« Television - Drug of a Nation | Main | FIght Media Consolidation »


Doug Tarnopol

I don't really think the incompetence is as high as people think. Bush is a figurehead, anyway. I think that we have done what we wanted to in Iraq, to a large extent, as Chris Floyd points out (http://www.chris-floyd.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=989&Itemid=135). The simplest explanation is usually the best, and the simplest one, the one that requires the fewest "epicycles" or special pleading, is that the Bush regime, and fellow travelers (whatever the party, in or out of government) simply don't care that much.

This goes for Katrina: most people don't care. It was a great way to "clean up" the city -- with all that suggests. Now it's a free-enterprise zone mostly devoid of poor and brown people who are so inconvenient to look at for tourists. And since the market is always right (hosanna in excelsis), doing nothing is the most moral thing to do.

We'll never know whether the Busheviks let 9/11 happen for sure; we do know for absoultely certain they let the Katrina disaster come and go with not much of a wrinkle.

MSM went all kablooie with the truth, even on Fox, but quickly got back in line. And NOLA's still a disaster zone.

What I'm trying to say is that most elites really don't care much about Katrina victims or the holy troops -- to say nothing of Iraqis, etc. Those who do are so ignorant of what is really going down in their country that their charity ends up becoming self-congratulation. As usual, there are exceptions, but we're talking about the norm here.

I know a nice person who talked about how "they" were looting in NOLA (a lie, as it turned out); however, she spent ages saving puppies from NOLA. Interesting, no? This is a very nice person; that's what makes it interesting.

And I'm amazed that friends of mine -- liberal Democrats -- are e-mailing me truly confused as to why the Demz are going to roll over and beg Bush to scratch their bellies on the "surge," a purposely disingenuous term to begin with. Smart people, by virtually every measure, who apparently know nothing of American history, human nature, or the workings of propaganda.

Beneath that is the likelihood that they do, but the truth, like that of nuclear war or simply personal death, is too much to handle. That's how these criminals reign; the truth is too awful to contemplate. Hence, the big lie.

Doug Tarnopol

To continue...

What I think is happening, if the cognitive dissonance doesn't short out the painful truth, is that many people are becoming aware of our one-party system.

1. Demz want power; afraid of being labeled as cowards or not supporting the troops (by not sending more to their deaths). 2008 is in the offing.
2. AIPAC, et al, own the Demz, even more than the Rethugz. They like us over there, and later in Iran.
3. The military-industrial complex is having a field day with this war. Exactly like AIPAC, and in exactly the same lobbying way -- probably more powerfully -- they want it to continue.
4. Iraq has nothing to do with Iraq, Saddam, democracy, or even Israel, per se. It's about maintaining the artificial global dominance we've had since 1945, steadily eroding. No one really gave a shit about communism, either -- certainly made for good propaganda, but we dealt with all kinds of terrible regimes, and still do.
5. Like most wars, and most empires, the key issue is elite dominance of the masses at home as well as of other nations abroad. The Demz are mostly of that ilk, too.

That's why I'm completely unsurprised. We don't live in a representative democracy, really. 61% against the "surge" -- a deceitful term; they'll be there for years. 26% for Bush's handling of the war. 37% support Bush as president, period. Note that nothing in the vaunted 100 Days legislation does fuck-all about the MCA, habeas corpus, the Patriot Act, etc. A majority of Americans are consistently for impeachment; off the table. They're for universal healthcare, when properly asked. Not gonna happen.

At the same time, it is possible that a groundswell of revulsion and public action will force change. That happens in all but the most totalitarian nations. So, as per usual, it's up to us, collectively and individually. Note the horror with which the term "class warfare" is hysterically thrown at normal progressive policies, while true class warfare is waged on the vast majority of the population here at home.

If you know any really rich people -- and I do (my uncle's brother by marriage is the now stroke-felled Malcolm Glazer, of Man United fame...a billionaire who could give a fuck about how one of his companies was destroying the Chesapeake, and was a huge Bush supporter) -- they pretty much get that the world is going to hell, don't much care, as they have their bunkers (literally and figuratively). Big shock. Why do Americans insist on thinking themselves exceptional? What would be exceptional would be to realize, as a group, that we are not exceptional.

And so it goes. We call it a "democracy deficit" when it happens in other countries. Here, it's called "mature centrism." If you read contemporary op-eds during Vietnam, it's the same shit. So-called "liberals" saying the same stuff as wacko-proto-fascists wipe out Asians nonstop, flexing muscles twitching from the M-I complex and other issues: "credibility" being a key euphemism. Plus, with all that excess wealth and armaments, without a real enemy, the people might start getting pissed off at the owners...

As Tammany says in _Gangs of New York_, "We can always hire one half of the poor to kill the other half." There are many ways of doing this, both figuratively/economically and literally.


The comments to this entry are closed.

February 2016

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
  1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 29