In a 2016 essay, the journalist Howard French wrote about the moment he convinced his bosses at the New York Times to make him the newspaper’s correspondent in Tokyo. Upon hearing the news, another Black journalist at the Times exclaimed, “Howard has reached the river!” The coverage of Ukraine shows how difficult crossing that racial boundary is, and why it’s so important to the way Americans see the world.
Alternatively you could interpret American focus on Ukraine as compared to Ethiopia and Mali as rational. For instance: Ukraine stands on the border of treaty allies in NATO, and is being invaded by a nuclear armed country which recently demanded America evacuate its military forces from Eastern Europe. So sure you could say "the US just doesn't like brown people!" and settle for that as an explanation, but I do not think it's satisfying. When we look at who receives TPS benefits the countries currently under protection are: El Salvador, Haiti, Honduras, Nepal, Myanmar, Nicaragua, Somalia, South Sudan, Sudan, Syria, Venezuela and Ukraine.
So...maybe the US isn't as 'racist' as you claim? And is not the US basically doing what liberals have constantly asked of us in foreign conflicts (in the two conflicts you're citing: Mali and Ethiopia) which is to say: staying out of them?
As for Nikole Hannah Jones, she wrote some things I agree with, but her whole "Europe isn't a continent and claiming it is is proof of racism!" rant is rather absurd and infuriating. I do not put too much stock in many of her claims.
While I, (American, Jewish and born in Palestine) and my girlfriend (not Jewish and Chinese) noticed and comment to each other that the European reaction to the Ukraine has something to do with seeing blond and blue eyed people being massacred; one does not have to draw on America’s racism or the Palestinians to understand an affinity for one’s neighbors, coreligionists and of course vivid live videos of people struggling against a predator nation. All people have a tradition of “stick to your own kind”. We are still very tribal.
There really is no connection between the 1619 project and Ukraine and Nikole Hannah-Jones is showing a certain lack of knowledge in assuming that Europe is part of Asia. By her geographical analysis Africa is also connected to Asia. It just muddies the water. The problem here is how to stop Putin not racism.
The motion was: "Hollywood has Fueled Anti-Americanism Abroad."
When I first heard that they were going to debate this motion, as someone who has spent decades living abroad, it got me thinking:
- On the "pro" side, I would note the cultural influence of Hollywood that overwhelms local film industries abroad that can't compete with Hollywood because they don't have the same kind of resources, and so moviegoers are presented with a dominant American point of view, and this does result in some anti-American resentment.
- On the "con" side, I would note especially that moment in 2003 when Michael Moore stood up at the Oscars and declared "shame on you" to President Bush. This was a great boost for America's image abroad, coming straight from Hollywood's most prominent stage. And on this same side are other Hollywood stars who publicly criticize American foreign and domestic policy, who by doing so make America more sympathetic to people abroad.
But then I started listening to the debate, and the first speaker for the motion took a line just like James Burnham and said, "we all know that Hollywood in its current incarnation, uh, boasts a, a large quotient of anti-Americanism. Uh, the names Matt Damon, George Clooney, Alec Baldwin, Barbra Streisand, Michael Moore, Susan, Susan, Susan Sarandon – the, the list goes on and on."
These are exactly the people that I thought of as reducing anti-Americanism abroad, not fueling it! The speaker went on to talk about how Hollywood movies often depict a bad image of life in America. But as I've experienced, to the extent that's true, people abroad already agree with such negative views of what life in America is like, and when Hollywood shows it, that shows that Hollywood is being honest, thereby actually improving America's image abroad.
I was struck by a recent discussion on MSNBC concerning the lack of concern for Black refugees as opposed to White refugees. There was no mention of the great refugee tragedy in Syria. Putin bombed Syria the way he is bombing Ukraine now, killing thousands if not millions and completely destroying the ancient city of Aleppo. And what about American bombing in Afghanistan. Everyone preaches for their own racial parish. A refugee is a refugee is a refugee
Agree with all that was said. Hypocrisy has contributed to Putin’s boldness and in no small way. The US needs to address its failures upholding and defending human rights – through actions not only words. That would do much to advance peace in the US and abroad. That said, an important aspect to the scale of the response by the West is that, unlike conflicts in Africa for example, the conflict in Ukraine involves a country with the second largest military in the world and largest nuclear arsenal that poses a direct threat to citizens of the West. At the very least here will be significant economic pain. Putin arguably is also the most dangerous autocrat in the world. These aspects of the conflict do not apply to other conflicts in the world. (China’s invasion of Taiwan would obviously be an exception.) Yes, this is a great learning moment for the US and exposes our bias and hypocrisy. Unfortunately, it typically takes a crisis that may result in personal harm for people to act. It seems that is the biggest reason why the US has responded so forcefully in Ukraine and – sadly – with much less involvement and moral clarity in other conflicts at home and abroad.
"What Americans need to believe in in this moment is the principles of liberal democracy and self-determination for which Ukrainians fight."
How can an anti-Zionist blog call for Ukrainian self-determination when it spends plenty of time decrying Jewish self-determination as racist and worse?
Maybe it's time for Ukraine-Russia to just implement a one state solution. Peter seems to think it's such a good plan for Israel-Palestine.
Alternatively you could interpret American focus on Ukraine as compared to Ethiopia and Mali as rational. For instance: Ukraine stands on the border of treaty allies in NATO, and is being invaded by a nuclear armed country which recently demanded America evacuate its military forces from Eastern Europe. So sure you could say "the US just doesn't like brown people!" and settle for that as an explanation, but I do not think it's satisfying. When we look at who receives TPS benefits the countries currently under protection are: El Salvador, Haiti, Honduras, Nepal, Myanmar, Nicaragua, Somalia, South Sudan, Sudan, Syria, Venezuela and Ukraine.
So...maybe the US isn't as 'racist' as you claim? And is not the US basically doing what liberals have constantly asked of us in foreign conflicts (in the two conflicts you're citing: Mali and Ethiopia) which is to say: staying out of them?
As for Nikole Hannah Jones, she wrote some things I agree with, but her whole "Europe isn't a continent and claiming it is is proof of racism!" rant is rather absurd and infuriating. I do not put too much stock in many of her claims.
While I, (American, Jewish and born in Palestine) and my girlfriend (not Jewish and Chinese) noticed and comment to each other that the European reaction to the Ukraine has something to do with seeing blond and blue eyed people being massacred; one does not have to draw on America’s racism or the Palestinians to understand an affinity for one’s neighbors, coreligionists and of course vivid live videos of people struggling against a predator nation. All people have a tradition of “stick to your own kind”. We are still very tribal.
There really is no connection between the 1619 project and Ukraine and Nikole Hannah-Jones is showing a certain lack of knowledge in assuming that Europe is part of Asia. By her geographical analysis Africa is also connected to Asia. It just muddies the water. The problem here is how to stop Putin not racism.
Ran Kohn
On your point about MLK, that "But far from undermining American strength, King’s efforts greatly enhanced it."
I'm reminded of one of my all-time favorite Intelligence Squared US debates. Not the one that you were on, but this one from 2006:
https://www.intelligencesquaredus.org/debates/hollywood-has-fueled-anti-americanism-abroad
The motion was: "Hollywood has Fueled Anti-Americanism Abroad."
When I first heard that they were going to debate this motion, as someone who has spent decades living abroad, it got me thinking:
- On the "pro" side, I would note the cultural influence of Hollywood that overwhelms local film industries abroad that can't compete with Hollywood because they don't have the same kind of resources, and so moviegoers are presented with a dominant American point of view, and this does result in some anti-American resentment.
- On the "con" side, I would note especially that moment in 2003 when Michael Moore stood up at the Oscars and declared "shame on you" to President Bush. This was a great boost for America's image abroad, coming straight from Hollywood's most prominent stage. And on this same side are other Hollywood stars who publicly criticize American foreign and domestic policy, who by doing so make America more sympathetic to people abroad.
But then I started listening to the debate, and the first speaker for the motion took a line just like James Burnham and said, "we all know that Hollywood in its current incarnation, uh, boasts a, a large quotient of anti-Americanism. Uh, the names Matt Damon, George Clooney, Alec Baldwin, Barbra Streisand, Michael Moore, Susan, Susan, Susan Sarandon – the, the list goes on and on."
These are exactly the people that I thought of as reducing anti-Americanism abroad, not fueling it! The speaker went on to talk about how Hollywood movies often depict a bad image of life in America. But as I've experienced, to the extent that's true, people abroad already agree with such negative views of what life in America is like, and when Hollywood shows it, that shows that Hollywood is being honest, thereby actually improving America's image abroad.
I was struck by a recent discussion on MSNBC concerning the lack of concern for Black refugees as opposed to White refugees. There was no mention of the great refugee tragedy in Syria. Putin bombed Syria the way he is bombing Ukraine now, killing thousands if not millions and completely destroying the ancient city of Aleppo. And what about American bombing in Afghanistan. Everyone preaches for their own racial parish. A refugee is a refugee is a refugee
Agree with all that was said. Hypocrisy has contributed to Putin’s boldness and in no small way. The US needs to address its failures upholding and defending human rights – through actions not only words. That would do much to advance peace in the US and abroad. That said, an important aspect to the scale of the response by the West is that, unlike conflicts in Africa for example, the conflict in Ukraine involves a country with the second largest military in the world and largest nuclear arsenal that poses a direct threat to citizens of the West. At the very least here will be significant economic pain. Putin arguably is also the most dangerous autocrat in the world. These aspects of the conflict do not apply to other conflicts in the world. (China’s invasion of Taiwan would obviously be an exception.) Yes, this is a great learning moment for the US and exposes our bias and hypocrisy. Unfortunately, it typically takes a crisis that may result in personal harm for people to act. It seems that is the biggest reason why the US has responded so forcefully in Ukraine and – sadly – with much less involvement and moral clarity in other conflicts at home and abroad.
"What Americans need to believe in in this moment is the principles of liberal democracy and self-determination for which Ukrainians fight."
How can an anti-Zionist blog call for Ukrainian self-determination when it spends plenty of time decrying Jewish self-determination as racist and worse?
Maybe it's time for Ukraine-Russia to just implement a one state solution. Peter seems to think it's such a good plan for Israel-Palestine.
Hypocrisy has been a long running aspect of American politics! There is so much to improve, before we can say that the USA
is the best country in the world.
Humanity means that we help everyone in need, no matter what color or shape. We should not distinguish between who gets our
help. That is why my husband's father in the second world war said when he saved 2000 Jews in the forests that he oversaw, that
he was helping "human beings".