Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
'National Security': The Ghost Story
The unfolding political contest is a window into America's soul. The nation is arguing with itself. The candidates embody separate impulses. As voters choose sides, a red state-blue state polarity again takes shape. Within the Democratic Party, the dispute is narrower, but still sharp. Yet in truth, each citizen carries within herself or himself the structure of the conflict: hard versus soft, experience versus change, programmed versus spontaneous, self-interest versus empathy, hope in an open future versus lessons from the past. Politics, by isolating these positions and attributing them to one candidate over against another, parodies the interior struggle of every American.
In this era, humans have been cut loose from ancient moorings of meaning and purpose. The context within which this condition is most manifest in the United States is the debate - or, more precisely, the lack thereof - over what is called "national security." The phrase is potent because it promises something that is impossible, since the human condition is by definition insecure. When candidates vie with one another over who is most qualified to be "commander in chief," and when they unanimously promise to strengthen military readiness, they together reinforce the dominant American myth - that an extravagant social investment of treasure and talent in armed power of the group offers members of the group escape from the existential dread that comes with life on a dangerous planet. That such investment only makes the planet more dangerous matters little, since the feeling of security, rather than actual security, is the goal of the entire project.
Military power, that is, functions in America the way state religion has functioned in other societies. The Pentagon is the temple of this religion. It has dogmas, rituals, high priesthood, saints, cults of sacrifice, sacred language, and a justifying narrative - what theologians call "salvation history." Last week, John McCain, in his victory speech after Wisconsin, warned that his Democratic opponent would take "a holiday from history," implying that the past is only a warning of terrible things to come. McCain, alert to "moral monsters," sets the standard for national security discourse lately, but the Democrats must echo it. The political debate, which seems so defined by differences, actually puts on display the unquestioned orthodoxy of the deeper American consensus.
When politicians invoke the rote formulae of martial rhetoric, banging the drum of dire prediction, and promising best protection, they are only fulfilling the requirements of set rubrics, which produce in the electorate not the anxiety one would expect, but enchantment - the enchantment of the pew. Preachers warn of hellfire to offer rescue from it, which is available to those who submit. This feedback loop of damnation-salvation-submission serves the people by offering meaning, and it serves the elite by protecting the structure of power. In religion, all of this is overt. In presidential politics, it is implicit.
Thus, the entire electoral process has become centered on establishing the candidates' "toughness," as if the only "virtue" a leader must fully possess is unflinching willingness to declare war. Never mind the question of whether, since 1945, war makes sense. No surprise, therefore, that no presidential candidate questions the current Pentagon budget, which surpasses every record set during the Cold War. That would be apostasy - and political suicide.
This is not the candidates' doing, but the nation's. Barack Obama, in character as a liberal Democrat, manifests a certain skepticism toward the cult of military power, but, also true to that character, he cannot propose the elimination of the underlying ideology of power. Obama can suggest, as he did in his post-Wisconsin speech, that "it is time to write a new chapter in American history," yet he must not revise the familiar chapters that already exist. But "history" is not a mere record of past events and choices; it is an interpretation of those events and choices. In today's America, the "national security" interpretation is sacred.
When that consensus assumes, for example, that World War II was "good," or that the United States arms build-up "won" the Cold War, it protects the militarized economy, the status of the military-industrial elite, the iron lock of incumbents on office. Any reinterpretation of this salvation history, it is feared, would undermine the economy, disempower the elite, unsettle politics - and deprive the citizenry of meaning in an otherwise meaningless world. Voters may want change, but not change at this level. Yet "national security" is bogus - part ghost story with which the nation scares itself at bedtime, part nightly prayer with which it then goes to sleep.
James Carroll's column appears regularly in the Globe.
© Copyright 2008 Globe Newspaper Company
79 Comments so far
Show AllThe Beast of militarism marches. No one dares stand up to it.
More and more it consumes, less and less it leaves for us.
Very well spoken.
One need only to look back at the advice and counsel of one of the greatest military minds to exist in modern times to realize the error of these ways.
President (General) Dwight D. Eisenhower warned us against allowing the current military-industrial complex from acquiring power, and most forgot or ignored the warning.
Having successfully commanded the greatest military force ever known to man, Eisenhower came away with wisdom that no one else could ever hope to match... and here is some of that wisdom:
"After my experience, I have come to hate war. War settles nothing."
"Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed. This world in arms is not spending money alone. It is spending the sweat of its laborers, the genius of its scientists, the hopes of its children. This is not a way of life at all in any true sense. Under the clouds of war, it is humanity hanging on a cross of iron."
Dwight David Eisenhower, 1953
Amen. The Obama incremental approach of talking with foreign nations instead of demanding of them is the first step.
Carroll brings it.
"That such investment only makes the planet more dangerous matters little, since the feeling of security, rather than actual security, is the goal of the entire project."
That's the political goal of military spending and the way the myth of national security has been constructed and perpetuated -- but it's not the REAL meaning of "national security".
The words "national security" should be read each time as "economic stability -- for the wealthy". One is the political title assigned to the program to secure public funding. The other is the only legitimate goal of the program, because even the perception of security of the public has been proven to be unimportant.
The current war in Iraq is an excellent example -- the public does not believe the war has made us more safe. Of course, all the publically funded studies of the war also substantiate the public's intuition.
Finally, for the men who have been given the title "Commander in Chief" the phrases "national security" and "economic security -- for the wealthy" actually do mean the same thing. They are not being untrue to themselves using the one phrase in place of the other.
Peace is the best strategy for achieving security and prosperity.
Aren't you all going to feel more secure when National Security Directive No. 51 is invoked, unleashing Infragard, Blackwater and their ilk, and heavily armed police SWAT teams directed by the Miltary command for the United Staes?
A recent article at Foreign Policy in Focus (www.fpif.org) compares Obama and Clinton by contrasting their advisors. Clinton's tended toward militarism and Obama's to the more reasoned and non-violent. It's an interesting and valuable article.
Would that Eisenhower could return to straighten out the party that once was as wise as he.
Wow. Incredibly incisive. ARE YOU LISTENING MR. OBAMA??
The best national security is a just foreign policy.
Out of Iraq now, completely, no training, no Green Zone, no mercenaries, no enduring bases.
A UN/mideast consortium to rebuild Iraq.
how smart was eisenhower really? after all, he let the party saddle him (and us) with the smarmy paranoid nixon.
a turn of phrase i hear with increasing frequency is "to protect our security," a curious formulation that seems to abstract an abstraction. is it just more garden-variety bloviating, or does it operate on a subtler level to bypass the higher centers and go straight for the reptilian-brain fight-or-flight reflex?
provoice--- I can fight back with Eisenhower quotes too
"A vital element in keeping the peace is our military establishment. Our arms must be mighty, ready for instant action, so that no potential aggressor may be tempted to risk his own destruction."... He was a true American Hero.
hamster-- great idea you just signed the death warrant for alot of UN/mideast consortium types, The terrorists would eat them alive.
peace coup-- Peace is great, Private First Class Peace USMC. Is a master with the M-249 SAW kills alot of terrorist.
"If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it."
-- Dr. Joseph Goebbels, German Minister of Propaganda, 1933-1945
Interesting article and writing style, but the end result is little more than creative spin from yet another sharp but useless pundit !
With 761 words available, the discussion never touches on American imperialism.
While wandering in abstract circles about the cultural and political delusions surrounding "national security", the illegal and destabilizing actions of the U.S. military representing corporate America are not addressed.
Theoretical constructs can become a diversion or sideshow concealing real historic and current events. The reader gets a nice massage, or shall we say "the media is the message".
Duh ! We are NOT in Iraq to defend America, but to KILL Iraqis and STEAL their oil. In Afghanistan it is about oil and gas pipelines and hegemony over Asian markets for Big Oil. Taxpayers assume the endless war debt and Iraqis and Afghans are given the gift of depleted uranium radiation for the next 4 Billion years.
Most Americans remain clueless on essential issues while clever journalists wallow in rhetoric rather than present the bloody facts.
The 700+ American military bases around the world are not about defending our "security" but exist to sustain various global corporate empires. The taxpayers have been duped, used and manipulated with the idea of an external threat.
With the help of complicit or incompetent writers, 300 million American lemmings have been saddled with $9 Trillion in debt and are blissfully headed over the cliff together.
War is a deadly racket and the military is muscle for Wall Street !
RIght on Joseph Conrad!
Carroll's article is more proof that MARS rules. Our nation is under thrall to the god of death, war and destruction, yet ironically the pack thinks it's following Jesus. A diabolical sleight of ideological hand has rendered this pact with dark forces. If Christ was a God-realized being here to raise the mass's awareness through the powers of love and forgiveness, HIS name is now used for everything OPPOSITE that teaching (except in those individuals who "got" the message and are HIGH enough to embody it).
Our military IS the anti-Christ for it destroys everything in its path, and the new generation of DU weapons are a scourge to future generations, a cancer upon the very banks of DNA which took eons to assemble.
"...the United States arms build-up "won" the Cold War, it protects the militarized economy, the status of the military-industrial elite, the iron lock of incumbents..."
J Conrad, The author agrees with you, clearly; what are you ranting about?
Give the guy some credit, this is revelatory stuff for the mainstream press.
Jonthenet, I see the terrorist boogeyman has got you.
The American economy is, for all intents and purposes, militarized. It's based on "international investment and returns" (especially energy securities) "defense contracters" and "subjugation/expoitation of each country." Though this third point is more of a consequence of the first, in order to secure an investment, the country must be controlled and stable. Massive centralized power running all this, and using the US and it's military the tool to control the economy and wealth.
Hello SRose and thanks for the delicious words. And yes, Mr. Conrad understood the real "heart of darkness."
"He cried in a whisper at some image, at some vision,—he cried out twice, a cry that was no more than a breath—'The horror! The horror!'"
The American death machine pretends to bring "civilization" and "freedom" while spreading the cancer of war and tyranny while setting in motion endless cycles of violence.
Right on James Carroll. You hit the nail on the head with this one. The god of elite America is the military/industrial and now religious complex. And it's a very ugly, ruthless entity that does require infinite sacrifice from the people. One way to win over it is not to feed it. And if possible, empathize for those who are so disconnected from the rest of the universe around them that they must live from their older, lizard brains which only know black and white, fight or flight, good guy, bad guy. Must be dark in there.
If it ever dawns on the military men and women what they're really fighting for, more specifically who they're really fighting for i'd give a ballpark estimate of 2 days before you'd see a coup of this current government.
Yes, the whole "national security" thing with it's 'homeland security' is a farce but I disagree with 'provoice February 25th, 2008 11:33 am, who describes General Eisenhower as "one of the greatest military minds to exist in modern times" due to his command of the allies in WW11. Eisenhower was chosen because the U.S. stamped it feet like an angry child and refused to enter the conflict unless their General was Supreme allied commander. Over and over again he and the U.S. with it's "cowboy" way of doing things would have screwed up and probably lost the war had it not been for Churchill's manipulation of Eisenhower and the U.S. command.
Maybe Eisenhower's farewell speech had some wisdom but he certainly doesn't rate as a "great General", maybe a lucky General and a "hands off-do nothing" President that spent a lot of time on the Golf Links like a lot of old retirees.
A wonderful article. There should be more analysis of surface events in terms of the underlying psychosis. We take our slogans and the labels we use to represent our fears for realities, and because we do this our bogeymen materialize in the real world and our perennial mistakes repeat themselves.
Just nitpicking, but there was one small error: "... no presidential candidate questions the current Pentagon budget." Technically, Ralph Nader is a presidential candidate.
hamster:
Point taken, but a reader could digest this entire piece and never understand the more essential political and economic truths.
I would be very surprised if we could find even one article from the Boston Globe discussing UNOCAL/ExxonMobil and the trans-Afghan pipeline, or the "benchmarks" laid out for the Iraqi government which would give Big Oil 75% of Iraq's oil. This elementary and critical information is missing from nearly every piece of writing published on the subject.
A lie of omission is no different than a fabricated lie.
I also think the concept of national security as "religion" is a stretch although it makes for colorful imagery and metaphor. The distortions associated with "national security" are little more than political propaganda used to control the masses. ETC.
Another example: Friday Moyers did a show last Friday and featured a human rights activist who has been in Afghanistan since we bombed our old friends the Taliban out of office. They were fairly honest about the Taliban's gains on the ground but never once mentioned why we are there, that is, so American oil corporations can market the oil and natural gas of Central Asia via Afghan pipelines. This and may could be related to the existence of interlocking directorships involving media and Big Oil and various banks....or in other words creeping corporate fascism...etc.
Cheers !
Cynthia McKinney is also a presidential candidate. If you've ever seen the footage of her questioning Rumsfield about the Pentagon budget, you would know that Nader is not the only one. And there is also Mike Gravel, questioning since 1972.
Only the corporate candidates support the military industrial complex, including the golden child of so many here, Obama, who wants to increase the size of the military. With more soldiers, they can attack more countries.
opps, typo:
"This media blackout could be related to"
and another thought:
Perhaps we should give Carroll an "A" in creative writing but an "F" in journalism.
Neither the primary trail, nor the general election campaign, is a prudent time to delve comprehensively into a national debate about the role of militarism in American history, or what the talismanic phrase "national security" should really mean in a world and age genuinely threatened by global nuclear annihilation and suitcase nukes alike.
I often cringe when Barack Obama (and other political figures who surely must know better) make the mandatory genuflexes before our Commander-in-Chief's primary duty to keep the innocent civilian citizenry safe, and the gratitude perpetually due to those in uniform who make the personal sacrifices. James Carroll is absolutely right.
But when, then, is the proper time for the long overdue discussion of Ike's prescient warning to take place, if not during the election season?
It seems to me calendar year 2009 would be just fine - with a new president, new House, new Senate, and new Cabinet all in place. Congressional hearings, followed by a comprehensive revision of the National Security Act of 1948 could address not only the guns versus butter budget priorities of a post-Cold War world, but also the alarming extent to which soldiering itself - the taking of enemy lives on foreign soil or at home, ostensibly as a collective act of self defense - is now being farmed out to civilian CIA black ops James Bond wannabes, for profit independent US contracting firms, and/or to thugs of other nationalities.
Another part of that legislative process could involve extensive declassification of sixty years worth of historical materials (which would shed a lot of light on the economic and social cost of blowback). Also, the Act could be revised to deal with the growing influence of national intelligence estimates (NIE's) in domestic partisan politics, and of course to redefine what really can be or should be stamped Top Secret to begin with, at what bureaucratic level of accountability.
Who knows. Even if it can't be put it into a stump speech, revisiting the fundamentals of the 1948 National Security Act would be a healthy, bipartisan approach towards addressing the problems Mr. Carroll so aptly describes. How about some really meaningful Congressional oversight over what the military/industrial/national security complex has become?
Bill from Saginaw
Jonthenet,
Do you know how big Al-Qaeda is -- worldwide? I would readily bet you a nice sack of coin that the entire group of people affiliated with the term Al-Qaeda could fit comfortably in the halls of your high school, perhaps even in its cafeteria.
Let's forget the fact that cells are unrelated and that the words apply more to a frame of mind than to an organization.
Find yourself a reliable source that explains the true size of the threat. Then, place that threat in a context that is appropriate to its true scale.
This is the question that I've asked Jonthenet a couple times before but nobody seems to answer it… Assuming that the official story of 9/11 is correct (which I doubt, but for argument sake, let's assume that it is), 3000 some odd "Americans" died…. The US went on it's quest for vengeance (which I also doubt is the real reason, but again, let's assume it is). My question would be this: How many deaths is required before vengeance is completed? How many bodies does it take to pay this "blood-debt"? How much more blood to you require jonthenet?
I would like to see our military budget cut by about half just for starters. Get rid of most of our secret institutions, what good are they if you don't even know what they are doing. What we do know is assassinations, renditions, coups on democratic governments, torture, drug running , money laundering etc. Let the light shine on they evil they have been up to.
Our military is designed mostly for attacking defenseless 3rd world countries.
When our leader's say there will be bigger terror events is the offing we have to watch them ever closer. Because from what I have seen they are the ones doing them. Imagine that, state sponsered terrorism right here in the good old USA. If they persued their own stated goals they would have to arrest themselves.
Also there is evidence that foreign governments undually shape our policies. I would like to see a government that would work for the average citizen's for a while.
Rock is on, feller
America is deep sleeping in the digits of naught
a feathered left- right gated nation secured by the doomsday waking clock
while white bread, black oil, liberation, manna, Mullah, non entity dogs fetch their bottom line
the flat line for us all
as the predator power pomp driven drivel
gushes up to the Venus studded few
who throw us a bone as first light
and our reflections lost in the wave of time
are there.... what's left to ponder.
I guess what ever scares you. The HOMEGROWN TERRORISM bill, FISA, and like that scares me.
Peace
JConrad,
Thanks for your thoughtful posts.
I disagree on your harsh judgment of this article.
Agreed, he does not try to recount the monumental crimes and sins of what the military does in the real world. That information is certainly available in abundance, and it's important. However, this article focuses on trying to cut through the psychology of fear used to keep people in a fog and submissive. (Including our Congress...!)
JConrad - I'm in complete agreement with you and your comments about this article.
No. 51 is just around the corner.
"Military power, that is, functions in America the way state religion has functioned in other societies. The Pentagon is the temple of this religion. It has dogmas, rituals, high priesthood, saints, cults of sacrifice, sacred language, and a justifying narrative - what theologians call "salvation history."
As opposed to legitimate defense, militarism is a phallic surrogate trying to satisfy sexual urges for dysfunctional conservatives.
James Carrol, i wish i could write with your kind of eloquence, great article!
To justify a massive military budget, an enemy has to be created or fabricated. Peace on the planet would reduce the money appropriated for the death and destruction industry, so a 'boggeyman' or an omnipotent, omnipresent group of 'terrorists' (it replaced the word communist) is carefully crafted and installed as part of the daily news stories alongside the real-life acceleration of murders across America. JConrad quotes Dr. Goebbels, and that statement is as true today as was then.
Keep the people full of fear and uncertainty and the docile, willfully ignorant masses will give up life and limb for the crooks and liers in power.While we're at it, Field Marshal Hermann Goering had his infamous quote as well. Most of you know it.
The thing is, most of the world understands American Imperialism and our 'armed force' approach to everything since this Crime Family took power. Alliances have formed and are preparing to not only defend themselves from the bully, but possibly 'humble' us in the near future.
Everyday in this once great country, more and more of our fellow citizens are losing jobs, homes, health care, their bank accounts...you name it! On the other hand, people serving in the armed forces are doing well and the "security" industry is flourishing. Oh, the new billion dollar industry is the "Manchurian Candidate" oriented Christian Fascist enterprises teaching ignorance, fear, subservience, intolerance, torture, murder, etc. Siouxrose says it much better than angry me.
Mr Carroll's (and I've always liked his columns) next one could be about our 'interests' on the African continent.
Empires have come and gone over the eons and ours is numbered.
We have a serious cancer of scavaging parasites eating away at the fabric of what once was a healthy system in this country. That carcinogen is Washington,D.C.
I wrote a letter called "The Tyranny of National Security" and submitted it to this website. They never print my stuff.
Conrad's most famous line could be inspiring if it were The Heart of Lightness: "The irony, the irony!" Jesus was one ironic dude, wasn;t he? This is what I see in this life; Renunciation of wealth makes one wealthy in spirit. Vows of nonviolence will eventually conquer every empire.
Therefore, the words of Jesus, "Give up your possessions and follow me," must be hidden from the capitalist's handbook. Yikes! Jesus was a commie!
One quick glance at the CIA world fact book, rank of national military budgets, and it is easy to see the real boogeyman.
The USA and our key allies, both economic and/or military, account for about 80% of the world's military expenditures. We also sell most of the world's weapons. The scary Axis of Evil represents less than 1% of the world's military build-up.
Even armed with millions of tons of WMD, these countries wouldn't last 5 minutes without airpower supremacy.
Fear is the friend of the military-industrial-complex.
Einstein argued that "it is impossible to simultaneously prevent and prepare for war." What the hell is Obama planning to do with increased military spending?
Let's be honest folks, the corporate media does a pretty good job of hiding the life stories of General Smedley Butler, Gandhi, and Nader. Reality is what they fear because reality is bad for profiteering warmongers.
Reality is the greatest irony of life. It scares the hell out of them.
A lively thread of ideas !
I think we all read differently and bringing a variety of approaches to the situation is good medicine. No doubt Carroll is a syntactically talented individual.
But, I must confess my jaded old brain was stopped cold with the clichéd statement, " The unfolding political contest is a window into America's soul." How profound and perhaps pretentious !
I suppose one could argue that Jeffery Dhamer had a "soul".
If it is possible that America has a "soul" it has been hopelessly tarnished by centuries of imperialism, racism, materialism, and environmental destruction yet has been given an artificial pulse and synthetic life via pathological levels of denial that have effectively turned crimes against man and nature into heroic nursery rhymes and psychotic national myths blessed by pervasive religious hypocrisy !
Opps...was that over the top ?
And to risk a generalization I have noticed that well-educated people can be very prone to getting lost in theoretic constructs while overlooking the obvious such as the blood and horror that keeps the ship of state afloat and the national heart of darkness alive.
If we can begin to get some of the lies out of the way, we might find some room for sanity and kindness.
Elmo I answered your question in the B-2 crash post.
By the way I can send you that picture of Elvis planting C-4 in the World Trade center. I agree with you the WTC was brought down from the inside, Booth, Oswald, Bigfoot all involved.
Politics is kabuki. A colorful and ornate dance by characters white-faced to hide their true character. The theatrical waving and dancing are a typical tool of illusionists to distract the audience from the true nefarious actions that are occurring.
Its just kabuki. Entertainment. The true owners of the play are behind the curtains loosely directing the action.
And most of the audience falls for it.
Articles like this just perpetuate the myth that it all means something.
mirf59 asked: Do you know how big Al-Qaeda is — worldwide? .... the entire group of people affiliated with the term Al-Qaeda could fit comfortably in the halls of your high school, perhaps even in its cafeteria.
I believe the pre-9/11 numbers of AQ was about 300.
"I believe the pre-9/11 numbers of AQ was about 300".
WTF, where did you get this, please?
The politics of hope not fear!
Bill from Saganaw: Well said! It's all about the framing and how we can learn from history to revisit past mistakes and go into a more informed future.
Speaking of framing-Raygun told Gorbachov to "tear down this wall". The all the politicians promised a "peace dividend". So where is my f**king dividend? Where is the peace they all promised now that the Communist boogey man was dead?
Oh, yeah, I forgot, "they" just keep coming up with "new" boogy men. Since the "war on Terror" thing seems to be running out of steam, now these damn neocons are poking the Bear in the eyes with threats of putting missles and radar stations in Putin's back yard. And shooting satalites to smithereens in outer space! So, I guess the reasoning goes, if you didn't like the old arms race, you're gonna LOVE this one! I can remember the Cuban missle crisis like it happened yesterday. Want to talk about a scared population? Jez, this is just another reinactment. Only worse. Amerika now believes that nuclear holocost is a viable solution to our insecurities.
It an insane world.
Oh, and by the way, I still want my gawd dam peace dividend. I earned it with all those stupid drills every Monday at noon when I was told to "duck and cover" under my desk and stay out of the way of flying glass from the school windows. I grew up with a government induced fear that was so palpable that everyone was putting up bomb shelters in their back yards. Something akin to Ridge's duct tape and plastic. Only it lasted for about 20 years.
So, I guess I will just start planning for that spring garden. And hope for the best. Enjoy family and friends. Vote. Make my Congress critter insane because I won't shut up. Visit with folks here at CD. Work for Relocalization and Community Sovereignty and hope we are all better prepared for a very uncertain future. But, I have to admit that it's pretty diffecult getting up every morning knowing that the picture for the human race and my grandchildren is getting dimmer by the day. Somehow I almost wish I was dumber and less informed. There is some advantage I suppose in the ostrich posture.
Oh, I almost forgot....thanks for the hot dogs. They were great as long as I didn't know what was in 'em......
curmudgeon99
No matter how loud the bell is rung, heads will remain buried in the sand
I hear ya Rebel Farmer. Our peace dividend evaporated. Makes me wonder if we can ever have peace under capitalism.
everyone read House of War by the author of this article. NOW!
If anybody is interested in another point of view about our illustrious government protecting us from the boogeyman, go to: www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va+aid=8165
and scroll down to the globalresearch.ca site and see the article titled
'False Flag Prospects 2008-Top Three US Target Cities'
and see what you think.
"Impeachment is off the table" may someday be added to the lexicon of American sayings along with, "go west young man", "frankly my dear, I don't give a damn", "I coulda been a contender," "you talkin' to me", and "you can't handle the truth."
"Truth this stranger than fiction."
No story about anything could possibly be complete without yet another meaningless quote from Obama... "it is time to write a new chapter in American history."
But it's really the same as the previous chapter, where a "political sociopath" rides meaningless slogans all the way into the Oval Office.
Compassionate Conservatism, Change We Can Believe In...
Let's elect new sloganeer, just like the old sloganeer...
Obama-Bush, 2000-2016!
To an observer from outside, the militarism of America seems to be rapidly increasing. Maybe I didn't hear it previously, but at least one of the candidates this time has used the phrase "I am best equipped to be commander in chief". Has that been said before so baldly in previous presidential contests? When I heard (was it McCain?) I thought just a minute you guys, I thought you were electing a PRESIDENT, one of whose many functions is to be "commander in chief" of the armed forces. But who has a range of other tasks and responsibilities in health and education and the environment and so on. Have you really become so militarized that you think what you are doing is electing a commander in chief who may do a few other jobs in his or her spare time? I can't think of many societies for which this has been true - Soviet Russia, Nazi Germany, perhaps ancient Sparta, ancient Rome. Is this really what the American Declaration of Independence has evolved into - a military state electing its commander?
Someday, probably in the desperate wake of some unspeakable war-born catastrophe worse than we've ever seen, we are going to realize what Carroll almost gets right---that history emerges AS the story of trying war as an answer to human problems, that history IS the laboratory proving that war is no answer, the worst possible, least justifiable and worse-than-unsuccessful answer....Historians (those in the pay of the war machine) have tried to tell us that our longest, most peaceful and successful period of progress (Minoan Crete) came to an end because that society did not prepare for life as war. Correction: That is why they lasted longer than ANYbody else including Greece, Israel and Rome. The Mycenean, "Homeric" Greeks who conquered Crete were the ones who gave us war as a way of life first---and they fell apart TEN TIMES FASTER than their peaceful predecessors. No utopia. Just the facts, folks. War was a complete SCAM invented by males to make themselves important at home by demonizing the folks just over the hill. Period. That was why even the king-hating ancient Israelites chose their first king, the lunatic Saul---to make war on their neighbors for a control of "promised land" already inhabited. Didn't work, never will. And when you feel like anchoring Progressivism in something real and demonstrable rather than pure hope, you'll start to find this out. http://ancientgreece-earlyamerica.com
Some questions for Jack37:
Do you really believe that most progressives don't get the political use of demonization for the purposes of fomenting war after 8 years of Shrublette? What is the "something real and demonstrable" that you suggest progressivism should be anchored in? Do you believe progressivism is now anchored only in pure hope or has always been?
Demonstrably speaking, unless enough of the American middle class has been directly threatened by a major crisis it has seldom been open to truly progressive change. There are now 3 simultaneous perfect storms that present opportunities for such change or, conversely, for an escalation in "foreign" and domestic wars: Pending economic collapse in Bush's "Amurka," the related failure of the current Big Weapons At Huge Cost to Steal Big Oil paradigm that has shattered the tiny smidgeon of restraint and even competence (from the Establishment's POV) left of what passes as our foreign policy, and Global Warming Plus Biosphere Collapse that is already pitting regional over-populations and over-consumptive economies against each other.
Demonization isn't the only factor driving war in the 21st century: The blunt force fact is there are too many humans competing with too few scruples for too few finite resources. As cheap oil, arable land and clean water supplies run out the survival pressure to fight over what is left will increase exponentially past a certain environmental tipping point. Scientists familiar with the data give various estimates in the range of 20 to 50 years.
Dr. James Lovelock estimates that BILLIONS of humans may perish from desertification and its related struggles. He thinks this die-off could begin within 40 years. Before you scoff, consider how you would react towards your fellow Amurkans if a new Great Depression were compounded by lack of food, affordable fuel for your cars and the winter cold, and clean water. Consider the mechanisms of a Police State already in place to "manage" this situation.
Lastly, regarding Jonthenet: The young brainwashed Right-wing "Amurkans" who still buy Bush's excrement regarding the GWOT--who went over, all trigger-happy, into an illegal occupation and received and eagerly carried out brutality that continues to this day--will be the ones Americans should most fear if complete domestic martial law in the U.S. is actually implemented. We already live under partial martial law under a de facto military tyrant who routinely ignores the Constitution. These war-damaged chickens are coming home to roost. Several hundred thousand of them. They have been indoctrinated in the violent oppression and murder of civilians with a "kill them all and let God sort them out" mindset demonstrated at road checkpoints and Faluja and the torture prisons and Haditha and hundreds of other places never covered in the mainstream "news." They believe torture of civilians is effective in obtaining useful intelligence and that it is morally justified. Massive private mercenary armies like Blackwater may be their only economic opportunity back in the U.S. now that the bipartisan "free trade" regime has gutted our manufacturing jobs. It might soon be their job to help gut most of what's left of the middle class. If Jonthenet thinks Americans won't be suspicious and wary of these brutalized and brutal pro-war vets he is either too rich or too young to remember how America treated its Vietnam vets and how many ended up unemployed and homeless. America loves to cheer the military parade on its way to war, but it doesn't give a George Duhhbya Bush about them when they come back.
elmysterio -
You pose the question about how many deaths are required to avenge 9/11.
My immediate thought was not about vengence, it was about prevention.
The better question is, "How do we stop this from happening again?"
Regardless of political persuation or influance, there is a real and rational need for self-defense. How much is subject to debate, but history has proven to us many times that unilateral disarmament leads to hastened defeat. This is not conceptual, but factual.
I honestly believe in peaceful conflict resolution. On my own personal level, I strive to maintain peaceful relations with my neighbors, avoid conflict with all, and promote cooperation and mutual benefit with everyone I deal with. I beleive this to be good personal policy, and I believe this to be good governmental policy.
But at the same time, I keep a baseball bat near my front door.
I never want to use it, I would see it as a failure on many different levels if I was to have to resort to a cro-magnon stance and physically beat somebody, but I have to respond to the reality of my personal situation. Bad things do happen to good people, and it's really up to each of us to protect ourselves and our families. Mazlow had a point when he talked about Safety and Security needs. When we evolve to the utopian point where everybody on the planet is peacefully co-dependant, enlightened, satisfied and self-actualized ~ perhaps that bat can be used only on the baseball field. Until that time, it's where it is.
Expand this same concept to include our society and our planet, and I think you'll agree that we must maintain that bat and keep it ready. To do otherwise is inviting aggression.