Self Indulgence Alert Redux: The South Africa Blog

Over at the South Africa Blog I've been busy with the Zimbabwe crisis, the Zimbabwe crisis, the Zimbabwe crisis, and other stuff (including SADC's response to, well, the Zimbabwe crisis).

Self-Indulgence Alert!

Cliff May, President of the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies, gives me some props in the FDD "News & Notes," for my recent argument about "The Unbearable Lightness of Howard Zinn."

The Dual-Edged Sword of Email

I'm certain I'm not alone among my readers, but I spend an insane, inordinate amount of time on email. Keeping up with friends, of course, but also academic listserves, which proliferate seemingly daily, and news sources -- newspapers and magazines and journals -- and too many sports-related emails to mention. Much of my daily contact with Africa comes to me via email. Email that by any definition is work-related. There are days, it seems, when "work" consists entirely of deleting email, responding to email, ignoring email, blogging based on things I receive via email, and engaging in endeavors and making the sort of inquiries that will lead to more email. A day away from the computer can set me back two days. A week away from email and I cannot imagine how I would dig myself out.

Now we have confirmation that we are not alone from the website of the respected literary magazine-cum-journal N+1, which explicitly makes the case"Against Email." Here is a sample, though the whole thing is worthwhile:

America, most efficient country on earth, is in fact a nightmare economy of squandered time. Our economic system condemns people to work in offices and send email; that’s what they do there. (And in order to cover their asses, they cc everyone about everything.) Then they go home and take with them all the work they were supposed to be doing all day. Their revenge upon those of us who don’t work in offices? To send us email from nine to five.

We too have sometimes been the have-nots in the email economy. In the role of supplicant emailer, we have labored to achieve the impossible right tone: so winning that others will have to write back, so casual you can pretend it doesn’t matter when they don’t. The whole thing is painful all around. And this, finally, is what must be understood: email, which presents itself as a convenience, a breeze, is in fact a stern disciplinary phenomenon. You must not stray too far from your desk. You must be polite, you must write back soon. And yet in order to strike the right note, you must not write when too giddy, angry, tired, or drunk. Always at the disposal of email, never, except guiltily, at the disposal of your moods. . . . It fits our phase of capitalism: the collective attitude is casual, natural-seeming, offhand; the discipline is constant and intense.

Email represents a form of self-inflicted tyranny, but it is tyranny nonetheless. But I have to cut this short. I have to check if I have any new messages before I go to bed.

Dirty Water: Sox Talk With the Thunderstick

Thunderstick: What a great week. We roll 2-1 against TB and 4-0 over Chicago while the Yanks are going 1-2 against Anaheim and 1-2 against Detroit with one left today and that 4 game lead that had us back on the ledge a week ago has grown into a 7.5 game lead. This series with the Yanks that starts tomorrow has been looming for a while now, but this past weekend might have made it immaterial. The Sox will enter with at least a 7-game lead. The only thing that could really derail our train to the AL East title in these three games would be a sweep and even with that, it just gets us back to the ledge that we were on a week ago.

Like the Yanks did after the all-star break, we fattened up against some bad teams this past week, but you don't make apologies for who you beat, you just got out and beat them and improve that record. We got solid pitching all around and the bats were lively this past weekend and now we can get a day of rest (key given the doubleheader that had to be played on Friday after the rainout) and can roll into NY with Dice, Schill and Beckett lined up to go (although the way Waker is pitching right now, I'm not so sure I wouldn't rather see him in the rotation this week than Schil). It'd be nice if the Sox could go in and lay a beat down on and finish them off like the Yankees did when they came into Fenway late last year and laid down a 5 game hammer on the Sox. Bring on this series.

dcat: Bring on this series indeed. You hear that sound? That is the bluebird of happiness singing softly into our ears. Are you basking in that warmth on your skin, that sweet, fresh smell in the air, that indescribably blue sky? Those, my friend, are the heightened senses of victory.

Let us forget for a moment the historic whomping we just put on a team that will probably remove the last bit of shine from the Ozzie Guillen diamond on the South Side of Chicago. It's pretty clear that we got on a bit of a run, that ChiSox team is demoralized, and their middle relief is execrable. But while we were ringing up double digits in every game and keeping them to minimal runs, several of those scored in games that had long been decided, the Yankees were falling back to earth. They have finally reverted to their mean. Not as bad as they were in May, not as good as they were in July, the Yankees are revealing themselves for the sort of team that they are -- a mishmash of old and young, a fantasy team brought to life, with little coherent construction, a dangerous but weakened old animal capable of devastation if you corner them, but at the end of the day toothless when matched up against those who are emerging as the alpha dogs in the pack. They can forget the American League East. Once we take just one game in this series, that becomes a pipe dream for the Yankees. Right now Steinbrenner's lads are looking at a deficit that is becoming increasingly daunting in the Wild Card race. I for one cannot think of a better recruiting tool to get A-Rod than to have him watch us in the postseason while the inevitable Steinbrenner storm rages through the fall and into the winter and while the dullards who populate the Yankee City State point their errant, accusing fingers at their best player.

Naturally this series is important. But we have the pitching lined up nearly perfectly. (Though when your pitching staff goes six deep, you always have your pitching staff lined up -- Tim Wakefield is tied, with Beckett, for the ML lead in wins, and he has had a decision in every start, something that has not happened in a full season for something like 80 years. Let's also give a hat tip to what Tavarez has done for the Sox this year.) The bats are bringing home the bacon and frying it up in a pan. The Yankees will come in with the stink of desperation (which is only barely discernibly different from the stink that normally follows them like that which enveloped Pig Pen of the Peanuts) and our job will be to crap all over them. They need a sweep to have even a slight hope. That ain't happening.

Go Sox!!!

Sox Offensive Explosions

Think the Rangers' 30-run explosion against the Orioles last week was impressive? At The Boston Globe Bob Ryan uncovers the story of how the 1950 Red Sox, a team that he reminds us was one of the great offensive juggernauts in baseball history, scored 49 runs in a two-game blasting of the St. Louis Browns.

Of course this weekend the Sox scored in double digits in every game of a four game series, something accomplished only three other times in the last century. But more on that in the next edition of "Dirty Water: Sox Talk With the Thunderstick."

Moving On Up

James Wood, the sometimes-controversial literary critic at The New Republic, is moving on the The New Yorker. This may be the source of some consternation in the literary world. Wood is often controversial, sometimes frustratingly narrow-minded, but rarely dull.

More Belated Justice in Mississippi

In another effort to get at the truth and deliver justice from some of the crimes of the Jim Crow era, a federal judge on Friday gave former Ku Klux Klansman James Seale to three life sentences for his role in the abduction and murder of Henry H. Dee and Charles E. Moore in Meadville, Mississippi in 1964. The murders were not the subject of a great deal of attention because of the high-profile disappearance of Andrew Goodman, James Chaney and Mickey Schwerner that summer, though it was in the process of searching for the bodies of those three young activists that the bodies of Dee and Moore, who were both 19, were discovered. To provide some perspective on the scale of racial oppression from that era, according to the piece there are still more than one hundred cold cases from the civil rights era that have gone unsolved, including thirty in Mississippi.

Red Sox Nation Travels

Courtesy of the Thunderstick, a USA Today article on how the Red Sox Nation represent the "kings of the road," and the Sox the biggest attraction in baseball:

The cheering, fawning and often angst-ridden Red Sox Nation is everywhere, some nights outnumbering the home team's fans at Red Sox road games. Some fans are newcomers, having latched on to the team of the moment. Others are die-hards who have found it easier to see their beloved Sox away from Boston because it's often difficult and expensive to get tickets to games in Boston's tiny Fenway Park.

(See also this story in today's Boston Globe.)

Let's just say that I am well aware that were the regular season to end today, the American League playoff representatives would be the Sox along with Cleveland, Seattle, and Anaheim. And the National league playoff teams would be the Mets, Cubs, San Diego, and Arizona. With the possible exception of a World Series matchup in Wrigley, every one of those cities would be easier and cheaper to see a Sox postseason game than Fenway by a matter of magnitude. I'm rooting for Arizona in the National League, as a good friend just moved to within miles of Arizona's ballpark. Though like everyone, I would love a Sox-Cubs meeting as well.

Of course there is a long way to go in the regular season . . .

Iraq and Vietnam: The Quagmire of Analogies

So now Iraq is like Vietnam. When for so long war supporters have fulminated and sputtered that it is not. And now the anti-war masses will argue that Iraq is not like Vietnam. When for so long they have fulminated and sputtered that it is.

How is this: In some ways the Iraq War loosely resembles some aspects of Vietnam. In a huge number of ways it does not. That will prove deeply dissatisfying to ideologues who are unwilling to make comparisons except for when it helps them to make some larger point to lambaste the other side. A moderate stance on the analogy is a lot more true than the perspective of those who now argue that Iraq is like Vietnam in order to try to pin prospective failure on a party that was not in power in any branch of government in the first four years of a war that is now not quite four-and-a-half years old. And it is a lot more true than the stance of those who have tried to invoke Vietnam as shorthand for "bad war."

In our constant quest to develop a usable past, we almost always do so the wrong way. The reality is that in terms of planning at strategy and long-term approaches, this war in Iraq is, like nearly all wars, sui generis. At this point the only quagmire that seems apt is the one that ideologues on both sides find themselves mired in as a result of their desperate attempts to score points against those with the temerity to disagree with them.

The Jimmy Fund, A Story, and a Reminder

Dan Shaughnessy has a reputation, largely deserved, of being one of those sportswriters who looks for weak spots and sticks the knife in and twists. But when Shaughnessy, who was long, long ago my favorite sportswriter, is on, he is still capable of greatness.

(Contrast this with Rick Reilly, who inexplicably is arguably the most famous and revered sportswriter alive, largely on the basis of his column, "Life of Reilly," on the back page of Sports Illustrated. Reilly's columns come in two types: The attempts at being clever, which rarely are. And the attempts at being sentimental, which always are. And that's not necessarily a good thing.)

If Reilly wants an example of a good column addressing an emotional topic, he could do worse than this Shaughnessy piece from Sunday's Boston Globe in which he discusses the red Sox's recent Jimmy Fund campaign and its confluence with events of 40 years ago when Tony C was beaned in the face. Here is a lump-inducing sample:

A lot of the '67 guys are back in town this weekend and they were standing behind home plate, in uniform, Friday night when 7-year-old Jimmy Fund patient Jordan Leandre sang the anthem, then circled the bases before the second game of the day-night doubleheader.

You can have your Carlton Fisk homer in '75, or David Ortiz's walkoff against the Angels in the ALDS in '04, or even Ted's clout off Jack Fisher in his final major league at-bat in 1960. Jordan's tour de bases was more meaningful and emotional. A lot of us hadn't seen the brave little guy since the home opener in 2006 when he sang the anthem from a wheelchair.

The chair was gone Friday, another victory for the Jimmy Fund. And in the final hours of a two-day WEEI/NESN Radio-Telethon in which citizens of Red Sox Nation pledged more than $3.6 million, Jordan gave us a moment for the ages. He was wearing a T-shirt that read, "Making Dreams Possible," and he was running on legs that weren't strong enough to allow him to stand last year.

This was his 10th anthem at Fenway, but his first without a brace, a cast, or a chair. He ran for every kid who ever battled cancer and every Boston baseball fan who ever put a quarter in a Jimmy Fund box. And when he crossed home plate, staggering to the finish, he was swept up and held aloft by Jose Santiago, who won the final game of the August '67 series with the Angels, a game in which the Sox trailed, 8-0, in the fourth inning.

The Sox fundraiser for the Jimmy Fund was a huge success, pulling in nearly $3.5 million, largely over the course of Friday's day-night doubleheader against the Angels. No team in any sport is as closely connected to a charity as the Sox are with the Jimmy Fund and few teams in any sport would be capable of holding a fundraiser of that magnitude. The Jimmy Fund is also one of dcat's main go-to charities, and it is worth reminding many of you about dcat's charity drive, to which it is never too late to make a commitment. Click here for details, and make your commitment either in the comments here, the comments at that link, or as many have done, via email, based either on the remainder of the season or on the season as a whole.

RoJo, an Amiable Dunce, On Michael Deaver

Over at Amiable Dunce RoJo has a thoughtful reflection on the passing of Michael Deaver, longtime aide to Ronald Reagan.

Dirty Water: Sox Talk With the Thunderstick

Thunderstick: We went into this weekend against the Angels saying "you know what, it'd be great to win 3, but the Angels are a very good team and in all likelihood we'll split and NY is playing well so it's very possible that we could exit this weekend up 4, having gone a respectable 2-2 over LA because the Yanks take 3 of 4 from Detroit." And that's exactly what happened and yet I still feel like we got kicked in the gut. You know, if you go 2-2, get good wins in the games Schil and Beckett start and you see Buckholz and Tavarez get lit up, you say "oh well--two guys not in our rotation that needed to make spot start got bombed--what can you do". We win Buckholz's game and come back from 5-0 down to win Schill's--both nice wins. But Gagne totally geeks Beckett's game and then on Sunday the bats don't even show up. So we went 2-2 which we kind of said before the weekend we'd be happy with, but the way it happened, obviously put us back on the ledge. Not good.

But then we get to face Tampa. God it's nice to knock two off the magic number. Seems like those days have been few and far between. I agree with what you have been saying for a while now, though, that the Yanks are finding out how hard it is to come back from that deficit, especially against a team like the Sox who aren't going to go on many long losing streaks. In fact, the ground that the Yanks have made up is largely because of them playing great, not us playing really poorly--it's more like when we've got 4-3 over 7 games, they've gone 6-1. It's tough to keep that up. Going in I was thinking it would be great if we could just get this lead back up to 5 games before the series with TB was done. now that it's there, I can't help but think that it would be nice if we could sweep the series and Anaheim could find a way to take one more and we could get this to 6 before the weekend series with Chicago. I'd feel comfortable going to NY with a 6 lead, less so with a 5 game and downright frightened with a 4 game lead.

By the way -- I heard on the radio this morning that game 1 of Sox/Yanks is shaping up to be Schil vs. Clemens. Geez--that's going to be nuts.

dcat: It's a good thing that I am used to climbing out onto and then back off of the ledge during the latter stages of every Red Sox season, because otherwise this last few weeks would be doing a lot more damage to my heart than it is. But I think this day-to-day emotional investment is what separates a baseball pennant race from anything else in sports. Americans are passionate about football, to be sure, but the nature of a football season is that with one game a week per team, it is all about anticipation, the buildup to that one game on Friday night or Saturday or Sunday (or Monday. Or Thursday night. Or Wednesday night. But you get the point.) In baseball, they play every day, or nearly so. And so a race ebbs and flows, crescendoes and decrescendoes. Every single day a scene of the drama plays out, thus capturing emotions with more sustained immediacy, I would argue, than any other sport.

I wnat to take just a few minutes to discuss Tim Wakefield's performance this season. It is pretty stunning to realize that Waker has already accounted for 25 decisions this season. He has 15 wins. And yes, he has 10 losses. But what this tells me is that he is eating up innings, saving the pen, and that he is putting the Sox in a position to win when he takes the mound. He quietly might amass 20 wins and he is in many ways the anchor to this staff. Wins (and losses) are not really the greatest statistic to assess pitchers, but it is telling that when Wakefield goes out to the mound, he always sticks around long enough to get the win or get the loss. We have flashier guys. We always have. But Wakes is always there, always steady, and provides us with depth, but also with postseason options that few have, because we well know that he is capable of pitching on short rest, on the spur of the moment, in relief, as well as in the more familiar starting position. He threw another gem last night, something that has happened quite a lot regularly, and his shutout gave the Sox a serious boost.

We now get two more against Tampa while the Yanks have two more with the Angels, and we know how tough they can be. Let's hope for another two games to come off that magic number tonight. For most of the country, it is far too early to think about the Magic Number, but as we have been counting down since the first day of the season, we may as well let everyone know that according to the Thunderstick's infallible system, the Sox' Magic Number sits at 33. Or as you put it in an email this morning, "Larry Bird Says 'Go Sox!'"

The Unbearable Lightness of Howard Zinn

Howard Zinn is probably the best selling historian of all time. And yet many of his supporters (rarely the professional historians who write in the areas about which Zinn has written) like to pretend that he is a maligned outsider who has been ignored by all but a brave, enlightened cadre willing to speak truth to power. While his books have sold a gazillion copies, I do not find him to be an especially good historian. By wearing his ideology on his sleeve, some might see Zinn as ruthlessly honest, but he lets his politics drive his historical work in a way that warps and twists his interpretations and makes his work tremendously dishonest. Or at least uninteresting for those of us who are not interested in creating a usable past to confirm rather than challenge our own prevailing worldviews. Zinn has served as a fairly good polemicist at times, and his reportage on, say, the Civil Rights Movement helped me to shape some of my own ideas about the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee early on, but on the whole, I have little use for him. I can almost always anticipate what he is going to write before I’ve completed reading the first paragraph, and I’m rarely surprised by what follows.

Thus when I came to Zinn’s letter to the editor in this weekend’s New York Times Book Review, I could see what was to follow. Let’s just parse the letter paragraph by paragraph. I’ll place Zinn’s words in quotation marks and will precede my own with *** in customary dcat fashion:

“Samantha Power has done extraordinary work in chronicling the genocides of our time, and in exposing how the Western powers were complicit by their inaction.”

*** In approaching his letter this way, Zinn is setting Powers up in order to knock her down. But let’s keep in mind who the respective writers – Zinn and Powers – are and their relative status not in book sales, but on the actual issue of global genocides and the Western responses to them. Oh, and I am curious what action, in light of what follows, Zinn would have advocated Western powers taking in the face of the genocides Powers has chronicled so well.

“However, in her review of four books on terrorism, especially Talal Asad’s “On Suicide Bombing” (July 29), she claims a moral distinction between ‘inadvertent’ killing of civilians in bombings and “deliberate” targeting of civilians in suicide attacks. Her position is not only illogical, but (against her intention, I believe) makes it easier to justify such bombings.”

*** One can only assume that in what follows Zinn will try to claim that intent does not matter, that intending to kill someone is no different from unintentionally killing someone. I really hope I do not have to explain to any sentient person why an unwillingness to distinguish between the two is monumentally stupid.

“She believes that ‘there is a moral difference between setting out to destroy as many civilians as possible and killing civilians unintentionally and reluctantly in pursuit of a military objective.’ Of course, there’s a difference, but is there a “moral” difference? That is, can you say one action is more reprehensible than the other?”

*** Yes, you can. I’d like to be more snarky about it actually, because the question is so obtuse, reveals such sophistry, that it warrants little more than scorn. But the answer to the question is so patently clear that I’m at a loss for snarkiness except to say that yes, intending to kill someone is worse than inadvertently killing someone in almost any imaginable case. Morally worse. Or, as he’d have it for reasons I cannot quite divine, “morally” worse.

“In countless news briefings, Donald Rumsfeld and Dick Cheney, responding to reporters’ questions about civilian deaths in bombing, would say those deaths were ‘unintentional’ or ‘inadvertent’ or ‘accidental,’ as if that disposed of the problem. In the Vietnam War, the massive deaths of civilians by bombing were justified in the same way by Lyndon Johnson, Hubert Humphrey, Richard Nixon and various generals.”

*** Look, I loathe Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld. I think they have been irredeemably terrible public servants, and though I will never know them personally, their public personas are to me disgusting, self-important, arrogant beyond words, and dangerous. I would not trust either of them to shit competently after a bran binge. But simply mentioning their name and halfheartedly using them as the spokesmen for a complicated idea (and for historical analogies that obscure more than they reveal) such as civilian deaths in war is simply shoddy argumentation.

“These words are misleading because they assume an action is either ‘deliberate’ or ‘unintentional.’ There is something in between, for which the word is ‘inevitable.’ If you engage in an action, like aerial bombing, in which you cannot possibly distinguish between combatants and civilians (as a former Air Force bombardier, I will attest to that), the deaths of civilians are inevitable, even if not ‘intentional.’ Does that difference exonerate you morally?”

*** Leaving “inevitability,” a concept of which good historians are always wary, aside for a moment, that “inevitability” still does not erase the difference between intending and not intending to kill people in war. And it does not elide the fact that targets can be chosen so as to minimize damage. It certainly does not address the issue of whether when countries go to war, they tend to be asking for moral absolution or exoneration. But that sidesteps the actual question, which is whether all deaths are morally the same or whether they are not. Zinn’s assertion is that intentionality does not matter. Ultimately, “exoneration” is not the issue, though invoking it represent a clever sleight of hand to try to obscure things.

“The terrorism of the suicide bomber and the terrorism of aerial bombardment are indeed morally equivalent. To say otherwise (as either side might) is to give one moral superiority over the other, and thus serve to perpetuate the horrors of our time.”

*** I am going to say otherwise. I am going to assert that there are morally superior stances to make, morally superior stances that when he has believed the morality to be on his side, Zinn has not ever been afraid to make. Indeed, Zinn’s career is nothing more than a series of moral judgments. (“You can’t be neutral on a moving train.” That was the title of one of Zinn’s books.) The terrorist chooses to target innocents. Their death is his goal, and the overarching objective beyond that goal is to instill fear ina population and their leaders so as to accomplish a political objective. I am willing to grant that aerial bombardment is problematic. But so too is manslaughter. The difference is that I’m not about to assert that manslaughter and murder are morally equivalent just because manslaughter is unpleasant and I wish it did not exist. More to the point, perhaps, I wish no one would have to kill another out of self- defense. But I’m not naïve or blinkered enough to argue that there is no difference between murder and a killing done in self-defense. Regretting some bad things does not make all bad things equal. Zinn is too smart not to know as much, but too fatuous a thinker to care.

Overstating the Glow of the Lights

The latest issue of the New York Times' sports magazine, Play has an interesting piece on both Friday Night Lights and the spectacle of Friday Night Lights that inspire the show. Football is fast approaching and so naturally Odessa and the region are getting geared up for another season under the lights. There is no doubting that football is huge in West Texas, and that Permian High is the most prominent program, though in Odessa it appears that the coverage of both PHS and Odessa High are fairly evenhanded (my guess is that Bronchos fans might disagree).

To a degree I take issue with one assertion from Darren Allman, Permian's third-year head coach who played on the Panthers' 1984 state championship team, when he discusses how realistic the television show is:

“The book, movie and TV show are all based on how rabid the people in this community are about high-school football,” he says. “Is that realistic? Yes.” Football is “the No. 1 source of entertainment,” he continues, adding, “It’s what people think about and talk about all the time.”

This represents fiercely insular thinking. Lots of people spend lots of time thinking about football here, to be sure. But football simply is not so dominant throughout the community that we all sit around discussing whether the Panthers can improve on last year's playoff performance. (I think perhaps they can).

For parents and alumni and die-hard fans, of course, local football is huge, as it is in just about any community across the country. But once you escape the penumbral shade of Permian's world, one can live an existence in Odessa quite removed from the black and white wonders of Mojo. And this does not come from a hostile observer -- anyone who has read this blog for even a week nows that I obsessively love sports. But like most things related to high school life, those within its ambit tend to over-inflate the significance of what goes on within.

Of course Coach Allman thinks Permian High football is the be-all and end-all for the community's existence. As well he should as the program's head coach. But one of the problems we as a country tend to have with regard to high school sports is to make them life-or-death, and thus more important than they are. Since 1998 Permian High has made the playoffs exactly once. And by almost any indicator, the community is thriving, arguably more, on the whole, than it ever has. Like a swath of the city's denizens, I'm looking forward to next weekend's Permian Basin Football Preview in the Odessa American. I'm hoping to make my first foray under the lights at Ratliff Stadium this fall. But if I chose to pay the hype no heed, I would not represent a scorned outlier in this community. In a sense, it does Odessa and this region a disservice to imply otherwise.

FPA Analysis on The Vlok Trial: Self-Indulgence Alert

The Foreign Policy Association has published another of my Great Decisions Analysis pieces. "The Vlok Trial and a Reconciliation With the Truth" looks at the recent criminal proceedings against Adriaan Vlok, South Africa's Minister of Law and Order in the 1980s, and four other members of the security apparatus for a bizarre attempted murder that involved the attempted poisoning of the underwear of anti-Apartheid cleric Frank Chikane in hopes of killing him with neuro-toxins.

The case involves the intersection of my two main areas of interest in South Africa: the state response to the anti-Apartheid movement in the 1980s and the post-Apartheid push for truth, reconciliation, and justice. Almost literally as the piece was posted, it was announced that Vlok pleaded guilty along with his co-accused. By working out a deal, Vlok was able to avoid jail time, though he did receive a ten-year suspended sentence and one assumes that these may not be the last charges he sees.

(Crossposted at the South Africa Blog.)

In Praise of Beckham

The coverage of the American sports media when it comes to international sports is generally awful. Your typical sportswriter or talking head (and increasingly, the difference between the two is slight) knows nothing or close to nothing about soccer and significantly less about sports such as rugby or cricket. And so the natural inclination they have is to mock these sports. David Beckham's arrival in the US has merely allowed too many guys -- including some I generally respect a lot, like Tony Kornheiser -- to reveal their manifest ignorance about and prejudice against sports that the rest of the world love.

Becks has been dealing with an ankle injury for the last few weeks, which inevitably earned the condemnation of journalists quick to call him a wimp despite the fact that more than one of the games was a glorified exhibition, and that we in the US are in the midst of the inanely long NFL preseason when players will miss practices and exhibition games at the drop of a hat. Well, Beckham saw his first substantial action last night in a Superliga game (which matches teams from Mexico's pro league and the MLS) and hopefully he shut his detractors up for a while, scoring one of his patented free kick goals and handing out an assist in a 2-0 Galaxy victory over DC United.

David Beckham is not going to save soccer in the United States. I'm not certain that it needs saving. And I actually think that MLS might now be our fourth major team sports league, despite the fact that it is a second-rate professional soccer league by global standards. But he has been a wonderful player (even if limited in many ways, and even if his fame surpasses his still considerable abilities as a player) for a long time and Americans are lucky to have him in our professional ranks. It is easy to overstate the Beckham effect, but it is, as recent behavior from our supposed sports experts reveals, even easier to mock and understate what we don't understand. Beckham won't do what he did last night every time out. But he has now shown why the Galaxy wanted him to cross the pond and join our sporting firmament. Let's just allow him to play. And let's enjoy it when he does.

Irene Morgan Kirkaldy, Rest in Peace

Irene Morgan Kirkaldy passed away last week at the age of 90. Back in 1944 the then-Irene Morgan challenged segregated seating on a bus traveling between Gloucester, Virginia and her home in Baltimore. She was arrested and convicted of violating the state's Jim Crow laws but she challenged her conviction in court. Eventually the Supreme Court ruled in her favor in the case Morgan v. Virginia in 1946, which established (in the realm of Constitutional law, but not in practice) that segregation on interstate transportation violated the Commerce Clause of the Constitution. That decision fueled the 1947 Journey of Reconciliation, in which sixteen men, eight black and eight white, boarded buses in order to test whether or not the Morgan decision was recognized on the ground and to educate people about the case.

Irene Morgan has played a real and important role in my development as a historian. In a seminar class as a PhD student I investigated the Morgan decision and Journey of Reconciliation and it was from that work that I began pursuing my dissertation on the fight to desegregate interstate transportation. That project in turn has become my book manuscript, about which I hope to have some long-awaited positive news in the next six weeks. The events of the 1940s occupy three chapters of that manuscript. Without Irene Morgan's brave stand against Jim Crow, my own career might be rather different. And of course that is the least of her contributions.

The New Haven Review of Books

It's not the American Review of Books that my friend, erstwhile golf partner, and some-time mentor Jeff Herf famously called for a few months back at Open University, and it might only be a one-off, but The New Haven Review of Books has produced an issue. Even if this is not a one-time thing, it is unclear whether the NHRB will do more than involve the estimable talents in the New Haven area, but in an era of newspapers reducing their books coverage, at least the folks within Yale's penumbra have gotten the ball rolling.

A Baseball Road Trip

It doesn't take much for a guy like me to start waxing poetic about baseball and its magic. John Donnelly of The Boston Globe took his kids on a baseball road trip -- ten games at ten venues in ten days. Here is his account of that trip. This is one of those stories that makes me want kids right now.

Over at the South Africa Blog (Self Indulgence Alert)

I've been industrious of late at the Foreign Policy Association's South Africa Blog where amidst a lot of emphasis on Zimbabwe I have used the Wizard of Oz as a model to understanding why an invasion of Zim from the UK or the US might be a bad idea. But I've also looked at issues related to development, to China's role in Africa, and much more. If you have anyinterest in current African affairs, please go check it out.