Newspaper logo  
 
 
Bookmark and Share
Local News & Opinion

Ref. : Local Newsbriefs

Travel
Letters

Ref. : Letters to the editor

Open Letters:

03.05 Open Letter to Congressman Bart Stupak

Health & Environment

Video National Health Care Systems In Other Countries

03.20 The Death of American Populism

03.18 Pressure Drop: Brave Sir Dennis Ran Away

03.12 Slick Barry and the $100-Billion Medicaid/Medicare Fraud Claim

03.09 Kill Bill: Death to Obamacare!

03.09 Obama’s Rhetoric May Be “Fiery,” But His Health Care Reform Is Still Lukewarm

Media Watching

03.17 CNN Scrapes Bottom of Right-Wing Barrel With Erickson Hire

03.16 WPost Blames Obama First, on Israel

03.16 Letter to the New York Times' Editor: Stovepiping To Persia

03.12 Cud and Complicity: Burying the Alternatives to Empire's Dominion

03.11 NYT and the ACORN Hoax

03.05 Sorry, Rove, Bush Did Lie About Iraq

03.03 It's Snow News

03.03 The Woeful Washington Post

Ref. : The Daily Howler

Legal Matters

02.26 America's Supremes: Court Over Constitution

US Politics, Policy & Culture

03.11 Power Rangers: Policing the System With the "Fightin' Progressives"

03.09 Thinking About Countings

03.07 Unnatural Acts: Breaking the Fever of Militarism

02.25 Future Shock: A Better World Beyond the Imperium

“High Crimes?”

03.19 Israel's Troubling Tilt Toward Apartheid

03.18 The Lawfare Project's Anti-Democratic Agenda

03.17 Expecting Gen. McChrystal to Reduce Afghan Civilian Casualties is Like Asking Ted Bundy to Cut Sex Harassment in the Workplace

03.16 America's Secret Prisons

03.13 Palestinian Dispossession in East Jerusalem

03.12 Israeli Settlement Expansions Continue

03.11 Brutalizing Palestinian Children

03.08 The Russell Tribunal on Palestine: Barcelona Session

03.05 Targeting Israeli Apartheid

03.01 America's Permanent War Agenda

02.25 Global Sweatshop Wage Slavery

Economics & Business Non/Mis/Malfeasance

03.19 The Growing Movement For Publicly-Owned Banks

03.19 America's "Houdini Recovery" under IMF-Type Austerity

03.14 The Crisis in America's Telecommunications Network

03.09 The Business of Water: Privatizing An Essential Resource

03.05 Is the Recovery Real?

03.04 IMF-Style Austerity Measures come to America: What “Fiscal Responsibility” Means To You

03.04 Barry C. Lynn's "Cornered: The New Monopoly Capitalism and Economics of Destruction"

03.02 Obama's Budget Revealed: Money for Wars and Weapons, While More Americans Face Joblessness and Hunger

03.01 Thinking About Fees

International

03.15 Peace Process Hypocrisy: Stillborn from Inception

03.03 Muslim Disunity

03.02 Funding Israeli Militarism, Belligerence and Occupation

02.26 Iran Captures a 'Good' Terrorist

We are a non-profit Internet-only newspaper publication founded in 1973. Your donation is essential to our survival.
Google
This site Web
  Rewriting History with ''Noble Lies''

COMMENTARY:

Rewriting History with "Noble Lies"

by Greg Guma
Lying is more than an occasional option with this administration, it is essential, as is an endless supply of enemies, both abroad and at home. Study the writings of philosopher Leo Strauss, a great believer in the usefulness of lies in politics.
Attempting to explain why governments so often pursue policies contrary to their own interests, historian Barbara Tuchman provides four basic reasons, often acting in combination: tyranny, excessive ambition, incompetence, and folly.

Looking specifically at the Vietnam War, she notes that although those who designed and implemented that debacle understood the obstacles and dangers, they insisted on "staying the course" due to a combination of overreaction, illusions of omnipotence, and a shortage of reflective thought--the inability to balance the possible gain against the harm being done both in Vietnam and at home. She categorizes these as forms of folly, an explanation more generous than many people currently apply to the Bush administration.

Although the ingredients are largely the same — exaggerating the "national security" imperatives at work, assuming that the world’s “only remaining Superpower” can’t possibly lose, and refusing to consider that an invasion could spark global resistance, potentially on a scale that is impossible to contain--describing the Iraq War as pure folly is far too simple.

The first alternative explanation, advanced largely by elected accomplices eager to save face, was incompetence. The war began due to a "massive intelligence failure," they have argued, pointing to years of so-called evidence that Saddam Hussein's regime posed a serious, although perhaps not imminent, threat to Iraq's neighbors and the West. But even such semi-critics, both liberal and conservative, endorsed the idea that the United States should pursue "regime change." In other words, they assumed the right and the power to transform a country, to replace its power structure and "democratize" it. Clearly, a delusion of grandeur.

At this point, most people in the United States can see the re-writing on the wall and appear to believe their leaders have been deluded, somewhat incompetent, or both. Others claim what could be defined as folly. What remains is a heated debate over whether this completely explains the situation, or if darker forces are at work. In short, was it just a terrible mistake, or did the Bush administration consciously mislead the country? If the latter, the issue becomes whether its actions meet the definition of tyranny.

Sensitive to the danger, Pres. George Bush used a Veterans Day speech to respond to his critics, charging that it is "deeply irresponsible to rewrite the history of how that war began." His version is that removing Hussein from power had "strong bipartisan support" and that no one pressured the intelligence community to alter its apparently erroneous judgments. But this is itself an historical rewrite.

What Congress authorized was the use of force, if necessary, to ensure that Iraq either gave up its weapons of mass destruction, or proved it didn't have any. Although it is disingenuous for Democrats to claim that they didn't know Bush's true aim, the fact is that their votes voiced a potentially different outcome. It is also clear that the information Congress received was not complete, but rather scrubbed of all doubts, warnings, and qualifications.

In September 2000, Dick Cheney commissioned a strategy paper by the Project for a New American Century. This telling document asserted that "the need for a substantial American force presence in the Gulf transcends the issue of the regime of Saddam Hussein," and pointed out that the public would not agree to a war unless there were a "catastrophic and catalyzing event--like a new Pearl Harbor."

So, what is the real history of this war? The story begins long before Congress voted, even before the 9/11 attacks so often used to justify an open-ended "war on terror." In September 2000, prior to Bush's installation in the White House, Dick Cheney commissioned a strategy paper by the Project for a New American Century. This telling document asserted that "the need for a substantial American force presence in the Gulf transcends the issue of the regime of Saddam Hussein." It also pointed out that the public would not agree to a war unless there were a "catastrophic and catalyzing event —like a new Pearl Harbor."*

During the campaign, Bush and Cheney presented a very different agenda, criticizing the idea of nation-building and, in Cheney's word, any moves suggesting that "we were an imperialist power." As soon as the new Pearl Harbor presented itself, however, the entire administration united behind a series of arguments favoring war, all of which have been proven false. Bringing democracy to Iraq, transforming the Middle East, and permanently installing U.S. forces in Gulf were not among them.

Were lies told? That's the issue on the table, but the Bush administration cares not, since many of the war's architects are admirers of philosopher Leo Strauss, a great believer in the usefulness of lies in politics. Secrecy and deception, a veritable culture of lies, are necessary, he argues, to protect "the wise"--those with a natural right to rule--from the vulgar masses, who would otherwise be ungovernable and rise up against them. He calls such tactics "noble lies," the grease of aggressively nationalistic politics.

"Because mankind is intrinsically wicked, he has to be governed," Strauss once wrote. "Such governance can only be established, however, when men are united--and they can only be united against other people."

This neatly explains not only why and how the nation was misled into war, but also why Bush is now aggressively attacking his critics. Lying is more than an occasional option with this administration, it is essential, as is an endless supply of enemies, both abroad and at home.


*"Further, the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event--like a new Pearl Harbor," page 51 of the Sept. 2000 report called "Rebuilding America’s Defenses: Strategy, Forces and Resources for a New Century." View entire report here. Learn more about the Project for the New American Century by clicking here.

Greg Guma is the co-founder and an editor of Vermont Guardian, (www.vermontguardian.com), a statewide weekly newspaper. This editorial was first published in the Vermont Guardian, and is published in the Baltimore Chronicle with permission of the author, who may be reached at gguma@vermontguardian.com.




Copyright © 2005 The Baltimore Chronicle. All rights reserved.

Republication or redistribution of Baltimore Chronicle content is expressly prohibited without their prior written consent.

This story was published on November 21, 2005.

 

Public Service Ads:
Verifiable Voting in Maryland