TNR BLOGS

July 03, 2009 | 7:55 PM
July 03, 2009 | 7:37 PM
July 03, 2009 | 7:12 PM

March 09, 2009 | 5:19 PM
March 09, 2009 | 5:16 PM
January 07, 2009 | 12:20 PM

July 01, 2009 | 10:33 PM
June 30, 2009 | 8:42 AM
June 29, 2009 | 9:09 AM

July 26, 2008 | 2:24 PM
July 23, 2008 | 1:55 PM
July 17, 2008 | 3:56 PM

July 03, 2009 | 10:13 PM
July 02, 2009 | 12:57 PM
July 01, 2009 | 7:02 PM
COLUMNISTS
TODAY'S STORIES
26.06.2008
From the Pity Columnist of the New York Times

 
Everybody knows whom I mean: Nicholas D. Kristof. You know you are in the presence of very wise folk when you read (or hear) syllogisms like "books not bombs" or "ballots not bullets." He did the first of these preachments this morning. This is the kind of deep wisdom dispensed by Mr. Kristof who seems to believe everything anyone in desperate circumstances tells him. A world traveller, he visits places where he can see misery. His columns are washed in blood.
 
Actually, he was the first to notice Darfur and maybe even the first to move us by it. But he shies away from real solutions, like in Darfur where the only way to stop the killing is the deployment of Western force. Both bombs and bullets.
 
Today's column is about Sunni refugees from Iraq now in Amman and Damascus. Kristof does admit casually that "some of them may have shot at Americans or brutalized Shiites." But no matter. In Baghdad for decades and for three years after the U.S. intervention, however, Sunnis systematically smothered Shi'a life…and Shi'as. The Sunnis were Saddam Husssein's storm troops, his SS. That is why there is so much hatred in the country.
 
And now there are these escapees from Shi'a revenge, and this revenge also was brutal. But the Maliki government has been fighting the Sadr movement, with some success.
 
One family with whom Kristof met in their apartment had hung a "huge poster of Saddam Hussein." Would you have pity on someone who had hung a poster of Adolf Hitler or Joseph Stalin on his walls?
 
Of course, Kristof never writes an analysis. He dishes out schwarmerei.
 
And he now has a fashionable and stupid metaphor for his anointed victims, "the new Palestinians."

Posted: Thursday, June 26, 2008 6:05 PM with 50 comment(s)

Comments

You must be logged-in to comment.

Not a subscriber? Click here to get a digital or print and digital subscription to The New Republic!

teplukhin2you said:

A low blow. Regardless of the man's phrasing, Kristof has _been there_-- to Darfur and many other major hellholes. He may have misspoken re the Palestinians but Kristof's writing generally has a certain dignity that's often absent from the emissions of certain modem-warriors. Hardly "schwarmerei".

June 26, 2008 7:03 PM

lymon1 said:

Marty, you just hate Kristof because he's a peacenik on Israel-Palestine.  Go back and read those Darfur columns and you'll see he's hardly been against "bombs and bullets."  On Iraq he takes a middle-position (favors announcing a pullout but says it should be set farther in the future, like 2 years).  

As to this column, don't shy away from his moral point -- COlin Powell's "you break it, you bought it."   Did that change just because some of the civilllians we harmed like Saddam Hussein?  

June 26, 2008 7:08 PM

tec619 said:

Wasn't Marty against bombs and bullets?  Didn't he use his wife's money to support Eugene "Anti-War" McCarthy?

But that was when being anti-war was cool and Marty somehow escaped the draft. We know he didn't pursue three degrees for nothing. Gosh, North Korea could attack South Korea--again!

Now mister big man is so pro-defense he supports war of choice base on squishy, tendentious definitions of "imminent threat."  What changed? I guess the commies could do whatever they want in Vietnam but noot the Soviet Union. No, no, no.

Anyway, why not bomb the Khartoum government? Niggers aren't worth it? Let me answer that. No!

June 26, 2008 7:22 PM

jacksondyer said:

Kristof is  pretty weak when it comes to stopping conflicts, no matter how good he on recognizing its existence.

This is because, like most peaceniks, to use Lymon's phrase, he doesn't recognize that you need a strong arm to end conflict and that you can't talk yourself out of it.

Still, the worst NY Times columnist these days isn't Kristof, its Roger Cohen.  Where the hell did they find him? He thinks that every world conflict is South Africa and recommends the Mandela’s prescription for every conflict. He also believes the Obama is another Mandela.

Come to think of it, someone on the Spine seems to think that Obama is another Hubert Humphrey or Scoop Jacksons. They couldn’t both be right, could they?

June 26, 2008 7:29 PM

jacksondyer said:

tec619 what teh fuck are you babbling about, asshole.

I'd bet your wrote the post so that you could get to spell out the term "ni**ers."

What a jerk.

June 26, 2008 7:31 PM

The Ignorant Populist said:

"anointed victims" Marty?

So their suffering is all about his ego?

And then the inevitable Palestinians, who clearly have not suffered, in any shape or form. More an anointed suffering really.

Boring.

June 26, 2008 7:35 PM

tec619 said:

Just following your lead, Jackie.

June 26, 2008 7:41 PM

lsernoff said:

One can't help but notice that the most "colorful" comments in this and any other on-line publication always come from people who hide their identities.

Maybe they remember the late Senator Saxbe of Ohio.  When he got an outrageous letter from a constituent he would write back warning the constituent that a lunatic was writing letters to Saxbe and signing them with the constituent's name.

June 26, 2008 8:58 PM

jacksondyer said:

"So their suffering is all about his ego? "  Ignoble Irishman

No, it's about YOUR EGO.

BORING!

June 26, 2008 10:50 PM

jacksondyer said:

and whose name did you borrow, lsernoff?

June 26, 2008 10:51 PM

lsernoff said:

I borrowed lsernoff from Louis R Sernoff.   I am curious, in light of your comment: Is your real name Sebastian Dangerfield, not Jackson Dyer or Jack Sondyer?  Your elegant use of language suggests a literary background.

June 27, 2008 9:17 AM

jacksondyer said:

Jack Sondyer is what Marty called me once.

No, I plead guilty to being Jackson Dyer.

Thanks for the compliment, Louis.

June 27, 2008 9:33 AM

lsernoff said:

Good for you Jackson.  I like when people are willing to couple their name with their thoughts, whether or not I agree with those thoughts.  

June 27, 2008 9:58 AM

blackton said:

Having lived in China it was common for me to see a picture of Mao still hanging in homes of some pretty poor people who suffered, as did all Chinese people, under Mao. They are just ignorant people who truly don't know the truth, so yes, I could have sympathy for them. Likewise, just hanging a picture of Hussein is pretty slim evidence of guilt, I do think they do need to be confronted with Hussein's crimes since we now have the opportunity to do so.

As to Kristof, he is just a columnist, same as Marty really. I don't understand why some columnists get so worked up over other ones. How many armies does Kristof command? What ministries? Who does he command? Personally, I think the days when a columnist can influence nations are long past, and Marty's post is so much inside baseball.

June 27, 2008 10:29 AM

blackton said:

Isernoff, Ignorant Populist is his real name as well. He comes from a long line of Populists in Ireland, but when his mother first saw him she said, "my oh my, look at that little ignorant son of a bitch." And the name kind of stuck. What made it even interesting is that she didn't see the irony is calling her son a son of a bitch. That is a Irish Populist for you!

June 27, 2008 10:32 AM

jacksondyer said:

"As to Kristof, he is just a columnist, same as Marty really."

Good boy, and oh so right.

"I don't understand why some columnists get so worked up over other ones."

You don't? Let's me explain it to you....

For the same reason that poets think they are the "unacknowledged" legislators of the world.

They and only they think so, and perhpas some disseration writer to give himself a reason to spend years in the library doing research.

June 27, 2008 11:49 AM

teplukhin2you said:

fwiw, this subscriber's reaching the end of his tolerance for the endless pissfest-cum-Artful Putdowns that characterizes such a large portion of TNR.com blog content these days. Not quite out of here, but I'm getting close. Never mind. Carry on. Have a nice day!

June 27, 2008 12:40 PM

basman said:

I'm gonna' stick up for the main post. What's wrong with one guy calling another guy on his weak shit,, if that's what the first guy thinks. Plus agree or not, there is a substantive criticism in the post that is not ad hominem. Okay by me.

Itzik Basman

June 27, 2008 12:46 PM

teplukhin2you said:

Itzhik - Kristof's sin was in mentioning the 'P' word, purely and simply. I'm a realist, I'm pro-Zionist, I don't believe for a second that the Palestinian leadership as currently constituted will ever make peace, but is it really necessary to shoot down every instance of sympathy with the Palestinian people, everywhere it rears its little head-- including an OpEd column that's known for its inoffensive, good-guy championing of real victims in real hellholes around the world?

June 27, 2008 1:20 PM

fougasseu said:

Someone open a window.

June 27, 2008 1:57 PM

basman said:

T.

..Itzhik - Kristof's sin was in mentioning the 'P' word, purely and simply...

Do ya' think so? I guess my question about this is how would one know? i find Kristoff for alll his intrepidness pretty squishy tho' I have only read him here and there. But I ike the tough take on him. It's one man's view and it's kind of provocative: a stab at telling truth to squishiness.

But this concerns me more:

...Not quite out of here, but I'm getting close...

Say it ain't't so or even close to being so. And don't you dare. If you do I'll mount a two pronged offensive: I'll organize an intervention to talk you down from the narrowing limb you are edging out on; and I'll bring a combined habeas and mandamus proceeding to liberate you from being detained by your worst impulses--the Guantanamo of your mind so to speak-- and to have you subject to a decree enjoining your doing any such thing.

Get me?

Itzik

p.s. fougasseu:  Open your own window!

June 27, 2008 2:34 PM

teplukhin2you said:

basman - cf razor, Occam. MP never pays any attention to Kristof. He jumped on him solely because Kristof had the temerity to cast the P's as victims.

fou - maybe open a door while you're at it. One that swings out. If tnr.com keeps drifting into bloggery (All snark + tribalism, All the time!), I'll walk through that door.

June 27, 2008 3:43 PM

basman said:

...cf razor, Occam...

Sorry, my questioning begging friend, you have made no case, and have simply asserted your conclusion as your premise. One man's simplest resolution here is another man's irrelevancy.

June 27, 2008 4:27 PM

willpastor said:

You're not being fair here guys. All Kristof is saying is that the Palestinian diaspora created problems throughout the region, and the Iraqi diaspora might do the same thing. Regardless of the sins of Iraqi Sunnis and their support for Saddam, they could really create problems for the countries they end up in, and their children could grow up seriously messed up. You hardly have to be a peacenik to believe that.

June 27, 2008 8:31 PM

jerkaboy said:

haha! fougasseu's comment upvoted. this place is such an echo chamber

June 27, 2008 8:32 PM

CRS9TNR said:

Marty's take on this Kristof Column is Bang On.

Typical of the NYT, the Sunni Arab problem now has to be turned around and made to be America's problem.  Wrong.

Someone should have take Kristof aside and told him that the Palestinian metaphor may apply, but the correct thing to do here is cut off the Palestinians.  The Arabs may want to create another Psuedo Country of refugee camps, and ask the world to fund it, but the west is a little smarter 50 years later.

It's stupid opion pieces like this that are killing the NYT.

June 27, 2008 9:24 PM

jacksondyer said:

jerkaboy said:  "haha! fougasseu's comment upvoted. this place is such an echo chamber"

Jerky you are a one man echo chamber yourself.

June 27, 2008 11:02 PM

jacksondyer said:

tep, whatever your feelings about Marty, I hope you won't decamp anytime soon.

There aren't too many non Obamaautomatons left here.

June 27, 2008 11:07 PM

tim6325 said:

To this ancient subscriber, TNR online is a welcome advance. But I do wish commenters would resist directing gratuitous insults to the Managing Editor, whose opinions - usually correct - are always well argued and should be countered only by good arguments.

June 28, 2008 7:59 AM

fougasseu said:

tep, I'm right behind you.

June 28, 2008 9:31 AM

teplukhin2you said:

I'm with Michael Crichton. What I want from this brave new media world is simple: "Tell me true things which I didn't know before." Both true and new, IOW.

The problem with so much bloggery-- including the sort that, increasingly, characterizes the tnr.com content that has a functioning, semi-viable commenting feature for us subs-- is that, in Crichton's terminology, the vast majority of it is not fact-based reporting but speculation, and most of the remainder isn't fresh.

In short, what's new isn't true and what's true isn't new. Why am I paying for this, again?

June 28, 2008 11:18 AM

jacksondyer said:

"Why am I paying for this, again?"  TEP

You don't really want an answer do you?

It looks to me like you are arguing with yourself in public.

I hope you don't leave, but if you do decide to go, go already and stop torturing yourself. It's painful listening on someone else’s indecisive soliloquies.

Ambivalence is fun only on the stage or in one’s head, once in a while.

June 28, 2008 2:48 PM

basman said:

...tep, I'm right behind you...

Careful there: I thought you were opening the door for him and he was following you out. Anyway, once youse guys get yourselves sorted--"after you, no after you, no after you", and so on--and go out, please when you come back bring some eggs, a loaf of bread, and a hearty Merlot. Le cupboard is getting bare.

June 28, 2008 4:14 PM

jacksondyer said:

fougasseu said:  "tep, I'm right behind you."

Puede fugarse, fougasseu. Nadie te va anorar.

June 28, 2008 6:03 PM

fougasseu said:

jackson - got it. Ciao.

June 28, 2008 7:22 PM

jacksondyer said:

Chau fleeting fougasseu.

June 28, 2008 8:35 PM

hotshot22 said:

Slightly off topic but hopefully relevant.

C'mon Tep, it is Mr Peretz whose attachment keeps our TNR subject to such polarizing but vital opinions. On the other hand it's subscribers like you that are necessary to subscribers like me. To borrow from  James Joyce, comments from subscribers like you lend the glow of genius to Talkback like the glow of a rainbow that adheres to a drop of dew.

This isn't as I have said before rank flattery. F%^* your threats to scoot. Stick around, we need you.

June 29, 2008 1:39 AM

teplukhin2you said:

I was indeed first attracted to TNR precisely because it was ornery, contrarian in a smart and unpredictable, "we piss anywhere " [pace; Mick J and Keith R] kind of way. That was the era of Kinsley and Krauthammer, btw. Central to my political formation.

Perhaps it's my age, but I think more likely it's that the change in format that's been brought by the triumph of the blog-mentality, that accounts for my increasing disenchantment with tnr.com. In the 1980s, the snarky Kinsley style signature TNR piece that gave me and so many readers our weekly frisson was written in well-crafted, lengthy prose. It featured logic and fact. It was _reportage_.

As for lacerating opinion pieces by Krauthammer et al, they also were rigorous in their observance of basic journalistic standards and conventions. You never saw a straw man argument in TNR (well, outside of Fred Barnes' stuff, anyway). No crapulosity, no matter how politically correct, went unskewered. A more recent version of this style can be seen in Kinsley's sparkling take-down of Justice O'Connor's complete incoherence in her opinion on the U Michigan aff action case a few years ago. Brilliant, devastating, powerful.

At TNR we can still see the Kinsley-glory years tradition occasionally in longer pieces of reportage that pop up now and then, most notably in ex-TNR ace Ryan Lizza's reporting on the PinPrick senator from VA, or his piece on Huggybear Bill Richardson.

But far more common on today's TNR is the drive-by hit and run blog piece that invariably conflates a small, marginal aspect of the story for the real story, or creates a straw man with olympian legs and sets him sprinting, or devolves into smirks 'n' sneers at OtherPundit or RivalBlogger. And when space is unlimited, all opinions are equal. Including the morons and trolls which CanWest in some fit of unexplained revenge sees fit to sic on the poor sad-sack subscribers every time we venture outside the closed walls of the TNR blogs.

So many pixels. So much noise. It would be nice if someone would buck the trend.

June 29, 2008 5:27 AM

aeromonas said:

The phrases 'books not bombs' and 'ballots not bullets' are not "syllogisms."

syllogism: Logic. An argument expressed or claimed to be expressible in the form of two propositions called the premisses, containing a common or middle term, with a third proposition called the conclusion, resulting necessarily from the other two. Example: Omne animal est substantia, omnis homo est animal, ergo omnis homo est substantia. ---OED

Mr. Peretz, every so often you surprise me with how bloody illiterate you are.

June 29, 2008 7:49 AM

aeromonas said:

teppy, teppy, teppy,

You're like a drunk at a bar talking about how this drink, this-drink-right-'ere-in-frunna-me, is the last he'll ever take.  

I'll believe it when you show up wearing your 90-day lapel pin from TA--Talkbacker's Anonymous.

June 29, 2008 8:02 AM

teplukhin2you said:

One blog at a time, aero. I've alreday dispensed with reading anything under the byline of over half the TNR scribes. I'm getting there.

June 29, 2008 11:41 AM

r-ennis said:

Well said Tep. I am not nearly as good a writer or thinker than you, but I

was originally attracted to TNR for its ability to be liberal and objective at the same time. It is very rare now that I feel that way. Not only because of Obama worship and Hillary hatred, which is truly shameful. But also because of distortions on McCain, and very suspect material on environmental and energy issues on which I have more than layman's knowledge.

June 29, 2008 11:50 AM

basman said:

...The phrases 'books not bombs' and 'ballots not bullets' are not "syllogisms."...

Books and ballots are excellent means of national improvement;

Bombs and bullets are destructive of national improvement.

Therefore,  for national improvement books not bombs,  ballots not bullets.

Coherent slogans are collapsed syllogisms, their logic impicit in their concision.

So let's  not get too pedantic orsmug and maybe for the slower fellas like myself you'd want to ease up on the all the French.

June 29, 2008 12:06 PM

williamyard said:

What jackson said:

"Why am I paying for this, again?"  TEP

You don't really want an answer do you?

It looks to me like you are arguing with yourself in public.

I hope you don't leave, but if you do decide to go, go already and stop torturing yourself. It's painful listening on someone else’s indecisive soliloquies.

Ambivalence is fun only on the stage or in one’s head, once in a while.

June 29, 2008 4:02 PM

aeromonas said:

Basman, by those lights any statement asserting the superiority of one thing over another is a syllogism.  It follows then that any affirmative statement is a syllogism since the statement implies its alternatives.  But this formulation extends the term "syllogism" beyond all usefulness.  I acknowledge the logic of your post, but I wasn't arguing about logic, I was arguing about usage, so if you want to put me into my place what you need to bring to the table is examples of slogans such as "ballots not bullets" being described as syllogisms by folks other than Peretz.  And I'll give you and Marty my preemptive apology if you do come up with such examples--as well you may.

And, sorry, but what French?  That was Latin.  Or maybe that's your joke.  Anyhoo that wasn't mine anyway.  I just cut and pasted a dictionary entry.

Cheers  

June 29, 2008 6:34 PM

basman said:

aeromonas

Maybe you are right about the syllogism thing, but my understanding of the slogans Peretz cited was they were wedded to specific socio political contexts. So if one--decades ago-- cited better dead than red or better red than dead in the context of a particular approach to dealing with Communism, I would have thought that those slogans enacapsulated particular lines of reasoning, which then would be reducible to syllogistic forrmulation.

But I'll tell you what: just out of interest I'll run this by a friend of mine, a former logic prof and let you know.

French/Latin...that was my joke or rather an attempt at one.

Cheers indeed.

June 29, 2008 7:33 PM

jacksondyer said:

aeromonas said:  "The phrases 'books not bombs' and 'ballots not bullets' are not "syllogisms.""

True they are alliterative cliches.

Samples of iincomplete Ol English verse;

Here is a more complete verse:

"A feir feld full of folk || fond I þer bitwene,

Of alle maner of men, || þe mene and þe riche,

Worchinge and wandringe || as þe world askeþ."

From Pirrs Plowman by William Langland

Aeromonas amy wnat to complete the thought of her cliche driven criticism.

Perhaps something like:

'books for the brain,   bombs for the battlefield

ballots for the voting booth, bullets for hilgihting the winner's name.  

Oh what a tame time we live in! Interesring times, not for us.

June 29, 2008 8:05 PM

jacksondyer said:

aeromonas said:  "The phrases 'books not bombs' and 'ballots not bullets' are not "syllogisms.""

True they are alliterative cliches.

Samples of iincomplete Old English verse;

Here is a more complete verse:

"A feir feld full of folk || fond I þer bitwene,

Of alle maner of men, || þe mene and þe riche,

Worchinge and wandringe || as þe world askeþ."

From Pirrs Plowman by William Langland

Aeromonas may want to complete the thought of her cliche driven criticism.

Perhaps something like:

'Books for the brain,   bombs for the battlefield

Ballots for the voting booth,  bullets for highlighting the winner's name.  

Oh what a tame time we live in! Interesting times, not for us

June 29, 2008 8:57 PM

LISAH said:

Too much meaningless horse race speculating in TNR these days...not enough solid issue-examing content. Just glad the back of the book is still there....

June 30, 2008 11:44 AM

basman said:

aeromonas: if you are still in this neighbourhood:

You are right and I am wrong. I owe you the apology.

Basman:

"Here is a question for you: if  I would have said say during the cold war  "better red than dead" and the other guy had said "no, better dead than red"  in the context of how to deal with Russia, could one say that those  slogans,  encapsulating our positions, were syllogisms or implicitly syllogisms or  some such?"

Logic prof:

"Neither are syllogisms, and there is no such thing as an implicit syllogism.

A syllogism is by definition an argument with two premisses only, from which

a particular conclusion follows if the argument is valid, or does not follow

if the argument is invalid. The closest thing to your notion of an implicit

syllogism is an enthymeme. An enthymeme is an incomplete argument, i.e., an

argument with some premisses from which a particular conclusion is said to

follow that in fact does not follow, but such that it would follow if the

appropriate premiss were to be inserted. An enthymeme, however can have any

number of premmises, and so is not a syllogism. The required missing

premisses are usually so obvious that they are assumed and not stated, but

they require stating for formal validity. Do not bother to look it up in the

Concise Oxford Dictionary because the reported definition there is mistaken

in calling an enthymeme a syllogism with one of the premisses missing; it is

not."

Cheers once more and I am happy to be set straight.

Peretz can speak for himself.

Itzik Basman

June 30, 2008 5:33 PM

Double click this space to insert your ad.