Think of this as Volume 11, Number 6 of A-Clue.com, the online newsletter I’ve written since 1997. Enjoy.
The countdown to the end of the Bush era has begun.
We think.
But as we gaze over the immense crimes of this time, and seek justice for the damage to our world, our people, and our finances, the demand for revenge and justice is getting in the way of reform.
I share the thirst for revenge.
If no one pays for all this, if no one is held legally responsible for Iraq and Katrina and torture and the massive thefts which may add up to trillions of dollars we don’t even have, then the whole country becomes like the Reagan labor secretary Raymond Donovan (right), plaintively wailing (after being found innocent of corruption) "where do I go to get my good name back?"
Fact is, with countries, it’s not so easy. The guilt for this era will never wash off our hands. Not entirely. No matter our politics, the crimes of George W. Bush, his henchmen, and his followers, done in our name, are our crimes as well.
And before we can even approach that question we must first, still,
face the question of getting rid of this regime.
Despite the polls that
is not certain. The system has been gamed. The Bush people control who
gets to vote, and if you’re likely to vote Democratic you face hurdles
you never faced before. The Bush people control many of the voting
machines, the technology of which remains closed, opaque, and subject
to manipulation.
Polls showed George W. Bush up to 6 points behind Kerry as the
November 2004 election approached. He "won." Often the mere claiming of
victory, by the party in power, becomes victory. The other side is
supposed to "get over it" and "accept the system."
When Bush was first selected we could say, well, it was a one-point
game either way, and so maybe that’s OK. With Kerry, in Ohio, maybe it
was a 5 point game, and whether he stole it or not, he has it and gets
to keep it. (Above, then Ohio Secretary of State Kenneth Blackwell, who did the stealing.)
Each of these thefts has emboldened others, around the world, to do
the same. Nominal democracies have become adept at stealing elections
the Bush way, and so the voice of the people has been silenced. It was
silenced in Mexico in 2006. It was silenced in Kenya just a few months
ago.
We set the example, and when we lie that becomes how the world acts, just as when our better angels rule us that becomes the
example. When power means everything democracy cannot survive, anywhere. This may be the greatest, most damning legacy of the Bush era.
How big a defeat might Bush be able to steal, on behalf of his ally
Mr. McCain? If Hillary Clinton is the alternative, will the polls
become close enough that there is plausible deniability for a third
theft of democracy, for the final mockery of our system, the final
triumph of power over people?
This is why "impeachment is off the table." This is why Democrats in
Congress remain afraid of confronting this criminal regime directly.
They are afraid. Rightfully afraid. Find a way to ease those people out, thinking they’ll get to blame us for the mess and come back. Find a way to get the power for our side.
Then we’ll see.
Of course, in many ways it will be too late then. Far too late.
Another $400 billion we don’t have will have been tossed down the
rathole, this time with the approval of a Democratic Congress. Who will be
the last to die for a mistake in Iraq? In New Orleans?
Then there are the splits within the party. Not over principles, but
over personalities, and approach, and Democrats’ attitude toward power.
One side claims to value confrontation, but has a comfortable attitude
toward power gained from experience using it, and knowledge of many
things power has the ability to keep silent about. The other side
claims to value consensus, but has the newcomer’s attitude toward
power, an admiration for the good it can do and less understanding of
the necessary price it carries.
This isn’t just a decision between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama.
It’s a choice on how we wish to proceed. Do we want to seize power,
then promise to use it gingerly? Or do we want to claim we can rise
above power, then use it aggressively? That’s the Rorschach test before us.
In approaching this question it’s important to look at the precedents.
- Yankees hammered the South until they tired of it, leaving Southerners free to stew in their prejudices for another century.
- Americans put Nazis on trial until they saw a new threat, letting
some go, taking others on as assets, but creating a stable, democratic
system which has become a model for all Europe. - Russians embraced democracy only to reject it when it became inconvenient.
- South Africans created a commission, offering amnesty to those of
the former regime if they would just tell the truth about their crimes.
Most societies do nothing. They pull the rug of history over
themselves, let time heal all wounds, and try to move on. Chile did
that with Pinochet. Brazil did that with its Generals. Latin America is
in the process of doing the same thing with those who directed secret
wars in America’s name over the last six decades.
There is comfort in that approach. Let it be. Forgive, forget, move
on. While that may work for a small country, we are not a small
country. We don’t go to Chile or El Salvador expecting a model we can
follow, we don’t see them projecting power over their neighbors.
America is different. We cannot just ignore the crimes of this era,
and expect to be taken seriously. We can’t withdraw our military (as we
must since it’s unaffordable), bugger our currency (which the market
will do anyway), then expect our words or our claimed morality to mean
anything to people. We can’t compete with India or China on that basis.
So keep silent on this for now. Let the Bushies believe they’re
going to get off scot free. Let GWB think he’s going to be build a
giant library and become the next Hoover Institution. Let them all
think they have nothing to fear from a Democratic Administration.
Remember the Russian proverb, which so many Americans have memorized and made their own.
Why do you say that is a Russian proverb? Most people claim that this phrase originated from a translation of the French novel Les Liaisons Dangereuses. It doesn’t even seem to have entered the popular vernacular until Kahn said it in Star Trek II.
Why do you say that is a Russian proverb? Most people claim that this phrase originated from a translation of the French novel Les Liaisons Dangereuses. It doesn’t even seem to have entered the popular vernacular until Kahn said it in Star Trek II.