Each of Mitt Romney and Rich Lowry published a piece in
National Review Online on July 31, 2012. Lowry's piece has the title: “Romney's
Truth Telling” and the subtitle: “Palestinians would profit from recognizing
the success of Israeli culture.” When you see this, and knowing that Lowry is
the editor of the magazine, you prepare yourself to reading views as to what he
believes the truth is. And you prepare yourself to reading how the Palestinians
would profit from recognizing the success of Israeli culture.
But is this what you read? No. Instead, you read this
sentence for opener: “Sometimes the world seems a little smaller.” Right there
... you wonder if you should keep reading what promises to be a load of
garbage. But you feel you have the duty to keep reading the piece because you
know that you will have to write something about it. And so I kept reading the
thing.
The next thing I encountered was Lowry's swipe at MSNBC and
the American critics of Romney, the Republican candidate, whom they all hate,
says the author/editor. Actually, the idea he conveys in this passage is that
Saeb Erakat who is a Palestinian official, is as bad as MSNBC and the critics
of Romney because Erakat accused Romney of being a racist in response to
something the latter said about the Palestinians. So here you have one man
sitting in Palestine describing Romney by what
he heard him say, being rebuked by Lowry because the description matches what
is being said about Romney in America
thousands of miles away. And the writer wants us to believe that all these
people are wrong because Romney does not sound like a racist when talking.
Be that as it may, what is the point that the author is
trying to make, anyway? Here it is: “Judging from his performance, Erakat is
almost as good at calling Republicans racist as people in the United States ...
His understanding of the fundamentals of economic growth … isn't as impressive,
though. Otherwise he wouldn’t get the
vapors at the … suggestion that contemporary Palestinian culture is lacking.”
You become a little baffled here because the growth rate in the West Bank of Palestine , where Erakat resides, has been higher than that
of America
lately. Maybe the writer will soon explain the discrepancy between what he says
and what the truth is.
But instead of giving an explanation, he gives this: “Erakat
evidently hasn't read much Tocqueville – and that's a cultural deficiency right
there.” And Kaboom! It is like getting a punch in the face. For Rich Lowry to
call Erakat culturally deficient when the man is versed in at least three
languages if not more as well as their cultures, is like a cockroach telling
the scientist who is examining it: “I know more science and math than you.” It
is one thing for Lowry to say I don't like this man's culture; it is another
thing to say this man is culturally deficient when he has a train of cultures
behind him big enough to envelop a dozen Rich Lowrys. No doubt what we have
here is a demonstration of the saying: a little knowledge is a dangerous thing.
Not even a half baked intellectual; just a little knowledge and he can give you
this much heartburn.
I grew up reading French even before I started to read
Arabic, and I read Alexis de Toqueville in his language before I read the translation
of his works in English. What I found most interesting were the views he held
about the European wars in Africa , and the
comparison he made of the Europeans and the Arabs. He called the Europeans
savage barbarians, and called the Arabs highly civilized. He also called the
conquest of America
an act of extermination. Of course, you don't find this in the book that was
written by Levy, that French Jew who is as much a mutilator of history as any
Jew, and this is probably the only work by de Toqueville or about him that
Lowry ever read. This is why he is so misinformed in addition to being
culturally inferior.
But these are matters of history and economics that have
transpired more than a century and a half ago. The world has changed since de
Toqueville, and so have the theories pertaining to the relationship between
culture and economic growth. I am certain that if he were alive today, he would
want to update his works. I wrote a great
deal myself on this subject, and my articles are all here on this website. The
readers can go over them and see for themselves. Rich Lowry may learn some
economics, which he should do, before passing judgment on someone like Erakat
who can do more during one hour of sleep than Lowry can do while awake for a
whole day.
As to the Mitt Romney article, it is titled: “Culture Does
Matter”. He begins by complaining that the remark he made in Israel “became
the subject of controversy.” And so he asks: “But what exactly accounts for
prosperity if not culture?” Well, no one in his right mind would dispute that
culture plays a role in providing for economic growth, thus influences the
level of prosperity. But it is not enough to say only this much then comment:
“the Israeli and Palestinian living standards was powerfully influenced by it”
without explaining what he means.
And the reason why an explanation is needed here is that
many characters as ignorant as Rich Lowry pounced on it and said things like:
“[The Palestinians] are crippled by the fact that they live in an illiberal society
obsessed with perpetuating the conflict with Israel over almost all else.” For
a thing like Lowry to say that the Palestinians are obsessed when he was the
one that saw a conspiracy between Erakat and MSNBC, is a little too much. Thus,
if Romney wants to redeem himself and also prove the claim that he understands
economics, he can do a few simple things:
Explain how growth relates to the culture in Communist China
as opposed to Democratic India.
Explain how ancient Egypt became a superpower and remained
so for several thousand years under the rule of the “not so democratic”
pharaohs.
Explain the difference in the economics of Hitler's
authoritarian Germany
and modern Democratic Germany.