On Progressives and Cinco De Mayo
My blog posts, Tweets, etc. are original. I go through pains to attribute/link to other sources, and I'll quote or paraphrase depending on the nature and extent of the referenced material. On Twitter it sometimes can be difficult because, say, in a hashtag game, different people can be simultaneously inspired by the same concepts. I might rattle off a dozen tweets, but usually I'll scan at least the first few dozen tweets to make sure my prospective tweet isn't THAT predictable. (I'm not going to review tens of thousands of tweets, so it's technically possible someone similarly could have beaten me to publication, but I didn't see it. And on at least a handful of occasions, I've come across a near duplicate and decided to delete my own tweet. To give an example, I loathe pineapple on pizza, and it's an Internet meme. So, if someone created a hashtag game, say, of food crimes, "pineapple on pizza" quickly comes to mind. Of course, since it's a meme, I'll usually scan more tweets on the hashtag just to make sure. But in this one case, I stumbled across one, maybe published in the interim or somehow I didn't spot earlier, and I went back and dropped my tweet.Scan almost any leftist/"progressive" or news hash tag, and it'll drive you crazy how repetitive they are, the same rhetoric, the same points. It's like Mom nagging you 50 times to make your bed or clean your room; it's just freaking annoying. Just like some Christians feel obligated to remind you every Christmas that Jesus is the reason for the season (I readily acknowledge this, but I don't like the constant nagging about it), "progressives" need an ideological compulsion to remind people that "Cinco de Mayo" is not a celebration of Mexican independence, but an (early) battle against the French invasion, isn't not just about eating tacos and drinking margaritas, and they try to link Napolean III to the Confederacy.
Okay, to go beyond the bumper sticker, you will find that France became one of Mexico's biggest trading partners after Mexico's independence in 1821, recognized by France in 1830. The first French intervention, the Pastry (French King Louis-Philippe's profession) War was a response to Mexico's higher tariffs on French goods and Mexico's refusal to compensate for alleged property damage to French-owned businesses. The second French intervention, under Napoleon III, was a response to Mexican President Juarez' suspension of loan payments to foreign countries in mid-1861 (initially including Britain and Spain, other big trading partners, which simply wanted to pressure the Juarez regime). The French saw Mexico as a balance to the Protestant-dominated US and a trade gateway to the fellow Catholic Latin America. The first battle of Puebla on 5/5/62 was a morale-boosting victory by an outnumbered Mexican army, mostly commemorated locally and in a more limited sense elsewhere. It should be noted this was a temporary setback for the French, and later reinforcements led to a French overrun, most notably capturing Mexico City just over a year later. The Austrian Maximilian was crowned Emperor of French-held Mexico in 1864. But the tide began to change by 1865 as the US, emerging from the Civil War, reiterated the Monroe Doctrine and helped resupply Juarez and the Mexican resistance. Napoleon III blinked under American pressure and started withdrawing his troops by 1866. The Maximilian Empire quickly collapsed with the emperor captured and executed by late spring 1867.
As for the leftist propaganda on the Confederacy, let's not forget that both Britain and France had abolished slavery some years earlier. It's true that they had no sympathy for the high-tariff North, and their textile industries initially were hurt by cutoff by the US blockade of the South's cotton (bur other global suppliers stepped up). In fact, the Confederacy had put slavery on the table by the late stages of the war. But they also know the larger, more industrialized, economically diverse North, with a Navy, would likely prevail in a war of attrition, and they didn't want to be on the wrong side of history.
I basically roll my eyes when some self-appointed expert decides, for instance, that Christians are linking the birthday of Christ with some annual pagan celebration, or you don't know what you're celebrating on May 5. I don't care if St. Patrick is more myth vs. real. I don't care if Mexicans don't eat American versions of their food. Life is too short; enjoy it. If I want to spend an arbitrary day each year listening to mariachi music and eating Tex-Mex (I bought some pork tamales at Aldi's yesterday), it's my business; you don't approve of it: blow it out your ears!
The Cultural Appropriation Nonsense
Sometimes wearing a dress is just that: wearing a dress. No one would bat an eye if some NY socialite really liked the style of some dress that a model wore down a Paris runway. When Russian teens rushed to buy American Levi jeans after the end of the Cold War, no Americans I'm aware of argued that the Russians were appropriating our culture; I think most would be flattered that Russian youth are interested in American clothes. In the first country which is a melting pot of the world, I don't have an issue with people being inspired to wear clothes with roots in other cultures--I certainly don't think I need some elitist bastard deciding I need to pass some cultural literacy exam before I can wear something I choose.I'm speaking, of course, about Utah student Keziah Daum's decision to wear the traditional cheongsam, or qipao she found in a vintage shop; she thought it looked good on her, and I agree. Many Chinese are very supportive and proud of the teen's choice. But the PC crowd has openly attacked her; get a life, people!
