President Obama seems to be having such a laughing good time re-doing America. But why stop at the water’s edge? This from an opinion column by Caroline Glick in today's Jerusalem Post: "Yediot Aharonot reported that at a recent lecture in Washington, US Lt.-Gen. Keith Dayton, who is responsible for training Palestinian military forces in Jordan, indicated that if Israel does not surrender Judea and Samaria within two years, the Palestinian forces he and his fellow American officers are now training at a cost of more than $300 million could begin killing Israelis."

It seems to me that Obama's plan for Middle East does actually represent a new approach: wipe Israel off the map and we’re sure to have peace at last. Gee, it seems so simple! I wonder why nobody else has thought of this before.

It occurs to me why capitalism has suddenly become so despised throughout much of the world. I used to think it was envy – but it’s not. It is because capitalism is equated with making money. We ourselves have come to regard money as dirty. We’ve become very puritan in this respect – eating sprouts and twigs; eschewing meat; recycling and all the rest. Years of a soft tyranny in our schools have taught us that ‘green’ is better.

Hollywood has been instrumental in portraying capitalism (or making money) in a negative light. The hugely popular Godfather trilogy (USA) is an example that illustrates that crime pays. Wall Street (USA) tells of insider trading and stock manipulation. If only for a short time, the perps are (anti)-heroes who are able to indulge in living gluttonous lives.

Surely, the writers, producers and directors of such movies do not intend this lesson. Their aim is likely innocent enough: a good story - not necessarily to cast a wide net - meant simply to entertain. The people in other countries (and some in our own, including our current president), however, see this and say, “This must be what life in America is like.” Seldom do they grasp the nuance woven into the fabric of the tale, the humor; the pyrotechnics; the art; and often the pathos meant to show the desperate aimlessness of criminals condemned to compulsively repeat their crimes; attempting to fill the vacuous void in their hearts with mansions and women; more money, and senseless, robotic sexual encounters. Cops are often shown to be corrupt as well; as are politicians. All are portrayed, if not rich, at least as well off. In Hollywood movies, the innocent are mere fodder for capitalists’ bottomless longing.

I’ve been watching a lot of foreign movies lately. All these seem to echo similar themes. In “Your Name is Justine” (Polish), a young girl is abducted and sold into prostitution. The culprits are made out to be almost human. The difference between them ranges between ‘bad’ and ‘very bad”. Justine is an innocent, driven to murder. She serves her time and is released. She finds she has lost a significant part of her life – to other’s pursuit of (what else?) 'capitalism'.

“PU-239” is a HBO film in which a dying man tries to sell weapons grade plutonium to anyone who can come up with $30,000. He contacts a gang who live by extortion, kidnapping, protection, drugs, you name it… All this is done in the name of 'capitalism' – or making money.

In “Grimm” (Dutch) and “The Harvest (USA) human organs are harvested from the living for profit.

Foreign movies tend to be far less nuanced than American ones. They reflect their American counterparts only in that robbing a bank, for instance, is likely to produce less attractive consequences than say, Redford, Pitt and company sitting smartly in an airport lounge after having just robbed a Las Vegas casino. American movies are fun, often funny. American audiences (except Barrack Obama and his supporters) do not (yet) equate them with real life where people work hard (and legally) for what they happen to be in the process of building and can claim as their own (though under the current administration that too may change).

Foreigners look at Americans and see they are rich. An American in India is always assumed to be rich. From the movies they watch, they would naturally assume that such riches must have been ill-gotten at the expense of the meek. “How much blood on American’s hands to be able to exhibit so much wealth?” they ask, exercising their curious nature. “How much blood to float the mighty ship called the ‘USS Capitalism’?” they question, their voices soaring in righteous indignation. “It couldn’t possibly be our system of government that has failed us,” they murmur just before burying their faces in what passes for popcorn in their variously assorted native places.

Their leaders reflexively deflect blame from their own corruption and bad policies by blaming ‘The Great Satan”. “Look, Americans are eating steak and eggs for breakfast in contrast to the anemic gruel on your own tables,” they say in five-hour speeches in the proverbial ‘Plaza de la Revolucion’. “Time to turn the tables; let them know what it’s like.” And, we, like the fools we’ve become, agree with them and go around apologizing, promising to do better next time.

Very well written. I really enjoy your comments.
Larry W.

Corlyss - I don't think the U.S. had anything to do with it. This victory belongs to the Sinhalese alone. India contributed greatly simply by staying out of it. I do find curious, however, the Western media's insistence on tarnishing Sri Lanka's victory by publishing false claims of atrocities, even genocide. B. Raman lays out a convincing rebuttal of such charges in one of his recent papers.