Coming
in August!
Dime's
Worth of Difference: Beyond the Lesser of Two Evils
Order Now!
Today's
Stories
July 31, 2004
Alexander Cockburn
Kerry:
He's the (Any) One
July 30, 2004
Kolhatkar /
Ingalls
Shattering
Illusions: Kerry's Speech Tells Anti-War Activists They're Not
Wanted
Dave Lindorff
Murder
Not So Foul?
Bruce Jackson
Walt Whitman on the Sound of Wolf Blitzer's Voice
Fidel Castro
The
Pathology of George W. Bush
Maximilien Robespierre
Memo to Kerry and Bush: Why They Resist
Saul Landau
Bush
Charges Castro with Sex Tourism; JFK Rolls Over in His Grave
Sex, Drugs & the Blues!
Serpents in the Garden
CounterPunch's
Sizzling New Book on Culture and Sex is Now Available
Click here to purchase
July 29, 2004
Cockburn /
St. Clair
Hail,
the Conquering War Criminal: What Kerry Really Did in Vietnam
Frank Bardacke
What
Michael Moore Left Out of F9/11
Tom Barry
Shallow and Formulaic: Kerry's Latin America Plan
Ron Jacobs
Kerry
and Lennon: Hawking the CounterCulture
Robert Fisk
The Unreported War
Lichtman /
Kellis-Borok
What Kerry Must Do to Win (But Probably Won't)
William S. Lind
The 9/11 Commission Report: Cashing in on Failure
CounterPunch
Wire
Doonesbury Onto John Kerry in 1971!
Website of
the Day
Jabbing JibJab: Copyright Madness
July 28, 2004
Robert Fisk
The
Occupation at 114 Degrees: Baghdad is Swamped in the Smell of
the Dead
Kevin Mink
Kerry's Misperception of Palestine
Ray McGovern
Israel and the Iraq War: How the 9/11 Report Soft-Pedals Root
Causes
United for
Peace & Justice
An
Open Letter to John Kerry: Winter Soldiers and Summer Patriots
Mike Ferner
Vets Demand End to Occupation: "Pull the Troops or Face
Impeachment Mvt."
Imraan Siddiqi
Turning Tricks with Ann Coulter
Alexander Cockburn
Candidate
Kerry
Website of
the Day
Iraq Vets Against the War
July 27, 2004
Alexander Cockburn
Why
the Democrats Deserve Nader
Dave Lindorff
Back to the 19th Century: Globalization's Coming!
Mike Whitney
Control Room: Inside Al Jazeera
Ali, Anderson, Bello, et al.
If We Were Venezuelan, We'd Vote for Chavez
Stefan Wray
Texas Plan to Grab Los Alamos Takes Hold, as DOE Shuts Down Labs
Louis Proyect
Reflections on Nicaragua: First Came the Contra Butchers, Then
the Sweatshops
Rick Giombetti
Faith in Freedom: the Challenge of Thomas Szasz
Bill and Kathleen
Christison
The
9/11 Report and Its Weak-Kneed Consensus: Dogding Israel/Palestine;
Blinkered on Causes of Terrorism
July 26, 2004
Todd Chretien
Green
Resistance: a Reply to Normon Solomon & Medea Benjamin
Robert Fisk
Terror
by Video
Richard Forno
Security
Theater in Boston: Security Expert Harrassed by DHS for Exposing
Flaws at the Fleet Center
Mitchel Cohen
Report from a Boston Demo: Arresting the Curious
Richard Moreno
Rockers
for Justice: an Interview with Tom Morello and Serj Tankian
Alexander Cockburn
Boston
Awaits a Dead Party
July
24 / 25, 2004
Alexander
Cockburn
The Democrats and Their Conventions:
Part One
Dennis
Hans
Those 16 Words Still Smell, Mr. Bush
Patrick
Cockburn
The Struggle for Iraq is Only Beginning
Josh
Frank
The War Path of Unity: Dems Reject
the Peace Movement
Justin
E.H. Smith
Christianity and the Left: the Latin
American Experience
Tariq
Ali
What's at Stake in Venezuela
Fred
Gardner
The Politics of Pot: Year of the
Antagonist
Mark
Scaramella
There's Dope and There's Dope
Ron
Jacobs
The Weather Underground's Prairie
Fire Statement...35 Years On
July
23, 2004
Lee
Sustar
Revolution in Nicaragua: 25 Years
On
Dave
Lindorff
Battle for NYC: Bush 1, Protesters
0
Saul
Landau
Zaniest President in US History: Bush
Beats Reagan
Mike
Whitney
The 9/11 Whitewash: Blaming No
One
Mickey
Z
Get On the Bus: 150 Years After Elizabeth
Jennings
Gary
Leupp
The 9/11 Commission and the Looming
War on Iran
July
22, 2004
M.
Junaid Alam
Ten Ways to Build a Better Democrat
Brian
McKinlay
Rusted On Down Under: Howard, Bush and Sharon
Jason
Leopold
Cheney Lobbied for Easing of Sanctions on Terrorist Regimes While
CEO of Halliburton
Chris
Floyd
Mob Rule: Ripping the Lid Off of America's Pious Myths
Uri
Avnery
Chirac v. Sharon
July
21, 2004
Paula
J. Caplan
The Emotional Casualities of War:
Psychologists Can't Heal All the Damage
Joshua
Frank
Nader Sleeping with the Enemy? Let's
be Fair
Ron
Jacobs
American Exceptionalism
Reza
Ghorashi
The Elections, Iran and al-Qaeda
Amy
Martin
Will Congress Rearm the Guatemalan Generals?
John
Ross
Bush May Lose, But His Wars Will Go
On and On
July
20, 2004
Stan
Cox
The Bush / Kerry War Ticket
Chris
Randolph
An Open Letter to Dr. Ehrenreich: It's Over, Barb!
Forrest
Hylton
The Ghosts of Gonismo: "Popular
Patricipation" and Bolivia's Gas Referendum
Mark
Scaramella
It's Official! Mendocino County is Crazier and Fatter Than the
Rest of California
Sam
Bahour
The World is Knocking on Israel's Door
George
Reiter
A Defense of David Cobb
John
Ross
Burying Iraq, Burying Bush
John
L. Hess
Girlie Stuff: Media Tolerance of Arnold & Co.
Website
of the Day
This Land is Your Land
July
19, 2004
Uri
Avnery
Marie and the Ghosts: the Hoax of
Paris
Col.
Dan Smith
What Has Been Accomplished?
Mike
Whitney
Allawi: Our Puppet with a Pistol
Karyn
Strickler
Just Marriage, Not Gay Marriage
Robert
Fisk
The Crisis of Information in Baghdad
David
Swanson
Media Blackout of US Labor Opposition
to Iraq War
Jennifer
van Bergen
The Death of the Great Writ of Liberty
July
17 / 18, 2004
Gary
Leupp
Apocalypse Now: Why the Book of Revelations
is Must Reading
Ghada
Karmi
Vanishing the Palestinians
Lenni
Brenner
When Cattle Unite, Lions Go Hungry: Notes for Ralph Nader
Ben
Tripp
Man on a Bridge: a Ghost Story
Brandy
Baker
What Would Elizabeth Cady Stanton Make of John Kerry?
M.
Shahid Alam
Israel Builds Another Wall
Sasan
Fayazmanesh
Nuclear Hypocrisy: Israel, Iran and the IAEA
Patrick
Bond
The George Bush of Africa
Fred
Gardner
Politics of Marijuana: Cannabiniod Therapuetics
William
Blum
Bush and Thucydides
Ben
Terrall
Carter and the Indonesia Elections: "I Don't See Anything
Wrong with a General Running the Country"
Tom
Barry
John Lehman on the War Path
David
Vest
Dylan Without the Music
Phyllis
Pollack
Return to Sin City: Keith Richards Does Gram Parsons
Ron
Jacobs
Smearing Muhammad Ali: Bob Feller Strikes Out
Joshua
Frank
Kerry to Edwards: "Let's Lose!"
David
Nally
A Call for Sudan: Our Georgraphical Blindspot
Toni
Solo
Bolivia's Gas Referendum
Landau,
Hassan, Prashad & Lindorff
Three Reviews of Moore's F911
Poets's
Basement
Ford, Smith and Albert
July
16, 2004
Dave
Zirin
Adonal Foyle: Master of the Lefty Lay-Up
Shervan
Sardar
Dershowitz, the ICJ and Jim Crow Laws
Ron
Jacobs
The Lil' Engine That Couldn't: Kucinich Surrenders on Anti-War
Plank
Robert
Fisk
Iraq, According to Edgar Allen Poe:
Coffin Bombs in Baghdad
Greg
Moses
The Forts of Iraq
Mickey
Z.
Ad Infinitum?: Presidential Campaigns in the Age of TV
Dan
Bacher
A Landmark Win for Salmon and the Tribes
Dave
Lindorff
The Mumia Case: Support from NAACP,
But a Movement in Shambles
Paul
McGeough
Did Allawi Shoot Inmates in Cold Blood?
Website
of the Day
10 Reasons to Fire Bush (and 9 Reasons Kerry Won't Be Any Better)
July
15, 2004
Heather
Williams
McMissing
the Point: Supersize Me Crashes on Its Message
Werther
Iraq: Follow the Money
Tom
Crumpacker
The Birds of Guantanamo
Brian
Cloughley
What Does the Bush Regime Object To?
Bill
Christison
Reorganize the CIA? Of Course,
But...
July
14, 2004
Jeffrey
St. Clair
Chronicle of a Nomination Foretold:
the Green Deceivers
Neve
Gordon
Of Socrates and the Apartheid Wall
Diane
Christian
The Priesthood of Death
Stefan
Wray
Who Benefits from Missing Data at Los Alamos Nuclear Lab?
Josh
Frank
The Nader / Dean Debate
Conn
Hallinan
Divide and Conquer as Imperial Rules
Elizabeth
Weill-Greenberg
Bring My Brother Home!: Class, War
and Education
Website
of the Day
Hijacking Catastrophe: 9/11, Fear and the Selling of US Empire
July
13, 2004
Ray
McGovern
The CIA and Iraq: an Intelligence
Debacle...and Worse
Mark
Donham
The Sierra Club's Inexplicable Treatment of Cynthia McKinney
Ben
Tripp
Politus Interruptis: With Friends Like
These, Who Needs Electorates?
Mark
Gaffney
Slipping Towards Armageddon: Israel
in Iraq
Dave
Lindorff
Osama Wins! Election Postponed!
Chris
White
Double Think: the Bedrock of Marine
Indoctrination
July
10 / 12, 2004
Kathleen
Christison
The Problem with Neutrality Between
Palestinians and Israel
Janine
Pommy Vega
Trail of the Comet: a Gathering of the World's Poets Against
War
Sherry
Wolf
From Maverick to Party Attack Dog: Howard Dean Gay-Bashes Nader
Saul
Landau and Farrah Hassen
A Transfer of Power, Sort Of
Michael
Donnelly
How to Steal an Election: the Green Version, 2004
Stanton
/ Madsen
Iraq Survey Group: Rumsfeld's al-Qaeda?
Richard
Lichtman
The End of Innocence: Reflections on American Pathology
Gila
Svirsky
Thank You, Your Honors: a Legal Blow to the Wall
Kurt
Nimmo
Clinton's Life
Toni
Solo
Empire-Speak: What Roger Noriega Really Means
Ron
Jacobs
The Black Panthers and the Rest
Camelo
Ruiz Marrero
Gene Warfare in Oaxaca: Genetic Mutation of Mexican Maize
Omar
Barghouti
Wither the Empire: Rise of a Global Resistance
Poets'
Basement
Curtis and Albert
July
9, 2004
Dave
Zirin
Carlos Delgado on Deck: Blue Jays Slugger
Stands Up Against War
Justin
Delacour
Wishing Kerry Would Shut Up About
Latin America
Robert
Fisk
Iraq in Reverse: Martial Laws Fuel Insurgency
Boris
Kagarlitsky
Two Congresses and a Funeral
William
S. Lind
The October Surprises
Sibel
Edmonds
Our Broken System: John Ashcroft's War on Truth
Ron
Jacobs
Reading Tea Leaves: What Vietnam Tells Us About Iraq's Future
Gary
Leupp
The Lie That Will Not Die: Cheney and
the Iraq/al-Qaeda Link
July
8, 2004
Niranjan
Ramakrishnan
The Inexplicable John McCain
Toufic
Haddad
Protesting Israel's Apartheid Wall:
a Letter from the Hunger Strikers' Tent
Dave
Lindorff
Liberation as Martial Law
Joshua
Frank
The Fall: How Beltway Dems Sank Howard
Dean
Christopher
Brauchli
Bush & Cheney Play the Hitler Card
James
Petras
The Truth About Jimmy Carter
July
7, 2004
John
Chuckman
Kerry's BBQ: a Deafening Silence
of Meaning
Virginia
Tilley
A Line in the Sand: Azmi Bishara's
Hunger Strike
Susan
Martinez
A Letter to Bill Cosby
Mickey
Z
Elie Wiesel's Strange Parade
Michael
Donnelly
Our Own Private Wilderness: Trusting the Land in the Inland Empire
Sean
Donahue
Boston Social Forum: the Dems aren't the Only Show in Beantown
Diane
Christian
Sovereignty and Freedom in Iraq
July
6, 2004
Lisa
Viscidi
Fleeing Guatemala: Central Americans
Risk Lives to Reach El Norte
Marc
Norton
The Felonious Five Ride Again: the
Supreme Court and Enemy Combatants
James
Brooks
Chemical Warfare on the West Bank?
Ray
McGovern
Porter Goss as CIA Director?
William
Cook
Legacy of Deceit: If Dante Knew of Bush and the Neo-Cons...
July
5, 2004
Forrest
Hylton
US Imperialism in Latin America: Sept.
11, July 4 and Systematic Torture
Chris
White
A Former Marine Sgt. on the Meaning
of Independence Day
Joe
Bageant
Cranky Reflections on the 4th of July
Robert
Jensen
Stupid White Movie: What Michael Moore
Misses About the Empire
Kathy
Kelly
"Two Days an' a Wake-Up"
July
3 / 4, 2004
Elaine
Cassel
Bush's Police State and Independence
Day
Stan
Goff
ABC of Opportunism: "Progressive"
Latin American Leaders Support the Coup in Haiti
Snehal
Shingavi
"We Want Real Justice for Bhopal": Two Survivors Speak
Out
Bruce
Anderson
The Cheney-Leahy Metaphor and the Greens
Sharon
Smith
Twilight of the Greens: the Chokehold of "Anybody But Bush"
Josh
Frank
Ralph Nader's Revolt: an Interview with Greg Bates
Robert
Fisk
Pentagon Tried to Censor Saddam's Hearing
Joe
Bageant
Sons of a Laboring God: Leftnecks Unite!
Brian
Cloughley
Fortress Bush and the One Law Doctrine
Justin
Delacour
The Anti-Chavez Echo Chamber: Venezuela's Media Tycoons
William
S. Lind
Saudi Spillover
Linda
S. Heard
A Joke Called "Justice"
Greg
Moses
"It's Illegal, But It's Our Right": Korean Labor Won't
Back Down
Ron
Jacobs
"Ain't You Proud to be White on Independence Day?"
Toni
Solo
Weary of Indigenous Resistances? Just Pretend They're Not There
Dan
Nagengast
Chicken Manure as Cattle Food: Safe, But Do We Want to Eat It?
Stew
Albert
Brando, a Personal Recollection
Dave
Zirin
From the Black Panthers to Sacheen Littlefeather: a Eulogy for
Our Brando
Patrick
W. Gavin
The Progressive Case for Dodgeball
Steven
Rosenthal / Junaid Ahmad
The Problem is Bigger Than the Bushes: a Review of F911
Poets'
Basement
Kearney, Ford and Davies
Website
of the Day
Global Peace Solution
July
2, 2004
Jeffrey
St. Clair
Suicide Right on the Stage: the Demise
of the Green Party
Douglas
Valentine
Fahrenheit 911: Mocking the Moral Crisis of Capitalism
Gary
Leupp
"Just Because I Could": On Obscenities and Opportunities
Lee
Ballinger
Illegal People: Kerry Opposes Immigrant Rights
Robert
Fisk
Saddam in the Dock: Confused? Hardly
CounterPunch
Wire
"What Law Formed This Court?": a Transcript of Saddam's
Arraignment
Christopher
Brauchli
Bush's Drug Card Lottery: the Price Ain't Right
Saul
Landau
Buzz Words and Venezuela
July 1, 2004
Katherine
van Wormer
Bush's Damaged Mind: the Madness in
His Method
Joe
Bageant
Is Our President a Whackjob? Does It Matter?
William
James Martin
The Dogma of Richard Perle
Dave
Lindorff
Bush's Evacuation Moment
Robert
Fisk
Bread and Circus Trials in Iraq
Alan
Maass
Green Party in Reverse
Website
of the Day
Michael Moore and Israel: Blind or a Coward?
June
30, 2004
Kurt Nimmo
Nicholson
Baker's Checkpoint: a New Kind of Anger About Bush
Tariq
Ali
Getting Away with Murder in Iraq
Jennifer
Van Bergen
Bush and the Detainees
Douglas
Valentine
Apotheosis of the Psychopaths: Instead of Fahrenheit 9/11, Rescreen
The Quiet American
David
Price
Fahrenheit 9/11 Through the McCain-Feingold Looking Glass
Roger
Normand
America's Criminal Occupation of Iraq
Stan
Cox
Sanitized for Your Protection: Ashcroft's
War on Art
Henry
David Thoreau
On the Futility of Bush v. Kerry: All Voting is a Kind of Gaming
Ben
Tripp
Who Dast Call Him Liar: a Rebuttal to Nicholas Kristof
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.
|
July
31, 2004
"The
Savage Extreme of a Narrow Policy Spectrum"
Five
Questions with Noam Chomsky
By
MERLIN CHOWKWANYUN
MIT Professor Noam Chomsky
is one of the world's most perceptive social critics. I had
the opportunity recently to ask him some questions concerning
a range of subject matter. Professor Chomsky's latest book is
Hegemony
or Survival: America's Quest for Global Dominance. Other
works, many recently reissued, include American Power and the
New Mandarins, Manufacturing Consent, and Deterring Democracy.
Merlin Chowkwanyun: One scholar and activist whom you've
cited (and whom I wish more people knew about and read) is Seymour
Melman, who more than two decades ago articulated the concept
of a "permanent war economy." What was Melman describing,
and how does it limit or shape a chief executive's foreign policy?
Prof. Noam Chomsky: The term "permanent war economy"
is attributed to Charles Wilson, CEO of GE, who warned at the
end of World War II that the US must not return to a civilian
economy, but must keep to a "permanent war economy"
of the kind that was so successful during the war: a semi-command
economy, run mostly by corporate executives, geared to military
production. Among other very important contributions, Melman
has written extensively on the harmful effects of gearing much
of the economy to military production rather than to civilian
needs. What he describes is correct and important, but there
are other dimensions to be considered. After World War II, most
economists and business leaders expected that the economy would
sink back to depression without massive government intervention
of the kind that, during the war years, finally overcame the
Great Depression. The New Deal had softened the edges, but not
much more. Business understood that social spending could overcome
market catastrophes as well as military spending, but social
spending has a downside: it has a democratizing and redistributive
effect while military spending is a gift to the corporate manager,
a steady cushion. And the public is not involved. People care
about hospitals and schools, but if you can "scare the hell
out of them," as Senator Vandenberg recommended, they will
huddle under the umbrella of power and trust their leaders when
it comes to jet planes, missiles, tanks, etc. Furthermore, business
was well aware that high-tech industry could not survive in a
competitive free enterprise economy, and "government must
be the savior," as the business press explained. Such considerations
converged on the decision to focus on military rather than social
spending. And it should be borne in mind that "military
spending" does not mean just military spending. A great
deal of it is high-tech R&D. Virtually the entire "new
economy" has relied heavily on the military cover to socialize
risk and cost and privatize profit, often after many decades:
computers and electronics generally, telecommunications and the
Internet, satellites, the aeronautical industry (hence tourism,
the largest "service industry"), containerization (hence
contemporary trade), computer-controlled machine tools, and a
great deal more. Alan Greenspan and others like to orate about
how all of this is a tribute to the grand entrepreneurial spirit
and consumer choice in free markets. That's true of the late
marketing stage, but far less so in the more significant R&D
stage. Much the same is true in the biology-based sectors of
industry, though different pretexts are used. The record goes
far back, but these mechanisms to sustain the advanced industrial
economy became far more significant after World War II.
In brief, the permanent war
economy has an economic as well as a purely military function.
And both outcomes -- incomparable military force and an advanced
industrial economy -- naturally provide crucial mechanisms for
foreign policy planning, much of it geared to ensuring free access
to markets and resources for the state-supported corporate sector,
constraining rivals, and barring moves towards independent development.
Chowkwanyun: The coup in Haiti occupied headlines
for about a month this past spring, but a scan through the major
news archives reveals a lack of follow-up stories since, save
for the recent minor surge of articles on the U.S. new investigation
of Aristide's alleged corruption. What preliminary interpretations
can we make about the general U.S. press coverage of Aristide's
fall from power? And how can we situate what happened in Haiti
in historical context?
Chomsky: As press coverage has declined, serious
human rights violations increase, a matter of no interest since
Washington attained its goals. Previous press coverage kept closely
to the officially-determined parameters: Aristide's corruption
and violence in a "failed state," despite the noble
US effort to "restore democracy" in 1994. It would
have been hard to find even a bare reference to Washington's
fierce opposition to the Aristide government when it took office
in 1990 in Haiti's first democratic election, breaking the pattern
of US support for brutal dictatorship ever since Wilson's murderous
and destructive invasion in 1915; or of the instant support of
the Bush-I and then Clinton administrations for the vicious coup
leaders (extending even to authorization of oil shipments to
them and their rich supporters in violation of presidential directives);
or of the fact that Clinton's noble restoration of democracy
was conditioned on the requirement that the government must adopt
the harsh neoliberal program of the defeated US candidate in
the 1990 election, who won 14% of the vote. It was obvious at
once that this would have a devastating effect on the economy,
as it did. Bush-II tightened the stranglehold by barring aid,
and pressuring international institutions to do the same, on
spurious pretexts, therefore contributing further to the implosion
of the society. No less cynical was the contemptuous refusal
of France, which preceded Washington as the primary destroyer
of Haiti, even to consider Aristide's entirely legitimate request
of repayment of the outrageous indemnity that Haiti was forced
to pay for the crime of liberating itself from French tyranny
and plunder, the source of much of France's wealth. All of this
was missing, replaced by lamentations about how even our remarkable
magnanimity and nobility were insufficient to bring democracy
and development to the backward Haitians, though we would now
try again, in our naive optimism.
This illustration of abject
servility to power is not, regrettably, unique. But the spectacle
is particularly disgusting when the world's most powerful state
crushes under its boot, once again, the poorest country in the
hemisphere, as it has been doing in one or another way for 200
years, at first in understandable fear of a rebellion that established
the first free country of free men right next door to a leading
slave state, and on to the present. It is a depressing illustration
of how a highly disciplined intellectual class can reframe even
the most depraved actions as yet another opportunity for self-adulation.
Chowkwanyun: Recent films and books from establishment
liberal circles focus almost entirely on actions of the Bush
Administration both abroad (the Iraq venture on false pretenses)
and at home (the Patriot Act, for example). Should the analysis
incorporate more events than that, and if so, how far back? How
sharp a cleave does there really exist between the Clinton years
and the current people in the executive branch? Is there
more continuity than the recent works are suggesting?
Chomsky: The Bush administration is at the
extreme savage and brutal end of a narrow policy spectrum. Accordingly,
its actions and policies came under unprecedented criticism in
the mainstream, in conservative circles as well. A good illustration
is the reaction to the National Security Strategy announced in
September 2002, along with the virtual declaration of war against
Iraq, and the onset of a highly successful government-media propaganda
campaign that drove the frightened population far off the spectrum
of world opinion. The NSS was condemned at once in the main establishment
journal, Foreign Affairs, as a new "imperial grand strategy"
that was likely to cause harm to US interests. Others joined
in sharp criticism of the brazen arrogance and incompetence of
the planners: Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Cheney, and the rest. But
the criticism was quite narrow, more concerned with style and
implementation than substance. Typical was the reaction of Madeleine
Albright, also in Foreign Affairs. Like others, she criticized
the Bush planners. She added, correctly, that every president
has a similar strategy, but doesn't smash people in the face
with it, antagonizing even allies. Rather, he keeps it in his
back pocket to use when needed. She knew of course that the
"Clinton doctrine" was even more extreme than the NSS,
declaring that the US would resort to force unilaterally if necessary
to ensure access to markets and resources, without even the pretexts
of "self-defense" conjured up by Bush propagandists
and their acolytes. But Clinton presented the doctrine quietly,
and was careful to carry out his crimes, which were many, in
ways that would be acceptable to allies and could be justified
or concealed by elite opinion, including the media.
Continuities are real, and
go back long before. After all, policies are largely rooted in
institutions, and these are quite stable. But there are also
differences, and even small differences can translate into substantial
outcomes in a system of enormous power.
Chowkwanyun: Even though day-to-day conditions
and structural realities in Latin America are generally worse
than those in the United States, political progress in Latin
America of the past few years is inspiring, especially given
the stacked odds in countries like Brazil. What accounts for
these successes? Do you see an opportunity for more solidarity
between American activists and counterparts in other countries,
and in general, more global approaches to activism?
Chomsky: Brazil is a remarkable and illuminating
case. It is instructive to compare the two largest and most important
countries of the hemisphere.
In the forthcoming presidential
elections in the US, there is a choice: between two candidates
who were born to wealth and political power, attended the same
elite university, joined the same secret society that instructs
members in the style and manners of the rulers, and are able
to run because they are funded by largely the same corporate
powers. The Public Relations industry, which basically runs
the campaigns, makes sure that they keep away from "issues"
(except in vague and obscure terms) and focus on "qualities"
-- "leadership," "personality," etc. The
public is not unaware of its purposeful marginalization. On the
eve of the 2000 election, about 75% of the public regarded it
as largely meaningless -- prior to Florida shenanigans, the Supreme
Court, etc., which were mostly an elite concern. In 2004, more
appears to be at stake and
interest is greater, but there is a continuation of the long
process of disengagement mainly on the part of poor and working
class Americans, who simply do not feel that they are represented.
The Harvard University project that monitors these matters currently
reports that "the turnout gap between the top and bottom
fourth by income is by far the largest among western democracies
and has been widening."
In Brazil, in dramatic contrast,
there was an authentic democratic election. The organized public
were able to elect their own candidate, a person from their own
ranks, despite barriers far higher than in the US: a very repressive
state, tremendous inequality and concentration of wealth and
media power, extreme hostility of international capital and its
institutions. They were able to do so because of decades of serious
organizing and activism by very significant popular organizations:
the Landless Workers Movement, the Workers Party, unions, and
others. These are all lacking in "failed states" with
democratic forms that have little in the way of substance, in
which we have elections of the kind taking place in November
2004.
It is also striking to compare
the US reaction to the election in Brazil today and the election
of a moderately populist candidate, with much less support and
much less impressive credentials, 40 years ago. That deviation
from good form led to intervention by the Kennedy administration
to organize a military coup, carried out shortly after the assassination,
instituting a neo-Nazi National Security State of extreme brutality,
hailed by Washington liberals as a great victory for democracy
and freedom. Today nothing like that is considered. Part of the
reason is that the activism of the intervening years has led
to much more civilized societies in both countries. The US population
is not likely to tolerate the unconcealed criminality of the
Kennedy and Johnson years, nor would Brazilians easily capitulate.
Another reason is that establishment of murderous dictatorships
is no longer necessary. It should hardly be a secret that neoliberal
mechanisms are well designed to restrict very narrowly the threat
of democracy. As long as Brazil accepts them, the elected President
must reject the program on which he was elected, and follow the
orders of the international financial powers and investors even
more rigorously than his predecessor, so as to "establish
credibility" with the masters of the world. One of Clinton's
impressive achievements was forging these bonds more firmly,
so as to guard wealth and power from the threat that democracy
might actually function.
Of course, none of this is
graven in stone. In the 1980s, for the first time in the history
of Western imperialism, solidarity movements developed in reaction
to Reaganite crimes in Central America, which went far beyond
protest; thousands of people joined the victims, to help them,
and to provide them with some limited protection from the US-run
state and mercenary terrorist forces that were ravaging the region.
Still more strikingly, they were rooted in mainstream circles,
including significant participation from church-based organizations,
among them evangelical Christians. These movements have since
extended to many other regions, with actions of great courage
and integrity, and heroic victims, like Rachel Corrie. Beyond
that, for the first time ever, there are really significant international
solidarity movements, based mainly in the South, but with increasing
participation from the North, drawing from many walks of life
and much of the world. Included are the global justice movements
(ridiculously called "anti-globalization" movements)
that have been meeting in the World Social Forum in Brazil and
India, and have spawned regional and local social forums over
much of the world. These are the first serious manifestations
of the kind of international solidarity that has been the dream
of the left and the labor movements since their modern origins.
How far such developments can reach we can, of course, never
predict. But they are impressive and highly promising.
Bitter class warfare in the
West is by and large restricted to the highly class-conscious
business sector, which is often quite frank about its objectives
and understands very well what its publications call "the
hazard facing industrialists in the rising political power of
the masses." But while they have had great success in dominant
sectors of power in the US, and other industrial countries, they
are no more invulnerable than they have been in moments of comparable
triumphalism in the past.
Chowkwanyun: A common trope these days holds that
academics are too "liberal," "leftist," or
"radical," etc. What are your thoughts on this interpretation
and on the state of contemporary academia in general?
Chomsky: I have to admit that I have an irrational
dislike of the word "trope," and other postmodern affectations.
But overcoming that, this "trope" hardly merits comment.
It can stand alongside of the charge that the media are "too
liberal." These charges are not entirely untrue. For quite
good reasons, the doctrinal systems try to focus attention on
"social and cultural issues," and in these domains,
it is largely true that professionals (academic, media) are "liberal";
that is, they have a profile similar to CEOs. Much the same is
true when we shift to the issues that are of major concern to
the population, but are systematically excluded from the electoral
agenda and largely swept to the side in commentary. Take, for
example, the misleadingly named "free trade agreements."
They are supported by a substantial elite consensus, and generally
opposed by the public, so much so that critical analysis of them
or even information about them has to be largely suppressed,
sometimes in remarkable ways, well documented. The business world
is well aware of this. Opponents of these investor-rights versions
of economic integration have an "ultimate weapon,"
the Wall Street Journal lamented: the public is opposed. Therefore
various means have to be devised to conceal their nature and
implement them without public scrutiny. The same is true of many
other issues. It is, for example, widely agreed that a leading
domestic problem is escalating costs for health care in the most
inefficient system of the industrial world, with far higher per
capita expenditures than others and poor outcomes by comparative
standards. The reasons are understood by health professionals:
privatization, which imposes enormous inefficiencies and costs,
and the immense power of the pharmaceutical industry. Polls regularly
show strong public support for some form of national health care
(80% in the most recent poll I have seen), but when that is even
mentioned, the "too-liberal press" dismisses it as
"politically impossible" (New York Times). That's correct:
the insurance companies and pharmaceutical industry are opposed,
and with the effective erosion of a democratic culture, it therefore
doesn't matter what the population wants. The same is commonly
true on international issues. One finds little difference, I
think, between the academic world and other sectors of the professional
and managerial classes, to the extent that broad generalization
is possible.
Merlin Chowkwanyun is a student at Columbia University.
His e-mail is mc2028@columbia.edu.
He also hosts a radio show
on WBAR 87.9 FM NYC (www.wbar.org).
Weekend
Edition Features for July 10 / 12, 2004
Kathleen
Christison
The Problem with Neutrality Between
Palestinians and Israel
Janine
Pommy Vega
Trail of the Comet: a Gathering of the World's Poets Against
War
Sherry
Wolf
From Maverick to Party Attack Dog: Howard Dean Gay-Bashes Nader
Saul
Landau and Farrah Hassen
A Transfer of Power, Sort Of
Michael
Donnelly
How to Steal an Election: the Green Version, 2004
Stanton
/ Madsen
Iraq Survey Group: Rumsfeld's al-Qaeda?
Richard
Lichtman
The End of Innocence: Reflections on American Pathology
Gila
Svirsky
Thank You, Your Honors: a Legal Blow to the Wall
Kurt
Nimmo
Clinton's Life
Toni
Solo
Empire-Speak: What Roger Noriega Really Means
Ron
Jacobs
The Black Panthers and the Rest
Camelo
Ruiz Marrero
Gene Warfare in Oaxaca: Genetic Mutation of Mexican Maize
Omar
Barghouti
Wither the Empire: Rise of a Global Resistance
Poets'
Basement
Curtis and Albert
Keep
CounterPunch Alive:
Make
a Tax-Deductible Donation Today Online!
home
/ subscribe
/ about us / books
/ archives / search
/ links /
|