• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Gaddafi's useful idiots.

Virus

Philosopher
Virus
Joined
Jun 19, 2006
Messages
6,875
Libya is a dark and brutal place which has been run by a filthy little fascist for the last 40 years. That's longer than I've been alive.

When NATO intervened to prevent a humanitarian catastrophe it was obvious that morally cretinous ideologues would be lining up to run interference for Gaddafi.

Lee Smith writes in Tablet how intellectuals have been bought off by the Gaddafi regime for ages. Various prestigious universities in England have been found out to have received generous endowments by the Libyan regime. Similar to the slathers of oil money that made their way into American universities courtesy of the Saudi monarchy.

But some intellectuals could be bought by something else; appeals to vanity.

For instance, Rutgers professor Benjamin Barber wrote just last week that he has “no doubt” that his engagement with Qaddafi “ameliorated the consequences of his rule and created conditions conducive to gradualist reform.” How Barber squares this assessment of his contribution to Libya’s future with events unfolding in the country is unclear. What is clear is that Barber turned a blind eye to Qaddafi’s past record, the murders, tortures, and disappearances that were the basis of Hisham Matar’s novel In the Country of Men, which was shortlisted for the 2006 Man Booker Prize.

In the same category as Barber is Joseph Nye, the Harvard professor famous for his ideas about soft power, or “the art of projecting influence through attraction rather than coercion.” “Sometimes people say soft power is too soft to accomplish anything,” Nye told an interviewer. “It’s an important part of the arsenal of power. When you ignore it, as we tend to have done, it turns out to be quite costly.”

Nye knows that Qaddafi “has long been seen as a bad boy in the West”—a sponsor of terrorism with little respect for human rights—“but in recent years, Qaddafi has appeared to be changing. He still wants to project Libyan power, but he is going about it differently than in decades past.” Does that mean the Bedouin chieftain in the big tent is interested in Nye’s intellectual framework? “Sure enough,” writes Nye, “a half hour into our conversation, he asked how Libya might increase its soft power on the world stage.”

It was clearly lost on the Harvard academic that he is part of Qaddafi’s “soft power” campaign to whitewash his regime’s image. But the Libyan strongman had him at hello—“Qaddafi ushered [Nye] into his tent, where he had five of Nye’s books laid out on a table.” Thus are intellectuals bought off, by showing an “interest” in their work.
Click to expand...

http://www.tabletmag.com/news-and-politics/62430/committed/

Cynthia McKinney is another such useful idiot, albeit without the intellectual sophistication of Albert and Nye. A former US congresswoman, radical Leftist and Truther, she recently travelled to Libya on a "fact finding mission" ie a sugar-coated disinformation campaign for the fascist dictatorship.

Here is a clip of her appearance of Libyan state TV:
http://www.memritv.org/clip/en/2955.htm

I knew that support for Gaddafi would be a fixture for the idiotic, simple-minded and loony-toon ideologues of the radical Left. Support for bloody totalitarians has been their thing since the Bolsheviks seized power in Moscow. This video from an "anti-war" demo featured some Native Americans delivering a hate-filled anti-white screed which the masochistic leftists couldn't get enough of. Note the "Long live Gaddafi" placard:

 
This isn't something I really want to get into in detail, because I have insufficient knowledge. However, I don't think the situation is entirely black-and-white. Gadaffi is a nasty tyrant, yes. But has he actually done all the things that are attributed to him? Examination of the role of the CIA back to the 1980s, and especially Vincent Cannistraro, gives a lot of reason to believe in the existence of a structured campaign to generate "black" stories about Gadaffi.

Some of the support he gets from Libyans seems to be quite genuine. I've heard westerners who have lived in Libya declare that life in the country wasn't nearly as bad as it was being portrayed, and that a lot of the "bad" was in fact a direct consequence of western sanctions in place throughout the 1980s and 1990s.

It's arguable that Gadaffi was actually trying to get on better terms with the west over the past ten years. Sure, he was still a nasty little despot, but that hasn't been a barrier to being allowed to get on with things in other cases. He was prepared to schmooze up to Blair and other foreign leaders, and vice versa. He really did pay out something like $26 billion to try to "normalise" his relations with the west.

The reason I'm posting this is that last night on TV I heard an interview with one of the Libyan rebel fighters, accusing Gadaffi of a bunch of stuff I didn't believe for half a second. It was absolutely risible. Forcing his troops to take hallucinatory drugs and so on.

I have no idea where the truth lies in any of this, and I doubt it will ever be established. But I think a lot of things aren't as clear cut as some people like to imagine. And I'm always wary when I see western governments demonise a foreign ruler as a prelude to getting in there with some "regime change". Especially when they've been cosying up to him very recently.

Rolfe.
 
Virus said:
Cynthia McKinney is another such useful idiot, albeit without the intellectual sophistication of Albert and Nye. A former US congresswoman, radical Leftist and Truther, she recently travelled to Libya on a "fact finding mission" ie a sugar-coated disinformation campaign for the fascist dictatorship.
Click to expand...

I take issue with you calling Cynthia McKinney a useful idiot, sir.

I demand that you retract that statement.

There is absolutely nothing useful about her.
 
Virus said:
Libya is a dark and brutal place which has been run by a filthy little fascist for the last 40 years. That's longer than I've been alive.
Click to expand...

He's not a fascist (his ideology is rather different as well as being subject to change from time to time) and he has oil. As an when your country has that much cheap oil the world might consider carring if you think it is dark and brutal.

Lee Smith writes in Tablet how intellectuals have been bought off by the Gaddafi regime for ages. Various prestigious universities in England have been found out to have received generous endowments by the Libyan regime. Similar to the slathers of oil money that made their way into American universities courtesy of the Saudi monarchy.
Click to expand...

Not really. The overwelming majority of intellectuals has spent the last few decades not caring about Libya. I mean lets face it does it look like a supersymmetric particle to you?


But some intellectuals could be bought by something else; appeals to vanity.



http://www.tabletmag.com/news-and-politics/62430/committed/
Click to expand...

Given the extent to which that neither the words "France" nor "Sarkosy" appear in that article it's a pretty blatent attempt to rewrite history.


I knew that support for Gaddafi would be a fixture for the idiotic, simple-minded and loony-toon ideologues of the radical Left.
Click to expand...

Then you are ignorant. No supprise there.

Support for bloody totalitarians has been their thing since the Bolsheviks seized power in Moscow. This video from an "anti-war" demo featured some Native Americans delivering a hate-filled anti-white screed which the masochistic leftists couldn't get enough of. Note the "Long live Gaddafi" placard:

Click to expand...


Oh wow a whole 6 people truely they speak for the radical left.
 
Rolfe said:
This isn't something I really want to get into in detail, because I have insufficient knowledge. However, I don't think the situation is entirely black-and-white. Gadaffi is a nasty tyrant, yes. But has he actually done all the things that are attributed to him? Examination of the role of the CIA back to the 1980s, and especially Vincent Cannistraro, gives a lot of reason to believe in the existence of a structured campaign to generate "black" stories about Gadaffi.

Some of the support he gets from Libyans seems to be quite genuine. I've heard westerners who have lived in Libya declare that life in the country wasn't nearly as bad as it was being portrayed, and that a lot of the "bad" was in fact a direct consequence of western sanctions in place throughout the 1980s and 1990s.

It's arguable that Gadaffi was actually trying to get on better terms with the west over the past ten years. Sure, he was still a nasty little despot, but that hasn't been a barrier to being allowed to get on with things in other cases. He was prepared to schmooze up to Blair and other foreign leaders, and vice versa. He really did pay out something like $26 billion to try to "normalise" his relations with the west.

The reason I'm posting this is that last night on TV I heard an interview with one of the Libyan rebel fighters, accusing Gadaffi of a bunch of stuff I didn't believe for half a second. It was absolutely risible. Forcing his troops to take hallucinatory drugs and so on.

I have no idea where the truth lies in any of this, and I doubt it will ever be established. But I think a lot of things aren't as clear cut as some people like to imagine. And I'm always wary when I see western governments demonise a foreign ruler as a prelude to getting in there with some "regime change". Especially when they've been cosying up to him very recently.

Rolfe.
Click to expand...

He's a fascist Rolfe, regardless of how much oil money he throws around.
 
geni said:
You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
Click to expand...

Do too.

I call totalitarians "fascists" as a pejorative because the differences between them are superficial.

All complaints about that can be directed to the Department of Don't Care.
 
Last edited:
I'm sorry, I mistook this thread for a genuine attempt to discuss a controversial issue.

See you later.

Rolfe.
 
Caustic called me a useful idiot for NATO. There are no totalitarians in NATO, so the concept doesn't make sense.
 
Rolfe said:
This isn't something I really want to get into in detail, because I have insufficient knowledge. However, I don't think the situation is entirely black-and-white. Gadaffi is a nasty tyrant, yes. But has he actually done all the things that are attributed to him?
Click to expand...

Probably not. Has he done the majority? Yes.

Pointing out that not everything evil about him is true really shouldn't be used as a defence against all the evil he undoubtedly has done, both within Libya and outside of Libya. As you say, he is a nasty tyrant, and he deserves that tag for a multitude of reasons. Supporting him, as some people outside of Libya still do, is nothing more than being a case of an idiot, useful idiot if you're in a position that matters.

McHrozni
 
Well, Virus, while you talk about the radical Left, I think you'll find that the isolationalist right have been some of the most forceful critics of the Libyan intervention.
 
Virus said:
This video from an "anti-war" demo featured some Native Americans delivering a hate-filled anti-white screed which the masochistic leftists couldn't get enough of. Note the "Long live Gaddafi" placard:
Click to expand...
How much is the war against Gaddafi costing the US government each day? Are Native Americans who live on the rez, often in appaling conditions, not even slightly justified in questioning the political priorities involved?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom