Chercheuse académique conclut: bin Laden est mort!

Madame, je vous remerci pour la précise enquête sur le destin de bin Laden. En fait je partage votre conclusion...ça fait déjà plus d'un an. Ce n'est pas une opinion personnelle car cette conclusion que bin Laden est probablement est forte repandue à travers la bloguesphère surtout anglophone.

Ouais, je sympathise avec votre chagrin mais il étiat assez évident que bin Laden gît en paix pusiqu'il n'a rien , mais absolumment rein dit, pendant la guerre d'irak; il n'a pas eu ni vidéo, ni des communiqués turgides déclament le complot international de sionistes-croisé. Pensez-vous qu'un gar comme Usama raterait l'occasion de cracher ses invenctives? pas de tout. Plus significative, il n'a pas eu encore un attentats contre un cible américain, européen ni occidental. Peut-être c'est grâce aux services des renseignements et les policiers. En tout cas, c'est presqu'evident que bin Laden ait trouvé la mort.

Some thoughts on anti-Americanism: dearth of translations

Over at Iain's blog Kristen posted an article on why anti-Americanism is rampant throughout the world. I suspect this article sheds some light. As long time readers know, I've been quite critical of the America's discouragement of preserving the neo-Americans' mother tongues. Indeed, as Revel has pointed out, American high culture is dangerously provincial in contrast to what it was 30 years ago.

Even the publishing companies have to find a professor of the foreign language to translate non-English books. Like Revel says that's not the really appropriate. The teacher might be excellent at imparting the language but that doesn't make him or her a translator able to bring out the nuances of the books.

The academics, writers, journalists and broadcasters today only have a superficial grasp of the world. More importantly, I'm not impressed by the depth or level of American pundity on the various talk shows. I find they rehash cliches and restatement of facts,. Their debates are dull and insipid.
I agree with Diday's citation to the effect that many winnes of the Nobel literature prizes are unknown to Americans. I'm vaguely familiar with them because I read the Avui's Supplement cultural every Thursday.

So how does the dearth of translated books in America lead to anti-Americanism? One factor is good ol' fashioned resentment due to a lack or reciprocity. Everyone assiduously follows American culture but Americans don't bother the rest of the world. Another is the perceived crassness of American culture. No I'm not necessarily referring to the hoary clichés of Starbucks or Americans dressed in jeans at the Opera; but rather, the crassness goes back to the provincialization of American literature. Because many of the contemporary American writers have become insulated from the wider cultural and intellectual influences, there a certain homogenity in their writings. Interesting as they are as chronicles of Americans life, most works don't delve very deeply on the pressing issues of our day.

Finally, there's incredulity. A lot of authours and readers from the rest of the world sometimes ask themselves how pedestrian writers make hundreds of millions of dollars for essentially 'disposible literature' Let's face it as much as I enjoy reading Tom Clancy as summer lit, people won't be reading him in 50 years. The books will come across as quaintly dated; while books by Kundera, Mahfouzh and Kadare will be read until humans no longer exist.

Update: Here's another reason that stokes anti-Americanism. It's not the the prohibition of American aircraft or generals at the Paris Airshow; rather it's the nauseating chest thumping about how awesome American aircraft are and the rest of the world's is third rate crap. Well yes, American aircraft are the best in the world because allied countries have also contributed to the aircrafts' production and components. American aircraft are so good that the country can't afford them. The J35 aircraft is the classical illustration. It's so expensive that several Allied countries have agreed to share production because they couldn't afford 1 aircraft let alone a fleet. The B2 bomber is another.

Les armes de destrucció massiva: ¡no canvieu d'idea ara!

Mai els americans i els britannics me persuadiren que existirien armes de destrucció massiva. El fet que la Coalitió encara no ha trobat les armes, alguns bitacornistes canvien d' de tema Que ara no aqueixes armes realment no foren la causus belli sinó la malvolència del règim. Perdona'm però això es canviar la justifiacció per declarar la guerra contra Irak. Personalment, sempre havia conlcuït que la Coalició tenia raó quan es recordava l'ONU que Irak mai havia complert les seves obligacions que es depenia del alto-foc i per tant menaçava l'ordre internactional que l'ONU pretenia que vetllava.
Pitjor, el fet que els americans i britiannics canvien de tema cau molt malament i molts països concluiran que tenien raó de voler més temps per les inspeccions i que ambdós mentiren al Consell de Seguretat. En futur, el món farà els seus calculs polítics per recolzar o no els EE UU. Molts decliniaran.
  ¶ 17:00

 

America, post-war reconstruction and allies: fritting away the coalition

I popped by Bill's blog when I came across an article on Americans pulling out of Germany and was struck by this link from Ralf Goergens

In any case, I shook my head at the news tat the U.S. will delay its free trade treaty with Chile as revenge over its opposition to the Iraqi war for failure to get a second UN resolution. I shook my head. It looks like the present administration isn't only boneheaded in its diplomacy, its committment towards free trade is increasingly hollow rhetoric.

The Chilean government is undoubtedly scratching its head. Of all the Latin American countries, Chile has been a relative success story not just with respect to reestablishing a democratic polity but also for having one of the more market-oriented economy. The delay will do more than just hurt the Chileans and put yet another obstacles in the Free Trade of the Americas treaty. Latin America will experience yet another period of beign neglect from the Americans. That's egregious because the societal chaos in Argentina, the political instability in Venezuela and the lawless in the Triple Border region should be a cause of deep concern to the American administration with respect to domestic security. A prosperous Latin America with a strong democratic polity and a vibrant civil society is in America's long term interest as the Southern Hemisphere would play an important role on the ongoing war on terrorism by preventing terrorist cells or hostile 3^rd country government from infilitrating Latin American countries to hit the U.S. from the rear; as well as showcasing that free trade really does benefit the poor countries. Kind of hard to shriek death to Amercia if your life prospect dramtically improve before your eyes.

Unfortunately, the American administration is slowly but inexorably fritting away its coalition and will reinforce those voices within and without the coalition to argue, somewhat reasonably, that America is to be mistrusted. Other countries are also reassessing their relationship with the U.S. and may conclude that it's not just worth the aggravation to oppose the Americans no matter what those countries do. So they'll scale back their relations with America.

Update: I'm not the only one who's increasing concerned by the Administration's determination to sanction countries that opposed it. The anonymous blogger at Beautiful Horizons voices the same concerns as I do.
As I've been pretty clear I don't oppose France and other countries from suffering the consequences for their position; it's the lack of proprotionality that disturbs me. To reiterate, most countries will simply conclude that, for now, it's just best to avoid any disagreements with the Americans and not oppose them. No matter what these countries do or avoid doing, they'll always be in the wrong. So why needlessly suffer avoidable aggravation?

El mon ha canviat però no us direm com

L'article de Marcela Sanchez exprimeix bastant bé com els aliats tradicionals- América Llatina en aquest cas- estan confosos de què exactement ha canviat en les relacions hemisfèriques.

Desafortunadament, els oficials americans no han explicat pacientment que d'ara endavant els EE UU se sent tan vulerable com els més vulnerable dels veïns llatinoamericans. Doncs, tots aquells països hauren no sols hauran d'aumentar la seguritat de llurs propries fronteres ans també hauran de prendre més inciatives a vigilar que entre i surt de llurs països hi inclòs intervenir més activament, en la regió

.

Aqueixos consells excepte l'últim que toca un punt nevralic de no-interfència en els afers domestics d'un pais, sont bastant raonable i àdhuc lloable; tanmateix, l'administració Bush presumeix que tots el països llatinoaméricans implentarien aquests consells de manera automàtica i per autonomàsia. No fou així car era els Estats-Units que havia sufret l'atac no els. Ademés, molts països latinoaméricans tenen llurs propris problemes que l'administració descuida. Es a veure com evolucionara la situació.

  ¶ 14:22