WARNING: This post was written from the perspective of an American. All usage of "we" or "our" refers to America or western culture in general. Sorry.
Background: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/modern-art-was-cia-weapon-1578808.html
So, on a whim I picked up a $1 book on a trip to DC last year. It's "Superpower Illusions" by Jack Matlock, wherein the Reagan-loving diplomat lays out just how fucking retarded we as Americans have gotten about the history of the Cold War and why it's fucking up our foreign policy. The short version as i understand it is that Reagan *did* have an important roll in bringing the Cold War to an end, but it was more because of his willingness to talk with the Soviets and give them a way out and less the saber rattling. That the biggest problems the Soviets had were self-created through the belief that they needed more control over their people and over the ideological discourse of the nation. By clamping down on their populace, they made western culture look more appealing.
What we're screwing up now is thinking that just "being stronger" than another nation and yelling at them long enough will make them fall down and get into line. That's bullshit. The harder we clamp down on our own people, the more vulnerable we are to internal strife and collapse. And leaning on other countries isn't enough, we have to show them how much more awesome it is to be on our side by making it more awesome to be on our side. You want freedom? Our artists are so free we let them just splash paint on a canvas!
The end of the Cold War was just as much Gorbachov as it was Reagan.
This is an interesting article though. I have a response to the art angle rattling around in my head, but it's not done quite yet.
Quote from: Billy the Twid on February 14, 2012, 06:01:46 PM
The end of the Cold War was just as much Gorbachov as it was Reagan.
And it was just as much McDonalds, Pepsi Cola, and Levis as it was the two of them.
Their system didn't work, and eventually ran out of steam...Reagan sped things up a bit, largely by bankrupting us while spending them into the ground, militarily.
Contrast that with our system, which operates like a well oiled machine...One that uses us as fuel.
Quote from: Billy the Twid on February 14, 2012, 06:01:46 PM
The end of the Cold War was just as much Gorbachov as it was Reagan.
This is an interesting article though. I have a response to the art angle rattling around in my head, but it's not done quite yet.
The author's argument was that a more moderate republican or democrat might not have been able to convince congress to start the process of curbing the arms race, which I kinda believe. The book is totally worth the read just to hear someone who actually worked with Reagan bitching out the idiots trying to claim his Sacred Mantle
R.
In fact, if we had a brain in our collective heads-of-state, we'd be tempting the Iranians with luxury goods, instead of slapping them with sanctions and saber-rattling.
Of course, getting the Iranians to cooperate is not precisely what our government's owners have in mnd.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on February 14, 2012, 06:06:48 PM
In fact, if we had a brain in our collective heads-of-state, we'd be tempting the Iranians with luxury goods, instead of slapping them with sanctions and saber-rattling.
Of course, getting the Iranians to cooperate is not precisely what our government's owners have in mnd.
Now I'm picturing something like "Persian Idol."
That would also probably help the Iranian government to maintain control and cut down on riots.
Quote from: Billy the Twid on February 14, 2012, 06:09:04 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on February 14, 2012, 06:06:48 PM
In fact, if we had a brain in our collective heads-of-state, we'd be tempting the Iranians with luxury goods, instead of slapping them with sanctions and saber-rattling.
Of course, getting the Iranians to cooperate is not precisely what our government's owners have in mnd.
Now I'm picturing something like "Persian Idol."
That would also probably help the Iranian government to maintain control and cut down on riots.
See? That's win-win. You're a fucking genius. Why you aren't in the state department is a complete mystery to me.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on February 14, 2012, 06:14:02 PM
Quote from: Billy the Twid on February 14, 2012, 06:09:04 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on February 14, 2012, 06:06:48 PM
In fact, if we had a brain in our collective heads-of-state, we'd be tempting the Iranians with luxury goods, instead of slapping them with sanctions and saber-rattling.
Of course, getting the Iranians to cooperate is not precisely what our government's owners have in mnd.
Now I'm picturing something like "Persian Idol."
That would also probably help the Iranian government to maintain control and cut down on riots.
See? That's win-win. You're a fucking genius. Why you aren't in the state department is a complete mystery to me.
It would probably be better than American Idol.
Interesting article, QG. i'll have to check out that book.
Twid. Iran does have an entertainment industry. I would be surprised if they didn't have a variety show like american idol. they're doing it everywhere else....
Quote from: Billy the Twid on February 14, 2012, 06:09:04 PM
Now I'm picturing something like "Persian Idol."
That would also probably help the Iranian government to maintain control and cut down on riots.
There's an Arab language Idol-type program, but they write poetry instead of singing. I can't remember much else about it, but they talked about it on NPR a while back.
Quote from: Pope Coyote of the Wolffnords on February 14, 2012, 06:15:06 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on February 14, 2012, 06:14:02 PM
Quote from: Billy the Twid on February 14, 2012, 06:09:04 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on February 14, 2012, 06:06:48 PM
In fact, if we had a brain in our collective heads-of-state, we'd be tempting the Iranians with luxury goods, instead of slapping them with sanctions and saber-rattling.
Of course, getting the Iranians to cooperate is not precisely what our government's owners have in mnd.
Now I'm picturing something like "Persian Idol."
That would also probably help the Iranian government to maintain control and cut down on riots.
See? That's win-win. You're a fucking genius. Why you aren't in the state department is a complete mystery to me.
It would probably be better than American Idol.
Even with the sound off. Persian women make my pants tight.
Quote from: Iptuous on February 14, 2012, 06:15:38 PM
Interesting article, QG. i'll have to check out that book.
Twid. Iran does have an entertainment industry. I would be surprised if they didn't have a variety show like american idol. they're doing it everywhere else....
Oh, I know. Picturing a country without an entertainment industry is impossible.
North Korean Idol would probably be hilarious.
Should google before posting: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=125356092
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on February 14, 2012, 06:16:04 PM
Even with the sound off. Persian women make my pants tight.
hell yeah. there's some real beauty there.
add in the exotic aspect of it.... oooff.
Quote from: Queen_Gogira on February 14, 2012, 06:15:38 PM
Quote from: Billy the Twid on February 14, 2012, 06:09:04 PM
Now I'm picturing something like "Persian Idol."
That would also probably help the Iranian government to maintain control and cut down on riots.
There's an Arab language Idol-type program, but they write poetry instead of singing. I can't remember much else about it, but they talked about it on NPR a while back.
Poetry's too cerebral. It's gotta be trite pop music. Trite pop music the contestant never even wrote.
This is going to turn into a fap thread, isn't it. :roll:
Quote from: Billy the Twid on February 14, 2012, 06:20:35 PM
Quote from: Queen_Gogira on February 14, 2012, 06:15:38 PM
Quote from: Billy the Twid on February 14, 2012, 06:09:04 PM
Now I'm picturing something like "Persian Idol."
That would also probably help the Iranian government to maintain control and cut down on riots.
There's an Arab language Idol-type program, but they write poetry instead of singing. I can't remember much else about it, but they talked about it on NPR a while back.
Poetry's too cerebral. It's gotta be trite pop music. Trite pop music the contestant never even wrote.
Yep. You don't want the audience thinking. This is why there is no "America Loves Rudyard Kipling", but instead "America Loves Watching Simon Cowell Shit on People".
Quote from: Queen_Gogira on February 14, 2012, 06:21:45 PM
This is going to turn into a fap thread, isn't it. :roll:
Yeah, I regretted that post the moment I hit the post button.
Quote from: Billy the Twid on February 14, 2012, 06:09:04 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on February 14, 2012, 06:06:48 PM
In fact, if we had a brain in our collective heads-of-state, we'd be tempting the Iranians with luxury goods, instead of slapping them with sanctions and saber-rattling.
Of course, getting the Iranians to cooperate is not precisely what our government's owners have in mnd.
Now I'm picturing something like "Persian Idol."
That would also probably help the Iranian government to maintain control and cut down on riots.
Reminds me of the movie War, Inc.
Quote from: Billy the Twid on February 14, 2012, 06:20:35 PM
Quote from: Queen_Gogira on February 14, 2012, 06:15:38 PM
Quote from: Billy the Twid on February 14, 2012, 06:09:04 PM
Now I'm picturing something like "Persian Idol."
That would also probably help the Iranian government to maintain control and cut down on riots.
There's an Arab language Idol-type program, but they write poetry instead of singing. I can't remember much else about it, but they talked about it on NPR a while back.
Poetry's too cerebral. It's gotta be trite pop music. Trite pop music the contestant never even wrote.
So, lots of Rami and Khalil Gibran, then.
it is my understanding that poetry actually is 'pop' in Iran.
Quote from: Iptuous on February 14, 2012, 07:15:12 PM
it is my understanding that poetry actually is 'pop' in Iran.
That puts them about 300 miles ahead of us, culturally. :lulz:
it really does.
it is my understanding that poetry is significant in their education. not just like our nursery rhymes, but honest to go poetry. all through schooling. in their popular media. in their religion. in their science.
Quote from: Iptuous on February 14, 2012, 07:30:04 PM
it really does.
it is my understanding that poetry is significant in their education. not just like our nursery rhymes, but honest to go poetry. all through schooling. in their popular media. in their religion. in their science.
In my father's day, you had to read Kipling, Frost, Service, etc.
When I was in grade school it was some shit about "A Poem As Lovely As A Tree", which was - I believe - specifically designed to KILL POETRY FOR YOU FOREVER, in the same manner that they KILLED SHAKESPEARE by ignoring
Henry V and
MacBeth in favor of that tripe,
A Midsummer Night's Dream.
WHY WON'T JOHNNY READ? :?
I'd like to get an english translation of some Persian poetry.
you could push it on most people without them even realizing that Persian=Iranian, and if it was really awesome and accessible/universal, it could stick with them.
i imagine it's harder to dehumanize someone that you associate with good poetry.
I like midsummer night's dream :sad:
Quote from: Queen_Gogira on February 14, 2012, 08:26:49 PM
I like midsummer night's dream :sad:
They make a pill for that.
Quote from: Iptuous on February 14, 2012, 07:59:46 PM
I'd like to get an english translation of some Persian poetry.
you could push it on most people without them even realizing that Persian=Iranian, and if it was really awesome and accessible/universal, it could stick with them.
i imagine it's harder to dehumanize someone that you associate with good poetry.
I recommend Rumi. He writes a lot of (very lovely) love poetry, but also lots of not-strictly-about-love and sometimes bawdy poetry/sermon-y things. "Essential Rumi" translated by Coleman Barks and John Moyne is the best version I've found.
Quote from: Iptuous on February 14, 2012, 07:59:46 PM
I'd like to get an english translation of some Persian poetry.
you could push it on most people without them even realizing that Persian=Iranian, and if it was really awesome and accessible/universal, it could stick with them.
i imagine it's harder to dehumanize someone that you associate with good poetry.
Au contraire. your revelations about how deeply poetry is ingrained in the fabric of Iranian culture has actually convinced me to join with the rabid wingnuts on the side of being in favor of dropping massive amounts of nuclear weapons on Iran.
Quote from: Secret Agent GARBO on February 14, 2012, 11:59:49 PM
Quote from: Iptuous on February 14, 2012, 07:59:46 PM
I'd like to get an english translation of some Persian poetry.
you could push it on most people without them even realizing that Persian=Iranian, and if it was really awesome and accessible/universal, it could stick with them.
i imagine it's harder to dehumanize someone that you associate with good poetry.
I recommend Rumi. He writes a lot of (very lovely) love poetry, but also lots of not-strictly-about-love and sometimes bawdy poetry/sermon-y things. "Essential Rumi" translated by Coleman Barks and John Moyne is the best version I've found.
I've been exposed to some selected bits of Rumi, some of it is really really amazing and beautiful. Didn't know he was Persian btw.
Hm, looking through my old collection of collected quotes I could only find one:
Intellectuals try not to drown, while the whole purpose of love is drowning.
- rumi
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on February 14, 2012, 07:33:13 PM
Quote from: Iptuous on February 14, 2012, 07:30:04 PM
it really does.
it is my understanding that poetry is significant in their education. not just like our nursery rhymes, but honest to go poetry. all through schooling. in their popular media. in their religion. in their science.
In my father's day, you had to read Kipling, Frost, Service, etc.
When I was in grade school it was some shit about "A Poem As Lovely As A Tree", which was - I believe - specifically designed to KILL POETRY FOR YOU FOREVER, in the same manner that they KILLED SHAKESPEARE by ignoring Henry V and MacBeth in favor of that tripe, A Midsummer Night's Dream.
WHY WON'T JOHNNY READ? :?
this!!
My poetry education started with Carl Sandburgh. Blech, nature poetry is some of the most boring shit ever. Our teacher made us write carl-sandburg style poems. It was like, "pick a bird. now write a poem about it."
Quote from: Triple Zero on February 15, 2012, 12:18:06 PM
I've been exposed to some selected bits of Rumi, some of it is really really amazing and beautiful. Didn't know he was Persian btw.
Burns turned me onto Rumi a while back. If you like rumi, you'll probably like Hafiz.
I find that if I'm in the mood to read those guys, I try to find a website with the absolutely worst style ever. You know, where the poetry is typed in pink comic sans. Makes it look like a hallmark card. Except it's a hallmark card written hundreds of years ago in Persia. I don't know why I insist on reading them this way, I just find it funny.
Quote from: Fuck You One-Eye on February 15, 2012, 12:08:22 AM
Quote from: Iptuous on February 14, 2012, 07:59:46 PM
I'd like to get an english translation of some Persian poetry.
you could push it on most people without them even realizing that Persian=Iranian, and if it was really awesome and accessible/universal, it could stick with them.
i imagine it's harder to dehumanize someone that you associate with good poetry.
Au contraire. your revelations about how deeply poetry is ingrained in the fabric of Iranian culture has actually convinced me to join with the rabid wingnuts on the side of being in favor of dropping massive amounts of nuclear weapons on Iran.
you're an exceptional creature. we could get the majority of people to empathize with the persians by exposing them to their art, (i've heard many ignorant hicks say something to the effect of "them ay-rabs [referring to Iran] havn't ever contributed a durned thing to the world!"), and then the rare bird such as yourself could be swung by rational discourse and appeal to personal interest.
Most Persian music is ABOUT the poetry. The beats and the melodic parts of their music are disastisfactorally similar.
I'd posit alot of Indian, Arabic and Afghan music can seem the same.
But the words are the heart of the piece, and that's why you'd see a poetry (see it more like freestyle Rap, if you can) ocmpetition as taking the place of one where people sing and dance. Old folk songs sung by "pop" idols can get a whole audience that 10 years ago might have been fighting in the streets to link arms and cry together, simply because the words to those people are so very beautiful and they identify with them as a culture.
It would be an awesome study, I've thought, as I've been semi-tortured with the Persian/Afghan/Indian genres of music for a couple of decades now, to juxtapose the music the West comes to expect as entertaining, meaningful and emotionally moving to the Eastern traditions of prose-over-notes.
Afghan Idol, by the way, has been on for a while now. One of the girls who won was threatened with death, so she had to have protection and I think had to leave the country for a while. And so it goes...
As to the whole Reagan debate, there's a consortium (read: thinktank, etc.) of right-wingers in the US whose sole occupation is not only to rename bridges, libraries and schools after Reagan, but also to change peoples' memories of that time period and reshape the man's "legacy." Books like the one described in the OP will soon be put on the 451 pile and burned to cinders if they don't continue to get some play.
Quote from: Queen Gogira Pennyworth, BSW on February 14, 2012, 05:54:49 PM
The short version as i understand it is that Reagan *did* have an important roll in bringing the Cold War to an end, but it was more because of his willingness to talk with the Soviets and give them a way out and less the saber rattling. That the biggest problems the Soviets had were self-created through the belief that they needed more control over their people and over the ideological discourse of the nation. By clamping down on their populace, they made western culture look more appealing.
This is certainly part of it. Although if any leader other than Gorbachev had been in charge, it might not have worked.
The USSR was always going to be suspicious of US intentions and somewhat hostile. Political paranoia has a long history in Russia...historically speaking, Russia wasn't so much a nation as a transit route for up and coming imperial powers, either from the east (the Golden Horde) or the west (Teutonic Knights, Baltic princelings). Often these two forces acted in tandem, destroying what little political authority native princes and lords had, at the very least up until the time of Tsar Ivan IV (the "Terrible").
As such, political authority in Russia was always sharply centralized, and often concerned about being "encircled" by foreign threats or being subverted from within. Before the KGB, the Tsars ran a highly effective and dangerous secret police force, one which had infiltrated many terrorist networks in the country and were responsible for elaborate forgeries like the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, a favourite conspiracy screed of anti-Semitic groups even to this day.
Bolshevism merely updated many of these traditional approaches and trends within Russian political culture. That almost immediately after the end of WWI, while the civil war still raged, that the "capitalist powers" of the UK, America and France intervened on the behalf of the "Whites", many of whom were almost proto-fascist in their worldview, was not quickly forgotten, even if their contributions were overstated. And that in the decade before WWII there was an unofficial policy of attempting to use the fascist states of Japan (East) and Germany (West) to contain international Communism certainly awakened old fears concerning encirclement, which eventually became official US policy after WWII, with the concept of containment.
Russia, as a state, was paranoid. Stalin in particular, literally so. Recent theories suggest, with some backing, that he had a brain disorder that made him a clinical paranoid, he saw enemies and conspiracies everywhere. But even without that, the political culture of the Soviet Union, on the bedrock of Tsarist suspicion, worsened by a brutal civil war which led to the formation of an unaccountable secret police force, dragged to the brink of starvation in the 1930s, brutally invaded by a former ally in the 40s...you had a country inclined to believe the worst of others and mistrust their motives even at the best of times.
The ideology of Communism did not help, of course. Communism was meant to be an advance on capitalism, a resolution of its inherent contradictions into a higher political state of being. And while the Soviet Union did manage some astounding economic growth, which likely would not have happened as quickly without Communism, it also capped its potential.
This paranoia also led to the establishment of a vast "counterintelligence state" and massive military buildups, which of course diverted funds which could have been used elsewhere. Some people credit Reagan with forcing the Soviets to spend outside of their means, triggering an economic crisis and collapsing the USSR. This is partially true, but not the whole story.
Firstly, despite certain economic weaknesses, the Soviets still had deep pockets, namely in the form of massive natural energy resources that they could sell for foreign currency or use to underwrite the economies of their Warsaw Pact allies. However, the Saudis boosted production massively in the 80s, causing the price of oil to crash. They knew what they were doing, and it worked - the Saudi gambit hurt them a little, of course, but they'd been prepared for it - the USSR had not. Suddenly, the economy was in a massive contraction, while military costs continued to rise due to Reagan's buildup and the war in Afghanistan.
Gorbachev rightly concluded that this could only be combated by making peace with the West, and abandoning the Warsaw Pact states to their own fate. In previous decades, native armies had been used to put down uprisings in most states, because it was known what the Soviet Union would do if it had to use its own forces (Hungary 1956, all over again). Local communist parties preferred to use their own forces to save their own necks. Army officers further up in the chain of command also knew the score. But with the threat of Soviet intervention gone....they didn't know what to do. Should they carry on as before? Didn't work out well, in Romania certainly. Hungary flipped sides (due to West Germans calling in their loans) and the border was opened with Austria...given free movement between states like East Germany and the Hungarian Republic, suddenly, many people in the Warsaw Pact could freely move to the West. Unless states moved quickly to liberalise their economies and their politics, they'd suffer a mass exodus that they couldn't stop.
Hardline elements within the Kremlin, KGB and military saw this as a disaster, and used it as a pretext to overthrow Gorby in a coup. Only, well, we all know how that worked out...
Wow, I hadn't known a good portion of that. Thanks! That was very interesting.