Welcome to the new version of European Tribune. It's just a new layout, so everything should work as before - please report bugs here.
Display:
Links to recent articles about Sharp's work.

Albert Einstein Institution in the News (Off-site links)
The New York Times - "Shy U.S. Intellectual Created Playbook Used in a Revolution" by Sheryl Gay Stolberg, February 16, 2011.

The Daily Beast - Profile of Gene Sharp by Samuel P. Jacobs, February 14, 2011.

New York Times - "Dual Uprisings Show Potent New Threats to Arab States" by David D. Kirkpatrick and David E. Sanger, February 14, 2011

Scientific American - "Egypt's revolution vindicates Gene Sharp's theory of nonviolent activism" by John Horgan, February 11, 2011

National Catholic Reporter - Interview with Gene Sharp by Claire Schaeffer-Duffy, February 4, 2011

CounterPunch - "Blind Faith and American Militarism" by Michael True, February 2, 2011

Jane's Intelligence Review - "Generation of '88, Kyaw Kyaw, NCUB director" - an interview with a member of the pro-democracy group in Burma, Oct 8, 2010

Pacific Daily News (Guam) - "People must know they have power" by A. Gaffar Peang-Meth, October 6, 2010

Associated Press - "Egypt's youth build new opposition Movement" by Sarah El Deeb, September 16, 2010

The New Yorker - "After the Crackdown, Talking to Mahmoud Ahmadinejad--and the opposition--about Iran today" by Jon Lee Anderson, August 16, 2010

Utne Reader - "Lessons from the Godfather: Interview with Gene Sharp" by Jeff Severns Guntzel, July 2010

ScientificAmerican.com - "How George W. Bush rejected my 'Sharp' idea for countering terrorism" by John Horgan, July 19, 2010

Jewish Herald-Voice - "How to get rid of a dictatorship" by Aaron Howard, Jan 14, 2010

Georgian Daily - "Georgia: Looking Back At The Rose Revolution" by Alex van Oss, December 31, 2009

The Spectrum & Daily News" - "Harvard academic's ideas reach Iran" by Tad Trueblood, December 31, 2009

The Christian Science Monitor - "Iran protesters: the Harvard professor behind their tactics" by Scott Peterson, December 29, 2009

The Boston Globe - "Revolution of the Mind" by Farah Stockman, December 20, 2009

The Daily Star - "Beware of a brittle Iran" December 10, 2009

Slovo (Slovakia) - "Studená vojna novej generácie: farebné revolúcie" by Leopold Moravčík, December 4, 2009 (Off-site link; Google automated translation)

Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty - "Gene Sharp: Theoretician Of Velvet Revolution" by Michael Hirshman, November 27, 2009

The Rushford Report - "An Inconvenient Man" by Greg Rushford, September 21, 2009

YES! Magaine - "Weapons of Mass Democracy: Nonviolent Resistance Is the Most Powerful Tactic Against Oppressive Regimes" by Stephen Zunes, September 16, 2009

The Associated Press - "Iran: new audience for US scholar's protest guide" by Sebastian Abbot and Katarina Kratovac, June 26, 2009

The Wall Street Journal - "American Revolutionary: Quiet Boston Scholar Inspires Rebels Around the World" by Philip Shishkin, September 13, 2008

The Financial Times - "Defiance undeterred: Burmese activists seek ways to oust the junta" by Amy Kazmin, December 6, 2007

The Phoenix (Boston) - "The Dictator Slayer" by Adam Reilly, December 5, 2007

Ohio State University Alumni Magazine - "The Most Influential Man You Don't Know" by Charlie Euchner, November-December, 2007
More...

Most are quite recent.
It would seem the word is leaking out--now, it's a big leak.
Even my old alumni,(one of them) Ohio State University, was grudgingly admiring, while slipping in the obligatory waffles and CYA phrases, and that's saying a lot.
 

Capitalism searches out the darkest corners of human potential, and mainlines them.

by geezer in Paris (risico at wanadoo(flypoop)fr) on Mon Feb 21st, 2011 at 02:07:22 AM EST
you forgot the Angry Arab, who also has some opinions on the subject.
by stevesim on Mon Feb 21st, 2011 at 03:01:07 AM EST
[ Parent ]
here is a sample.

Keynesianism is intellectually hard, as evidenced by the inability of many trained economists to get it - Paul Krugman
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Mon Feb 21st, 2011 at 03:05:34 AM EST
[ Parent ]
thanks.
by stevesim on Mon Feb 21st, 2011 at 03:48:27 AM EST
[ Parent ]
We like to link to sources...

Keynesianism is intellectually hard, as evidenced by the inability of many trained economists to get it - Paul Krugman
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Mon Feb 21st, 2011 at 04:00:40 AM EST
[ Parent ]
ok.

but I just read the Wikipedia entry for Gene Sharp, which links to a NY Times article about his supposed influence in the Egyptian and Tunisian uprisings.  We all know how reliable the NYT is.  

You know, I am wondering if this is how accepted history was written -   an incorrect but opinionated source used as a reference throughout recorded time.  It's a little bit depressing, to say the least.

by stevesim on Mon Feb 21st, 2011 at 04:19:11 AM EST
[ Parent ]
"but I just read the Wikipedia entry for Gene Sharp, which links to a NY Times article about his supposed influence in the Egyptian and Tunisian uprisings."

I'd already linked to this, it's a pity you don't actually bother to read what's being discussed.

 Informed history isn't written by people who dismiss things based on generalised claims such as "We all know how reliable the NYT is." You need to do the somewhat more demanding work of justifying the claim that this particular article is wrong or misleading - and not by the pathetic repetition that Angry Arab says so - I've already shown that he can't even report an article accurately.

Maybe it's because I'm a Londoner - that I moved to Nice.

by Ted Welch (tedwelch-at-mac-dot-com) on Mon Feb 21st, 2011 at 06:14:45 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Wikipedia:

Judith Miller (born January 2, 1948) is a Pulitzer Prize-winning American journalist, formerly of the New York Times in Washington D.C. Her coverage of Iraq's alleged Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) program both before and after the 2003 invasion garnered much controversy.[1] A number of stories she wrote while working for the New York Times later turned out to be inaccurate or completely false.

Miller was later involved in disclosing Valerie Plame's identity as a CIA agent. She spent three months in jail for claiming reporter's privilege and refusing to reveal her sources in the CIA leak. Miller retired from her job at the New York Times in November 2005. Later she was a contributor to the Fox News Channel and a fellow at the conservative Manhattan Institute think-tank. On December 29, 2010, numerous media outlets reported that she had signed on as a contributing writer to the conservative magazine Newsmax. [2][3]

I believe Bradblog may also have commented in passing on a few other minor terminological inexactitudes at the NYT over the years.

by ThatBritGuy (thatbritguy (at) googlemail.com) on Mon Feb 21st, 2011 at 06:33:11 AM EST
[ Parent ]

I'm well aware of that - and that the NYT admitted this and apologised for it and is likely to be more careful. So what ? This does not mean that everything in the NYT can be dismissed.  Has anyone else, besides Angry Arab, who can't read, disputed the NYT article? Have any of the people referred to as the leaders and some of whom referred to Sharp, disputed the NYT account ?  

Maybe it's because I'm a Londoner - that I moved to Nice.
by Ted Welch (tedwelch-at-mac-dot-com) on Mon Feb 21st, 2011 at 06:41:14 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I have no doubt that people in the middle of a revolution can't possibly think of anything more pressing than writing LTEs to a foreign newspaper they don't even read.

But clearly you'd rather believe any old nonsense from the NYT - with its proven track record of dishonesty - than someone with this bio:

As'ad AbuKhalil, born March 16, 1960. From Tyre, Lebanon, grew up in Beirut. Received his BA and MA from American University of Beirut in pol sc. Came to US in 1983 and received his PhD in comparative government from Georgetown University. Taught at Tufts University, Georgetown University, George Washington University, Colorado College, and Randolph-Macon Woman's College. Served as a Scholar-in-Residence at Middle East Institute in Washington DC. He served as free-lance Middle East consultant for NBC News and ABC News, an experience that only served to increase his disdain for maintream US media. He is now professor of political science at California State University, Stanislaus and visiting professor at UC, Berkeley.

Now - how on Earth could an individual with that background possibly offer an informed opinion about the Middle East?

by ThatBritGuy (thatbritguy (at) googlemail.com) on Mon Feb 21st, 2011 at 07:19:43 AM EST
[ Parent ]
ThatBritGuy:
any old nonsense from the NYT

So you consider that in this instance (whatever its record, and we surely agree on that) the NYT is talking "any old nonsense"? Care to back that up with particulars?

As for the Angry Arab's credentials, sure. Does that make him an indisputable authority in every case?

As always, reports or opinions we are looking at should be judged on their merits. What we know of the source and how seriously we take it obviously enters into that judgement. But blanket dismissal or blanket approval shouldn't.

by afew (afew(a in a circle)eurotrib_dot_com) on Mon Feb 21st, 2011 at 07:46:33 AM EST
[ Parent ]

"But clearly you'd rather believe any old nonsense from the NYT - with its proven track record of dishonesty - than someone with this bio"

There's no evidence yet that it is nonsense, or reason to suppose that a report on the successful overthrow of a long-time ally of the US gov is significantly mistaken. As to Angry Arab I don't care about his credentials so much as what he says and as I've pointed out several times already he gets basic things wrong in commenting on the NYT article.

Maybe it's because I'm a Londoner - that I moved to Nice.

by Ted Welch (tedwelch-at-mac-dot-com) on Mon Feb 21st, 2011 at 10:43:23 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Agreed on everything but the first sentence. While the NYT has apologized it has hardly mended its ways. See this for example.

Von überall könnte das Volk, Urbrut alles Undemokratischen, Zelle des Terrors, über die gewählten Hüter von Wachstum und Wohlstand® kommen. - flatter
by generic on Mon Feb 21st, 2011 at 07:41:32 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Although I'm not happy with your offhand remark that the Angry Arab can't read.

Von überall könnte das Volk, Urbrut alles Undemokratischen, Zelle des Terrors, über die gewählten Hüter von Wachstum und Wohlstand® kommen. - flatter
by generic on Mon Feb 21st, 2011 at 07:56:44 AM EST
[ Parent ]
he's a professor, for crying out loud, at a reputable university.  better academic credentials than many that you cite.

also, saying he can't read can be construed as a really racist statement.

by stevesim on Mon Feb 21st, 2011 at 08:07:31 AM EST
[ Parent ]
It would help if you noted what had already been said - do I have to keep repeating myself too ? I've already pointed out that he: 1) he claims that Sharp is claiming credit when the NYT article he's commenting on explicitly says Sharp is not doing this and is a modest, retiring guy. 2) He claims "nobody" in Egypt knows Gene Sharp, but in the same article organisers of the revolution refer to him and the Muslim Brotherhood have published one of his books online.

Maybe it's because I'm a Londoner - that I moved to Nice.
by Ted Welch (tedwelch-at-mac-dot-com) on Mon Feb 21st, 2011 at 10:20:20 AM EST
[ Parent ]
so Sharp is modest.  He founded an institute, for crying out loud.  how "modest" can he be?

that is also a subjective opinion, and hardly worthy of debate.

so, a few people seem to know his name.  that hardly proves anything.

by stevesim on Mon Feb 21st, 2011 at 10:51:52 AM EST
[ Parent ]
This is ridiculous.
In the original diary I quoted three very different sources with three different takes on the world in general. I did this for the obvious reason. These sources quoted a lot of Arabs who WERE on the street saying the man was influential, even seminal in places.
When it became clear that not a lot of the critics here either knew or intended to know much about Gene Sharp (the whole point of the diary), I laid down enough google food, from such a wide array of sources, that only a stone, someone totally disinterested or an ossified ideologue could fail to have an informed opinion.
And still we read references to sources so discretedited that they are laughable, and angry arguments from people who have not even read the post well, or the early links, let alone any of the work of Gene Sharp.
WSow. This is a low point around here.

Capitalism searches out the darkest corners of human potential, and mainlines them.
by geezer in Paris (risico at wanadoo(flypoop)fr) on Mon Feb 21st, 2011 at 01:15:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Quoting a source is not necessarily proof, you realize.  For example, someone just removed a line from the Wikipedia entry for Gene Sharp.  

And the NY Times with its neo-con agenda and dubious think tanks seem to have more validity here than left wing angry academics.  

by stevesim on Mon Feb 21st, 2011 at 01:44:06 PM EST
[ Parent ]
You quoted the NYT, Prospect and Voice of America.

You didn't quote any original Arabic sources.

And does this mean you're saying that Sharp has no links whatsoever to organisations like the ICNC? Or that you're saying the VA reports are simply lies?

Because if so, that's a hell of a stretch given the evidence trail - especially the ICNC link.

You know, it's not actually all that difficult to check Ackerman's history and connections.

I'll take the point about Einstein, but it still seems hi-falutin for someone who claims to be modest.

I'm not much bothered about Zunes' letter of support, because I'd rather look at the facts - and the facts really aren't as simple as you're claiming at all.

by ThatBritGuy (thatbritguy (at) googlemail.com) on Mon Feb 21st, 2011 at 01:49:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]
and I did quote an Arabic source.

but it got poohpoohed because some people here don't like him.

this doesn't seem to be a very rational method of evaluating the Truth.

it must be a new low in the history of this site.

by stevesim on Mon Feb 21st, 2011 at 01:59:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I had to do your linking of Angry Arab for you, lazy as you are.

This must be a new low in your short history with this site.

Get off your high horse already.

Keynesianism is intellectually hard, as evidenced by the inability of many trained economists to get it - Paul Krugman

by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Mon Feb 21st, 2011 at 02:21:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]
IIRC, the commencement speaker at CSU-Stanislaus this year  was the noted scholar and intellectual Sarah Palin.
by greatferm (greatferm-at-email.com) on Tue Feb 22nd, 2011 at 01:58:04 AM EST
[ Parent ]
When I saw Angry Arab's email address was @CSUstan I couldn't stop laughing...

Keynesianism is intellectually hard, as evidenced by the inability of many trained economists to get it - Paul Krugman
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Tue Feb 22nd, 2011 at 02:30:27 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Coincidentally, that was my reaction to the uncritical adulation here for the original NYT piece.

Also, this.

AbuKhalil loves Cal State Stanislaus and its students and would not consider trading it -- even for the more highly regarded UC Berkeley, where he is a visiting professor each spring.

"You know how shallow some Lebanese are about designer names, designer shoes, designer human beings, designer universities, excessive elegance?" he asked. "When I first came to Stanislaus, my mother was like, 'When are you going to leave? When are you going to leave?' She is a very well-educated person, very Francophile and very status obsessed. I had to tell her, 'You know, if you really want my happiness, you have to end this conversation. You have to accept that your son is happy at a non-prestigious university.' "

by ThatBritGuy (thatbritguy (at) googlemail.com) on Tue Feb 22nd, 2011 at 03:00:30 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I wasn't laughing at the prestige of the campus, but at the Afghanistan, Pakistan, CSUstan...

Keynesianism is intellectually hard, as evidenced by the inability of many trained economists to get it - Paul Krugman
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Tue Feb 22nd, 2011 at 03:49:48 AM EST
[ Parent ]
ThatBritGuy:
the uncritical adulation here for the original NYT piece.

Do you really believe what you're writing? Or are you just dishonest?

"People only accept change when they are faced with necessity, and only recognize necessity when a crisis is upon them." - Jean Monnet

by Melanchthon on Tue Feb 22nd, 2011 at 06:09:59 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I don't consider being told that my post was a "new low for ET" when I questioned the facts and the tone of the NYT piece to be either.

YMMV.

by ThatBritGuy (thatbritguy (at) googlemail.com) on Tue Feb 22nd, 2011 at 07:22:24 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Your post?

Take a look at who Migeru said that to.

by afew (afew(a in a circle)eurotrib_dot_com) on Tue Feb 22nd, 2011 at 07:57:41 AM EST
[ Parent ]
If you mean you didn't appreciate what stevesim said to you... I don't know, maybe you understand what he's saying. My mileage varies.
by afew (afew(a in a circle)eurotrib_dot_com) on Tue Feb 22nd, 2011 at 08:00:27 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Now, now! How many Arabic scholars can there be in the greater Stanislaus metro area? Oh, the joys of a career in academia.

As the Dutch said while fighting the Spanish: "It is not necessary to have hope in order to persevere."
by ARGeezer (ARGeezer a in a circle eurotrib daught com) on Wed Feb 23rd, 2011 at 01:19:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]
your opinion is just that - an opinion, not a fact.

he is also much more informed about the region than the NYTimes.

by stevesim on Mon Feb 21st, 2011 at 06:42:52 AM EST
[ Parent ]
The Angry Arab News Service
Comrade Talal sent me this (I cite with his permission): "I have to say that Tony Shadid made a huge difference to the coverage by the NYT of the recent Arab revolt. At his worst he was good, and at his best outstanding. The other NYT correspondents did not come close, and I am sure he would have been even better if the infamous NYT editors had let him loose." 

So - despite the "infamous NYT editors" (a judgement I agree with) - Angry Arab is passing on the word there can at least be some respectable material on the NYT.

by afew (afew(a in a circle)eurotrib_dot_com) on Mon Feb 21st, 2011 at 06:59:17 AM EST
[ Parent ]
because the correspondent is Arabic.

he makes fun of Thomas Friedman a lot because of his level of Arab language comprehension, among other things.

The reason I quote Prof Abu Khalil so much is that he is one of the few Arabic bloggers around.  There are many who blog about the Middle East but they are American or Jewish and have a biased opinion which does not reflect that of the majority of the population.

He also reads a lot of the area's media, gets a lot of e-mail from various sources, and knows the culture.

IF the NYT had correspondents like this more often, and removed their Zionist slant, perhaps they could be considered credible in the far future.

But come on, their editorials by Cohen over the revolt in Egypt had "Israel, Israel, Israel" all over them.  Who can take that seriously?  Seriously.

by stevesim on Mon Feb 21st, 2011 at 07:38:14 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I said I agreed with the opinion: "infamous NYT editors".

My point, that you have eluded, was that the Angry Arab is himself (by passing on the point of view of somebody he respects) accepting the notion that even the NYT can contain some decent material.

by afew (afew(a in a circle)eurotrib_dot_com) on Mon Feb 21st, 2011 at 07:50:13 AM EST
[ Parent ]
perhaps, but I know people in NYC that say that they can't even get the local news right -  they talk about brownstones on the street where an accident occurred when  there are none on that street, for example.
by stevesim on Mon Feb 21st, 2011 at 08:08:44 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Oh. I thought the Angry Arab was an authority. Never mind.

As for the anecdotes, if you can't link or make a proper reference, they're hearsay.

And I continue to agree the NYT is a lousy, biased paper. But that is not enough to blanket dismiss anything it publishes.

by afew (afew(a in a circle)eurotrib_dot_com) on Mon Feb 21st, 2011 at 08:52:19 AM EST
[ Parent ]
This isn't about the NYT, it's about whether or not the US is capable of, and interested in, running a PR campaign to promote its interests.

Reading around it's clear that the mythology of the Heroic Peace Activist doesn't stand up to scrutiny.

If it stood out on its own, with no context, it might be plausible.

But let's be realistic here.

US foreign policy has a long history of installing, financing, arming and backing dictatorial regimes which back its imperial policies and interests as long as they retain control over their people.

In the past, Republican and Democratic presidents worked closely for over 30 years with the Trujillo dictatorship in the Dominican Republic; installed the autocratic Diem regime in pre-revolutionary Vietnam in the 1950’s; collaborated with two generations of Somoza family terror regimes in Nicaragua; financed and promoted the military coup in Cuba 1952, Brazil 1964, Chile in 1973, and in Argentina in 1976 and the subsequent repressive regimes. When popular upheavals challenged these US backed dictatorships, and a social as well as political revolution appeared likely to succeed, Washington responded with a three track policy: publicly criticizing the human rights violations and advocating democratic reforms; privately signaling continued support to the ruler; and thirdly, seeking an elite alternative which could substitute for the incumbent and preserve the state apparatus, the economic system and support US strategic imperial interests.

For the US there are no strategic relationships only permanent imperial interests, name preservation of the client state. The dictatorships assume that their relationships with Washington is strategic: hence the shock and dismay when they are sacrificed to save the state apparatus. Fearing revolution, Washington has had reluctant client despots, unwilling to move on, assassinated (Trujillo and Diem). Some are provided sanctuaries abroad (Somoza, Batista),others are pressured into power-sharing (Pinochet) or appointed as visiting scholars to Harvard, Georgetown or some other "prestigious" academic posting.

The Washington calculus on when to reshuffle the regime is based on an estimate of the capacity of the dictator to weather the political uprising, the strength and loyalty of the armed forces and the availability of a pliable replacement. The risk of waiting too long, of sticking with the dictator, is that the uprising radicalizes: the ensuing change sweeps away both the regime and the state apparatus, turning a political uprising into a social revolution. Just such a `miscalculation' occurred in 1959 in the run-up to the Cuban revolution, when Washing stood by Batista and was not able to present a viable pro US alternative coalition linked to the old state apparatus. A similar miscalculation occurred in Nicaragua, when President Carter, while criticizing Somoza, stayed the course, and stood passively by as the regime was overthrown and the revolutionary forces destroyed the US and Israeli trained military, secret police and intelligence apparatus, and went on to nationalize US property and develop an independent foreign policy.

Washington moved with greater initiative, in Latin America in the 1980's.It promoted negotiated electoral transitions which replaced dictators with pliable neo-liberal electoral politicians, who pledged to preserve the existing state apparatus, defend the privileged foreign and domestic elites and back US regional and international policies.

So that's the background. And we're supposed to believe that suddenly the NYT and almost every other media outlet of note have simultaneously discovered an ageing intellectual who just happened to write some books that just happened to find their way to the revolutionaries and just happened to inspire them towards an irresistibly non-violent rush to democracy?

And who is paying for this?

On February 9, Al Jazeera aired an episode in its People and Power series entitled "Egypt: Seeds of Change." The programme offers a revealing behind the scenes look at a core group of activists from the April 6 Youth Movement who played a crucial role in Egypt's nonviolent revolution.

"This is not a spontaneous uprising," reporter Elizabeth Jones stressed. "The revolution has been in the making for three years." The key to its success, we learn, was the instruction April 6 leaders received from veterans of groups like Otpor, the student movement that brought down Serbian president Slododan Milosevic.

Srdja Popovic, a leader of that revolution, we are told, "shared his firsthand experience with April 6." Mohamed Adel, one of the April 6 leaders, describes his training in Serbia in the tactics of nonviolent resistance, including "how to organise and get people out on the streets." He brought back videos and teaching aids to help train the other leaders, who are shown "directing the uprising from the start."

Since the ouster of Milosevic in 2000, Popovic has been busy spreading the gospel of nonviolent warfare. In 2003, he founded the Centre for Applied Nonviolent Action and Strategies (CANVAS) in Belgrade. By spring 2010, the globe-trotting Serb reportedly had "five revolutions already under his belt." In a Mother Jones puff piece, Nicholas Schmidle writes: "CANVAS got off to an impressive start, training the pro-democracy campaigners in Georgia, Ukraine, and Lebanon who went on to lead the Rose, Orange, and Cedar revolutions, respectively."

But who funds it all? Schmidle, a fellow at the Soros-linked New America Foundation, cites Popovic: "CANVAS is '100 percent independent from any government' and funded entirely by private donors." Yet an LA Times profile of Nini Gogiberidze, a Georgian employee of CANVAS, says the group is funded in part by the near-governmental organisation Freedom House. "Gogiberidze," the Times adds, "is among Georgia's 'velvet' revolutionaries, a group of Western and local activists who make up a robust pro-democracy corps in this Caucasus country--so much of it funded by American philanthropist George Soros that one analyst calls the nation Sorosistan."

CANVAS works closely with the International Center for Nonviolent Conflict (ICNC), with which it has shared a number of staff members--including Dr. Stephen Zunes, who has collaborated with CANVAS in training Egyptian activists. Founded in 2002, the ICNC is funded entirely by Peter Ackerman, its founding chair. Ackerman, who chaired the board of Freedom House from September 2005 until January 2009, also indirectly funds CANVAS.

Ackerman's wealth derives mainly from his time at Drexel Burnham Lambert, the Wall Street investment bank that was forced into bankruptcy in February 1990 due to its involvement in illegal activities in the junk bond market. As special projects aide to junk bond king Michael Milken, Ackerman cleaned up. In 1988 alone, he took home a salary of $165 million for his critical role in financing Kohlberg Kravis Roberts's $26 billion leveraged buyout of RJR Nabisco. But four months before Drexel collapsed into bankruptcy, Ackerman "beat a fortuitously timed retreat" to the International Institute for Strategic Studies in London. While the "king" was sentenced to 10 years for securities fraud, "the highest-paid of all of Michael R. Milken's minions" emerged as "the big winner" with a fortune of approximately $500 million--prompting one of his former colleagues to complain: "Peter Ackerman is a real Teflon guy."

Having successfully escaped "the stench of Drexel," Ackerman completed what BusinessWeek called "an improbable transformation from junk-bond promoter back to scholar." Prior to his financial exploits, he had written his doctoral thesis under the guidance of Gene Sharp, the Harvard academic whose theories of nonviolent struggle had inspired the velvet revolutionaries. In fact, while he was still working for Milken, Ackerman had been funding Sharp's Albert Einstein Institution. According to the Wall Street Journal, "A large part of ICNC's and Canvas's theoretical arsenal is drawn from Mr. Sharp's writings."

As part of his own contribution to worldwide revolution, Ackerman has helped produce two documentaries on nonviolent conflict and even a regime change video game.

So at the very least the home-grown revolution turns into a deliberately trained one.

But it's deliberately trained in non-violent conflict - as opposed to the more explosive conflict which might lead to social transformation.

This isn't a difficult jigsaw to piece together.

As for the NYT - if it hadn't been quite so obvious in its praise of Sharp, I doubt anyone would have noticed. As it was, from a PR point of view, when you see the same point of view being repeated from multiple sources during a period of heightened emotion you can be damn sure you're being gamed.

Because that's pretty much the textbook definition of a PR campaign. We're not talking about one little story in an obscure journal - we're talking about significant air time for this modest, hitherto undiscovered meek intellectual who just happens not to mention that a former military operative was president of his institute, and that he's funded by an apparently frictionless investment banker who spent significant time at the very non-violent International Institute for Strategic Studies.

Goodness me - what interesting company Mr Sharp keeps.

Meanwhile we still don't know why and how the Muslim Brotherhood were reading Sharp. Supposedly they just happened to find his work online - which is a fine story, and is perfectly believable if you ignore the obvious support efforts the US has been making for the last few years.

(Is the story even true? Where was it sourced originally?)

by ThatBritGuy (thatbritguy (at) googlemail.com) on Mon Feb 21st, 2011 at 09:52:32 AM EST
[ Parent ]
excellent post!

I had completely forgotten about Soros and his links to "revolutions" which ended up installing American and in the case of Georgia, Israeli puppets in the name of "democracy".

Also, your research is excellent!

Well done!

by stevesim on Mon Feb 21st, 2011 at 10:06:27 AM EST
[ Parent ]
But who would be the target of this campaign? If we were talking about ElBaradei or the Google guy then I'd see the point of a hype campaign, but what is the nefarious plot behind claiming that some of the protesters read some book by an American?
I'd rather suspect that the western press is desperate to write about the Egyptian revolution without knowing much about it. They are just happy to find anything that seems relevant.

Von überall könnte das Volk, Urbrut alles Undemokratischen, Zelle des Terrors, über die gewählten Hüter von Wachstum und Wohlstand® kommen. - flatter
by generic on Mon Feb 21st, 2011 at 10:59:53 AM EST
[ Parent ]
in my opinion, it's to deflect the anger of the Egyptian people at Americans for repressing them for so long in order to maintain the peace with Israel, i.e. to make Americans look like good guys and not the self-serving repressive SOB's we are.
by stevesim on Mon Feb 21st, 2011 at 11:20:02 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I think it's a ham-fisted attempt at that, but also - since most US foreign policy is for domestic consumption - to wave the "hey, we're the good guys!' flag at home.

It takes a certain amount of chutzpah to pretend that after 50 years of instituting and supporting some of the most odious, violent and repressive regimes on the planet that the US has any interest at all in peace or democracy.

Clearly, it has none at all. But it's very useful to pretend that it does.

Now that Sharp has been identified as the - reluctant - saviour of Egyptian democracy, no one needs to ask who sponsored Mubarak, who trained his secret police, who supplied military aid, or who kept the country impoverished in the first place.

For many avid readers, the narrative is now full of hope that the rioting African savages can be civilised into modernity after all - but only when gently guided by the wise and mature counsel of a more serious and established intellectual tradition.

by ThatBritGuy (thatbritguy (at) googlemail.com) on Mon Feb 21st, 2011 at 12:29:35 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Oh of course, referring to this one guy is all a cunning capitalist plot to excuse the US government's support for dictators for decades. What rubbish.

It was young Egyptians who mentioned him:

When Egypt's April 6 Youth Movement was struggling to recover from a failed effort in 2005, its leaders tossed around "crazy ideas" about bringing down the government, said Ahmed Maher, a leading strategist. They stumbled on Mr. Sharp while examining the Serbian movement Otpor, which he had influenced.
...

Dalia Ziada, an Egyptian blogger and activist ... said that some activists translated excerpts of Mr. Sharp's work into Arabic, and that his message of "attacking weaknesses of dictators" stuck with them.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/17/world/middleeast/17sharp.html

The fact that some of them said they found some of his ideas useful hardly makes him a "saviour of Egyptian democracy" - except in your cartoon world. Another NYT article makes it clear that the organisers were bright, informed people who used net skills to help organise things, but they themselves pay tribute to the majority who risked their lives:


"When I looked around me and I saw all these unfamiliar faces in the protests, and they were more brave than us -- I knew that this was it for the regime," Mr. Maher said.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/14/world/middleeast/14egypt-tunisia-protests.html

And some already had experience of confronting police:

"The youth of the Muslim Brotherhood played a really big role," Mr. Maher said. "But actually so did the soccer fans" of Egypt's two leading teams. "These are always used to having confrontations with police at the stadiums," he said.

ibid

Also noted is Egyptian pride in their own level of civilisation:

"Eighty-five million people live in Egypt, and less than 1,000 people died in this revolution -- most of them killed by the police," said Mr. Ghonim, the Google executive. "It shows how civilized the Egyptian people are." He added, "Now our nightmare is over. Now it is time to dream."

ibid

Not quite the caricature you try to pass off.

Maybe it's because I'm a Londoner - that I moved to Nice.

by Ted Welch (tedwelch-at-mac-dot-com) on Mon Feb 21st, 2011 at 02:05:10 PM EST
[ Parent ]
is this like Thomas Friedman's quoting of a taxi driver?
by stevesim on Mon Feb 21st, 2011 at 02:10:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Is that supposed to be an intelligent response ?

Maybe it's because I'm a Londoner - that I moved to Nice.
by Ted Welch (tedwelch-at-mac-dot-com) on Mon Feb 21st, 2011 at 02:27:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]
ah, the ad hominem attacks commence!

yes, how do I know this woman exists and that the NYT is telling the truth about what she said?

they've lied before and are not above inventing comments from people to support their stories, à la Tom Friedman.

you dismissed my source, and I have a very valid argument to dismiss yours.

by stevesim on Mon Feb 21st, 2011 at 02:37:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Couldn't you do some elementary checking for yourself - try using Google (if that's not too "white man" for you):

http://daliaziada.blogspot.com/

The NYT is at least not stupid enough to just invent Egyptians and comments by them which could be revealed as inventions.

I didn't just dismiss your source, I showed where he had got things wrong - stupid of him since it's easy to check what the NYT did actually say.

Maybe it's because I'm a Londoner - that I moved to Nice.

by Ted Welch (tedwelch-at-mac-dot-com) on Mon Feb 21st, 2011 at 02:59:06 PM EST
[ Parent ]
wow.  you are really on a roll.

they are stupid enough to invent people.  they have done it before.  

by stevesim on Mon Feb 21st, 2011 at 03:08:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I think ONE of their reporters was stupid enough to do this, and so was fired.  The fact remains that you could have checked one of the named bloggers and had you done so you'd see she exists.

Maybe it's because I'm a Londoner - that I moved to Nice.
by Ted Welch (tedwelch-at-mac-dot-com) on Mon Feb 21st, 2011 at 03:12:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]
This isn't about the NYT, it's about whether or not the US is capable of, and interested in, running a PR campaign to promote its interests.

Who is supposed to be denying that the US is capable running a PR campaign to support it's interests? Nobody here I think.  We were discussing allegations against Gene Sharp after the NYT report.

The rest is is worthy of McCarthy, guilt by association: "Goodness me - what interesting company Mr Sharp keeps."

"who just happens not to mention that a former military operative was president of his institute"

1) that's false, of course Sharp has "mentioned" him:

Sharp's ties to Helvey raise one more important point. Perhaps, if the major proponent of Sharp's work had been an impeccably credentialed lefty rather than a former military man, Sharp's harshest critics wouldn't find him quite so spooky. But his collaboration with Helvey bolsters Sharp's own contention that nonviolent struggle isn't just a feel-good hobby for idealists and pacifists (he's not one himself). It is, instead, an intensely practical way to affect massive political change. "You don't have to be a saint; you don't have to be a mahatma," he tells me. "Ordinary people have done these things."

http://thephoenix.com/Boston/news/52417-dictator-slayer/

2) The guy beaten up while peacefully demonstrating at a speech by Clinton the other day is also a "former military operative" and even a CIA analyst, but is now part of Veterans for Peace - clearly must still be a covert CIA guy.

These allegations about Sharp ignore his bio, more telling than Angry Arab's academic record:

 the portrayal of Sharp as a crypto-imperialist just doesn't jibe with his own biography. After getting bachelor's and master's degrees from Ohio State, for example, he refused to serve in the Korean War, and did a prison stint in Connecticut as a result. After getting out, he spent a year and a half as an assistant to A.J. Muste, the pacifist labor and anti-war activist. And, notes USF's Zunes, a number of former Sharp protégés have become vocal critics of America's conduct abroad. "If it weren't for the fact that some people actually believe it," says Zunes of the notion that Sharp is a surrogate for the US government, "it'd be laughable."

ibid

It also ignores the open letter rejecting such allegations against Sharp, signed by such long-time and respected anti-imperialists as Chomsky and Zinn:


A charge made against Sharp by the Iranian government and Hugo Chavez--and echoed by some in this country--is that he acts in cahoots with U.S. officialdom in subverting anti-American governments. This is absurd, since Sharp's work has played a significant role in movements against Israel and Mubarak's Egypt, the two most pro-American countries in the Middle East.

"Rather than being a tool of imperialism, Dr. Sharp's research and writings have inspired generations of progressive peace, labor, feminist, human rights, environmental, and social justice activists in the United States and around the world," stated a 2008 open letter signed by Howard Zinn and Noam Chomsky, among many others.

Gene Sharp is a global treasure who deserves much more recognition here at home.

Amitabh Pal, the managing editor of The Progressive magazine

http://www.progressive.org/ap021711.html

 



Maybe it's because I'm a Londoner - that I moved to Nice.
by Ted Welch (tedwelch-at-mac-dot-com) on Mon Feb 21st, 2011 at 11:38:38 AM EST
[ Parent ]
ThatBritGuy:
This isn't about the NYT, it's about whether or not the US is capable of, and interested in, running a PR campaign to promote its interests.

Shifting goalposts, some. My comments were clearly about the value of sources and our attitude to them, so, sorry, but for me it was about the NYT. (Or the Angry Arab or any other source). And you don't need to convert me on American PR. Or the NYT's role in it.

I did ask you to support your claim that the NYT wrote "any old nonsense" about Sharp, so thanks for providing some backing. I'm not sure it's conclusive, (there seem to be counter-arguments), but then, I'm not in this discussion to attack or defend Gene Sharp, rather to insist on standards we usually apply round here.

afew:

reports or opinions we are looking at should be judged on their merits. What we know of the source and how seriously we take it obviously enters into that judgement. But blanket dismissal or blanket approval shouldn't.
by afew (afew(a in a circle)eurotrib_dot_com) on Mon Feb 21st, 2011 at 12:07:35 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Considering that you've just dismissed all my sources your point is - what, exactly?

And no, this is not about the NYT as a paper - this is about the NYT is being used (again) to craft a useful but misleading narrative.

by ThatBritGuy (thatbritguy (at) googlemail.com) on Tue Feb 22nd, 2011 at 03:04:33 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I have dismissed all your sources? What are you on about?

And what I was saying, to which you replied, was about the NYT as a source, whether you like it or not.

My point is perfectly clear. Just read.

by afew (afew(a in a circle)eurotrib_dot_com) on Tue Feb 22nd, 2011 at 03:13:35 AM EST
[ Parent ]
in this back-and-forth is that most of us are reading European media, in a variety of languages, and wouldn't dream of taking the NYT, or any other US media, as a reference on the Middle East. We're keenly aware of the "Israel" filter through which US media view the Middle East. This is a specifically US phenomenon.

It is rightly acknowledged that people of faith have no monopoly of virtue - Queen Elizabeth II
by eurogreen on Mon Feb 21st, 2011 at 08:16:50 AM EST
[ Parent ]
it's more than the NYT.  It's all of American and English culture and media.  They really think they are superior and having something to each others, when in fact, their history and culture is short and very soaked in blood and would have much to learn if they descended off their high horse and listened to people from other cultures.  

They mould history and "Western" culture according to their preferences, and I really don't like it.

The French are no better.

by stevesim on Mon Feb 21st, 2011 at 08:23:18 AM EST
[ Parent ]
So whoever is "Western" is tarred with the same brush?
by afew (afew(a in a circle)eurotrib_dot_com) on Mon Feb 21st, 2011 at 08:55:11 AM EST
[ Parent ]
we Westerners have to admit that is how we built our civilization and wealth.
by stevesim on Mon Feb 21st, 2011 at 09:00:22 AM EST
[ Parent ]
And when we do, are we allowed to have an opinion on world affairs beyond the West?
by afew (afew(a in a circle)eurotrib_dot_com) on Mon Feb 21st, 2011 at 09:13:05 AM EST
[ Parent ]
my philosophy is:

do whatever you want.  your choice will reflect your nature.

by stevesim on Mon Feb 21st, 2011 at 09:37:01 AM EST
[ Parent ]
That is the most phenomenally bullshit response I think I've seen on this blog. Congratulations!
by afew (afew(a in a circle)eurotrib_dot_com) on Mon Feb 21st, 2011 at 12:08:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]
you mean apart from what you spew?
by stevesim on Mon Feb 21st, 2011 at 12:32:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]
This thread has passed the "more heat than light" threshold.

Considering you consistently fail to substantiate your claims or link to sources, you might want to consider toning down a bit, too.

Keynesianism is intellectually hard, as evidenced by the inability of many trained economists to get it - Paul Krugman

by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Mon Feb 21st, 2011 at 12:40:52 PM EST
[ Parent ]
ok
by stevesim on Mon Feb 21st, 2011 at 12:50:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]
My comment at least contained a hint of humour.

No congratulations on your reply to it.

by afew (afew(a in a circle)eurotrib_dot_com) on Mon Feb 21st, 2011 at 12:42:06 PM EST
[ Parent ]
you call that humour?  here's some free advice - keep your day job. ;-)
by stevesim on Mon Feb 21st, 2011 at 12:51:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]
You have formulated this authoritative opinion based on extensive readings of French media coverage of the Middle East, I imagine?

I'm just trying to point out that there is a whole range of information sources between the NYT and Angry Arab. And some of them are quite good. There are, for example, a fair number of French journalists that speak Arabic; and a fair number of Arab journalists that speak French. There is, in fact, significant cultural interpenetration between France and North Africa, due to a long (and blood-soaked) colonial history. (There is also a high degree of cultural interpenetration with Israel, but it is not all-pervasive in the media).

It is rightly acknowledged that people of faith have no monopoly of virtue - Queen Elizabeth II

by eurogreen on Mon Feb 21st, 2011 at 09:29:52 AM EST
[ Parent ]
mais oui.  Je lisais Le Monde et Marianne à chacune de leurs parutions mais j'ai commencé à douter de leur appartenance à la gauche pendant les guerres d'Irak et d'Afghanistan. Et surtout que l'ancien ambassadeur d'Israel écrit régulièrement pour Marianne - pas trop biasé, non?

comment dit-on "droit d'ingérence" en anglais?

Le Nouvel Ob et Libé ne sont guère meilleurs.

voilà!

by stevesim on Mon Feb 21st, 2011 at 09:42:41 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I never considered that Marianne was on the left... Le Monde ceased to be so, progressivement, over the past couple of decades. Liberation is hardly any better, and fairly lightweight on foreign policy, so barely worth reading.

I have no problem with the Israeli ambassador having a regular column in a publication -- journalisme d'opinion is great, everything is transparent.
What I object to is having his opinions relayed by a supposedly objective journalist.

It is rightly acknowledged that people of faith have no monopoly of virtue - Queen Elizabeth II

by eurogreen on Mon Feb 21st, 2011 at 09:57:50 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Marianne is supposed to reflect the Republican ideals of France -  liberté, égalité, fraternité

it does a pretty good job, except with regards to Israel

by stevesim on Mon Feb 21st, 2011 at 10:49:47 AM EST
[ Parent ]
That is usually how the common version of history is written, yes. Gives something for future historians to deconstruct.

A vote for PES is a vote for EPP! A vote for EPP is a vote for PES! Support the coalition, vote EPP-PES in 2009!
by A swedish kind of death on Mon Feb 21st, 2011 at 02:24:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]

It's another sample showing that "angry" may be an accurate description but "accurate" isn't; he just repeats his old "nobody in Egypt knows him" line, which I've already answered above - key organisers DO know of him and have read him and the Muslim Brotherhood published one of his books online.


Maybe it's because I'm a Londoner - that I moved to Nice.

by Ted Welch (tedwelch-at-mac-dot-com) on Mon Feb 21st, 2011 at 06:45:01 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Nobody in The West™ knows him either, and that proves what, exactly?

Keynesianism is intellectually hard, as evidenced by the inability of many trained economists to get it - Paul Krugman
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Mon Feb 21st, 2011 at 07:08:04 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Maybe you could now deal with what I said.

Maybe it's because I'm a Londoner - that I moved to Nice.
by Ted Welch (tedwelch-at-mac-dot-com) on Mon Feb 21st, 2011 at 02:49:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]
that seems to be a very subjective point.  
by stevesim on Mon Feb 21st, 2011 at 07:34:34 AM EST
[ Parent ]
No, it's not.

Maybe it's because I'm a Londoner - that I moved to Nice.
by Ted Welch (tedwelch-at-mac-dot-com) on Mon Feb 21st, 2011 at 02:48:07 PM EST
[ Parent ]
key organisers DO know of him and have read him and the Muslim Brotherhood published one of his books online.

Maybe it just got lost in the confusion here, but what, precisely, is our reason to believe that these people were, in fact, "key organisers?" Are we going on an American newsie's say-so here, or do we have some sort of verifiable primary source for that claim?

- Jake

Austerity can only be implemented in the shadow of a concentration camp.

by JakeS (JangoSierra 'at' gmail 'dot' com) on Tue Feb 22nd, 2011 at 06:32:48 AM EST
[ Parent ]

We could hardly forget when you keep citing him, despite the fact that his "arguments" are more angry than intelligent, e.g. that Sharp was taking credit for the Egyptian revolution, specifically denied in the NYT article  AA himself refers to ( as I already pointed out) and he's not the only Arab who's referred to Sharp, and the others were ones centrally involved in Egypt, not just yelling angrily from the US.

Maybe it's because I'm a Londoner - that I moved to Nice.
by Ted Welch (tedwelch-at-mac-dot-com) on Mon Feb 21st, 2011 at 06:07:56 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I keep citing him because he cites many, many sources from the Arab world.

In this case, I really don't trust any American or even English news agencies' stories about the region because:

  •  they don't speak the language
  •  the don't understand the history or the culture
  •  they have an agenda, which can or cannot be unconscious, but still exists.
by stevesim on Mon Feb 21st, 2011 at 06:44:51 AM EST
[ Parent ]
 Unsubstantiated assertions:

You don't know that they don't speak the language - none of their correspondents ? !

You don't know that they don't know the history and culture

Does Angry Arab have an "agenda" ? What matters is what's claimed and whether there is any evidence for it, not dismissing things because of even unconscious agendas.

Again you rely on generalised, uninformed dismissals rather than any actual evidence about specific examples which might support your allegations.

Maybe it's because I'm a Londoner - that I moved to Nice.

by Ted Welch (tedwelch-at-mac-dot-com) on Mon Feb 21st, 2011 at 10:32:43 AM EST
[ Parent ]
even Robert Fisk, who has lived in Lebanon for over 20 years, doesn't speak Arabic

Thomas Friedman claims to, but confuses 17 with 70

Cohen from the NYT seems to have a good command of the language

but various Arab bloggers post about the language skills of the foreign correspondents assigned to their country and it is often repeated "doesn't speak Arabic"

by stevesim on Mon Feb 21st, 2011 at 10:42:00 AM EST
[ Parent ]

So, for ONE of your assertions you have one example - and Friedman made  a mistake, then an example against your assertion (Cohen)  and some Arab bloggers say SOME foreign correspondents don't speak Arabic.

Is that it ?

Maybe it's because I'm a Londoner - that I moved to Nice.

by Ted Welch (tedwelch-at-mac-dot-com) on Mon Feb 21st, 2011 at 02:46:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]
And your substantiated assertion is that the Egyptian revolutionary cadres are avid readers of the NYT? That while their compatriots were being slaughtered they were taking breaks to debate Brooks, Dowd, and the Moustache of Understanding?

Your compelling evidence for this is where, exactly?

I'm sure that Angry Arab will be delighted to know that his own biography doesn't count as evidence of achievement.

Still - I expect he can console himself with the thought that if he was writing for the NYT you'd believe everything he said, based on its proven expertise, impeccable track record, and convincing contrition when caught lying.

by ThatBritGuy (thatbritguy (at) googlemail.com) on Mon Feb 21st, 2011 at 10:53:33 AM EST
[ Parent ]

I asked if ANYONE had questioned the NYT's reports of what some of the people in the revolution had said in interviews.

They are very net-savvy young people so even they, especially since Mubarak left, are quite likely to read the NYT stuff on their revolution online.

Re the NYT, as afew pointed out:


The Angry Arab News Service


Comrade Talal sent me this (I cite with his permission): "I have to say that Tony Shadid made a huge difference to the coverage by the NYT of the recent Arab revolt. At his worst he was good, and at his best outstanding. The other NYT correspondents did not come close, and I am sure he would have been even better if the infamous NYT editors had let him loose."

So - despite the "infamous NYT editors" (a judgement I agree with) - Angry Arab is passing on the word there can at least be some respectable material on the NYT.


I'm sure that Angry Arab will be delighted to know that his own biography doesn't count as evidence of achievement.

I'm sure you'll continue to ignore relevant evidence such as Sharp's bio that doesn't fit your conspiracy theory.


Still - I expect he can console himself with the thought that if he was writing for the NYT you'd believe everything he said, based on its proven expertise, impeccable track record, and convincing contrition when caught lying.

If you don't have any arguments resort to caricature again. No, I don't believe everything that's in the NYT, but then I don't adopt the stupid position of rejecting everything that's in it either. You haven't shown that the NYT has got anything wrong in this case, so again you just caricature what it says.

Maybe it's because I'm a Londoner - that I moved to Nice.

by Ted Welch (tedwelch-at-mac-dot-com) on Mon Feb 21st, 2011 at 02:42:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]
that's so funny.  the NYT filters their comments like a Brita water filter.

even if they had read the article in the NYT and disagreed with it, that is assuming they  even exist, are you sure willing to grant the NYT the benefit of the doubt that they would post such comments.

LOL

by stevesim on Mon Feb 21st, 2011 at 02:46:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I didn't say it had to be in the NYT, does your mate Angry Arab or any Egyptian blogger question what they said ?  Anyway of course they do include comments critical of them. If they refuse them people post elsewhere, note that the NYT censored them and they look even worse.

Maybe it's because I'm a Londoner - that I moved to Nice.
by Ted Welch (tedwelch-at-mac-dot-com) on Mon Feb 21st, 2011 at 03:08:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Sadly, that logic only applies to outlets that a) are not anointed with institutional credibility by being Serious, and b) have a non-negligible share of readers who might happen across such indictments. Neither is true for NYT.

Which is not to say that they systematically memory-hole comments contradicting their news and views. I really can't say one way or the other. I have never been sufficiently motivated to wade through the crazy in their comments long enough to learn anything interesting about their comment policy.

- Jake

Austerity can only be implemented in the shadow of a concentration camp.

by JakeS (JangoSierra 'at' gmail 'dot' com) on Tue Feb 22nd, 2011 at 06:58:46 AM EST
[ Parent ]
the entire area is "angry".  why should he be any different, and what better harbinger that he reflects the mood of the populace?
by stevesim on Mon Feb 21st, 2011 at 07:35:18 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Because he's angry too he must be accurate ? - now you go beyond parody :-)

Maybe it's because I'm a Londoner - that I moved to Nice.
by Ted Welch (tedwelch-at-mac-dot-com) on Mon Feb 21st, 2011 at 10:33:43 AM EST
[ Parent ]
accurate?  you mean like a Swiss watch?

or does he reflect the mood, the Zeitgeist if you will, of his people?

on the second point, a definite "yes"

by stevesim on Mon Feb 21st, 2011 at 10:43:01 AM EST
[ Parent ]
To this point, the most interesting aspect to the response to my diary is that no one except perhaps Ted seems to have bothered to READ the man.
If I'm wrong, tell me.

WHO HERE HAS BOTHERED TO READ SOMETHING THAT GENE SHARP HAS WRITTEN?

--Some small part of the body of work that so impressed Chomsky, Zinn and so many other luminaries of the thoughtful left?

The lack of any real support for your angry arguments, stevesim, is obvious. If you had any real ammo, you'd have fired it off. Nothing in your many comments supports your angry assertions, and I've read them all at least twice.

TBG, your gratuitous and unnecessary history lesson has so little to do with the question "So who pays for all this"? My head swims searching for any connection with Sharp Unless you're asserting that, as a taxpayer, he's as screwed as the rest of us. I'll grant that point. As well, it's equally hard to find a logical frame for the rest of your slashing attack other than a cynical refusal to accept the possibility that there might be good, honorable men out there, and some of them might even be Americans. That's a problem I've encountered before with your comments, but I set it aside because I respect your intellect.

But this time it's tough.
You treat us to a revelatory journey into arcane organizational trivia, and eventually reveal that-- Shazam! One of his donors has a bio that suggests a crooked financial history.
That's --it?
Jeez. Shades of Gene McCarthy. Sounds a lot like J. Edgar Hoover's elaborate decades-long search for evil in MLK's heart (or pants), turning up a used condom and a doubtful merit badge. Or all the years of frothing over Clinton's blow job- we all know such things rot your brain. Don't they? (Drool).

But, now that you put it all together for me,-- jeez. I should have tumbled to the plot right off. Stupid me. Somewhere under that single room in his small home, guarded faithfully by his single female assistant lies the headquarters of a vast, well-funded intercontinental PR plot, supported by dough from a crook who just barely escaped the slammer for securities fraud. Of course. Just the sort of thing Mr. Teflon would do.
A PR --or more properly, a psywar operation, an evil  Media Medusa that has used once again all the compliant, servile major media, but also has sucked in international leftist media from 15 countries (that I can count, from his site) and has flimflammed an incredible list of high-powered thinkers alive and dead.
Jeez. If the evil empire is this slick, this powerful, ---what can us miserable ordinaries do?

Think I'll just suck off the gas water heater.


Capitalism searches out the darkest corners of human potential, and mainlines them.

by geezer in Paris (risico at wanadoo(flypoop)fr) on Mon Feb 21st, 2011 at 03:06:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Excellent :-)

Maybe it's because I'm a Londoner - that I moved to Nice.
by Ted Welch (tedwelch-at-mac-dot-com) on Mon Feb 21st, 2011 at 04:48:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:

Top Diaries

In defense of tree-huggers

by Cyrille - Apr 18
19 comments

Budapest Metro Line M4

by DoDo - Apr 19
3 comments

Elections in Orbánistan

by DoDo - Apr 6
39 comments

An unfair test

by Cyrille - Apr 8
6 comments

Might INET be a Trojan Horse?

by ARGeezer - Mar 31
10 comments

Occasional Series