>The comparison to Birmingham in the '50s illustrates such a failure of
>imagination.
>
>Carrol
imagine you were white in the south, in a country where people basically saw their states as sovereign, just as those in the european union see themselves as sovereign. what do you think of people who said back then, "well, it is a profoundly stupid idea to impose integration on them because it's not part of their culture. all kinds of violence will erupt and they will hate the US government and the north for imposing their ways on them, etc.?" (as if afghanistan hasn't experienced a taste of women's "lib" already. and where were you to denounce the soviet practice that helped encourage this misogynist backlash?) what about the same idiots who said the same thing in Boston?
do you think all the people subjected to violence in the past 50 years would have preferred that we slow change down to acclimate to the needs of whites? why the fuck should anyone in afghanistan--if women want to participate in politics--be expected to shut the fuck up and be quiet in the interests of protecting some asshole's ego and identity?
it would be nice if you could stop for one minute and problemtize this facile third worldism. there are actually women IN afghanistan who support these measures. what do you do about them? write them off as, uh, falsely conscious ignorant subjectivities, servants of US imperialism who know not what they are doing. sorta like calling rakesh an oreo cookie as you once did.
oh yeah, it's being backed by the Us so it's bad. if it were the soviet union, then more power to 'em. whatever.
i personally don't agree with imposing anything on any culture. but the facile ways of thinking about these issues--especially the way that remark was trotted out--because i know no one on this list would have let it lie if he were talking about integrating South Africa--is really pissing me off lately.
kelley