Steve
On Thu, 20 Jan 2000, Yoshie Furuhashi wrote:
> Daniel wrote:
> >I have known that colonialist ideology runs amuck on the so-called "left,"
> >from journalists and activists to prof.'s and scholars, which was why I was
> >so pleased today, to snag from the library James Blaut's book on The
> >Colonizer's Model of the World. But I used to think that Said over-stated
> >the case in re Islam and Arabic culture *specifically* (at the expense
> >of the so-called Far East, China in particular, and the "Asiatic" more
> >generally). I know better now, and not least b/c of all the various
> >"wars", ideological and material, over Kosova, as well as the self-serving
> >and self-righteous hand-wringing over the Taliban.
>
> We have to keep in mind, however, that bourgeois realpolitik isn't as
> simple-mindedly ethnocentric and Orientalist as Bush, etc. let on.
> Ethnocentrism & Orientalism are mainly for *official consumption*, put out
> in their efforts to keep enough workers mired in petty prejudices that are
> useful for management of the system. Geopolitical designs of the ruling
> class have and will make use of anyone, including those of "Islamic and/or
> Arabic culture." The KLA has been a great vehicle for the U.S. design on
> the Balkans. So were "freedom fighters" from Afghanistan. In fact, if you
> make a list of the governments that can be said to be influenced by "Islam"
> and/or "Arabic culture" _and_ have been used by the U.S. government, such a
> list would be much longer than those on the enemy list like Iraq,
> especially in recent history.
>
> Yes, "American culture" has been Orientalist, but that didn't stop the
> American governing elite from building up Japan -- perhaps the enemy No. 1
> during the "Good War" -- as the pillar of post-WW2 capitalist
> reconstruction in the Asia-Pacific theater. Perhaps Said should have paid
> more attention to the "Far East," after all. If he had, he would have had
> to revise his theory.
>
> Orientalism does exist, but it doesn't affect their geopolitical thinking
> as much as Said may think it does. They are, if anything, more
> Machiavellian than Orientalist. Perhaps the fault of leftists is that many
> of them seem unable to imagine that the ruling class really don't give a
> damn about "culture" in itself (except when "culture" issues can be
> manipulated in their interest). Questions on their minds are, above all,
> "Who benefits?" "What works?" "At what cost?" Orientalism doesn't get in
> the way of recruiting Asians, Muslim or otherwise, as allies, temporary or
> long-term.
>
> Yoshie
>
>
>