Polizeros podcast tonight. The little Debt Bill that couldn’t, Middle East

Topics:

Syria is near civil war. The Libya war drags on. IED attacks in Afghanistan are at an all-time high.

Jobs and the little Debt Bill that couldn’t.

With Steve Hynd of Newshoggers, Keith Boyea at keithboyea.wordpress.com, and myself.

To listen to the show live, go to Polizeros Radio on BlogTalkRadio. You can also listening by dialing in at 626-414-3492. The show is tonight at 8:00 PM PT (9:00 PM MT, 10:00 PM CT, 11:00 PM ET.) The time is 30 minutes earlier than previous shows and is the new time.

You can download it or listen to the archive on BlogTalkRadio after it’s done.

Polizeros podcast tonight. MENA, the Forever Occupations, Newt’s implosion

There were major events this week in MENA. Is Middle East destabilizing? What can US do? And should it do anything?

How many more occupations will there be and will any of them actually end?

Rick Perry will probably run as Republican now that Newt blew up. Will the left and Democrats run other candidates besides Obama?

With Steve Hynd of Newshoggers, Josh Mull (@joshmull) and myself.

To listen to the show live, go to Polizeros Radio on BlogTalkRadio. You can also listening by dialing in at 626-414-3492. The show is tonight at 8:30 PM PT (9:30 PM MT, 10:30 PM CT, 11:30 PM ET.) You can download it or listen to the archive on BlogTalkRadio after it’s done.

Why are Middle East protests more effective than ours?

Readers and social media pals respond to my post wondering why protests in MENA (Middle East / North Africa) have had major impact and toppled governments while similar huge protests have had little effect in the US and UK.

ocicat_bengals (on Twitter)

How many people have been killed?

Good point. Our government doesn’t murder peaceful protesters in the streets (nor do I expect they ever will.) But when it happens elsewhere, it inflames the protests, draw the undecided to their ranks, and de-legitimizes the government. This makes the protests even bigger and stronger.

John Couzin (in the comments to the post)

It could be that in the UK you arrange your protest in advance, get permission from the authorities and in most cases liaise with the police on stewarding and an agreed route. Then after a nice walk around town you go home and get on with working for your living. As a rule they are nice polite affairs where most people don’t want any trouble. When there is trouble the “official” march condemns the trouble makers as “anarchists” and the press have a story.

I don’t think that is the formula with the present protests in the Middle East and North Africa.

Indeed. It was the same with the big Iraq antiwar protests here in the US. The marches were carefully planned in advance after much meeting with police and negotiations by lawyers. In other words, it was all choreographed. Protesters chanted hooray for our side then went home. How convenient for the authorities to be dealing with such curiously pliant and basically passive antiwar coalitions.

But in MENA, the protests are genuinely from the street (and not stage-managed by hard left coalitions whose primary goal is to recruit for their party rather than end the wars) and without being melodramatic about it, the protesters there clearly are willing to die for their cause. Maybe that’s the difference.

Don Klein (on Facebook)

I could go into my theoretical “systems far from equilibrium” argument, but the societies in the Middle East are more tightly and artificially controlled so that some outbursts get amplified beyond the anticipations, whereas in the West they are within the elastic boundaries of anticipated behaviors. Too bad, but …

Absolutely, where repression is the worst, when the kickback finally happens it is often the strongest. For many of the big antiwar protests here, the primary focus (even if they didn’t want to admit it) was to get mass media attention. In MENA they want to bring down governments.

We need to go beyond the self-imposed boundaries that Don mentions. Because right now in the US, marching down a street with a shiny little parade permit saying you want to end war is approximately as effective as signing online petitions. No actual pressure is brought upon the government by those actions and they can ignore you with no consequences.

Also, Victor Hugo was right, all the armies on earth cannot stop an idea whose time has come. In a very real sense, that’s what we’re seeing in MENA now.

Please, jump in with thoughts, ideas, and comments.

Why are protests in Middle East way more effective than here?

Photograph: Ian Langsdon/EPA

500,000 protest cuts in London, and this is inspiring indeed.

But the protests in the Middle East / North Africa (MENA)have been vastly more successfully in forcing change than those held in the US / UK. Most of the MENA protests, which have toppled governments, have been predominately nonviolent too, just like here. So why have they been more successful while our protests are mostly ignored by the powers-that-be? Some of the anti-Iraq war protests were huge and while they may have led to some changes in US war policy, they’ve had nowhere the impact that the MENA protests have.

Why is this?

US so over that democracy thing in Middle East

After weeks of internal debate on how to respond to uprisings in the Arab world, the Obama administration is settling on a Middle East strategy: help keep longtime allies who are willing to reform in power, even if that means the full democratic demands of their newly emboldened citizens might have to wait.

Starting with Bahrain, the administration has moved a few notches toward emphasizing stability over majority rule,” said a U.S. official. “Everybody realized that Bahrain was just too important to fail.”

Translation: We will continue to back thugs in countries deemed strategically important to us, such as Bahrain, where the US Navy has a major base.

Of course, if we hadn’t supported thugs for decades in MENA, their populaces might not be in revolt today. But that would have required actual strategic thinking and genuine support for democracy.

So, the US will now back repressive regimes as revolution continues? I can’t think of a worse possible position for us to be in. Instead of guaranteeing the flow of oil (an obvious goal here) it will instead make oil supplies more tenuous.