WHEN NEGATIVES THINK THEY’RE POSITIVES

WHEN NEGATIVES THINK THEY’RE POSITIVES

In 1970, then U.S. Vice-pres­i­dent Spiro Agnew derid­ed jour­nal­ists (although some say he meant politi­cians) crit­i­cal of Nixon admin­is­tra­tion poli­cies as “nat­ter­ing nabobs of neg­a­tivism.” Today, the char­ac­ter­i­sa­tion seems to be con­sid­ered either com­pli­men­ta­ry or aspirational.

If that sounds like over-embell­ish­ment, con­sid­er that FOX News has made it a suc­cess­ful busi­ness model which has been called both dam­ag­ing and dis­pro­por­tion­ate­ly influ­en­tial, in the sense that what FOX says, MAGA does, and vice-versa.
Politi­cians of a cer­tain stripe mir­ror it. In an Op-Ed (sor­ry, “essay”) to mark the 80th anniver­sary of D‑Day, Sen­a­tor Mitch McConnell wrote that “…the world was plunged into war, and mil­lions of inno­cents died, because Euro­pean pow­ers and the Unit­ed States met the rise of a mil­i­tant author­i­tar­i­an with appease­ment or naïve neglect in the first place.”
Replace “Euro­pean pow­ers and the Unit­ed States” with “a self-serv­ing politi­cian”, and you get a won­drous dearth of irony and a self-descrip­tion that could only abide in a slav­ish-to-the-point-of-slob­ber­ing backer of a pres­i­den­tial can­di­date who wants to opt out of NATO, let Vladimir Putin (a “mil­i­tant author­i­tar­i­an” of proven and dan­ger­ous pro­por­tion) “do what­ev­er the hell” he wants, and called North Kore­an dic­ta­tor Kim Jung Un a “a great leader” with whom he had a “real­ly good” relationship.
In the inter­est of fair­ness, how­ev­er, bear in mind that 40 per­cent of South African vot­ers ‚who have been failed by the African Nation­al Con­gress (ANC) for three unin­ter­rupt­ed decades, vot­ed for them any­way. In a mini MAGA moment, 15 per­cent of vot­ers cast bal­lots for a new par­ty led by Jacob Zuma, a for­mer pres­i­dent and con­vict­ed crim­i­nal, whose tenure was defined by ram­pant cor­rup­tion and polit­i­cal violence.
I’m not sure how you put “Make South Africa Zuma Again” on a hat, but if there’s mon­ey to be made form it, no doubt some­one in his new par­ty will find a way.

        EVEN THOSE WHO SHOULD KNOW BETTER

In coun­tries where polit­i­cal matu­ri­ty and his­to­ry ought to be guide­lines, if not stan­dards, the far right is on the rise by call­ing for neg­a­tive actions against immi­grants and in many cas­es, the very val­ues for which the coun­try they are sup­pos­ed­ly try­ing to improve was either found­ed or prides itself on.
Top of the heap are Israel’s far-right cab­i­net mem­bers Ita­mar Ben-Gvir (Nation­al Secu­ri­ty) and Beza­lel Smotrich (Finance), both of whom advo­cate kick­ing all Pales­tini­ans out of what pro-Pales­tin­ian demon­stra­tors like to char­ac­terise as “from the riv­er to the sea”.
To square the cir­cle of their fanati­cism, they also refuse to accept any peace deal for Gaza that stops short of com­plete­ly elim­i­nat­ing Hamas, even if it means all of the remain­ing Israeli hostages held by Hamas die.
T
he Biden admin­is­tra­tion seems hap­py to accept any and all neg­a­tive actions by the Netanyahu gov­ern­ment, from using U.S. weapons in ways that are banned, to an online influ­ence cam­paign that “…used hun­dreds of fake accounts that posed as real Amer­i­cans on X, Face­book and Insta­gram to post pro-Israel comments.”
The only sur­prise is that it seems to have come as a sur­prise. Israel has one of the most sophis­ti­cat­ed – and unprin­ci­pled – hack­ing and cyber-spy­ing capa­bil­i­ties in the world.

                       HO-HUM

In the pub­lic forum, some bad news is accept­ed, some rev­elled in, and worst of all, ignored. Sudan is the most dis­grace­ful example.
By Amer­i­can esti­mates, since the war there erupt­ed a year ago, as many as 150,000 peo­ple have died. The UN says that in the largest dis­place­ment cri­sis on earth, some nine mil­lion peo­ple have been forced from their homes and a loom­ing famine could kill hun­dreds of thou­sand od chil­dren if it is unchecked.
Not being aware of, or worse, brush­ing that aside, is neg­a­tiv­i­ty on a sin­ful scale.
The war is the embod­i­ment of point­less, which adds anoth­er lev­el of mean­ing to negative.
It boils down to rival gen­er­als ( read war­lords) and their arms sup­pli­ers who are will­ing to lay waste to cities, towns and vil­lages, dri­ve the pop­u­la­tion to star­va­tion and com­mit geno­cide  so they can con­trol what­ev­er is left.
It’s fair to ask whether the dev­as­tat­ing and mas­sive human­i­tar­i­an cri­sis is being allowed to grind on in the back­ground of pub­lic con­scious­ness because its vic­tims are brown and black peo­ple who live in a place and in ways most West­ern­ers can­not begin to imagine.
Arguably, the answer is yes, which is anoth­er way of say­ing people’s per­ceived val­ue is neg­a­tive­ly affect­ed by their ethnicity.
It’s sad but also fit­ting in its own way that the last words on those doing their utmost to ignore or prof­it by neg­a­tiv­i­ty, are summed up in allit­er­a­tion from the dis­graced U.S. Vice-Pres­i­dent: “hope­less, hys­ter­i­cal hypochon­dri­acs of history.”

 Com­ments are wel­comed. Click CONTACT on the site header.
To receive e‑mail alerts to new posts, Click SIGN-UP on the header.

 

 

5 thoughts on “WHEN NEGATIVES THINK THEY’RE POSITIVES

  1. Colum­bia philoso­pher Sid­ney Mor­genbess­er was chal­lenged with: “you’ve heard 2 neg­a­tives make a pos­i­tive, but I bet you can’t have 2 pos­i­tives make a negative.”
    His answer? “Yeah, yeah.”

  2. Allen,
    Your Agnew quote remind­ed me, that way back then, when he made that speech from DeMoines we were plan­ning to cov­er his speech as a live event. To try and make amends for being some­what nasty to Mr. Nixon. Sad­ly it was sched­uled for deliv­ery just a very short time before he gave it. We tried to get a line to DeMoines but Ma Bell did not have enough time to get the need­ed lines installed. I also remem­ber that Agnew, nor his speech writ­ers had the abil­i­ty, or the tal­ent, to write such a speech. Instead they asked Mr. Nixon’s chief speech writer to help them, and so William Safire, who was soon to resign from the White House staff, to start his long career as an Op-Ed page main­stay for the New York Times. Safire took up his trusty type­writer , as a favor to Agnew, and part­ing ges­ture to the White House, very quick­ly turned out Agnew’s most famous speech as a small favor. I was told, at the time, that it took Safire less than 20 minutes.
    In case you had­n’t heard it before.

  3. Allen,
    Your Agnew quote remind­ed me, that way back then, when he made that speech from DeMoines it was sug­gest­ed we cov­er his speech as a live event. To try and make amends for being some­what nasty to Mr. Nixon. Sad­ly it was sched­uled for deliv­ery just a very short time before he gave it. We tried to get a line to DeMoines but Ma Bell did not have enough time to get the need­ed lines installed . We had to cov­er it with a film. I also remem­ber that Agnew, nor his speech writ­ers had the abil­i­ty, or the tal­ent, to write such a speech quick­ly. Instead they asked Mr. Nixon’s chief of staff Halde­man to get their best speech writer speech writer to help them. So William Safire, who was soon to resign from the White House staff, to start his long career as an Op-Ed page main­stay for the New York Times. took up his trusty type­writer As a favor to Agnew, and a part­ing ges­ture to the White House, he very quick­ly turned out Agnew’s most famous speech as a small favor. I was told, at the time, that it took Safire less than 20 minutes.
    In case you had­n’t heard it before.

    1. I knew Safire wrote it, but not the cir­cum­stances. And I’m will­ing to bet not manyn­pro­duc­ers of today could cope with what the make-it-up-as-you-go days demanded.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *