When asked what he thought should replace the Christianity he so unfailingly attacked, Voltaire replied that since the beast was sucking the blood of his family, he most surely did not want to replace it. This is quoted in Curtis White’s two-part article in Orion on the nature of our destruction of our own lives that is the continued assault on the environment. Food for thought:
Part One: Idols of Environmentalism
www.orionmagazine.org/index.php/articles/article/233
Part Two: The Ecology of Work
www.orionmagazine.org/index.php/articles/article/267/
White’s essay is excerpted in August’s Harper's, which also has a piece by Jonathan Kozol about the continuing effort to swap America’s public education system, a hallmark of democracy, for one based on profits. He introduces me to a term I hadn’t heard before, the EMOs, or “education management organizations” set on the thin edge of the pro-voucher wedge to become the HMOs of one of the last frontier of the public sphere, and hence our democracy. If nothing else, in the ruins of our antihealth care system, one can see the irony of the financiers deciding to use so similar a name for their attempted take-over.
Monday, July 16, 2007
Friday, July 13, 2007
Algeria
The stab-in-the-back theory of Vietnam still echoes: the media, the politicians, the hippies, et al. kept the grunts from “winning.” But that post-colonial war was not “winnable” by military force, even if every battle was won. There isn’t going to be a “victory” in Iraq, either. I worry about the effects of this loss on the military. Its so-called professionalization has in many ways cut it off from civil society. Ending the draft and tossing the notion of citizen-soldiers into the dustbin of history positioned the military outside the mainstream, while the self-styled romanticism of “warrior” culture threatens to imbue them with the sense that they’re better than that mainstream because they’re protecting it. A strong identification with the Right hardly helps. It’s not hard to imagine the circumstances that will make them feel like they have to step in. For you know the reasoning will be that they are saving democracy (from itself).
The reason I’m thinking such dark thoughts is that I’m reading Alistair Horne’s A Savage War of Peace: Algeria 1954-1962. I’ll be coming back to the many disturbingly relevant themes in this must-read, but for the moment I want to touch on the dangers of a defeated military to a democracy. The French Army, humiliated in 1940, rode back to glory in ’45, but only on the coattails of the Allies; then it had its ass kicked in Dien Bien Phu, after another decade of war; the colonels, who had by then spent their entire adult lives fighting, drew the line in Algeria. They damn sure wouldn’t let the politicians betray them again (as they saw it; this was before the “media” was such a whipping boy) and went so far as attempt a coup d’etat. Well before then, they had been deeply compromised by the use of torture.
The reason I’m thinking such dark thoughts is that I’m reading Alistair Horne’s A Savage War of Peace: Algeria 1954-1962. I’ll be coming back to the many disturbingly relevant themes in this must-read, but for the moment I want to touch on the dangers of a defeated military to a democracy. The French Army, humiliated in 1940, rode back to glory in ’45, but only on the coattails of the Allies; then it had its ass kicked in Dien Bien Phu, after another decade of war; the colonels, who had by then spent their entire adult lives fighting, drew the line in Algeria. They damn sure wouldn’t let the politicians betray them again (as they saw it; this was before the “media” was such a whipping boy) and went so far as attempt a coup d’etat. Well before then, they had been deeply compromised by the use of torture.
Thursday, July 12, 2007
Why?
Add the corporate media’s stenographic services, a cheap forgery about Niger yellowcake, and the fantasies of a crazy informant to the headlong determination of the neoconservatives to go to war in Iraq and you’ve pretty much got the “how.” Thomas Powers gives an amazingly good summary in the NYRB of the neocon drive to war as he takes apart Richard Tenet’s self-serving whitewash of a book. Tenet should have written his book in prison along with the others who have gotten away with mass murder: Cheney and his crew of neocon ghouls; Rumsfeld playing patty-cake at the war department; good soldier Colin Powell, who knows from Nuremburg that being a good soldier is not a legitimate excuse; that hack Rice and the rest of the President’s lapdogs; and of course, the Idiot Prince himself.
But the question still remains “why.” Politically, it seems clear that the War Party wanted both to show it had the right stuff to do something about 9/11 and to use that right stuff to consolidate its power domestically. I mean much more than paint the Democrats as treasonous, of course, although that too was rather successful for a time.
For our history shows us time and again that overseas adventures are the perfect excuse to clamp down on threats to elite control, as shown by the dissolution of the populist movement during the Spanish- American War, the suppression of the progressive movement by the First World War, and the taming of radical elements in the labor movement during the Cold War. These threats to the powers-that-were were set nicely aside by the tides of conforming nationalism, xenophobia, jingoism, Red Scares, and the like. (An exception is the Civil Rights movement, which survived even as Vietnam bled and the original "neocons" of the Neoconfederacy used the Red Scare playbook in attempting to de-legitimize it.)
Of course, there was no reformist threat at the beginning of the 21st century. (The bond market’s bondsman Bill Clinton had seen to that quite nicely). But there was the long project of the neoconservatives to supplant what we have of democracy with their brand of authoritarianism, a combination of neoliberal market fundamentalism (excepting for unfettered government control in matters of police, incarceration, and wealth transfer), with its magnificent success in restoring class power to robber baron levels, and the supposed moral rigors of Christian theocracy (in practice, just another corrupt patronage mill). Cheney and Rumsfeld, for example, both made plain their burning desire to undo the mild constraints on Executive overreach following Watergate, where they both cut their very sharp teeth, and largely succeeded in the wake of the national emergency of 9/11. They got their Reichstag fire. Cheney, the Cardinal Richelieu behind the Son King’s empty throne, and the intellectual gurus of neoconservatism have made their contempt for democracy loud and clear from their offices, coin-operated think tanks, corporate sinecures, and media cat-bird seats. War is their dream come true: they need it to last forever, it’s what gives them meaning, and power.
They saw their chances and took ‘em. Politics 101. It’s an oft-brutal endeavor, especially when the stakes are hegemonic. When you add hegemonic domestic power to military control of Middle East oil (plus keeping China at bay), pouring billions into the war industries (and gutting social spending), it all adds up.
But the question still remains “why.” Politically, it seems clear that the War Party wanted both to show it had the right stuff to do something about 9/11 and to use that right stuff to consolidate its power domestically. I mean much more than paint the Democrats as treasonous, of course, although that too was rather successful for a time.
For our history shows us time and again that overseas adventures are the perfect excuse to clamp down on threats to elite control, as shown by the dissolution of the populist movement during the Spanish- American War, the suppression of the progressive movement by the First World War, and the taming of radical elements in the labor movement during the Cold War. These threats to the powers-that-were were set nicely aside by the tides of conforming nationalism, xenophobia, jingoism, Red Scares, and the like. (An exception is the Civil Rights movement, which survived even as Vietnam bled and the original "neocons" of the Neoconfederacy used the Red Scare playbook in attempting to de-legitimize it.)
Of course, there was no reformist threat at the beginning of the 21st century. (The bond market’s bondsman Bill Clinton had seen to that quite nicely). But there was the long project of the neoconservatives to supplant what we have of democracy with their brand of authoritarianism, a combination of neoliberal market fundamentalism (excepting for unfettered government control in matters of police, incarceration, and wealth transfer), with its magnificent success in restoring class power to robber baron levels, and the supposed moral rigors of Christian theocracy (in practice, just another corrupt patronage mill). Cheney and Rumsfeld, for example, both made plain their burning desire to undo the mild constraints on Executive overreach following Watergate, where they both cut their very sharp teeth, and largely succeeded in the wake of the national emergency of 9/11. They got their Reichstag fire. Cheney, the Cardinal Richelieu behind the Son King’s empty throne, and the intellectual gurus of neoconservatism have made their contempt for democracy loud and clear from their offices, coin-operated think tanks, corporate sinecures, and media cat-bird seats. War is their dream come true: they need it to last forever, it’s what gives them meaning, and power.
They saw their chances and took ‘em. Politics 101. It’s an oft-brutal endeavor, especially when the stakes are hegemonic. When you add hegemonic domestic power to military control of Middle East oil (plus keeping China at bay), pouring billions into the war industries (and gutting social spending), it all adds up.
Wednesday, July 11, 2007
Representation
Due to our archaic Constitution, the Senate is controlled by Senators from 26 states, and should those states add up to only 20% of the population, too bad, they’re still calling the shots in that body. Of course, 20% isn’t the proper proportion, because a good percentage of people in those states, sometimes more than half, don’t vote at all. So roughly ten percent of the US population controls the Senate. It gets worse when you consider the narrow margins of victory in many elections: those who voted for the loser aren’t represented in a winner-take-all system.
The Senate, you will recall, was Founded by artisto-wannabes who made no bones of their fear of the unruly and unwashed mass (of white male property owners, the only people enfranchised), and wanted a House of gentleman (they were mostly appointed by governors to the office until the early 20th century) to keep the lid on any potential popular excesses. (In the so-called “People’s House” meanwhile, you may recall that the vaunted Gingrich “Revolution” came about even though 4/5ths of the American people did not vote for it.) It’s little wonder that most Senators are millionaire members of the economic elite, and that it now costs tens of millions to get a seat at that particular banquet.
Solutions (these are just off the top of my head, so I’m probably missing some good ideas):
Publicly funded campaigns. Of course power will out, and the money will flow, so strict disclosure, equitable air-time, and a vastly more investigative media are needed. (The Supreme Court’s decision in Buckley that money equaled speech was typical of that body’s adherence to elite class power.)
Electoral reform. There are ideas and local examples aplenty: proportional representation, instant run-off, cross-endorsement, non-partisan administration of registration & ballot access, an Election Day holiday.
Constitutional reform.
Citizenship. An informed, participating citizenry… imagine that.
The Senate, you will recall, was Founded by artisto-wannabes who made no bones of their fear of the unruly and unwashed mass (of white male property owners, the only people enfranchised), and wanted a House of gentleman (they were mostly appointed by governors to the office until the early 20th century) to keep the lid on any potential popular excesses. (In the so-called “People’s House” meanwhile, you may recall that the vaunted Gingrich “Revolution” came about even though 4/5ths of the American people did not vote for it.) It’s little wonder that most Senators are millionaire members of the economic elite, and that it now costs tens of millions to get a seat at that particular banquet.
Solutions (these are just off the top of my head, so I’m probably missing some good ideas):
Publicly funded campaigns. Of course power will out, and the money will flow, so strict disclosure, equitable air-time, and a vastly more investigative media are needed. (The Supreme Court’s decision in Buckley that money equaled speech was typical of that body’s adherence to elite class power.)
Electoral reform. There are ideas and local examples aplenty: proportional representation, instant run-off, cross-endorsement, non-partisan administration of registration & ballot access, an Election Day holiday.
Constitutional reform.
Citizenship. An informed, participating citizenry… imagine that.
Tuesday, July 10, 2007
Putinization
For now, the neocons can only dream of Putinization, but you know they wake with soiled jammies. In Russia, “managed democracy,” a Tsarist-like power structure, tightly controls dissent. Media, NGOs, and other aspects of civil society are highly constricted, and although the state itself may not have had thirteen journalists assassinated in recent years, it also hasn’t convicted anyone for these crimes and it has benefited from the cowed press. Admittedly, murder is rare; more usual is this "soft" repression story.
At least for the moment, the Russian people seem to agree with these methods. They were so traumatized by the post-Soviet shocks of western-enforced neoliberalism (the economy was looted by finance capital, new oligarchs emerged, thieving their way to billions, and average life span plummeted, a story little covered here), that they demand the stability, the ol’ law and order, that Tsar Vlad & Co. claim to deliver.
Ah, the bitter irony, that neoliberalism, long sold under the rubric of “freedom,” so inexorably leads to authoritarianism, either directly, as concentrated power and wealth maintains its grip, or indirectly, as when nationalists respond to its depredations in anti-democratic ways.
At least for the moment, the Russian people seem to agree with these methods. They were so traumatized by the post-Soviet shocks of western-enforced neoliberalism (the economy was looted by finance capital, new oligarchs emerged, thieving their way to billions, and average life span plummeted, a story little covered here), that they demand the stability, the ol’ law and order, that Tsar Vlad & Co. claim to deliver.
Ah, the bitter irony, that neoliberalism, long sold under the rubric of “freedom,” so inexorably leads to authoritarianism, either directly, as concentrated power and wealth maintains its grip, or indirectly, as when nationalists respond to its depredations in anti-democratic ways.
Thoughts for the day
Well, now we know how many dead and wounded it takes to break Senators Lugar, Voinovich, and Domenici’s slavish devotion to the Iraq Disaster. How many more for the next GOP defector from the holy cause of party-above-all?
Not, mind you, that we're seeing much dissent against military industrial keynesianism & (paradoxically, but one of many contradictions) neoliberalism that the Democrats are mostly signed up in a bloodpact with, too. Senator Clinton's quietly admitted that the megabases in Iraq will not go unmanned, and Obama the Hopeful One is only selling a notion (one bottle will cure what ails you, friends), so don't expect much from him. In fact, nothing should be expected from them; they need to be forced to represent us.
“Executive privilege” is the latest bullshit defense being put up the anti-democracy team bunkered in the White House. Unitary executive, fourth branch of government, monarchy, if the President does it isn’t illegal, Commander-in-Chief, yadda-yadda. A government of men -- or corrupt dwarves, as the case now is -- instead of laws is not a pretty thing.
Not, mind you, that we're seeing much dissent against military industrial keynesianism & (paradoxically, but one of many contradictions) neoliberalism that the Democrats are mostly signed up in a bloodpact with, too. Senator Clinton's quietly admitted that the megabases in Iraq will not go unmanned, and Obama the Hopeful One is only selling a notion (one bottle will cure what ails you, friends), so don't expect much from him. In fact, nothing should be expected from them; they need to be forced to represent us.
“Executive privilege” is the latest bullshit defense being put up the anti-democracy team bunkered in the White House. Unitary executive, fourth branch of government, monarchy, if the President does it isn’t illegal, Commander-in-Chief, yadda-yadda. A government of men -- or corrupt dwarves, as the case now is -- instead of laws is not a pretty thing.
Sunday, July 8, 2007
Sicko
Saw Sicko tonight and liked it more than any of Moore’s other agitprop interventions. I can’t say I learned anything new, since I’ve long thought universal health care is a requisite human right. A profit-driven (un)health system is criminal and barbaric. That part’s a no brainer, but of course getting there is the heart of the matter. Tony Benn states it forthrightly: when the people demand it they get it. That’s democracy, not the charade we have now. Of course an anxiety-ridden, fearful, demoralized, unhealthy, debt-bondage populace trained to think as if they are the problem, that's most difficult to organize. The power against us, a system profiting off our very bodies and actual lives, is tremendous.
Moore’s point that it’s all about “we” instead of “me” is right on. We already know how shared social costs like fire and police protection work. Wellness and health should be no different. We know that public institutions like schools and libraries are key to democracy. So's health: it’s “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness,” after all. We know that some of us already have aspects of socialized -- i.e. costs borne across society -- medicine: look at Medicare, Medicaid, the VA, and the great healthcare Congress gets.
Stand and demand it, people.
Moore’s point that it’s all about “we” instead of “me” is right on. We already know how shared social costs like fire and police protection work. Wellness and health should be no different. We know that public institutions like schools and libraries are key to democracy. So's health: it’s “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness,” after all. We know that some of us already have aspects of socialized -- i.e. costs borne across society -- medicine: look at Medicare, Medicaid, the VA, and the great healthcare Congress gets.
Stand and demand it, people.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
