Arianna, master logician

Those of you out East may not be aware of the local controversy swirling around the LA Times. Feminist gadfly Susan Estrich (and her team of bean counters) have weighed the Times' editorial page and found it wanting--needed: more women. Editor and well-meaning liberal Michael Kinsley felt he was being blackmailed and has, so far, refused to give in.

A few days ago, Arianna Huffington had a piece in the Times and I think I see Kinsley's strategy--sure, he's gonna publish stuff from women, but it'll be so silly that Estrich'll beg him to stop.

Huffington's piece purports to be a lesson in elementary logic, and it is, just not the way she thinks. While she complains about the Undistributed Middle, her argument is built upon straw men, sweeping generalizations, false dilemmas, card stacking, non sequitur, wishful thinking, special pleading, vagueness, Argumentum ad Odium, condescension and what seems to be lying.

See, she's upset that instead of the constant drumbeat of failure, some people who opposed the war in Iraq are now hopeful. (Actually, she claims everyone in DC now supports Bush, but I won't waste time with her mischaracterization of others, and will stick to her arguments.)

Here's a good example of her logic, as she criticizes a Bush "syllogism": "The Bush White House has been masterful at this infantile reasoning: Terrorists attacked America. Therefore, terrorists hate freedom and democracy." Oh, I think we have more evidence than that. When the terrorists ran things, the fact they banned freedom of speech, freedom of religion, open inquiry and killed women who were too bold, to name just a few items, suggests they oppose freedom as any rational person understands it. As for Democracy, maybe it's that they keep denouncing it by name.

Many have noted that the idea of freedom seems to be sprouting in the Middle East. Arianna first notes it's a coincidence that it's happening alongside the elections in Iraq. (Perhaps, but that's quite a coincidence.) Then she warns us that, as opposed to what Bush is saying, things are far from perfect as they stand. I obviously missed that speech where Bush said everything was perfect. She also claims we're not being told about the downside: "a bloody narrative about which we hear shockingly little." I guess she was too busy listening to imaginary speeches to note the day-in day-out front page coverage of the war and its effects over the past two years.

She reminds us "Holding an election is not the same as establishing a democracy." How true. It requires a lot of work and concerted effort to have a chance at success. The funny thing is I always thought this was the strongest reason to support Bush, not oppose him.

Here's another typical paragraph, with lengthy interruptions I apologize for beforehand.

"The truth is the vast majority of Arabs remain skeptical of U.S motives. And can we really blame them? [Personally, I want democracy to spread to Arab lands, and I have little doubt the Bush administration wants it as well. Alas, Arianna doesn't even want to admit this much.] After all, it wasn't that long ago that Dick Cheney was opposing the release of Nelson Mandela in South Africa [even if it were this simple, I think the answer to this thrust is "so what?"], Donald Rumsfeld was cutting deals with Saddam Hussein [yep, politics means you sometimes make deals with those you don't like; I think we've proved pretty definitively since then we're opposed to Hussein, while those against the war, like France, were still pretty open for business; furthermore the Arabs and Muslims we're helping have sometimes made deals with people we don't like, but if you expect purity in politics you don't get very far], and the CIA was overthrowing Mohammed Mossadegh, the democratically elected leader of Iran, and installing the Shah. [She started with "it wasn't that long ago," but this is more than half a century in the past. Heck, the Shah's been "uninstalled" for 26 years and the Iranians are so unhappy with their present leaders that they support us more than most countries.]

In any case, these stray facts aren't as important in creating Arab mistrust, seems to me, as that they've lived in unfree countries and been fed a steady stream of anti-US propaganda all their lives. How to break this cycle, hmm, how? While we ponder that, let me try to make a few positive arguments for why they should trust us that Arianna can't be bothered to consider: we've fought in a number of wars recently and lost many soldiers to help free Muslims around the world; we've generally supported democracy around the world (I'm aware some don't believe this--if Arianna is one, I wish she'd identify herself); if it were mainly about oil we'd still be dealing with Saddam; it's in our self-interest.

Another irony is Huffington doesn't realize the main fear of those who want liberty is not that the US is too quick to fight, but that we won't keep fighting; I don't think Arianna ever wanted to fight, so it's her side that the Democracy-lovers can't trust.

Greece, homeland of Socrates, Plato, Aristotle and now, Arianna.