|
3/30 more thoughts on kosovo:
I think Europe is also flailing, and depending on the US to do the dirty work. 'course the US isn't dependable for actually doing the dirty work so that anything positive can come out of it. then again, if it fails, Europe can still blame the US. Since the bombing of Afghanistan and the Sudan, I've just been struck by how much damage the (to quote madeleine albright) "long and heavy arm" of the US can do when it's flailing. I have little confidence in Albright's ability for diplomacy, her forte seems to be delivering snappy ultimatums. (Milosevic and his wife also have that talent in spades.)
I may have overstated myself on Milosevic's use of language about the holy land. I know that it has real significance for Serbs. My response also comes out of a deep rooted suspicion of that kind of language elsewhere, for instance regarding Israel. there are a lot of holy lands to various peoples (Iraq too), and their significance is real, but it is so easy to manipulate that language into a kind of manifest destiny for current political and military actions.
The other thing about the holy land metaphor is that it is not exclusive. The Serbs have a history in that area. So did other people, ( Angee talks about the Swabians, for example. Any land has layers and layers of history, migration, domination, invasion. Again, take Israel, take the US. Take England, the Angles and the Saxons and the Celts. So although it's important to understand the power of the metaphor, I think such
metaphors are very very dangerous. As melty said, "These are the myths that make nations." But I can't help help hoping for a choice of myths, for most nations, I see the ones that last, like the American Dream, or the story of Columbus the explorer, or the Anglo-Texan version of the annexation of Texas, serve specific, although multiple, contemporary purposes. As a historian mostly ignorant of that area, I understand only that the Balkans are complex. I get nervous when people start reaching into medieval past, thuogh, because nations and nationalities do change, and the farther back yo go, the more mythical and less like now it is. Or am i too American and short-historied? the Serbs fought in guerilla warfare against the nazis, while Croatia allied with them, right?Were ethnic tensions in check under Communist domination? Tito said, near the time of his death, that if communist domination of yugoslavia ended, we would see hostilities erupt which would make World War two look like a walk in the park. i'm not much of a nationalist. Nationalism is a mad tricky issue. I understand its political/ideological use better for minorities within a larger 'nation,' usually. Some incredible emails I have read from some Serbian anarchist punks (ask Angee and maybe she'll send you a transcript) get into that, revealing how nationalism emerges under siege conditions. And here I disintegrate into questions and frustrations. There's tension between nationalism and plurality. Multi-ethnic societies are possible, but under pressure, do they distintegrate? And what kind of mythologies would we need to build so that they do not?
3/29 can't stop thinking about Kosovo. Had an interchange with tj about this post-Cold-War situation. US foreign policy has always been pathetic, but during the Cold War it was at least consistent. It's obvious that to the US, even now (anachronistically,) nothing is worse than Communism. Famine, Civil War, Fascism, Genocide, none of these, to deciders of US foreign policy, are worse than communism. One has only to look at Chile, Cambodia, Vietnam, Guatemala. And now that the spectre of communism is gone, the US is flailing incoherently, only they're doing it with ballistic missiles. And remember at the start of this, Clinton said that the only way this would work was if the Serbian military didn't take it as a cue to start all-out destroying the albanians? And now he says there is "no connection" between the NATO actions and the stepping-up of violence. What does he think inspired the stepup, the phases of the fucking moon? And this terrifying 'holy land' metaphor that milosevic is using, like all fundamentalists, hearkening back to a mythical earlier time of perfection, images of divine destiny, to stir up emotions by a people who feel under siege. Like I did when the US bombed Afghanistan, I just keep thinking of Cambodia. what does it take to send a nation over the edge into madness? Apparently a much larger country fucking with it.
3/26 thinking about Kosovo. I agree with ms. Melty about the complexity, and I too feel ambivalent. Now, I haven't read a lot of Sun Tzu or any other tactics manuals, but I don't understand one thing:
How in heck can we stop what is being done to albanians by staying at a distance and lobbing missiles? Already, since the first missiles, the Serbian military has adopted a scorched-earth policy, bringing in the same people who were responsible for a lot of the earlier atrocities in bosnia, more villages are burning... I'm sorry, and this isn't what I'm sure that i support, but I don't see how anything but ground troops can work in this situation. It's just a sign of the US's unwilingness to commit, that it's all been missile attacks. I don't believe that there's any way to intervene in this conflict without physically getting in the middle. As horrible a memory as it may be for america given our history from Vietnam to Somalia, it doesn't make any sense for anything else to happen. Missiles won't prevent the kind of interpersonal and truckload-of-soldiers-against-a-village violence. It (as usual) endangers civilians under the guise of protecting them. Once again, I'm not saying that I WANT US and other soldiers to march on in, but i don't see how anything else can work to the supposed end of stopping the violence in Kosovo. I'm also right there with Ms. Melty in feeling wicked uncomfortable advocating the US be a global police force. It's obvious, after the cold war, how reluctant the US is to be such. The mystified fear of communism (redisribution of wealth, particularly) whas been the most effective mobiliser of US military action, and the fear of fascism and genocide doesn't seem to be such a big deal.
|
3/30 On other trails, other trains or flights: My first official, paying gig, spinning experimental breaks and jungle went really well. Under-attended, of course, but the audience (even those who weren't my friends) really liked it, and the club (bar, really) also liked it, and they want me back. I only wish they had a dancefloor, instead of a carpeted floor. But hey, i got paid, for doing something I would do anyway. And I really love my records. |
3/24Midterm today. The questions were.. i don't know... chatty. It was all theory, and the questions were basically asking me what I think. that's my favorite kind of question, you know. Just let me get a chance to run off at the mouth about what I think. Plus I got to rag on the competitive model on which the market system is based. pow!
Playing my first "real" gig tomorrow, opening for a friend's band at a little pub. DJ madness here I come. Trying not to have stage fright. I hope the sound system is okay so i can hear what I'm doing...given my luck the past few weeks I don't know what I can ask for. Got a call from my old gynecologist saying that they were going to send my files to my new doctor, but they have lost them. Did I mention my luck these past few weeks? I guess I should be grateful I didn't get a nosebleed during my midterm. or that lightning didn't strike me on the way to work this morning.
3/23 I watched part of Oliver Stone's "Nixon" the other night. If you can get by the Oliver-Stone-ness, it's pretty good. It makes you want to throw the TV out the window, preferably at Henry Kissinger. It was interesting that the local tv station showed it, in the context of current events: impeachment trials, military involvements. Watching it, you remember what the impeachment hubbub was about back in the early 70s. It's a good perspective on current events, especially seeing the reenactment (partly from nixon's own tapes I think?) of their evil, evil, evil, decision to bomb cambodia. And believe me, Clinton has done some evil things, foreign policy-wise, but that's not what all the hubbub has been about. This was a reminder that people really commit evil deeds, not just cowardly ones. Very interesting that WSBK decided to show it.
Another thing that came up while watching is the significance of historical context for modern events. Robert Bork's role in the Nixon administration, for example. So when he turns up later as a Supreme Court nominee, we know some of his record. This is the basis of democracy, right? An informed citizenship (listen to me preach, and how often do I read the paper?). But I wrote about this here in re: Eisenhower, or even when I watched the other Stone-a-rama, JFK, where you see that Arlen Specter was a raving crackpot already in the early 70s, when he came up with the 'magic bullet' theory which defies all laws of physics. These people have been around for EVER, and what are we doing about it? Maybe I should run for office. Would you vote for me? Would I?
|
|