The Dish

A reader writes:

You might want to read this. It's an opinion piece in one of the major Ugandan newspapers and basically shows you the fallacy-ridden argument that has gained so much traction in Uganda against gays within its population. You may be happy that Tom Coburn and Rick Warren are all belatedly distancing themselves from the happenings in the country, but let's not be fooled; (1) Their silence, as a reader of yours said, was quite eloquent, as is their saying it to an American public. I would be more convinced if they took that message to Uganda; and (2) This bill is really quite popular. You underestimate the number of people who think homosexuality is a "white disease" and therefore resistance to such is seen as resisting some sort of neocolonialism. Ridiculous, I know, but what of all this isn't?

Minxin Pei makes the case:

Chinese leaders seem unconcerned with their inability to translate strength into real gains on the international stage. That's because they're far more concerned with domestic stability. Yet here again the news is hardly reassuring. Antigovernment riots and collective protests throughout China are on the rise. Corruption remains rampant. More than a dozen senior officials, ranging from a vice minister of public security to several CEOs of giant SOEs, were arrested in 2009. The political maneuvering for the next succession, due in 2012, has already begun, making Chinese leaders all the more cautious—even a tiny misstep between now and then could be politically catastrophic.

Fallows had some vaguely related thoughts yesterday.

(Hat tip: Judis)

"I’ve got a fulltime job reading bills in Congress without reading the bills in another 190 countries,” – Senator Chuck Grassley (R-IA), asked if he would condemn the Uganda bill. Civil rights groups believe he has been involved in handling African affairs as a member of The Family.

In honor of the Iranian protesters, Minnesota Public Radio and Kermit the Frog update a classic Muppets song:

Upon quoting Truman – "We all have to recognize – no matter how great our strength – that we must deny ourselves the license to do always as we please" – Peter Beinart says of the Nobel speech:

[Obama] showed that he understands just what Truman meant. Because he understands, in a way Cheney and Palin never will, that true moral universalism requires recognizing that Americans are just as capable of evil as anyone else. And that means recognizing that we are in just as much need of restraint. For Obama and Truman, the paradox of American exceptionalism is that only by recognizing that we are not inherently better than anyone else, and thus must bind our power within a framework of law, can we distinguish ourselves from the predatory powers of the past.

He didn’t just condemn human rights horrors in Congo, Burma, Zimbabwe and Iran; he acknowledged that an unfettered America is capable of moral horror itself—which is why we must ban torture and submit to the Geneva Conventions. He didn’t just praise US soldiers; he praised the peacekeepers of the United Nations, thus acknowledging that military force can occur within a framework of international institutions and international law.

Andrew Sprung  has a smart reading of one part of Obama's Nobel speech:

Osama's favorite label for U.S. and western forces is "crusaders." Obama pointedly puts the European Crusaders of old on the same side of the ledger as Islamic extremists.  No holy war can ever be a just war.  One rule lies at the heart of all religions.  Obama is simultaneously taking on the militant understanding of jihad and denying any fundamental clash of civilizations. Mullahs of the world, mull that.

Bruce Bartlett feels that Obama's first stimulus was a special case:

The poor success rate of fiscal measures in counteracting economic downturns, and the likelihood that they will even sow the seeds of subsequent downturns, led a number of prominent economists to reject the Obama administration's stimulus proposal in February. Where I think those economists erred was in not recognizing that the current downturn was exceptional in its severity. Nor did they appreciate the fact that Fed policy was essentially impotent owing to the presence of deflation–the economy would have needed something like a negative 5% nominal Fed funds rate for monetary policy to be effective. But it is impossible for the rate to go below zero, thus hamstringing the Fed and creating a liquidity trap that brought the economy to a standstill.

Therefore, fiscal stimulus was justified in this instance, even though the general case against countercyclical policy remains valid. To use a cliché, it was the exception that proves the rule. However, now that the recession is over–economist Robert Hall of the NBER's business cycle dating committee believes it ended last summer–the case for emergency measures can no longer be justified. We are, I believe, slowly returning to normal economic conditions, and the normal rules should again apply.

A reader writes:

The photo of the Iranian men wearing green hijabs to honor Majid Tavakoli made me think of the great Middle English epic Sir Gawain and the Green Knight.

During his quest, Gawain broke his promise to share everything he acquired in Sir Bertilak's castle in order to conceal and keep a lady's green girdle, which he was told had the magical power to save his life. For that very human and understandable lapse in chivalry, the Green Knight nicked Gawain's neck slightly with his axe, when he would otherwise have spared him entirely. Ashamed of his partial failure, Gawain wore the girdle as a baldric and told the whole court at Camelot of his shame. Impressed by his bravery and humility, all the Knights of the Round Table decided from that day forth to wear green baldrics in fellowship with Gawain, to honor him.

They are very different stories from very different times and cultures, but the parallels — a hunted man wearing a woman's garment to escape mortal danger, that fact being held up as a mark of shame, and his peers wearing similar garments (green, even) to turn them into a badge of honor — are fascinating to me.  I wonder if the Gawain story once had some basis in fact, and if the heroes of the Green Revolution will one day be the subject of Persian epic poetry.

A reader writes:

I think your reader who said the “Greatest Generation” weren’t superheroes because they sat idly by as the war in Europe – and in the Far East, too – had been raging for two years misses a key point. The “Greatest Generation” who fought and died (like my uncle) were not the politicians, opinion makers, power brokers and celebrities of the day who demanded isolation. In fact, I doubt most of those men ever saw a battlefield. They were too old. The “Greatest Generation” were kids. Many of them weren’t even old enough to vote in the 1940 presidential election. These young men – and women – were very much superheroes in just the same way the volunteers of today are.