|
|||||||||
Posted September 27, 2001
Feminism and the Third World War
[Regarding Justin Raimondo's column of September 17, "The Third World War":]
I appreciate your web site's excellent selection of international news and opinion, and I have visited it often in the past week.
I'm not quite sure what your politics are, but it seems Mr. Raimondo has an ax to grind with feminists for their denunciation of the treatment of women in Afghanistan. I disagree with him -- feminists didn't create our enmity with Afghanistan; our government did. A little perspective is in order.
Women's rights are not at the top of our nation's priorities. The US has not ratified the UN treaty on the rights of women, nor have we passed an equal rights amendment. Nobody in the US government seems to care what happens to women in another country unless it fits with a predetermined foreign policy objective.
The US has not censured France for expelling Moslem school girls who wear the hijab, nor India for its continued tolerance of dowry murders, nor Brazil for its de facto approval of "murders of honor," whereby deceived husbands are routinely acquitted for murdering their wives.
In the case of Afghanistan, the Clinton administration had named Osama bin Laden a threat, and Afghanistan a "rogue state" for sheltering him. It was convenient for them to fasten onto feminist concerns about the status of women in Afghanistan, as an additional justification for their foreign policy. Not that they did anything to help those women. That was the status quo ante-bellum.
But I, like every other feminist I know, would laugh myself silly if the current administration were to claim the plight of Afghani women as any part of its pretext for war. The Bush administration is full of anti-feminists who would be glad to return American women to some pre-Hester Prynne state of suppression. We feminists are not stupid enough to rally behind them.
Justin Raimondo replies: I agree that the Bush administration is cynically using feminism for its own purposes, and that Condi Rice is not about to join NOW. However, leading feminists, such as Eleanor Smeal of the Feminist Majority group, are cheerleading for US military intervention in Afghanistan. Check this out:
"While law enforcement continues to collect evidence about Osama bin Laden's involvement in the horrific acts of terrorism on September 11, the relationship between the Taliban, Osama bin Laden, and the suffering of Afghan women is very clear. We know that the Taliban militia has been harboring bin Laden and that, together, they have been leading campaigns of terror against women, women's rights, ethnic and religious minorities, and the Western world for many years. The Taliban and bin Laden are interdependent and inextricable. Just as the Taliban is protecting bin Laden from extradition, bin Laden is providing financial resources, equipment, and highly trained mercenary fighters to bolster the Taliban regime's war against the Afghan people."
Ms. Smeal then goes into a riff about how "feminists were the first to bring the atrocities of the Taliban" to the attention of the US State Department and the world. She touts her "Campaign to Stop Gender Apartheid in Afghanistan" as working "tirelessly to bring to the attention of US policymakers that the Taliban must be stopped." She avers that "the war they are waging against women … in Afghanistan poses a real threat to global security and our national security" -- an accusation, one might add, that could be made against virtually every Muslim nation on earth. If this feminist version of America’s "national security" is to be a universal standard, then we may as well invade Pakistan, Iran, Saudi Arabia, the Gulf states, Syria, and vast sections of Southeast Asia.
My point is that the machinations of our domestic do-gooders and professional uplifters do not, unfortunately, stop at the water’s edge. Remember that the Kosovo war was also framed in terms of political correctness and left-liberal politics by the Clinton administration: the war against the Serbs was supposedly a war against "racism," and its evil twin, nationalism. This war, too, is framed by some in very similar terms. It is not only a war against male chauvinist pigs, according to the feminist leaders of Ms. Smeal’s ilk, it is also a war against medievalism and for modernity. This is really the essence of the Bushian concept of "they hate us because we’re so wonderful" line: they supposedly hate democracy, technology, and our prosperity so much that bin Laden and his crew were moved to commit the worst most destructive terrorist act in American history. In short, the terrorists are envious obscurantists -- and that’s why they did it. They hate the modern world because they refuse, for obscure and no doubt evil reasons of their own, to join it.
The "liberation" of women is seen, by many in the West, as the touchstone of our cultural and political evolution. The "progress" of women in the professions, their release from home and hearth, the cultural and political changes wrought by the feminist revolution: these are all measures of modernity, and on this score the Taliban has been found grievously wanting. Along with adopting democracy and paying lip service to the free market, the breaking down of traditional gender roles is now seen by our liberal interventionists as one of the qualifications for becoming a member of the "international community" – and god help those who fail to make the grade!
At the end of her tirade, Ms. Smeal exhorts her reader to write to secretary of state Colin Powell, demanding the invasion of Afghanistan and the "liberation" of its women. I am not making my point, here, against feminism per se -- although I could write about that subject, and I would, as always, have plenty to say, Antiwar.com is not the place for it. Where feminism comes into my purview on this site, however, is when its leaders join hands with the War Party. That is when -- abandoning all those terribly outmoded gender roles -- I take off the gloves….
Appreciated on the Left
Thank
you so much for continuing to take a principled stand
on this. If I'd have to identify myself as anything I'd
be an "anarchist," and I nevertheless think
[that Justin Raimondo is] my generation's Hitchens or
Cockburn. I tell all my lefty friends to read Antiwar.com
because I think it's the best source for information as
well as an indicator that people on "the right"
(whatever that means when Rush Limbaugh condemns Falwell
& Robertson) are also thinking critically about this.
The left is doing something in San Francisco, much
of it directly transplanted from the much hated "anti-globalization"
movement. Global Exchange organized in Precita Park in
the Mission 3-4000 people to attend on a day's notice
to say no to what you
perhaps rightly call "world war three."
An Arab choir was invited but was too frightened to attend.
There are tens of thousands of people in this city who
will resist a wholesale attack on the Arab world. I hadn't
considered the possibility of a US protectorate in the
oil fields of the Gulf.
The
BBC is reporting that the bush administration is citing
60 countries involved in terrorism. If this comes to pass,
our leaders will be aiding and abetting Osama bin Laden
and kindred ghouls in the most effective way possible.
Please keep up the good work, it is appreciated on the
left as well, now more than ever.
~ Stephen B.
Apple Pie and Chevrolet
Reading [Harry Browne's guest column of September 12,] "When Will We Learn," and your rebuttals to the angry responses to your article, I think that by writing this article you did a great service. Being an Orthodox Christian in America I probably draw a lot of fire for speaking the truth. People here, brainwashed by the propaganda from CNN, Peter Jennings, etc., don't understand or are simply ignorant to what is really going on.
I
especially became a pariah of my "patriotic"
neighbors when the US began their heinous attack on Serbia.
Serbia, being Orthodox is still suffering today. Your
rebuttals were excellent in this respect as well.
The
one person, who wrote "Now is not the time for such
an article, we should support our government" seems
to be like everyone else, blind to the truth. The point
is, Jesus Christ clearly stated that as Christians, we
must bare the truth and do no harm to anyone. We should
do no evil to those who do evil unto us.
As far as your article being "unpatriotic" or "anti-American" -- that is pride at work again. I know this sentiment well. I myself being labeled a communist for my love of Russia, through which I became Orthodox in the first place. The labeling of nationalities as being communist or Nazi, etc. is not uncommon in America and as the son of immigrants I suffered because of this, causing me to have a critical attitude towards America. Keep up the good work. We need guys like you to remind people that there is more to life than baseball, hot-dogs, Coca-Cola, apple pie, and Chevrolet.
What Are These Creatures?
I
have six children. When I listen to these neocons talk
about using my life's work as cannon fodder for the greater
glory of America and the S&P 500, I am made sick.
The war fever will be raised to a fever pitch by the media.
Who is the media anyway? They are so strange. They hate
big business, but the socialism they want destroys small
landholders. They hate religion. What are these creatures,
anyway?
~ R. J. Hanten, LUTCF, FIC, President, Solidarity Financial,
Inc.
Time to Think
A consistent feature of US attitudes to the Middle East is expressed in this Gallup poll.
In answer to the question, "In the Middle East conflict, do you think the United States should take Israel's side, take the Palestinian's side, or not take either side?" 72-74% of Americans say "neither." And yet, US government policy is widely defended as pro-Israel by leading commentators and politicians.
I wonder if it is time for that 72-74% to demand an apology from the rest for exposing US citizens to unnecessary danger.
Unfortunately, as this graphic shows, people are "more satisfied with the way things are going in the US" after the WTC-Pentagon attacks. This betrays more a gut-reaction of people just huddling to the flag than any real sentiment, one hopes.
Time to think.
What Did the Feds Know?
If past behavior is any indicator, members of the fourth estate should be leading the charge to find the answers to the questions: what did the Feds know, and when did they know it? They should have no fear of persecutions or burnings at the stake or drawings and quarterings, at least not just yet. However, if the keyboard brigade continues to busy themselves with stoking the flames of outrage in the country as they seem intent on doing, I expect a point of no return will be reached when no one will be able to safely investigate these questions.
~ Alan Koontz