kept under "house arrest" for virtually all that time.

My own OMG reaction was surprised delight. Even if reactionary forces here are driven to cheering when America gets an international rebuff, such as losing the bid for Chicago to host the 2016 Summer Olympics, and even if this brings still more howls of outrage from the self-emaciated Right, it's a huge win for America and the world-wide understanding of what America offers and can be when at her best. It's not a personal triumph for Obama, though he can rightly take pride in it. The Right will try to cast it as another loss for Obama, however, probably claiming that it shows how he kowtows to others in the world. If it weren't so sad, I'd laugh out loud. The ONLY people in the whole world who do NOT get what America is really about are those on the far Right, who claim to be the only ones who DO get it.

OMG!!!!!

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

OMG moment the third (sublimely ridiculous): I should have bought a PowerBall ticket last night. Every channel change I made while surfing cable TV sports events last night was at the absolutely perfect moment. I switched to the Dodgers game just as they started their improbable, bottom-of-the-ninth-with-two-out comeback victory over the Cardinals. I then bounced mostly between the Red Sox-Angels game and the Nebraska-Missouri football game. I was back to baseball just as Torii Hunter hit his three-run homer that gave the Angels the lead, and ultimately a 5-0 win; I saw a couple of really bad NU plays during the football game (like the safety and the defense yet again giving up a huge gain on a deep pass), but I came back to football just as NU took control of the game in the 4th quarter, on its way to a 27-12 win.

OMG!!!!!

Technology Is Wonderful--When It Works

FREE hit counter and Internet traffic statistics from freestats.com

The crash of the Air France Airbus A300 into the Atlantic Ocean off the coast of Brazil is at once a tragedy, a farce, and a mystery. A tragedy because of the loss of life. A farce because of the initial, erroneous reports by the Brazilian military of wreckage found and the general incompetence of the investigation until the past day or so. I am relieved that both the US and French navies have been asked to get involved in the hunt for the plane's black boxes.

A mystery? Not just because of the missing black boxes, thereby leaving investigators groping around for the reason(s) the plane crashed. But also because, for the life of me, I cannot understand why anyone would use the Airbus's "fly-by-wire" technology. You sure won't catch me flying in a plane that uses it.

Fly-by-wire systems make the pilot rely on sensors and computers instead of his/her own "feel" to fly the plane. If the sensors and computers conk out or give conflicting readings, the pilot has no way to control the plane. S/he cannot "feel" the plane through the stick. It's not unlike the difference between a car with an automatic transmission and power steering, and a car with a stick shift. If the automatic transmission and/or the power steering goes out, most drivers would be totally at the mercy of gravity and inertia. But with a stick shift, even if the clutch dies, drivers can still control enough of the vehicle's operating systems to bring the car to a safe, controlled stop.

So far, the scanty corroborated evidence in the Air France crash suggests that the computers and sensors got "confused" due to the extreme weather conditions in which the plane was flying. The scenario currently entertained is that the plane's sensors were providing contradictory data, which froze the computers, which kept the pilot from being able to control the plane, which caused the crash. Yes, it's speculative at this point, but it does fit all the facts as we know them so far.

Now, I know a few pilots (heck, I'm related to one of them). None of them likes the fly-by-wire system, period. None of them ever wants to be responsible for other lives when being forced to fly while using it.

So for me, the deeper mystery of the crash is why the heck anyone is using the fly-by-wire system in the first place. As with nearly everything else in this business-driven world, however, I suspect it has to do with the making of money at all costs, including the loss of many, many lives.

At least we can feel somewhat confident that the plane crash wasn't a terrorist act, if for no other reason than that no terrorist group has tried to "take credit" for it.

"Real" IRA? Give Me A Break!

FREE hit counter and Internet traffic statistics from freestats.com

I have listened with dismay to the news reports since Sunday of renewed violence in Northern Ireland. These acts of terrorism--let's call them what they are--are being claimed by the self-styled "Real IRA," an offshoot of the Irish Republican Army that refuses to recognize the peace accords that have been in place for a decade now.

I submit that the "IRA" in "Real IRA" actually stands for "Idiotic Republican Army." What is WRONG with these people? There is peace in Ulster for the first time in my memory, progress is being made on the political front, and these bozos are trying to muck it up.

I know. They are like spoiled 3-year-old boys who are mad that they are not the center of everyone's attention. Not unlike Kim Jung Il in North Korea. Nor any number of other idiots and petty despots all over the globe.

I hope the spokesmen in Northern Ireland and Britain who have said the peace process is too far along for these spasms of violence to derail them are correct. The last thing the world needs is more trouble.

Vanity, Vanity, It's All Insanity

(with apologies to Ecclesiastes)

The best definition of "insanity" I've ever seen is "doing the same thing over and over and over and expecting the results to change." Note that this is not a legal construct, nor a medical construct, nor a psychiatric construct--it's a real-world, practical application. And we are all insane in our own ways, about our own issues.

But what's going on in Israel and the Gaza Strip at the moment--and more importantly, the reactions to it--has to be the classic, dictionary illustration of this definition of insanity.

Israel is using military force to try to wipe out Hamas, the militant Palestinian faction legitimately voted into political power in the Gaza Strip. Hamas started the latest round of violence by shooting rockets into Israel and claiming it's all Israel's fault. The rest of the world is doing a lot of hand-wringing . . . and everyone is finding fault with the few serious attempts to broker a truce.

My biggest complaint is that those criticizing the latest negotiation efforts are claiming that we can put the details off till later--we need to stop the fighting now. They say that the negotiations cannot succeed as long as everyone tries to hammer out all the details first.

But getting a cease-fire and waiting till later to resolve the details is the very reason the fighting keeps erupting. This is truly insane. Why not try a different tack? Why not actually address the root issues for once and for all?

OK--it was a rhetorical question. I know why almost no one seriously wants to address the truly core issues. There's no money in it. The arms merchants, the extremists (on both sides), the other major political and military powers in the world--all of them have plenty of reasons to keep the conflict going, with only momentary lulls between the spasms of violence, and no real reason to cheer a true and lasting peace.

Some would lose money; some would lose power; some would lose prestige; some would lose their own raisons d'etre. The only ones who would gain anything are the bystanding victims of the violence, and those of us who think a change in the status quo would actually be a good thing.

As long as those with real power have no serious motivation to change, the violence will never end. Hell, it's been going on for over 5,000 years already. In their calculations, what's a few hundred more so long as they keep making money or holding on to their power?

I don't care what Adam Smith said about greed being a good motivator of economic (and other) behavior because in aggregate, it's filtered through so many diverse interests that it results in value-neutral societal decision-making. The facts of history and of current events plainly demonstrate Smith was wrong, wrong, wrong. We need to find another, a better, way.

Wow, Ivan! That's Terrible!

One of the first fatalities when a totalitarian government takes over is the free expression of humor. Think about it. Totalitarian governments are humorless, by definition. Not only do they have no sense of humor; they squash every attempt to get laughs that they can find. Why? Genuine humor, again by definition, is subversive. The real Adolph Hitler never would have been a great guest on, say, Saturday Night Live. The absurdity of the idea of Hitler's being such a guest, from my perspective in the here and now, is amusing, however. Hitler, not funny. Hitler, being made fun of without realizing it, very funny.

I nonetheless regard with increasing trepidation events of late in Russia. A government spokesman there recently denounced the movie Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull, asserting that its "unfortunate stereotypes" were enough to re-ignite the Cold War. The statement is absurd on its face, so it's very funny. The spokesman who said it was deadly serious, which is not in the least bit funny--it's frightening. And it speaks ill of Russia's future direction, and thus hope for world political stability. [Then again, maybe it's not so bad after all. With Boris and Natasha coming back, can Rocky and Bullwinkle be far behind?--Ed.]

If this whole thing were an Apple commercial, the US would be the Mac and Russia would be the PC. "PC's Number Two! PC's Number Two!" Only this PC has the capability of throwing nukes all over the place if its government gets its collective knickers in enough of a twist. Oh, I am mixing my similes and metaphors, aren't I? Well, it's late, I'm tired, and my synapses make extra silly connections under such circumstances.

I wouldn't last long under a totalitarian regime. I cannot live without air, water, and food. I cannot live well without humor.

Praise The Lord! They Aren't Passing The Ammunition!

Sinn Fein, the political arm of the Irish Republican Army, has abandoned its opposition to cooperating with the Northern Ireland (British) police. Gerry Adams, President of Sinn Fein, has thus accomplished something miraculous--moving the IRA toward compromise on the issues facing the putatively British province of Northern Ireland. Lasting peace may be at hand.

I don't doubt that the republicans' abandonment of the idea of making Northern Ireland part of the Irish Republic by force had a lot to do with the increasingly bad press given to any so-called "freedom fighters." After all, one man's freedom fighter is just another man's terrorist. I'm sure the IRA is perfectly happy to let Muslims around the world wear the mantle "terrorists" all alone.

But this is truly an important step forward. Despite the beatings that many IRA members received over the years at the hands of the mostly Protestant Northern Ireland police force, and despite the long prison sentences many of them suffered for their violent opposition to same, the IRA officially embraces peace.

Maybe there is some hope for the world after all. I will hold onto this the next time I begin to believe that the whole world is going to Hell. Hope does spring eternal.

Any bets on whether Gerry Adams gets beatified by the Pope sometime after his death?

Maybe Ritual Idioting IS Just For Cricket Players After All

I was half-asleep when I heard this report on NPR, so if I get any of the information wrong, please tell me!

In a recent test between England and Pakistan (which England had already won, but you have to play out the string), an umpire named Hair (Hare? spelling was not specified) was of the opinion that the Pakistanis had somehow doctored the ball. In protest, the Pakistanis refused to come out to play the next game. So the umpire went on to declare a forfeit.

The cricket players of all South Asian countries have had a feud of sorts with this umpire for a long time, apparently--they collectively are of the opinion that he lacks respect for them and the high quality of their play--and so several Indian newspapers had a lot of fun with the headlines for articles reporting this most recent incident ("Bad Hair Day," "Hare-Brained" being amongst the best puns).

The Pakistanis are also saying the umpire was too quick to declare the forfeit, as they were just going to come out late as a protest of his previous ruling about the state of the ball.

Does the term "tempest in a teapot" occur to anyone but me? If the outcome of the entire match were in doubt, this protest would be worth a lot more, but still . . . far be it from me to chastise anyone who wishes to protest "on the principle of the thing." I am one for whom principles matter. So I say to the Pakistani team, right on!

It does seem odd that this news was reported so soon after my last posting. Doubtless, it's merely coincidental . . . but then again, the Lord moves in mysterious ways!

Phil Collins Was Right

OK, so it was Genesis, not Phil Collins alone. But he/they was/were right: it is no fun being an illegal alien.

I confess to being totally in knots over the latest immigration proposals before Congress. As a matter of simple human decency, it's wrong to make felons out of both people who come to America to improve their circumstances and people who help illegal immigrants once they are here. However, if illegal immigrants are given guest worker status, they'll become a permanent economic underclass which business interests can exploit to drive down wages and benefits for citizens, undercut the power of labor unions to protect their members, and generally otherwise wreak havoc on everyone who is a worker bee and not an owner bee.

"Them what has, gets--and the rest of us gets screwed."

On the other other [yes, I meant to repeat that--Ed.] hand, I can also see the country coming apart at the seams, as more and more people come here for better money than they can earn at home, but who have no interest or stake in perpetuating the idea of "America." Is it fear of being discovered as illegal that keeps these immigrant communities so insular? Or is it lack of interest in making even a token effort to learn some American English? Or is it just plain bad manners--the scourge that seems to be afflicting every society on Earth right now?

I just do not know, and I am distressed. I do not like sitting on fences--for one thing, doing so is most uncomfortable--but I dislike the terrain on either side I'd land on if I were to come down. So, my readership, assuming you are out there, help me out. Post comments. Give me some insight, a fresh way of evaluating the situation, so that I can live with the results of getting off the fence. I'm counting on your individual and collective brilliance to show me the way.