History News Network: Bush the Empire Slayer

[seafan]

Bush the Empire Slayer

By Bernard Chazelle
1-29-07

.....

Dick Cheney is a man of war, and a man on a mission: a crusader who won't rest until the name Bush Jr is etched in the history books—not lost in the microscopic print of the endnotes section, mind you, as is destined to be Senior's fate, but glowing in the radiant typeface of a chapter heading. That mission, for once, is all but accomplished. In January of 2001, George W. Bush took—er, grabbed—the reins of an American Empire at its zenith. He will soon hand back a smoldering wreckage of broken lives, enduring hatred, and vanished influence. Michael Ignatieff has called Pax Americana Empire Lite. (2) A better phrase would be Empire Short-Lived, or, if you're William F. Buckley Jr and the vernacular ruffles your literary feathers, Imperium Brevissimum. At a recent ceremony for his son Jeb, George H. W. Bush was caught on national television sobbing uncontrollably. Pity the man who stands one short letter away from the worst president in US history. The letter is H, as in H for hubris.

......


Whose fault? (The wrong question for a moral perspective—starting the war was the sin, not losing it—but the right one here.) Breathtaking as they were, the majestic vistas of Rumsfeld's ineptitude were little more than a convenient excuse for war advocates with egg on their faces. The grand whining parade has already begun, and mealy-mouthed apologists are being wheeled in on bloated floats to proffer lame excuses about inadequate troop levels, insufficient 4GW training, political fecklessness, etc. Eventually, the chest beating will die down as it always does, with the blame for the debacle pinned on the dirty antiwar hippies.

But hippies don't fight wars. The Pentagon does. It did, and it lost.

......


The war has given the American mainstream media a brilliant opportunity to prove its essential worthlessness. It has shown itself to be little more than a circus of entertainers and cheerleaders for whom every season is the silly season. Tragically, the media has failed in its sacred duty to keep a vigilant, skeptical, critical eye on the centers of power. Who is the American Robert Fisk, Gideon Levy, or Amira Hass? Whoever they are (and Sy Hersh proves they exist), why are their writings not filling the op-ed pages of the great American newspapers? How can the nation that produces the bulk of Nobel prize winners be stuck with such a sullen bunch of journalistic mediocrities? The sycophantic enablers of the Fourth Estate have blood on their hands.
The unfolding catastrophe in Iraq had a single cause: the reassertion of US hegemony after 9/11. Its trigger was a rare astral alignment. Big Oil, the neocons, the Christian fundamentalists, the liberal hawks, AIPAC, the MSM, and 9/11 all formed cosmic dots in the sky that only one power could—and did—successfully align: the president of the United States. No American leader has so much owned a war.


And none has so little owned up to it. Victors are never war criminals. That's because they get to write the history books. Bush won't have that chance. The die has been cast and the hour is too late for him or anyone to alter the unforgiving judgment of posterity. Therein, paradoxically, lies our quandary. For, if freedom is just another word for nothing left to lose, then Bush is a free man—free to pursue the most malignant policies, heedless of the consequences to his unworsenable presidential standing. Beware the desperation of a cornered man.
The apostle of imperial dominance, Bush slew the “last empire.” The towering figure of our time, he is a piteously small man. The self-anointed emissary of a “higher father,” he is servant to no power but himself. The captain of the sinking ship has laid his command upon his fellow Americans: “Ask not what your country can do for you; ask what you can do for me.” No sacrifice of life shall be too great, no damage to civil liberties too high, no expenses too vast for a vainglorious man deluded by fantastic dreams of redemption by force.


But who besides the bereaved will mourn? Who besides the orphan will whimper? Who besides the humiliated will stare back? Who besides the thugs and the craven will lead? Patriotism is a lovely thing. In its name, some go dying by the side of an Iraqi road in twitching agony; others go shopping in oversized automobiles festooned with yellow ribbons. We all play our part—and nobody else's.
Yeats bemoaned an era when the best lacked all conviction, while the worst were full of passionate intensity. Today, Kristol blusters and hectors, Cheney scolds and forebodes, Bush struts and smirks. Meanwhile, the giant, timid chorus listens politely to the deafening silence of the outraged—and the mad march of war goes on.

Thirty-seven source references are listed at the end of the article.

[Supersedeas]

1. from Libby to the run-up to the War in Iraq--the Media's participation needs to be exposed

[Tin Man]

5. Agreed. Fourth Estate failed their obligation.

The prospect of a sensational, sexy, high tech war - with corresponding increases in readership/viewship - seemed to trump any desire to question the premises upon which the war was being justified. Shameful.

[Tin Man]

2. Looks like a good article. I wholeheartedly agree with the thesis.

W is certainly an empire slayer. Will read in entirety soon.

[CrazyOrangeCat]

3. Thanks, seafan.

Indeed, the "Sycophantic enablers of the Fourth Estate have blood on their hands."

This could never have happened without the press turning a blind eye.

K&R

[seafan]

7. And it will take decades to rebuild our media in terms of credibility.

Since Reagan's revocation of the Fairness Doctrine, there has been a relentless right-wing assault on the function of the press and electronic media, and it was accomplished by heavy consolidation of ownership of media outlets, forced homogeneity and shaping of "news" to spoon feed the public and to benefit corporate interests and by design, also those occupying our government.

And throughout, the right-wing screechers and religious charlatans have beaten to a bloody pulp the people's right to be informed of the facts about their government's activities and events unfolding around the world.


And because of this, we are flying blind in the most dangerous time in our history.

[autorank]

4. Wow, Highly Recommended. Thanks!!! n/t

[madrchsod]

6. one of the best articles i have read

thanks or the link i`m bookmarking it

[Bonhomme Richard]

8. Great article. I'm passing it on. n/t

[Phredicles]

9. Rocks unbelievably hard. Recommended.

:headbang: :headbang: :headbang:

[Patiod]

10. Two rumors

I talk a lot to cab drivers - have learned an amazing amount about the recent history and politics of Africa, the Somali diaspora, and race relations between Middle East-born drivers vs. US-born black drivers (not good). A while ago on a very long ride to the airport, one cabbie told me two stories, once he ascertained that I was not a fan of the current administration.

I can vouch for the truthfulness of neither. But I found them fascinating.

Story 1: He claimed to have driven Secret Service agents who served George HW Bush. According to him, these guys claimed that GHW Bush was living large and really enjoying his retirement life, "except that the mess that his son was making was keeping him up at night."

Story 2: Shortly before the Iraq war started, he said he had a passenger who wrote for the LA Times. He and the writer discussed the situation in the world at the time, and agreed that war with Iraq was absolutely inevitable. He asked the writer "well, if you think this, why aren't you writing about this in your newspaper?" According the the cabbie, the writer said "we aren't allowed to." He said that the writer claimed the word had come down from "on high" that there was to be no stories that were negative about the impending war.

Whether these are true or not, the latter one has stuck with me. I remember being angry all the time back then, because no one in the MSM (including the "liberal" NYT) seemed to be asking any hard questions: were there really WMDs? Was Colin Powell telling the truth? What did military historians and strategists think of our chances of success if we DID go into Baghdad? But back then, even I wasn't tinfoilhat enough to think that there was a concerted effort to keep these stories from being written.

[mod mom]

11. "Imperium Brevissimum" is already way too long! Indict! Impeach! Imprison NOW!

Excellent post- thanks, seafan!

[Egalitarian]

12. Great read!!!!!!!

I posted this a few days ago and meant to re-package it. Thanks for beating me to it. Here's a link to where I originally came across this article.

http://www.countercurrents.org/us-chazelle240107.htm

[seafan]

13. Thanks, Egalitarian. This is a dynamite piece. n/t