I am certainly not a port security expert myself, and I respect many of the bloggers who claim to have security fears about America's ports, but I think I can answer one question--what is xenophobia? How do we decide in this case what in the media and the blogs is xenophobic, and what isn't?
Well, irrational fear of foreigners is xenophobia. So here's my proposed test: If, in our concern about foreign ownership of US ports we ignore the best evidence--whether it confirms our fears or not-- then we aren't being rational. That would be xenophobic.
So, what do the experts have to say about port security?
Enter reporters like Paul Blustein and Walter Pincus in the Washington Post who interviewed real port security experts. Obviously Walter Pincus and Paul Blustein acted rationally as reporters--trying to give their readers the best information about this topic they could by talking to people who actually know something about it. Kind of like if you want to know something about evolution you talk to a biologist, not a religious fanatic.
In this case all of the port security experts they interviewed said foreign ownership of our ports is either not a problem, or it is the least of our concerns when it comes to port security:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/...
(port security itself is, however, a big problem--just not foreign ownership).
Quoted in the article are:
- Carl Bentzel, an internationally renowned expert on maritime security and former Senior Democratic Counsel for the US Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation who helped write the 2002 act regulating port security.
- Stephen E. Flynn, a ports expert at the Council on Foreign Relations.
- Kim Peterson, who is president of SeaSecure, a maritime security firm in Fort Lauderdale, Fla.
Other articles and experts reach the same conclusion, with still more expert opinion that the fears are not rational and reflect a misunderstanding of port security:
- Nick Savvides, the editor of CI Online, a research company for the shipping container industry with headquarters in London.
- Alexandra De Laet, a spokeswoman for the Port of Antwerp in Belgium.
- A spokesman for the Department of Trade and Industry in Britain.
- Richard Dibley, a director in London's Planco Consulting, which advises port authorities.
- David Whitehead, the director of the British Ports Association.
SOURCE:
http://www.nytimes.com/...
So do we claim this near consensus among port security experts like these, quoted by reporters of this caliber, have gotten it totally wrong based on...our hunches? Educated guesses? Deductive reasoning? Uh...sort of like the way the GOP dismisses the evidence for global warming or evolution? Would that be rational?
If not, there's a word for it. xenophobia
For those who might feel such a strong word isn't warranted, it might make sense to take a look backward for context. The following is a quote from one of America's more famous xenophobes, The Reverand Josiah Strong:
...The saloon, together with the intemperance and the liquor power which it represents, is multiplied in the city. East of the Mississippi there was, in 1880, one saloon to every 438 of the population; in Boston, one to every 329; in Cleveland, one to every 192; in Chicago, one to every 179; in New York, one to every 171; in Cincinnati, one to every 124. Of course the demoralizing and pauperizing power of the saloons and their debauching influence in politics increase with their numerical strength.
http://www.wwnorton.com/...
So, one could reasonably argue, based on that out of context quote, that his main concern is about...saloons. Right?
And were Strong alive today, you can bet that's how he would put it--so as not to be called a xenophobe. Of course, if you include the full paragraph and context (click the link), it's clear what Strong actually is getting at.
If it walks like a duck, talks like a duck, etc...
Sorry friends, Democratic Party politics is very important to me, but as a
liberal I have some core principles. I reject whipping up xenophobia with the hope that it will at some point benefit liberal causes I support--such as opposition to xenophobia.
I don't go along with the triangulation wing of the Democratic Party this time, kind of like I didn't think Bill Clinton was right to play the race card in 1992 by killing a retarded black man, Rickey Ray Rector.
http://www.commondreams.org/...
Of course, that wasn't xenophobia. That was racism.