It Takes a Retarded Journalist to Juxtapose Elizabeth Bishop to the War Criminal

Elizabeth Bishop, American poet (1911-79) Hirohito, the worst war criminal in man's history (1901-89)

In his recent article on The Times, Matthew Parris quoted some passages from Elizabeth Bishop's poetic work and Emperor Hirohito's declaration of war defeat. Apparently the piece titled "Like Hirohito, we need to find the right word for losing" was written to tell British Prime Minister David Cameron how to expostulate with Obama about the impasse of the Afghan War. Parris wrote: "We are losing Afghanistan. Losing, all losing, gets harder, then it gets easier. Losing in Afghanistan will get easier after we pass that point when the truth, just saying it, first sticks in the throat and then is finally acknowledged. As our Prime Minister headed for Washington to see Barack Obama, we were nearing that point." What a nonsense. I was not interested in discussing such a journalistic crap from the gay pundit. Neither was I concerned about the outcome of the talks between the two leaders. And yet, I wanted to set the record straight for the American poet because she is one of my favorite literary figures. At the same time I wanted to point out that it's about time the Brits dropped all the silly jokes about the Japanese counterpart of Queen Elizabeth II. The bastard didn't have the foggiest idea about the art of losing in the face of Japan's moment of truth.

Parris's citation of Bishop's poem titled One Art was so incomplete and inaccurate, I'll show you its original text here:

The art of losing isn't hard to master,
so many things seem filled with the intent
to be lost that their loss is no disaster.

Lose something every day. Accept the fluster
of lost door keys, the hour badly spent.
The art of losing isn't hard to master.

Then practice losing farther, losing faster;
places, and names, and where it was you meant
to travel. None of these will bring disaster.

I lost mother's watch. And look! my last, or
next-to-last, of three beloved houses went.
The art of losing isn't hard to master.

Some more stanzas follow but as you can already see, One Art sounds a little like Buddha's tenet about impermanence. A helplessly shallow journalist as he is, Parris didn't know he should not have expected the equally superficial guys in Downing Street and the White House to apprehend such a profound concept as the art of losing.

Alongside of Bishop, Parris also quoted the Japanese Emperor.

I can't afford the time to double-check, but according to Parris, the concession speech Japan's principal war criminal mumbled out on the radio on August 15, 1945 went like this:

"To our good and loyal subjects, the war situation has developed not necessarily to Japan's advantage. *snip* The thought of those officers and men who died at their posts of duty, or those who met with untimely death and all their bereaved families, pains our heart day and night. The welfare of the wounded and the war sufferers are the objects of our profound solicitude. However, it is according to the dictate of time and fate that we have resolved to pave the way for a grand peace for all the generations to come by enduring the unendurable and suffering what is insufferable."

Parris concluded his article with a ridiculous remark that "the Emperor was right."

I don't know much about Cameron, but at least Obama or his successor will eventually heed the misplaced advice by Parris, although he may not like the circumlocutory style particular to Japanese leaders. Just the same, the U.S. president will sound as though he is speaking from the nethermost hell of ignorance and incompetence just like the Japanese Emperor did sixty-five years ago.

As I have repeatedly said on this website, America has already outlived its historical role. And consequently, its minions are about to fail as well.

But does that mean that it's just a matter of time they master the art of losing? My answer is "No, not at all."

To begin with, it's not "we" (朕 or Chin) but the Japanese people that lost the Pacific War.

The Chin was actually acquitted of his crime of driving three-million subjects to death for the cause of preserving the national polity (国体 or kokutai) centered around the imperial institution. If there was anything the Chin could learn from the war defeat, it was the art of transforming himself overnight from a deity to the symbol of national unity, while remaining the same zombie.

The shameless bastard was still well off until his demise in 1989 and so are his children and grandchildren to date.

These days the incumbent Emperor, Hirohito's son, keeps saying, "The economic situation has developed not necessarily to Japan's advantage. The thought of those who lost their jobs and homes, or committed suicide, pains our heart day and night. But now we have resolved to pave the way for prosperity by enduring the unendurable," and so on and so forth.

But, in fact, the Imperial budget still remains a sacred cow despite the government's pledge that its budget cutback exercise will leave no sanctuary.

As a result the Imperial Family and its servants are given a handsome allowance of $74 million every year as against $69 million appropriated to the Royal Family of the United Kingdom.

Maybe it's Japan, not Great Britain, that won the Pacific War.

According to the website of ABC News, this $69 million does not include "the costs of Royal security which are kept secret." But in Japan, what is not included in the $74 million budget is $126 million being appropriated to the Imperial Household Agency.

A recent report from ABC News has it that Cameron not only refused Queen Elizabeth II's request for an increase in her annual income, but also demanded the Palace open its books to public scrutiny. That is something Kan will never think about doing before his country falls apart.

After all, the art of losing is not that easy to master for the Japanese and Americans. They will acknowledge the loss only when the inevitable disaster hits them hard - so hard that the leaders of the two countries can't find the right word at the right time.

---

POSTSCRIPT in response to the interesting feedback from the user by the handle of "samwidge":

Dear samwidge,

Thanks for regularly visiting the world's most infamous website. And I am sorry if I misled you to assume I am addressing the Taliban issue here.

Honestly, I am not concerned a bit about the next moves of the Taliban, Al-qaeda or North Korea. I really mean it. I have no affections, no hatred, no fears, no nothing toward these bullies.

It is for this reason that I often think I should shut my mouth for good. I sometimes discuss this question with God. Our Q&A session usually goes like this:

God: If you can't share any thought or feeling with others, I'll deprive you of your voice because it's useless.
Me: Why not? Go ahead.
God: That may hurt you like hell. Are you really prepared for that?
Me: I know it hurts because voice is the last bastion of my existence. There will be nothing else left with me. But it can't be helped.
God: Let's see, then.
Me: May I ask you something before you do that to me?
God: Shoot.
Me: Don't you think you should kill other voices before depriving me of mine?
God: Other voices such as?
Me: For instance, there are many Americans who are more arrogant than I. They keep telling us that had it not been for the humiliation they experienced in Vietnam, we must have seen a domino effect sweeping all over the world by now. Who knows if that's what would have happened?
God: I know.
Me: Sure you do. By the same token, they go on to say, if and when America made up its mind to leave its hand off this part of the world, that would certainly encourage Mohammed Omar, Osama bin Laden or Kim Jong-il to conquer Japan to usurp the throne as the Emperor.
God: Hm .... I have none of these scenarios in mind because these guys know very well Japan's imperial throne is not that cushy position. That is apparent from Emperor's countenance which always looks as sad and vacant as zombie's. Well, I'll further think the matter over. You may keep on blogging until further notice.

Getting back to the issue with Matthew Parris' article, my personal observation about the Afghan War is that America has practically lost it, or at least, it will never win it. Please correct me if I am wrong. Also tell me exactly how the Commander-in-Chief can dramatically turn around the situation there?

One last comment on Bishop's art of losing: With very few exceptions of born defeatists, we lose not because we want to, but despite our aspiration for the glory of victory. I think you would agree. ·