Month: January 2019

Motherfucker

Posted in Daniel Serwer - January 5, 2019 - 4 Comments

Half the readership of peacefare.net, more or less, is non-American, and a large part of that does not have English as a native language. So it seems to me the furor over Rashida Tlaib requires some explication. She is the newly elected Democratic member of Congress from Michigan who called President Trump a motherfucker during a celebration of her election victory.

Motherfucker is not an obscenity that exists in the other languages I know (French, Italian and Portuguese–I never learned obscenities in German). Readers will have to inform me if I am wrong about that or if it translates to others.

I’ve lost most of my French and Portuguese obscenities–hard to remember the words if you don’t use them–but let’s take for contrast to “motherfucker” the Italian obscenity “cornuto,” which means cuckold and is just about the most offensive thing you can say to an Italian male, especially if you use the associated hand gesture. Italians also say “vaffanculo,” which is usually translated “fuck you” or “fuck off” but literally means “go do it in the ass.” They may call someone a “cazzo,” or prick. But Italians don’t in my experience call someone a motherfucker.

The word’s meaning in English depends on context. When Kanye West referred to himself as a “crazy motherfucker” in the Oval Office, the real meaning was in the “crazy” not the “motherfucker,” which was there only to attract attention to the adjective and magnify its significance:

He could just as easily have said “crazy son of a bitch.”

Tlaib used the word differently and in the more conventionally offensive sense. What she meant was that Trump is beyond her own ethical norms, in particular in bullying people:

America is a Puritan-founded society. The idea of sexual relations with your mother is pretty much the worst you can accuse someone of in that context. It is certainly much worse than “cuckold,” which is a word many Americans wouldn’t understand unless they were schooled in Shakespeare. Americans are much more likely to express disapproval of a wife who cuckolds her husband (calling her a slut, for example) than to criticize the husband.

I had a boss when I started my diplomatic career at the UN who was Hungarian, the Karl Marx professor of sociology at the University of Budapest. He called me in one day to discuss why Americans lack colorful obscenities like the Hungarian ones, which in his rendition seemed all to have to do with body parts of the Madonna. So I did what I could to convince him that “shit,” “asshole,” and “fuck you” merited consideration. He was unconvinced.

But here is my short lexicon of American obscenities, based on a childhood in Brooklyn and the New York City suburbs (English expressions can vary a good deal across the country):

1. Calling someone a “shit” implies they have done or said something offensive. It is also used as an expletive on its own, like the French “merde!” but somewhat stronger.

2. “Asshole” is close to “shit” but has the additional implication that the offense was committed intentionally and with malice aforethought.

3. “Prick” suggests a man who is habitually nasty. “Cunt” is the equivalent when referring to a woman.

4. “Son of a bitch” is someone despicable for any reason.

5. “Fuck you” is an expression used to reject as unacceptable something someone has done or said. It is almost never received well.

6. “Motherfucker” is even stronger and implies moral turpitude on the part of the person so labelled, unless used as Kanye did just to amplify the meaning of an adjective. It may also be associated with betrayal, as in “Those motherfuckers stabbed me in the back.”

I know that doesn’t complete the vocabulary, but it will be a good start for non-English speakers the next time Trump elicits an obscenity not taught in school, or uses one. But take my advice: don’t use any of these English words unless you are ready for consequences.

Tags :

The Democratic House and foreign policy

Posted in Daniel Serwer - January 4, 2019 - 0 Comment

The new US House of Representatives that was elected November 6 met for the first time yesterday. The Democratic majority re-installed Nancy Pelosi as Speaker, a job she held 2007-11.

The world asks: what does this mean for us?

The short answer is not much right away. Washington is preoccupied for now with reopening a big slice of the government, which is shut down due to an impasse over funding for border security. President Trump wants $5 billion for his border wall, which he is now sometimes calling a barrier or fence.  He has betrayed his promise to get Mexico to pay for it, but still insists on building it to meet what he terms a crisis of unauthorized immigrants. The Democrats think there are better ways to protect the border from unauthorized immigration, which is generally down.

Until that gets resolved, the Congress isn’t going to do much on foreign policy. The President has almost absolute power in dealing with other countries, except when (as on the border wall) the Congress uses the budget, a war powers resolution, or sanctions to shape US relations with other countries. That usually requires legislation, which needs to pass in both Houses. Ambassadors and other presidential appointees need only be approved in the Senate, which confirmed a slew of them last week. The Democratic-controlled House will focus initially on the manifold scandals in the Trump Administration, including the President’s own financial affairs and the malfeasance of multiple cabinet members.

But eventually the House Democrats will get a shot at foreign policy. Using the subpoena power of the majority, they will certainly hold hearings on Russian and other interference in US elections. They will await the results of the Special Counsel investigation before deciding on whether to impeach the President for “high crimes and misdemeanors” related to Russia, but even if they do conviction and removal from office requires a two-thirds majority in the Senate that is nowhere to be seen, yet. Impeaching without convicting is not a winning political maneuver.

Hearings on other foreign policy issues will come as well. The Middle East and China are likely subjects. A lot of Democrats are unhappy with the withdrawal from the Iran nuclear deal and with Trump’s support for Saudi Arabia. Some, including two new Muslim members, are unhappy with unconditional US support for Israel and neglect of relations with the Palestinians. The now global military and economic challenge from China will interest both Democrats and Republicans. The House will scrutinize the continued US military presence in Iraq and Afghanistan.

These hearings and many public pronouncements from House members will attract lots of attention abroad, but it is difficult to parse out of the cacophony of voices in Washington where American policy is headed. For the moment, the best assumption is that there will be no big changes as a result of the Democratic takeover of the House, even if the tone changes: less unequivocal towards Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Israel, more nuanced with respect to Iran, more friendly towards NATO and the European Union, and more skeptical towards North Korea.

China is another question. Right now, Americans are discovering the obvious: they have more to fear from Chinese economic failure than from its success. The slowdown in Chinese growth, partly caused by American tariffs and Chinese retaliation, is causing major losses in stock markets worldwide, which are anticipating both declining corporate profits and high US interest rates. A lot will depend on the outcome of trade negotiations with Beijing, which are due to reach a conclusion in March. If they don’t, expect slowing growth, also due to the US government shutdown and the Federal Reserve’s concerns about inflation.

President Trump had a halcyon first two years. Republicans controlled both Houses of Congress, the Senate moved rapidly to approve their preferred judges, lessening the burden of environmental and other regulations on business faced no serious opposition in Congress, and the Obama expansion was still powering decent economic growth. The next two years are likely to be far more difficult, with the economy slowing if not declining, the Special Counsel reporting on his findings, and the House Democrats conducting in-depth investigations. The party is over, even if Trump continues to sing the same tunes.

Tags : , , , ,

Inane

Posted in Daniel Serwer - January 2, 2019 - 0 Comment

My Smithsonian employed spouse is headed home on furlough. I know whom to blame:

The inanity of furloughing the US government is profound:

  • It takes a lot of time and costs a lot of money to plan and implement an orderly shutdown.
  • The employees have always been paid, for time not worked, once they return
  • The public thinks shutdowns are a bad idea, so there is no political advantage to be gained in causing one.
  • A shutdown demoralizes all those furloughed, as it conveys the impression that they are superfluous.
  • This particular shutdown was initiated while Republicans controlled both Houses of Congress, and when 100 Senators were prepared to avoid it but were stopped from doing so by the President.

What is the solution? An automatic continuing resolution at last year’s levels, with a boost for inflation, would satisfy me. Many other countries do it. Why not us?

A good 4-minute start to the new year

Posted in Daniel Serwer - January 2, 2019 - 0 Comment

Srdja Popovic starts the New Year with a four-minute version of what to do to bring down a dictator:

 

Tweet