Now
Available from
CounterPunch for Only $11.50 (S/H Included)
Today's
Stories
November 11, 2003
Stan Goff
Honoring
Real Vets; Remembering Real War
November 10, 2003
Robert Fisk
Looney
Toons in Rummyworld: How We Denied Democracy to the Middle East
Elaine Cassel
Papa's Gotta Brand New Bag (of Tricks): Patriot Act Spawns Similar
Laws Across Globe
James Brooks
Israel's New War Machine Opens the Abyss
Thom Rutledge
The Lost Gospel of Rummy
Stew Albert
Call Him Al
Gary Leupp
"They
Were All Non-Starters": On the Thwarted Peace Proposals
November 8/9, 2003
Kathleen and Bill Christison
Zionism
as Racist Ideology
Gabriel Kolko
Intelligence
for What?
The Vietnam War Reconsidered
Saul Landau
The
Bride Wore Black: the Policy Nuptials of Boykin and Wolfowitz
Brian Cloughley
Speeding Up to Nowhere: Training the New Iraqi Police
William Blum
The Anti-Empire Report:
A Permanent Occupation?
David Lindorff
A New Kind of Dancing in Iraq: from Occupation to Guerrilla War
Elaine Cassel
Bush's War on Non-Citizens
Tim Wise
Persecuting the Truth: Claims of Christian Victimization Ring
Hollow
Toni Solo
Robert Zoellick and "Wise Blood"
Michael Donnelly
Will the Real Ron Wyden Please Stand Up?
Mark Hand
Building a Vanguard Movement: a Review of Stan Goff's Full Spectrum
Disorder
Norman Solomon
War, Social Justice, Media and Democracy
Norman Madarasz
American Neocons and the Jerusalem Post
Adam Engel
Raising JonBenet
Dave Zirin
An Interview with George Foreman
Poets' Basement
Guthrie, Albert and Greeder
November 7, 2003
Nelson Valdes
Latin
America in Crisis and Cuba's Self-Reliance
David Vest
Surely
It Can't Get Any Worse?
Chris Floyd
An Inspector
Calls: The Kay Report as War Crime Indictment
William S. Lind
Indicators:
Where This War is Headed
Elaine Cassel
FBI to Cryptome: "We Are Watching You"
Maria Tomchick
When Public Transit Gets Privatized
Uri Avnery
Israeli
Roulette
November 6, 2003
Ron Jacobs
With
a Peace Like This...
Conn Hallinan
Rumsfeld's
New Model Army
Maher Arar
This
is What They Did to Me
Elaine Cassel
A Bad
Day for Civil Liberties: the Case of Maher Arar
Neve Gordon
Captives
Behind Sharon's Wall
Ralph Nader and Lee Drutman
An Open Letter to John Ashcroft on Corporate Crime
November 5, 2003
Jeffrey St. Clair
Just
a Match Away:
Fire Sale in So Cal
Dave Lindorff
A Draft in the Forecast?
Robert Jensen
How I Ended Up on the Professor Watch List
Joanne Mariner
Prisons as Mental Institutions
Patrick Cockburn
Saddam Not Organizing Iraqi Resistance
Simon Helweg-Larsen
Centaurs
from Dusk to Dawn: Remilitarization and the Guatemalan Elections
Josh Frank
Silencing "the Reagans"
Website of the Day
Everything You Wanted to Know About Howard Dean But Were Afraid
to Ask
November 4, 2003
Robert Fisk
Smearing
Said and Ashrawi: When Did "Arab" Become a Dirty Word?
Ray McGovern
Chinook Down: It's Beginning to Look a Lot Like Vietnam
Woodruff / Wypijewski
Debating
the New Unity Partnership
Karyn Strickler
When
Opponents of Abortion Dream
Norman Solomon
The
Steady Theft of Our Time
Tariq Ali
Resistance
and Independence in Iraq
November 3, 2003
Patrick Cockburn
The
Bloodiest Day Yet for Americans in Iraq: Report from Fallujah
Dave Lindorff
Philly's
Buggy Election
Janine Pommy Vega
Sarajevo Hands 2003
Bernie Dwyer
An
Interview with Chomsky on Cuba
November 1 / 2,
2003
Saul Landau
Cui
Bono? The Cuba Embargo as Rip Off
Noam Chomsky
Empire of the Men of Best Quality
Bruce Jackson
Midge Decter and the Taxi Driver
Brian Cloughley
"Mow the Whole Place Down"
John Stanton
The Pentagon's Love Affair with Land Mines
William S. Lind
Bush's Bizarre Korean Gambit
Ben Tripp
The Brown Paste on Bush's Shoes
Christopher Brauchli
Divine Hatred
Dave Zirin
An Interview with John Carlos
Agustin Velloso
Oil in Equatorial Guinea: Where Trickle Down Doesn't Trickle
Josh Frank
Howard Dean and Affirmative Action
Ron Jacobs
Standing Up to El Diablo: the 1981 Blockade of Diablo Canyon
Strickler / Hermach
Liar, Liar Forests on Fire
David Vest
Jimmy T99 Nelson, a Blues Legend and the Songs that Made Him
Famous
Adam Engel
America, What It Is
Dr. Susan Block
Christy Canyon, a Life in Porn
Poets' Basement
Greeder, Albert & Guthrie
Congratulations
to CounterPuncher David Vest: Winner of 2 Muddy Awards for Best
Blues Pianist in the Pacific Northwest!
October 31, 2003
Lee Ballinger
Making
a Dollar Out of 15 Cents: The Sweatshops of Sean "P. Diddy"
Combs
Wayne Madsen
The
GOP's Racist Trifecta
Michael Donnelly
Settling for Peanuts: Democrats Trick the Greens, Treat Big Timber
Patrick Cockburn
Baghdad
Diary: Iraqis are Naming Their New Babies "Saddam"
Elaine Cassel
Coming
to a State Near You: The Matrix (Interstate Snoops, Not the Movie)
Linda Heard
An Arab View of Masonry
October 30, 2003
Forrest Hylton
Popular
Insurrection and National Revolution in Bolivia
Eric Ruder
"We Have to Speak Out!": Marching with the Military
Families
Dave Lindorff
Big
Lies and Little Lies: The Meaning of "Mission Accomplished"
Philip Adams
"Everyone is Running Scared": Denigrating Critics of
Israel
Sean Donahue
Howard Dean: a Hawk in a Dove's Cloak
Robert Jensen
Big Houses & Global Justice: A Moral Level of Consumption?
Alexander Cockburn
Paul
Krugman: Part of the Problem
October 29, 2003
Chris Floyd
Thieves
Like Us: Cheney's Backdoor to Halliburton
Robert Fisk
Iraq Guerrillas Adopt a New Strategy: Copy the Americans
Rick Giombetti
Let
Them Eat Prozac: an Interview with David Healy
The Intelligence Squad
Dark
Forces? The Military Steps Up Recruiting of Blacks
Elaine Cassel
Prosecutors
as Therapists, Phantoms as Terrorists
Marie Trigona
Argentina's War on the Unemployed Workers Movement
Gary Leupp
Every
Day, One KIA: On the Iraq War Casualty Figures
October 28, 2003
Rich Gibson
The
Politics of an Inferno: Notes on Hellfire 2003
Uri Avnery
Incident
in Gaza
Diane Christian
Wishing
Death
Robert Fisk
Eyewitness
in Iraq: "They're Getting Better"
Toni Solo
Authentic Americans and John Negroponte
Jason Leopold
Halliburton in Iran
Shrireen Parsons
When T-shirts are Verboten
Chris White
9/11
in Context: a Marine Veteran's Perspective
October 27,
2003
William A. Cook
Ministers
of War: Criminals of the Cloth
David Lindorff
The
Times, Dupes and the Pulitzer
Elaine Cassel
Antonin
Scalia's Contemptus Mundi
Robert Fisk
Occupational Schizophrenia
John Chuckman
Banging Your Head into Walls
Seth Sandronsky
Snoops R Us
Bill Kauffman
George
Bush, the Anti-Family President
October 25 / 26,
2003
Robert Pollin
The
US Economy: Another Path is Possible
Jeffrey St. Clair
Outsourcing US Guided Missile Technology to China
James Bunn
Plotting
Pre-emptive Strikes
Saul Landau
Should Limbaugh Do Time?
Ted Honderich
Palestinian Terrorism, Morality & Germany
Thomas Nagy
Saving the Army of Peace
Christopher Brauchli
Between Bush and a Lobotomy: Killing Endangered Species for Profit
Laura Carlsen
Latin America's Archives of Terror
Diane Christian
Evil Acts & Evil Actors
Muqtedar Khan
Lessons from the Imperial Adventure in Iraq
John Feffer
The Tug of War on the Korea Peninsula
Brian Cloughley
Iraq War Memories are Made of Lies
Benjamin Dangl
and Kathryn Ledebur
An Uneasy Peace in Bolivia
Karyn Strickler
Down
with Big Brother's Spying Eyes
Noah Leavitt
Legal Globalization
John Stanton
Hitler's Ghost Haunts America
Mickey Z.
War of the Words
Adam Engel
Tractatus Ridiculous
Poets' Basement
Curtis, Subiet and Albert
Website of the Weekend
Project Last Stand
October 24, 2003
Kurt Nimmo
Ashcroft's
War on Greenpeace
Lenni Brenner
The Demographics of American Jews
Jeffrey St. Clair
Rockets,
Napalm, Torpedoes and Lies: the Attack on the USS Liberty Revisited
Sarah Weir
Cover-up of the Israeli Attack on the US Liberty
David Krieger
WMD Found in DC: Bush is the Button
Mohammed Hakki
It's Palestine, Stupid!: Americans and the Middle East
Harry Browne
Northern
Ireland: the Agreement that Wasn't
Hot Stories
Alexander Cockburn
Behold,
the Head of a Neo-Con!
Subcomandante Marcos
The
Death Train of the WTO
Norman Finkelstein
Hitchens
as Model Apostate
Steve Niva
Israel's
Assassination Policy: the Trigger for Suicide Bombings?
Dardagan,
Slobodo and Williams
CounterPunch Exclusive:
20,000 Wounded Iraqi Civilians
Steve
J.B.
Prison Bitch
Sheldon
Rampton and John Stauber
True Lies: the Use of Propaganda
in the Iraq War
Wendell
Berry
Small Destructions Add Up
CounterPunch
Wire
WMD: Who Said What When
Cindy
Corrie
A Mother's Day Talk: the Daughter
I Can't Hear From
Gore Vidal
The
Erosion of the American Dream
Francis Boyle
Impeach
Bush: A Draft Resolution
Click Here
for More Stories.
|
Veteran's
Day Edition
November 11, 2003
Bush's Version of
Global Democracy
Hypocrisy
at the Top
By KAM ZARRABI
I have been a fan of Noam Chomsky ever since my
interest in linguistics led me to his groundbreaking contributions
as a professor of linguistics at the Massachusetts Institute
of Technology. But my greatest admiration for him began in earnest
after reading some of his more than seventy publications on socio-political
issues.
Chomsky can best be identified as the
grand champion of political dissent in the United States. His
analytical exposition of America's foreign policies rise above
the usual criticisms of the typical left-wing liberals. Chomsky's
approach is meticulously structured, well reasoned, and supported
by a vast amount of research data, no doubt with the help of
a dedicated volunteer staff. We can summarize Chomsky's principle
issue with the American foreign policies in one word, hypocrisy.
Don't hold your breath until you see
Chomsky on any mass media channels. The commercial network channels
are monopolized by the highly sellable trash, mouthed by the
likes of Bill O'Reilly who is a legend in his own mind, or the
pompous windbag, Rush Limbaugh, and others who cater to mass
mediocrity for the sake of the treasured bottom-line, celebrity
and fortune.
But, what is Chomsky or other intellectuals
of the Left-Liberal mindset trying to accomplish? Addressing
admiring audiences at Harvard, MIT or Cambridge, or writing books
and articles that appeal to the already 'enlightened' is like
selling the merits of altruism to Mother Teresa! In other words,
those who stand to benefit the most from exposure to these ideas
are the least likely to welcome such exposure.
At the same time, knowledge of the facts
does no more than confuse and agitate the minds of the 'ditto'
crowds whose votes count exactly as much as those of the intellectual
and the worldly--this is the essence of democracy, isn't it?
Is democracy in action, then, no more than an illusion, a necessary
illusion, to borrow from one of Chomsky's best-known books of
the same title? If that is in fact the case, isn't hypocrisy
or a system of mind control an effective means of creating first
the mindsets, and then implementing policies of the state that
cater to that mindset?
If the truths were only publicized in
the public domain, many policies of the various administrations,
drummed up to be in the nation's best interest, would not have
received the support of the public at large. But, the disinterested
and the oblivious far outnumber the curious and the skeptic.
This picture has not changed from the time of the great Greek
philosopher, Plato, who also believed that there had to be a
fundamental disconnect between the rulers and the ruled. The
non-elected wise had the quite natural right to plot the course
for the future of civilization, and the masses, the disenfranchised
and the proletariat, had to be led along that path by the advantaged
lot and the bourgeoisie. Neither Prince Machiavelli nor Karl
Marx, or especially the father of the new American neoconservatism,
Leo Strauss, proposed anything fundamentally different.
The ancient Greeks are believed to have
invented the concept of democracy. Athenian democracy worked,
as long as only the male landlords and slave owners had the right
to decide public policy. The Iranian Emperor, Darius, is said
to have pondered on the type of governance for the vast empire
he had just usurped. He wisely determined that the only logical
and workable solution was a benevolent, authoritarian monarchy.
A participatory democracy, even in the limited Athenian version,
Darius argued, would be impractical in a vast empire. Any oligarchy
or feudal system, he thought, would lead inevitably to rivalries
and confrontations, and to the disintegration of the empire.
But, argued a close companion, what if the Emperor proves to
be less than benevolent? Too bad for the nation, Darius had supposedly
responded!
Darius's remarks were truly cutting through
the proverbial crap and calling a spade, a spade. In our modern
democracies, liberal or otherwise, no government can afford to
be that honest. This brings us back to the intellectualism of
Noam Chomsky and his criticism of America's grand hypocrisy.
His arguments fly against what the political philosopher, Leo
Strauss, advocated in his teachings and writings over fifty years
ago, and whose disciples, the neocons, are promoting today. Those
of us who have problems with the foreign policies of the Bush
Administration blame the likes of Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld,
Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Perle, Douglas Feith, and other neoconservative
Hawks, most of them disciples of Leo Strauss, for charting a
path for the nation that, in our opinion, is about as un-American
and antithetical to what this nation constitutionally stands
for, as one could imagine. This is exactly why the term hypocrisy
is so appropriate in this context.
The term hypocrisy applies because the
truths about the agendas, and the means undertaken in achieving
the objectives, have of necessity gone through a transfiguration
process in order to appear attractive and acceptable to the public
mindset. The philosophy behind such modus operandi is embarrassingly
quite simple: A father must use his better judgment to decide
the best course of action for his immature children, as does
a wise leader to guide the masses submerged in the mediocrity
of everyday life? Methods employed in accomplishing this task
in a democracy are different from those in a totalitarian regime.
In a democracy people participate in the decisions of the state
by voicing and voting their opinions, albeit in blissful ignorance.
At dinner at a Persian restaurant recently,
an acquaintance of mine was trying to explain to his wife why
the restaurant had both Persian and Greek foods listed on the
menu. "Greece and Persia used to be one and the same in
the olden days, you know!" He proceeded to explain. "Then
the Shah showed up" he continued, "and changed Persia
to I-Raq." This truly wonderful gentleman, about seventy,
is a Navy veteran with a high school education, has a wonderful
family and a fairly decent lifestyle. He is also quite patriotic,
admires George W. Bush, and votes at every election.
In the small community where I live in
rural San Diego, the town's only newspaper, now nearly thirty
years old, is owned and edited by one man, an older fellow whose
editorial and opinion column is very humbly titled 'The RIGHT
Stuff.' Next to Jesus Christ, this self-declared political pundit
considers "Dubya" (short for George "W."
Bush), as the greatest hope for the salvation of humanity.
When I objected to some of his acrimonious,
even outright stupid, commentaries about Iran and the Middle
East, he gave me his ironclad reason why my opinions didn't matter
to him: His paper was doing well enough, with increasing subscriptions
and advertising revenues; so, he maintained, why fix it when
it ain't broke! This fellow also votes, and so do most of his
readers of similar mindset. In our democracy each of their individual
votes count exactly as much as does Mr. Chomsky's!
Noam Chomsky objects to the rampant hypocrisy
that has characterized America's foreign policies in every region
of the globe. He goes as far as to accuse America of almost every
crime against humanity that America has been accusing others
of committing. His criticisms are so bitter, sharp, and profoundly
reasoned, that his audiences are basically limited to academic
centers or the liberal intelligentsia. Most of what he says,
although in a mellow and measured tone, would offend the average
listener who'd rather be watching a mindless sitcom or sports
program anyway. So, what would Professor Chomsky like to see
happen to improve our system to where the votes of a well-informed
or enlightened majority would be instrumental in determining
vital policies? Or, what would Mr. Chomsky propose that might
alleviate the Administration's propensity or even need for resorting
to public deception or hypocrisy in dealing with foreign policy
issues? A better question is, Why would he want to?
The President, in his latest speech on
Thursday, November 7, stated that there was going to be a change
in America's foreign policies; no longer would America be supporting
autocracies that do not partake in the principles of freedom
and democracy. The main theme of his speech was an expression
of America's moral objectives of promoting the ideals of freedom
and democracy throughout the Middle East. This, of course, sounds
just wonderful, and the American people must undoubtedly feel
proud of the high moral ideals of their leader. But such moral
pronouncements are nothing new. Didn't former President Jimmy
Carter, in his state visit to Tehran during Christmas 1977, praise
the Shah for his friendship and leadership, and call Iran the
seat of stability and positive reforms in the region? This was
only months before all hell broke loose in that seat of stability,
and that same symbol of friendship and good leadership was not
even admitted to the United States for medical treatment! Was
Jimmy Carter hypocritical, or was he simply ignorant?
What makes George W. Bush's grand gestures
of political altruism different from his predecessors' hypocritical
statements? There are some who honestly believe that this President
truly means what he says; but does he really understand the ramifications
of his bold and cavalier statements, such as the foot-in-mouth
thing about the Axis of Evil? Does he really think that the invasion
of Iraq, the quagmire of Afghanistan, blind support for Israel,
and allowing Israeli interests to dictate America's Middle East
policies, are all to promote democracy, peace and prosperity
in the region? Reverend Franklin Graham, the illustrious son
of old Billy, the visionary Evangelist who called Islam a religion
of terrorism, is also of the opinion that the road to salvation
for the Islamic Middle East is for all Moslems to become born
again in Christ. There is no doubt as to this man's sincerity,
blind faith and devotion to a horribly distorted version of Christianity.
But, one cannot accuse this fellow of deliberate mischief or
malevolence; young Franklin is, to put it quite frankly, genuinely
ignorant!
Franklin Graham and other bigots like
him are not hypocrites; they truly mean what they say. Hypocrites
are those who know fully well that what they preach is intended
as the means of achieving what is antithetical to what is preached.
This is what Noam Chomsky has spent his adult life to flush out.
He would never waste his time commenting on what the likes of
Par Robertson, Jerry Falwell, Franklin Graham, or my dinner partner
at that Persian restaurant, have to say about world affairs.
In his criticism of America's foreign policies, Chomsky seldom
pointedly attacks the President's statements as hypocritical.
Perhaps it is because he does not think that they are. Instead,
he points his accusing finger at the Administration and its strategists,
all the way down to the Congress. When questioned as to whom
he would hold ultimately responsible for this trend, he points
back at the questioners for their complacency, those who do have
the savvy to understand such issues, or wouldn't be there listening
to his lecture instead of watching TV.
Every free and open society needs a Chomsky
or two to flush out and challenge ruthless dictatorships, runaway
autocracies, and hypocritical democracies. But, even in this
Land of the Free and Home of the Brave, how far and how wide
does Chomsky's voice reach before it vanishes in the firestorm
of mediocrity fanned by the opportunistic media entrepreneurs
or close-minded fanatics?
There is a lot philosophically wrong
with Leo Strauss' ideas of governance; but there is an aspect
of practicality or no-nonsense pragmatism in his thoughts that
can hardly be denied. The most influential proponents of the
Straussian philosophy, his true disciples, can be found at the
Washington think tank, Project for the New American Century.
Their statement of objectives, influencing the opinions reflected
in the publication, The Weekly Standard, can be summarized sequentially
and syllogistically as follows: There is a vacuum of power and
leadership in the world. America is the sole superpower capable
of filling this vacuum. America is logically entitled, and morally
obligated, to assume the role of global leadership. America's
moral and ethical values are universal, applicable to all humanity.
What is good for America is, by definition, good for mankind.
Those who object to or resist America's leadership role must
be overcome by force if necessary.
What the old Greek philosopher, Plato,
implied as the rule by the wise in the small world of his times,
was espoused and amplified by Leo Strauss as applicable to the
complex world of today. If the Platonic ideals of hyper-elitism
was intended to address the issue of governance in a city or
island state, the modern disciples of Strauss, our neocon gang,
have already allocated the twenty first century world to their
vision of an American Empire.
The blueprint created by this gang of
the wise came out of the drawing room with the election of the
religious-conservative George W. Bush as President, and launched
into action right after September 11, 2001.
Professor Chomsky stands for honesty
and integrity in all aspects of government and public policy.
He wants to expose deception and hypocrisy so that the American
public may gain the true perspective of world events and America's
response to these events. Just picture this: After the disaster
of 9/11, the President appears on national television, standing
amidst the rubble in Manhattan, addressing the frightened, angry,
and anxious crowds. What kind of truths is the President, himself
a neophyte in world affairs, privy to or find satisfactory to
express on such an occasion? What about the plain truth? Could
the President, even if he knew the facts, have admitted to decades
of misguided policies in the Middle East that finally brought
the fury of anger and frustration back to our own shores? How
would his speech on such a somber occasion have been received
if he had admitted that our support for dictators and tyrants
in that region to buy their allegiance, or our preferential treatment
for the Zionist state because of the political influence of its
lobby, finally exploded in our face? How would the public have
reacted to those truths?
Instead, he said what he personally believed:
With the sincerity of a non-actor, he declared that the terrorists'
motive was their disdain for freedom, democracy, and our way
of life. He said that they hated America because of our moral
values, our sense of fairness, justice and liberty, etc., etc.
He finished by promising to smoke them out and bring them to
justice, those who were the perpetrators of this act of terrorism,
and those who harbor and support them. He said all the right
things, and the nation rested in anticipation of the Messianic
victory of good over evil.
Was the President being deceitful or
hypocritical? Hardly! He had stated his position based on the
information provided to him by his very capable staff. This same
capable staff, under the guidance of the wise, has been guiding
us along in the pursuit of the terrorists, their hideouts and
their supporters. We have thus far re-destroyed Afghanistan and
'liberated' them further back into the Stone Age they were already
in; we have invaded and created for ourselves a new quagmire
in Iraq, are threatening Syria, and are about to make a potentially
disastrous mistake in dealing with Iran. The Afghanistan that
we bombed to dust and are still involved in had nothing to do
with perpetrators of the 9/11 episode; Saddam Hussein's Iraq
never threatened the United States and did not have those dreaded
weapons of mass destruction; and Iran and Syria we are threatening
now are simply annoyances for Israel, not us. We are losing friends
and creating enemies at an unprecedented pace.
In spite of all this, not only does George
W. Bush have a good chance of being reelected for a second term
next year, his opposition, the Democrats, although obviously
in disagreement with his domestic policies and certain aspects
of his strategies in his war against terrorism, are generally
espousing the same lies and hypocrisies regarding the core issues
of our foreign policies. How could a Democratic Party challenger
stand a chance for election by turning against the prevailing
public sentiments, as misguided and wrong as they might be? Would
any candidate dare shun or alienate the Israeli lobby in a political
atmosphere where money and publicity make or break a candidate's
chances?
How did all this come about, where the
greatest democracy in human history survives by yielding to a
system of mind control and deception, where the public remains
in a state of euphoric oblivion, busy with the fluctuations in
the stock market, weight-loss diets, and credit-card miles? What
does Noam Chomsky propose to do about that?
How did this gang of the wise manage
to get itself into such position of power and authority? What
motivates Richard Perle, Paul Wolfowitz or Douglas Feith, all
State Department or Pentagon strategists, to relentlessly push
the Administration toward a confrontation against Iran? Are they
really concerned about the safety and security of the United
States? Is it just a coincidence that they, and a great majority
of others of the same mindset, enjoy close ties with various
Israeli interests and organizations?
Even if we were to accept the hard fact
of life that, in the final analysis, it is the wise that must
chart the course, and it is the hero, the patriot, the brave
and the entrepreneur that then shall lead the masses along the
charted course, the question becomes, Who are the wise and how
do they achieve such positions? Clearly, they cannot be democratically
elected, as the whole concept would be an oxymoron. Are the wise
chosen from among their own peers as are the Popes in Catholicism;
do they assume this righteous title after usurping power through
their superior cunning, intellect or diplomatic maneuvering,
as did Darius of Persia and practically every other national
leader ever since; or do they simply rise to eminence as though
divinely ordained, as do Grand Ayatollahs, to become unchallenged
sources of jurisprudence?
Historically, no successful rule, from
small states to huge empires, those that have lasted longer than
the lifespan of the ruler, have ever been liberal democracies,
practicing democratic egalitarian principles within their own
borders, and promoting the same ideals abroad. The strength and
prosperity of successful empires have always depended upon preserving
or 'conserving' the empire's economic superiority and strategic
advantage over rival states. Is it any surprise that it is almost
always the conservative ranks that comprise the flag-wavers and
chest-thumpers, the self-declared 'real' patriots?
Now we hear that the wise are officially
promoting reforms toward freedom and democracy throughout the
Middle East. How could such aspirations not sit well with all
Middle Easterners with a history of repression under totalitarian
rules? But one can only be skeptical because of historical reasons.
One can be suspicious of the motives behind these altruistic
gestures because, implying that what is happening in Afghanistan
or Iraq is leading to democratic reforms is as hypocritical as
calling Iran the biggest threat to the peace and security of
the world, while the world regards Israel, America's own so-called
friend and ally, to be exactly that.
And, why would we really want to jeopardize
our control over the lifeline of the industrialized world, oil
resources of Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, and now Iraq, by promoting
democratic reforms in those states, reforms that, by their very
nature, might lead to our former serfs deciding to take the reigns
in their own hands?
Isn't it more logical to think that such
grand altruistic gestures, doubtless masterminded by the wise,
are intended to cause greater agitation and instability in the
region, while trying to justify and moralize our activities in
that area and, at the same time, convince the American taxpayers
of the Administration's humanitarian mission in the Middle East
in the course of war against terrorism? Not bad; killing three
birds with one stone!
Finally, how many leftwing liberals and
champions of human rights and fair play do we know who'd be willing
to jeopardize their inordinately high standard of living they
have come to regard as their birthright, through a less hypocritical
approach to our foreign policies? We criticize the hypocrites,
but enjoy the fruits of their methods nonetheless. We are still
paying less for a gallon of gasoline at the pump that we do for
four quarts of drinking water--and we are complaining! Now, that's
hyper-hypocrisy!
Kam Zarrabi is
a writer, Lecturer, former President of World Affairs Council
of San Diego, North County. This article originally appeared
in Payvand.
Weekend
Edition Features for Nov. 8 / 9, 2003
Kathleen and Bill Christison
Zionism
as Racist Ideology
Gabriel Kolko
Intelligence
for What?
The Vietnam War Reconsidered
Saul Landau
The
Bride Wore Black: the Policy Nuptials of Boykin and Wolfowitz
Brian Cloughley
Speeding Up to Nowhere: Training the New Iraqi Police
William Blum
The Anti-Empire Report:
A Permanent Occupation?
David Lindorff
A New Kind of Dancing in Iraq: from Occupation to Guerrilla War
Elaine Cassel
Bush's War on Non-Citizens
Tim Wise
Persecuting the Truth: Claims of Christian Victimization Ring
Hollow
Toni Solo
Robert Zoellick and "Wise Blood"
Michael Donnelly
Will the Real Ron Wyden Please Stand Up?
Mark Hand
Building a Vanguard Movement: a Review of Stan Goff's Full Spectrum
Disorder
Norman Solomon
War, Social Justice, Media and Democracy
Norman Madarasz
American Neocons and the Jerusalem Post
Adam Engel
Raising JonBenet
Dave Zirin
An Interview with George Foreman
Poets' Basement
Guthrie, Albert and Greeder
Keep CounterPunch
Alive:
Make
a Tax-Deductible Donation Today Online!
home / subscribe
/ about us / books
/ archives / search
/ links /
|