Delicious
Digg
StumbleUpon
Newsvine
Facebook
Google
Yahoo
TechnoratiGrab your flak jackets because there's "trench warfare" on the campaign trail, as would-be commanders-in-chief prove their mettle not merely by persuading people to vote for them but by "demolishing" their opponents, because the leader of a country as powerful as the United States of America must, above all, be someone who's tough and ruthless, right? Like George W. Bush.
We may be a nation that goes shopping after the terrorists strike, we may have more to fear from obesity than Osama bin Laden, but suddenly it's an election year and we, or at least the media, are preoccupied with threats to our security that have the complexity of comic-book bad guys.
"Military power . . . functions in America the way state religion has functioned in other societies," James Carroll writes, in an excellent piece this week in the Boston Globe on the myth of national security. The central dogma of this religion, which no candidate dare question lest he or she be damned for heresy, is "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."
This is the nub of our national impasse, as we spin our wheels between the past and the future, not daring to let go of the myth of militarism that, while it may bind us together emotionally as a nation, at the same time destabilizes and pollutes our world and makes us increasingly less safe, to the point of threatening our very survival.
Wouldn't it be nice if we could at least talk about such matters at the level of a presidential debate, as though we really were a democracy?
Instead, we get fluff and faux-outrage: Here's a photo of Barack Obama wearing a turban! Pssst, he's one of them, he's one of them, the subtext whispers, and whispering is what counts in our timid, gossip-driven, easily manipulated semi-democracy.
"World governments focus too much on fighting terrorism while obesity and other 'lifestyle diseases' are killing millions more people," begins a recent story in Agence France Presse, on the fifth annual conference of the Oxford Health Alliance, held this week in Sydney.
"An estimated 388 million people will die from chronic disease worldwide over the next 10 years, according to World Health Organization figures quoted by the alliance," the story continues, prompting one reader to respond on the Common Dreams Web site, where the story was posted, with a list of "Things More Dangerous Than Terrorism."
The reader's list included: global warming, economic disaster (including neo-liberalism), environmental and workplace contamination, poverty, bigotry, a police state. All of us could spend the next hour expanding such a list: auto accidents; domestic gun violence; rape; spouse and child abuse; war itself and its attendant, lingering horrors (depleted uranium poisoning, unexploded munitions, post-traumatic stress disorder); injustice of all sorts; lousy schools; road rage; lack of impulse control.
Feel free to keep the list going. My point is not that I expect a president to "protect" me necessarily from any of the above, so much as show a capacity to prioritize these and other dangers, grasp root causes and project awareness, intelligence and not "toughness" but courage, a moment of silence, please, for this quality that seems so often MIA in the political arena, in dealing with them.
I repeat: "Toughness" and strength through militarism speak to the myth of nationalism but will get us only deeper into the quagmire that President Bad Example has bequeathed us as his legacy. We won't stop terrorism with shock-and-awe bombing, torture and pre-emptive global bullying. Almost everybody knows this by now, but our presidential candidates still genuflect before the almighty defense budget, varying only in the fervor they are able to project.
This is scary, is it not, that we might wind up with More of the Same as our next commander-in-chief, simply because we lack the capacity to step outside the stagnant mythology of macho nationalism.
"Preachers warn of hellfire to offer rescue from it, which is available to those who submit," writes Carroll. "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."
In obeisance to the myth of national security, we have squandered trillions of dollars invading and occupying Iraq. We've broken a country, killed as many as a million Iraqis, created 4 million internal and external refugees, thrown the Middle East into chaos and incurred global animosity.
Maybe obesity is still a greater threat to Americans than terrorism, but if we stick to our "mission," terrorism will close the gap.
Robert Koehler is a national-award-winning journalist, fiction writer and poet. He is an editor at Tribune Media Services. His essays and columns have appeared in numerous newspapers and magazines and have been heard on public radio.
copyright ©2008 israelenews.com
17 Comments so far
Show AllSeems odd that the Boston Globe column was not linked, so ---->
http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2008/0...
SIOUXROSE -- Yes quite so, but I would press on the point that there is ANY overall "profit" in the obscenity of war and oppression, as we both agree that the lords of karma will have the last laugh. They may have for a sconce 'more dollars than sense'.
POET -- Excellent reminder of visionary MLK's brilliance and great compassion. [Three-times scary beast that is]
Namaste
MCAIMLESS said, "Remember, war is money and we love money!" Depends on who WE is, my friend... only a very small number profit from this obscenity, and the nation has and will suffer greatly. The karmic boomerang is yet to return!
POET: Good one!
I believe that Nationalism is really the state religion... Along with the other regularly worshipped Gods of Consumerism, Fundamentalism, Blind Patriotism, and all those other ugly isms. Are we not instructed from the moment we step foot into public school to pledge allegiance to a piece of cloth?
I think Obama took one small step when he refused to wear that lapel flag pin. Certainly got my admiration for that brave move.
Wasn't it Eisenhower who warned against the military industrial complex? Remember, war is money and we love money!
I have been taking a deep breath lately, stepping away from the internecine conflicts flaring up among the Democrats and Republicans and trying to imagine what the real fight will be about once the nominess are chosen and the official campaign begins. I must confess that 6 months ago, I was looking forward to it. It couldn't have been more clear: a foriegn policy debacle of historic significance, an imploding domestic economy, a dual health care crisis characterized by rising costs and rising numbers of un and under insured, concerns for the environmental crisis reaching unprecedented levels within both parties (thanks Al), disasterous conditions in rural and urban public schools, falling literacy rates and global competitiveness preperation for American graduates, free trade gone haywire under neo-liberal social engineering schemes, an imperiled (near bankrupt) middle class and an expanding (sinking) lower class ... (I guess the writer is right – the list goes on and on) ... and to top it all off, I was really optimistic about the American public being fed up with GWB's indifference, the Religious Right's waking to the fact that it had been cynically duped, the wide spread disgust at the mainstream media's delusional self importance, and what looked like a growing appetite for an end to the culture classes of days gone by. What a battle I imagined between the forces of the failed past and those of an optimistic future, all of it resulting in real change. Not just a change in style but a change in policy
But now I see us slipping back into the same old patterns: judging candidates on their ability to "win" an election (deceive us) instead of focusing on issues and content, and divisions within both parties which only emphasize our inability to get over all the crap of the past 20 years as we passionately avoid consensus and compromise – the foundations of a functioning pluralistic democracy.
I know many of you are enthused about the candidates, but everything I read and more importantly feel is that (no matter who wins!)this will be victory of style over substance and many of us are still viewing the election process as some twisted hydrid of "The Weakest Link", "Survivor" and the "Super Bowl".
The TV show it is most beginning to remind me of however is "Lost".
This article reminds me of one of the most profound things spoken by Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. during his speech given 41 years ago this April titled: "A Time to Break Silence" in opposition to the Vietnam war. He said:
"we must rapidly begin the shift from a thing-oriented society to a person-oriented society. When machines and computers, profit motives and property rights, are considered more important than people, the giant triplets of racism, extreme materialism, and militarism are incapable of being conquered."
If America has had a state religion throughout its entire history that is it--racism, extreme materialism, and militarism. This three headed monster is what has us in its grips--the politicians and other society leaders are nothigmore than subserviant priests in service to our "gods".
"maybe it is time to give the girls a chance - couldn't be any worse"
...sure it could.
As the saying goes, "hell thath no fury like a woman scorned (or trying to prove her personal machismo)
here I though the state religion was Molochism
actually the state religion is capitalism which causes this endless (seemingly) search for material, markets and cheap labor. we spread the doctrine, like a religion at the point of a gun to feed the corporate and the wealthy's need for more. . .more. . .more. think about it- the most important institutions in the US are the corporation, the military and the organized religion. small wonder we think and act as we do.
"WOW — CD blogger becomes part of news story - let's have more of same..."
I've quite often found the postings more interesting and informative than the Articles...sought of ironic really!
"Hillary, where are you?"
She self-destructed. Taking politically expedient positions counter to personal beliefs tends to give an impression that one is all about power and ambition and drives people away.
You boys have been running the show for the last 250 years; maybe it is time to give the girls a chance - couldn't be any worse and might be a whole lot better. Most of us can balance a checkbook, raise the kids, clean the house and still go to work everyday and kiss all kinds of thing to get along. Hillary, where are you?
I'm with ezeflyer
Tough and ruthless, or boneheaded and irresponsible, drunk and disorderly, dumb and dysfunctional, stupid and greedy, rich and cowardly, authoritarian and militaristic, conservative and reactionary, psychotic and murderous?
"...simply because we lack the capacity to step outside the stagnant mythology of macho nationalism."
How true. As long as a populace is afraid and "me-focused," the lines between maintaining a military for strong defense and creating an offensive force in the name of "national security" will blur in favor of "macho nationalism."
WOW -- CD blogger becomes part of news story - let's have more of same.
Many of the postings herein to CD, are honed to far sharper points than many of the published reporters might risk, being launched into the "mainstream".
But that 'dog don't hunt' as that stream doesn't move much now days regardless.