Tuesday, December 19, 2006

Okay, I Guess I'm not that Important

I'll admit it, I think TIME's choice for Person of the Year is cop-out. Though the ongoing media revolution may be important now, I am hard pressed to see any great significance to the growing prominence of such media. Those of us who write blogs and utilize YouTube and MySpace may be generating a new medium of communication, but these accomplishments are deserving of very little acclaim.

When we examine previous winners of this coveted award, we see names such as Franklin D. Roosevelt, Harry Truman, Stalin, Winston Churchill, and Richard Nixon. The Person of the Year award should go to the individual (or individuals) who merit special recognition and who are charting a new path in the course of human history.

Most commentators thought that Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad would receive the award. Over the past year, Ahmadinejad has made headlines for his country's unwavering pursuit of nuclear power. His anti-Israeli comments and support for terrorist activity makes him the foremost power-player in the Middle East.

TIME's snub of Ahmadinejad is yet another example of how the media is downplaying the danger Iran poses to the West. Though Iran's leaders have called for America's demise, media outlets have continually turned a deaf ear to Ahmadinejad's regime. Our inability to fully assess the threat posed by Iran and radical Islam bears a startling parallel to our country's actions and attitudes toward Adolph Hitler in the months before World War II.

So ten years from now, will we see a transformed world through the use of MySpace or as a result of the firebrand, belligerent President of Iran. Both Pat Buchanan and I think the latter.



1 comment:

Caleb said...

Whether or not he got the award, Ahmadinejad will be charting a few years of history in 2010. Everyone except our politicians seems to know that the "nuclear power" he is after isn't for electricity, but for nuclear bombs. Our debate case for this year was to get rid of his threat, but we have been forced to stop using it because of the disadvatages involved with attacking (the only truly feasible method). So many aspects of their program prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that it is for weapons purposes. Democrats and Republicans agree that this is problem (Democrats say Iran will spur other Islamic regimes into getting weapons, Republicans say they will use them), but if you read their articles no decent change is proposed.

We also use examples of how much Ahmadinejad resembles Hitler (policies, rhetoric), and that was before he hosted the holocaust denial conference.

We are fiddling while Rome burns.