Comments on Reads 9/24

Jeffrey Goldberg: John Mearsheimer Endorses a Hitler Apologist and Holocaust Revisionist

If you recall from the fight over "The Israel Lobby," which Mearsheimer wrote with Stephen Walt, of Harvard, the authors claimed that they were simply writing a critique of American foreign policy, and of certain American citizens who, they said, "distorted" foreign policy. Many of us disagreed. Here is a bit of what David Rothkopf wrote about Mearsheimer and Walt: "W)hatever the pale intellectual merits of his hackneyed argument may be (the authors) know full well that their prominence on this issue has come not because they have had a single new insight but rather because they were willing and one can only believe inclined to play to a crowd whose 'views' were fueled by prejudice and worse. They may not be anti-Semites themselves but they made a cynical decision to cash in on anti-Semitism by offering to dress up old hatreds in the dowdy Brooks Brothers suits of the Kennedy School and the University of Chicago."
Now, Mearsheimer is endorsing the writing of a man who espouses neo-Nazi views. In other words, he's not even bothering to make believe anymore -- he's moved from a self-described critic of Israel to a corrosive critic of Jewry itself. The blogger Adam Holland, like yours truly, didn't quite believe that Mearsheimer would endorse such a crude anti-Semite, so he asked him to confirm:

I had trouble believing that a distinguished professor at one of the world's greatest universities would link himself to a hatemonger like Atzmon. So I sent Professor Mearsheimer an email quoting the blurb and asking him to verify it's accuracy.  I also gave him an opportunity to amend it or add to it.  Here's what he wrote back:
"The blurb below is the one I wrote for "The Wandering Who" and I have no reason to amend it or embellish it, as it accurately reflects my view of the book."

Gilad Atzmon, by the way, is also on record saying this:

"I believe that from certain ideological perspective, Israel is actually far worse than Nazi Germany."

Perhaps Mearsheimer has found a new co-author.

FP: From the first time I became aware of Mearsheimer and Walt’s work on the Jewish lobby I thought it was the work of anti-semites, no matter how much effort was made to refrain from accusing them of racism just because they were academics; and I even wrote an online article about it. Well, voila.
Unless and until people learn to call a spade a spade—if it quacks like a duck, it is a duck—this mental illness will only spread and get accepted.

CENGİZ AKTAR: Presidential system: Looking for absolute power

Although it is a widespread style of administration, the presidential system works democratically well only in the United States, maybe in Brazil now and perhaps in Mexico in the future. Most countries governed by a presidential system are dictatorships. A few familiar names are Azerbaijan, Syria, Egypt, Tunisia, Algeria, Armenia and Sudan… But before we discuss this model, we should look at the discrepancies of the system at work. For the problem is not the lack of more power but of a social contract to keep this power at check through legislature, law and regional structures; or in other words, it is about the lack of a democratic constitution.
Since everyone in Turkey believes that only top positions can change things in the country, everyone wants to become prime minister. Apparently, the prime minister is unsatisfied with having such power, so he wants to have some more by becoming the president of the country.
So, let me wrap this up with a famous quote by Lord Acton: “Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely.”

FP: Islamism is as compatible with democracy as Nazism or Communism were: temporarily. And here's Claire Berlinski:

More vibrant democracy:

Parliament will open on Oct. 1. The first item on the agenda for the chairmanship council will be the broadcast hours of the “Meclis TV” [Parliament TV]. This is because Parliamentary Speaker Çiçek has not renewed the contract with the Turkish Radio and Television Corporation, or TRT, as he did last term. The group speeches of leaders will not be broadcast during this term. Also, the general assembly sessions will be on air between 3 p.m. and 7 p.m. Except for these hours, there will be no broadcast. The opposition is reacting to this. The CHP and MHP say this is a means of “censorship” and they argue that the parliamentary activities are being snatched away from the people. According to whispers, Speaker Çiçek will not take a step back. It could be possible to install a closed circuit broadcast within the parliamentary campus so that parliamentary deputies are well informed of sessions. That is a broadcast system closed to the public but open to deputies is in question. Let’s see who will be the winner of the broadcast fight ...
This is how it works, you see?
...
It means no one will even be able to watch the debate about the new constitution that will, supposedly, shape Turkey's future. Here's why it matters. As for the opposition, they're not serious about winning, anyway, so who cares.

Turkey has been presented as the model of a democratic Muslim country. But secularism was imposed on the country dictatorially via military rule and it was only a matter of time before Islam would surface; and only a matter of time before it would do what it’s wont to do.