To NY Times: On August 3, 2009, you published a story about Genghis Khan’s 131-foot statue in Mongolia. The story was written by a journalist named Dan Levin and was well written overall. The only real issue is that your journalist had the audacity to end his post with something along the lines of Genghis Khan and Hitler being the same thing!!
This is totally unacceptable.
First, Chinggis Khaan, the correct spelling for Genghis Khan, is Mongolia’s beloved hero and the founding father of our nation. He is beloved and respected above anything else in Mongolia. To us, he is like Abraham Lincoln, God, and Chuck Norris put together. All jokes aside, your journalist and your post is no laughing matter.
This is how your post ended:
“Mongolian tradition respects our grand ancestors’ names,” she said. “To really honor him, it’s much better to use his name on only premium merchandise.”
Other Mongolians skew a bit more toward realpolitik in their devotion to Genghis Khan, even if they are happy to drink to his memory.
“He was a cruel man but he led our country to greatness,” said Toguldur Munkochir, 25, a bank teller unwinding at the Chinggis Khaan bar later that night. “If you look at Lincoln, Hitler and Julius Caesar, it’s kind of the same thing.”
99.99999% of Mongolians do not feel the same way as this guy “Toguldur”. Chinggis Khaan is NOT the same thing as Hitler.
I don’t want anyone to be upset with this Mongolian guy. I give him the benefit of the doubt because a) he likely had been drinking as he was at a bar at night and b) author may have twisted or misinterpreted his wording or meaning. Plus, I just cannot believe a Mongolian person would say that Hitler, Lincoln, Caesar, and Chinggis Khaan are all “the same thing”.
What really bugs me is the Dan’s use of wording “realpolitik”.
The use of this word implies somehow that this quote is descriptive or fitting of the real feeling of the Chinggis Khaan. Surely, there still are a few remaining negative thoughts about Chinggis Khaan in the west, despite the fact that he was named The Man of the Millennium by Time Magazine and despite the fact that Jack Weatherford’s “Genghis Khan and the Making of the Modern World” opened so many insights into the real Chinggis Khaan.
However, to make a far-fetched claim based on one quote from a guy at a bar at night is surely not utilizing proper journalism techniques. Vast majority, if not all, Mongolians do not view Chinggis Khaan in the same light as “Toguldur”. As such, the term “realpolitik” is not fitting in the manner in which it was used. In fact, “realpolitik” is may be in the way in which Dan is using to push his views onto the world under the New York Times brand name.
And, does this “Toguldur” guy even exist? Is he a real person? Is he Mongolian? Who knows!
The point is that the damage has been done. This story has been spread over all over the web. Dan Levin was successful in pushing his views onto the world. Just try googling (searching on google) for key terms “TSONJIN BOLDOG” or “Genghis Khan Rules Mongolia Again”.
Here is the original article: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/03/world/asia/03genghis.html?_r=2
NY Times Needs To Issue an Apology
If you are not from NY Times, then please write emails to the following people. They need to issue an apology, retract the last two paragraphs of this post, and notify all websites which have re-posted the information of the updated post.
The email addresses are: firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com