[Peace-discuss] The estimable wm. Blum report
Brussel Morton K.
mkbrussel at comcast.net
Sun Mar 30 13:44:59 CDT 2008
The Anti-Empire Report
Read this or George W. Bush will be president the rest of your life
March 29, 2008
by William Blum
www.killinghope.org
"The makers of aspirin wish you had a headache right now," says the
graffiti.
Propaganda as an Olympic competition
The latest protests in Tibet and crackdown by Chinese authorities
have brought up the usual sermonizing in the West about Chinese
government oppression and illegitimate control of the Tibetans.
Although I have little love for the Chinese leaders -- I think they
run a cruel system -- some proper historical perspective is called
for here.
Many Tibetans regard themselves as autonomous or independent, but the
fact remains that the Beijing government has claimed Tibet as part of
China for more than two centuries. The United States made its
position clear in 1943:
The Government of the United States has borne in mind the fact
that the Chinese Government has long claimed suzerainty over Tibet
and that the Chinese constitution lists Tibet among areas
constituting the territory of the Republic of China. This Government
has at no time raised a question regarding either of these claims.[1]
After the communist revolution in 1949 US officials tended to be more
equivocal about the matter.
Even as the Chinese were attacking Tibetan protestors, New York City
Police were beating up and literally threatening to kill "Free Tibet"
protestors in front of the United Nations. It's all on video.[2]
The Washington Post recently ran a story about how the Chinese people
largely support the government suppression of the Tibetan protesters.
The heading was: "Beijing's Crackdown Gets Strong Domestic Support.
Ethnic Pride Stoked by Government Propaganda." The article spoke of
how Beijing officials have "educated" the public about Tibet "through
propaganda".[3] That's a rather interesting concept. Imagine the
Post or any other American mainstream media saying that those
Americans who support the war in Iraq do so because they've been
educated by government propaganda. ... Ditto those who support the
war in Afghanistan. ... Ditto those who supported the bombing of
Yugoslavia. ... Ditto scores of other US invasions, bombings,
overthrows, and miscellaneous war crimes spanning more than half a
century.
Now Germany's foreign minister has warned China that its response to
the crisis in Tibet may jeopardize the Summer Olympics in Beijing.
"The German federal government is saying to the Chinese government:
be transparent! We want to know exactly what is going on in Tibet."
He also warned China to avoid any violent measures in its standoff
with Tibetan protesters.[4] Human rights organizations have demanded
that Coca-Cola, Visa, General Electric, and other international
companies explain their dealings with the Chinese government as it
prepares to host the Summer Games. The French Foreign Minister
floated the prospect of boycotting the Games' opening ceremony
because of China's response to the protests. And the president of the
European Parliament said European countries should not rule out
threatening China with a boycott if violence continued in Tibet.[5]
It's nice to see the West's conscience stirred up. They're real good
about such things, when the target is not one of their own,
particularly against a communist country. In 1980, 62 nations --
including the United States, Canada, West Germany, Japan, and Israel
-- boycotted the Olympics in Moscow because the previous year the
Soviet Union had invaded Afghanistan. Four years later, the Olympics
were held in Los Angeles. Not a single member of "The Free World"
boycotted it, even though the previous year the United States had
invaded Grenada and overthrown the government, with a lot less
political justification than the Russians had for invading
Afghanistan. The Grenada invasion was as much lacking in legality and
morality as the invasion of Iraq in 2003.
The Soviet Union and 13 of its allies stayed away from the Los
Angeles Olympics, but when the Russians announced the boycott they
cited only security concerns. President Reagan had declared at the
time of the invasion that Grenada was "a Soviet-Cuban colony being
readied as a major military bastion to export terror and undermine
democracy, but we got there just in time."[6] One would think that
Moscow would have mentioned Grenada at least for the satisfaction of
throwing Afghanistan and the 1980 boycott in Washington's face. The
fact that the Russians made no such mention was a measure of how
unconcerned they were about the tiny island nation and its alleged
future as a major Soviet military bastion. The magnitude and variety
of Reagan administration lies that accompanied the invasion of
Grenada may have stood as a record until the Bush administration
topped it in Iraq 20 years later.[7]
"In politics, as on the sickbed, people toss from one side to the
other, thinking they will be more
comfortable." Johann Wolfgang von Goethe
A recurring theme of Hillary Clinton's campaign for the presidency
has been that she has more of the right kind of experience needed to
deal with national security and foreign policy issues than Barack
Obama. The latest play on this is her advertisement telling you: It's
three a.m. and your children are safe and asleep; but there's a phone
in the White House and it's ringing; something really bad is
happening somewhere; and voters are asked who they want answering the
phone. Of course they should want Hillary and her marvelous
experience. (If she's actually explained what that marvelous
experience is, I missed it. Perhaps her near-death experience in
Bosnia?)
Typical of Clinton's growing corps of conservative followers, the
Washington Times recently lent support to this theme. The right-wing
newspaper interviewed a group of "mostly conservative retired
[military] officers, industry executives and current defense
officials", who cite Mr. Obama's lack of experience in national
security.[8]
And so it goes. And so it has gone for many years. What is it with
this experience thing for public office? It was not invented by
Hillary Clinton. If I need to have my car repaired I look for a
mechanic with experience with my particular car. If I needed an
operation I'd seek out a surgeon with lots of experience performing
that particular operation. But when it comes to choosing a person for
political office, the sine qua non consideration is what their
politics are. Who would you choose between two candidates -- one who
was strongly against everything you passionately supported but who
had decades of holding high government positions, or one who shared
your passion on every important issue but had never held any public
office? Is there any doubt about which person almost everyone would
go for? So why does this "experience" thing keep coming up in so many
elections?
A recent national poll questioned registered voters about the
candidates' "approach to foreign policy and national security". 43%
thought that Obama would be "not tough enough" (probably a reflection
of the "experience" factor), while only 3% thought he'd be "too
tough". For Clinton the figures were 37% and 9%.[9] The evidence is
overwhelming that decades of very tough -- nay, brutal -- US policies
toward the Middle East has provoked extensive anti-American
terrorism; the same in Latin America in earlier decades,[10] yet this
remains an alien concept to most American voters, who think that
toughness works (even though they know it doesn't work on Americans
-- witness the reaction to 9/11).
John McCain, who is proud to have dropped countless bombs on the
people of Vietnam, who had never done him or his country any harm
until he and his country invaded them, who now (literally) sings in
public about bombing the people of Iran, and who tells us he's
prepared to remain in Iraq for 100 years, is still regarded as "not
tough enough" by 16% and "too tough" by only 25%. What does it take
to convince Americans that one of their leaders is a bloody
psychopath? Like the two psychos he may replace. How has 225 years of
our grand experiment in democracy wound up like this? And why is
McCain regularly referred to as a "war hero"? He was shot down and
captured and held prisoner for more than five years. What's heroic
about that? In most other kinds of work, such a record would be
called a failure.
Winston Churchill said that "The best argument against democracy is a
five-minute conversation with the average voter." And if that doesn't
do it for you, try a five-minute conversation with almost any
American politician. This thing called democracy continues to be used
as a substitute for human liberation.
One parting thought about Obama: Is he prepared to distance himself
from Rev. Martin Luther King as he has from his own minister, Rev.
Jeremiah Wright? King vehemently denounced the Vietnam War and called
the United States "the most violent nation in the world". Like
Wright, he was strongly condemned for his remarks. As T.S. Eliot
famously observed: "Humankind can not bear very much reality."
Do Americans live in a democracy or in an economy?
The Dow Jones industrial average of blue-chip stocks:
On March 19 it increased 420 points
On March 20 it went down 293 points
On March 21 it increased 261 points
Do the economic fundamentals change dramatically overnight? Or is our
economic system as psycho as John McCain?
The US economy is teetering on the edge of recession because for a
long time banks and others were selling mortgages at subprime rates
to people who were bad credit risks. They sold them the mortgages
anyhow because they knew they could combine these questionable
mortgages into bundles and sell them to financial speculators higher
up on the food chain. The higher speculators in turn sold bundles of
various debt instruments to other speculators. The supposedly
objective credit rating agencies told everyone that these firms and
their bundles were good investments, but the credit rating agencies
in fact had played a role themselves in putting some of the bundles
together. This convoluted system created such complex and
deliberately opaque financial vehicles -- all devised to make someone
a buck every time they swapped some paper -- that they long ago had
lost track of the papers' true value. We had a financial system
terminally choked with worthless paper "instruments". A genuine house
of cards. It fell.
We go from the dot-com bubble to the stock market bubble to the Enron
bubble to the housing bubble to the credit
bubble ... capitalist growth increasingly being driven by speculative
bubbles, which invariably burst, and with each burst many thousands
lose jobs, and, currently, their homes.
Can anyone say with any kind of precision how the price of gasoline
at the pump is arrived at each day? And exactly what the relationship
is, if any, between that price and the price of oil on the mercantile
exchanges which are regularly announced as the "official" price of a
barrel of oil? And why the speculators who spend their days playing
buy-and-sell games at these exchanges -- while having no actual
personal contact with barrels of oil -- should have such a profound
effect upon our daily lives? And why gasoline is priced at $3.40.9
per gallon? Or $3.24.9 per gallon? That's 9/10 of a penny.
And while we're at it ... Why is almost everything in American
society priced at amounts like $9.99, $99.99, or $999.99? Or $3.29 or
$17.98?
"If all economists were laid end to end, they would not reach a
conclusion." -- George Bernard Shaw
Marketing is about creating emotional, even irrational bonds between
your product and your target audience. There was a time when
capitalism strove, much more than now, to meet the real needs of
people. Now its forte is creating artificial needs with advertising
and filling them, like bottled water. And how do they get away with
it? Because you'll believe anything. Even that bottled water is purer
than tap water.
"It is difficult to produce a television documentary that is both
incisive and probing when every twelve minutes one is interrupted by
twelve dancing rabbits singing about toilet paper." -- Rod Serling,
famed TV writer
"Get off this estate."
"What for?"
"Because it's mine."
"Where did you get it?"
"From my father."
"Where did he get it?"
"From his father."
"And where did he get it?"
"He fought for it."
"Well, I'll fight you for it."
-- Carl Sandburg
Can it be imagined that an American president would openly implore
America's young people to fight a foreign war to defend
"capitalism"? The word itself has largely gone out of fashion. The
approved reference now is to the market economy, free market, free
enterprise, or private enterprise. This change in terminology
endeavors to obscure the role of wealth in the economic and social
system. Simply naming the system, after all, might imply that there
are others. And avoiding the word "capitalism" sheds the adverse
connotation going back to Karl Marx.
At some unrecorded moment a few years ago, the egg companies of
America changed their package labels from small, medium and large to
medium, large and jumbo. The eggs remained the same size.
"The Federal Trade Commission concluded that there is very little
connection between what drug companies charge for a drug and the
costs directly associated with it."[11]
"The makers of aspirin wish you had a headache right now," says the
graffiti.
Slavery is the legal fiction that a person is property and corporate
personhood is the legal fiction that property is a person.
"The private-benefit corporation is an institution granted a legally
protected right -- some would claim obligation -- to pursue a narrow
private interest without regard to broader social and environmental
consequences. If it were a real person, it would fit the clinical
profile of a sociopath." -- David Korten
Ralph Nader once charged the Justice Department anti-trust division
with going out of business without telling anyone.
Capitalism as practiced in the United States is like chemotherapy: it
may kill the cancer cells of consumer shortages, but the side effects
are devastating.
Many workers are paid a wage sufficient to allow them to keep on
living, even if it's not a living wage. Here's a radical solution to
poverty -- pay people enough to live on.
"The paradox is that, three centuries after America's colonial
beginnings, wealth and income are more unequally distributed in the
'New World' than in most of the nations of Europe."[12]
How many Americans realize that they have a much longer work week,
much shorter vacations, much shorter unemployment coverage, much
worse maternity leave and other employee benefits, and much worse
medical coverage than their West European counterparts?
Expressing elementary truths about the oppression of the poor by the
rich in the United States runs the risk of being accused of
"advocating class warfare"; because the trick of class war is to not
let the victims know the war is being waged.
What do the CEOs do all day that they should earn a thousand times
more than schoolteachers, nurses, firefighters, street cleaners, and
social workers? Re-read some medieval history, about feudal lords and
serfs.
The campaigns of the anti-regulationists imply that pure food and
drugs will be ours as soon as we abolish the pure food and drug laws.
"American Airlines, Delta Air Lines, US Airways and Continental
Airlines raised round trip fares $10 on most domestic flights to take
advantage of strong demand"[13] -- a news item from late 2006;
similar items can be found before and since. Is that not odd? Raising
prices because of strong demand? Raising prices even though they're
already making more money as a result of the increased demand? So the
more someone wants something, or the more they need it, the more they
have to pay. Yes, it's the good ol' law of supply and demand.
Economics 101. You have a problem with that? You should. What takes
place in the world of economics is 60% power/politics/ideology, 30%
psychological, 10% immutable laws. (These percentages are immutable.)
The more you care about others, the more you're at a disadvantage
competing in the capitalist system.
To say that 1% of the population owns 35% of the resources and
wealth, is deceptive. If you own 35% you can control much more than
that.
How could the current distribution of property and wealth have
emerged from any sort of democratic process?
The myth and mystique of "choice" persuades us to endorse the
privatization of almost every sphere of activity.
A study of 17,595 federal government jobs by the Office of Management
and Budget concluded that civil servants could do their work better
and more cheaply than private contractors nearly 90 percent of the
time in job competitions.[14]
Communist governments take over companies. Under capitalism, the
companies take over the government.
The American oligarchy has less in common with the American people
than it does with the oligarchies in Japan and France.
If you lose money gambling, you can't take a tax deduction. But you
can if you lose on the glorified slot machine known as the stock
market; your loss is thus subsidized by taxpayers.
If the system should cater to selfishness because it's "natural", why
not cater to aggression which many people claim is also natural.
Do the members of a family relate to each other on the basis of self-
interest and greed?
"The idea that egotism is the basis of the general welfare is the
principle on which competitive society has been built." -- Erich
Fromm, German-American social psychologist,
Capitalism is the theory that the worst people, acting from their
worst motives, will somehow produce the most good.
"The twentieth century has been characterized by three developments
of great political importance: the growth of democracy; the growth of
corporate power; and the growth of corporate propaganda as a means of
protecting corporate power against democracy." -- Alex Carey,
Australian social scientist
And this, dear friends, is the system the American Empire is
determined to impose upon the entire known world.
"The country needs to be born again, she is polluted with the
lust of power, the lust of gain." -- Margaret Fuller, literary
critic, New York Tribune, July 4, 1845
"When plunder becomes a way of life for a group of men living
in society, they create for themselves, in the course of time, a
legal system that authorizes it and a moral code that glorifies it."
-- Frederic Bastiat, "The Law" (1850)
An ode to five years of heartless destruction of a five thousand year
civilization
"Letters My President Is Not Sending" by Naomi Shihab Nye.
Dear Rafik, Sorry about that soccer game you won't be attending since
you now have no ...
Dear Fawziya, You know, I have a mom too so I can imagine what you ...
Dear Shadiya, Think about your father versus democracy, I'll bet
you'd pick ...
No, no, Sami, that's not true what you said at the rally that our
country hates you, we really support your move toward freedom, that's
why you no longer have a house or a family or a village.
Dear Hassan, If only you could see the bigger picture ...[15]
"Building a new world" conference
May 22-25, Radford University, Radford, Virginia, 5-hour drive from
Washington, DC.
Cindy Sheehan, Kathy Kelly, Michael Parenti, David Swanson, Gareth
Porter, William Blum, Medea Benjamin, Gary Corseri, and others.
Inexpensive room and board available. Full details at: http://
www.wpaconference.org/
NOTES
[1] "Foreign Relations of the United States, 1943, China", Department
of State, 1957, p.630
[2] http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article19611.htm
[3] Washington Post, March 17, 2008, p.12
[4] Associated Press, March 21, 2008
[5] Washington Post, March 22 and 23, 2008
[6] New York Times, October 27, 1983
[7] William Blum, "Killing Hope", chapter 45
[8] Washington Times, February 26, 2008
[9] Pew Research Center for the People and the Press (Washington),
February 28, 2008
[10 William Blum, "Rogue State", chapter one re Middle East and Latin
America
[11] Washington Post, August 3, 2005, p.D1-2, column by Steven
Pearlstein
[12] Wallace Peterson, "Silent Depression: The fate of the American
Dream" (1994)
[13] Washington Post, November 4, 2006, p.D2
[14] Washington Post, May 26, 2004, p.A25
[15] Washington Post, March 22, 2008, p.1; the poet lives in San
Antonio, Texas
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.chambana.net/mailman/archive/peace-discuss/attachments/20080330/a1dd089a/attachment.html
More information about the Peace-discuss
mailing list