Motley Moose – Archive

“Gentle giants” — that’s a phrase often used in speaking of draft horses.  It’s true they’re massive; their muscular bulk makes them loom larger even when they’re no taller than many riding horses.  The greatest among them are awesome, their physical presence almost overpowering up close, your own puny insignificance dwarfed by their immense height and girth, their unimaginable strength.  If they wished to, they could crush you like a bug.  

And yet they don’t.  Though draft horses, like any other equine, can lose it, can panic and freak out or become enraged, mostly they bear patiently with the small two-legs that buzz about them, commanding their obedience and ordering their lives.  Working around my own two horses, a Thoroughbred and a Morgan, I’m often struck by how easily they could defy me, muscle over me, tell me “Hell no!” and yet they do what I say, go where I tell them; and they’re nowhere near as huge and strong as a Percheron or Shire, who could demolish a human annoyance, if they chose, without breaking a sweat.  But they choose obedience.

Humans are lucky drafters are so biddable (though they can take much of the credit, having bred for docility in the breeds over many centuries), and not just in terms of safe handling.  For most of recorded history draft horses have pulled the plows and wagons of agriculture and transport, skidded logs out of the forest, hauled ore from the mineheads, mowed fields for the hay that fed them through the winter, dragged graders down dirt roads, and in multitudes of ways powered the people who selectively bred them to their massive greatness.  

Given the tension of the past week, I thought I’d launch the weekend with an extracurricular open thread regarding other, thought related interests.

A friend sent me a link to an interesting letter one of my heroes wrote about another (keep reading, it’s below the fold). Way back when the 70s turned into the 80s, narrow-minded and dogmatic punks (a perverse contradiction if there ever was one) often snickered that Joe Strummer of The Clash was basically the English Bruce Springsteen. They meant this as a smear of course, because Bruce wasn’t anti-establishment enough for them. Indeed, there were clear resemblances. They did look a bit alike at that point. Both loved to belt and snarl their vocals. Both played telecasters. Both displayed a working-class perspective and a commitment or claim to a certain kind of authenticity. Both had a great ear and love for an uplifting hook (hell, Joe admitted to being a fan). Both shared some of the same heroes, like Woody Guthrie, Bob Dylan, and Johnny Cash. Both loved the history of Rock ‘n Roll.  

The coverage on Egypt has often been frustratingly simplistic. Many of us don’t know much about Egypt other than the usual familiarity with it’s famous characters of antiquity and their monuments. All the talk of a power vacuum is often followed by talk of the possible rise of the Muslim Brotherhood. Of course, Fox has been screeching, deeply involved in their own nightmares, providing comic relief and giving conservatives another reason to lock their doors and hide their women.

In spite of wall to wall coverage, most news only really scratches the surface of Egyptian politics. Last evening, on CNN’s Parker/Spitzer, Eliot interviewed MOHAMED MORSY, spokesman for the Muslim Brotherhood. (link to transcript of the program) He gave answers that you would expect from a media savvy spokesman, but when Eliot asked about the peace with Israel, Morsy made a few statements that some could find ominous. Here’s a snippet from Eliot’s next guest

Fouad Ajami, Johns Hopkins University:

And in fact this is the game that Mubarak plays, and plays it to perfection.”

Mubarak has always used the Brotherhood as boogey men, with himself the hero, protecting the rest of Egypt from theocracy. This simplistic view of good vs evil makes good slogans for Mubarak and has worked quite well for him. What about the Brotherhood and Al Queda?

“SPITZER: He says the right words. He says of course we believe in the rules of pluralism. Freedom of religion, freedom of speech. Does he, in fact, believe in that?

In fact, al Qaeda really wages war against the Muslim Brotherhood. They believe that these are domesticated Islamists and Ayman al-Zawahiri, who’s Egyptian, really he comes in the highest reaches of Cairo society, has nothing but contempt for the Muslim Brotherhood. He thinks that they have basically accommodated themselves to the world and Cairo and they have cut a deal with the ruler that they sat in the parliament.

So the truth of the matter is that The Muslim Brotherhood is actually quite moderate when compared to the extremist Al Queda. The hatred between these two groups runs deep and long according to the next guest, Fareed Zakaria. Will Egypt look to Iran as a shining example of governing?

ZAKARIA: Well, the first thing to understand is that the fears of a kind of Iranian theocracy are vastly overdone. I mean, Iran is a Shia country with a Persian history. The Shia clergy always played a very powerful political role in Iran. SPITZER: Right.

Egypt has some of the seeds of democracy. Look, it’s going to be tough. It’s a poor country. There’s a lot of very religious feeling in there but they do have elements that would — that will make it succeed.

So who would fill the void? Zakaria says that egypt is a military dictatorship and power flows from the military. Mubarak himself was a general and most of his immediate appointments are also military. That same military has been coming to America to our military schools, by the hundreds, maybe by the thousands over the last 30 years. We have a lot of personal ties and thus channels of communication with Egypt’s military.

Regarding Morsy’s comments on the peace with Isreal, when you realize that it’s the Egyptian military who honor and keep that peace, the situation is less dire because the military isn’t going anywhere.  

So the most recent suggestion floated by the US has been a coalition consisting of the military, opposition representation (like El Baradei) and the current vice president, Sulieman until elections can be planned and executed, with inclusion of all Egypt’s varied factions.

So there is a way forward. Even if the Muslim Brotherhood dominates parliament in the beginning of a new Egypt, chances are that eventually, as people find their voices, that situation may change. Throughout the middle east in any given dictatorship or autocracy they mostly shut down all opposition voices, except those coming from within Islamic groups. They can not easily move against Islam.

Eventually, given an open democratic system, people may find that opinion need not be couched in religious terms any more. There is hope for a secular, democratic Egypt.

If you have the time, read the entire transcript of Spitzer’s show; I found it fascinating and informative. This gave me reason to dare to be more optimistic of Egypt’s chances to come through this with a fledgling democracy.

This is my first diary here at the Motley Moose, and I’m thinking that the Moose just may be my new blogging home.  

The struggle for the future of Egypt continues.  Will today be the day that the Government falls?

This is a pretty substance-free diary. I was just looking at some pictures (Hubie’s, I think) being posted in another thread, and noticed that some of you seemed to be reminiscing or missing places you’ve left. They say, cliché as it is, that home is where the heart is.

If that’s true, then here is my home, my heart:

This diary was first published in February, 2010. This was the first ‘walking the dog’ diary I wrote. It’s topical again so I decided to repost it.

Walking the dog is, in some ways, very similar to being a mailman. Neither rain, nor snow, nor sleet… Well, maybe not quite the same. Rain and sleet will keep me indoors. Snow, on the other hand, is not a problem for someone born and bred in the north country. It’s not a problem for my buddy Al, either.

Al has some Husky in him. It shows in his brilliant blue eyes and his thick undercoat. He’ll romp in the snow for hours without showing the slightest discomfort. At least, he used to when he was younger. Nowadays, he’s more like me. A slow, rambling walk is good enough. Even when we have 8″ of fresh snow like we had this day.

This might be premature, but after the violence of the last 24 hours (reports of a thousand injured and a dozen dead) it seems: the army has taken the side of the people.

By: Inoljt, http://mypolitikal.com/

Six years ago the Republican Party ruled American politics. A Republican president had just been re-elected, cementing two decades of Republican dominance (apart from the freak election of one President Bill Clinton). It held solid majorities in the House and Senate. Conservatives controlled the Supreme Court, and most states were governed by Republicans.

Naturally, Republicans were celebrating this state of affairs. A PBS set of interviews provides a very interesting look into Washington’s conventional wisdom following President George W. Bush’s 2004 triumph. Titled “How Secure Is Republican Dominance?” it constitutes an almost alien contrast to today’s narrative of Democratic dominance.

Some of these differences can be quite amusing.

Al Gore recently responded to Bill O’Reilly’s question:  “Why has southern New York turned into the tundra?”

Today President Obama gave his thoughts on the incredibly complex and potentially wonderful events occurring in Egypt. World leaders have struggled to find their voices in this instance as they tried to come to grips with the potential unraveling of the most dangerous region of the world.

There was much anticipation as the world waited to here The Position of the world’s most powerful country. Doubters on both flanks had already carved a virtually hopeless maze of tiger traps and pitfalls. What could the President say that would speak to the intricate needs of the situation?

In four minutes and fifty three seconds he told us.