[Peace-discuss] Bush admin torture policy

[C. G. Estabrook]

Given that policy is largely insulated from politics in the US, why don't we pay 
attention to what US citizens actually think, rather than what the media tell us 
they think -- and rather than dismissing them as "idiots" on the basis of that 
very policy?

Both political parties and the media are far to the right of the general 
population on a whole host of issues and the population is purposely atomized 
and kept apart from political issues; they know they can't really affect them -- 
which is why they don't care too much if Gore/Bush, Kerry/Bush. or 
Clinton/Obama/McCain become president.  Specifically on foreign policy, the 
point has been made recently by Benjamin Page and Marshall Bouton in their book, 
"The Foreign Policy Disconnect."

"Drawing on a series of national surveys conducted between 1974 and 2004, Page 
and Bouton reveal that -— contrary to conventional wisdom -— Americans generally 
hold durable, coherent, and sensible opinions about foreign policy. Nonetheless, 
their opinions often stand in opposition to those of policymakers, usually 
because of different interests and values, rather than superior wisdom among the 
elite ... [For example] the public consistently and overwhelmingly favors 
cooperative multilateral policy and participation in international treaties. 
Moreover, Americans’ foreign policy opinions are seldom divided along the usual 
lines: majorities of virtually all social, ideological, and partisan groups seek 
a policy that pursues the goals of security and justice through cooperative means."

"Sometimes government-media propaganda dupes the public -- on Saddam and 9/11, 
to take a dramatic example. We know the means very well: huge government-media 
propaganda exercises, which do have detectable effects. But quite often the 
public is not duped and continues to oppose the policy decisions of the 
government, the media, and elite opinion, as public opinion studies reveal."

"The Chicago Council on Foreign Relations, which regularly monitors American 
attitudes on international issues, illustrates the disconnect. A considerable 
majority of Americans favor 'working within the United Nations, even when it 
adopts policies that the United States does not like.' Most Americans also 
believe that 'countries should have the right to go to war on their own only if 
they (have) strong evidence that they are in imminent danger of being attacked,' 
thus rejecting the bipartisan consensus on 'pre-emptive war.'

"On Iraq, polls by the Program on International Policy Attitudes show that a 
majority of Americans favor letting the UN take the lead in issues of security, 
reconstruction and political transition in that country."

We see what voters actually say on these matters in countries like Venezuela and 
Spain, which are more democratic than ours.  Even after the intense media 
campaign that was the "Reagan revolution" (in no election did more than one 
fourth of the eligible voters vote for him), polls showed that about 80 percent 
of the public thought that the government works for the few and the special 
interests, not for the people. (The numbers have undoubtedly gone up in the Bush 
years.)

So we can pay attention to what serious survey data reveals about the real 
political views of Americans, or we can trust what we "know" about those 
"idiots" (so different from us) -- our knowledge being a product of the US 
media...  --CGE


Jenifer Cartwright wrote:
> I agree absolutely, from "idiots" (maybe "willingly ignorant voters" 
> would be more accurate?) thru "get their attention." I do think that a 
> large head shot with very large letters saying, e g, EXPOSED TORTURE AT 
> ABU GRAHIB might work. Short, and legible from a distance. Also gets my 
> vote because he's a Fillipino who experienced discrimination from fellow 
> officers during his military career and knew he'd have no career if he 
> blew the whistle. Definitely a hero.
> 
>  --Jenifer
> 
> --- On *Wed, 6/18/08, LAURIE /<LAURIE at ADVANCENET.NET>/* wrote:
> 
>     From: LAURIE <LAURIE at ADVANCENET.NET>
>     Subject: RE: [Peace-discuss] Bush admin torture policy
>     To: peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
>     Date: Wednesday, June 18, 2008, 5:09 PM
> 
>     Well, if they weren't, we would never have been in these wars and Bush would
>     not have been re-elected.  Arguably, there would be an influx of anti-war
>     floats in the July 4th parade, protesting the war rather than celebrating
>     wars and the military, patriotic duty to support the troops while they
>     engage in maiming and killing in the name of making the world safe for
>     Democracy and U.S. corporations, among numerous other inane things like
>     capitalism (i.e., the JM Jones and two trucks) rather than merely the birth
>     of the country.  Also arguably, if the public were not idiots, we would not
>     need to even have a float - never mind one that presents them with anti-war
>     heroes and people of courage to stand up against their government's wrong
>     doing. 
> 
>     I am willing to wage that if you polled most of the public on the names that
>     you are proposing, over half would not know who the hell you are talking
>     about and half of those would not get the message even if you conveyed it on
>     the float.  Before you can get their attention to educate them, you have to
>     get their interest and the easiest way is through things that they have some
>     familiarity with. I doubt if many know who the hell Major General Antonio
>     Taguba, USA (Ret.) is or that he was not in support of the administration
>     stand.