Desiring Machine

Say what you will but Christopher Hitchens has always been at least entertaining. I particularly like his new pugnacity.

I wonder if he has been feeling a bit sheepish about his support of Bush and Iraq. He must not hear the end of it from all his left leaning personal friends. Perhaps not. But he does keep it real and for that I can find forgiveness no matter how tragically wrong he has been in recent years about foreign policy. I do think the tenacity in his contrarian viewpoint is genuine, even if he does see the political writing on the wall and recognizes that there will be much less airtime and honorariums for Bush war apologists.

For a very long time the notion of debate has been tainted in our popular civic culture. A seamingly common sensical but ultimately corrosive idea has dominated the popular notion of what constitutes debate. It is more often than not presented that debate is constituted through the engagement of direct and polar opposite arguments. Perhaps this view of debate stems from a hegelian dialectical intellectual tradition. The notion that progress only grows out the agonistic tension between thesis and antithesis. In the political sphere and mass media more often than not this has lead to a reactionary mode of discussion between fringe elements of the left and right that tries to pass itself off as informative to the public.

A real debate is one in which there is an oppositional tension but each side raises genuinely legitimate insights. Consensus can be built but simultaneously there are real points of difference. With a good debate the audience comes away from with a real dilemma. All sides are presented so well that coming to a single conclusion is nearly impossible.

It is in this spirit of debate that I point you to a most excellent debate between Sam Harris and Chris Hedges about religion and politics. A lot of subtle perspectives and insights are well served in this debate. Harris and Hedges have genuinely divergent points of view. I am sympathetic to Harris’ perspective, but I was equally impressed by how well Chris Hedges presents the case for religious moderation. I came away from this debate genuinely torn but equally satisfied and excited. The questions are difficult and the responses profound.

There is a reading by author David Sedaris called “Six to eight black men” that is by far my favorite thing from David’s work. It explores in a very humorous way cultural differences. And given that it centers around Christmas and the different notions of Santa Claus it precisely reveals that the experience of Christmas is not a universal phenomenon. This dramatic variance of the Santa Claus story demostrates the importance of a phrase like “happy holidays”. Nothing should be taken for granted lest we accept that American Culture is in fact a hegemonic enterprise. Which runs contrary to rich multi cultural experience we celebrate in the United States.

I found this rendention of David Sedaris’ reading on You Tube. Hope you enjoy. I laughed uncontrollably the first time I heard this. David’s comic delivery is impeccable.

I don’t profess to know much about the middle east or Iran. I am opposed to an United States protracted military engagement with Iran. However, there is something rotten in Tehran and it goes under absurd “Chastity” provisions of Sharia Law.

Take the case of Atefah Sahaaleh, a 16 year old Neka girl who was hung to death for having sex with boys, and her greatest crime being raped by a man many times her senior. Whatever you think about this, the fundamental fact remains that there is a court in Iran willing to harshly prosecute women for actions and freedoms we westerners take for granted.

Watch this documentary and hopefully like me you will come to recognize how desperately parts of the middle east need to undergo a labium revolution. And in part this is why I really think our next president should be a womann and Hillary Clinton. Because it is a female head of the American state that would be sensistive to these realities and furthermore inspire women across the middle east to assert their right to freedom and liberty in their respective societies.

And while I focus on Iran, Saudi Arabia is not much better. Here is a more humerous take on the very serious difference in value systems. Because after all humor is generally the best way to attack the humorless.

For all you chastity nuts out there this how we roll where I live.

And yes, that is Wonder Woman out in front waving her lasso of truth among other things.

Recently watched this Charlie Rose interview with former Carter National Security Adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski.

I must say that I am both saddened and profoundly inspired by this interview. I say saddened because I regret that we lost so much of what might have been when Reagan swept into power in 1980 and continue live with today under ham handed and muscular neocon chest beating that passes itself off as foreign policy. I say inpsired because it is encouraging to know that there are people like Brzezinski who hold an honest, critical and, most importantly, cogent view of the world. We need reflective leadership like this to deal with the intractable problems we have today. As John Lennon once said there are no problems only solutions. Anyone who wants to sell you on the hopelessness of the world most often has an agenda. That goes for the activists on the left who are so angry about war and distrustful of government, and the war mongers on the right who have weapons and oil contracts to procure. Either way you look at it, the world is a complicated place with complicated issues but it is nice to hear someone like Zbigniew who is so concise, cutting and cogent about the issues of foreign policy. This kind of discussion is refereshing from the clap trap you get on Fox, CNN, and MSNBC.