"Here in the United States, you have
the pretense of a democratic system, with Republicans versus Democrats,
but when you pierce through to reality, you realize that it’s really just
one big political charade. There is one political party -- the
welfare-warfare party -- that is divided into two wings, Democrats and
Republicans, who complete against each other to gain control over the
political largess that comes with running the welfare-warfare state.
"For all practical purposes, the welfare-warfare party has a
monopoly on power, one that it does not intend to relinquish. That’s the
purpose of the campaign finance laws -- the limits on contributions --
the extensive campaign regulations that are enforced with the threat of
heavy fines and perhaps even criminal prosecution. The purpose of all the
rules and regulations is to make things as difficult and expensive as
possible for outside candidates -- that is, those who oppose the
welfare-warfare paradigm -- to run for office and win."
Monday, February 7, 2010
Shared Values in the U.S. and Egypt
by Jacob G. Hornberger
On the surface of it, one might reasonably ask how it is that President
Barack Obama and other U.S. statists feel so comfortable having the U.S.
government partner with a brutal dictator like Hosni Mubarak. In an
attempt to excuse the partnership, U.S. statists argue that such a thing,
even if distasteful, is a necessary part of protecting the national
security of the United States. However, there is actually a much more
realistic reason: Shared values. Barack Obama and Hosni Mubarak, and
their respective statist supporters, share the same values.
Look at Obama’s proposed “solution” to the “problem” of the massive
anti-government protests in Egypt. He’s willing to see Mubarak go to ease
tensions but only if Mubarak’s hand-selected vice-president, Omar
Suleiman, is selected to rein in his stead. Why do Obama and U.S.
statists love Suleiman? Because he’s one of their type of people -- the
man in charge of Egypt’s CIA who was responsible for torturing people at
the behest of the U.S. CIA. As such, he’s able to continue providing
“order and stability” while continuing Egypt’s partnership with the
United States.
After all, democracy is unpredictable. The voters can make mistakes and
put the wrong person into power. Through the maintenance of “order and
stability,” the military and the intelligence services are able to
protect the nation from the possibility or consequences of such a
mistake.
Here in the United States, you have the pretense of a democratic system,
with Republicans versus Democrats, but when you pierce through to
reality, you realize that it’s really just one big political charade.
There is one political party -- the welfare-warfare party -- that is
divided into two wings, Democrats and Republicans, who complete against
each other to gain control over the political largess that comes with
running the welfare-warfare state.
For all practical purposes, the welfare-warfare party has a monopoly on
power, one that it does not intend to relinquish. That’s the purpose of
the campaign finance laws -- the limits on contributions -- the extensive
campaign regulations that are enforced with the threat of heavy fines and
perhaps even criminal prosecution. The purpose of all the rules and
regulations is to make things as difficult and expensive as possible for
outside candidates -- that is, those who oppose the welfare-warfare
paradigm -- to run for office and win.
For example, here in Virginia, hardly anyone outside the mainstream
parties ever runs for statewide office. The reason? The monopoly party
has made it too difficult and too expensive to do so. The argument
against letting whoever wants to run for office do so is that the voters
would be too confused having too many candidates on the ballot.
Oh, by the way, did you know that there are periodic elections in Egypt
under Mubarak? See, it’s not as if they don’t have democracy, just like
we do here in the United States.
What about the standing army and the military-industrial complex? Like
here in the United States, the military plays a dominant role in Egyptian
life. Also, like here in the United States, the dominance of the military
is permanent. There is no possibility that the military in either Egypt
or the United States would ever willingly relinquish the major role it
plays in society.
In Egypt, the military-industrial complex is so extensive that it even
owns and operates businesses across Egypt. Here in the United States, it
is difficult to measure the enormous extent to which private-sector
businesses depend on military contracts. And, of course, everyone is
aware of the deep dependency that U.S. states and localities have on
military bases.
Like here in the United States, the military and intelligence forces in
Egypt justify their existence by resorting to national security, the war
on terrorism, and the war on drugs. If it weren’t for the military and
the intelligence services keeping people safe, the story goes, the two
nations would quickly succumb to conquest from the terrorists and the
drug dealers.
What about corporatism in Egypt -- the system of crony capitalism by
which people get rich by virtue of their connections to the state? Isn’t
that what America’s system of corporatism is all about? What red-blooded
American statist opposes America’s decades-long system of welfare largess
for the privileged?
What about the welfare state and controlled economy that have produced so
much economy misery for the Egyptian people? It goes without saying that
Barack Obama and his statist supporters embrace such a paradigm as
enthusiastically as the Egyptian statists.
Torture, indefinite detention, spying on the citizenry, and
national-security courts? What better example of shared values than in
the infringement of civil liberties? Does anyone really think it’s a
coincidence that Egypt serves as one of the places that the CIA
renditions its prisoners? Egypt has long been renowned for being one of
the finest torture countries in the world, and it boasts some of the
worlds’ finest torture facilities and most experienced torturers.
Indefinite detention and spying on the citizenry were a hallmark in Egypt
long before the 9/11 attacks that were used to justify such practices
here in the United States. And national security courts and military
tribunals to try suspected terrorists are something that both U.S.
statists and Egyptian statists enthusiastically embrace.
It’s undoubtedly a bit uncomfortable for U.S. statists to have so much
publicity about the U.S. Empire’s longtime partnership with the Egyptian
dictatorship. But really, no one should be surprised over the
partnership. Partners usually have shared values.
http://www.fff.org/blog/jghblog2011-02-07.asp
--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
