On Obama and Pathological Tolerance of Criminality
By Paul Street at May 11, 2007 |
|
I do not understand our tolerance of imperial arch-criminality. Last night on “public” television I saw Joe Mantegna say that PBS will host Colin Powell in a special Memorial Day concert later this month..
I don't think Colin Powell sings or plays an instrument, so I guess they mean he'll be sitting in a front row seat wearing a tuxedo and smiling and waving. Maybe he'll give a little speech or something – that would be my guess.
Sorry, but I don't get it.
Colin Powell is a war criminal. He was a key player in the making of the Bush administration's fraudulent case for the mass-murderous, monumentally illegal occupation of Iraq. That brazenly imperialist war has killed many hundreds of thousands of Iraqis and more than 3300 U.S. soldiers.
I hope Colin Powell is haunted every night of his life by images of Iraqi children blown to bits by U.S. missiles and of U.S. G.Is missing their legs after going to Iraq under the false belief – deliberately propagated by the Bush administration (with Powell's critical assistance) and its media enablers – that Saddam Hussein's regime was linked to 9/11 and al Qaeda.
Colin Powell? I will not watch him talk and smile and wink and wave at a concert of any kind. The only thing about Colin Powell I want to hear is that he has been incarcerated for the rest of his life. Or that the aforementioned images caused him to hang himself.
I am reading in the papers where Condaleeza Rice has been working behind the scenes to defend Paul Wolfowitz from his critics at the World Bank, which he heads. People are upset at Wolfowitz because he directed some World Bank resources to his girlfriend.
I'm sorry, but I don't get it. This is what Paul Wolfowitz is in trouble about? As the Deputy Secretary of Defense and a leading "intellectual" with the Project for a New American Century (PNAC), Wolfowitz was a leading architect, advocate and agent of the illegal, mass-murderous oil occupation of Iraq. He's a world class war criminal.
I hope Paul Wolfowitz is haunted every night of his life by images of Iraqi children blown to bits by U.S. missiles and of U.S. G.I.'s missing their legs after going to Iraq under the false belief – deliberately propagated by the Bush administration and its media enablers – that Saddam Hussein's regime was linked to 9/11 and al Qaeda.
I don't care all that much about his corrupt girlfriend dealings at the World Bank. The only thing I want to hear about Paul Wolfowitz is that he has just been incarcerated for the rest of his life or that the aforementioned images caused him to slit his wrists.
Same for that mendacious imperialist Rice, who went on television to invoke the threat of “a mushroom cloud” to justify the unprovoked invasion of Iraq. Same for that vicious Al Capone-admiring bastard Donald “Shit Happens' Rumsfeld. Same for R. James Woolsey (Defense Policy Board), Eliot Cohen (Defense Policy Board), Ken Adelman (Defense Policy Board), Lewis Paul Bremer III (the first U.S. imperial Viceroy of Iraq), John Bolton (the frothy warmongering Under Secretary of State in March 2003), Rupert Murdoch (the blood-soaked warmongering CEO of the News Corporation), L. Lowry Mays (the imperialist CEO of Clear channel), Karol Rove (Bush's warmongering political strategist), Richard Armitage (Deputy Secretary of State in 2003), I. Lewis Libby (Dick Cheney's warmongering Chief of Staff), Doug Feith (the warmongering oil-imperialist Undersecretary of Defense for Policy at the invasion's launch), Gen. Tommy Franks (remember him? He got a Silver Cross or something like that for leading the invasion), Henry Kissinger (Defense Policy Board), Paula Dobriansky (the warmongering petroimperialist Undersecretary of State for Global Affairs in 03), Newt Gingrich (Defense Policy Board), Nicholas Chabraja (the war-profiteering CEO of General Dynamics), Riley Bechtel (CEO of the leading imperial “defense” contractor Bechtel), Daniel Pipes (warmongering PNAC intellectual), Michael Ledeen (warmongering militarist from PNAC and the American Enterprise Institute), Roger Ailes (CEO of proto-fascist Fox News), William Bennett (PNAC), Jeb Bush (PNAC), Frank Gafney (Center for Security Policy), Elliot Abrams (National Security Council), Otto Reich (Assistant Secretary of State for Western Hemisphere Affairs in 2003), John Ashcroft (right wing Christian fundamentalist), Ronald D. Sugar (CEO of the war-profiteering "defense" firm Northrop Grumman), David J. Lear (CEO of the war-profiteering petro-imperialist company Halliburton), William Swanson (CEO of the war-profiteering “defense” contractor Raytheon), Phillip Condit (CEO of the war-profiteering imperial “defense” contractor Boeing in March 2003), Vance D. Coffan (CEO of the war-profiteering imperial “defense” contractor Lockheed Martin when the invasion was launched), Rush Limbaugh (legendary warmongering right wing asshole), William Kristol (PNAC), Bill O'Reilly (legendary warmongering right wing asshole), John Negroponte (terrorist) and the rest all the way up of to Darth Cheney (fascist) and that miserable, moronic and sneering messianic militarist George W. Bush.
I hope they are all haunted every night of their wretched remaining lives by images of Iraqi children blown to bits by U.S. missiles and of U.S. G.I.s missing their legs after going to Iraq under the false belief – deliberately propagated by the Bush administration and its media enablers – that Saddam Hussein's regime was linked to 9/11 and al Qaeda.
The only thing I really want to hear about any of them is that they've just been incarcerated for the rest of their lives or that the aforementioned images finally compelled them to swallow pistols and blow their brains out the backs of their skulls.
I just can't imagine being an American news broadcaster and having to get up in front of a camera and say “President Bush said this” and “Vice President Cheney did that” and "Condaleeza Rice met so-and-so" and so on. These people are vicious, monumental war criminals and arch-authoritarian hyper-plutocrats to boot. They are world-systemic super-predators.
It is a disgrace that they still hold office and are still free to commit terrible atrocities.
Which brings me to Barack Obama. There is something very seriously wrong with this guy.
There's a section in Obama's ponderous, power-worshipping and Janus-faced campaign book The Audacity of Hope (one of the three worst books I've ever read) where he claims that George W. Bush “and the people around him”are “pretty much like everyone else.” The Bush-Cheney gang-bangers are “possessed,” Obama says, “of the same mix of virtues and vices, insecurities and long-buried injuries as the rest of us.”
Say what now?
I read that passage to a University of Iowa student the other day and this is what he said: "that's fucked."
The student is right.
Obama has no business telling us that we're all "pretty much like" those arch-transgressors.
Obama shouldn't talk that kind of shit to Americans. He should be ashamed of himself for that sort of commentary.
Just like he should be ashamed of himself for saying that Iraq was invaded with the best of democratic intentions. And that black Americans have made it 90 percent of the way to equality in the U.S. And that the United States' “greatest asset has been our system of social organization,” that is capitalism – “a system that for generations has encouraged constant innovation, individual initiative and efficient allocation of resources.” And for telling people in developing nations to reject “left-leaning populists”' argument that they “should resist America's efforts to expand its hegemony” and try (imagine) to “follow their own path to development.” And for saying that “the biggest casualty of [the Vietnam War] was the bond of trust between the American people and their government – and between American themselves.” How about the 3 million Vietnamese the imperial criminals in Washington killed (along with 57,000 U.S. soldiers) during the 1960s and 1970s – a source of some of that terrible fraying of the shared "ties that bind" Americans that Obama so grotesquely bemoans?
If you want the page citations, go read the extended review (titled "Obama's Audacious Defernce to Power") I did of his book for ZNet and Black Agenda Report. While you are at it take a look at the latest piece I did on Obama, where I provide evidence in defense of Russell Simmons' comment that the Senator is a “mouse” of big capital.
It would be interesting to ask some injured Vietnam or Iraq war veterans if they share Obama's revolting “pretty much just like us” perspective on Bush and Cheney, who supported the criminal U.S. war on Vietnam but had “other priorities” than “serving” in Indochina during the 1960s and 1970s.
Such veterans shouldn't harbor any bitterness towards their warmongering Chickenhawk superiors, Obama thinks. He argues that “those who are struggling – or those who claim to speak for those who are struggling” are not “freed from trying to understand the perspectives those who are better off.”
The duty to feel “empathy,” he claims, is shared by the “the powerless” and “the oppressed” as well as “the powerful” and “the oppressor” (p. 68 in Audacity).
The veteran sitting with missing limbs in Walter Reed Hospital is supposed to “empathize” with the filthy rich warmongers who sent him or her off to die and kill on totally false pretexts. The parents of dead G.I.s are supposed to “empathize” with the War Pigs who made the fraudulent case for launching the illegal oil invasion that killed their son or daughter.
No, sorry...that is completely pathological. Slaves do not need to understand and empathize with their masters. Ordinary working-class citizens do not need to empathize with wealthy arch-plutocrats and war criminals. They just don't. Such empathy would be pathological.
The Barockstar is all about: pathological accommodation with power and evil. He's got this totally perverse aversion to conflict and struggle – a sick, fake-cool and quasi-academic over-attachment to conciliation.
He puts an erudite, Harvard- and corporate-media-certified spin on Rodney King's pathetic plea: “Can't We All Just Get Along?”
Let me tell him the answer to that question: “No. Hell No. Sorry, but we cannot all just get along.”
No self-respecting and authentic advocate of democracy and “social justice” (a recurrent phrase in Audacity of Hope) would ever extend an olive branch of any kind to people like Bush and Cheney.
Wanting to get along with people like them and the forces they represent has nothing to do with democracy. It has everything to do with being a power-seeking asshole.
Democracy is not about us all getting along. It's not about “reaching across the aisle.” It's not about making deals with criminals. It's not about “civil discourse” (another pathetic Obama obsession). It's not about dropping your responsibility to fight the power and struggle for radical change. It's not about foolishly hoping for liberal and pseudo-liberal saviors (Obama is correctly described as "deeply conservative" in a recent flattering New Yorker write up) to make it all okay.
It's about one person, one vote. It's about equal policymaking influence for all people, regardless of wealth and race and gender, etc. It's about majority rule. It's about turning the world upside down and sweeping the privileged few off the stage of history.
It's often ugly and mean. And it's fundamentally opposed to the business system that is giving Obama most of his political money and which he calls our “greatest asset.” By the way, Obama's career campaign finance profile includes a considerable sum from the Henry Crown investment company, a major Chicago-based investor in General Dynamics, a leading imperial "defense" contractor.
I honestly don't know who is worse – a Cheney or an Obama. Is the enabler parent who tells the child to tolerate and "understand" the parent who beats and rapes the child any less evil than the more direct abuser? Is the good cop who gives you a sip of Diet Coke any less part of the same dynamic of oppression than the bad one who slams your head against the wall?




Reflections
By Kissenger, Clark at Jun 18, 2007 12:12 PM
Reply this comment
Give Walt K the dunce cap
By Communard, Paris at May 16, 2007 10:32 AM
Walt K isn't serious...just another reactionary hack who swallowed too much capitalist cum. I wouldn't waste another word on him if I was you. I'd say just delete his crap or give him his own special little dunce corner like you did for the conspiracy folks. Obama, Hillary, Edwards, Kucinich...I like the work you're doing on the first one but dude why even worry about capitalist politics?
Reply this comment
Same old nonsense, Walt
By Kissenger, Clark at May 15, 2007 23:16 PM
Walt K it's just the same old stuff with you: (a) refusal to engage criticism; (b) diversion; (c) guilt by absurd association; (d) unsightly love of capitalism; (e) childish identification of Left anticapitalism with fascism. Your last comment is consistent with your sorry record on this blog.
As usual you got the crap kicked out of your first comment and pretend that never happened. You make no attempt at substantive response and just start up another ridiculous and doctrinaire attack.
You consistently make absurd efforts to establish guilt by association (a standard right wing ploy). Trying to link my terminology up with Ward Churchill's "little Eichman" comment is a sloppy, over-obvious attempt to smear through insinuation.
You have always diverted from core issues discussed in original posts, trying to turn the attention instead to your vicious attacks from the right. Your last comment is no exception.
Your childish comments on "serfdom," capitalism (presumably) and Kucinich (right, he killed Cleveland...great analysis) are typical of the abject business-class worship you have consistently displayed and which you incorrectly think is representative of normal opinion and common sense.
Your obsequious groveling before the economic plutocracy is grotesque.
cyrano I could not pull off tactical voting "for" Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama; I don't care if it's one of them versus Atilla the Hun or (worse) John McCain. Just couldn't do it. Edwards I could maybe do the tactical voting thing for. I repeat, the best hope is citizen action in the broad sense, not politicians and electoral politics.
Reply this comment
Speaking of analogies, Paul,
By Tbarnich, Tb at May 15, 2007 20:38 PM
Reply this comment
obama
By Kissenger, Clark at May 15, 2007 18:51 PM
Reply this comment
Honesty
By Kissenger, Clark at May 15, 2007 10:19 AM
RedButtons I think hatred can be a dangerous thing for the hater as well the hated but there's something to be said for honesty about the anger (okay hatred) that class rule and race rule and imperial rule create. And there's something pathological about Obama's call for us to empathize with our oppressors and look at the "ties that bind us as Americans" (or whatever his phrase is) as he tries to ride the money and media of his approving ruling class masters to imperial power and as we reach new levels of grotesque inequality that rival the Gilded Age. I certainly understand your queasiness. Reading B.O.'s book The Audacity of Hope literally made me nauseous.
"Mr. X" you strike me as over your head on this blog; I would suggest a more elementary trainer blog for now.
Reply this comment
Nice to see some hate
By Redbuttons22, Leftmarxist at May 15, 2007 00:17 AM
Reply this comment
I'm picturing Forrest Gump:
By X, Mr. at May 14, 2007 22:47 PM
I'm picturing Forrest Gump: "Sorry I ruined your Black Panther party." And then Paul says, "It's all because of that lieing bastard Johnson!"
Reply this comment
comment
By Anonymous, Anonymous at May 14, 2007 22:26 PM
Reply this comment
Our Best Hope (again)
By Kissenger, Clark at May 14, 2007 16:41 PM
You are getting a little confusing and perhaps over-personalizing. I do not understand why you wanted to work for Edwards if Obama is the (your words) "best hope." So was Edwards the "best hope" before you confronted the geographical issue - the four hour distance from the nearest Edwards office?
Here are three pieces I did that directly address the crassly disingenuous Obama claims (which you naively reproduce) on (a) lobbyists and (b) reliance on small contributions:
"Sitting Out the Obama Dance in Iowa City"
"Barack Obama's Wonderful Wealth Primary"
" ' He's a Mouse' : Russell Simmons Speaks Some Truth on Obama"
This may sound self-flattering but "doing the work" on Obama now includes reading, well, me. Nobody is doing the job on him that I am right now.
You never addressed the Left black political writer's concern that Obama's election could be bad for racial justice (I explained the argument at some length) and you do not address the issue of not doing the work before proclaiming Obama (your words) "our best hope."
You only saw personal attack and left out all the substance, which strikes me understandable; your position is not a strong one.
I repeat that our "best hope" is ourselves - rank-and-file citizens' action (with an eye to radical-democratic systemic change) and not any politician(s). Take this personally if you want but it's a standard sort of position on the radical Left.
Reply this comment
Nice attack. Just so you
By Kissenger, Clark at May 14, 2007 15:47 PM
Nice attack. Just so you know, I was going to work for the Edwards campaign had not any of the field offices been so far from where I live (the nearest is probably four hours away, at least).
Don't pretend I'm a know-nothing (was it know-it-all?) liberal. I've also often decried the "Obamamania," too, not to your lengths of course. You omit, however, that Obama doesn't receive money from lobbyists or PACs as has perhaps the most broad-based support in terms of funding of any of the candidates.
Reply this comment
He's just a symptom
By Kissenger, Clark at May 14, 2007 15:21 PM
Reply this comment
good for you
By Protocol4, Nemo at May 14, 2007 12:11 PM
Paul,
Good for you for trying (for the past few months) to disabuse people of the Obama myth. Also thanks for articulating what a lot of us (on the anti-imperialist left) think about the war criminals occupying the executive branch. There is only one thing that I disagree about in your post above. When Obama says that our war criminals are "just like you and me", he is right (though he may not have realized in what sense). Hannah Arendt said as much ( in Eichmann in Jerusalem). I think we should focus on their deeds rather than their personal characteristics--which, I suspect Obama actually meant--for it is their deeds that define them as war criminals. Like a lot of war criminals of yore, the present bunch no doubt believe that they carried out their enterprise (which they themselves would hardly term criminal) for noble purposes.
Reply this comment
You have to do the work
By Kissenger, Clark at May 13, 2007 22:39 PM
Reply this comment
Mr. Street, I understand
By Kissenger, Clark at May 13, 2007 18:02 PM
Mr. Street,
I understand your opinion on Obama, but frankly, he's probably the best hope for the country right now. Unfortunately, to get *anywhere* in the political system somehow or another you gotta "worship power." I didn't read Audacity of Hope; don't read any campaign books. Yet how can you write that you "honestly don't know who is worse -- a Cheney or an Obama." Are you serious?
Cheney, final answer. Maybe you're thinking that 'Big Time' (by his Bush moniker) is more candid about his role in "the same dynamic of oppression" that Obama, in his small way, is trying to challenge? As for Powell, the man was used, plain and simple. Condemning him to life imprisonment lets the real crooks off the hook.
Reply this comment
It's hard to know what to
By Kissenger, Clark at May 13, 2007 17:39 PM
Reply this comment
I loathe B.O.
By Commonsense321, Eddie at May 13, 2007 02:40 AM
I loathe B.O. (pun intended). But come on Paul, once again, what the hell do you want? You are practically denying that IF (and that's a big if) B.O. gets elected President it wouldn't be a big, if not HUGE, probably the biggest since the Emancipation Proclamation, step towards race equality in the U.S. In fact, one could argue that if a half-black man gets elected president, we could stop focusing so much on race in this country and focus on other things. We no longer would have to say "Because you are black" (insert entitlement/sterotype here)...
All your posts and links on the otherhand (At least in this thread) appear to imply that you would rather focus solely on race. It leaves wondering about your latent racism in all of its conotations.
Finally, citing the notorious anti-semitic Stokley Charmichael a.k.a. Kwame Ture (Judiasm is gutter disease) doesn't bode well for your track record. I like to remind everyone that a few posts ago you quoted, as someone else pointed out, Marx's "Jewish question" that blamed capitalism and all of its ills on Jews. (But then again, blaming Jews for everything was all the rage in mid 19th century fatherland.)
Reply this comment
Actually, an Obama presidency could be bad for racial justice
By Kissenger, Clark at May 12, 2007 21:15 PM
Reply this comment
Next you'll be saying a
By Kissenger, Clark at May 12, 2007 19:05 PM
And what about a gay person as president? Poland's reactionary Prime Minister, suspected to be gay, is known for making statements like, "homosexuals who are involved in homosexual propaganda should not be teachers".
btw, France just elected a first generation immigrant as it's President, and most non-white immigrants are bracing for more race/culture baiting, more brazen curtailment of opportunities, and more police brutality.
Reply this comment
Let him be
By Libbias, Liberalbias at May 12, 2007 16:28 PM
Reply this comment
Reflections
By Kissenger, Clark at May 12, 2007 16:13 PM
Well I don't know if he's "in denial," to be honest. I think he really worships and lusts for power and that this makes him tread very carefully around anything close to the truth. He has these really (in my opinion) perverse ideas about the need to feel for monsters (empathize with Dick freaking Cheney? Sorry B.O. but no way) and avoid conflict (what ever for? Even FDR once said he welcomed the "hatred" of the New Deal's plutocratic enemies) that probably have something to do with his unusual childhood, loaded with abandonmnet and repeated cultural crossings and confusion. Child psychology aside, he wants to be president and centrist Democratic wisdom says that the way to do that is let the Republican war criminals twist in the wind of the Iraq War right up til quadrennial election Day '08. It all makes sense for a highly educated/indoctrinated and calculating politician like him. Acknowledging the criminal and imperial nature of the war and the elementary duty to impeach, remove, and incarcerate (all mild penalties relative the administration's crimes) current war criminals in chief would cost him the corporate media love and political money from big corporate military-industrial funders and their associated financial interests.
It's not about Obama at the end of the day. I write about him so much here because he's the main beneficiary among the top tier candidates of (I think) pathetic illusion and desperation on the Left. But there's little meaningful to be achieved via U.S. politics and we create the atrocity of Obama (and of Bush and Cheney and Hillary and all the rest)by refusing to democratically transform and revolutionize our polity, economy, culture and society from below. It's time we the people took personal and collective responsibility for all this imperialist/racist/ classist/sexist/authoritarian bullshit. We allow it. We perpetuate it. We let them mystify and hypnotize and paralyze us (people who put peace stickers on their cars next to an Obama '08 sticker should be mercilessly exposed as abject buffoons). We can be revolutionaries or we can be slaves. The second choice is winning.
Whatever, let's at least be real: we will continue to fight one war and one asinine power-hungry president and one duplicitous politician and one corporate-imposed ecological atrocity and one plutocratuc outrage and one [fill in the blank] after another and another and another until and unless we get off our butts and make a revolution. Good news: there's no more relevant and strategic place to make one than in the U.S. - in the belly of the beast. That by the way is a big part of why things are so tough for the Left in the U.S.: there's so much at stake here...no country has more capacity to shape the future of class society. The masters know this very well and invest heavily in mass thought coordination and other and many-sided forms of domestic population control in the U.S. homeland.
Reply this comment
re: There is something very seriously wrong with this guy.
By Kissenger, Clark at May 12, 2007 09:01 AM
Reply this comment
And the winner for "the worst" is...
By Kissenger, Clark at May 11, 2007 19:37 PM
Reply this comment