The worrisome details, as reported by our correspondent, Mr. Sun.

February is Black History Month and over at my site I am celebrating by holding a writing contest. The rules are simple. Compose a fairly well thought out article about some aspect of Black History. Anything at all will be fine. Let me know where to find your writing and I’ll add you to the list.

The point is just to get people more interested in African American Heritage and the history of things like slavery or the civil rights movement. As a bonus for taking part, at the end of February I will pick the best piece and give the author a prize. The prize will most likely be a book dealing with Black History.

Head on over for more details and then start thinking up something to write about. You have until the end of the month and you can enter as many seperate articles as you want.

Many have linked to this article from the 60’s on the date of the South Vietnamese elections, which witnessed an 83% participation rate and were, at the time, deemed largely successful. Without assessing the overall premise that there is some similarity between the problems that plagued Vietnam and those that face our operation in Iraq (there obviously are, but there are of course similarities between all conflicts; I would have chosen the Phillipines), the basic comparison for the significance of elections in moving towards a pluralistic society is worth examining.

When discussing anything in the Iraq is Vietnam Redux context, one has to acknowledge that in Vietnam, not only were we fighting a distinct and identifiable state in North Vietnam, but that the opposition in that battle could hardly be considered a minority population whose existential expression of angst was a biproduct of their lack of political power. In Iraq, we are facing the exact opposite. The current insurgency, though formidable in size, does in no way constitute a majority/plurality of the Iraqi people as did the movement in Vietnam, or other revolutionary movements such as that in Algeria against the French. Though there are sympathizers amok, they are much more anti-American than they are pro-insurgency.

Another advantage for the North Vietnamese, aside from their shear size, was the leadership of Ho Chi Minh. Undoubtedly a charismatic and populist leader in the entire peninsula, he solidified the North Vietnamese block while simultaneously bringing forth support in South Vietnam. For Iraq, it is unclear whether any side–the Zarqawi bloc, the Sadr wing, the Chalabiites (they’re mostly in our Pentagon), or the incoming majority party–has a true social legitimacy that can attract such support. That is, aside from al-Sistani, who derives his authority from his scholarly work and hierarchical title.

What really made the South Vietnamese struggle in their battle to fend off the communist block in the North, was their ineffectiveness in crafting a government that was actually answerable to the people. Plagued by mind-boggling levels of government corruption and led by self-concerned and illegitimate leaders, there was never any real effort to establish a stable democratic state by a significant portion of SV’s themselves, despite countless efforts by the U.S. The significance for Iraq is that it will have to face many obstacles, including the current insurgency and the likelihood of communal violence, to actually establish a viable state (read: monopoly on means of violence) and that its success will depend more on Iraqis themselves than anything that can be done by the U.S. The South Vietnamese gave only a half-hearted effort, and at this point, the Iraqis are much more enthusiastic, as shown by yesterday’s election, and seriously concerned about a proper stasis for Iraq and, in general, the Middle East.

So, what to expect. Though many of the problems that face Iraq today can easily be attributed to the flaccid nature of our post-occupation plan, or lack thereof, and our ineffective methods at rectifying them thus far, digging out of the hole will be up to the Iraqis themselves. Most reform movements boil down to this essential dynamic, as are most failures.

(Cross-posted at Polemic Propaganda)

Jeanne on the nature of conservatism as a political movement.

Most Oregon DNC members have agreed to support Howard Dean for chair of the Democratic Party, including Committeeman Wayne Kinney, Oregon Democratic Party chair Jim Edmunson, vice chair Meredith Wood Smith, and (yours truly) Committeewoman Jenny Greenleaf.

Although Meredith Wood Smith voted for Donnie Fowler in the Association of State Democratic Chairs executive committee meeting, she will support Dean in accordance with the vote of the total body, which voted this morning to endorse Dean.

Delegation member State Senator Kate Brown has not yet committed to a candidate. Sen. Brown has a vote as a representative of the Democratic Legislative Campaign Committee. Oregon also has one at-large delegate, Gail Rasmussen,