Comments on: Zakaria on Obama, Identity

By: ashvin

ashvin — Sun, 23 Dec 2007 20:01:18 +0000

I don't in general trust Fareed's judgment or instincts. Having said that, I would like to believe that having an outsider's perspective (such as growing up as an immigrant or a foreigner) does influence one's ability to see different points of view and empathize with one's "enemies" which could translate into good foreign policy. But if Kissinger is the best example Fareed can come up with, it doesn't bode well.

Also, jyotsana, his "I have a PhD" line was clearly a self-effacing joke. All his readers know he has a PhD from Harvard or wherever.

By: Kurma

Kurma — Sun, 23 Dec 2007 08:50:41 +0000

So, jyotsana, what about the prescriptions?

By: jyotsana

jyotsana — Sun, 23 Dec 2007 08:02:32 +0000

"Identity and violence" is even worse than "Argumentative Indian". While both the volumes are riddled with careless factual errors, the former is utterly confused. That is the danger with using late 19th and early 20th century pseudoscience to analyse the issues of today.

I have nothing against Cathedral. Though I was not schooled in Bombay, I have known several fine alumni of the more elite schools of the city. Cathedral isn't exactly the place where one gets to learn about struggling peasants. Fareed shouldn't take his readers for a ride by writing pop prose. Diplomacy is a tricky business. For Fareed's own sake I hope he doesn't have to negotiate with someone like Lalloo, Jayalalita or Mayawati. There are many politicians and diplomats the word over who can forget more in an afternoon than all Fareed has learnt to date.

By: Deep

Deep — Sun, 23 Dec 2007 07:39:29 +0000

What I am normally surprised by, Camille, is how little I do know compared to most people who inhabit the so-called bottom pool of the economic food chain. Intellectually and academically, I think I am all right. It’s the common sense bit that I have trouble dredging out of a textbook. It makes sense many of these chaps understand the policies better than the policies understand them.

By: Camille

Camille — Sun, 23 Dec 2007 06:45:54 +0000

I remember that because it was surprising to me that the people he quoted knew as much as they did, and I realized my mistake when e-mailing Sainath about that. Maybe landowning farmers, who, as Kurma says, are more aware of politics in a wider sphere talk to small farmers and landless farmers.

I can't speak for non-landowning farmers in India, but I've actually always been surprised (I don't know why, maybe b/c of lack of literacy/newspaper access) about the level of knowledge re: global development initiatives/politics among subsistence farmers in different parts of the world (this is just an anecdotal comment, not a blanket or authoritative statement). Then again, if it's your life on the line, it's not that surprising.

By: Ruchira

Ruchira — Sun, 23 Dec 2007 06:41:31 +0000

Thank you Manju for bringing up the Bob Kerrey / Bill Shaheen / Mark Penn dirty tricks and all this while Hillary was pouring tea with her mom on TV campaign ads. I have been seething but didn't want to begin an anti-Hillary flame war here since Amardeep's post is not about her really. Kerrey's recommendation of appointing Obama as the outreach person into the AA community reached the new low of condescension and stupidity. And all this after the choice words Kerrey had to say about Bill in 1992 and '96 - one of them was about his lack of experience in national and international affairs

Obama has shown unbelievable class and restraint so far.

By: Amrita

Amrita — Sun, 23 Dec 2007 06:32:40 +0000

You nailed it, Manju!

t seemed to me that you mistook Sainath's knowledge for the farmers

Dizzy Desi, I admit I just linked to that article as a good Sainath read. He does quote subsistence farmers on their response to World Bank and other American initiatives in another article but I can't find it. I remember that because it was surprising to me that the people he quoted knew as much as they did, and I realized my mistake when e-mailing Sainath about that. Maybe landowning farmers, who, as Kurma says, are more aware of politics in a wider sphere talk to small farmers and landless farmers. I would hazard a guess that urban middle class people are more likely to get misled by Thomas Freidman.

By: Manju

Manju — Sun, 23 Dec 2007 06:28:31 +0000

Field Negro, dilettante?

my guess is booker rising, camille. she said conservative blog

By: ghussa

ghussa — Sun, 23 Dec 2007 06:26:18 +0000

Oops I mistakenly thought it was the Kerry (John) from Massachusetts, the gigolo who marries only wealthy heiresses. Bob Kerry I thought was a decent fellow. He demeaned himself here.

By: Camille

Camille — Sun, 23 Dec 2007 06:21:57 +0000

Wow the Clintons are classy.

ghussa, razib is being sarcastic/ironic.

Amardeep, I don’t think this is what Fareed Zakaria is saying, but for many people one’s identity/ies affect our life experiences. I think they’re both related but different issues. I think what’s exciting about Obama is his global outlook and experience, and while this is due in part to his diverse background/identity, I would hope that if someone else had had “global exposure” they would also be more thoughtful and interesting people. That’s probably reductionist and overly idealistic, though.

It embarrasses me to write this- but I’ve definitely been in online discussions w/ some African Americans who consider Mr. Obama’s “global” outlook proof that he wasn’t black. [This on a reputedly "conservative" blog for African Americans "Negroes" -preferred term of self ID for that particular site]

Field Negro, dilettante? This argument also appeared in Slate, and is one of the most embarrassing and profoundly stupid/essentializing arguments I’ve heard. Not only does it play at a fundamentally racist argument, it’s also incredibly irrelevant and does no one any favors.