Creative destruction

[mogster]

"Creative destruction is our middle name, both within our own society and abroad.
We tear down the old order every day, from business to science, literature, art, architecture, and cinema to politics and the law.
Our enemies have always hated this whirlwind of energy and creativity, which menaces their traditions (whatever they may be) and shames them for their inability to keep pace.

Seeing America undo traditional societies, they fear us, for they do not wish to be undone. They cannot feel secure so long as we are there, for our very existence -- our existence, not our politics -- threatens their legitimacy. They must attack us in order to survive, just as we must destroy them to advance our historic mission."
- Michael Ledeen

"We tear down the old order every day, from business to science, literature, art, architecture, and cinema to politics and the law."

Let's see, there was the anti-Clinton Arkansas project. It stands out for me as an attack on the Presidency, not only on Clinton. They wanted the creative destruction of the office of the Presidency, so they tore down Clinton.
Then Bush came along and made the Presidency a joke. No one can today think about the US president without seeing Bush, the idiot-in-chief.

Then there is the law. Today, the US entered out of the league of democracies and into the realm of unknown. Maybe nazi is a correct term, although I think it confuses people more than helping them to understand the nature of what's happening. As long as Bush doesn't have a toothbrush moustache and comes in black and white, people will tend to notice the differences and not see that nazism may have developed just like the rest of the world has progressed. Modern life requires modern fascism. For now, I'm more interested in the destruction of Law this represents. The law is only valid if the citizens broadly accepts it and more or less respect it. The absurdity of implicating that the President can interpret the Geneva conventions undermines the whole set of international laws, and also the US constitution and other laws. And hey - torture used to be considered inefficient as a means of producing intel anyway.
That's creative destruction of science right there; you change the law for nothing, to produce nothing, by implying that interrogation methods from the middle ages did work. Well, they did; they produced a result. But it wasn't scientific, and hardly revealed the correct 'perpetrator'.

Then there's intelligent design, or so-called ID. 'Are you a Darwinist or are you a believer in Intelligent Design?' Imagine - they're equal. Pick a choice. Evolution and the Age of Enlightenment, the Renessance, the industrial revolution - science and empirical decision methods doesn't matter. History doesn't matter. Just by introducing ID you destructively create a second opinion which eradicates all our collected wisdom, because it's faith-based and not necessary to prove.

Let's see - that was politics, law and science. What about business? Ever heard of 'voodoo economics'? That was actually Bush I calling out Reagan's economical plan during the primaries in 1979, before they got chummy. The ever-tempting trap for the freshly coined dictator is to just print the money he needs. If there's a lack of money, just print some more. It never works.
Business needs sustainability, else you don't get to spend the money you earn. Or swindle. But the ability to see past today and into tomorrow with a certain .. certainity is a pillar of business. Now, I don't like modern capitalism much and it's losing my support for every day that passes. But even jackals need to find a new carcass to eat tomorrow.

What has happened is that business has entered the government sphere, the military sphere and the intelligence/police sphere. Business eats government, and Reagans 'woodoo economy' was built on the ability to accuse govt. of huge spending, and at the same time reap the equally huge harvest when Govt. was privatized and the overprized bill was presented for the citizens. All while claiming it had become more cheap to serve the citizens because the built-in efficency of capitalism would never fail. At the outset it looked sound (I'm speaking for the Norw. society here), but as time passed by, it developed into a monster which really is outside the (democratic) control of the citizens because of it's status as untouchable inside the free market.
Companies are global, and has not necessarily a national tie to which you can hold them responsible. At the same time, global law and justice became 'out of fashion', to say it mildly. The exception is the WTO, World bank and other institutions controlled by the same people that earn from the globalization of capitalism.
War is a racket, but global thermonuclear wars are not rackets. Nor is destruction of you market, your business or even yourself by terrorism as sudden, violent episodes that may change - overnight - your market, your business or yourself. The surrounding political climate.

Can we, with conviction, say that the future today is so foreseeable that this may not happen? Is business sustainable? I don't feel that way. Other than for Halliburton and maybe some big companies that knows how to tow money out of the US govt., there's uncertainty, if not actually total despair yet, lol ;-)
Business is unsustainable because you don't really know what this administration will do next. It's built on cronyism, always a bad sign for business (if you still think of business as 'an opportunity' and not 'any opportunity') and when it is evident that this threatens your market, business or self, business stops being an opportunity and cronyism becomes mandatory if business is to be done. I see the current US govt. as a slow turning maelstrom, gathering companies in the vicinity and dragging them down, leaving spaces vacant for the next tier.
Once you're down, you're in, and that tape is replayed to you every time you want out. Either you're with us or against us.

Note how the destruction 'items' interplays with each other, reinforcing the effect. Business comes into US military, bringing the non existent morale of the private sector with it (if the Govt. says it's legal and you can earn a lot of money, you don't ask questions). If you as a single individual question the job, you're bought out or fired.
The US military has an ethics codex built over many, many decades and honed through many losses and wounded soldiers. They built their honor by giving life for freedom. The ultimate price is paid by those that may or may not win a war. The good name of the US military is destroyed by the Abu Ghraib pictures and evidence of torture, in addition to being in an almost impossible position morally as the justification for the war didn't show up. The company Caci was accused in connection with Abu Ghraib but got off the hook.
Would the Abu Ghraib have happened with the US military of 1945? Is that at all conceivable?
'In the Second World War the average age of a soldier was fortyone, in Vietnam he was nineteen'
Age breeds life experience, life experience enables you to handle difficult moral questions to a greater degree than Joe 19.

When (if) the Iraqi war is over, the company Blackwater will have a standing army of tens of thousands. Halliburton will have even more, if we're to judge from their annual income. Interrogation specialists, drivers, pilots, security, soldiers - all geared on war, trained for war and war-experienced. Now, if those companies could choose, what would they prefer; another war or sacking most of their staff? Going out of business, so to speak? I bet the answer is clear.

In the 50's, 60's and 70's the secret agents had to set up a company front end before starting an operation, if we're to believe Le Carre and other people round the fringes. Today, they just have to call one of the companies from the post-911 jungle of homeland security experts. 'Good day, sir. Can we help you? Three tortures and one assassination? I'm sure we can arrange. I'll have the department manager call you back with the details later. On the usual account?' Or maybe the intelligence services run those front-end companies permanently, even with profit. Money earned don't hurt ya? :shrug:

Art is free, but is contained by commercialism. That's creative destruction right there. Especially rock music. Where the fuck is the peace movement? Where's the broad, culturally based, ultraliberal movement that will wipe these idiots out of office by the noise of punk music only? If you see them, call me. I'm mean for chrissake - torture laws?? Where's the anger?
I'm a cultural, not a political, person. I usually don't give much thought to politics. It's a nice state of mind. I was sure nothing like this could ever happen because we'd be warned by the rock'o'meter; the noise of the angry young people marching to loud three-riff songs with security needles - yeah, even badgers - though their noses, ears and god knows where else. They would have Woodstocks and Live Aid's - throw beer bottles at Bush - and never, ever, would such a breach of 'we don't want the cake, we want the whole fucking bakery' pass unannounced and accepted. But it did.

Rightwingers doesn't understand art. Look at Free Republic in comparison with Democratic Underground; no avatars, no graphics in the sig lines, almost no graphics posted. This place is rich with cultural expression while I've dubbed FR 'the white dungeon' because of it's lack of same. It's all politics; words, bible verses and flag jerking. It is the same over here, the rw places are void of anything but words, usually not data but opinion. And they form informal, immediate Groups online which by group pressure keep people in line to a much greater degree than their liberal equivalents - not encouraging the individual excess that art is.
Art is really dangerous and only useful for propaganda, which is controlled art not free art. So, they attack Hollywood, which in the past has been known to produce both ;-)
They attack art all over in the media, bringing free expression in conflict with public morale. If the media show any art, it is the prettified, easy-to-watch-while-eating-breakfast art. In Norway, the largest commerical channel uses art as intro to the commericals every half hour; a short swift glimpse of the work of art, and the artists name, over in two seconds, sometimes only one. Good or bad? You decide.
So that's art; containment, glitzy wrap/silly accusations by people that doesn't understand the concept of art, and content filter in the media.

Architecture?
I don't know. Watch out for the over use of eagles in construction design, promotion etc.


Freedom towers 1776 meters high built on the ruins of the Old America, destroyed in an event now questioned by a large number of Americans may be a sign of at least bad antennas, if not right out obnoxious. Do you feel free today? Did the horrifying events on 911 set you free?

Me neither.