Moon of Alabama Brecht quote
June 11, 2005
Iraq Is Not The Issue

(Elevated from a comment)


by Antifa

Iraq is not the issue.

Iraq is a symptom.

The root cause of this Iraqi resource war is our national consensus that we intend to keep living like Americans, come what may.

That’s why Democrats and Republicans alike voted overwhelmingly for this oil war, and routinely vote to fund it anew, at obscene prices, with pure overdrafts from our Treasury. Because we all intend to keep living like we do.

In practice then, we the point three billion people, we Americans, aren’t really at odds with Dick Cheney’s dictum, "The American way of life is not negotiable."

It is only when that does become negotiable that we will stop burning down other nations to get our provisions.

Iraq is a symptom.

Iraq is only one nation. Oil is only one provision. There are other nations, and other provisions. To survive, America needs those provisions from those nations, and we can’t take no for an answer.

Fact: there aren’t enough provisions in the whole world for every nation, every human, to live like Americans. It would take nine planet earths to do that. That means eight out of nine people alive today will never live like Americans do.

It means every American has eight other humans to share with. Now, if you don’t share with those other eight humans, you’ll have to kill a couple of them to get enough provisions to live like an American. And you’ll probably have to kill a couple others to keep the rest off your provisions. On an overcrowded ship, it’s the pirate way — share the booty or fight to the death over it.

And that’s our choice, we Americans.

Iraq is a symptom of that choice.

Actually, most of the resource wars to come in this century will be over potable water. And, we’ll need to kill for uranium at some point, too, to keep our electrical grid up. And kill for a few other precious ores as well, or someone else will dig them up and then we won’t live as well as we do. And that was never our intent. That’s not negotiable.

The point being, getting out of Iraq doesn’t address the root cause of our being there. We’ll just go to war somewhere else for provisions.

The country we need to get out of is the mad America that won’t even attempt anymore to live within its means or by civilized rules. Pirate America.

We need to climb down from where we find ourselves these days, folks. This is just nuts, what we, the people, are doing.
 

Comments

@Antifa
This is a conservative progressive blog, so you will likely hear little dissension other than mine. Which is – that I find it almost inexplicable that with an alphabetic soup of AIPAC, PNAC type lobby groups – and the number of American-Israeli actors involved with steering American foreign policy – few here appear willing to have an open, honest debate on – “to what extent is America’s actions and policies in the ME influenced by the interests of Israel?”

Posted by: DM | Jun 11 2005 12:42 utc | 1

@DM – I am sure its a mixture of interests. The rapture happy folks want the Middle East revolting for what they believe is their cause. Some Zionist want this for their issue. Business greed plays a role. Some militaries need war because it justifies their living. All these come together in this war.
But underlying those issues is the really big one that unites the Repubs and the center Dems and that is the general mindset Antifa describes and Cheney put into words. “The American way of life is not negotiable.”
A gas tax of US$ 5 per gallon would not win much of a vote in the U.S.

Posted by: b | Jun 11 2005 12:53 utc | 2

not to avoid the discussion on
“to what extent is America’s actions and policies in the ME influenced by the interests of Israel?”
Israel needs a strong America to exist. America needs a strong Israel as an open wound in the ME resource area.

Posted by: b | Jun 11 2005 12:57 utc | 3

Correction to the correction. “point three billion” was about right, as is “three hundred million”, but not “point three hundred million”.

Posted by: jo | Jun 11 2005 13:23 utc | 4

@jo – you are right, I did drink a bit too much yesterday – fixed.

Posted by: b | Jun 11 2005 13:28 utc | 5

Two issues :
1. What brought about the war in Iraq?
2. Why do we Americans sustain it?
My answers :
1. Greed. Garden variety, for :
a. the profits from the oil business,
b. the profits from the arms business,
c. the (Israeli) profits form the expropriation business.
2. Because we’ve bought into:
a. the American way of life is based on consumption,
b. war will somehow safeguard consumption.
The war has profited the oil lobby, the arms lobby, the Likud lobby. It is impoverishing us ordinary Americans and making our consumption more expensive not less.
That which makes any way of life worthy is not consumption. I say that not as a pious platitude but as one one who now lives outside the continental US and is surrounded by what would be termed poverty in the US but with immeasurably more satisfaction in daily life.
Garden variety greed is the impetus. Fear and the unreasoned acceptance of faulty assumptions the sustainer.
People hate change. Our political class capitalizes on that fact to keep themselves in power. The fact that its people’s lives being sacrificed rather than just their usual larceny is shocking and awful… but they, and we, got over it.

Posted by: John Francis Lee | Jun 11 2005 13:55 utc | 6

A friend told me of an east coast friend who, along with 100 other progressives, paid $900 to attend a weekend seminar on “What We Can Do About World Poverty”. At one point the presenter said “Taking a 50% reduction in your standard of living will have an immediate, positive impact on world poverty. How many of you are willing to do that?”.
Out of the 100 progressives who paid good money to attend this seminar, exactly zero raised their hands.
Now you see why the only way anything is going to change is the hard way.
By the way, memory tells me it was Daddy Bush who first said “The American Standard of Living is not negotiable”, not The Dick.

Posted by: stvwlf | Jun 11 2005 13:56 utc | 7

@DM
talking about Israel is ALWAYS like touching the third rail. It has been brought up before and ends in a lot of hysterical shouting. One tires of it quickly so we talk about it without talking about it. At the end of the day it is the elite that calls the shots and their religion has damn little to do about it.

Posted by: dan of steele | Jun 11 2005 14:11 utc | 8

Amen and preach it, brother Bernhard!
Photoshop-ed American Skull ‘n Crossbones flag comin’ right up…!
We truly are living off the rest of the world, extending our “manifest destiny” to the rest of the globe. Most of the corporate and political greed is seriously short-term and short-sighted; and the example of the “What We Can Do About World Poverty” seminar is a perfect example. The hard way, or no way — that’s how we’ll change.

Posted by: Jeff | Jun 11 2005 14:15 utc | 9

One reason not specifically addressed in this comment is what would happen if the wealthy could not buy off the middle classes? They (the wealthy) would lose quite a bit of their security, and therefore their wealth. But, the American way-of-life, presently configured, is doomed anyway, hence the slow motion contraction of the middle classes and the inflation of the National Security State (quaint term isn’t it). Isn’t that the “real” reason for the PATRIOT Act!? seems likely to me.
P.S. Look to the Ex-Soviet Union as the most contemporary model of this process, although there are many more.
P.P.S. Look to South America for the opportunities to make the USA a more livable place.
P.P.P.S. All imho 😉
peace

Posted by: ed | Jun 11 2005 14:20 utc | 10

Suppose that everyone’s basic needs–the “four necessaries of life,” as Thoreau calls them, meaning “food, fuel, clothing and shelter”–were actually met in a stable and stabilizing manner (consumption neither reducing the needed supply, nor in any way degrading the environment ). A steady state, shall we say, in which greed and agression were universally pointless . Would our conduct be altered in any fundamental way? Perhaps it would, where the consumption of biologically sustaining resources is concerned.

Posted by: alabama | Jun 11 2005 16:26 utc | 11

But I think a deeper drive to consume would remain in force, the one that has to be called, for lack of better term, the drive to “cannibalize” our fellow man. Because survival requires growth, and growth can only happen if we nourish ourselves on others. Whence the sacrament of Holy Communion, and whence, as well, the drive to exchange goods, to collect (and be collected), to engage in all the complex processes of hospitality, etc.. The process can’t be arrested (that would be suicide), and can hardly be controlled–merely stylized. Because we cannibals have to consume our fellow man. It’s hard to imagine what forms this cannibalism would take in a hypothetical steady state of infinitely replenishable resources, but it’s unthinkable to suppose that it wouldn’t actually go on (these thoughts are prompted by a perusal of Walden –which is thoroughly, if obliquely, obsessed with this very process).

Posted by: alabama | Jun 11 2005 16:26 utc | 12

Alabama,
Interesting thoughts! Are you suggesting that god or gods are stylized “cannibalizations”?

Posted by: ed | Jun 11 2005 16:35 utc | 13

Oops. That should be,… “cannibalism” stylized?
Sorry

Posted by: ed | Jun 11 2005 16:37 utc | 14

The regretably Stalinist Bataille pointed out humans don’t rationally organize behavior to accord with resource scarcity but are more interested in the irrationally unproductive expenditure of /surplus.
It’s a powerful argument with immensely contradictory implications for traditional political economy.

Posted by: slothrop | Jun 11 2005 16:46 utc | 15

…irrationally unproductive expenditure of /surplus.

Potlatch

Posted by: ed | Jun 11 2005 17:16 utc | 16

Resource wars are the natural outcome of unrestrained reproduction of the human species but it is too facile to explain the Iraq occupation. If it was about oil, why is less pumping out of Iraq than before the invasion? If it is too keep SUVs running across America why the distinct lack of enthusiasm to sacrifice life and limb? Why aren’t taxes on the wealthy raised to pay for it.
Actually the Iraq Occupation is a vanity war fought for ideological and emotional reasons. As soon as it starts really hurting Americans it will end. But, when China starts expatriating our oil and gas lines reappear, don’t be surprised if Pearl Harbor repeats itself on the Pearl River.

Posted by: Jim S | Jun 11 2005 17:17 utc | 17

Well, eb, Hoc est enim corpus meum has been a vortex, if not the vortex, of the West for 2000 years. And while I’m no student of comparative religions, I’d be surprised if it had no analog in other creeds and confessions.
The burning off of our wealth through wars and defense-spending is certainly a version of the potlach, slothrop–with Bataille for sure–but I don’t know how it might pertain to cannibalism. I have some homework to do on this.

Posted by: alabama | Jun 11 2005 17:37 utc | 18

Contrary to the beliefs of the lefty horsepersons of the apocalypse, we don’t need to return to some sort of imaginary hunter-gatherer commune in order to reduce our resources usage to a reasonable level.
Now, I’m in Europe, so I’m already way ahead of most of the US, but when I do those surveys that try to work out how much resource footprint I cause it comes out at about twice sustainability. I’m sure as hell not living in a mud hut and eating bugs. (Except for snails when I can get them. Though they may not technically be bugs.)
A little moderation, a little technological advance, a little more thought to how we do things, and we’d be able to achieve something quite like a western standard of living for everyone. Hell, forcing Americans into decent sized cars would probably save 10% of oil consumption, possibly more. Unfortunately, the US isn’t interested in being moderate, or thinking, or (increasing) in supporting technological advance.
However, Iraq isn’t really a resource war. It’s far more complicated than that. Vanity, political advantage, ideological insanity, arrogance: it is possible that the Neo-cons believed they were doing the Iraqi people a favour. They certainly thought that the aftermath of war would be easy.
And don’t tell me that the current state of the war is the successful outcome of their plan. That’s total bollox. The current US administration is full of people far too vain to intend for themselves to look like fuck-wits for any advantage. Personally, I think they spent ten years stewing in the dungeon of their little think-tank building their grand little plans and simply lost connection with anything resembling objective reality.
As for Israel, it’s possible that some of them thought that one of the positive side-effects to their little adventure in Iraq would be to help out Israeli interests. There isn’t one motivation for this war, there are many.
I don’t recall discussion about Israel going that mad here, but maybe I’m forgetting something.

Posted by: Colman | Jun 11 2005 19:33 utc | 19

While there are multiple causes/reasons for our invasion of Iraq, DM is right to point the Israeli dimension. After all the recent AIPAC meeting in DC apparently featured a multimedia presentation arguing for some kind of pre-emptive move against Iran. Our representatives, notably Hillary and Nancy Pelosi made speeches at the convention unending support for Israel’s “security interests”. Our leaders on both sides of the aisle are less shy about putting Israel’s interests at the center of our ME policy.
What seems to be true is that a number of disparate interests have dovetailed to form our ME policy:
big oil
greater Israel
premillenialism
military industrial complex, etc.,
As to preserving the American Way of Life – it’s been disappearing since the early 80’s. neo-liberalism is an excellent strategy for pauperizing large segments of the world’s population, including the American population, and the elites both here and elsewhere seemed to determined to do it. Washington Consensus indeed!

Posted by: tgs | Jun 11 2005 19:54 utc | 20

neo-liberalism is an excellent strategy for pauperizing large segments of the world’s population, including the American population, and

Maybe they’re really closet environmentalists?

Posted by: Colman | Jun 11 2005 19:57 utc | 21

Antifa, there’s a job awaiting you @CFR.
Speaking of Israel & resource wars, look at it on the map & think skyrocketing oil prices…. It’s entirely a creation of cheap oil. No other way they can hold out against hundreds of millions of MaleMuslims. The educated elites will quietly migrate back to the West & it’ll be ingested into the general maelstom of the area – maybe in 30 yrs, maybe 100 yrs, but’ll it’ll disperse, evaporate & the remnants will be devoured. (The West has a short range strategy “for victory”, but the Arabs have a long range one – just throw enough money at it to keep the conflict alive & time will take care of the rest.)
If one wants to get involved or learn more about the vast array of constructive things that are being done to reduce consumption & promote sustainable democratic communities – rather than freak out – google Insitute for local self reliance and you’ll be rewarded with an overload of possibilities.
If you spend some time visiting the sites google brings up, you’ll be flabbergasted by the Total Disconnect between what Americans are working to create throughout the country, and the future the Entrenched Politcal & Economic Classes in Wash & NYC have in mind.
It’s not insignificant that Howard Dean comes from Vermont, the most progressive state in America – in the real meaning of the term “progressive” rather than the one used by bloggers trying to disguise their attachment to robber baron economics. No wonder he screams a lot. He’s caught in a vise smack in the middle, trying to take a conservative version of Vt. politics, the politics of real people living their lives, into a world being destroyed by… .

Posted by: Anonymous | Jun 11 2005 20:44 utc | 22

Oops, that was me above.

Posted by: jj | Jun 11 2005 20:47 utc | 23

jj, I’d never have guessed.

Posted by: Colman | Jun 11 2005 20:49 utc | 24

i’m with dan of steel on this one. the state of israel has for some time been run by elites who do not consider the larger possibilities – even for their own population – the area of demographics for one – there is also such a symbiosis between certain elements of the elites in israel & those united states – that it is lunatic to search for a ‘jewish’ thread
i am careful, very careful even when i attack the monster rupert murdoch tp not make a golem out of him but for my hatred to be based on cold, hard facts for fear that it can be rendered into an anti semitism. with murdoch for example – i don’t see anything ‘jewish’ about him at all. & i imagine he considers israel’s govt like he considers all other governments, small change
but i have to disagree, iraq is the issue

Posted by: remembereringgiap | Jun 11 2005 20:54 utc | 25

I agree entirely Anifa, I’ve posted in similar previously, however, R’Giap is entirely correct, Iraq and Afghanistan are the issue.
The deaths, maimings and uncounted ‘collateral’ crimes of these wars must stop, and not in some vague, notional, Demopublican future timetable yet to be defined, but NOW.

Posted by: Outraged | Jun 11 2005 21:20 utc | 26

Actually, most of the resource wars to come in this century will be over potable water.
Oh no, Costner was right! Waterworld will be a reality!
I guess the logical next step is that we will start hearing Paul Martin and Canada in the same sentence as 9-11 and the inclusion of Canada in the Axis of Evil.
I can see it now, since they don’t want missile defense, they are with the terrorists who have ICBMs. As such we are obliged to attack according to the Bush Doctrine. It is nice to have a tool like the Bush Doctrine that they can furry out whenever it’s convenient and then put back under the bed and no one ever calls them on it.

Posted by: Bubb Rubb | Jun 11 2005 21:57 utc | 27

“the world is so much bigger
now,
that you have to clean it”
s

Posted by: sabine | Jun 11 2005 22:21 utc | 28

Well, I think the level of intellectual dishonesty here is palpable.
We can make vague references to an ‘elite’, to ‘MaleMuslims’, but let’s not talk about dual loyalties or examine who is setting the agenda – as it is lunatic to search for a ‘jewish’ thread.
It is a mixture of interests, but no-one here is honest enough, or brave enough (or stupid enough) to touch the third rail.
I guess I’ll just have to continue to talk to myself like a lunatic (although in closing, I will point out again, that even if greater Israel and the ‘jewish thread’ are indeed lunatic perceptions, they are also the perceptions of most Muslim people that I have talked with, therefore I would assume, worthy of open discussion.

Posted by: DM | Jun 11 2005 22:30 utc | 29

Oh, for fuck’s sake, DM. Do you have any idea how often jj has been shouted at around here for the MaleMuslim crap? We’ve started ignoring it except when he says something especially pernicious or nothing would ever get done. No doubt we’ll eventually get around to ignoring your carping on about how the US is entirely under Israeli control. Damn near every poster on this thread has acknowledged that perceived Israeli interests were part of the motivation for the fucking war. What do you want?
And let’s not fall into the trap of equating Judaism with Israel, despite the best efforts of the Israelis.
While you’re at it, what is a “conservative progressive”, apart from someone who doesn’t take your wisdom at face value?

Posted by: Colman | Jun 11 2005 22:48 utc | 30

dm
i do not think there is any doubt about the criminality of both the us & israel governments. you have no argument there. you also have no argument about the interests of both countries being intertwined. you have no argument here that those policies are almost without question against the poor & especially the poor who are black brown or yellow.
israel’s complicity with the apartheid regime in south africa & several latin american & african dictatorships are also firmly grounded in facts & research
what i cannot see is a cabal of any kind. perhaps of common interest & common greed & common lack of sense or of proportion but i cannot for the life of me believe in conspiracies
the slaughterhouse of our world is too stupid for conspiracies. their monologues are without sense, they are incapable of dialogue & polyphony for them represents not multiplicity but chaos
what i do see however is a confluence of interests going for broke & not caring who gets fucked up on the way – enemies certainly but this administration has also mightily fucked up its friends & their credibility
i do not see a jewish cabal or any other vabal for that matter. i see a group of gangters filling their pockets so full of money their pants are falling down revealing distended bellies reeking of putrefaction & mendacity. i see an elite who wouldn’t know its ass from its elbows & certainly does not know in what way – the world is constructed. they would not know of some very interesting ideological conversations taking place within the central committee of the chinese communist party (revealed in china study group) for example – after all they do not know their own minds
it is you dm who has warned against my lack of moderation, you have accused me of being melodramatic, thinking emotionally (which i am proud of) & now you want to infer that there exists – of all things that come from the 19th century – a jewish cabal. no i cannot & will not take that seriouslly. & the greatest thinkers in the arab world do not believe that

Posted by: remembereringgiap | Jun 11 2005 22:55 utc | 31

i see a group of gangters filling their pockets so full of money their pants are falling down revealing distended bellies reeking of putrefaction & mendacity.

Yet again, you produce an image I really don’t need. Thanks very much. How do you suggest I get that out of my head?

Posted by: Colman | Jun 11 2005 22:58 utc | 32

colman my dear irish friend
try to listen to the cd of naseer shamma on the ‘baghdad lute’ & if you don’t have that a christy moore record before planxty tho you will accuse me of sentimental crimes

Posted by: remembereringgiap | Jun 11 2005 23:03 utc | 33

I might skip the Christy Moore thanks. The samples of naseer shamma on his site are helpful though. Unfortunately, iTunes doesn’t have anything by him. What a shock.

Posted by: Colman | Jun 11 2005 23:09 utc | 34

I’ve been proposing that Dean’s conflict with AIPAC has a lot to do with his current problems. Problems, in fact, with Democratic senators and congressmen, who spend most their time raising funds, and protecting the interests of their funders. In Alabama, after speaking in friendly ways about the PLO, Earl Hilliard lost his congressional seat in the Democratic primary to Artur Davis (the district in question belongs to the Democrats). Davis, who’s never said anything about the PLO, received most of his money from New York (or so we’re told). This is how congressmen get along, and this is what the DNC has to deal with. It looks like a “third rail” to me, especially where folks holding office in Washington are concerned. For them, it’s not just one issue among others. It could only become one if there were a Jewish pacifist organization that could match the funding power of AIPAC.

Posted by: alabama | Jun 11 2005 23:11 utc | 35

yr a devil colman. aren’t you proud of your patrimoine

Posted by: remembereringgiap | Jun 11 2005 23:13 utc | 36

comman
just joshing
if i hear the parting glass one more time – i might parlay with paisley

Posted by: remembereringgiap | Jun 11 2005 23:23 utc | 37

Uh, patri-moan maybe? (sorry) Do you know how whiney a lot of Irish traditional stuff is? Yuck. And not in a good, bluesy sort of way. It seems designed to help build resentment and feelings of inferiority.
Some of the sean nos singing can be lovely. Or absolutely horrible. I’ve sat in a pub in Co. Clare listening to an elderly, wizened farmer singing the most beautiful stuff.
And there’s stuff about real life that is great. The sentimental whinging really gets to me though. Maybe when I get old I’ll be more tolerant.
Anyway, I’m a bit of a bastard, having been born in London and spent some time growing up there. Rebel songs don’t really do it for me.

Posted by: Colman | Jun 11 2005 23:24 utc | 38

Darwinian markets

Posted by: Nugget | Jun 11 2005 23:25 utc | 39

Nugget, I have a to-do item to write something about a Sci-Am article on that sort of topic. That article falls apart for me about the point where it supposes that this is a human quality. It seems most primates act the same way to a greater or lesser extent.

Posted by: Colman | Jun 11 2005 23:29 utc | 40

@Colman
A conservative progressive is merely someone who doesn’t want b to make any changes to MoA. Or perhaps someone who otherwise doesn’t want to leave his comfort zone.
‘What I want’ (other than for Americans to go home)- is not a shouting match about ‘jewish cabals’ or equating Judaism with Israel – but rather a sensible discussion on the extent of ‘Israeli Interests’ as part of the motivation for this war. I doubt that America is entirely under Israeli control, but I don’t doubt that the influence is significant, and that we need to fully understand the extent of this influence rather than dismissing it out of hand. It isn’t ‘all about oil’, but the mere mention of Israel seems to send everyone into an apoplexic fit.
And r’giap, I am a plebian, but one who doesn’t give a rat’s arse about the ‘greatest thinkers’ in the arab or any other world. I rather tend to think that I can get as much wisdom from a taxi driver than from any academic.

Posted by: DM | Jun 11 2005 23:40 utc | 41

A conservative progressive is merely someone who doesn’t want b to make any changes to MoA. Or perhaps someone who otherwise doesn’t want to leave his comfort zone.

People who don’t want to break things that work? Ok.

I doubt that America is entirely under Israeli control, but I don’t doubt that the influence is significant

Is there something I’m missing here? Who disagreed with you?

And r’giap, I am a plebian, but one who doesn’t give a rat’s arse about the ‘greatest thinkers’ in the arab or any other world. I rather tend to think that I can get as much wisdom from a taxi driver than from any academic.

So all taxi drivers are just as wise as any academic? Or do you mean a specific taxi driver? Because the guy that drove me last week was a bloody idiot. Or is it just all Arab taxi drivers that are oracles?
Generally, it’s considered sensible to pay some attention to the greatest thinkers in their field rather than random passers-by. I don’t suggest you take your fashion advice from me for instance. Or any other advice for that matter. Except for cookery. I’m pretty good at that.

Posted by: Colman | Jun 11 2005 23:48 utc | 42

No. It’s pretty random with taxi drivers, about the same hit ratio with academics.

Posted by: DM | Jun 11 2005 23:57 utc | 43

Well sure, if you’re looking for wisdom rather than expertise.

Posted by: Colman | Jun 11 2005 23:59 utc | 44

At the risk of being denounced as a “little Heydrich”, I’ll agree with everything that DM said in the last comment, and what alabama said in his last post.
The israeli influence was very significant factor in the lead-up to the Iraq War and is a serious factor in US political fundraising.
Don’t know what harm it does to shine a little light on the big skunk in the corner.

Posted by: FlashHarry | Jun 12 2005 0:00 utc | 45

ô me i amm a superproletarian of three continents who will listen to almost anything except nonsense
a ‘jewish cabal’ whether reified into a labrynthine superstructure or your more simple protocols of zion – makes absolutely no sense to me at all
jews are my brothers & sisters in this struggle -the struggle against the american imperium & all its evil deeds
taxi drivers being oracular & all – there’s a few questions i’d like to ask of them but often this lofty ‘respect’ for the thinking of the dispossesed mask an aristocratic contempt fot them as the divine marquis de sade noted in one of his noble works
taxi drivers like academics are jus part of the polyphony — their connection makes the music

Posted by: remembereringgiap | Jun 12 2005 0:01 utc | 46

@JJ
Thanks in particular for the ILSR link(s).
Having determined some time ago that:
my gangster government is going for broke, and
that I do not intend to go live in the woods with a big pile of canned food, cloth diapers, beans and a rifle,
I’d druther work on transforming my local and regional community to a smaller, sustainable economy and footprint for all of us hereabouts, and all our grandkids, and their grandkids.
No thanks to a career in national political action or fundraising. Piss in the wind. If Democrats sweep all three branches of the government in 2006 and 2008, they’ll still vote to fund the war in Iraq, Afghanistan and then points beyond.
Nah. If I can help my local community get to a self-reliant and cooperative place, great. If my gangster government sends in troops to arrest us all for un-American activities, well I’ll leave a skid mark on their shiny democracy and that will be that.
“I can see the day comin’ when even your home garden is gonna be . . . against the law.”
— Bob Dylan
JJ, thanks for the local links.

Posted by: Antifa | Jun 12 2005 0:05 utc | 47

Ok, R’Giap, you’re being purposely obtuse now.
He hasn’t really called on a Jewish conspiracy, just an Israeli one. Not quite the same thing.

Posted by: Colman | Jun 12 2005 0:07 utc | 48

colman
tho it was j v stalin who had a great deal diplomatically to with the estabishment of israel – for all intents & purposes – for over the last fifty years – the nation of israel is an american construct
& i wasn’t accusing dm of anti-semitism just saying clearly where the frontiers of a real critique of israel must not be crossed – whether you are an academic or a taxi driver

Posted by: remembereringgiap | Jun 12 2005 0:12 utc | 49

just saying clearly

Or not so clearly: I haven’t even started my whiskey and I misunderstood you.

Posted by: Colman | Jun 12 2005 0:14 utc | 50

Don’t worry about RG, there, Colman.
Must be his time of the month.
But when he gets the latest issue of the Atlantic Monthly that I sent him today, he’ll perk right up.

Posted by: FlashHarry | Jun 12 2005 0:16 utc | 51

where the frontiers of a real critique of israel must not be crossed
Free Thinking in a Dirty Glass

Posted by: DM | Jun 12 2005 0:21 utc | 52

How the hell did I get to be referee?
I think that perhaps, just maybe, r’giap is warning against the dangers of anti-Semitism, or of being seen to be anti-Semitic, rather than warning against criticising Israeli interests in the US.

Posted by: Colman | Jun 12 2005 0:28 utc | 53

No one’s talking about a “jewish cabal,” remembereringgiap. We’re talking about AIPAC, a registered lobby competing with other lobbies to capture the commitments of elected officials. AIPAC’s out in the open, and plays the game as straight as anyone else. It’s very generous, and very exact in its expectations. It’s disciplined. I think it’s priorities are insane, but that’s not the point being raised here.

Posted by: alabama | Jun 12 2005 0:38 utc | 54

It’s our point that Democrats running for office in Washington have become utterly beholden to the patron known as AIPAC, and when Howard Dean took issue with AIPAC’s position on America’s policy toward Israel–rightly, in my view–he greatly complicated his task as a practicing politician; if you’re a Democrat nowadays, and you want to secure AIPAC’s patronage–or preclude its patronage of you opponent–you’ll just take a shot at Howard Dean on any pretext whatsoever. Pelosi did it, and so did Biden, but of course they won’t admit it. And why won’t they admit it? For the simple reason that no politician in Washington can admit to depending on patrons (they’d sooner register as lobbyists, which is in fact what they happen to be). No politician can admit this dependency: the fetish of practicing a just and impartial statecraft is the holy of holies among our elected officials, and becomes the very stuff of their falsehood, precluding any candid or honest discussion of the issues, wasting our time, and demeaning our status as citizens.

Posted by: alabama | Jun 12 2005 0:39 utc | 55

The post we are commenting on is about the Iraq War and the sustainability of the US lifestyle. Not the status of the State of Israel – a state that I believe is not only unsustainable but criminal and racist – indeed the foundations are racist. Zionism IS racism. More importantly, they are doing this on our dime. Finally, for those jerks out there who want to whine about treating Israel unfairly when the US government also supports Uzbekistan etc., sorry, the Uzbecks, unlike the Zionists, have no influence on Amercian politics. John Kerry had to grovel to some Jewish Organiztion or the other for simply meeting with an Arab group in Michigan. Disgusting.
Have I hit the third rail yet? No? I, like a number of others, Tony Judt for example now believe there is no “two state solution”. Nor should there be (and that is the important point).
I stopped taking Billmon seriously when some years ago he signed on to the the tempest in the teapot caused by Mel Gibson’s revolting Jesus movie. The big worry was European style “pogram”, your know jews driven out of Cleveland for being “Christ Killers”. That may have worked in the Ukraine 100 yrs ago, but as he should have known, not the US in 2004/05. As it turns out, and as he should have known Israel’s minister for “Tourism” was in Nashville, at the same time, shaking down the very same people that were the natural audience for Gibson’s movie.
In other words, I believe that the Israelis have no stake in the survival of our what is left of our republic at all. They are more than happy to see a Taliban style government in Washington, so long as it is one that believes that it will be raptured up and is dedicated to killing a maximum number of Arabs and more generally Muslims. And more importantly, continue to fund the Israeli genocide project to the tune of 100s of thousands dollars a day. In short, these racist assholes have a stake, a major interest, in destroying our country(they have now have enought nuclear weapons to defend themselves if and when the rapture people become to frisky about the “conversion of the jews”}.
Israel is a parasite writ large!!
None the less, Israeli interests are not the only cause of thy Iraq war. Deal with it.

Posted by: tgs | Jun 12 2005 0:40 utc | 56

I think Godzilla just crushed the Third Rail.

Posted by: Groucho | Jun 12 2005 0:55 utc | 57

tgs,
I’d say you have it about right.
The folks who are in charge of AIPAC and the Likud are no more representative of Israelis, certainly not of Jews, than the present American regime is of Americans.
The problem for right-thinking Israelis and Americans is the circular funding put in place by the American political class and the AIPAC.
The one funds the other.
The amount of money delivered to the Likud is so disproportionate, like a tsunami it carries all before it.
It is up to us Americans to cut off the funding for the Likud. They will wither and die on the vine in nanoseconds with out their vampire tap.
We Americans are presently funding the construction of what can be seen by a man form Mars for what they are : Concentration Camps for the Palestinians in their own country. All of Gaza is to be one large Concentration Camp.
All of this would have been over decades ago if it were not for the enabling funds supplied by the utterly corrupt American political class, Republicrat-Demoplican alike.

Posted by: John Francis Lee | Jun 12 2005 1:44 utc | 58

I should rather say, John Francis Lee (and speaking for ourselves, and for the nearer term), that it is “up to us bloggers to cut off the silence about the (American) funding for the Likud. A finite, modest and pertinent task. The silence at issue is the silence in the press. Blogs are parasitic upon the press, and vice versa (and we know this to be a fact because the press is busily engaged in reporting, mimicking, minimizing and co-opting the medium of the blog). Let the message seep from the blogs to the press; and let the subject be, in particular, the part of the “circular funding” that the press can most comfortably engage–namely the movement of AIPAC’s funds (a metonym for the process as a whole). Let it be known (a.) how much money a given candidate receives from AIPAC; (b.) how much money the given candidate’s opponent or opponents do not receive from AIPAC; and (c.) how this patronage is rewarded, either by the candidate’s supporting of AIPAC, or (and more importantly) by the candidate’s silence about the patronage of AIPAC. Strategically speaking, the first and biggest story here is the silence of the body politic, and of its elected representatives in particular.

Posted by: alabama | Jun 12 2005 2:36 utc | 59

So, assuming you are right in your analysis John Francis Lee, and I do agree with your line, how do you expect to change things so that AIPAC is no longer in control, so that USA does not fund concentration camps in Gaza, so that the Likud does not dictate US foreign policy?
You make sounds as if this could be corrected if only everybody knew what was going on, that some kind of moral imperative would change things as soon as the truth was known. FYI, this has been going on for decades, with no trend toward reality; in other words the lies have ruled and will continue to rule as long as blackmail is practiced by the israelis. Do you expect them to change, to go straight as it were, just because you or I caught them in the act?

Posted by: rapt | Jun 12 2005 2:41 utc | 60

Same for you alabama. Your last, which was posted before mine and before I had a chance to see it, seems to imply that all that is necessary is to shine a light on these blackmail practices for them to be stopped, or at least recognised and controlled.
We are way beyond that in case you hadn’t noticed. It is to the point that lies and blatant power-plays are the accepted practice when it comes to intercultural warfare. If you play the sport and give away a point or two you are dead.

Posted by: rapt | Jun 12 2005 2:52 utc | 61

“The lies have ruled”: yes, rapt, but how? Not only through untruths that are expressly told, but through silence about the truths that are known. Money enforces silence–this much we know–and so the breaking of the silence has to occur where money is least in force, and I take that place to be the medium of the blog. I suggested, above, that the message should seep from the blogs across to the press, but even this pathway is a little too hasty and premature. The message should seep, in the first place, from one blog to another; blogs should, in the process of “seeping,” declare themselves; those that are pro-AIPAC should be encouraged or challenged to say so openly–to articulate this commitment within the context of their message overall; because blogs, in principle, should never be silent about their sympathies and relationships to causes and patrons, openness being their one great claim to a place at the table of public discourse–a claim completely unavailable to the commercial pres (as far as I can tell).

Posted by: alabama | Jun 12 2005 3:01 utc | 62

rapt, I don’t agree–but then my idea of the game itself is admittedly different from yours. “Blackmail” and “intercultural warfare” are practiced, and experienced, by every one of us in our everyday lives speech. We swim, if you will, in the black waters of blackmail–of intimidation, lying and manipulation. This is news to no one. But every moment in the game is a starting point: each of us can, and does make a decision to speak or not to speak,in any available milieu. Many such milieus are not available. We won’t soon speak, for example, on television, or in the pages of major newspapers. But it’s a fact that we speak all the same, and that our words can have a benign effect–first of all on our own personal selves, because telling the truth really does help the morale (as Billmon himself points out in “Howard’s end”); and secondly, to one another within the traffic of the blog (as you and I are doing at this very moment). And blogs link: the linkage of a blog is more than a starting place; it has the capacity to light fires, and we do ourselves an injustice to deny this, or to presume that we can predict exactly where and how any given fire will run its course.

Posted by: alabama | Jun 12 2005 3:18 utc | 63

First, a thank-you to Godzilla, John Francis Lee, and alabama.
If anyone had any concerns about anti-semitism creeping into this debate, then I should think that the presence of the eminent alabama should be enough to quell those concerns.
I do agree with alabama. Blogs are today’s open forums, the town hall meeting, Hyde Park Corner. Open discussion of issues that are avoided in the press can break the silence, and perhaps culminate in a thunderous roar.
There is a clear definable objective here. Challenging the power of AIPAC, breaking the silence, and forcing politicians to be accountable to their electorate. Sort of like a people-power democracy thing.

Posted by: DM | Jun 12 2005 3:24 utc | 64

Times
Say something in public, and you’re bound to be embarassed at how far behind the times you really are.
DM, I think you’ll be amused by this particular link. It says it much better than I do.

Posted by: alabama | Jun 12 2005 3:30 utc | 65

alabama, it may be convenient for you to sit back and make a philosophical and entertaining riddle out of this issue; to some of us it is more urgent, front & center because I/we see it as a direct threat. I dunno about you, but when I am lied to face-to-face with the expectation of the liar to be listened to as if he were a true friend, and then when caught out, he pretends to be offended at my diselief, I am enraged. As now. I offer no apologies for that.

Posted by: rapt | Jun 12 2005 3:34 utc | 66

rapt, I don’t believe, finally that AIPAC is “in control”, or not, at least, to the extent that you do (@10:41 PM); and I certainly don’t believe that “all that is necessary is to shine a light on these blackmail practices for them to be stopped, or at least recognised and controlled” (@ 10:52 PM). It’s never been my experience that the shining of a light works in that way. I do believe in the power of argument, provided the argument truly pursued. For example, my quarrel, on this thread, is not with AIPAC per se , but with the American legislators who let themselves be seduced and intimidated by AIPAC’s purse-strings, and who, in office, try to seduce and intimidate you and me to do the bidding of AIPAC. They infuriate me, those legislators, and I certainly don’t experience this as “a philosophical and entertaining riddle” (@11:34 PM). As a problem to be addressed, rather, and forthrightly so.

Posted by: alabama | Jun 12 2005 3:56 utc | 67

Sure messed up that tag….time to check out for a while.

Posted by: alabama | Jun 12 2005 3:58 utc | 68

@DM, tgs, John Francis Lee, and alabama
Seems I have come in a bit late here. If condemning the wheelings and dealings of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, the Likud government in general and Ariel Sharon in particular, Zionism and the duplicitous actions of those dual-citizen neocons who continue to foster atrocities against Muslims in general and Palestinians in particular and simultaneously not giving a rat’s ass about Judaism or Christianity one way or another means I run the risk of being labelled an anti-Semite… well, call me whatever you want to and let’s get on with the debate. Thanks to you guys for punching a hole through the PC smokescreen (or “third rail” to use DM’s terminology, although I’ve never seen a third rail that was built expressly to protect a sacred cow) before I got here. I wouldn’t have been so diplomatic as you guys have been so far.
@rapt
While I understand both the rage and urgency you feel, we had a bit of a lengthy discourse earlier about well-intentioned activists shooting themselves in the foot. You aren’t going to be able to get your point across with a hammer… as the White House should have learned in its “hearts and minds” campaign long before this milennium. Alabama mentioned in that earlier discussion that timing plays a very pivotal rôle in these things, and I couldn’t agree more. On the 12th of September, 2001, there were people threatening to put my head on a pike for suggesting the very things I am reading on blogs now regarding neocon complicity. Self-righteousness and anger are understandable, but if you want to see how well that gains you a coalition, please read a history of US policy over the last four and a half years.
People are becoming ready to hear these things… painfully slowly, granted, but it is happening. It’s not easy, but try to put your anger on a back burner or you run the risk of driving away people who agree with you. Yes, perfidy is enraging, but it would be much more enraging if the perfidious get away with all of this because we are unable to make ourselves viewed as serious, thoughtful and rational.

Posted by: Monolycus | Jun 12 2005 5:54 utc | 69

alabama, thanks for the Times link. It reinforces my recollection that it was the Americans who pulled the inspectors out in a rush, before it became clear to the world that Sadaam had capitulated and allowed the inspectors to go wherever they wanted. Sadaam miscalculated ever so slightly in how far he could push Bush. In fact it was largely this rush to get the inspectors out that convinced me it was all a lie. It was all so obvious at the time. I think there is very little chance people have gotten smarter since then and I can’t think of any revelation that would lead to impeachment. More likely is the possibility of a gradual realization that there is not now much justification for being there. In other words maybe at some point everything, including the financial aspect, will sink in at once and there will be a change. I think the time has come for a candidate to say how fucked we are, and people are ready to listen. Things weren’t quite bad enough for it to work with Kerry, plus he didn’t impress. The right candidate could have and could now win. I would like to see someone, right out of the gate, start ripping into America’s little primary system. Dean should have stuck with that. Fuck Iowa.

Posted by: x | Jun 12 2005 7:11 utc | 70

The media will never expose the action. They haven’t for three decades. It will take a politician to speak the truth. Once its spake all hands will wonder how it could have been taboo for so long.
This seedy little scam that’s grown out of all proportions with such tragic consequences has nothing to do with religion or race. It’s greed pure and simple. The AIPAC is a lobby whose charge is the care and feeding of the Likud and the American political class. Same as the lobbies in charge of f-22 fighter plane construction, or subsidies to the Pharmaceutical companies. Their pitch was the “poor Jews” and the “Arab terrorists” who wanted to pick up where the Nazis left off. Easy story to sell back home to the constituents for the American political class of three decades ago. It’s since become an Entitlement program. The beauty of the scam is further enhanced by the fact that the deliverable was and is essentially cash, of which some could be saved as seed corn for next year.
The politician who takes this one on need only package the AIPAC with their other scam artist brethren and make the issue of corruption in Washington her number one issue. What can be drawn attention to is that the effects of this particular scam were not only murderous, they were and are in direct opposition to the interests of the American people. 9/11 was blowback, as we all know. All this puts the folks responsible in a very severe light. Hence the third-railedness of even bring this up.
Once this is put on the public record and brought up for discussion by someone running for a national office the AIPAC and the Likud will be dropped like the bad penny they are.
All that’s necessary are the facts of the matter.
You won’t be able to find anyone in Washington able to remember ever having voted for any of the myriad special provisions of the AIPAC/Likud have had written into American law.
The AIPAC and Likud are only powerful as long as they can threaten us with the wrath of their vengeful god of greed. But he lives behind the curtain with megaphones and sopund and fury and will be exposed for the wizened little man that he is.

Posted by: John Francis Lee | Jun 12 2005 7:30 utc | 71

Reality check: AIPAC is one of many groups that bribe US congress – however, it attracts a large share of abuse. Oddly enough. Case in point: the generally pretty cool Cynthia McKinney neglected her district and then was defeated by a very well funded challenger a couple of years back. McKinney’s favorable comments about Arabs and the AIPAC opposition received a huge amount of commentary. However, Cynthia’s pal’ing around with Pakistan and the large contributions that Indian-Americans (of course, Dehli Indians, not Native Americans) then made to her challenger received nearly ZERO notice. It’s one thing to ventilate about AIPAC in the context of generic bribery, but you’ll forgive me I hope for noting that Jews and FOJ have very good reason to be skeptical of the motives of people who are particularly incensed at “Jewish money”. I’m particularly unimpressed with European critics of Zionism who act as if the founding of Israel and the strong paranoia of Israeli politics has absolutely nothing to do with them: all that ancient history is just old words.
As for Likud – their alliance with the US religious christian nuts and the Israeli jewish religious nuts and their de-facto alliance with the muslim religious nuts in Hamas is an astounding illustration of the seduction of power. Jabotinsky – the founder of a political party that now functions as the coordinater of three strains of exactly the same type of ignorant, vicious, superstitious, stupidity that prompted the founding of the Zionist organizations in the first place.

Posted by: citizen k | Jun 12 2005 7:50 utc | 72

French-ifying Retail America.
Not a joke.
Smell the incoming wrath of God.

Posted by: Lupin | Jun 12 2005 8:01 utc | 73

My god, Lupin. Do those fifth columnist liberals have no limits? Will they grab from us our luxurious Wal-Mart experience and roughly drag us into the horror of Le shopping? Can our delicate American sensibilities survive such horror? For one, I can tell you that a single “I don’t give a shit” shrug and an “eh bonne?” at a Wal-mart, where I expect to hear nothing but “yes, sir, can I help you sir”, will send me into the Militia movement.
(BTW: like many conservative anti-elitists, your cited author apparently has not shopped at Wal-mart, where, I can assure you bagging one’s own selection is not unusual).

Posted by: citizen k | Jun 12 2005 9:03 utc | 74

@Lupin
Does James D. Miller disclose how much stock in Wal-Mart he owns to motivate him to make such a ridiculous argument, or are we left to guess? And is it still vogue to resort to Francophobia when reality won’t bend far enough to suit your argument?

Posted by: Monolycus | Jun 12 2005 9:06 utc | 75

DM: It is a mixture of interests, but no-one here is honest enough, or brave enough (or stupid enough) to touch the third rail.
One has to remember that Israel is a US client state, bought and paid for. In a way, Israel has no independent power at all. Its impressive military machine is the creation of others. It is the numba one colonial outpost, a tiny ragged troublesome foothold on the edge of the ME, with Pakistan and Egypt (military regimes paid for by the US…) as second runners. Of course, the US must be seen to pander to it, and the clever Israelis have exploited that as far as is possible, which is only natural. Not to their best interests I might add.
The myth that the US has Israel’s interests at heart is just that, a myth. (Subtracting some loony Zionist neo-cons if one likes, but that is not even necessary.) As long as interests converge, fine. As long as Israel can keep up hype, reinforce hate of Pals (Muslims, Arabs), stigmatising these populations for the US public, wonderful; the conflict must be kept boiling, both Pals and Israelis (and all their neighbors and sympathisers) must continue enraged and up in arms (both metaphorical and literal). Anti-Semitism has to be kept alive..endlessly brandished, documented, feared, repressed..
Bush will not fix the wound in the ME. A peaceful one-state democratic Israel (nothing is impossible!) would have no quarrels with its neighbors and would commerce with them happily, perhaps even creating a positive domino effect. And then what? Who possesses the oil / water etc. then?
The US-Israel relationship is *symbiotic* but at heart cold and mututally disdainful, and therefore both very close and subject to terrible strains, with various factions pulling it tighter and others trying to loosen it. The loosers are the Israeli people, who have been instrumentalised. And, ultimately, the Americans (and many others) as well.

Posted by: Noisette | Jun 12 2005 10:12 utc | 76

” The myth that the US has Israel’s interests at heart is just that, a myth. (Subtracting some loony Zionist neo-cons if one likes, but that is not even necessary.) As long as interests converge, fine. ”
I must remind myself that there are two levels, at least, of interest in both the US and in Israel : the peoples’ interest, and the regime’s interest.
In the case of the regime in either country the interest is to keep terrorism alive and well because the regime’s ticket to power is opposition to terrorism.
In the case of the people in either country the interest in both countries, in all countries everywhere, as Goebels lamented, is peace.
So, yes there is a coincidence of interest between Israel and the United States, but the interests of the war mongers in each state is in opposition to the peoples interest in each state.
That is the simple truth and my thesis is that the simple truth is craved more and more among the populace with every passing day, week, month, year, decade of murder and chaos.
The problem is that the people benefiting are greedy above all else and the sums involved, enshrined, in the Israeli Entitlement Program are vast.
A politician of national stature who chooses to play the truth card will be met with thunderous applause, as Howard Dean is being met with thunderous applause, to the consternation of all the fully-vested interests in the Republicrat-Demoplican-Likud Axis in Washington DC and in the MSM.
But soon someone is going to stride out onto the stage and pull the rug out from underneath the Axis, from noble or ignoble inspiration.
So beware the pendulum swinging the other way when the change does come.
I look to an American of color, without a seat at the table, to stand up and speak the truth. In October there will be a Millions More March on Washington DC. It was begun by Farrakhan but is espoused now by many, many more. I think an audience of several million in the nation’s capital would make a splendid backdrop for a waft of crisp, fresh air.
Perhaps a Democrat of Color, not discounting the color white, might stand up and announce the truth while announcing a primary run for the seat of Joe Biden, Nancy Pelosi, Christopher Dodd, or Hilary Clinton as well.

Posted by: John Francis Lee | Jun 12 2005 11:33 utc | 77

@citizen k
Reality check: AIPAC is one of many groups that bribe US congress – however, it attracts a large share of abuse.
Oh gee. Poor APIAC. They only want to start little wars in the ME, and all they get in return is abuse. And the defense is:- tattletaling about Pakistan.
@Noisette
Israel is a US client state
So, Israel is the ‘client’, and the US pays the bills. Exactly what does the US get in return for this investment?
Of course, the US must be seen to pander to it
I’m a bit lost trying to figure out the subtle difference between actually pandering and just making a show at pandering. How many billions, and how many vetoed UN resolutions would actually make this show at pandering into actual pandering?
The myth that the US has Israel’s interests at heart is just that, a myth
Well, I’m not sure about the heart, but I’d like to know exactly what the myth is, mythical billions, mythical F-16s, mythical guaranteed UN Vetoes, mythical nuclear technology? I mean, you might be right here, this may all not be in Israel’s best interests, but they seem to have some objection to a single state solution.
But I don’t get it. You are saying that Israel hatred of Palestinian is hyperbole, a sham, and this is done ‘for the US public’ ?
Maybe I would get it if you could just explain to me how this symbiotic relationship works. What is it exactly that is of benefit to the US (no oil there, no water) – exactly what good is Israel to America ?

Posted by: DM | Jun 12 2005 11:36 utc | 78

Your emotional and misdirected response makes my point. As Malcom X once said, I hear your words and hear the meaning under them.

Posted by: citizen k | Jun 12 2005 13:12 utc | 79

Re: Israel:
Israel leads in ignoring Security Council resolutions from Haaretz.
And yet we are not bombing Tel Aviv.

Posted by: Lupin | Jun 12 2005 14:42 utc | 80

Lupin: Those types of resolutions count for so very much – as the Dutch proved at Sbrenica when they stepped to the side.

Posted by: citizen k | Jun 12 2005 16:10 utc | 81

you are in denial citizen k.

Posted by: dan of steele | Jun 12 2005 16:28 utc | 82

ô fuck it citizen k
the big bad europeans & their legacy of humanism borne of the darkest circumstances. you never miss an opportunity to take your pot shots at them & for me it is completely asinine – & it final comprehension of history itself is surprisingly slim
& in your book the american empire is just in a bad moemnt – which will soon be ‘righted’ by correct thinking people who will return america to a participatory democracy
for you the dulles brothers don’t exist, the good professor edward teller does not exist, the chicago school does not exist, richard nioxon does not exist, henry kissinger does not exist, poindexter north etc do not exist
no these are just temporary aspects of the american dream
the great great film by abraham polonsky – force of evil – would tell you otherwise

Posted by: remembereringgiap | Jun 12 2005 17:02 utc | 83

@citizen k. You said: Those types of resolutions count for so very much…. I don’t understand why.
The methodology quoted in HAARETZ seemed very fair, filtering out all “arguable” resolutions or even mere condemnations. What remained struck me as being of the same magnitude as the Iraqi resolutions.
Now, if you want to argue Israeli exceptionalism, like the US constantly argues American exceptionalism, go ahead. There certainly are good arguments to be made, but then of course every country, Russia, China, etc. can make similar type of arguments to defend what they see as their legitimitate interests. So where do you draw the line?
You could also argue that Israel should be a “rogue nation” subject to no review but its own. Perhaps. It certainly is a very unusual state.
But so far your argument seems very illogical. Or perhaps I miised something?

Posted by: Lupin | Jun 12 2005 17:29 utc | 84

Lupin: Clearly the Security Council serves the needs of its member states and its resolutions have force only as much as forcing them is valuable to the member states. When resolutions are for PR purposes, as with those condemning Serb atrocities or the genocide in Sudan or Israeli illegalities or Nasser’s crossing of UN lines in Suez, then they are purely useful as toilet paper. When they serve as an excuse, as in Iraq, they have some force even if they don’t mean what the enforcer says they mean. But to cite Israel’s flauting of those resolutions as if it meant anything seems bizzare. The moment TelAviv is no longer useful to the US state is the moment that Israelis need to find bomb shelters: they can bulldoze Palestinians to their hearts content without fear of retaliation until that moment, and at that moment they may be as moral as can be without it doing any good. The moral consistency and high ground of the French, US, Chinese, and Russian states does not impress me.
RGiap: says “& in your book the american empire is just in a bad moemnt – which will soon be ‘righted’ by correct thinking people who will return america to a participatory democracy”, but I don’t have a book like that at all. Your insistence on fitting me into some shabby ideological schema as the “idealist” is sad.
As for the European legacy of humanism, when the European left shuts the fuck up about the evils of the US and Israel and does something about the worldwide genocide caused by the EU agricultural subsidy, I’ll be impressed. But otherwise it reminds me of nothing more than white Americans pontificating about the flaws of black family structures.

Posted by: citizen k | Jun 12 2005 18:24 utc | 85

citizen k
your posts speak for themselves, sad or otherwise

Posted by: remembereringgiap | Jun 12 2005 19:08 utc | 86

I am constantly meeting well educated (often auto-didact) people who have come to the US from other countries, and one very consistent interpretation I hear from so many of them is that there is a Jewish conspiracy ruling the world. When I argue that this is a convenient narrative line to transfer rage onto a particular ethnic group, these acquaintances give me pitying looks and tend to consider me brainwashed.
I rather imagine that it would be a huge contribution to democracy and popular sovereignty (which do not thrive under pogroms) to expose any AIPAC/US-Federal money nexus as an essentially political process and not some fundamental cancer derived from the character of any ethnic group. The parallel between the two sides is clear – both are presiding over robbing and demoralizing the citizenry of the U.S. and Israel. Both claim that the citizens are too foolish to choose wisely. Can we start there, from the soft underbelly instead of the armored head of the dragon?

Posted by: citizen | Jun 12 2005 19:12 utc | 87

citizen, remembereringgiap has expressed a great deal of impatience with the study of our political processes, and this makes sense, given his categorical attitudes.

Posted by: alabama | Jun 12 2005 19:24 utc | 88

rg
is there some software that makes citizen k’s posts speak for themselves? so far i’ve been stuck with reading and trying to reconstruct and retrieve meaning after uploading the graphic symbols into what false consciousenss i have constructed over the years. some software upload would really help.
just thought i would respond in kind to a claim of the apodictic from such an unlikely source

Posted by: razor | Jun 12 2005 19:30 utc | 89

citizen k
My last post is particularly addressed to you because I am impressed at how right you are that there are many groups that move U.S politics through bribery, in particular your notion about a “context of generic bribery”. I think you are right that the AIPAC/US-Federal-politics link needs to be described in that kind of terms, ones that address power, money and damage to democratic rule.
But my experience of this discussion with people I actually know in the flesh is that they get thrown off the scent of the real problem by manufactured Zionist conspiracies. Although I agree that the problem in reality is generic, reality has no ears. The key misconception for the people I talk to, the one that is most worth overturning because the misconception blinds them to their own interests, is that when they look for enemies they look for ethnic groups, and not political groups. I hear you saying look to the generic political problem, and I say, yes, let’s pursue that insight.
But the first step in talking is to free people from misconceptions, not to force insight. If we are going to start withthe misconceptions rather than forcefeed people our “brilliant insights”, maybe AIPAC/Feds is exactly the right place to start. People already identify with this problem. Let’s start where people care.
Ignorance is always the problem, not stupidity. People are already smart enough to figure out the rest once they solve the key riddle in one frame. Have faith – our only task is to punch a single stream through the dam, the water will tear down the whole construction of lies on its own.

Posted by: citizen | Jun 12 2005 19:54 utc | 90

it’s quite simply really, razor. i read. the posts. with perhaps more seriousness than should be applied. i collect in a file what has been said & i reflec again. close reading. it’s something your culture says its proud of. tho i have come to think of you & citizen k as my mike tyson/frank bruno configuration
i have no idea however whether you are academics, taxi drivers, lawyers, screenwriters, male prostitutes, valets, doormen, physicists, gardeners or simple inteliigent analysts
i understand you both loathe the confessional mode as bring a little too gaudy for your tastes – so i presume you dine well
but your posts i would read as i would anything else – i suppose the only posts that i find truly difficult are either the sunlimely anti-semitic or the allusions to other species. crocodiles, sharks, ants
& alabam yes i am impatient & yes i do have attitudes & ideas that could be described as categorical. in fact – i am proud of them – certainly it is not a baton with which i hit myself or you over the head
& if i am impatient, it is because there are a mountain of those most empirical of facts – cadavres

Posted by: remembereringgiap | Jun 12 2005 19:54 utc | 91

I’ve heard that a lot too. Especially in Asia where, outside of China, one generally hears next that the Chinese bankers are part of the conspiracy too.

Posted by: citizen k | Jun 12 2005 19:56 utc | 92

citizen
re the dam – i wish i was as optiistic as you

Posted by: remembereringgiap | Jun 12 2005 19:57 utc | 93

alabama,
I am sympathetic with rememberinggiap’s impatience with U.S. political processes because our government has quite thoroughly defined him as an outsider. So I welcome his perspective and extremely informative articulation of how we are collectively asking for judgment by accepting none.
I have been informed by the perspective of Wendell Berry, that the worst things we do in the U.S. are because we regard our places as disposable. That we are accustomed to moving on after we destroy where we are.
I am committed to staying because it is the only way I know how to educate myself and better love my neighbors and my land (actual land and its critters, not the conceptual “homeland”). I think I can hold together the contradictions of my perspective and his because I know enough (for the moment) about how we have come to them, and because I know enough (for the moment) about how my country still treats lands and peoples like tomorrow’s garbage pile.

Posted by: citizen | Jun 12 2005 20:08 utc | 94

rememberinggiap,
not really optimistic about how easy it is to make that stream (sharpshooters everywhere), but I am quite sure the dam’s engineering is fucked.

Posted by: citizen | Jun 12 2005 20:13 utc | 95

Given the theme of this thread I’m rather surprised that nobody has yet mentioned PNAC.
I’m not up to the wizardry of Outraged or Nugget, but if I remember correctly the central premise was “full spectrum dominance”. Which tends to support Antifa. I also seem to remember that document specified that America had to invade Iraq EVEN IF SADDAM WAS NO LONGER IN CONTROL. Which again supports Antifa.
On the sub-thread: America’s elite does indeed have an interest in (greater) Israel. It is called Jerusalem.

Posted by: John | Jun 12 2005 20:16 utc | 96

John,
I agree, red heifer breeding programs and all.
But it is not the Nostradamus/Revelations/etc. angle that is the most powerful here. That is rather a narrative line that could be disposed of (and will be) when the Rapture skips us all. The key is that there’s a lot of good graft to be earned.
So let’s start with the narrative as the entry point of critique, but remember that we’re after the disease not the symptoms.

Posted by: citizen | Jun 12 2005 20:21 utc | 97

Claims of a Zionist conspiracy are as ridiculous as the claim of a Muslim conspiracy under the leadership of bin Laden..i.e. that all Muslims want to destroy America. Yes, Israeli Likudniks have a strong lobby in the U.S., and they have followers from the radical right like Kahan and the settler movement, and they have the kool-aid kids of the armeggeddon-the hell out of here when god take me through that big worm hole in the sky.
but to claim a Zionist conspiracy makes me sick because the origins of that idea come from the Tsarist pogroms. The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, which is still being shown as a documentary on Egyptian tv, was an rip-off of a French satire about Napoleon III. It made its way to Russia where it was co-opted by the Tsar’s secret police.
A man there, whose name I do not recall off the top of my head, fled from Russia to Germany during the Revolution, with copy of that book, which most likely had also made its way to Germany with other refugees. Many of the idealists behind the Bolsheviks were Jewish. The French Revolution was the first time Jews were allowed status as full citizens, so there was surely a reason for their hope for revolution, as surely as Malcolm X and MLK hoped for various forms of revolution in America via civil rights (whether non-violent or otherwise.)
During Weimar Germany, Jews like Walter Benjamin and Freud and on and on were making their impact on arts, philosophy, theories of human motivation…Jews and Gentiles mixed in this intellectual climate…this was horrible to Germans who wanted a conservative myth of a “German” to also constitute the recently formed Germanic nations.
So, this Tsarist supporter made his way to Germany and he got The Protocols of the Elders of Zion into the hands of a guy named Rudolph Hess, who had this friend named Adolph Hitler who was happy to hear of yet more “proof” of a Jewish conspiracy.
Henry Ford also, with The International Jew, knew who to hate. The industrialists, who feared Bolshevism, knew who to hate and who to finance to build up Germany…good ole Adolph. Jews seeking refuge as they lost more and more rights as humans were refused entry into various nations…they were such a problem…
Heiden, in Der Fuhrer, noted this history at the beginnning of his book, long ago. This history has been recorded over and over, and yet it is still presented as fact to many.
Karen Armstrong’s Battle for God is a really informative look at various fundamentalisms that have led to craziness from all three monotheisms.
Anyway, I think it is ridiculous to claim that Zionists have a conspiracy to take over the world. I think it is right to claim that certain Israelis have too much power and influence over our foreign policy and perceptions of the middle east (as Lt Col Karen Kwiatkowski claimed way back when in her series of articles about Israeli Generals helping to plan the invasion of Iraq.)
But, just as with Roosevelt, Stalin and Churchill, such mutually beneficial alliances last as long as they do not interfere with bigger, internal goals. If you think that the Rockfellers and Sciafes and Murdochs care about the Likudniks any more than it takes them each to achieve market goals, or that the Talibornagains care about any Jews that do not convert for that big superslide ride to heaven, you’re, imo, naive, and too willing to play into the long-standing fear of “the other” that has been a constant of Jewish existence since the diaspora.
fwiw, I’m not Jewish. but hopefully you know there are very orthodox Jews who do not support a Jewish state because they believe it violates the terms of the coming of the messiah. There are reform Jews who do not believe in a messiah, per se, but a messianic era of peace that is shared by all religions, all people, and is based upon the same sort of basic human rights for all, in terms of needs, that many other people see as the baseline for decency in this world.
Anyway, since people are so afraid to touch the third rail, I’m driving a subway car down the tracks made by former posts on this thread.

Posted by: fauxreal | Jun 12 2005 20:51 utc | 98

fauxreal,
Please correct me if I’m wrong about this. My impression is that there are two types of Judaism. Those who follow the Pentatuech(?) and what Christians call the Old Testament. And those who follow the Babylonian Talmud.
My impression is that the Talmud says it is OK to treat the Other less well.

Posted by: John | Jun 12 2005 21:22 utc | 99

Holy shit John, are you seriously going to try to pretend that Jewish beliefs are the issue?
To what end?

Posted by: citizen | Jun 12 2005 21:28 utc | 100