Brutha-on-brutha violence

Posted on by

The city of Newark, New Jersey just elected its first new mayor in 20 years. Known for its high rate of violent crime, Newark suffered a nasty campaign between golden boy Cory Booker and the candidate anointed by outgoing mayor Sharpe James.

Hizzoner Booker T. Coryngton

Cory Booker swamped his nearest challenger, state Sen. Ronald L. Rice, taking 72 percent of the vote compared with 24 percent for Rice in the nonpartisan election. [Link]

Mr. Booker, a chatty former Rhodes scholar who developed his oratorical talents at Yale Law School, has been tagged by fellow Democrats as a rising star in the party. [Link]

Booker is a vegetarian who doesn’t drink… [Link]

… a Democrat who cites the Republican mayor of New York, Michael R. Bloomberg, as a political model, and a churchgoing Baptist who meditates and quotes from Hindu texts… [Link – thanks, Randompedia]

<

p>

Booker won by a landslide, but the campaign was marred by naked racial gibes from his black opponents. Red in tooth and claw, the ‘insufficiently black’ smear sounds a whole lot like desi racialists who question candidates’ authenticity (e.g. Bobby Jindal) and lob the grenade of Selling Out.

Booker is talking about the blacker-than-thou themes that James has been hammering on for weeks… “Sharpe James is running a campaign that uses every attempt possible to distract voters from the issues. He’s making racial allegations; he’s appealing to people’s worst fears…

“Four years ago, they said I was a tool of the Jews and a member of the KKK.” [Link]

… the battle pits the young challenger against an old-style political machine capable of using any means necessary–including personal harassment and police intimidation–to crush its opponents. Though both candidates are African-American, the race becomes racially charged when the mayor accuses Booker–a Rhodes scholar and Yale Law School grad–of not being “really black…” [Link]

… Sharpe James described him — though they are both African-American Democrats — as Jewish, gay, a Republican and a proxy for the Ku Klux Klan… At Oxford, after wandering into a meeting of L’Chaim, a Jewish student organization, he joined the group and was eventually elected its president…

He was a vegetarian in a city where the insiders still made deals over smothered chicken at Je’s, a soul food restaurant near City Hall. “He doesn’t want to create himself just in the mold of a black politician… He wants to be someone that white people, Latino people, who other people just feel comfortable with.” [Link]

<

p>I don’t think it’s how future desi vs. desi campaigns in the U.S. will inevitably turn out, but it is a cheap and easy insult in a mud-slinging campaign. It certainly shows the crude racial smears in white vs. desi political campaigns in a whole new light.

In the end, the electorate grew tired of James’ machine politics, and the better candidate won. You win it, you fix it: let’s hope Booker is a better mandarin than dull Sharpe.

Outside one polling place… a Democratic district leader said he had just voted for Mr. Booker because he was sick and tired of all the crime in Newark. “There are prostitutes on my street corner and I call the police and nothing ever gets done.” [Link]

Related posts: The default smear, Bobby Jindal: ustad of Indian culture

118 thoughts on “Brutha-on-brutha violence”

  1. DJ Drrrrty Poonaani-jaabi: I know what “logorrheic” means. I’ll see you in front of Walgreens. Come prepared.

    Sounds like I’m going to have another black eye to explain to the neighbors.

  2. There are somethings that US is responsible which no one can argue – like Napalming in Indo-China, Repression and supporting fascist regimes in Latin America and Africa. Still you can’t say millions were killed by these policies. I am not saying a few thousand killed is not significant. All the numbers are quite documented. And you can’t still be bringing up Hiroshima & Nagasaki. Lots of things happened 50 years ago and US will not repeat the same thing again without suffering a lot of consequences. Lots of lessons have been learned and that is why even the battlefield Nukes are stil hot potato.
    Are you saying that millions weren’t killed? Please read up a little. The fact that Nukes still exist leads one to conclude that nuclear warfare continues to be an option.
    I did read up a little and that is why I asked where you came with ‘millions’ number. Any weapon in an arsenal is an option, but on a practical basis, what is the probability of the US using it? The threshold for the use is so high that there will be a lot of opposition in the US Armed forces itself unless they face an eminent threat. Of course, the US will always use it as an implied and similarly Russia, China etc. Pakistan, Korea and Iran (if it gets it) are more likely to use it before the US.
    If inventions, wars, supporting regimes etc are conducted by the state and its military (ie government), then it is a policy. And the consequences of these actions, including deaths, are an outcome of these policies. If napalming Indo-China, repression and supporting fascist regimes aren’t policies of governments, than I don’t know what the hell they are. Engaging in a military coup d’etat, bombing civilians with military jets, and state military occupation are certainly not done by NGO’s.
    I thought we are talking about the US govt, then we should be comparing govts and other regimes. What has NGO’s got to do with it. Not all NGO’s are pristine. They have their own agendas and value systems. You are mixing apples and oranges and saying one apple is rotten out of the whole barrel, when the apple you are referring to is probably better than most.
    But let us take the other examples
    Cambodia – Most of the killing was done by Pol Pot and who is the biggest supporter of that regime was Communist China.
    Yes, you’re right about the Pol Pot having killed millions. Let’s not forget the prior US involvment, though. But yes, your clarification is absolutely right.
    Why did you throw this stuff when the US is not responsible. What has the prior US govt got to so with it, and what about the prior French involvement. Where do you stop. And US didn’t ask Pol Pot kill the millions of people. Maybe you need to revisit the Marxist-Maoist idealogy. I have friends who have come in as refugees on boats after their parents and themselves as kids fled the communist govt in Vietnam. They do have a different story to tell. It is not alwaws black and white.
    Genocide in East Timor – East Timor wouldn’t have been free without US making it happen. It was the biggest driving force making it happen. And the genocide was perpetrated by Muslim Indonesia.
    You’ve got it the other way around: the US supported the genocide ever since the Suharto regime (propped up by the US) initiated it. until the US under the Clinton Administration finally decided to end its 30 year support of the Indonesian government’s genocide — this is how East Timor became free. This evidence is found in the State Department’s documents.
    the peak of US arms sales to Turkey at the height of the ethnic cleansing of the Kurds in 1993 – It wouldn’t matter if US sold arms or not, Turkey would still have done the same thing. There are some things that US can’t influence as regimes decide what they want to do no matter what.
    I agree and disagree with you. US arms or no, the Turkish state’s policies towards the Kurds would have not changed. But, the arms given rapidly facilitated the ethnic cleansing/genocide.
    Well Indonesia got arms from China also. With both Indonesia and Turkey, US didn’t have much leverage, because it was in the political interests of Indonesia to act in East Timor and Turkey against the Kurds. If you use facilitation as the criterion for assigning blame, most countries in the world who had trading relationship with these nations are also to be blamed. And if you can provide evidence that the US supported genocide in Indonesia from the state dept records, ask AK to prosecute genocide using all the exotic theories he propounded in the other thread.
    over 12 years of repeated bombing of Iraq and devestating sanctions that have killed over 1.5 million Iraqi children – There were no 1.5 million Iraqi children killed. Even by the most liberal estimates, the no of Iraqi children affected were in the tens of thousands. And for your consideration – Saddam’s regime killed more than that. The estimates that I quoted come from the UN. If you find the UN a questionable source, then I can’t help you with that. Re: Saddam Hussein and his atrocities, in my previous post I was specifically addressing US actions. However, re: Saddam, he had been supported throughout his most grotesque violations with the support, funding, and backing of the US.
    I couldn’t find any UN source after extensive googling. The only website that has any numbers is http://www.bodycount.org (which is also referenced by antiwar.com) and the max. civilian deaths is around 40K. The deaths that are result of sanctions use questioable methodologies, where there is no taking into account the deaths that would have naturally occurred even without sanctions and other questionable projections and methodology that use assumptions that are not validated and have now been withdrawn by the authors. Well if you are blaming US for the deaths of iraqis, you have to better look at the other side also. So if more deaths occurred during Saddam regime than the US, by that measure the US action was a good one.
    NATO bombing of the Yugoslavia, the heaviest bombardment since WW II – The benefits will depend on which side you ask. The Bosnians, Kosova Albanians and the Croats will say it was a good thing. Should the US have stayed on the sidelines and watch the Serbians do the ethnic cleansing of the Bosnians and Kosovans? Damned if you and damned if you don’t First of all, you might want to ask yourself what benefits the US derived from bombing Yugoslavia. Secondly, how are you measuring that millions of Bosnians, Kosovar Albanians, and Croats agree that it was a good thing? Don’t solely base your judgements on what the governments say– I’m talking about the citizens. How you asserting that all the civilians of these now autonomous countries agreed that it was a good thing?

    How do you know that what I said wasn’t the civilian’s opinions. Without bombing the war would have been more gory and with lot more deaths and the bombing shortened the war (if you know anything about military strategy you will know that). I work in the high tech sector and I have friends and acquintances from that part of the world who fled the war. And how are you asserting thatl all civilians hold your point of view. It is overall opinion of the Bosnians and Kosovans that bombing was good. If you ask a random Serbian, most probably you will get your point of view.

    US military atrocities on US military bases in Italy, Japan and elsewhere – Come on, you can’t be serious. I am serious. There have been gross civil and environmental violations that have been carried out by the US on its military bases. Incidents such as the rape of Japanese girls by US military men in Okinawa are just the tip of the iceburg. There has been much resentment by the local populations in, for example, Italy about how the US is grossly violating environmental laws by conducting experiments that ironically, the US wouldn’t want to do on its own soil. Furthermore, under the Protection Act of US Servicemen (or something like that, I can’t remember the name exactly), the US Servicemen who rape, murder, and violate other laws have been guaranteed immunity from being prosecuted in the country where the act has been committed. Supposedly, these servicemen are to be tried under US courts, but many don’t ever get prosecuted (Abu Ghraib human rights violations perpetrators did, though.) As such, the US Servicemen on these bases often commit crimes knowing full well that they are immune from paying the consequences of violating the law, both of the country where they are residing, and domestic law. These occurances have been amply documented (but forgive me, I don’t have all of my references here; left them at home).

    Ask our friend AK to go after these if you think they are prosecutable.

    and the current wars in Afghanistan – Let me put it this way. It should have been done a long time ago unless you think the Taliban is god’s gift to Afghanistan. I would have preferred if the US had done it earlier and not just because of 9/11. And where, may I ask, is the Taliban currently? And what have been the consequences of the war for the Afghani people?

    Well if you want to know where the Taliban is, you may want to ask our Indian secularists and candlewallahs favorite friend, El Presidente or is General Musharraf. The Afghani people are better off than they were under the Taliban, better off being relative not comparing to some idealistic standards.

    And for God’s sake don’t tell me Cuba and N. Korea are paradises on earth.
    No. But neither is the US a paradise. I am not saying that N. Korea is preferable to the US. What I am saying is that we shouldn’t blind ourselves into thinking that the US was, is, has been, and will be the most perfect nation on this earth.

    Jai has addressed this better than I can, so I will just add this – How many people are eager to come to the US legally or illegally compared to the other countries. If US is the great Satan, don’t you think they will not be so eager to get in. Maybe you should think about living in another country more compatible with your idea of paradise.

    Lastly, something stands out in your responses: all of your responses deal with regime changes and you speak of the events I brought up in terms of some big political board game. My responses largely deal with the civilian aspects.

    What is political and what is civilian? Where do the lines cross? Or is it something that fits your idealogy? can you explain and clarify.

    I hopefully will not be adding to the discussion any more, since I find that you throw out numbers and statements without justifications and add additional caveats that don’t relate to the original statements when your assertions are questioned.

  4. Saurav

    Your starting point for analysis seems arbitrary, to put it mildly. But for argument’s sake, sticking to your bounds of excluding Hiroshima and Nagasaki, read William Blum’s Killing Hope for a better account of recent history. I’m sure you’re probably not a fan of the CIA’s alleged attempt to kill Nehru.

    Why don’t we start maybe a thousand years ago. Why arbitrarily start from Hiroshima & Nagasaki?

    I am off the opinion Nehru was a disaster for India and should have left after his first term or preferably earlier. Not that I want him to be killed.

    Of course, arguably, the real damage is in what the U.S. government does not do but easily could at least attempt to prioritize to the same extent that it does, say, toys–namely stem famines, end easily eradicable diseases, provide money for food, education, and public health, and a number of other things that would do a world of good for, well, the world. That’s where you’ll find your millions.

    Why don’t you donate your entire income to some charity like Oxfam and henceforth start diverting all your income except for your basic necessities to the said charity. You spending on things like computers, cell phones, extra clothes, friends, family is diverting money from stem famines, end easily eradicable diseases, provide money for food, education, and public health, and a number of other things that would do a world of good for, well, the world. You can start by saving a few. You can take my comment either as sarcastic or serious. If you agree that I am being serious, I will agree with yours.

  5. Hindutvavadi in California

    Thanks for the Karl Popper question. I never studied him but IÂ’m intrigued, especially his critique of historicism (re dialectic materialism via Hegel and Marx) and his taking of Plato to task for flirting w/ totalitarianism.

    My first philosophic love, Sartre, was also famous apologist for totalitarianism (of the soviet kind). Of the 3 great enslavement ideologies of our time (racism, fascism, and communism) I find the first two easy to explain b/c they appeal to the primitive in man (racism, nationalism, tribalism) that is common in every society. But communism is different. How men of both great intellect and clearly good intentions could descend into a madness only matched by Hitler is one of the great questions of our time.

    Studying hegel and then Marx provided me w/ some answers. There is an internal logic w/i Marxism that protects it from criticism…which boils down to attacking the motive of the critic rather than addressing the actual argument. This process can get very sophisticated w/ concepts like “false consciousness” that has been adopted by radical feminists. (to be fair, one must point out that pro Israeli jews often engage in this by declaring jews who sympathize w/ the Palestinians as “self-hating”) I see popper may have a lot to add to this w/ his contention that historicism underpins many forms of authoritarianism.

    I also think fukuyamaÂ’s theory of the end of history has basically got it right and he may clash w/ popper b/c of his belief that history develops inexorablyÂ…though his reliance on free will may protect him from the criticisms levelled against hardcore historicists. Obviously, heÂ’s turned Marx on his head by asserting that liberal democracy is the final stop in history. Many of these various revolutions (from eastern europe to china to even India) while all very different, have a lot in common, and they show histories general trend toward liberal democracy and capitalism. I think this is b/c locke basally got it right w/ the notion that these systems are in cahoots w/ universal human nature. Empirical evidence–that freedom of the classic liberal kind has grown during to 20th and 21st centuries backs up this theory. IÂ’m really interestred in watching china, since thay have posited economic freedom above the other kinds, and of course the great question is whether freedom is actually indivisable and does this mean china will inevitably become a liberal democracy.

    The other great test of the theory is of course the rise of Islamic Fascism. But I donÂ’t think this will ever rise to a serious challenge to liberal democracy (as communism did) since its philosophical underpinnings are rooted in religion. The only danger that really pose is the practical issue of how to prevent them from getting WMDÂ’s. But of course, we could also be seeing a return to an old world clash of civilizations as opposed to ideologies. But in the end, I donÂ’t think weÂ’ll see it, as technology and globalization has bought us all much closer together.

  6. Er, Hindutvavadi bhai/behen, remarks of the “Why don’t you donate your entire income to some charity like Oxfam and henceforth start diverting all your income except for your basic necessities to the said charity” type really bring down the standard of the debate…not to mention that they smack of taking the easy and desperate way to silence your opponents.

    Not to mention the irony of someone who calls themselves “Hindutvavadi in California” preaching to others “Maybe you should think about living in another country more compatible with your idea of paradise.”

    Hmmm, I had no idea that California was actually a Hindu paradise :). Ah, Maha-Kali-fornia….now I get it!

  7. Manju,

    Thanks for the extensive explanation. Unfortunately though I have some inclination, I haven’t had the chance and nor do I have the time to pursue the various western philosophies except on the surface.

    The other great test of the theory is of course the rise of Islamic Fascism. But I donÂ’t think this will ever rise to a serious challenge to liberal democracy (as communism did) since its philosophical underpinnings are rooted in religion. The only danger that really pose is the practical issue of how to prevent them from getting WMDÂ’s. But of course, we could also be seeing a return to an old world clash of civilizations as opposed to ideologies. But in the end, I donÂ’t think weÂ’ll see it, as technology and globalization has bought us all much closer together.

    I am not sure about your above thesis. Maybe Islamic fundamentalism, may not take over the world, but may carve enough pockets to be treated separately. These pockets can be separate countries or seperate regions within the country. So the people in those pockets will not enjoy the fruits of liberal democracy even if the they want to, because they will be dominated by the goons. This has already started to happen in India where if you are not muslim, you are not welcome. Well on the other hand, if Iran ever gets to overthrow their Ayatollah regime and have true democracy, maybe I will revisit the issue.

  8. Ms. Fink Nottle

    Er, Hindutvavadi bhai/behen, remarks of the “Why don’t you donate your entire income to some charity like Oxfam and henceforth start diverting all your income except for your basic necessities to the said charity” type really bring down the standard of the debate…not to mention that they smack of taking the easy and desperate way to silence your opponents.

    The statement I made had a more deeper implication. If you can’t understand it, let me broaden it for you – Like people have various frivolous needs, nations have them to and this has to do with politics, constituencies, votes and other things in a democracy. I responded to Saurav’s glib comment on Toys. So please if you can’t understand don’t accuse others.

    Not to mention the irony of someone who calls themselves “Hindutvavadi in California” preaching to others “Maybe you should think about living in another country more compatible with your idea of paradise.” Hmmm, I had no idea that California was actually a Hindu paradise :). Ah, Maha-Kali-fornia….now I get it!

    Maybe I should keep my name as Mr. Pink Throttle as it would be more appropriate in these woods. Well last time I looked, California didn’t have the requirement to pray in a certain direction or to be saved by a particular person. And Hindus don’t believe in paradise. If you can’t look beyond my handle name on a discussion board, then I am wasting my time here in responding to you.

  9. Professor/Lawyer/Your Highness/Your Royalty/Einstein/high tech worker/ Military strategist expert/cum hindutvavadi in California :

    Why did you throw this stuff when the US is not responsible. What has the prior US govt got to so with it, and what about the prior French involvement. Where do you stop. And US didn’t ask Pol Pot kill the millions of people. Maybe you need to revisit the Marxist-Maoist idealogy.

    If you honestly think that the US is not responsible in the cases I cited, then the US is an angel. Really– the US only engages in wars, interventions, and covert/overt operations simply because it is a benevolent force.

    I had stated the US government involvement in Cambodia, and you brought up Pol Pot. I was kindly acknowledging your comment. That doesn’t take away from my initial argument. In addition, even here you are throwing in France. I apologize I didn’t bring in the French, even though I was speaking about the US specifically from the very beginning. But tell you what: when I publish a book on international affairs (certainly won’t be on par with your expertise and knowledge!!)I will also bring in France; and get this: I will dedicate it to you!! “I humbly dedicate this book to Hindutvavadi in California, for the breadth and scope of his vast and impeccable knowledge and expertise, via the google search engine”.

    And if you can provide evidence that the US supported genocide in Indonesia from the state dept records, ask AK to prosecute genocide using all the exotic theories he propounded in the other thread.

    You really should stop relying on google to get your information. The State Department documents that I was referring to are all declassified. If you are not aware of the existence of declassified US government documents, then it only sheds light on your ignorance of the information that exists.

    All those “exotic theories” that AK were actually more grounded than what you were saying. AK’s comments accurately captured the the field of international law and state practice. Maybe AK’s theories sounded more exotic because AK probably didn’t derive all of his information exclusively off the internet. In every single discussion you seem to believe that you are a first class expert on every topic. Don’t be so arrogant; you don’t know me, and you don’t know AK, so lay off of the sarcastic insults, which portray you in a negative light. Furthermore, it is rude and immature for you to take swipes at AK when he has never even commented on this thread. If you have bones to pick with him, please post your sarcastic comments on the thread where both you and AK had exchanges.

    I couldn’t find any UN source after extensive googling.

    Ah, I see… if you can’t find anything after extensive googling, you simply continue to insist with your questionable and dubious counter-arguments to refute what I was saying. If this is how you validate your arguments- ie extensive googling- then maybe that’s why your opinions are uninformed and disingenous at best (nothing against google, though. I do use it from time to time).

    Ask our friend AK to go after these if you think they are prosecutable.

    This irrevelent, snarky comment just underlines the fact that when you don’t have anything to say, you simply revert to low blows.

    I hopefully will not be adding to the discussion any more, since I find that you throw out numbers and statements without justifications and add additional caveats that don’t relate to the original statements when your assertions are questioned.

    Reread my comments before you take the high ground, Your Excellency. I included two figures because you had asked me to. The other comments did not include numbers. Furthermore, I backed up what I was saying; on the other hand, you simply asserted sweeping and empty claims.

    Hopefully, I won’t be hearing from you regarding this discussion, because you simply do not have anything to say; making assertions do not constitute an argument in and of itself.

  10. CAD,

    You first said

    You’ve got it the other way around: the US supported the genocide ever since the Suharto regime (propped up by the US) initiated it. until the US under the Clinton Administration finally decided to end its 30 year support of the Indonesian government’s genocide — this is how East Timor became free. This evidence is found in the State Department’s documents.

    My response was:

    And if you can provide evidence that the US supported genocide in Indonesia from the state dept records, ask AK to prosecute genocide using all the exotic theories he propounded in the other thread.

    Anf you came back with:

    You really should stop relying on google to get your information. The State Department documents that I was referring to are all declassified. If you are not aware of the existence of declassified US government documents, then it only sheds light on your ignorance of the information that exists.

    This is how you mis-characterize others arguments. I didn’t say that there is no proof on the records, all I said was based on your first assertion that the state department records have proof of complicity on genocide, ask AK who was asserting on the MIA thread about universal jurisdiction to prosecute the US persons responsible for this. I didn’t bring up google not I am ignorant of declassified US Govt documents. Unfortunately for me and a few others, the US declassified hundreds of thousands of pages every year, which includes everything from dealings with Russia to matters related to NASA. Unlike people like you, we don’t have the time to dig some obscure filings pertaining to the US policy in Indonesia in the 70s.

    And unlike you I don’t come up with these golden gems:

    Professor/Lawyer/Your Highness/Your Royalty/Einstein/high tech worker/ Military strategist expert/cum hindutvavadi in California and Senator Manju McCarthy

    And you have the gall to say: “This irrevelent, snarky comment just underlines the fact that when you don’t have anything to say, you simply revert to low blows.”

    This is a public board. The readers/viewers can read my comments and your comments and come to their own conclusions. I am not running for a public office or trying to win a poularity contest. And I am not here for scoring points or claiming to be an expert on anything. I just hate to see misinformation being spewed.

  11. Hindutvavadi:

    Professor/Lawyer/Your Highness/Your Royalty/Einstein/high tech worker/ Military strategist expert/cum hindutvavadi in California and Senator Manju McCarthy

    I addressed each post to the respective person, not making sarcastic comments on other threads in responses to other people’s comments.

    And you have the gall to say: “This irrevelent, snarky comment just underlines the fact that when you don’t have anything to say, you simply revert to low blows.”

    Of course I have the gall to say this: do you not see the difference? You are sneeringly making comments to me, not AK, about AK as a response to my comment. But if you think that this is not rude, then be my guest; I certainly don’t rule SM!

    Re: “misframing” and “misreading” posts, I suggest that you please read your posts, and then the replies that you receive in response.

    Clearly, I wasn’t born and raised in India, I have a crappy knowledge of everything, and you are just too, too, too above my level. So, have a nice day and it was nice exchanging comments.

    PS. I wrote you a post on “MIA”, and I used the word “jackass”. I apologized there, but if you haven’t read it yet, I apologize to you here on this thread. It was unnecessary and wrong of me to use that word.

  12. DJ Drrrrty Poonaani-jaabi:

    CAD wrote:

    I know what “logorrheic” means. I’ll see you in front of Walgreens. Come prepared.

    DJ Poonaani-jaabi responded:

    Sounds like I’m going to have another black eye to explain to the neighbors.

    So where were you, hm? Didn’t have the courage to show up, did you? Where were you hiding, behind the bushes near Strawberry Creek?

    If I EVER see you on Shattuck Ave, in the BART Station, or loitering around the vicinity of Walgreen’s, you better hope that your legs serve you well.

    Don’t be a poonaani and hide your hand after having thrown a stone.

  13. <

    blockquote>Why don’t we start maybe a thousand years ago. Why arbitrarily start from Hiroshima & Nagasaki?

    Well, I was trying to do you a favor by starting after WWII, but even starting from Hiroshima & Nagasaki is arbtirary. A few logical starting points would be: a) 1776; b) 1787; and c) the start of English colonialism in North America; d) 1492. A more flattering one for your argument might be 1865. You pick one, and we can start counting deaths and figuring out how to measure qualitative abuses by the U.S. government and its subsidiaries.

    Why don’t you donate your entire income to some charity like Oxfam and henceforth start diverting all your income except for your basic necessities to the said charity. You spending on things like computers, cell phones, extra clothes, friends, family is diverting money from stem famines, end easily eradicable diseases, provide money for food, education, and public health, and a number of other things that would do a world of good for, well, the world. You can start by saving a few. You can take my comment either as sarcastic or serious. If you agree that I am being serious, I will agree with yours.

    Well, you certainly make a lot of assumptions about how I spend my money (and I would add time and labor). But the false analogy is besides the point I made–which is that the United States government has the capacity to do a lot of things that it’s not doing to easily improve millions if not billions of people’s lives. Calling me a hypocrite doesn’t undermine my argument or bolster yours.

    Now, if you want to get into the extent to which American administrations are constrained by the American political system, or how the nation-state system as a whole produces these kinds of failures through a lack of structural accountability to billions of people, or the failures of states in general, I’m happy to do that with you. But even with the complexity of these issues, you can see particular points to critique easily–like the failure to adequate address the legacy of colonialism, the perpetuation of the same in “national interest”-based foreign policy like Washington Concensus economics, and a total lack of concern for literally billions of people.

  14. So where were you, hm? Didn’t have the courage to show up, did you? Where were you hiding, behind the bushes near Strawberry Creek? If I EVER see you on Shattuck Ave, in the BART Station, or loitering around the vicinity of Walgreen’s, you better hope that your legs serve you well. Don’t be a poonaani and hide your hand after having thrown a stone.

    Whoa whoa whoa, no one’s throwing stones here. That little turbaned smiley face after the comment regarding logorrhea? It denotes a certain implicit jocularity in the previous statement: you’re not more guilty of cacoethes scribendi than anyone else here. I thought my follow-up post in plain, unequivocal angreze (the one about syrupy gulab jamams) would quiet talks of a showdown at the Berkeley Corral, but I’ll allow Communis Ricatrix the final word:

    CAD, interacting with you is exhausting. Requiring painstaking clarifications and constant reassurance that we like you, we really really like you = high-maintenance.

    So there: you’re cool. And I’ll be a poonaani whenever I damn well please. @=)

  15. So there: you’re cool. And I’ll be a poonaani whenever I damn well please. @=)

    Continue, my friend, continue being a poonaani 😉

    BTW, making somebody eat gulab jamuns as punishment is really not punishment. This is like placing a convicted felon in a marble palace rather than a prison cell. They should be forced to eat something unpleasant, like jalebi. Lots and lots of jalebis.

  16. but I’ll allow Communis Ricatrix the final word

    Oh god. I was fearful of someone discovering that comment. Dammit, I shouldn’t have indicated the number of that comment in my posts.

  17. BTW, making somebody eat gulab jamuns as punishment is really not punishment. This is like placing a convicted felon in a marble palace rather than a prison cell.

    Who said anything about eating them as punishment? Read my original post again. @=)

    They should be forced to eat something unpleasant, like jalebi. Lots and lots of jalebis.

    Nah, jalebi are cool. If you really want to punish someone, give them a lukewarm bowl of baingan bharta. That stuff looks and tastes like it was salvaged out of a medical waste dumpster.

  18. DJ DRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRTY Poonaani-jaabi:

    Who said anything about eating them as punishment? Read my original post again. @=)

    Oh.