[extropy-chat] re: Politics: worthwhile commentary

[Amara Graps]

> I would view any "political" commentary which does not include Friedman's
> perspective as incompletely informed.

> (So, to the "political" commentators -- *shut up* until you have read what
> Friedman has written and observed the shows on which he has spoken -- he has
> a grasp of the "big" picture which is lacking in most political
> discussions.)

I don't find it useful for me in learning and discussing middle
eastern politics to focus on one person as an 'expert'. If for lack of
time, I needed to focus my readings, I would choose works from people
like Edward W. Said, V.S. Naipaul, Idries Shah (& Saira), who have 
lived for significant parts of their lives both in that region, and in 
a region
like my own so that I can trust that they have good experience and
perspective. When I have more time to learn about the politics between
my own and another, I would also (and I do) educate myself on the arts,
history, and cultural aspects.

I disagreed with everything I read from Thomas Friedman in his
political Op-Ed pieces in the New York Times. After reading about a
dozen, I stopped because I don't think it is a good use of my time. I
picked up at my relative's house Friedman's book _The World is Flat_ 
however, and read four or five chapters and enjoyed those chapters
alot, so I will probably buy this book at some point in the future.

Amara