The Moral Imagination of Fear

When the authoritarians finally and fully take over the United States, they will do so by fear-mongering about authoritarianism.

They will say that government is the problem, that mobocracy is the danger. They will say that they are being oppressed when the poor and minorities, workers and immigrants demand equal rights and freedom, equal representation and opportunity. They will accuse of others the very authoritarianism they seek to promote.

It is no accident that in this country that there is an overlap between authoritarianism and the conservative movement. Many studies have shown this strong correlation. These people don’t fear authoritarianism, but rather the possibility of sharing power with others, which means the loss of their privilege and position.

As they lose power in the numbers they once held, they will become more vicious and devious in their manipulations of that waning power. Sure, they will likely wrap themselves in the American flag and hug the cross, but it won’t end there. They will do anything and everything. They will even embrace the rhetoric and tactics of the political left, as they take on the mantle of populism and progressivism. They will offer the solutions to the problems they created.

The attack is merely the first step. That is where fear takes over, the battlefield that ever favors the demagogue or worse still the dictator. Only then will they offer their stark vision.

Birds of a Feather
by Corey Robin

Nixon to Kissinger:

We’ve got to destroy the confidence of the people in the American establishment.

Mao to the Red Guards:

Bombard the headquarters.

Real Threats

“If you added up all the women who have been murdered by their husbands or boyfriends since 9/11, and then you add up all the Americans who were killed by 9/11 or in Afghanistan and Iraq, more women were killed by their husbands or boyfriends.”
~Gloria Steinem, as quoted by Corey Robin in Violence Against Women and the Politics of Fear

“Americans are a whopping 29 times more likely to die at the hands of a police officer than they are of a terrorist attack. It’s impossible to say for certain how many people are killed by cops each year, but the best estimate is anywhere from 600-1,000. Contrast that with the 30 police officers who were killed in 2013.”
~Caleb G., Why American Police Departments Are More Of A Threat Than ISIS

People are notoriously bad about assessing personal risk.

I’m an American. Like most Americans, I’ve spent my whole life in this country and don’t travel outside the country. The genuine threats that should concern me are in America. I’m more likely to be killed by my own government than by a foreign government. I’m more likely to be killed by a Christian than by a Muslim.

Also, I’m “white”. Like most whites, I live in a white neighborhood in a white community. I don’t spend much time with non-whites. As the data shows, whites such as myself are more likely to experience crimes and violence from other whites. Blacks have more to fear from whites in this country than vice versa, since most of the police, judges, etc are white.

Being a white American, I’m way safer than the vast majority of people in the world. I have little to realistically worry about. I have no reason to fear terrorism, ebola, or much else.

I have more reason to fear being run over by a car or having a heart attack. Why doesn’t the news obsess over the things that actually will kill me?

McDonald’s unhealthy food is one of the greatest threats to my life in the immediate vicinity. Why doesn’t the government spend millions of dollars to fight that menace?

My rights are more likely to be taken away by the ruling elite of my own country. Why don’t we Americans fight that enemy?

Fear of the Future: Against Progress

I was wondering about why people support certain things that seem against their own interests, even their own openly stated interests. What made me think about this today is a Pew poll:

Lower-Income Republicans Say Government Does Too Little for Poor People

“Mitt Romney’s statement that he is focused solely on the problems of middle class Americans, not the poor, may not sit well with lower-income voters within his own party. Roughly a quarter of Republican and Republican-leaning registered voters have annual family incomes under $30,000, and most of them say that the government does not do enough for poor people in this country.”

The Republican Party has had a War on the Poor for decades. Republican politicians regularly attack the poor as lazy and as leeches on society. The official stance of the GOP is less money for welfare or at least less welfare money for the poor.

It’s seems absolutely insane that a poor person would vote Republican while hoping for more help from the government. As I’ve been studying American history, I was reminded of how some American colonists supported the British government against those who sought freedom and democracy and I was reminded of how some slaves supported the Confederacy during the Civil War.

People fear change. Republicans use the rhetoric of the fear of change. They speak of traditional values and make romanticized claims about the past. Many people fear change because they fear the perceived/imagined threats of chaos, of social disorder and instability.

That is similar to why many who would benefit from revolution supported the British Empire. To embrace change is to embrace the unknown. There is no way one can know that one will gain something greater than what one loses. The British Empire, despite all of its failings and oppression, did offer stability and protection.

The Quakers, for example, feared change because they knew they were surrounded by enemies. The Quakers had been persecuted horrifically by the Puritans. The Quakers were despised by the Southern and Tidewater elites (who saw all of Pennsylvania as a breeding ground of the lower sort). And the Quakers were constantly being threatened by the Scots-Irish in their own territory. It turns out the Quakers did benefit from revolution, but it wasn’t certain that they would benefit.

Slaves were in an even greater situation of facing the unknown as they were intentionally kept ignorant. Most slaves had no idea about what was going on in the North. And it was true that most Northerners wouldn’t welcome them as equal citizens. But the fears of change that many slaves had weren’t entirely accurate, but then again they weren’t entirely inaccurate. The period of history directly following the Civil War was far from kind to African Americans. At least as slaves, their lives had stability and order. It took many generations and massive violence/oppression before African Americans would gain any civil rights victories.

It always comes down to fear of the future, fear of the unknown. That is what humans always face. Progress tends to benefit most people in the long run, but it doesn’t always benefit everyone and certainly doesn’t benefit everyone equally. The problem is that there is no other option. Civilization has set humanity on a course where we can’t just cling to the past. The world is changing whether we like it or not. We can embrace change and guide it toward our benefit or we can resist change and allow someone else decide our fate.

Divide and Conquer

Here is something I never understand.

Every time I hear someone talk about “Real Americans” it’s almost always a Christian conservative (such as Sarah Palin”. Why is this “Divide and Conquer” mentality so appealing to many conservatives? And why does it seem so repulsive to most liberals?

The only answer I’ve found is the research of Bob Altemeyer. He found in the US Right-Wing Authoritarianism correlates to social conservatism and Christian fundamentalism. In communist countries, the bigots tend to be communists. In fascist countries, the xenophobes tend to be fascists. But, in America, this same type of person tends to be a socially conservative Christian. Why?

I understand the power of group mentality especially in terms of fundamentalism, but still I just can’t get my mind around it. There is this obvious conflict between what Jesus did and said and what right-wing Christians too often do and say. Shouldn’t all Christians, even conservatives, be against such bigoted xenophobia and fear-mongering?

Many right-wing Christians will ask: What would Jesus do? But why do so few right-wing Christians ask this question when they walk past the homeless guy sleeping on the cold sidewalk? Why do so few right-wing Christians ask this question when confronted with undocumented immigrants who are trying to escape a country that has become violent because of the US War on Drugs? Why do so few right-wing Christians ask this question when they hear drum-beating and flag-waving propaganda for yet another war?

My problem isn’t that Christians fail to live up to Christ’s example but that so few even try. Still, their not trying doesn’t stop them from being righteous towards the failures of others.

I don’t know what Jesus would do, but I do know that Jesus wouldn’t be a right-wing Christian.

Rightwing Madness

I read many comments online. I always wonder why many rightwingers have a tendency to make extreme statements

Whenever they disagree with someone or something, they say things such as:

  • Obama is the Anti-Christ, a Muslim, a terrorist, a Nazi, Hitler, Stalin, etc.
  • Obama isn’t American. Show me his birth certificate.
  • I hope Obama gets assassinated.
  • Jim Wallis is Satan.
  • Liberals are Communists.
  • Dr. Tiller got what he deserved and Roeder is a hero.
  • Overthrow the government!
  • He is an FBI operative.
  • FEMA will put us in concentration camps.
  • Violent militia groups are just defending their rights.
  • America is a Christian nation and the Founding Fathers meant the govt to be a fundamentalist theocracy.

They’re particularly obsessed with their xenophobia. They constantly live in fear of fags, blacks, and immigrants. They’re blind to their own bigotry and love to allege reverse racism. They conflate beliefs and facts, rhetoric and logic. They think the opinions of anyone else is equal to or greater than the opinion of the consensus of experts. They think they have the right to their own ‘facts’. They just know they’re right and you’re wrong. They often see conspiracies all around them:

  • New World Order
  • Liberal Elites
  • Hidden Communist conspiracy
  • Jewish Cabal
  • Immigrant invasion
  • Black helicopters

It’s not that all conservatives think and act this way, but there is a surprising number who do. More importantly, mainstream conservatives apparently are afraid of their own fringe. Conservative politicians and media personalities rarely criticize the fringe and often instead fan the flames instead. When a Tea Party leader asked about the fringe, he agreed they existed in the party but he thought they had a rightful place in the movement. They welcome the fringe and help give the extremists a voice. It’s not surprising that this filters into the mindset of the average conservative and so that is why you see all these crazy rightwing comments all over the web.

I’m trying not to over-generalize here. I know there are intelligent and rational conservatives. There are some who will criticize the fringe sometimes. I give credit for Bill O’Reilly in that he will on occasion make attempts to distance himself from the crazies and he’ll even sometimes directly criticize them. I just wonder why the ‘normal’ conservatives tend to be so silent. Is it the same reason why average Muslims too rarely speak out against the violence and oppression of Muslim extremists? Is it fear to speak out or is there an element of complicit agreement?

There is always a way to rationalize away or ignore evidence to the contrary. The federal report about rightwing militias is a smear campaign, but when righwing militias start conspiring violence against the government it’s automatically assumed these groups have been innocently framed. ACORN and Climategate are liberal conspiracies and they must be destroyed. The conservative media goes batshit over it and gets the rest of the media to jump on the bandwagon. After organizations and reputations are destroyed, investigations conclude that all involved were innocent. The conservatives use lies and deceit to destroy their enemies, but they don’t care about the truth. Will ACORN and the CRU scientists get vindicated in the media? No, probably not. Scandals get attention, but innocent victims of rightwing hatred don’t make for entertaining news. So, the media waits to get carried away by the next ‘scandal’.

Why is it so rare than anyone gets held responsible for any of this kind of immoral behavior? Yes, Roder gets life in prison and the guy who slandered ACORN ended up in prison as well. But Dr. Tiller can’t be brought back to life and who knows how many women will die or suffer serious health conditions because there is now one less doctor to help them. ACORN is permanently villified in the public eye and the organization is no more. What about all the people that Dr. Tiller and ACORN helped? Why doesn’t the media obsess over the real victims?

I know that, in response, rightwingers will argue that leftwingers are just as bad. They’ll point out a couple examples they once saw in the news. That is fair in that there are extremists of all ideological varieties, but there is a difference that makes a difference. First, I doubt people toting guns and screaming racial slurs wouldn’t feel very welcomed at most liberal protest and I could imagine the politically correct police asking them to leave. Second, the loony left doesn’t get a platform from the “liberal media” in the way that loony right gets a platform from conservative media such as Fox News. All news have agendas, but Fox News takes it to a new level of outright political spin and propaganda. I’m not sure why a media corporation would want to fan the flames of rightwing fear and hatred. I suppose it must be serving some purpose of theirs or of the GOP.

There seems to be a different attitude between the left and the right. On the left, different opinions are embraced as long as they’re respectful. On the right, different opinions aren’t embraced, but as long as your remain within the in-group ideology it doesn’t matter if you voice your opinions respecfully. In fact, rightwingers seem to pride themselves on being disrespectful. Anger, hatred and bigotry are seen as strengthening and consolidating the group. It’s the us vs them attitude. As long as the disrespectful message is directed outside of the group at the enemy, it doesn’t matter what a rightwinger says or how they say it.

Part of why I bring all this up is because I’ve noticed how it’s changed me. I feel unable to let it just roll of me. I’ve never called George W. Bush the Anti-Christ or Glenn Beck the devil, but it has become more common for me to call someone an asshole when someone is being offensive or aggressive, when someone is acting righteous or bigoted. I’ve learned to respond this way because some people don’t seem to understand how mean-spirited their comments are until you confront them in a forceful manner. Why should I respect the opinion of someone who claims Roeder is a hero for committing murder and terrorism? If they want to say they’re against abortion fine, but there is no excuse for what Roeder did. What Roeder did goes against everything our country stands for. Why should liberals try to be understanding towards such hatred and violence? Why shouldn’t stand up for the rights of everyone? For that matter, why shouldn’t it be expected that conservatives should stand up for the rights of everyone?

This isn’t just about my being a liberal. What rightwing extremists are doing and what mainstream conservatives are (implicitly or explicitly) supporting is stupid just from the perspective of strategy. They’re turning a whole generation of youth against the conservative movement. All the shootings and militias are just going to deservedly bring down hard the hammer of the law. In their fear of the government, they’re forcing the hand of the govenment. It’s as if they want a war. The culture war has failed. So, what they couldn’t accomplish through politics they’ll now try to accomplish through violence. I don’t what strategy would work for conservatives trying to get their message out, but what they’re doing right now is not working. Yes, it feels empowering to rant and rave, to fear-monger and use hate speech, to brandish guns at political gatherings. But this sense of empowering is just reactionary, just a shortterm gain. Conservatives were successful in the past because they took the longterm view, but they seem to have forgotten the lesson of their past success.

If you’re a Christian and you don’t like another Christian’s views, don’t call them the Anti-Christ or the Devil. If you’re a libertaraian and you don’t like Democrats being in power, don’t call Obama Hitler or a Commie. If you’re worried about our employment or your economic security, don’t attack immigrants and blame the poor. If you want to make a difference, reach out to others and not just to the small group of people who are just like you.

I realize I’m offering you liberal advice. But guess what? The world has become a liberal place. We no longer live at a time when white Christians monopolize all power. We no longer live at a time when minorities, immigrants and the poor knew their place. It’s just a fact of life. Accept it or not, but the world isn’t going to return to simpler times. Anyways, your idealizing of the past is just a fantasy. It’s time to stop fighting the inevitable. Change happens and there is nothing you can do to stop it. You either join in and work together or else you become obsolete. It’s your choice.

When Obama voices bipartisan values, I don’t know if he actually means it or not. However, people voted him into office because they believed in the message. The young generation that voted Obama into office doesn’t want partisan bickering, doesn’t want angry ranting and fear-mongering. The young generation looks for what we all share in common and they don’t care about parties, they don’t even care about the Tea Party. Many liberals and many conservatives as well were inspired by Obama’s message of hope and change. This is what people want. Obama was voted in by a majority of Americans. He may not be living up to his speeches, but the point is that people want to believe in the vision he spoke of.

Maddow Reports on Rightwing Incitement of Violence

I’ve seen many news reports about the recent fear-mongering, hate speech and violence coming from the rightwing. Partly, it’s just a response to the health bill being passed, but of course it’s much larger as it’s been going on for a while now. On a smaller scale, this trend of militant rhetoric was seen the last time a Democrat was president. The 1990s was a hotbed of rightwing militia groups.

I’ve been closely following this trend in recent years. It certainly was amped up after Obama was elected and it hasn’t slowed down. It just gets worse and worse. If this trend continues, a major attack or assasination attempt is inevitable.

The above video stood out to me in pointing out why this matters. Maddow is a good reporter in general, but she hit the nail on the head here. The part where Pelosi speaks really touched me because I could sense the genuine fear that she was feeling. Maddow asks a very direct question:

“Do you think there is a cavalier attitude about the risks of political violence today? It feels like there are two ways to think about this. Either it doesn’t seem like a real threat to people and so it’s okay to flirt with it or it is a real threat and people are still stoking this ‘use of violence’ rhetoric knowing that that real possibility is there. Which do you think it is?”

Her guest was Cleve Jones who, like Nancy Pelosi, still has fresh memories of the assasination of Harvey Milk. Here is his answer to Maddow’s question:

“I think it is a very frightening, cynical, deliberate attempt to manipulate the fears of many people in our country. And I’m certain that Representative Boehner is old enough to remember, as I remember, how it felt to be an American following the assasination of President Kennedy, how it felt to be an American following the assasination of Dr. Martin Luther King. I remember as a child when the cities burned and I remember tanks going down the street in front of my school. Is that the kind of America these people want to lead us into? It is, I think, becoming inevitable that we’re going to see political violence. And that is a terrible thing for everyone in this country regardless of your position on these issues.”

Deeply disturbing

Below is an e-mail I received from MoveOn. I don’t often add my name to political letters, but conservative politicians (and media personalities) have gone too far in their speech and I’d rather not wait until a conservative activist goes to far (again) in their actions. Even if or especially if you’re a Republican, you should sign this. No matter what your ideological values, this shouldn’t be acceptable to any moral person.

Here is the personal message I added to the letter:

History has shown that actively promoting and passively condoning hate speech leads to violent action. Yes, it’s usually only a few that take violent action, but it only takes a few to undermine democracy. The few, unfortunately, too often act because they think they’re supported by their leaders. It’s the responsibility of Republican politicians and conservative media personalities to denounce this trend of violence. Let’s not wait for history to repeat itself. Anyone who thinks another bombing or assasination couldn’t happen is utterly fooling themselves. This isn’t a party issue. No American should be in favor of overt or implicit hate speech.


In the last week, Democrats have faced racial slurs and death threats. But Republican leaders have been mostly silent or dismissed these deeply disturbing events as isolated incidents. Will you sign the letter asking them condemn the bigotry and hatred?

Add your name

Dear MoveOn member,Last weekend, anti-health care protesters were out in force in Washington—and some of their behavior was deeply disturbing.

A crowd of tea partiers shouted the “n word” at Congressman John Lewis, a former civil rights leader who marched with Dr. King. They yelled homophobic epithets at Rep. Barney Frank, an openly gay congressman. And one protester actually spat on a Black member of Congress.1

Then this week, Democrats who voted for reform began receiving death threats—one had a coffin left on his lawn and another was told snipers would kill the children of lawmakers who voted yes.2 Several Democrats had their district offices vandalized, and a gas line was cut at a home that tea partiers mistakenly believed belonged to Rep. Tom Perriello.3

A few Republicans have spoken out against the racism and violence, but most are still treating them as “isolated incidents.”4 They are not isolated. They’ve been part of Republican-supported tea parties for almost a year and they’re a natural consequence of telling people that reform is a totalitarian plot.5

It’s an outrage, and no American should tolerate it. So we’re joining with our friends at Color of Change to stand up to the hate. Can you add your name to this letter asking Republican leaders to unequivocally condemn bigotry, hate, and violence among their supporters?

http://pol.moveon.org/condemnhate/?id=19569-5367081-ItIAwhx&t=3The letter asks the leaders of the Republican party to do two simple things:
  1. Unequivocally condemn bigotry and hate among your supporters, and make clear that those who embrace it have no place in your party and that you reject their support.
  2. Make clear that you will not tolerate fear-mongering and coded appeals to racism from officials in the Republican Party, at any level.

Instead of calming the tea partiers’ anger, Republican members of Congress have stoked it. NBC reported that on Saturday, Reps. Mike Pence, Tom Price, and Michele Bachmann all addressed the tea partiers and that Bachmann stirred them “into a tizzy.”6 Protesters from that rally then fanned out across Capitol Hill and were behind the assaults on Reps. Lewis, Frank, and Cleaver.7Yesterday, Rep. John Boehner called the violence and threats “unacceptable.”8 But just last week, he referred to fellow representative Steve Driehaus as “a dead man” if he voted for health care reform.9 And while Boehner’s office insisted his remark wasn’t meant to be taken literally, as Rep. Driehaus pointed out, “It doesn’t really matter the way you meant it, nor the way I accept it. It’s how the least sane person in my district accepts it.”10

And there’s more: During the debate on the floor of the House on Sunday, Rep. Randy Neugebauer shouted “baby-killer” at Rep. Bart Stupak.11 And after the vote, Sarah Palin told supporters “Don’t Retreat—Reload,” and then highlighted specific members of Congress she thinks are politically vulnerable using gun cross-hairs.12

The Tea Party movement has been marked by racially inflammatory and violent outbursts since its inception a year ago. And while most Republicans are probably disgusted by this behavior, the Republican Party and its leaders have repeatedly tolerated it at events they support.13 But the hateful rhetoric and the tacit acceptance of “isolated incidents” of violence have gotten way out of hand.

Will you sign our letter to the leaders of the Republican Party telling them they must stop it now?

http://pol.moveon.org/condemnhate/?id=19569-5367081-ItIAwhx&t=4

Thanks for all you do.

–Justin, Nita, Kat, Daniel, and the rest of the team   

Sources:

1. “‘Tea party’ protesters accused of spitting on lawmaker, using slurs,” The Washington Post, March 20, 2010
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=87574&id=19569-5367081-ItIAwhx&t=5

2. “FBI investigating threats to Democrats,” The Associated Press, March 24, 2010
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=87575&id=19569-5367081-ItIAwhx&t=6

“Coffin placed on Carnahan’s lawn,” Politico, March 25, 2010
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0310/34982.html

“The backlash: Reform turns personal,” Politico, March 24, 2010
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0310/34907.html

3. “The Map So Far,” Talking Points Memo, March 24, 2010
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=87576&id=19569-5367081-ItIAwhx&t=7

“Severed gas line found at home of Perriello brother,” Charlottesville Daily Progress, March 24, 2010
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=87577&id=19569-5367081-ItIAwhx&t=8

4. “Steele: Slur-hurlers ‘idiots’,” Politico, March 21, 2010
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=87578&id=19569-5367081-ItIAwhx&t=9

5. “Swastika painted outside Congressman’s office,” The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, August 11, 2009
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=87580&id=19569-5367081-ItIAwhx&t=10

“10 Most Offensive Tea Party Signs And Extensive Photo Coverage From Tax Day Protests,” The Huffington Post, December 28, 2009
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=87579&id=19569-5367081-ItIAwhx&t=11

“Armed and Dangerous?” Talking Points Memo, August 11, 2009
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=87581&id=19569-5367081-ItIAwhx&t=12

“We have something to fear from fear-mongering itself,” The Washington Post, March 24, 2010
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=87582&id=19569-5367081-ItIAwhx&t=13

6. “Tea Party Protest Scene,” MSNBC, March 20, 2010
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=87583&id=19569-5367081-ItIAwhx&t=14

7. “‘Tea party’ protesters accused of spitting on lawmaker, using slurs,” The Washington Post, March 20, 2010
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=87574&id=19569-5367081-ItIAwhx&t=15

8. “Leadership decries threats to lawmakers in wake of health vote,” The Hill, March 24, 2010
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=87584&id=19569-5367081-ItIAwhx&t=16

9. “Exclusive: House Minority John Boehner on the Health-Care Vote,” National Review Online, March 18, 2010
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=87585&id=19569-5367081-ItIAwhx&t=17

10. “Amid Death Threats, Dem Rep Driehaus Points The Finger At GOP Leadership,” Talking Points Memo, March 24, 2010
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=87587&id=19569-5367081-ItIAwhx&t=18

11. “‘Baby killer outburst fuels Republican’s new funding ad,” The Houston Chronicle, March 24, 2010
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/nation/6928920.html

12. “Palin Uses Crosshairs To Identify Dems Who Voted For Health Care Reform,” Talking Points Memo, March 24, 2010
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=87586&id=19569-5367081-ItIAwhx&t=19

13. “Tax Day Tea Parties Officially Endorsed By Republican Party,” The Huffington Post, May 15, 2009
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=87588&id=19569-5367081-ItIAwhx&t=20

“Steele: I’d join the tea parties,” Politico, January 5, 2010
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0110/31177.html


PAID FOR BY MOVEON.ORG POLITICAL ACTION, http://pol.moveon.org/. Not authorized by any candidate or candidate’s committee.

Military-Industrial Complex: Cycle of Violence, Manipulated Public

During the Cold War era around the world, the US government committed immoral actions or participated in the immoral actions of others. These included the School of Americas, death squads, assassination attempts, coups, puppet governments, and on and on. The two most relevant incidents was our financial and political support of Osama Bin Laden and Saddam Hussein. This support, of course, included buying weapons for these people (such as the chemicals Hussein used to kill his own population).

So, why is anyone surprised that this led to negative repercussions? People like Bin Laden and Hussein were tired of being manipulated by the US government and didn’t want to be told what to do. They were evil when we aligned ourselves with them and they continued to be evil when they no longer served our purpose, but the US government is far more evil in that it helped put them in power where they could commit great acts of evil. Do you want to fight the greatest evil in the world? If so, you’d have to start with Washington, DC.

What is the US government’s response to the evil they created? They wage massive wars against Bin Laden and Hussein, and in the process go back to the Cold War era methods of nation-building. Before the US attacked Iraq, the country wasn’t a threat nor were there any international terrorist organizations located there. Now, the country is filled with terrorist organizations plotting against the US. We’ve lost numerous American lives and we’ve lost our moral standing in the world. In seeking revenge for those who died in the 9/11 attack, we killed more innocent civilians in Afghanistan and Iraq than innocent Americans have been killed by terrorists.

We are fighting wars that can’t be won and we’ve polarized a whole generation who will grow up to be a largescale organized force of terrorism that will be a threat to the US for decades. Just like during the Cold War, we’re just creating a new generation of enemies to fight.

Why do we or rather why do politicians do this? There are only two possibilities I can think of. You could just consider politicians to be stupid and ignorant, but that seems naive to me. Or you could take the cynical route and consider that it probably is an intentional plan. Even as American soldiers die, corporations with government contracts are making money hand over fist. Eisenhower warned about the Military-Industrial Complex and he apparently was correct. Corporations who make money off of war don’t want war to end because then their profits end. Military spending is the biggest chunk of the budget. In fact, it’s the biggest chunk of the economy in the entire world as the US spends massively more money on our military than all other governments combined.

Right now, some child in Afghanistan or Iraq is watching his mother or some other loved one die during an attack by US soldiers. That child will grow up with hatred towards the US and will join others whose lives were also destroyed by our military. One day, that child will commit some atrocious act against Americans. Right now, some politician or leader is being supported by our military and yet feels resentful at being manipulated. One day, that person will see an opportunity to use his power to do harm to the US. When that day comes, the American public will respond with its usual ignorant fear and the government will start the whole cycle over again… and the corporations will once again make huge profits.