“Where reason ends, violence begins.” - author unknown
I was doing some research to see how the parties fall on the
event of making war – it turns out they are pretty much the same. As a country
we have been at war – constantly – under presidents of both parties. The Democrats
have actually started more wars than the Republicans. However, it is the use
and length of wars as political instruments that interests me here.
The most recent being the most convenient example, I am
looking at the pointed political use of the game of war being played in
the Middle East in structuring and running our country. This is evident in the ignition and re-ignition
of hostilities in the middle east that were the hallmark of the Bush eras and
passed on to subsequent presidents to deal with as a convenient resource or a rancorous
recurrence, depending on how they are viewed and used. Whenever needed, there
is always a convenient diversion and popularity boost to be found in promoting, escalating or deescalating overseas violence to become the great and wonderful protector and leader of the American people and preserve their way of life. And
that is exactly what a number of American Presidents have done in our very
human and foible-filled past.
While all the patriotic hoopla and rhetoric of this effort
goes on, no one seems to mind or notice national debt tripling into billions
and trillions, companies and executives fattening on war budgets garnered from tax
revenues, and piddling little items at home such as racial and gender equality,
the relocation of jobs to tax free countries to line already rich pockets at
the expense of American workers, loosening of environmental protections. burgeoning medical costs, an overrun drug
industry, increased hate and violence at home, and now, hopefully, impeachment.
Who would impeach a President so obviously posturing heroism
rhetoric and cowboy actions? “Imminent Threat” is a powerful and unconfirmable
term being used liberally by an administration with a reliable history of untruth.
And in truth, Mr. Trump is following a long and successful, though possibly distasteful,
line of multiple presidents who have used overseas incidents to create domestic
support. A nice little war is a political management tactic, an economic
booster and a great distraction. “Collective fear stimulates herd instinct and
tends to produce ferocity toward those who are not regarded as members of the
herd.” - Bertrand Russel, Unpopular Essays. A convenient little war, or the threat of it, is a great way to
solidify a voting base and a great way to beef up support for turning a blind
eye to clear misuse of power. More and direct information on the impeachment charges was being released as Trump ordered the attack on Soleimani in Iraq.
In a recent NY Times "On Politics" article Lisa Lerer points out Mr. Trump’s appealing to both hawkish and
isolationist arms of the Republican Party in his most recent strike hard and pull back
tactics. More evidence of the use of this move to consolidate his base and distract
and divert the American people with the threat of war. I was bemused this morning
as I read her article offering these views in the NY times: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/08/us/politics/trump-iran-republicans.html
Authorizing an inconsistently over-scaled covert strike to
incite an international incident to consolidate a base at home – a suspicious
use of power? Borderline misuse? But legal, all legal. Yeah, we’ve got that.
Right here. Made in America.
