The World Is Simple
by
Bill Bonner
by Bill Bonner
The force of
a correction is equal and opposite to the deception and delusion
that preceded it. Alan Greenspan, George W. Bush, and all the great
nabobs of positivism assure us that there is nothing to fear. Our
favorite imperial columnist, Thomas L. Friedman of the New York
Times, explained that "the next big thing almost always comes
out of America . . . [because] . . . America allows you to explore
your own mind."
Friedman believes
the world would be a better place if America were more aggressive
about "empowering women" and "building democracies."
He also thinks that technical innovations give America a permanent
advantage. Americans are always innovating, always figuring things
out. Heck, we even invented outsourcing, says Friedman:
"This
is America’s real edge. Sure Bangalore has a lot of engineering
schools, but the local government is rife with corruption; half
the city has no sidewalks; there are constant electricity blackouts;
the rivers are choked with pollution; the public school system is
dysfunctional; beggars dart in and out of the traffic . . . and
so forth."
Among the things
Mr. Friedman seems to lack is a feeling for verb tenses. He goes
to Bangalore and notices that it is backward. His conclusion is
that it will always be so. "Is" is forever in Friedman’s
mind. "Will be" has no place. It is as if he looked at
the stock market in 1982. "Stocks are cheap," he might
have said. "Stocks elsewhere are expensive," he might
have added, without it ever occurring to him that they might change
places. And yet, why else would anyone outsource work from Baltimore
to Bangalore unless Bangalore was relatively, though not necessarily
permanently, cheaper? Let us imagine that Bangalore had no electricity
blackouts or pollution or beggars. Let us imagine that it was like
Beverly Hills or Boca Raton. We might just as well imagine that
stocks were expensive in 1982. Of course, if they had been, there
never would have been the bull market of 1982 to 2000. It is only
because they were cheap in the past that they had the potential
to be expensive in the future. And it is only because Bangalore
is a Third World hellhole that it is cheap enough to take work away
from overpaid Americans 10,000 miles away. Whether it will, neither
Friedman nor we can know.
We always try
to get our day off on the right foot by reading Friedman’s column
before breakfast. There is something so gloriously naïve and
clumsy in the man’s pensée, it never fails to brighten our
mornings. It refreshes our faith in our fellow men; they are not
evil, just mindless. We have never met the man, but we imagine Friedman
as a high school teacher, warping young minds with drippy thoughts.
But to say his ideas are sophomoric or juvenile merely libels young
people, most of whom have far more cleverly nuanced opinions than
the columnist. You might criticize the man by saying his work is
without merit, but too that would be flattery. His work has negative
merit. Every column subtracts from the sum of human knowledge in
the way a broken pipe drains the town’s water tower.
Not that Mr.
Friedman’s ideas are uniquely bad. Many people have similarly puerile,
insipid notions in their heads. But Friedman expresses his hollow
thoughts with such heavy-handed earnestness, it often makes us laugh.
He seems completely unaware that he is a simpleton. That, of course,
is a charm; he is so dense you can laugh at him without hurting
his feelings.
Friedman writes
regularly and voluminously. But thinking must be painful to him;
he shows no evidence of it. Instead, he just writes down whatever
humbug appeals to him at the moment, as unquestioningly as a mule
goes for water.
One of the
things Friedman worries about is that America will "go dark."
As near as we can tell, he means that the many changes wrought after
9/11 are changing the character of the nation, so that "our
DNA as a nation . . . has become badly deformed or mutated."
In classic Friedman style, he proposes something that any 12-year-old
would recognize as preposterous: another national commission! "America
urgently needs a national commission to look at all the little changes
that were made in response to 9/11," he writes. If a nation
had DNA and if it could be mutated, we still are left with the enormous
wonder: What difference would a national commission make? Wouldn’t
the members have the national DNA? Or should we pack the commission
with people from other countries to get an objective opinion
a U.N. panel and a few illiterate tribesman and achieve cultural
diversity?
But this is
what is so jaw-dropping about Friedman’s ideas: Even mules and teenagers
have more complex views. His work is a long series of "we should
do this" and "they should do that." Never for a moment
does he stop to wonder why people actually do what they do. Nor
has the thought crossed his mind that other people might have their
own ideas about they should do and no particular reason to think
Mr. Friedman’s ideas are any better. There is no trace of modesty
in his writing no skepticism, no cynicism, no irony, no suspicion
lurking in the corner of his brain that he might be a jackass. Of
course, there is nothing false about him either; he is not capable
of either false modesty or falsetto principles. With Friedman, it
is all alarmingly real. Nor is there any hesitation or bewilderment
in his opinions; that would require circumspection, a quality he
completely lacks.
Friedman fears
he may not approve of all the post-9/11 changes. But so what? Why
would the entire world "go dark" just because America
stoops to empire? The idea is nothing more than a silly imperial
conceit. America is not the light of the world. Friedman can stop
worrying. The sun shone before the United States existed. It will
shine long after she exists no more. But, without realizing it,
imperial conceits are what Mr. Friedman offers, one after another.
He knows what is best for everyone, all the time.
But even at
his specialty, Friedman is second-rate. It is not that his proposals
are much dumber than anyone else’s, but he offers them in a dumber
way. He sets them up like a TV newscaster, unaware that they mean
anything, not knowing whether to smile or weep, out of any context
other than the desire to make himself look good. He does not seem
to notice that his own DNA has mutated along with the nation’s institutions
. . . and that he does nothing more than amplify the vanities and
prejudices that pass for the evening’s news. Is there trouble in
Palestine? Well, the Palestinians should have done what we told
them. Have peace and democracy come to Iraq? If so, it is thanks
to the brave efforts of our own troops. Is the price of oil going
up? Well, of course it is; the United States has not yet taken up
the comprehensive energy policy he proposed for it. Friedman’s world
is so neat. So simple. There must be nothing but right angles. And
no problem that doesn’t have a commission waiting to solve it.
It must be
unfathomable to such a man that the world could work in ways that
surpass his understanding. In our experience, any man who understands
even his own thoughts must have few of them. And those he has must
be simpleminded.
But we enjoy
Friedman’s insipid commentaries. The man is too clumsy to hide or
disguise the awkward imbecility of his own line of thinking. The
silliness of it is right out in the open, where we can laugh at
it. His whole oeuvre can be reduced to the proposition that Arabs
ought to shape up and start acting more like New Yorkers. If they
don’t want to do it on their own, we can give them some help. He
says we can send "caring" and "nurturing" troops
to "build democracies" in these places and "protect
the rights of women." But he doesn’t understand how armies,
empires, politics, or markets really work. American troops can give
help, but it is the kind of help that Scipio gave Carthage or Sherman
gave Atlanta. Armies are a blunt instrument, not a precision tool.
Friedman urged
the Bush administration to attack Iraq. But the man has a solution
for every problem he causes. "So how do we get the Sunni Arab
village to delegitimize [we love these big words every one of them
hides a whole dictionary of lies, fibs, prevarications, malentendus,
misapprehensions, miscalculations, guesswork, hallucination, conceit,
and mendacity] suicide bombers?"
Simple.
Propaganda! "The Bush team needs to be forcefully demanding
that Saudi Arabia and other key Arab allies use their news media,
government, and religious systems to denounce and delegitimize the
despicable murder of Muslims by Muslims in Iraq."
That ought
to do it. What is wrong with the Bush team? Why didn’t they think
of that? "Forcefully demand" that the Arab states do more
propaganda. Yes, problem solved.
By
the way, your authors have no position on foreign policy. We only
notice that the people who do have them are idiots.
December
12, 2005
Bill
Bonner [send
him mail] is the author, with Addison Wiggin, of Financial
Reckoning Day: Surviving the Soft Depression of The 21st
Century and
Empire of Debt: The Rise Of An Epic Financial Crisis.
Copyright
© 2005 Bill Bonner
Bill
Bonner Archives
|