It is a Vodka advertisement that has recently raised American hackles, prompting the ultimate withdrawal of the advert and an apology from the Vodka Company to boot! If you look at the Yahoo questions on this issue, you will see just how many hackles! Lots of people pissed off enough to say they will boycott the drink until an apology is published etc, etc. The American sensibility is so important that the ad has been pulled and not a trace of it can be found anywhere except a Brisbane news site which is where I got the photo from! The ad, which says “In an Absolut world” goes on to show a map with the entire mid western area of the US including California shown to be part of Mexico.
This incident has brought back into focus some long forgotten bit of history, that states such as Texas and California which are now almost symbolic of the United States of America were actually part of Mexico in the past. In the mid nineteenth century, the United States annexed Texas and thereafter hatched a plan to purchase the areas that form present day California and New Mexico for the sum of $30 million! Such unabashedly imperialistic action would shock the world today. In fact it was just such an attempt at invading and annexing of Kuwait by Iraq that caused the Gulf War. The war that resulted from this annexation was the Mexican War (1846–48). At the end of the war and as a result of a treaty, Mexico ceded to the U.S. nearly all of present New Mexico, Utah, Nevada, Arizona, California, Texas, and Colorado for princely sum of $15,000,000!
In light of this I don’t think it is unreasonable for many Mexicans to think about these south western American areas as an erstwhile part of Mexico or feel some territorial kinship. Further the Americans are at pains to keep Mexicans out of areas which Mexicans have some reason to believe should have been theirs. And if a company decided to gain some advertising mileage for their product from this historical perception, so be it I say! This commercial meant to target the Mexican consumer audience, and anyone taking umbrage at this I do understand, but have no sympathy for! Take it with a pinch of salt and a dash of humor for heaven’s sake! What do you all think?
I remember going to Dharamshala and Mcleodganj some years ago (the Namgyal monastery, where the Dalai Lama is based, is there). At the time, China had just won the contract to host the Olympics and even then the Tibetians were circulating flyers telling everyone to boycott those Olympics and other Chinese products etc. I remember thinking at the time, that this is not much of a protest or struggle, ensconced safely in India hundreds of kilometers from their actual homeland. Ever since India offered the Tibetians and their spiritual leader the Dalai Lama a safe haven in Dharamshala, Tibetians moved to India in their thousands and settled here, continuing to wage their agitation against Chinese oppression from afar. I had thought to myself they are living a comfortable enough life here in India, not really putting them in the line of fire, so do they really deserve support?
In a word, Yes! The fact is that they have been agitating for many years and not only have their pleas fallen on deaf years thru the years; the Chinese have been oppressive and unconcerned and have presented a false picture to the world. A recent media event organized in Lhasa (capital of Tibet) was a disaster from China’s point of view. Wailing, protesting monks (who China would not have wanted anywhere near the cameras) could be seen telling the world of their woes and this blew the lid off China’s pretenses.
The Tibetians have been suppressed and denied basic rights such as religious freedom under Chinese occupation and these factors are only now coming to the fore with the Tibetian call to the world to boycott the Olympics and to support their struggle against Chinese oppression. Tibetians who have been able to escape continue to live in India or elsewhere, unable to return to their homeland because of this. In this article the Dalai Lama appealed to the world community to “please help” resolve the crisis in his homeland. He was so disturbed by some of the protesters turning violent that threatened to resign as the religious and spiritual head of the Tibetian people.
World leaders, including George Bush have been urging China to hold talks and have a dialogue with the Tibetian people. The reason why I think that Tibet deserves support is the imperious and impervious manner in which China has behaved in this issue, by refusing to even hold talks or negotiate. The Dalai Lama has said that he would like to “remind the Chinese that in order to be respected hosts of the Games human rights in Tibet must improve” I agree with this, do you? What are your thoughts?
I am convinced that the British common man is not just a tabloid junkie, but also a royalty junkie! Everything that any member of the British royalty does (or does not do) is instantly news. What they wear, who they see, what they eat, where they go (especially with whom) all of this is fodder for the tabloid mill. And then if one of them is a young, good-looking heir to the throne, albeit not an immediate heir, then the interest is all the more acute.
No other soldier would dream of coming home to such a hero’s welcome after just a 10 week military service in country like war torn Afghanistan. The British press is agitated by such questions as “if he had died what then!” One gushing, adoring columnist expresses great relief that the young prince has come away from ‘harm’s way’ unscathed and goes on to describe Prince Harry as an “unassuming, sensible, endearing and brave young man; clearly popular with his men and well regarded by superior officers”. Apparently his royal lineage makes him far more valuable than all the other young people out there fighting this bloody and pointless war. They certainly do not seem to deserve reams and reams written about their heroics and bravery.
Other portions of the British public have sought to dismiss the media glare on this news as propaganda or a publicity stunt. Another, more balanced view of this whole story is also taken by portions of the British media who question why the young man was sent to Afghanistan in the first place.
It isn’t as if he is ever going to be a professional soldier, so why was he accepted into the army, in what appears to be a rather farcical exercise. The Scotsman says, and I quote; “If every serving soldier was given the protection Harry enjoyed, their families would not be suffering as they are now. It all seems to have been such a pointless exercise.”
I have to confess people; I am more inclined to agree with the latter view, and am rather put-off by the media circus, even frenzy surrounding this occurrence. I am also inclined to a small amount of sympathy for the members of the royalty, bogged as they are every day, in whatever they do, by the unwavering glare of the media. What do you think?