Reality 1, Neo-cons 0

Free Congress Foundation ^ | March 2, 2004 | William S. Lind

[Chapita]

The Marines have landed, and the situation is not well in hand, nor will it ever be. I am speaking, of course, of Haiti, that boil on the Western Hemisphere's posterior which no plaster can ever cure. In the 18th century, Haiti was so rich, thanks to the sugar trade, that it alone provided two-thirds of the value of France's overseas commerce. Today, Haiti is so poor that the average American dog probably lives better than the average Haitian.

But I forget: just ten years ago, we solved all of Haiti's problems. Applying the neo-cons' prescription for the whole world, we sent in thousands of American troops, overthrew the "undemocratic" Haitian government and installed Haiti's Mr. Chalabi, Monsieur Aristide - the same savior who just departed, with Washington's encouragement, to the universal anthem of the Third World's elite, "I'm Leavin' on a Jet Plane." For some incomprehensible reason, democracy backed by American bayonets failed to turn Haiti into Switzerland. It's probably because we forgot to teach them how to make cuckoo clocks and put holes in cheese.

Haiti is in fact a fair test of the neo-cons' thesis, a thesis we are now putting to further trials in Iraq and Afghanistan. Their core argument is that history and culture simply don't matter. Everyone in the world wants American-style "democratic capitalism," and everyone is also capable of it. To think otherwise is to commit the sin of "historicism."

The argument is absurd on the face of it. History and culture don't matter? Not only do the failed cultures and disastrous histories of most of the world argue the contrary, so does our own history and culture. Democratic capitalism first developed in one place, England, over an historical course that goes back almost a thousand years, to the Magna Carta. America was born as an independent country to guarantee the rights of Englishmen. If England had possessed the culture of, say Mongolia, can anyone with the slightest grasp on reality think we would be what we are today?

While the neo-cons' thesis says nothing about reality, it says a great deal about the neo-cons themselves. First, it tells us that they are ideologues. All ideologies posit that certain things must be true, regardless of any evidence to the contrary. That evidence is to be suppressed, along with the people who insist on pointing to it. Sadly, the neo-cons have been able to do exactly that within the Bush Administration, and the mess in Iraq is the price.

Second, it reveals the nature of the neo-con ideology, which has nothing whatsoever to do with conservatism (as Russell Kirk wrote, conservatism is the negation of ideology). The neo-cons in fact are Jacobins, les ultras of the French Revolution who also tried to export "human rights" (which are very different from the concrete, specific rights of Englishmen) on bayonets. Then, the effort eventually united all of Europe against France. Today, it is uniting the rest of the world against America.

Finally it reveals the neo-cons as fools, lightweights who can dismiss history and culture because they know nothing of history or culture. The first generation of neo-cons were serious intellectuals, Trotskyites but serious Trotskyites. The generation now in power in Washington is made up of poseurs who happen to have the infighting skills of the Sopranos. If you don't believe me, look at Mr. Wolfowitz's book. Or, more precisely, look for Mr. Wolfowitz's book (hint: he never wrote one).

Perhaps it was America's turn to have its foreign policy captured by a gang of ignorant and reckless adventurers. It has happened to others: Russia before the Russo-Japanese War, Japan in the 1930's. The results are seldom happy.

Before we get ourselves into any more neo-con led follies, we should apply their thesis to a simple test: send them to Haiti and see if they can make a go of it, after the U.S. Marines pull out. If they can, I'll put my money in a Haitian bank.

William S. Lind is Director for the Center for Cultural Conservatism for the Free Congress Foundation

[discostu]

GE sold ball bearings to Nazi Germany. We sold grain to communist Russia through most of the Cold War. Welcome to the real world.

What would happen if we lost the oil isn't "some economic pain" it's a complete and total collapse of America, it would be turning us into a 3rd world country. Nothing in this country, absolutely NOTHING at any level, happens without oil. We move our people with it, we move our product with it, we power Free Republic with it. No energy means no America. Oil is by far our biggest source of energy and won't be replacable with any other at level sufficient to keep America working for decades.

Krushev said he'd bury us. Don't EVER think that ANYBODY is stronger than America. We've taken on all comers and these sandrat terrorists will lose too. Betting against America is stupid, as the previous incarnation of your own country proved quite thuroughly.

[RussianConservative]

Because of two thing: first many royals support Al Quida, second it is danesgeld and aimed to keep Al Quida on attack elsewhere...mainly because while Saudi support terror they also enjoy decadent life while majority peoples dirt poor...no double on my part, it is contriductions in Saudi thought. Who best source of monies? Poor Iraq or dirt poor Afghanistan? Only good source of cash is was and will be Saudi Arabia.

[discostu]

Iraq wasn't poor. According the the IDF Hussein pumped hundreds of millions into terrorism every year. Afghanistan with it's poppy crops wasn't ever poor either. There's still quite a few good sources of cash, but we're working on it. Can't solve all the world's problems at once, then we wouldn't have anything to complain about tomorrow.

[pfflier]

But I forget: just ten years ago, we solved all of Haiti's problems. Applying the neo-cons' prescription for the whole world, we sent in thousands of American troops, overthrew the "undemocratic" Haitian government and installed Haiti's Mr. Chalabi, Monsieur Aristide -

Is this for real? Is it from the Onion?

Is there anyone alive that doesn't know that klintoon and the congressional black carcass restored Aristide as the Haitian dictator? No one ever accued them of being neo-cons.

[RussianConservative]

Russia's mostly uncontested invasion of Chechenya.

Ummm did US invade self when it go after Wacko or Montana Freemen? How Russia able to invade self?

[RussianConservative]

What would happen if we lost the oil isn't "some economic pain" it's a complete and total collapse of America, it would be turning us into a 3rd world country.

Ummm, maybe you not notice, one: Saudi Arabia not only oil source in world, plenty others, two: you sit on enough oil to run own country instead of being Arab whores.

[Dr. Frank fan]

...klintoon and the congressional black carcass restored Aristide as the Haitian dictator? No one ever accued them of being neo-cons.

Well, they are now. They've suddenly, retroactively been re-defined as "neo-cons".

Anyone, apparently, can be retroactively re-defined as a "neo-con" if it is believed that doing so will help someone, somewhere, bash David Frum or Paul Wolfowitz.

[RussianConservative]

Afghan was not poor? Is that why Bush give Taliban $48 million in Spring 2001 for destruction of few poppy field? Is that why they have such great technology with such monies...and is that why best Iraq have is: 30 year old tank and 20 year old wife guided anti-tank missile?

[Dr. Frank fan]

20 year old wife guided anti-tank missile?

A wife guided missile? That I gotta see!! ;-)

[Ohioan]

The idea of imposing Democracy on another people is rather absurd. It is particularly absurd when you do not have a population, which shares a common set of values. (See Democracy In The Third World.)

The problem in both Haiti and Iraq is a large number of people who simply do not have a good comprehension of what are the basic functions of a modern State. In Iraq, you also have a tremendous problem--if you care at all about fairness, as well as practicality--in that you have several quite distinct groups, with quite distinct values and history. Where people cannot agree on the ultimate pursuits of the Government, you have real problems--to put it mildly.

William Flax

[RussianConservative]

First wire...:0) but in many case yes wife too...she walk out see where US is and point.

[discostu]

I've already answered that twice. For the THIRD TIME:
OPEC
Saudi runs it
There's isn't even close to enough non-OPEC oil to keep America going

Yeah we have a lot of oil under us, but most of it isn't being drilled. Even if we abolished all the legal barriers to drilling it today it would still take YEARS to access it to a level where it could replace OPEC. There's nothing out there, not solar, not wind, not nuclear, not propane, not coal, not corn, not oil from other countries; that could replace OPEC before 2020 possibly even 2025. Which is why there's no way in hell we're going to attack Saudi any time soon.

Piss and moan all you want but the fact are unchangable: attacking Saudi directly would be suicide for America. There's no way around that for at least 15 years. None.

[Qwinn]

1) The Chechens might feel differently about whether they are a part of Russia, no? I mean, I take your point, and I frankly don't know enough about the situation to take a stand either way personally, but let's not claim that Russia's claim is uncontested by those who were invaded, okay? Meanwhile, I don't think anyone at Waco was suggesting that their compound was not part of the U.S. (if they did, I missed it). The point is, claiming that the land being invaded ALREADY BELONGS TO THE INVADER is usually part and parcel to a pre-emptive invasion. Except when the U.S. does it. Which is probably why we're so eeeeevil.

2) Did I just hear you call the U.S. Arab whores? LOL. One second, we're whores for the Israelis, the next, we're whores for the Arabs. We can't win!

Qwinn

[discostu]

You answered it yourself. We gave them money to stop them from getting it through their other means. The fact that it took 48 million dollar to convince them to SLOW the traffic of heroine shows just how profitable a cash crop that is.

Iraq's military hardware sucked because they chose to ally with Russia in the Cold War. Had they allied with the country producing the best military hardware in the world instead of an overblown third world cesspool with delussions of grandeur...

[discostu]

Never forgotten an anniversary huh ;-)

[RussianConservative]

Hmmm, Russia produce as much oil as Saudi, Mexico also very much, US has enough for own use...bad excuse for whoring to Saudi Wahhabists. Oil sold on world markets, often through 2nd/3rd parties, plenty oil in world.

[Dr. Frank fan]

The idea of imposing Democracy on another people is rather absurd.

Yes, it is. Because if it really is democracy, it will not have been "imposed", but embraced. (The "imposition" will have been done to whatever regime was ruling at the time, not to the "people".)

It is particularly absurd when you do not have a population, which shares a common set of values.

What is the common set of values shared by the population of the United States of America (and/or why is democracy in that country not absurd)?

The problem in both Haiti and Iraq is a large number of people who simply do not have a good comprehension of what are the basic functions of a modern State. [...]

I'd say the same is true of the U.S.A. ;-)

Anyway, now you've started (apropos of nothing, and not related to our prior communication) abstractly listing "problems" with making a democracy in this and that country. Who exactly are you pretending to be arguing with? No one that I can see (certainly not me!) is claiming that creating a democracy in Iraq entails No Problems Whatsoever. So, Congratulations for triumphantly, deftly winning the argument against that whole "there are no problems in creating democracy in Iraq" position. I guess. (??)

[RussianConservative]

The fact that it took 48 million dollar to convince them to SLOW the traffic of heroine shows just how profitable a cash crop that is.

It show how dirt poor they are...on national level $48 million is nothing. US spend probably twice amount on govenrment office toilet paper and soap. $48 million buy you 20 some T-72s.

[discostu]

And how much oil is Russia willing to sell us? Mexico doesn't produce much oil so in that you're just wrong. And where are we going to get substitute for the oil from Iran, and Somalia, and Egypt, and UAE, and Yemen, and Syria and ALL the other nations in OPEC that will cut us off the minute we go after Saudi.

There is plenty of oil in the world, and Saudi through OPEC control the vast majority of it. Got a REAL answer that isn't just insulting to America and might actually work sometime before the end of the year present it, otherwise go away because all you've proven in this conversation is that you know absolutely nothing about America, oil, or history.

[discostu]

Comparing the budget of little bitty Afghanistan, a nation without a port, with America, the richest on earth and sole surviving super power, is even more disingenuous than the article that started this. You are 100% full of crap, all of your points are a fiction, you deliberately ignore the truth of history and technology. goodbye.