The Daily Grasshopper

James Madison famously said that "A popular government without popular information, or the means of acquiring it, is but a prelude to a farce or a tragedy, or perhaps both." And while I am aware of Madison's other pronouncements and the anti-democratic sentiments they betray (e.g., the role of government is "to protect the minority of the opulent against the majority"), I think he was right on the money about the consequences of an ill-informed citizenry. Tuesday's news was full of farce and tragedy, most of which can be at least partly blamed on the fact that the American people, through a massive failure of the media to do their job, have been - and continue to be - gravely misinformed about the world they live in.

FARCES:

*************************

On its front page yesterday, the Boston Globe informed us: "Hunt on for banned weapons." The article describes the "urgency of proving the regime has lied about its weapons activities." There's a quote in the story from the obligatorily anonymous "senior defense official" who said, "Believe me, if we find chemical weapons in Baghdad or elsewhere in Iraq we will ensure that reports come out." Oh, I believe him, all right. Here's a bold prediction: they're going to find what they need to find. The Bush administration has consistently lied to the world about their justification for going to war, so nothing is going to stop them from lying now that the war is underway. If anything, they have even more incentive now. The Globe article informs us that the "teams" are "led by US Special Forces." A Globe story back in January informed us that US Special Forces had already begun operating in Northern Iraq. If they don't turn up any of Saddam's stuff, they'll turn up the stuff they planted. If you don't think official lying has been a crucial component of the justification for this war, I urge you to read "terrorist" Seymour Hersh's latest article for the New Yorker, in which he details the history of the embarassing forged documents that were used by the administration to stir up fear of an Iraqi nuclear weapons program. It was a complete farce, now openly acknowledged - the Washington Post covered it on Saturday, the New York Times on Sunday. But the mainstream media ignored or downplayed this important story prior to the outbreak of war, just like they did many others (e.g., spying at the UN).

Hersh's article, "Who Lied to Whom?" can be found here:
http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/?030331fa_fact1

Globe article:
http://www.boston.com/dailyglobe2/084/nation/Hunt_on_for_banned_weapons+.shtml

*************************

Madison's prediction assumed "a popular government," though anyone who's been paying attention to American politics knows that we are living under corporate rule, with wealthy special interests dominating legislative agendas at the local, state, and national levels. This control is achieved by what are euphemistically known as "campaign contributions," but what are more accurately called "bribes." There's a story in Tuesday's New York Times about Democratic presidential candidates, and their attempts to figure out "what is appropriate to do or say at a time when the nation is absorbing endless images of soliders in combat." Because of an impending March 31 FEC filing deadline, however, fundraising parties continue apace. Here's how the article concludes: "Not surprisingly, most of these events are closed to the press. When they are open - Mr. [Joseph] Lieberman opened one this afternoon - they are on the condition that television cameras be kept out. The last thing the campaigns want is news footage that might capture images of politicians pleading for money from big-ticket donors feasting at open bars and tables laden with food, an image that arguably might seem vulgar when Americans are fighting in Iraq." Note that, according to the Times, it is only the "image," and not the fact, of influence-peddling that "arguably might seem vulgar." After all, the troops are bringing democracy to the Middle East, and we wouldn't want anyone to think that our "American democracy" is, in fact, a farce. The war in Iraq is just one of the predictable results of a government that answers to corporate interests, and not those of the people. The media are not going to blow the whistle on this tidy arrangement, because they profit from it, too (being corporate interest themselves, the kind that sell advertising).

Times article:
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/03/25/politics/campaigns/25POLI.html

*************************

Given that U.S. commitment to democracy here at home is at best a questionable proposition, it is small wonder that our stated goals in Iraq are greeted with skepticism (or derision, depending on where you are). The official understanding of "democracy" is laid out well in an opinion piece in Tuesday's Wall Street Journal, "What's Up With Turkey?" Turkey, as we all know, had the nerve to reject U.S. demands that our troops be allowed to attack Iraq from inside the Turkish border. Most observers agree that the roughly 95 percent of Turks who oppose the war probably influenced the vote. A victory for democracy? Not at all. The op-ed, by former U.S. ambassador to Turkey Morton Abramowitz, declares that the "vote produced a shock" and its failure was "to the surprise of almost everyone," even as he allows that there was "almost total public opposition." Abramowitz laments the "inexperienced" Turkish government, which "opted not to sell the benefits of Turkish cooperation but to present themselves as diplomats for a peaceful solution." In other words, they didn't pimp their people out for the guaranteed loans and grants that the U.S. was peddling (which would have come with strict IMF-style constraints, whose effects are well understood by the Turkish people). Abramowitz writes that the U.S. has "an abiding interest in an economically dynamic, stable, secular, and increasingly democratic Turkey." You see, Turkey is not sufficiently democratic - the parliamentarians are too easily manipulated by popular opinion, which in the official U.S. view isn't democracy at all. For Turkey to become "increasingly democratic," it must learn to participate in the farce of U.S.-style democracy, where people don't matter - dollars do.

*************************

TRAGEDIES

*************************

For me, the war in Iraq was always a no-win proposition. Had it gone smoothly (and as predicted), the Bush administration would have been emboldened to carry out the next phase of the "Plan for the Next American Conquests" (http://www.newamericancentury.org), namely the war on Iran. Now that things aren't going so well, we're going to see massive casualties on all sides: U.S. and Iraqi soldiers and Iraqi civilians. A front-page story in the Times asks: "The Goal is Baghdad, but at What Cost?" The tragedy, of course, is that Americans were given little or no reason to expect anything but the best-case scenario for this war: a couple of days of lightning strikes ("Shock and Awe") followed by some light clean up, all accompanied by the cheers of newly liberated Iraqis, who would rise up against Saddam and greet us with open arms. Well, guess what? It didn't work out that way. Now, American soldiers are finding out that war is not a video game, and that technological superiority doesn't count for much if you haven't won the minds and hearts of the people you are supposed to be "liberating." Sound familiar? Saddam Hussein, who has probably read a history book or two in his life, is openly talking about dragging the Americans into "this quagmire." (NYT, 3/25/03, p. A1). Front page coverage in yesterday's Times was given to Kaye Young, who saw her son, Ronald, in an Iraqi POW tape. "It felt like the top of my head was going to come off," she said, after seeing the tape ("TV Images Confirm Fears of Prisoners' Kin" NYT, 3/25/03, p. A1). A curious expression, to be sure, and equally prominent coverage was afforded in yesterday's Times to Iraqi civilians who know precisely what that feels like, courtesy of U.S. bombs. Here's what we were told about the impact on Iraqi civilians: "Helicopter gunships rocketed the city from above, and Nasiriya's residents said the raids had killed and injured scores of civilians. Their assertions were impossible to verify in the chaos of the fighting today." ("Marines, Battling in Streets, Seek Control of City in South" NYT, 3/25/03, p. A1). I guess it's too much of a leap in logic to conclude that when rockets are fired into a city, civilians are very likely to die or be wounded.

*************************

New York Times columnist Paul Krugman, commenting yesterday on the Clear Channel corporation's efforts to drum up pro-war sentiment by sponsoring big rallies (which I wrote about last weekend), comes close to mentioning the unmentionable in his column - which is that we may now be moving toward a fascist state. He begins by describing the incident in Louisiana where a crowd gathered "to watch a 33,000-pound tractor smash a collection of Dixie Chicks CD's, tapes and other paraphernalia." Here's the next sentence: "To those familiar with 20th-century European history it seemed eerily reminiscent of.... But as Sinclair Lewis said, it can't happen here." Of course, it can happen here, and there is a brilliant essay by Thom Hartmann circulating on the 'Net about some other very eerie similarities between America in 2003 and Germany in the 1930s. This is not one of those "Lincoln's secretary was named Kennedy and Kennedy's secretary was named Lincoln" deals - you should really read it: http://www.commondreams.org/views03/0316-08.htm. Krugman quotes Jonathan Chait's assessment that under the Bush administration "government and business have melded into one big 'us.'" For those who know their history, that's a pretty scary development. Here's Benito Mussolini, explaining fascism: "Fascism should rightly be called Corporatism as it is a merger of state and corporate power."

Krugman's op-ed in the Times:
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/03/25/opinion/25KRUG.html

*************************

This isn't a comprehensive list of yesterday's farces and tragedies. Tragically, a 14-year-old Palestinian boy was killed by a headshot delivered by the Israeli Defense Forces in the West Bank yesterday. The farce: the IDF opened fire because he had been throwing rocks at an armored car - and these are guns and bullets and vehicles that we pay for, arming Israel to the teeth as it furthers its illegal occupation of Palestine. There will be tragedies here at home as the $75 billion Bush is requesting from Congress gets used up to pay for an illegitimate war - money that could have been spent to feed, house, educate, medicate Americans who are struggling. The farce: in addition to the money for the war, Bush and the Republicans are pushing through another tax break which will overwhelmingly favor the ultra-wealthy. You know, to get the economy moving. Not as any kind of a kickback on the bribes they paid when Bush was running for President. That doesn't happen in a "democracy."

Anyone reading this in the New England region is encouraged to come to Boston Common at noon on Saturday, March 29th. There is a large antiwar demonstration happening, and I ask you to join me there.

PK
http://www.dailygrasshopper.com