Fucking America!

[Petra]

This shit makes me so grumpy. You know I love you Americans that I've come to know (well, a few of you, anyway ), but your fucking nation is a party at others expense.

I'm not even going to blame Bush, 'cos this kind of crap has been going on for decades, regardless of which party holds office. What am I talking about? Well, this is what I'm talking about. America is like the Mafia - it's success has only come through extortion, murder, exploitation, and theft. Argh! Sorry guys, but I cannot wait for America to fall. And no, it's not a "jealousy" thing - there's nothing to envy in a greedy, sociopathic criminal.

Whatever it is, OUR President has decided that THEIR president has to go. This is none too easy given that Chavez is backed by Venezuela's poor; and the US oil industry, joined with local oligarchs, has made sure a vast majority of Venezuelans remain poor.

Some months ago, a little birdie faxed to me what appeared to be confidential pages from a contract between John Ashcroft's Justice Department and a company called ChoicePoint, Inc., of Atlanta. The deal is part of the War on Terror.


Justice offered up to $67 million of our taxpayer money to ChoicePoint in a no-bid deal for computer profiles with private information on every citizen of half a dozen nations. The choice of citizens to spy on caught my eye. While the September 11 highjackers came from Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Lebanon and the Arab Emirates, ChoicePoint's menu offered records on Venezuelans, Brazilians, Nicaraguans, Mexicans and Argentines. How odd. Had the CIA uncovered a Latin plot to sneak suicide tango dancers across the border with exploding enchiladas?


What do these nations have in common besides a lack of involvement in the September 11 attacks? Coincidentally, each is in the throes of major electoral contests in which the leading candidates -- presidents Lula Ignacio da Silva of Brazil, Nestor Kirschner of Argentina, Mexico City mayor Andres Lopez Obrador and Venezuela's Chavez -- have the nerve to challenge the globalization demands of George Bush.

However, when Mexico discovered ChoicePoint had its citizen files, the nation threatened company executives with criminal charges. ChoicePoint protested its innocence and offered to destroy the files of any nation that requests it.


But ChoicePoint, apparently, presented no such offer to the government of Venezuela's Chavez.


In Caracas, I showed Congressman Nicolas Maduro the ChoicePoint-Ashcroft agreement. Maduro, a leader of Chavez' political party, was unaware that his nation's citizen files were for sale to U.S. intelligence. But he understood their value to make mischief.


If the lists somehow fell into the hands of the Venezuelan opposition, it could immeasurably help their computer-aided drive to recall and remove Chavez. A ChoicePoint flak said the Bush administration told the company they haven't used the lists that way.

Our team located a $53,000 payment from our government to Chavez' recall organizers, who claim to be armed with computer lists of the registered. How did they get those? The fix that was practiced in Florida, with ChoicePoint's help, conscious or not, appears to be retooled for Venezuela, then Brazil, Mexico and who knows where else.


Here's what it comes down to: The Justice Department is averting it's gaze away from Saudi Arabia while shoplifing voter records in Venezuela. So it's only fair to ask: Is Mr. Bush fighting a war on terror -- or a war on democracy?

Fuck the New American Century.

[livius drusus]

That is some sick, sick shit, luna.

[Petra]

Originally Posted by livius drusus

That is some sick, sick shit, luna.

And this kind of thing has been going on for years, liv.

America's impact on the rest of the world stinks. Grubby politics and big business. So much lies at your feet; but guess who pays?

I get quite torn, because of my friendships - but I swear I'll support any global action that brings America to it's knees. As a nation, an ideology, a business, and a culture, America is a poison. Totally toxic.

[livius drusus]

I understand, luna, really. I have British friends; it doesn't mean I want India to be a colony.

You know, when I was in my early teens, I read an article in my dad's Fortune magazine about the decline and fall of the British Empire. The conclusion mentioned that the US was bound to go through something similar sooner or later, and it totally scared the shit out of me. Keep in mind that I had never lived in the US at that point, but I was still so deeply invested in the idea of its superpowerhood that it actually caused me pain to think of it being gone.

Needless to say, those days are over. I found out CIA subversion of post-war Italian elections was real, not my friends making shit up just to fuck with me. I found I could no longer rationalize US support of fascist and military dictatorships using some parroted Kissingerian theory of realpolitik. I read stuff.

So I agree: the US has too much power which it uses horridly. I think we would all be better off if it were just a regular ol' country.

[Petra]

Originally Posted by livius drusus

I understand, luna, really. I have British friends; it doesn't mean I want India to be a colony.

Good analogy.

You know, when I was in my early teens, I read an article in my dad's Fortune magazine about the decline and fall of the British Empire. The conclusion mentioned that the US was bound to go through something similar sooner or later, and it totally scared the shit out of me. Keep in mind that I had never lived in the US at that point, but I was still so deeply invested in the idea of its superpowerhood that it actually caused me pain to think of it being gone.

I actually think that the USA should break up into smaller countries. The only reason I support the growing EU is as a counter-weight to US superpowerdom and the America dollar.

I guess as German-born Kiwi with duel British citizenship, I grew up with a more UK/European/Asian/Polynesian focus. America was just somewhere flashy that pumped out entertainment products. Later, from about Reagan on, I learned to fear America and it's cultural/economic hegemony and war-profiteering nature. The UK and France weren't too favoured, either. The thing is, it almost - almost - doesn't matter who the POTUS is; the President is just a puppet when it comes to all this CIA/big business crap. So are the everyday people of the USA. It's the CIA and big business that fully understands the power of realpolitik. They are mercenary.

Needless to say, those days are over. I found out CIA subversion of post-war Italian elections was real, not my friends making shit up just to fuck with me. I found I could no longer rationalize US support of fascist and military dictatorships using some parroted Kissingerian theory of realpolitik. I read stuff.

Yup. There's no need to make shit up - the facts may read like fiction, but they are facts.

So I agree: the US has too much power which it uses horridly. I think we would all be better off if it were just a regular ol' country.

Or several smaller countries, perhaps. Maybe one day that'll happen.

As it stands now, though, it's one giant Mafia - and all the terrorists wear Armani suits.

[JoeP]

Originally Posted by lunachick

I actually think that the USA should break up into smaller countries.

That is a fantastic idea. Where shall we draw the boundaries? Obviously California could make up a sizeable country on its own.

What about Texas? Would that be part of the "South" with Louisiana, Florida, the Carolinas, and so on?

DC, New York and all of New England?

Would the central states and the midwest, wherever that is, form a coherent whole? Or just a hole?

Does Utah need to be on its own - "one nation under Joseph Smith"?

[livius drusus]

Originally Posted by lunachick

I actually think that the USA should break up into smaller countries. The only reason I support the growing EU is as a counter-weight to US superpowerdom and the America dollar.

Ah... Is that the sweet scent of Anarchism I detect? Americalets could be great, but it seems far more likely to me that they'd be horrific. Most of the separatists I know of strike me as utter cunts (present company and indigenous peoples movements excluded), so what are the odds the Diced States of America would be great places to live?

Scroll down here to see a list of the current secessionist types. He he... Silly Texas....

I guess as German-born Kiwi with duel British citizenship, I grew up with a more UK/European/Asian/Polynesian focus. America was just somewhere flashy that pumped out entertainment products. Later, from about Reagan on, I learned to fear America and it's cultural/economic hegemony and war-profiteering nature.

I woke up to Reagan's assholishness when he bombed Libya and Quaddafi fired those missiles at Lampedusa in revenge. That, my profound, visceral fear of nuclear war, Genesis' Land of Confusion video and Sting's Russians made me hate the bastard.

The thing is, it almost - almost - doesn't matter who the POTUS is; the President is just a puppet when it comes to all this CIA/big business crap. So are the everyday people of the USA. It's the CIA and big business that fully understands the power of realpolitik. They are mercenary.

Yup. That's why Chomsky says he'll never run for president. Wise man. It also explains how someone like Jimmy Carter, who seems to me someone who truly cares about human rights, could support the likes of the Shah of Iran.

As it stands now, though, it's one giant Mafia - and all the terrorists wear Armani suits.

Many of them can't even make that claim, I'm afraid. I'd have more respect for them if they at least spent their billions in good taste.

[lisarea]

Originally Posted by lunachick

I guess as German-born Kiwi with duel British citizenship

So you're an American citizen? Get it? Get it? Har har. That were a spelling joke. I done burnt ya.

Anyway, I have to say that, on paper, I like America the best. I like our Bill of Rights better than anything else I've seen. I like that we're a young, diverse nation, and that we're not, on paper, as xenophobic as so many other cultures.

What makes me sick is, say, look at Canada's Bill of Rights. It's lame. It's a watered-down copy of ours. It starts out with a bunch of crap about "as long as it's OK with the monarchy" that just makes me sick. And I don't care for Canada's casual approach to free speech, either. I despise--and I do mean despise--the concept of SUBJECTS.

But why is Canada so much better off than us? Because, despite the fact that, on paper, we are the people, we're not. We're subjects, too, whether we say so on paper or not. And we're not just subjects to some flaccid old bats in RenFaire costumes, either. We're subjects of legal fictions. And our legal fictions are fucking HUGE. They get our tax money. They whine about their civil liberties. They pay our politicians. They write our fucking laws. They dictate our foreign policy. And we just sit around, fat and happy, drinking the Kool Aid.

We believe that we're better than the rest of the world. Not just the government. Not just the politicians. The rest of us. We don't know what exactly it is we believe in, but we know it's red, blue, and mostly white. We value our own lives I'd say ten times as much as we value the lives of others. And that's a conservative estimate.

We're pointlessly nationalistic. We're short-sighted and greedy. When we hear about our own troops going into Iraq and rounding up civilians looking for evidence that they support Saddam, we cheer. Anyone remember the picture of the Iraqi guy, sitting on the curb with soldiers pointing their guns at his head because they found a picture of Saddam in his house? We figure it's A-OK for us to invade a country and imprison and torture civilians there because they just might support a government we don't approve of. How many of us, though, would feel the same way if a more civilized nation invaded us, searched our homes for pictures of Bush, and tortured those who disagreed with them? Would we be terrorists, too, if we resisted these invading armies? Would we mind all that much if they stripped our moms naked and humiliated them because they didn't agree with them?

And do we even know what sort of government we're fighting so hard to spread? Just saying "Freedom" doesn't count. What is the point of our constitution, and our democratic process, if we don't know what the fuck we stand for? And make no mistake, we do not know.

The foundations of American politics are entirely meaningless if the people don't know what's going on. Most of the people don't know what's going on. The foundations of American politics are almost entirely meaningless.

And in "What Americans Know About Politics," published in 1996, political scientists Michael X. Delli Carpini and Scott Keeter cite some similarly dreary findings: Forty-five percent of Americans attributed the phrase "From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs" to the U.S. Constitution rather than to Karl Marx's "Communist Manifesto." Nearly a third of Americans thought the Constitution guaranteed every American a job, 42 percent thought it guaranteed health care, and 75 percent thought it guaranteed a high school education.

To be fair, most of us know what the constitution guarantees: All the candy we can eat, free pornography, government subsidies for Everybody Loves Raymond, and free long distance phone calls with every arrest.

But enough of us don't know, or don't care, that we've allowed the foundations of our government to be eroded through the tireless efforts of those with the most to gain from doing so. And if they say the word "Freedom" a few times, we start to believe that we stand for pure, unfettered capitalism and world domination.

Now, I don't even really have a problem with interventions sometimes. To be honest, I'd fucking love to see every nation in the world have a bill of rights guaranteeing the right to vote, and freedom of speech and religion and all that. And I don't have a problem with using aid and embargos and even deposing the occassional bloodthirsty dictator, as long as we're really doing it in the interests of oppressed people, and as long as we let them run their governments, and give them the tools to rebuild their countries and retool their governments.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that if our power were really what it's supposed to be, what it was set up to be, and if our priorities and our goverment recognized our real foundations, the fact that we're huge and influential would be a good thing for everyone.

But it's not.

[The Lone Ranger]

The thing that impresses me on reading that article is that no U.S. newspaper would dare print such a thing. "Liberal media" my eye! I find that I can learn a lot more about the United States' foreign policies from sources like the BBC than from even the most careful perusal of U.S. sources (even NPR, sadly). It's a long list of things that don't get printed in U.S. newspapers or mentioned on news broadcasts.

And don't get me started on television news! Granted, I haven't watched television news in years, but I catch it every now and again when visiting friends, and I'm simply astonished at how shallow, sensationalist, and almost completely lacking in substance it is.

Originally Posted by livius drusus

So I agree: the US has too much power which it uses horridly. I think we would all be better off if it were just a regular ol' country.

I agree wholeheartedly.

Originally Posted by lunachick

The thing is, it almost - almost - doesn't matter who the POTUS is; the President is just a puppet when it comes to all this CIA/big business crap. So are the everyday people of the USA. It's the CIA and big business that fully understands the power of realpolitik. They are mercenary.

That's the truly frightening thing.

Given its power and wealth, the United States could be a great country. By that, I mean that it could have a huge positive influence on the world -- leading the way in reducing environmental damage, feeding the hungry, educating and helping the poor, and so on and so on. But do we use our wealth and power responsibly? Not at all!

Given the way that our political system works nowadays, I think it's all but impossible for an honest and decent person to make it to the White House. You have to sell your soul to get there.

Jimmy Carter might -- I repeat, might -- have been an exception, but I suspect that he'd never have made it into office if not for the collective disgust over Nixon's Watergate affair and everyone (read Ford) who was associated with him.


I do think an important distinction must be made (as you have, actually) between the American people and the American government. The American people are mostly kind, decent, and generous people (if hopelessly uninformed on world affairs), in my opinion. The American government is corrupt, power-hungry, and ruthless.


I'm perfectly serious when I say that I think of emigration more and more frequently these days.

*Sigh*

Michael

[Dingfod]

Originally Posted by The Lone Ranger

I'm perfectly serious when I say that I think of emigration more and more frequently these days.

You and me both, pal.

But, perhaps it was inevitable, as predicted in Paul Kennedy's book The Rise and Fall of Great World Powers: Economic Change and Military Conflict 1500-2000 (published 1987). It's been a long time since I read it, so I grabbed this quote from an outdated (pre-Iraq War) review:

Originally Posted by Paul Kennedy

Once their productive capacity [is] enhanced, countries...normally find it easier to sustain the burdens of paying for large-scale armaments in peacetime and of maintaining and supplying large armies and fleets in wartime. It sounds crudely mercantilistic to express it this way, but wealth is usually needed to acquire and protect wealth. If, however, too large a portion of the state's resources is diverted from wealth creation and allocated instead to military purposes, then that is likely to lead to a weakening of national power over the longer term. In the same way, if a state overextends itself strategically--by, say, the conquest of extensive territories or the waging of costly wars--it runs the risk that the potential benefits from external expansion may be outweighed by the great expense of it all--a dilemma which becomes acute if the nation concerned has entered a period of relative economic decline.

One could argue that as a percentage of GDP, the US, even with it's Iraq War,has not even come close to World War II military expenditure levels. Add to what we are spending to the size of the national debt and the deficits as far as the eye can see along with declining energy production, I can see how the USA might indeed become marginalized globally in the future, out of economic necessity. But, the question is, will it go quietly, or go down kicking and biting all the way?


Warren

[Petra]

Originally Posted by The Lone Ranger re TV news

...I'm simply astonished at how shallow, sensationalist, and almost completely lacking in substance it is.

I often wonder how the ratings of shows such as Survivor and Jerry Springer compare with the ratings of TV news, as they appear to be competing in the same race.

Given its power and wealth, the United States could be a great country. By that, I mean that it could have a huge positive influence on the world -- leading the way in reducing environmental damage, feeding the hungry, educating and helping the poor, and so on and so on.

Unfortunately, the character of those who pursue great power and wealth is not condusive to that vision, Michael. And those people run the show.

I think those countries and their leaders who don't feel the need to own and rule everything at any cost are much more likely to have positive influence in the world. Alas, that influence is already a tiny thing compared to the behemoth, and is diminishing.

Given the way that our political system works nowadays, I think it's all but impossible for an honest and decent person to make it to the White House. You have to sell your soul to get there.

You guys really need to do something about that.

[JoeP]

Originally Posted by The Lone Ranger

And don't get me started on television news! Granted, I haven't watched television news in years, but I catch it every now and again when visiting friends, and I'm simply astonished at how shallow, sensationalist, and almost completely lacking in substance it is.

We get CNN and I can see exactly what you mean. Did you notice after Sept 11th there was a sudden deepening of serious reflection, and lots of comment on how it might be a landmark shift in American news attitudes? It lasted a couple of months.

Originally Posted by The Lone Ranger

I'm perfectly serious when I say that I think of emigration more and more frequently these days.

Don't! The rest of the world needs clear-headed people to stay in America and counterbalance the rest. Correct the system from the inside. However impossible it seems.

[freemonkey]

Originally Posted by The Lone Ranger

the American people....... (if hopelessly uninformed on world affairs)

This is it, in a nutshell. We have the power to make things better, to do things better, to be better. But instead, a huge number of Americans choose to be distracted by non-issues.

Lisa, I agree, excellent post.

[Ronin]

Originally Posted by lunachick

And this kind of thing has been going on for years, liv.

America's impact on the rest of the world stinks. Grubby politics and big business. So much lies at your feet; but guess who pays?

I get quite torn, because of my friendships - but I swear I'll support any global action that brings America to it's knees. As a nation, an ideology, a business, and a culture, America is a poison. Totally toxic.

<emphasis mine>

Aside from the myopic vitriol discounting that which this country has done to improve the human condition...I found this to be the most disturbing and disheartening sentiment.

I may not like everything about the way this country functions, but I'll still defend it...even for it's potential...against any global action that attempts to bring it down.

That said, anyone want to suggest which power would hypothetically fill the vacuum left in the wake of a defeated America?

[Petra]

Originally Posted by Ronin

<emphasis mine>

Aside from the myopic vitriol discounting that which this country has done to improve the human condition...I found this to be the most disturbing and disheartening sentiment.

Yup, that was myopic vitriol.

Yes, America has done things to improve the human condition. You have many wonderful specialists in all scientific fields, and have added much to the wealth of human experience in the arts, the sciences, humanities, and even in war.

That all seems such a long time ago, now.

I may not like everything about the way this country functions, but I'll still defend it...even for it's potential...against any global action that attempts to bring it down.

Of course you would: It's your home, your heritage, your ethnicity, your heart. I would expect you to defend it.

That said, anyone want to suggest which power would hypothetically fill the vacuum left in the wake of a defeated America?

That's the problem. The fall of power leaves a vacuum, which idiot man must egotistically fill. I wish the UN were more effective. Single superpowers are a blight on the landscape.

[livius drusus]

Originally Posted by Ronin

Aside from the myopic vitriol discounting that which this country has done to improve the human condition...

What sorts of things did you have in mind? The spreading of the wonderful on-paper ideals lisarea referred to? Luna's arts, sciences, humanities influences? I guess in the end I can't help but dream of a government that stands by those ideals and supports the artists and scientists without hypocrisy and miserliness. The succession of horrors wrought by every US government I know of, starting right off with George Washington's administration and the 80% of its federal budget dedicated to Indian wars, makes it easy for me to discount that which the government has done to improve the human condition.

I may not like everything about the way this country functions, but I'll still defend it...even for it's potential...against any global action that attempts to bring it down.

What do you mean by the country, though? Because I think I'd be glad to see the federal government brought down. It wouldn't be total chaos - our state governments will do in a pinch - and then we could get to the business of calling a new constitutional convention and having one of those revolutions Jefferson thought we should have every 30 years or so.

That said, anyone want to suggest which power would hypothetically fill the vacuum left in the wake of a defeated America?

Well, the country is still replete with natural resources, industry, money so I don't think it would become an economic nonentity or anything. Other than that, I'd imagine the EU would step up to the plate, and of course, there are plenty of countries around the world with large, functional economies.

Militarily, I would say there is no power that would become a superpower; the vacuum would be splintered, not filled. The world hasn't always had superpowers. We could return to balance of power systems or stable, long-standing alliances and unions.

[Farren]

I don't want to see the US of A on its knees. I want to see the rest of the world on its tippy-toes. Like Luna, I'm bitter about the way America has wielded its power, but I think things would be a whole lot better if the US just wasn't top dog any more.

That can be accomplished by other nations picking themselves up just as much as by tearing America down and I'd rather not see a nation of 350 000 000 people go down in flames.

A little humility is all that's needed and increased economic power in other parts of the world can usher that humility in. Its already happening with the strong Euro emerging as a viable second reserve currency, developing nations starting to negotiate as a bloc at events like the WTO talks and China rising faster than anyone could have imagined.