Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
US Actions, Not Obama's Words Tell Story of US Middle East Policy
We all want to be supportive of our President as he attempts to broaden America's positive role in the Middle East and North Africa. But it is important to critically analyze what the President does, not what he says, when it comes to U.S. policy abroad. When the President says ‘[i]t will be the policy of the United States to promote reform across the region, and to support transitions to democracy,’ we must look more carefully at how this policy has been implemented as well as the implications of the actions that have already been taken.
President Obama violated the Constitution by pursuing war against Libya without a Constitutionally-required authorization for the use of military force or declaration of war from Congress. His actions, and now his policy recitations, set the stage for more interventions, presumably in Syria and Iran. His recounting of the reasons for U.S. intervention in Libya is at odds with the facts. There was no clear evidence of an impending massacre in Libya. There was menacing rhetoric and a violent government put-down of an armed insurrection which may have been joined by some with legitimate non-violent aspirations. No one can justify the actions of any parties to this conflict. In any case, discretion requires leaders to move with the utmost care in developing military responses to rhetoric and similar care to intervention in a civil war.
The UN mandate to protect civilians was exceeded almost immediately and used as a pretext for regime change. The U.S. and NATO are one in Libya. Our nation, through NATO, has taken sides in a civil war which is spreading more violence throughout Libya and putting more civilians' at risk. The Interim Council of the rebels moved quickly to a $100 million oil marketing agreement with Qatar, unmasking a potential reason for intervention: control over Libya's vast oil fields which can yield over $300 million in oil daily. The military intervention in a civil war against the backdrop of a struggle for oil casts a shadow of doubt upon lofty rhetoric about positive change, peace and stability. That the U.S. has not intervened militarily in Bahrain and Yemen demonstrates that violent intervention carries high risks and political resolution of conflict is desirable. We must be prepared to seek political resolution of conflicts through statecraft not through military force.
NATO's expansion as ‘globocop’ is hardly about peace and stability. It has people in Pakistan and Afghanistan in the streets loudly protesting NATO's onslaught against innocent civilians.
We have an obligation to work together to make America safe, but it is important to note that our intervention in Iraq was based on lies, that ‘the end of combat operations’ in Iraq is not the end of American occupation, and the war in Afghanistan could drag on for another decade. These wars, along with the conflicts over Pakistan, Yemen and Libya will continue to cost the American people hundreds of billions of dollars and add trillions to the deficit, diverting resources from pressing domestic needs in health care, education, job creation and retirement security.
The President wants to ‘advance economic development for nations that transition to democracy.’ It would be good to advance economic development in the United States, since there are over 14 million Americans are out of work. Such a high level of unemployment degrades our own democracy.
64 Comments so far
Show AllThe first sentence of this article -- "We all want to be supportive of our President as he attempts to broaden America's positive role in the Middle East and North Africa." -- has an Orwellian ring to it. What positive role in the Middle East and North Africa does the US have that we could broaden? Launching cruise missiles into villages in Yemen? Massacring civilians with our proxy soldiers in Bahrain? Helping Israel slaughter Palestinians? Selling poison gas to Saddam Hussein so he could kill the upstart Kurds? Killing Dr. Mossadegh so the Shah could take over Iran? Starting a transparent war for oil against Libya? At least Mr. Kucinich got one thing right -- Obama started an illegal war in Libya. Where is the call for impeachment? No democrat will ask for it because Obama is their serial chainsaw baby killer, and they love him like bloody vampire wives.
Thanks Tom. Good comment. Positive role my ass. Impeach this puppet traitor now. Daily Kos is so in love with this cretin, it is hard to read. I mentioned G G and was troll rated. But there is a diary on the rec list of the beautiful Family. The same Family that is killing millions across the pond while the US sinks.
Damn the US. What right do we have to do these things?
But the banks and the oil companies are sure getting rich. And Americans are just too damned stupid to see this.
Send a million soldiers to war to get blown up.
Tom: Your compelling questions are answered astutely by Nir Rosen in his essay posted on C.D. today. Mr. Rosen exposes what passes for media, and the language used to condition the masses into agreeing with the policy initiatives elected by elites.
It's sad to see Dennis sing along; although I will say on his behalf that he does at least move the discourse by suggesting the bombs to Libya were NOT justifiable. He always tip-toes close to the key issues and gently tweaks them. That may be all that our present embedded media will allow.
"Please join with me as we sing 'Middle East Salvation,' found on page 7 in the Empire's Hymnal. Everyone, ready? Now, please... on key!"
Sorry, Siouxrose, I'm tone deaf and was not allowed to sing even at my 8th grade graduation, but I will certainly tap my toes in agreement.
The most pathetic thing here seems to me that DK has been gerrymadered out of his district, will likely not run and if he runs will likely lose. Even as a lame duck he can't come to grips with the reality of the Democratic Party.
I was upset by the first paragraph, too. Kucinich has already mentioned impeachment in regards to Libya, I believe, so he doesn't need the first pandering paragraph -- there is nothing left to support in this President. On NPR I just heard about the billions being sent to Egypt to help in their economic development. What about our economic development in the U.S.? BTW, that was rhetorical. I don't usually get so incensed when I hear about aid to other countries. This $$$ has to do with control and nothing more.
I liked the rest of this article. I want to Kucinich to keep talking, but I would really like to see him drop the pretense on supporting the war criminal Obama.
Good comment Tom. Kucinich has gotten into a noticeable pattern since Obama and the Democrats got power: criticize Obama but don't cross the line and keep it just hot air, and still support him.
The "Orwellian ring" in this article by Kucinich may show desperation on Kucinich's part to say something positive about Obama while still criticizing him. Kucinich's votes for the corporate giveaway in the Health Care bill and the tax cuts last year aren't erased with election season speeches (Obama has already declared his intent to run again), especially since the Democrats in the House have lost power and Kucinich has probably lost the little leverage he had.
Yes. I wish DK felt the same way about oBOMBr as he did in 2008 when he ran against him. That Dennis was killed.
So invading the wrong country, Iraq and Killing 30,000 men women and children on the first night is OK with you. I didn't hear you yelling "Impeachment" then and believe it was far worse cause it cost us trillions. Long as a Republican does it, it's OK? Is that what you're saying?
Break away, Dennis! (from the Dems) While there is still time... surely no principled person can continue to go along to get along with evil?
Build a coalition of the unwilling ... to present a genuine opposition to the Democratic party since it's fully taken on the persona of the Republicans, allowing that party to morph into verifiable fascists.
Sioux Rose, I absolutely second your admonition to Dennis K. Most of the other comments are as well right on. Though Dennis like Obama always expresses him self eloquently and (unlike Obama) with moral rectitude, when it comes to action he always winds up "supporting" the President, as he did most greviously on health care reform. Obama's actions demand not just condemnation but withdrawal of support unless they are corrected. And that goes for the Democratic Party as well; don't support it, oppose it. As an 04 and 08 campaigner for Dennis, I have responded to his request for views on what "option" he should exercise now that his seat in Congress is about to be gerrymandered from under him---and I urged him exactly as did Sioux Rose.
I do hope that Dennis has the time to read our comments.
Hear hear!!!
Someone will have to do so if we're ever going to progress beyond the awful status quo. If not now....when?
Exactly! The democratic-republican hat trick is no place for someone like you, Dennis. Come on over to the progressive side and bring what's left of the progressive caucus with you. They are re-arranging your district anyway. Better for you to go out fighting than retiring. I and most of the people I know who helped get ":The One" elected would work tirelessly for you. We would have then, but you know how the Dems pick their front runners (who can generate the most campaign funding quickest.) Well that means that the Dem with the most lucrative promises to their corporate masters gets the nomination. Just create a new party, give yourself a goal to be elected in fifteen years and let's get to work!
YES, YES, YES!!!
This Menace we call Washington, is a nothing short of a dark ball of psychotic evil. Its violent and immoral attempts to force itself and American Capitalism upon the world has to be stopped.
Since we as citizens can't seem to o anything about it, perhaps the rest of the world can.
Wonder what Dennis plans to do about it?
Much of the rest of the world sees/ knows amerika for what it really is; a fascist, imperialistic, war mongering nation, bent on slaughter and occupation. So, therein lies some hope; as the amerikan empire continues to collapse; the peaceful nations will help to truly change amerika. It will not be easy as there is much delusion, resistance to peaceful change, and most amerikans still live in the state of denial..... lots of painful suffering, aka, karma ahead !
We are a divided citizenry. This was done and maintained on purpose, just as installing Obama into the white house is purposeful for the real owners of this country.
We have been led to believe a lot of things. What we are led to believe now is beneficial to no one but those who's power seems omnipotent. 'The Elite'(Bildeberg etc al.).
Those of us who see part of the picture can speak out, those of us who see varying percentages of the picture say what we think, those who see the whole picture can speak out, but realize the spirit of democracy was lost long ago, and is only a facade now. We are the subjects of a very powerful group. They act as our Kings and we blindly follow as pawns. It appears we are left unable to change the path of this vile machine. We have neither the wealth, power, or game pieces.
I agree with your commen, moonpie. We are being ruled,manipulated, controlled and terrorized by conscienceless psychopaths as was Germany under the Nazis. What I wonder is what Dennis CAN do about it. Few in Washington have the guts to speak out as Dennis has against our now entrenched policies of deception, death and destruction under the guise of promoting democracy. But his party has failed him just as it has failed everyone who voted for Obama, and Dennis has not yet accepted this sad, sad truth.
We need a David, strong and with a deadly, true aim against this monstrous, terrifying Goliath-- that "dark ball of psychotic evil," but who yet has come forth?
"We need a David, strong and with a deadly, true aim against this monstrous, terrifying Goliath" -- Not a good metaphor in the context of this article -- actually, according to the received narrative, the "strong and deadly" David was the champion of the invaders; the "monstrous, terrifying Goliath" of those defending their homeland. Nothing seems to change.
No one has come forth. You'd think out of a nation of billions there would be just ...one.
How about instead of one, there is an organized many? We have lived too long under the "leadership" of those who are too ignorant and take to much power unto themselves to make decisions for the many.
Thank you Dennis. I wonder if the peoples of the Middle East know that Obama is all shuck and jive and that the words coming out of his mouth mean nothing. Obama's job is to temporized the "Arab Spring" and to preserve the same old order of things.
That first sentence sticks in my craw exactly as it sticks in the craw of so many other commenters.
I fully understand that it is more than anything an artifact of rhetoric or style; any politician who's not a one-note demagogue will habitually think and speak in such blandishments as naturally as a bird flaps its wings to fly.
So one must recognize that preposterous phrases like "we all want to be supportive of our President..." are only meant to be true "in a manner of speaking".
I trouble to set up this point, however, only to knock it right back down. Again, to echo the sentiments of most of the previous commenters, Dennis's penchant for rhetorical courtesy, facile acceptance of conventional clichés, e.g. "America's positive role" and gently offering so-called constructive criticism "more in sorrow than in anger", is simply inadequate to the present cultural and political crisis.
I've often mentioned that when I first heard Bob Dylan's "Queen Jane Approximately" during my prehistoric teens, I was riveted by the pregnant phrase "Trying to prove that your conclusions should be more drastic". If anything, it's only gained power and meaning over the decades.
I ought to put it on a loop and send it to Kucinich.
When your mother sends back all your invitations
And your father to your sister he explains
That you're tired of yourself and all of your creations
Won't you come see me, Queen Jane ?
Won't you come see me, Queen Jane ?
Now when all of the flower ladies want back what they have lent you
And the smell of their roses does not remain
And all of your children start to resent you
Won't you come see me, Queen Jane ?
Won't you come see me, Queen Jane ?
Now when all the clowns that you have commissioned
Have died in battle or in vain
And you're sick of all this repetition
Won't you come see me, Queen Jane ?
Won't you come see me, Queen Jane ?
When all of your advisers heave their plastic
At your feet to convince you of your pain
Trying to prove that your conclusions should be more drastic
Won't you come see me, Queen Jane ?
Won't you come see me, Queen Jane ?
Now when all of the bandits that you turned your other cheek to
All lay down their bandanas and complain
And you want somebody you don't have to speak to
Won't you come see me, Queen Jane ?
Won't you come see me, Queen Jane ?
As long as Israel continues building settlements and as long as the US continues its lifelines to Israel there will be no peace. The US could help by chopping off Israel's balls but they won't. They will do what they always do - support them no matter what. I do support suicide diplomacy but Israel is a bully. What happened to the country known as Palestine?
Dear wonderweenie
Unfortunately the mentality of American Christians (with the exception of the Quakers) is very anti Palestinian. It is so because it fears the judgement of God if it were to question Israel's actions.
"We all want to be supportive of our President as he attempts to broaden America's positive role in the Middle East and North Africa"
Actually, a "broadened role" sounds too much like Empire. Does "positive role" mean keep an eye on the oil?
I read that 1st sentence and didn't need to read anymore. The USA has never had a "positive role" in the region except helping to run the Axis out during WW2. For all of DK's presumed good intentions, he's in a bind because he's a Democrat, and a president worse than Bush ought to be censured in at least the same manner as DK did at the time. Sanders doesn't have the same baggage. DK's conflicted soul would be much happier by declaring its independence from the Democrat Party.
Thank You Dennis. There are at least a few out there looking out for the general Ameican population, and Constitution.
In contemporary times we speak of chaos, legitimation and creative destruction without flinching from a pretext of rationality (we should shudder!)
In an older time it might have been termed "Havoc" and we might recall the ghosts of evil past in Shakespeare's phrasings:
ANTONY:
Blood and destruction shall be so in use
And dreadful objects so familiar
That mothers shall but smile when they behold
Their infants quarter'd with the hands of war;
All pity choked with custom of fell deeds:
And Caesar's spirit, ranging for revenge,
With Ate by his side come hot from hell,
Shall in these confines with a monarch's voice
Cry 'Havoc,' and let slip the dogs of war;
That this foul deed shall smell above the earth
With carrion men, groaning for burial.
Yes cry Havoc, and let slip the dogs of war...
but in today's world we have no insight as bright as Shakespeare. The best we can DO is:
WHO LET THE DOGS OUT....?....WOOFF !!....WOOFF !!
WHO LET THE DOGS OUT....????
and maybe that's the problem.
Any talk of impeachment should begin with Bush. And why the hate for Kucinich for crying out loud, he's on our side. As a politician, he needs to soften his words, unlike posters here who can be anonymous. Even if you aren't anonymous, no one knows who you are, unless you're in the public eye somehow. Kucinich has to retain some semblance of political standing with the Democrats, since he professes to be one.
And I think all the hate on both sides is what's causing far too much division in America. We will be in a civil war soon. Hate is counter productive.
"If he means that, he should have the courage to act on it."
Indeed. But we all know Dennis doesn't do courage. More big talk from a little man. Besides, he knows who his daddy is. He doesn't want to be taken to the woodshed for another spank'n.
Screw Dennis Kucinich.
"ACTIONS SPEAK LOUDER THAN WORDS!" The Middle East is all about the oil, folks. How many $billions & $trillions this time around to "democratize" the Middle East at the expense of good-paying, long-lasting jobs, civil liberties, public education, clean energy, single-payer health insurance, Medicare/Medicaid, social security and the rest of the social safety-net programs? Dr. Stephen Covey: "FIRST THINGS FIRST" comes to mind when I think about how America needs to get "its own house in order" before cleaning up another's house. This is so ironic. There is no democracy without a middle class, yet we are trashing the middle-working class in this country through vindictive tax cuts. While we are trashing our own democracy and slashing budgets, we will have to accept multiple years of rising budget deficits of billions & trillions of dollars to democratize (bring change, peace and stability) to the Middle East. When will we ever "force," through diplomacy and tough love, the middle eastern leaders to finally take on the responsibility to stabilize and change their own region? Or, is it all about the oil? One aspect of tough love could mean that we wean ourselves off of the oil and massively mobilize to clean, renewable energies.
"Pleased to meet you
Hope you guess my name
But what's puzzling you
Is the nature of my game"
Fits like OJ's glove!
Joseph Stiglitz describes the root causes of the problems we face, pouring our energies into blaming politician pawns instead of the real culprits:
Governing Of the 1%, By the 1%, For the 1%
by Abby Zimet
A cogent, sorrowful, impassioned look by economist Joseph Stiglitz at the growing and wholly untenable disparity of wealth in this country, the way it "distorts our society in every conceivable way," its subsequent erosion of our sense of community and fair play, and, as in the Middle East, its likely cost.
The ruling families elsewhere in the region look on nervously from their air-conditioned penthouses—will they be next?...The top 1 percent have the best houses, the best educations, the best doctors, and the best lifestyles, but there is one thing that money doesn’t seem to have bought: an understanding that their fate is bound up with how the other 99 percent live. Throughout history, this is something that the top 1 percent eventually do learn. Too late.
Of the 1%, By the 1%, For the 1% Americans have been watching protests against oppressive regimes that concentrate massive wealth in the hands of an elite few. Yet in our own democracy, 1 percent of the people take nearly a quarter of the nation’s income—an inequality even the wealthy will come to regret.
By Joseph E. Stiglitz
It’s no use pretending that what has obviously happened has not in fact happened. The upper 1 percent of Americans are now taking in nearly a quarter of the nation’s income every year. In terms of wealth rather than income, the top 1 percent control 40 percent. Their lot in life has improved considerably. Twenty-five years ago, the corresponding figures were 12 percent and 33 percent. One response might be to celebrate the ingenuity and drive that brought good fortune to these people, and to contend that a rising tide lifts all boats. That response would be misguided. While the top 1 percent have seen their incomes rise 18 percent over the past decade, those in the middle have actually seen their incomes fall. For men with only high-school degrees, the decline has been precipitous—12 percent in the last quarter-century alone. All the growth in recent decades—and more—has gone to those at the top. In terms of income equality, America lags behind any country in the old, ossified Europe that President George W. Bush used to deride. Among our closest counterparts are Russia with its oligarchs and Iran. While many of the old centers of inequality in Latin America, such as Brazil, have been striving in recent years, rather successfully, to improve the plight of the poor and reduce gaps in income, America has allowed inequality to grow.
Economists long ago tried to justify the vast inequalities that seemed so troubling in the mid-19th century—inequalities that are but a pale shadow of what we are seeing in America today. The justification they came up with was called “marginal-productivity theory.” In a nutshell, this theory associated higher incomes with higher productivity and a greater contribution to society. It is a theory that has always been cherished by the rich. Evidence for its validity, however, remains thin. The corporate executives who helped bring on the recession of the past three years—whose contribution to our society, and to their own companies, has been massively negative—went on to receive large bonuses. In some cases, companies were so embarrassed about calling such rewards “performance bonuses” that they felt compelled to change the name to “retention bonuses” (even if the only thing being retained was bad performance). Those who have contributed great positive innovations to our society, from the pioneers of genetic understanding to the pioneers of the Information Age, have received a pittance compared with those responsible for the financial innovations that brought our global economy to the brink of ruin.
Some people look at income inequality and shrug their shoulders. So what if this person gains and that person loses? What matters, they argue, is not how the pie is divided but the size of the pie. That argument is fundamentally wrong. An economy in which most citizens are doing worse year after year—an economy like America’s—is not likely to do well over the long haul. There are several reasons for this.
First, growing inequality is the flip side of something else: shrinking opportunity. Whenever we diminish equality of opportunity, it means that we are not using some of our most valuable assets—our people—in the most productive way possible. Second, many of the distortions that lead to inequality—such as those associated with monopoly power and preferential tax treatment for special interests—undermine the efficiency of the economy. This new inequality goes on to create new distortions, undermining efficiency even further. To give just one example, far too many of our most talented young people, seeing the astronomical rewards, have gone into finance rather than into fields that would lead to a more productive and healthy economy.
Third, and perhaps most important, a modern economy requires “collective action”—it needs government to invest in infrastructure, education, and technology. The United States and the world have benefited greatly from government-sponsored research that led to the Internet, to advances in public health, and so on. But America has long suffered from an under-investment in infrastructure (look at the condition of our highways and bridges, our railroads and airports), in basic research, and in education at all levels. Further cutbacks in these areas lie ahead.
None of this should come as a surprise—it is simply what happens when a society’s wealth distribution becomes lopsided. The more divided a society becomes in terms of wealth, the more reluctant the wealthy become to spend money on common needs. The rich don’t need to rely on government for parks or education or medical care or personal security—they can buy all these things for themselves. In the process, they become more distant from ordinary people, losing whatever empathy they may once have had. They also worry about strong government—one that could use its powers to adjust the balance, take some of their wealth, and invest it for the common good. The top 1 percent may complain about the kind of government we have in America, but in truth they like it just fine: too gridlocked to re-distribute, too divided to do anything but lower taxes.
Economists are not sure how to fully explain the growing inequality in America. The ordinary dynamics of supply and demand have certainly played a role: laborsaving technologies have reduced the demand for many “good” middle-class, blue-collar jobs. Globalization has created a worldwide marketplace, pitting expensive unskilled workers in America against cheap unskilled workers overseas. Social changes have also played a role—for instance, the decline of unions, which once represented a third of American workers and now represent about 12 percent.
But one big part of the reason we have so much inequality is that the top 1 percent want it that way. The most obvious example involves tax policy. Lowering tax rates on capital gains, which is how the rich receive a large portion of their income, has given the wealthiest Americans close to a free ride. Monopolies and near monopolies have always been a source of economic power—from John D. Rockefeller at the beginning of the last century to Bill Gates at the end. Lax enforcement of anti-trust laws, especially during Republican administrations, has been a godsend to the top 1 percent. Much of today’s inequality is due to manipulation of the financial system, enabled by changes in the rules that have been bought and paid for by the financial industry itself—one of its best investments ever. The government lent money to financial institutions at close to 0 percent interest and provided generous bailouts on favorable terms when all else failed. Regulators turned a blind eye to a lack of transparency and to conflicts of interest.
When you look at the sheer volume of wealth controlled by the top 1 percent in this country, it’s tempting to see our growing inequality as a quintessentially American achievement—we started way behind the pack, but now we’re doing inequality on a world-class level. And it looks as if we’ll be building on this achievement for years to come, because what made it possible is self-reinforcing. Wealth begets power, which begets more wealth. During the savings-and-loan scandal of the 1980s—a scandal whose dimensions, by today’s standards, seem almost quaint—the banker Charles Keating was asked by a congressional committee whether the $1.5 million he had spread among a few key elected officials could actually buy influence. “I certainly hope so,” he replied. The Supreme Court, in its recent Citizens United case, has enshrined the right of corporations to buy government, by removing limitations on campaign spending. The personal and the political are today in perfect alignment. Virtually all U.S. senators, and most of the representatives in the House, are members of the top 1 percent when they arrive, are kept in office by money from the top 1 percent, and know that if they serve the top 1 percent well they will be rewarded by the top 1 percent when they leave office. By and large, the key executive-branch policymakers on trade and economic policy also come from the top 1 percent. When pharmaceutical companies receive a trillion-dollar gift—through legislation prohibiting the government, the largest buyer of drugs, from bargaining over price—it should not come as cause for wonder. It should not make jaws drop that a tax bill cannot emerge from Congress unless big tax cuts are put in place for the wealthy. Given the power of the top 1 percent, this is the way you would expect the system to work.
America’s inequality distorts our society in every conceivable way. There is, for one thing, a well-documented lifestyle effect—people outside the top 1 percent increasingly live beyond their means. Trickle-down economics may be a chimera, but trickle-down behaviorism is very real. Inequality massively distorts our foreign policy. The top 1 percent rarely serve in the military—the reality is that the “all-volunteer” army does not pay enough to attract their sons and daughters, and patriotism goes only so far. Plus, the wealthiest class feels no pinch from higher taxes when the nation goes to war: borrowed money will pay for all that. Foreign policy, by definition, is about the balancing of national interests and national resources. With the top 1 percent in charge, and paying no price, the notion of balance and restraint goes out the window. There is no limit to the adventures we can undertake; corporations and contractors stand only to gain. The rules of economic globalization are likewise designed to benefit the rich: they encourage competition among countries for business, which drives down taxes on corporations, weakens health and environmental protections, and undermines what used to be viewed as the “core” labor rights, which include the right to collective bargaining. Imagine what the world might look like if the rules were designed instead to encourage competition among countries for workers. Governments would compete in providing economic security, low taxes on ordinary wage earners, good education, and a clean environment—things workers care about. But the top 1 percent don’t need to care.
Or, more accurately, they think they don’t. Of all the costs imposed on our society by the top 1 percent, perhaps the greatest is this: the erosion of our sense of identity, in which fair play, equality of opportunity, and a sense of community are so important. America has long prided itself on being a fair society, where everyone has an equal chance of getting ahead, but the statistics suggest otherwise: the chances of a poor citizen, or even a middle-class citizen, making it to the top in America are smaller than in many countries of Europe. The cards are stacked against them. It is this sense of an unjust system without opportunity that has given rise to the conflagrations in the Middle East: rising food prices and growing and persistent youth unemployment simply served as kindling. With youth unemployment in America at around 20 percent (and in some locations, and among some socio-demographic groups, at twice that); with one out of six Americans desiring a full-time job not able to get one; with one out of seven Americans on food stamps (and about the same number suffering from “food insecurity”)—given all this, there is ample evidence that something has blocked the vaunted “trickling down” from the top 1 percent to everyone else. All of this is having the predictable effect of creating alienation—voter turnout among those in their 20s in the last election stood at 21 percent, comparable to the unemployment rate.
In recent weeks we have watched people taking to the streets by the millions to protest political, economic, and social conditions in the oppressive societies they inhabit. Governments have been toppled in Egypt and Tunisia. Protests have erupted in Libya, Yemen, and Bahrain. The ruling families elsewhere in the region look on nervously from their air-conditioned penthouses—will they be next? They are right to worry. These are societies where a minuscule fraction of the population—less than 1 percent—controls the lion’s share of the wealth; where wealth is a main determinant of power; where entrenched corruption of one sort or another is a way of life; and where the wealthiest often stand actively in the way of policies that would improve life for people in general.
As we gaze out at the popular fervor in the streets, one question to ask ourselves is this: When will it come to America? In important ways, our own country has become like one of these distant, troubled places.
Alexis de Tocqueville once described what he saw as a chief part of the peculiar genius of American society—something he called “self-interest properly understood.” The last two words were the key. Everyone possesses self-interest in a narrow sense: I want what’s good for me right now! Self-interest “properly understood” is different. It means appreciating that paying attention to everyone else’s self-interest—in other words, the common welfare—is in fact a precondition for one’s own ultimate well-being. Tocqueville was not suggesting that there was anything noble or idealistic about this outlook—in fact, he was suggesting the opposite. It was a mark of American pragmatism. Those canny Americans understood a basic fact: looking out for the other guy isn’t just good for the soul—it’s good for business.
The top 1 percent have the best houses, the best educations, the best doctors, and the best lifestyles, but there is one thing that money doesn’t seem to have bought: an understanding that their fate is bound up with how the other 99 percent live. Throughout history, this is something that the top 1 percent eventually do learn. Too late.
Sometimes I think the most dangerous people in America are the MBA ivy league educated. Profits over people, the environment and democracy. Anything for a buck is their motto.
mtdon, Absolutely. All of these assholes have been to Harvard, where they are taught that the highest responsibility is to the profit line. Their superiority is constantly reaffirmed until any connection they have with real people is obliterated. They view themselves as kings and kingmakers and the rest of us as "fucking retards".
Good review, but explain this: why are the representatives of this ruling elite consistently voted into office? Could it be that lies are more powerful than the "truth?" Look at the election of Obama as an example.
"peaceful protest"....?
What's the point?
The title of the article is a fitting eulogy for the failed political career of DK.
Regarding Western duplicity, fascist appeasement by both Israeli fascism, and Amerikan, fascist Empire, Obama was given a letter regarding democracy, international laws against PIRACY, ISRAELI FASCISM.......by Ray McGovern........SO FAR IGNORED:
Don't Shoot Up "The Audacity of Hope" (DON' T APPEASE ISRAELI , AMERIKAN FASCISM)
http://warisacrime.org/content/dont-shoot-audacity-hope
EXCERPT: "Obama, Tell Netanyahu – Don’t Mess With Flotilla to Gaza
Ed. Note: The U.S. boat, “The Audacity of Hope,” will depart for Gaza next month with 50 on board, including Ray McGovern, who wrote this open letter to President Barack Obama after watching his speech Thursday on the Middle East. Speaking for passengers and crew, McGovern asks the President to serve notice on Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu Friday that Obama will hold him accountable for ensuring safe passage.
May 19, 2011
Dear Mr. President:
Your speech on the Middle East earlier today emboldens me to claim your protection as we set out to put flesh on your rhetoric. Fifty of your fellow citizens will be sailing on “The Audacity of Hope” to Gaza in June.
You spoke eloquently today about “times in the course of history when the actions of ordinary citizens spark movements for change because they speak to a longing for freedom that has been building up for years.” And you lamented “failure to speak to the broader aspirations of ordinary people.”
We, the passengers and crew of “The Audacity of Hope,” sailing to Gaza together with the 2nd International Freedom Flotilla, represent ordinary Americans determined to speak to the aspirations of the 1.5 million ordinary Gazans yearning to be free.
We will be delivering thousands of letters of support and friendship from other ordinary Americans who are persuaded, as Dr. King put it, that “injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.”
I write you for assurance of your support and protection as we try to embody your rhetoric. You emphasized that “the United States supports a set of universal rights,” and that this U.S. support is “not a secondary interest.” It is, rather, “a top priority that must be translated into concrete actions.”
Bold words. With respect to the situation in Gaza, though, perhaps you will agree that it hardly suffices to bemoan the fate of one “Palestinian who lost three daughters to Israeli shells in Gaza” — who, as you put it, has a “right to feel angry.”
That Palestinian and his dead daughters are four. But Israeli forces killed 1,400 Gazans in December 1998-January 1999 — and 1.5 million Gazans remain deprived of the universal rights of which you spoke.
Gaza is a sequestered, crowded open-air prison, in which Israel keeps “inmates” at a subsistence level of existence. This amounts to the kind of collective punishment banned by international law and is enforced by an equally illegal Israeli naval blockade.
Many Americans have long been puzzled that you choose to exempt Gazans from your stated concern about universal rights; and, frankly, we have tired of waiting for a cogent explanation. So we ask you to look upon our voyage to Gaza as our attempt to implement your rhetoric about what ordinary citizens can do — not only to “speak,” but also to act to meet the broader aspirations of the ordinary people of Gaza.
On May 20, you will have an opportunity to inform Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of our intention to sail to Gaza next month. You have probably already been briefed on Israel’s far-flung diplomatic and propaganda offensive to prevent our boat and the other boats of the international flotilla from embarking for Gaza.
Those Israelis determined to enforce their illegal blockade may feel emboldened by your lack of response to the killing of nine passengers — including an American citizen — on the 2010 relief flotilla and the wounding of dozens of other peaceful passengers. This is your chance to disabuse those Israelis of the notion they can attack unarmed civilians with impunity. This year we expect you to speak up for us beforehand.
And please do not try to pretend that $3 billion of our taxes — our annual gift to Israel — cannot be translated into the kind of leverage that will spare “The Audacity of Hope” from harm at the hands of the “Israeli Defense Forces.”
Finally, allow me to suggest talking points not likely to be included in your briefing papers. These points transcend rhetoric and spring from a faith heritage you share with Netanyahu. They deal with the doing of justice — the preoccupation of the prophets of the Judeo-Christian tradition.
Before meeting with Netanyahu, have a look at what Isaiah says about “proclaiming liberty to captives and release to prisoners” and how Jesus of Nazareth repeats that, word for word, eight centuries later. Please give that some serious thought, and be prepared to put justice above politics.
And please let us – and the world – know how the discussion goes.
Yours truly,
Ray McGovern"
I WILL BET THAT OBAMA WILL SIDE WITH ISRAELI, ZIONIST FASCISM!!!! ALL OF HIS CORPORATE MONEY FOR MY MORALTY!!!......HE LOSES!!!
" We all want to be supportive of our President ". Dennis! Do not include me in your ALL! I never supported this murdering, abomination to our nation. Tell me, how in the hell can you support a known liar and a con man?
I learn more from reading the comments than the original article. The people who read Common Dreams are a well informed lot. Taking the pulse on FB, e-mails and here, I see that America is trembling on the brink of revolt. The next question is, "What is worth dying for?" How far would you go to stop the insanity?
Peaceful Greetings, my dear.
You are quite direct as to a profound point in our collective consciousness. (read my lengthy post today also).
"How far would one go to stop the insantity?"
The sad answer is....As far as they want or let you to go.
Unfortunately, as I mentioned in my reply to 'Rat4', before serious change can be fomented it is necessary to escape from delusions and dreams and launch to the next level. Reality thinking.
So first you have to change and accept that "America is not at all 'trembling on the brink of revolt. On other forums and blogs we have analyzed this and came to sad conclusions. They keep us just appeased enough so that it is not worth the 'trouble' to really get too worked up and violent. Think about it.
People are too locked in their comfort zones to even contemplate a question like, 'what is worth dying for or how far you'd go? This is how they they manage and control us. The plutocratic royalist elite in this country have been setting us up like this for years.
Even the Muslim inflitrators migrating to this country (about 8 million here now)who plan to 'change our western civilization to Shariah culture are losing ground once they arrive and start a life here because of how well functioning the 'program' is to indoctrinate into American society. The power elite will destroy them the old fashion way. Just by creating a more powerful 'Theocracy' before they gain enough voting base, called Vaticanist Theocracy! You can see it happening right now in the presidential race!
Unfortunately the idea of revolution in this country is nothing more than a means to vent frustration if the video games or sporting events don't do the trick for you.
Nobody is going to stop commenting on these forums and then go out and practice guerilla tactics with your militia buds for the hours required to establish a counterforce to physcial dominance superiority against our current government's
'Law enforcement' and national guard elements of regime power.
We're all too busy surviving now,.. because of the way they set up the 'milking of the masses' system. Again, which we allowed them to do by our own laziness and apathy.
It's hard to accept reality which almost always has 'hope' as its first casualty...
The solution is to think differently and 'de-program' ourselves first, And then start over and beat them at their own game. One has to re-educate ourselves to truth and reality. Not the 'programmed' education we though we knew but were so bullshitted that even consume it willingly now.
There's a book I suggest anyone who is serious about true egalitarian change read when it comes out next month... It was banned a couple years ago but will hit Amazon soon. Called the Forbidden God Secret. It wakes everybody up with what they need to know and provides the ultimate plan for a better world...
We'll start there and keep moving....
Pax anu luz!
"All governments lie." I. F. Stone
Nothing has changed, Dennis.
There is no point in protests of any kind.
The oligarchy controls all branches of the fed. government, the media, and many of the anti war, and ecological/preservation NGO's.
This is pretty well total domination.
BTW, have you noticed that Obama is taking on that George W. Bush smirk?
Peaceful Greetings, my friend.
You are completely correct. But it's more of a plutocracy in this country, and then maybe an 'affiliate world oligarchy' (depending upon your monetary associations) the other phrase being 'new world order'. The more that we come to understand and realize this, the more we have a chance to find a better solution. We waste too much time with 'Rev-Illusion', or worse Mouth-o-lution. And thats what 'They' actually want us to do.
And believe me, please, from serious insider knowledge. They have in this country far more effective ways to enforce serious 'crowed control' than anything Syria or Bahrain can deploy on their best/worse day. Plus we are already too 'programmed' to even allow banal forces of revolultionary anger to foment physical action on any serious scale.
It would interfere too much with our 'comfort zone' harmonics.
For example, just look at the apathy concerning the gouging of fuel prices. Where's even the representative protest at even a local BP for instance every time the price hits 4 bucks? Nowhere! Where's the outrage and revo action? It ain't happening?
Maw don't want daddy arrested otherwise we 'cain't' pay the bills...especially the union dues....
Maybe thats the problem. Teacher's unions in wisconsin sure staged some good protest... Too bad it didn't DO any good. Actually worse for the teachers, when it will all be over... Pay your worthless dues, waste your time at marches and demos, and still lose.
Yup, If anybody thinks we have a real choice anymore , keep fantasizing.
Pax anu Luz et al