![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
mmcirvinDavid Brooks is almost there, but his strange and instinctive trust in George W. Bush takes over two thirds of the way through.
This is unavoidably going to sound icky and self-serving, but: I think that one of the major obstacles to changing your mind over something this huge is the fear that a lot of people are instantly going to jump on you: "Well, that's all very nice, isn't it? Changing your mind when all the babies have already been killed?" Admitting you were wrong is essentially the same thing as admitting that you're evil and a murderer and can never perform sufficient atonement; so it's emotionally easier not to. Certain comments to Matthew Yglesias's worthy reflections go that way, though, laudably, most of them are quite magnanimous.
I give great credit to The Editors of The Poor Man, who was right far earlier than I was, for not taking that tack around the time that I was coming around and spouting off about it in his blog comments. Within that vortex of mockery lies a generous soul.
(Addendum: I should clarify that Yglesias actualy flipped to opposing the war before major combat started; he just thinks it wasn't early enough. Personally, I doubt that even majority antiwar sentiment in the US would have affected administration policy; they were too wrapped up in their own delusions at the time. The guy I really can't figure out is Colin Powell, if, as he claims to Bob Woodward, he really knew better. But I suppose that's a subject for another time.)
This is unavoidably going to sound icky and self-serving, but: I think that one of the major obstacles to changing your mind over something this huge is the fear that a lot of people are instantly going to jump on you: "Well, that's all very nice, isn't it? Changing your mind when all the babies have already been killed?" Admitting you were wrong is essentially the same thing as admitting that you're evil and a murderer and can never perform sufficient atonement; so it's emotionally easier not to. Certain comments to Matthew Yglesias's worthy reflections go that way, though, laudably, most of them are quite magnanimous.
I give great credit to The Editors of The Poor Man, who was right far earlier than I was, for not taking that tack around the time that I was coming around and spouting off about it in his blog comments. Within that vortex of mockery lies a generous soul.
(Addendum: I should clarify that Yglesias actualy flipped to opposing the war before major combat started; he just thinks it wasn't early enough. Personally, I doubt that even majority antiwar sentiment in the US would have affected administration policy; they were too wrapped up in their own delusions at the time. The guy I really can't figure out is Colin Powell, if, as he claims to Bob Woodward, he really knew better. But I suppose that's a subject for another time.)
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2004-04-18 11:30 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-04-18 11:55 am (UTC)Harry Belafonte's "house Negro" crack seems less vulgar nowadays.
no subject
Date: 2004-04-18 11:55 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-04-18 12:09 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-04-18 12:17 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-04-18 02:49 pm (UTC)Yes, many and perhaps most Iraqis were happy to see Saddam go. They'll be even happier when the "coalition" troops go, and it's unrealistic--no, it's plain stupid--to expect them to be patient and let the invader decide when it's time to leave.
no subject
Date: 2004-04-18 04:26 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-04-18 04:44 pm (UTC)Matt McIrvin is worse than Hitler!!
Date: 2004-04-19 02:18 pm (UTC)