Most Americans hadn’t heard of the Uyghurs until a small group of them, unjustly imprisoned in Gitmo and whose release was ordered by the Bush Administration, became a political hot potato for the Obama Administration. As you may recall, these unjustly imprisoned and innocent men were labeled “terrorists” by conservative Republicans who thundered at Obama’s plan to attempt to resettle them in the United States, since they faced persecution at home in China. Ultimately Obama was forced to bribe the island nation of Palau to take the Uygurs – giving dishonest pundits yet another cheap shot to take.
As it turns out, the Uyghurs are among the most severely repressed minority in China, because in both religion and ethnicity they are apart from the ruling Han mainstream. This weekend, that oppression became a brutal crackdown that one reporter likened to Tiananmen Square. Unfoirtunately, partly because of a lack of awareness and also because China has more control over communication and the Internet, the oppression of the Uyghurs isnt getting as much play as the Iranian protests.
(incidientally, I really must repeat myself here – Chris Muir’s comment on the Uyghurs’ resettlement was a despicable low point, even for him. I personally respect my ideological opponents like Dave, Kevin, CC etc here, and I think Muir isn’t fit to share the same web page with you fine folks.)
{ 19 comments }
I’ve already made my opinion of Day By Day known here. I consider it soft core porn masquerading as political commentary, and with about the level of subtlety and nuance you would expect from a strip that relies on naked cartoon flesh to generate interest.
CC, I’d apreciate a link to that.
My main critique of Muir is that his “liberal” characters are about as grotesque a strawman caricature of what liberals actually think as you’ll find anywhere on Democratic Underground. Plus he always treats the first-spin as fact, in essence a follower of the latest partisan meme rather than any genuine commentary or original analysis. In the grand tradition of political cartooning, Muir’s work simply does not rate, nor even deserve mention. Its political porn, agreed.
Aziz:
That’s because Chris’s main two techniques are cheesecake and red meat. Which seems to be enough to keep him popular.
Aziz: Where I will disagree with you is in any assertion you make that Chris Muir is any worse than the Left’s usual darlings, for example those who drew Condi Rice as a “house nigga” and who routinely draw GW Bush as a chimp without a brain. In terms of partisanship and political nuance, Chris is in fine company with Pulitzer prize winners aplenty. In fact I find those sorts of things far more offensive than Chris’s cheesecake. My issue with Day By Day is that it purports to be a conservative toon yet it exhibits actual moral values on a par with “Desperate Housewives.”
Aziz,
agreed with both you and CC re: Chris Muir and agree with CC re: most partisan political cartooning. Though I think there are shades between Muir and Rall on one side, and, say, Toles on another.
The Uighur question isn’t as cut-and-dried as you make it out to be here. I am DEFINITELY not an expert on this subject, but here is my take. They have had a long history of both persecution and unrest – stretching well before the Chinese revolution. Like all long-standing ethnic conflicts, there are no innocent players. The official Beijing position is one favorable to the Uighurs in terms of being treated equally under the law – but good luck enforcing that. Beijing has almost zero power projection and the Han officials on the ground carry ethnic and religious prejudices. Some Uighurs really do fit the bill of terrorists, separatists, and/or religious extremists. I don’t think it’s clear who started the fight this time (predictably state media says one thing, the Uighur groups say another, both with vested interests in a particular narrative) – though it’s easy to argue that the authorities went too far in ending it. Regardless of the subtleties, it is unfortunate that it isn’t getting more TV play, either in America (I’m assuming) or in China (where the brief reports are certainly not brimming with outrage).
those who drew Condi Rice as a “house nigga” and who routinely draw GW Bush as a chimp without a brain.
um, who would that be? Tom Toles? Tom Tomorrow? Those are te two prominent lefty cartoonists that I am aware of, both far more successful than Muir, and neither one has ever done anything of that sort.
There’s of course that one annoying cartoonist, teh really offensive one whose name escapes me at the moment, but hes been even handed inhis lampooning left and right. name on the tip of my tongue.. argh
Zach, the specific incident at hand may have its root in ethnic tensions, but the brutal crackdown was by military forces, so cant be swept away as overreaction by local Han functionaries. And this incident aside, theres a systematic pattern of oppression of the Uyghur as a whole, which is partly why there are ethnic tensions and resentment of the Han in the first place. For just one example, see the link to Indscribe at my COB post about the Uyghur language.
Aziz:
Color me unsurprised that you don’t register the same outrage when a Leftist political cartoonist viciously savages and misrepresents someone on the right. I remember a Toles cartoon depicting Don Rumsfeld talking to a quadruple amputee veteran of Iraq saying “I’ll just put you down as ‘battle hardened.’ ”
Yeah, that’s real subtle. And real accurate in depicting the conservative side. Or I guess you must think it is.
My point stands. I find myself in the very awkward position of defending Chris Muir and saying that even naked women reciting partisan dialog isn’t nearly as offensive as that Toles cartoon.
But then again, I tend to judge conservatives by a higher standard for precisely this reason. I EXPECT conservatives to be better.
Terrorism, like piracy in the 16th century, is currently an essential tool of statecraft. Larger nations and some small ones fight their wars through the indirect manipulation of terrorist proxies. Pakistan keeps India and various ethnic groups in line by supporting and training the Taliban. Syria maintains its status by manipulating various terror groups. Russia supports Iran and we have our good friends, al Qaeda’s supporters in Saudi Arabia.
China has been doing a lot of business with our Saudi allies lately, and we all know that wherever our Saudi allies go, terrorism follows, like stink following a skunk. There are many minority groups in China who object to Han dominance, but these other minority groups are not supported by Saudi Arabia. They don’t visit Saudi Arabia, they don’t serve in the Saudi army and they aren’t influenced by the most extremist nation on the planet. The Uyghurs are unique that way.
Because I believe that the use of terrorist proxies to fight wars is self-destructive and stupid, I’m not going to take sides in this battle. The Chinese, the Uyghurs, the Saudis and the malign gargoyles in our state department are all equally responsible for the current carnage.
…and what on earth does Chris Muir have to do with any of this? He’s one of the few cartoonists out there who has real artistic skill. That’s worth a lot
Mary,
I should add that even though his comic isn’t for me, I applaud his courage in taking dbd full time and investing himself in his dream. He certainly has enough fans to keep him going at that – so I doubt he’ll mind if he can’t count me as a reader.
Aziz,
Why can’t it be put down to overreaction? Unless you buy uncritically the claim by Uighur groups that they were staging a peaceful protest until the Army came bearing down guns blazing. Similarly, it probably was not the case that the stoic army held their ground until the violent separatists literally forced them to fight for their lives. The truth is somewhere in that grey middle where facile condemnations are easy to come by but usually do not reflect the messy and complicated reality.
I’m withh CC on Muir. I like the ladies as much as the next guy but too often his work skirts uncomfortably close to softcore pictorials. I get it that sex sells but need it be so gratuitous? The left uses sex in lieu of a point. Conservatives don’t need to stoop so low because we have the argument on our side.
CC, color ME unsurprised that you assume my opinions are so shallow in origin. Perhaps someday you’ll extend to me the same benefit of teh doubt I extend to you.
i hadnt seen teh cartoon, so went looking for the Toles cartoon you mentioned. I found it and it did indeed cause a controversy, but from what I understand he was criticizing the comments by Rumsfeld that the severe strain on the Army due to its deployment in Iraq was making it “battle hardened”. Toles was critiquing Rumsfeld, not the military. In no way can the cartoon be reasonably construed as mocking wounded soldiers, if you look at t in context. If anything, it was Rumsfeld, not Toles, who insulted teh troops with his comments (see below).
Heres the relevant article from the Washhington Post:
My feeling is that part fo respeccting the troops involves ensuring that their sacrifice is not taken lightly, and critiquing policies whihch seem to treat soldiers as commodities rather than valuable and priceless resources. That is what Toles’ cartoon does, it makes that sort of critique.
I fully supported Defense Secretary Gates’ apoointment and I think he would never have made such a callous statement as Rumsfeld did.
at any rate, the question of what liberal cartoonists do or dont do is tangential to teh discussion of Muir. Muir consistently misrepresents liberalism in order to make his partisan point. And he does so with gratuitous sexual imagery that doesn’t really contribute anything to his message. About all I can say for him is that his artwork skills have improved over the years.
Is there anyone here who actually likes Muirs’ work?
Is there anyone here who actually likes Muirs’ work?
I do, mostly because I like the character of Sam, one of the few intelligent, non-whiny females in cartoonland.
Day by Day is kind of the anti-Doonsbury. Like Doonsbury, the characters on the opposing political team are strawmen, dumb, inaccurate caricatures. That’s what all red vs. blue political commentary is all about. Don’t blame the cartoonists.
Mary:
Sam may be one of the few intelligent non-whiny females in cartoonland, but I fail to see why she can’t be intelligent and non-whiny with her clothes on. In fact I feel it perpetuates a pattern of presenting women in media as primarily sexual objects who mostly get their way by flaunting their private parts.
Just my opinion.
CC,
Can you repeat that? Once I got disrobed Sam in my head I stopped listening.
Mmmmmm… Saaaaaammmm….
well Kevin you can always pay Muir for his topless Sam calendar. saw that being advertised whihle i was clicking thru teh archives looking for his defamation of the Uyghurs strip.
I guess I’m not one of those who believes any argument can be improved by having it delevered by a semi-naked hot chick. My reaction tends to be the opposite, which is “How good can this argument be if they think they have to have a semi-naked hot chick to deliver it?”
Of course I appreciate semi-naked hot chicks as much as any guy, I just think there’s a time and place for everything. I guess Muir is pretty good at presenting a merging of semi-naked hot chicks and political punditry, but my personal opinion is that I don’t generally seek those together, and when I seek either of them individually, there are far more compelling sources than the Day by Day comic strip. So I don’t read it much at all.
OK, I’m done with Day by Day. If other people enjoy a little cheesecake with their shallow political commentary, that’s fine with me. Enjoy.
Besides, all his chicks are too thin for my taste, and they bend in the wrong places.
The only semi-naked drawing that bothered me was the one of the chunky Uyghur in a bathing suit. What were they feeding those poor oppressed prisoners in Guantanamo, corn dogs and ice cream?
I literally know nothing about the Uyghurs, so I won’t get into that discussion. But I have opinions on the cartoon itself.
As far as exaggerating the foibles of your political opposite, without that, political cartoonists would have nothing to do. There is something to be said sometimes for exaggerating to make a point.
But it is a rare day indeed when Day by Day is actually funny or on point. And today is not that day. The semi-naked cartoon strips (pun intended) weirded me out too, although I don’t view it as a betrayal of conservative principles since I don’t know that Chris claims to be that kind of conservative.
I wouldn’t say the strip is as much the anti-Doonesbury as it is a rehash of the stale Doonesbury formula for a different ideology.
Comments on this entry are closed.