Thank You, You May Be Quiet Now

Having said what I just said, TNR's inappropriate silence on what to do about Iraq today is vastly preferable to Michael Ignatieff's ridiculously prolix mea culpa for having supported the invasion in the first place. I'm with Poulos:

... like many people Ignatieff's piece left me with ... a creeping sensation of dread, an actual intellectual dampness and a dankness of the soul. Rarely does one see so many grotesquely obsequious yet arrogantly obtuse self-assurances crammed into a single apology.

Indeed. This is one of those rare cases where the ranting, pleased-with-itself HuffPo takedown of the piece more or less spoke to my feelings as well.

Comments

I never got the point of "pleased with oneself" as a put-down. Are people supposed to be displeased with themselves? Studiously ambivalent as to themselves?

I mean, if writing is bad, then it's bad and I suppose it can become even more annoying if the writer seems to think it's good. But good writing is almost always even more enjoyable when the writer seems confident in the writing.

Posted by Christopher M | August 9, 2007 7:07 PM

And to think Ignatieff tried to be (and still probably wants to be) my Prime Minister. Sweet Jesus have mercy.

Posted by Chris J | August 9, 2007 10:46 PM

good lord, that huff-po thing is a masterpiece, no matter where you 'stand.'

Posted by live | August 10, 2007 3:23 AM

Rees is a funny guy. I highly recommend his comic strip "Get your war on":

http://www.mnftiu.cc/mnftiu.cc/war.html

Posted by Jim W | August 10, 2007 10:23 AM

Rees' piece fails to engage Ignatieff in any manner except for snarky one-liners that prove little more than Rees' familiarity with music lyrics.

Rees criticizes Ignatieff for writing that constituents may have some issues wrong and it's the job of a leader in a republic to occasionally exercise his/her own judgment. To Rees, this seems paternalistic and elitist. Does Rees think leaders in a republic should always do the bidding of their constituents?

I don't know Rees, but I'm guessing he doesn't think anything of the sort. I bet he agrees with Ignatieff that good representation in a republic is a difficult tension between leading and following. Indeed, this criticism of Ignatieff, like most everything else in his vapid piece, is only meant to crack a smug smile. How masturbatory.

Ignatieff has a feeling for conflict and tension that Rees will never have.

Posted by Iowa | August 11, 2007 2:11 PM