STILL LOST IN THE CLOUDS... 2

Hope this doesn't seem too much like navel-gazing, but Power Line's Paul Mirengoff was kind enough to link to yesterday's round-up.  I sent him an e-mail later, to clear up any misunderstandings.  I'm getting messages from people accusing me of being starry-eyed about the troubles. I'm not at all.  Here's part of my e-mail:

I just want to make it clear that my aim wasn't to rule out an Islamic/Islamist link, only to question the claims that parts of the blogosphere have been putting forward. So far, it all looks very murky to me, but that hasn't stopped a lot of bloggers - and commentators - rushing in with wild talk about "civil war" and all the rest. Who knows, it may come to that in the end, but so far the evidence doesn't justify [it].

I also think the US blogosphere needs to stop talking as if it has found the secret to solving all social ills. A walk on the wrong side of the tracks in New Haven or a glance at Victor Davis Hanson's "Mexifornia" tells us that isn't true. Maybe I'm a bit unusual, but I think America and France are both great countries in their different ways.

Is that going to unleash a load of hate-mail? I'm pro-Bush and pro-war, but that doesn't stop me worrying about the way some American conservatives look at the rest of the world. Somewhere in his book Free World (I haven't got time to look it up now - I'm on a deadline)  Timothy Garton Ash talks about the temptation, post-9/11, to give in to the "hubris of the victim".  He's right. It may be comforting to do that, but it's not a good idea when you're the world's only superpower.

PS: Of course, part of the solution would be for European bloggers to start pulling their weight too. We haven't achieved anything like critical mass yet. There's a void out there.

CORRECTION: I just looked up the Garton Ash line. It's actually "hubris of the wounded". But you get my drift. 

Go here for more thoughts on the French and race.

Comments

[Martin Adamson]

Clive, I too am in two minds about this. However, at the moment I'm inclined to pessimism. Consider this. The revolutionary history of Europe, France especially, shows that when revolutions start it's often with spontaneous violence and unformed, contradictory demands. However, when revolutions continue, they fall under the leadership of experienced revolutionaries with more coherent plans, and better tactics. Now, in the French banlieues at the moment, who do you think has the most organised, best financed and most ruthless leadership cadres? It's not any conventional European political movement, is it?

[yellerKat]

Revolutions also require the support of a large part of the bourgeoisie. A few thousands youths in the Banlieues will never form a critical mass.

[Martin Adamson]

But they're not seeking to overthrow the state, are they? They're only looking to expel the state from their turf. Look at the success the IRA had in creating no-go areas for the British Government in Northern Ireland. And they had far fewer militants than the muslims have in France.

[jswendt]

Timothy Garton Ash should talk. The alternative approach as demonstrated by the British government at both national and council levels is to piecemeal ban portions of British culture deemed offensive to Muslims.

Good-bye Piglet, hello Allah!

If the US had given into the "hubris of the wounded" we would have simply flattened the Muslim worls. It is within our power to do so, should we choose to. The enormous restraint shown by Americans internationally and especially domestically may yet prove to be our own undoing.

The hubris here is not of the wounded, but of those who believe our culture to be an invulnerable hegemon.The arrogance of many government officials, academics, and their cheerleaders in the media trends towards blaming the wounded and covering up for the terrorists.