ELITIST |
Say it loud - I'm elitist and proud
Name: David Morgan
Front page
More Blogs:
|
Saturday, July 26, 2003
Posted
4:51 PM
by David Morgan
Tuesday, July 22, 2003
Posted
11:13 AM
by David Morgan
Saturday, July 19, 2003
Posted
9:21 AM
by David Morgan
Posted
9:12 AM
by David Morgan
Tuesday, July 15, 2003
Posted
5:30 PM
by David Morgan
Thursday, July 10, 2003
Posted
10:21 AM
by David Morgan
Playing for $64,000, Mr McBrien, wrongly according to the network, said that five justices sat on a full bench of the High Court of Australia. The correct answer, host Eddie McGuire told him, was seven. But news of Mr McBrien's $32,000 loss has reached Australia's highest court and the ears of Chief Justice Murray Gleeson. The Australian understands the Chief Justice, who did not see the program, reckons Who Wants To Be a Millionaire got it wrong. There was a disputed question not long ago regarding the flag of Rwanda - the losing contestant was invited back to continue where he'd left off. Doesn't look like it's going to happen in this case. Tuesday, July 08, 2003
Posted
1:36 PM
by David Morgan
Thursday, July 03, 2003
Posted
5:16 PM
by David Morgan
Thursday, June 26, 2003
Posted
5:31 AM
by David Morgan
"For many years I have read the NI with respect. Many an article I have written, and film I have made, have had their roots in something I have read in the NI." As the ad points out: It can be pretty difficult when your colleague Kylie says: "I don't like what the Government is doing with refugee policy. But there's doesn't seem to be any alternative to a tough line on border protection." If only Kylie could have read the NI magazine article that set the whole issue in the global context, so that she would better understand the humanity of the situation. Then she'd know that other countries manage hundreds of thoudsands of refugees without indefinite detention. In the meantime poor Kylie relies on the shock-jocks for formulating her point of view. Well, what else can you expect from that Kylie? What a bogan. Kath and Kim are surely far harder to manipulate. As it happens, I'm in favour of open borders too - though I suspect NI would be shocked at the 'free-trade' implications of such an attitude! And while the world refugee problem is huge, our share of it is pretty minuscule. Why get worked up over a few illegals? Wednesday, June 18, 2003
Posted
11:17 AM
by David Morgan
Noela was born in 1925, and grew up in Fairlight on Sydney's northern beaches. Monday, May 05, 2003
Posted
2:51 PM
by David Morgan
Australia, she claims, is seen [in Asia] as a second-rate Western country still tainted by memories of the White Australia policy, lacking culture and history, racist, inept in negotiation and image-promotion, "large, lucky and lazy"... In other words, We Brought it on Ourselves. I agree we've done a poor job in negotiation and image promotion. But when negative stereotypes lead to acts of terrorism, that sounds a lot like...racism. And not ours.
Posted
9:17 AM
by David Morgan
There are two approaches to history. One is the studious, respectful approach, in which history is consumed in any one of a number of ways: reading books, attending lectures, undertaking research. The other is the American approach - in which history is completely ignored. That way yesterday's hero (Osama, Saddam, etc) can become today's villain. And then there's the Sasha Molitorisz approach: 'The Yanks are bad. The Yanks are bad, mmmkay?' Thursday, May 01, 2003
Posted
6:15 PM
by David Morgan
Tuesday, April 29, 2003
Posted
11:32 PM
by David Morgan
A careful consideration of these accounts and figures leaves no room for doubt: they were indisputably migrainous, and they illustrate, indeed, many of the varieties of visual aura [associated with migraines]. But Sacks does not dismiss these visions as mere delusions: Invested with this sense of ecstacy, burning with profound theophorous and philosophical significance, Hildegard's visions were instrumental in directing her towards a life of holiness and mysticism. They provide a unique example of the manner in which a physiological event, banal, hateful or meaningless to the vast majority of people, can become, in a privileged consciousness, the substrate of supreme ecstatic inspiration. Was Hildegard merely deluded? Saturday, April 26, 2003
Posted
9:24 AM
by David Morgan
How can we have clean hands when our wealth is built on the merciless exploitation of others? If you want to know why people in poor countries want to blow us up, look no further. Depressing, shameful, essential viewing. Glass of water for Mr Knox, please. That's not to say parts of it weren't bizarre. Those who wanted to work for an American company, and had to learn to talk American, were lectured to by a Scotsman with a not-very-convincing fake American accent. And they learnt about Australian culture by watching The Castle. An Indian who had lived in Australia told them Australians weren't corrupt, and any corruption there was all the fault of the Chinese and Lebanese. He obviously can't have lived in NSW. But instead of complaining about western companies exploiting Indians, why not ask why India can produce so many smart, well-educated, hard-working people, and not find better jobs for them? It may have someting to do with the fact - dealt with in Diverted to Delhi - that customer service has until recently not been a way of life in India, where civil service attitudes persist. One of the things the students had to learn was how to make on-the-spot decisions - instead of having the attitude that, if there isn't a rule for it, it can't be done. If you think Australian banks act like they're doing you a favour, what about the Indian bank that won't accept cash deposits unless they're bundled up properly? Saturday, April 19, 2003
Posted
8:27 PM
by David Morgan
Friday, April 04, 2003
Posted
9:46 PM
by David Morgan
Tuesday, April 01, 2003
Posted
11:29 PM
by David Morgan
Sunday, March 30, 2003
Posted
8:12 AM
by David Morgan
Smashed...eight stained glass windows of St Andrew's Cathedral at Town Hall Square must be replaced after damage caused during Wednesday's anti-war rally. The verger of St. Andrews, Rick Filmer, who estimates the cost of the damage at about $6000, was pelted with stones and verbally harassed by a group of teenage boys who apparently mistook the cathedral for a synagogue. The cathedral's 150-year-old carved pulpit was splashed with pink paint during the protest.Where did they get stones? Town Hall Square is paved with pebblecrete. UPDATE, TUESDAY, APRIL 1: As I'm a volunteer at the City of Sydney History Program, I needed to get details of the Public Liability Insurance arrangements for people working for the Council. Today I called the Council's Risk Manager, but he wouldn't give them to me - I had to get my supervisor to ask for them. She did, and he emailed back the reason why: he'd been getting some 'strange phone calls' from people asking about the Council's insurance, and he'd become 'gun-shy' after last week's riot. (He described me as 'a person claiming to be a volunteer working for the Council'.) Also today, I saw the barriers being put up in Town Hall Square for another rally tomorrow. This time they won't get near the cafe chairs. Tuesday, March 25, 2003
Posted
8:10 AM
by David Morgan
'...it's just tragic that the United States is led by such an inarticulate and intellectually confused and unattractive figure who personally makes me cringe -- other people should be standing up and trying to fight for issues of humanitarianism and social solidarity, of women's rights and liberal freedoms. Monday, March 24, 2003
Posted
9:29 PM
by David Morgan
Subject: FW: in case you're interested... Q & A on Iraq Q. Why? A. Because it has economic, legal and political systems conducive to the creation of wealth. Q: Which country has the largest oil reserves?Q. Who now controls these reserves? A. Saddam Hussein Q: How much is spent on military budgets a year worldwide?Q. Why? A. Partly because of all those people who want to attack the US, and partly because of all those people who want the US's help when someone attacks them. Q: What percent of US military spending would ensure the essentials of life to everyone in the world, according to the United Nations? Q. Why might very little of this money reach the people who needed it? A. Diversion by corrupt governments (e.g. Iraq and the Oil-for-Food Program). Q: How many people have died in wars since World War II?Q. Which country helped Iraq with its nuclear program? A. France. Q. Which country recently invaded the Ivory Coast? A. France. Q. Which country has the most alienated Muslim population in Western Europe? A. France. Q: Did the US government condemn the Iraqi use of gas warfare against Iran?Q. What had the Ayatollah Khomeini, Iran's spiritual leader, called America several years before? A. 'The Great Satan.' Iran then proceeded to take US embassy staff in Teheran hostage for more than a year. US-Iran relations became a bit frosty after that. Q: How many people did Saddam Hussein kill using gas in the Kurdish town of Halabja in 1988?Q. How many Vietnamese now live in the US? A. 1.1 million. Q. How many Vietnamese now live in Australia? A. 150,000. Q. What proportion of these were escaping the regime which 'liberated' South Vietnam in 1975? A. 100%. Q: Are there any proven links between Iraq and Sept. 11 terrorist attack?Q. Why would post-Sept. 11 links between Iraq and Al-Qaeda make sense? A. On the principle that 'My enemy's enemy is my friend' (or 'They're using us but we're using them'). Weapons of mass destruction could be developed in Iraq and delivered to Western targets by Al-Qaeda. Q: What is the estimated number of civilian casualties in the Gulf War? Q. Who started this war? A. Saddam Hussein. Q : How many casualties did the Iraqi military inflict on the WesternQ. How many surrendered without firing a shot and were well treated? A. 87,000 Q: How many tons of depleted uranium were left in Iraq and Kuwait after the Gulf War?Q. Was there any proof (i.e. a signed order) that Hitler planned the Holocaust? A. No. Q. Did he do it? A. Yes. Q: Does Iraq present more of a threat to world peace now than 10 years ago?Q. What is the origin of the expression 'human shields'? A. Foreigners forcibly kept in Iraq during Saddam's 1990 invasion of Kuwait as insurance. Q: How many years has the US engaged in air strikes on Iraq? Q. Why? A. It was enforcing UN Security Council resolutions calling on the Iraqis to cease persecution of the Kurdish minority in the north and the marsh Arabs in the south. Q: Were the United States and the United Kingdom at war with Iraq between December 1998 and September 1999? Q. If there is no war, and no imposition of sanctions, what else can be used to enforce UN resolutions? A. Nothing. Q: How many Iraqi children are estimated to have died due to sanctions since 1997? Q. Have mass baby funerals been faked for the Western media? A. Yes. Q: Did Saddam order the inspectors out of Iraq? Q. Did he co-operate fully with them? A. No. Q: How many inspections were there in November and December 1998? Q. What else is Scott Ritter now known for? A. This. Q: In 1998 how much of Iraq's post-1991 capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction did the UN weapons inspectors claim to have discovered and dismantled? Q. Which country now chairs the UN's Human Rights Commission? A. Libya. Q: How many countries are known to have nuclear weapons? Q. Is Iraq still capable of building them? A. Yes. Q: How many nuclear warheads has the United States got? Q. Why? A. Because Japan attempted an invasion of the US. The attack on Pearl Harbor (1941) was the first step in this, to knock out the US Pacific Fleet. By then, Japan had already been invading China for 4 years. Total Chinese dead in the war against Japan (1937-45): 16,000,000. Total Filipino dead (1941-45): 1,000,000 (in case 'Philippine Daily Inquirer columnist, Conrado de Quiros' is interested). When the war was clearly lost, Japan's leadership nevertheless insisted on suicidal, kamikaze-style defence of the islands of Iwo Jima and Okinawa, convincing the US leadership that the battle for Japan's home islands would be equally bitter. Only after the second atomic bomb did Japan finally surrender. Q: How many nuclear warheads does Israel have? Q. Why? A. Surrounding Arab states who wanted to 'drive the Jews into the sea.' Q. How many Arab members does the Israeli Knesset (Parliament) have? A. 8. Q. What are the 'Protocols of the Elders of Zion'? A. An anti-semitic forgery originating in 19th-century tsarist Russia that invented a secret cabal of Jews plotting to take over the world. Q. Where are they quoted? A. In much official Arab propaganda, and the Charter of the Palestinian organisation Hamas. Q: Who said, "Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter"? Q. Who said, 'If the anti-war movement dissuades the US and its allies from going to war with Iraq, it will have contributed to the peace of the dead. Saddam Hussein will emerge victorious and ever more defiant.' A. Jose Ramos Horta, 1998 Nobel Peace Prize Laureate. Q. Who said, 'If we should fail, then the whole world, including the United States, including all that we have known and care for, will sink into the abyss of a new dark age'? A. Winston Churchill in 1940. Q. Who was he talking to? A. Defeatists in Britain and isolationists in America who thought 'Hitler's not our enemy.' Tuesday, March 18, 2003
Posted
8:28 PM
by David Morgan
Wednesday, March 12, 2003
Posted
8:56 AM
by David Morgan
Posted
8:54 AM
by David Morgan
Posted
8:50 AM
by David Morgan
Tuesday, February 18, 2003
Posted
9:55 PM
by David Morgan
Monday, February 17, 2003
Posted
2:25 PM
by David Morgan
Sunday, February 16, 2003
Posted
3:00 PM
by David Morgan
Thursday, February 06, 2003
Posted
4:05 PM
by David Morgan
Wednesday, January 29, 2003
Posted
9:16 AM
by David Morgan
Tuesday, January 21, 2003
Posted
9:20 PM
by David Morgan
...the affinity the Workers Party showed for Mr. Bové also rankled because he is one of the European Union's most outspoken supporters of restrictions on agricultural imports. Rio Grande do Sul is a major exporter of meat and grain that wants those barriers removed. Monday, January 13, 2003
Posted
12:27 PM
by David Morgan
Sunday, January 12, 2003
Posted
1:49 PM
by David Morgan
Used variously to hint at resentment, dismay, sometimes wonder and even admiration, it not only separates the speaker from the perpetrators of whatever it is They do, but also implies that they are almost another order of beings, inhabiting another world beyond our control. Recourse to the term suggests passivity in the speaker, as though he and his intended audience are mere onlookers to the march of history...Apply this to the actions of your government. Even if you voted for it, do you think it acts in your name? When it acts, do you think 'THEY are doing this', or 'WE are doing this'?
Posted
12:17 PM
by David Morgan
When I first came to Australia in the 1980s the national sense of humour was less developed than now. Scarcely had I settled in my taxi at Perth airport than my driver offered, unsolicited, the following joke: ‘Mate, what’s the difference between a roo lying dead at the side of the road and an abo lying dead at the side of the road?’ ‘Er, I don’t know,’ I replied. ‘There are skid marks in front of the roo.’ Now, the Indigenous Peoples are revered, respected, fêted in an orgy of post-colonial guilt.Ah, taxi drivers: the ultimate crutch for bad journalists trying to get a local feel. In the Australian Museum in Sydney, on the way in to an exhibition of the life and culture of the Indigenous Peoples, a notice solemnly proclaims that if any visiting Indigenous Person should be offended by any sight or sound in the exhibition, he or she should make the offence known to the staff, who (presumably) will remove the offending object or silence the offending sound.This sounds like the ABC's warning that a program may contain images of people who have died, which is offensive to some Aboriginal people; yet another example, not of PC, but CP: common politeness. Australia loves laws and regulations — funny, when you consider how this place started...Ugh, here we go again: convicts explain everything. (And, in any case, the life of a convict was nothing BUT laws and regulations.) ...and so when I got to Sydney and saw a sign ordering ‘Don’t be a Tosser’, I wondered what rule I would have to break to be so condemned. Happily, as a non-smoker, I was safe: it was about the evil of chucking fag ends in the gutter because they end up in the water supply. (Don’t ask me how: I’ve yet to see one coming out of the tap in my hotel bathroom.)No, Simon, they just end up in Sydney Harbour and on the beaches. The Australian Broadcasting Corporation’s television channel is wonderfully Anglocentric, smelling of the era of Robert Menzies, Chips Rafferty and Don Bradman...Better still, it seems every night to show two or three proper British films between about midnight and 5 a.m., perfect for expat film buffs with hopeless jet lag. By ‘proper’ I mean they are in black-and-white, made in the reign of King George VI, and full of people who dress correctly and speak comprehensible English.As it happens, I love the golden years of British film as well. But that period ran from about 1942 to 1960, while most of the films that appear on the endless loop the ABC runs (the same ones show up every three months or so) seem to come from the 1930s 'Quota Quickies' period. There's little of the Archers beyond a few favourites, and no Alexander Korda, Ealing or early Hitchcock. One reason for my trip was to watch cricket here [Sydney] and at Melbourne. This aspect was something of a disappointment. I don’t say that because Australia retained the Ashes — good luck to them — but because of their most surprising achievement: the Americanisation of cricket.NOW he notices?? It's been going on since 1977. We may not be very original, but we only copy from the best. If commercial vulgarisation was required to save cricket - and it was - of course we were going to copy the Americans. But when we decided we wanted decent coffee, we showed good sense and copied the Italians instead. Thursday, January 09, 2003
Posted
8:51 PM
by David Morgan
Wednesday, January 01, 2003
Posted
8:39 AM
by David Morgan
Australia appears intent on surpassing the United States in a quest for self-control...Actually we've been looking towards America since at least 1941. It is also a product as much as a cause of the nation's confidence and competence, both of which ave become clear to the rest of the world and to anyone who follows sport, given Australian success in so many sporting arenas in the past decade. Discussing the baffling furore around Steve Waugh's future, former skipper Mark Taylor captured the essence of the modern Australian ethos: "Our cricket is run like a business now; it is utterly ruthless." The lack of sentiment over Waugh, his legendary status notwithstanding, is not baffling to Australians. Proficiency comes naturally now - welcome to the Switzerland of the south.But is any of this really new? Geoffey Blainey argued in A Shorter History of Australia (1994) that, while excellence hadn't been encouraged in industry, it was always expected in sport. There has been a lot of sentimental talk about how Australians allegedly prefer 'heroic failures' (Gallipoli and all that) to unambiguous winners. But there has never been a heroic failure captaining a losing Australian cricket team - just a failure. Bill Woodfull may not have succeeded against bodyline, but it was unsportsmanlike - he was a victim, not a failure, so it was all right. The only people who really like heroic failures are journalists, because they're usually such unheroic failures themselves. But even the Americans aren't always that efficient. I originally entered this post (and the last one) yesterday, and they were promptly chewed up by Blogger. Good thing I had copies.
Posted
8:32 AM
by David Morgan
Monday, December 16, 2002
Posted
8:55 PM
by David Morgan
A number of writers, including some who should have known better, have inflated frontier death tolls well beyond safe evidence. Reynolds himself has cautioned against histories of race relations which assume "the worse, the better" [My italics.] He concludes: [Windschuttle] is probably Australia's most polemical historian since H.V. Evatt wrote Rum Rebellion...Because the stakes [regarding land rights] are high, the risk of distorted scholarship is great, both among those who seek redress for wrings committed against Aborigines and those who would deny them. I think that in several places Windschuttle goes too far, but he is right to invoke Sir Paul Hasluck, who wrote: Like the late Paul Hasluck - politician and Governor-General as well as historian - Geoffrey Bolton is a Western Australian. He's hardly a dreaded 'post-modernist' of the type Windschuttle loves to attack. Indeed, he has sometimes been bracketed with Hasluck as an exponent of the 'gentry school' of WA history. He wrote the volume of the Oxford History of Australia covering the post-World-War II period: it was appropriately called The Middle Way.
Posted
4:57 PM
by David Morgan
He sums up Windschuttle's conclusions: The conflict cannot plausibly be characterised as warfare or guerilla warfare...The Aborigines were not patriots fighting for their land but were little better than burglars and murderers. They were criminal - no more, no less... Charming.
Posted
3:34 PM
by David Morgan
Sunday, December 15, 2002
Posted
3:02 PM
by David Morgan
In the entire period from 1803 when the colonists first arrived, to 1834 when all but one family of Aborigines had been removed to Flinders Island, the British were responsible for killing only 118 of the original inhabitants. I love the 'only'. As Reynolds points out in Fate of a Free People(1995) (p. 210), the overall frontier confict death toll on both sides in Tasmania during the years 1824-31 'falls somewhere between the Korean War with 323 [Australian] fatalities and the Vietnam War with 424'. Cladio Veliz, launching Windschuttle's book, called European settlement in Australia 'a nun's picnic' compared with what went on elsewhere: This is the first major nation in the history of the world to have secured full independence and sovereignty without killing anyone.Wow: even Windschuttle doesn't claim that!
Posted
9:50 AM
by David Morgan
Monday, December 09, 2002
Posted
9:41 AM
by David Morgan
Friday, December 06, 2002
Posted
10:04 PM
by David Morgan
Posted
9:54 PM
by David Morgan
Sunday, December 01, 2002
Posted
9:54 AM
by David Morgan
"It gives Keith a free kick. It's a bad mistake and I have to acknowledge that and thank him for pointing it out. Clearly, it will have to be changed in a new edition," he said. At least he admits his mistakes. (Hello Janet?) 'Stolen generations', 'invasion', 'massacre', 'genocide', '10,000 dead', 'sorry': these are emotive terms, and one can pick holes in all of them. But what are we doing if we do that? Reynolds and others have been trying to get recognition for what was done to Aboriginal people, and to offer an explanation for why they occupy their current position in Australian society: the bottom rung. One of the key themes of Reynolds' work is that of organised Aboriginal resistance: that Aborigines did not simply give in to white domination, and that therefore the belief that the settlement of Australia was uniquely peaceful was the result of what W.E.H. Stanner called a "cult of forgetfulness practised on a national scale". There was extensive frontier resistance which deserves to be called "war". Windschuttle has spoken of "people working with the same assumptions, methods and objectives" inevitably coming up with the same results, all of which need to be challenged. As Reynolds describes it in his autobiography Why Weren't We Told?, his own assumption was that Aborigines were on the bottom of Australian society, economically and socially, and that there had to be a historical explanation for this. His method was simply to go back over the historical record - contemporary newspapers, books, government reports, diaries and memoirs - and report the themes that he found. His objective in all this was to explain the position of Aborigines in Australian society today. I can't help feeling that all Windschuttle's current work is an act of revenge on the leftist he once was: the author of Unemployment and editor of New Journalist back in the 70s. I’m glad he’s abandoned Marxism - I just wish Aboriginal history weren't part of his collateral damage. If it makes Keith feel any better, Green Left thought Reynolds’ last book, An Indelible Stain?, was far too timid. Thursday, November 21, 2002
Posted
1:45 PM
by David Morgan
Wednesday, November 20, 2002
Posted
9:54 PM
by David Morgan
I am not saying people deserved this appalling fate just because they loved sex, surf and sand... Then why mention it? but we must become more aware what risks come into play when so little real connection exists between us and the people of the places we love to visit. More straw: how do you know they had no connection? Not every Bali visitor wants to be insulated from the locals - who are surely part of the reason people want to go there rather than Surfer's Paradise. As a black Briton I have other questions too about our relationship with Australia and the lack of criticism of that country, its history and the thousands of Australians who flood into small, over-crowded Britain, which we are told, will sink if one more Iraqi or Kenyan enters it. Look around you; white Australians are ministers, pop stars, editors, pundits, authors, even human-rights lawyers. They have been able to get to places blacks cannot dream of...So, where are these people of massive influence when it comes to the inhumane asylum policies of their government?...Geoffrey Robertson, Patricia Hewitt, Kylie Minogue, Clive James, Pamela Anderson, where are you? Pamela Anderson? Isn't she Canadian? I suppose Yasmin assumes that anyone blonde, pneumatic and wearing a swimsuit must be Australian. Britain is apparently being 'flooded' by Or-straylians who form ghettos (like Earl's Court and the upper levels of the British arts and political establishments) and don't assimilate. We seem to be the one ethnic group in Britain not protected by the Race Relations Act. Well, I thought I'd found a scarecrow: but then she wrong-foots me and goes and writes things like 'Let's not forget our own Muslim intolerance', 'Black history should never be safe history - Africans in Britain should be discussing the part played by their ancestors in the slave trade' and 'Manipulative as she was, Hindley didn't fool me'. Pity she's still so aggressively self-righteous. Sunday, November 17, 2002
Posted
9:48 AM
by David Morgan
Biography remains a commercial enterprise. It is judged by reviewers and book sales, thereby freeing writers from the dulling grip of departmental orthodoxy. She was speaking at the launch of Queen Mary's new Centre for Editing Lives and Letters. Also involved in the launch was David 'Rudest Man in Britain' Starkey. He's clearly a very busy man: the book club of which I'm a member informs me that his latest book on the six wives of Henry VIII, which they'd promised, now won't be available till the new year. And his own website has been about to be 'relaunched shortly' for several months. He's not an idler like me, but maybe he's spreading himself too thin? Friday, October 18, 2002
Posted
5:24 PM
by David Morgan
Posted
12:32 PM
by David Morgan
Last year, his colossal popularity helped sales of history books in Britain exceed, for the first time, those of cookery books, and applications to study history at university are increasing... I can't think of better description of what historians do - or are supposed to do. Tuesday, October 15, 2002
Posted
12:22 AM
by David Morgan
Saturday, September 14, 2002
Posted
1:26 PM
by David Morgan
Well, Western civilisation produced people like Hitler, who was responsible for the deaths of six million Jews in the Holocaust, and Stalin, whose purges in the 1930s took an estimated 20 million lives. My response in today's SMH Letters: Like many who are appalled that people actually care about September 11, Tony Stephens ("Here's the view from the World Trade Centre to Bhuj", Heckler, September 13) calls for us to put it into "perspective". As Janet Jackson might say: 'What has Saladin done for me lately'? Friday, September 06, 2002
Posted
1:58 PM
by David Morgan
Were the soldiers who surrendered to the Japanese 'cowards'? Perhaps Taki (High Life, 24 August) would like to come to Australia next April 25 (Anzac Day) and tell that to the former members of the 8th Division. Thursday, September 05, 2002
Posted
12:08 PM
by David Morgan
In the fall of 1999 Amis attended a meeting in London where I spoke from the platform. The hall was one of those venues (Cooper Union, in New York, might be an analogy) where the rafters had once echoed with the rhetoric of the left. I made an allusion to past evenings with old comrades, and the audience responded with what Amis at first generously terms "affectionate laughter." But then he gives way to the self-righteousness and superficiality that let him down. Here is Amis's 'self-righteousness and superficiality': Why is it? Why is it? If Christopher had referred to his many evenings with many "an old blackshirt," the audience would have ... Well, with such an affiliation in his past, Christopher would not be Christopher-or anyone else of the slightest distinction whatsoever. Is that the difference between the little mustache and the big mustache, between Satan and Beelzebub? One elicits spontaneous fury, and the other elicits spontaneous laughter? And what kind of laughter is it? It is, of course, the laughter of universal fondness for that old, old idea about the perfect society. It is also the laughter of forgetting. It forgets the demonic energy unconsciously embedded in that hope. It forgets the Twenty Million. Hitchens responds: But we have grown up reading Solzhenitsyn, Joseph Berger, Eugenia Ginzburg, Lev Kopelev, Roy Medvedev, and many other firsthand chroniclers of the nightmare. Names like Vorkuta and Kolyma are not as familiar to most people as Treblinka or Birkenau, but the word "gulag" (one of the many hateful acronyms of the system) does duty for the whole, and is known to everybody. Amis appears to deny this when he says that a general recognition of the toll of Stalinist slavery and murder "hasn't happened," and that "in the general consciousness the Russian dead sleep on." He should have hesitated longer before taking the whole weight of responsibility for this memory, and our memory, on his shoulders... But who knows about the Gulag, other than the word itself? I'd read some of Solzhenitsyn, but I'd never heard of Yezhov until I read Alan Bullock's Hitler and Stalin: Parallel Lives. If they were questions on Who Wants to be a Millionaire, Adolf Hitler would be a $500 question, while Stalin would be up around $32,000 or more. Yezhov would be $500,000. Hollywood has dealt with the Nazi Holocaust, but Stalin's terror remains largely untouched. It was in the background of Dr Zhivago, and rather more prominent in Enemy at the Gates, but both of these were primarily about Russia at war. The Gulag has no Schindler's List. Amis says he doesn't wish that World War II had gone the other way, which is good of him (though there were many Ukrainians and Russians who took their anti-Stalinism to the extent of enlistment on the Nazi side). However, it would be nice to know if he wishes that the Russian civil war, and the wars of intervention, had gone the other way. There are some reasons to think that had that been the case, the common word for fascism would have been a Russian one, not an Italian one. The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion was brought to the West by the White emigration; even Boris Pasternak, in Doctor Zhivago, wrote with a shudder about life in the White-dominated regions. Major General William Graves, who commanded the American Expeditionary Force during the 1918 invasion of Siberia (an event thoroughly airbrushed from all American textbooks), wrote in his memoirs about the pervasive, lethal anti-Semitism that dominated the Russian right wing and added, "I doubt if history will show any country in the world during the last fifty years where murder could be committed so safely, and with less danger of punishment, than in Siberia during the reign of Admiral Kolchak." Thus "the collapse in the value of human life," as Amis describes the situation in post-revolutionary Russia, had begun some time before, perhaps in the marshes of Tannenberg, and was to make itself felt in other post-World War I societies as well. Let's engage in some Niall Ferguson-style virtual history: what if Aleksandr Kerensky - leader of the Provisional Government which actually overthrew the Czar - had had Lenin arrested and shot on arrival at the Finland Station in St Petersburg in 1917? Russian involvement in World War I would have continued, with hundreds of thousands more Russian lives being lost. But once the Germans had surrendered, Kerensky would have had the chance to build a stable government - though he would still have had a civil war on his hands, and, undoubtedly, a lot of blood on them as well. The lack of a Bolshevik government in Russia would have meant there was no example to hearten Communists in the rest of the world, or to serve as a bogeyman to rouse Fascists - indeed, would Fascism even have existed if not for Bolshevism? No Lenin, no Stalin. No Stalin, no Hitler. No Hitler, no World War II. No World War II, no Nazi Holocaust and, possibly, no nuclear weapons. This outcome would certainly have been better for the rest of world, and it's hard to see how it could have been worse for Russia. As the old man, about to be stoned to death in Monty Python's Life of Brian, cried: 'Worse? How could it be worse?!' Hitchens concludes with a spray at everyone who's anti-communist: Writing toward the very end of his life, a life that had included surprising Stalin himself by a refusal to confess, and the authorship of a novel—The Case of Comrade Tulayev—that somewhat anticipated Darkness at Noon, Victor Serge could still speak a bit defensively about the bankruptcy of socialism in the "midnight of the century" represented by the Hitler-Stalin pact. But he added,Have you forgotten the other bankruptcies? What was Christianity doing in the various catastrophes of society? What became of Liberalism? What has Conservatism produced, in either its enlightened or its reactionary form? ... If we are indeed honestly to weigh out the bankruptcies of ideology, we shall have a long task ahead of us. Well, the Western countries (home to all of the strains of ideology Serge mentions) helped to defeat Fascism, stood firm against Soviet Communism, and have made themselves into the kind of countries everyone wants to emigrate to. Hitchens himself migrated from one Western country to another, undoubtedly the most 'Western' of all. But after all the above, I nevertheless agree with his conclusion: Be very choosy about what kind of anti-communist you are. Wednesday, September 04, 2002
Posted
10:00 AM
by David Morgan
Saturday, August 17, 2002
Posted
4:10 PM
by David Morgan
Since Napoleon's invasion at the end of the previous century Egypt could look back upon hardly anything but defeat and humiliation at the hands of the Christians. At the first sign of trouble British and French warships were sure to appear at Alexandria, and the possibility of outright invasion was always in the air...Even as early as 1868...even in the depths of the Sudan, the Franks (a term that applied to other Europeans besides Frenchmen) were detested, and in the years that had elapsed since then this xenophobia had increased. It had been kept underground, its spirit had faltered because of the natural lethargy of the Middle East, but still it continued to expand. Sound familiar? But I don't know about 'the natural lethargy of the Middle East' - when it comes to Middle East politics, some lethargy might be a good thing. Thursday, July 04, 2002
Posted
6:15 AM
by David Morgan
Tuesday, July 02, 2002
Posted
10:05 AM
by David Morgan
To put my position seriously, once more. Any political death threat, whether or not there is any intention of carrying out, is an attack on democracy, and should be condemned unequivocally. OK, let's be serious. [Groan.] Certainly, if such things are said in political debate, they damage democracy. The fact that they were said at the Cambridge Union sounds impressive - after all, its Oxford equivalent is one of the world's great debating societies. But look at their events last term: a whisky tasting, a Ben & Jerry's Ice Cream tasting, a ball dress sale, and as keynote speaker in Week 4, Ulrika Jonsson, former Good Morning Britain weathergirl and recent Kumars at Number 42 guest. This is The Great and The Good? Sunday, June 30, 2002
Posted
4:55 PM
by David Morgan
Friday, June 28, 2002
Posted
11:57 PM
by David Morgan
Thursday, June 27, 2002
Posted
10:54 PM
by David Morgan
Wednesday, June 26, 2002
Posted
9:53 AM
by David Morgan
Sunday, June 23, 2002
Posted
4:06 PM
by David Morgan
Small coffins, decorated with grisly photographs of dead babies and their ages - 'three days', 'four days', written usefully for the English-speaking media - are paraded through the streets of Baghdad on the roofs of taxis, the procession led by a throng of official mourners. Sweeney's report will be on BBC2's Correspondent program tonight. While Sweeney was in northern Iraq, 'the chairman of the Great Britain Iraq Society, Labour MP George Galloway, was in Baghdad. He popped up on Iraqi TV, saying "when I hear the word Iraq I hear someone calling my name".' Now I understand what John Malkovich was on about. Saturday, June 22, 2002
Posted
9:18 PM
by David Morgan
"Random checks or profiling aren't going to stop the determined operatives who are trained to defy visual expectations. The moment one has a fixed image, say of a man, it'll be a woman next time." Both the British "shoe bomber" Richard Reid, and the Chicago Latino al-Muhajir, bucked the expected profile of an "Islamist terrorist". She also asks how we'll know when we've won: "I appreciate the necessity for extraordinary measures in wartime," she says, "but an indefinite period of emergency measures worries me more than a list of finite military objectives. We need a clearer definition of what we're at war with." Friday, June 21, 2002
Posted
10:04 PM
by David Morgan
Posted
9:48 PM
by David Morgan
Posted
9:40 PM
by David Morgan
Wednesday, June 19, 2002
Posted
11:46 AM
by David Morgan
Tuesday, June 18, 2002
Posted
1:03 PM
by David Morgan
Posted
10:32 AM
by David Morgan
Sunday, June 16, 2002
Posted
10:10 AM
by David Morgan
Posted
9:34 AM
by David Morgan
[T]he state of history in Australia is depressing...History in the sense of our civic story and a source of national wisdom is less significant than the endless construction of specialised papers of interest to few. It's still true. There's a huge demand for Australian history. That's why Gallipoli by Les Carlyon was such a bestseller - but then he's a journalist. And, far from being a 'propagandist' or 'myth-smith', Carlyon energetically tackles many of the Gallipoli misconceptions. 'Why was there a sudden burst of writing, both fictional and scholarly, from the early 1970s?' McCalman asks. 'Because of the Australia Council grants and the "book bounty".' It might also have had something to do with the fact that writers then had something to say, and knew how to say it. Former Keating speechwriter Don Watson sums up the situation today: If only a handful of young Australians now study their own history it is possibly at least in part because our myths no longer feed them and were never real enough, or big enough, to reproduce themselves. (From his book Caledonia Australis: Scottish Highlanders on the Frontier of Australia, 1997, p. xxvii.) Jason Soon's comments about what makes a public intellectual make me wonder: where are our public historians? There's Geoffrey Blainey and...er, that's it. Compare that with Britain, where they've got Simon Schama, David Starkey, David Cannadine and Niall Ferguson all creating meaty yet popular history.
|