It Didn’t Start With Bush
by
Ira Katz
by Ira Katz
DIGG THIS
George W. Bush should be the poster boy for Hayek’s dictum of Why
the Worst Get On Top; in other words, he is the worst. His
statements are the worst; virtually everything that comes out
of his mouth is either stupid, illiterate, ill informed, false and/or
a lie (e.g.; "Major
combat operations have ended," "I’m
the decider."). His administration is the worst, responsible
for putting the US in its worst condition in terms of the economy,
military readiness, international standing, education, and medical
care. From the 2000 election to the present, Bush and his administration
have consistently and successfully worked to undermine the remains
of the constitutional republic that was the United States.
Yet, we must remember that though Bush has accelerated what was
a descent into a freefall, the descent itself didn’t start with
him and will thus not likely end with him. I was reminded of this
fact recently while following an internet thread. It started at
the blog at Takimag, where
there is an interesting remembrance
of William Buckley, especially regarding his personality. Among
the civil discourse in the responses was a discussion of the conservative
culture journal Modern
Age. The archive of the journal contains all of the back
issues starting from volume 1, number 1 issued in the summer of
1957. In that first issue is an article by Felix
Morley. He was a Pulitzer Prize winning editor (Washington Post),
a college president (Haverford College), and co-founder of the magazine
Human Events. This apparently very establishment résumé should not
obscure the fact that Morley was a stalwart of the Old
Right ("See Joseph R. Stromberg's Felix
Morley: An Old Fashioned Republican Critic of Statism and Interventionism
(Journal of Libertarian Studies, Vol. 2, No. 3, pp
269–77) and Felix
Morley: An Old Fashioned Republican. Leonard Liggio, in
Felix Morley
and the Commonwealthman Tradition: The Country-Party, Centralization
and the American Empire (Journal of Libertarian Studies,
Vol. 2, No. 3, pp. 279–86) looks at Morley's historical analysis
of the libertarian movement and the rise of the state. Of
Morley's books, Freedom
and Federalism (Indianapolis: Liberty Fund, 1981 [1959])
and The
Power in the People (Nash Publishing, 1972 [1949]) are his
best critiques of imperialism abroad and the welfare state at home.")
The article from 1957 is called American
Republic or American Empire. I happened to use a green highlighter
to mark significant passages, including the title, on my printout
of the article. As a whole, the article was so significant that
it became as green as Dublin on St. Patrick’s Day. I will present
several of these passages below with a few comments (though they
are generally self-evident) but I highly recommend that you read
the article yourself.
The article is preceded by a note from the editors (among them
was Russell Kirk) that the goal of publishing this particular piece
was to "stimulate thought, rather than to express a single
point of view." Morley’s opening passage questioned the raison
d’être of the American Right during the height of the
Cold War, the targeted audience of the new magazine.
We seem to have reached the stage, in our national evolution,
where we have a vested interest in preparation for war. It has
become necessary for us to have a powerful enemy. Soviet Russia
is currently our target not only because its economic system is
communistic and its political system tyrannical, but perhaps primarily
because the Russian organism rivals ours in actual or latent physical
power. Russia could revert to free enterprise, or restore an hereditary
Czardom, tomorrow; and still our Secretary of State would be compelled
to question her bona fides. Peaceful co-existence
with Russia is impossible not simply because of Communist plotting
but because our economy apparently needs the constant stimulus
of a threat of large-scale war.
Today, as NATO pushes east and the bellicosity toward Russia continues
years after the fall of the Soviet Union helps prove the truth of
Morley’s hypothetical point. He then presents a discussion of the
economics of the military industrial complex, how it drives foreign
policy, and the symbiosis between them. Simply stated by Morley,
"As long as the country is menaced, or thinks itself menaced,
Congress will patriotically vote almost unlimited funds for armament,"
as the menace lies throughout the world. In Morley’s time this was
the Soviet menace, today it is terrorism (and perhaps once again
the Russians and Chinese in the future). Furthermore, "Congress,
which nominally controls the purse strings, seldom does much to
cut the military estimates. They are presented as essential for
the national security, and it is all but impossible for even the
most conscientious legislator to prove that they are not essential."
Robert Higgs has written extensively on how this practice operates
today (e.g., see here
and here).
Morley then explains why these economic issues are so serious to
the state of our domestic political system.
Political scientists should give much more attention than is
customary to the effect of these huge defense appropriations,
continued in terms of tens of billions of dollars year after year.
For while the immediate consequences may be primarily financial
and economic, the ultimate consequences which we are now
beginning to witness are political in the deepest sense of the
word.
He then gives several examples of the propaganda that is necessary
to the empire and the dangers that it leads to.
Today, with increasingly rare exceptions, you only read or hear in
matters of foreign policy what Washington wants you to read or
hear.
And what Washington wants one month may be, and often is, the
exact opposite of what Washington wants the next month. That is
why the American people are so bewildered trying to follow the
contortions of a foreign policy which first disarms and then rearms
the Germans; which first prohibits and then insists upon Japanese
conscription; which gives tanks to the French in Algeria and then
chides the French for using them; which encourages the Chinese
Communists to take over the mainland but then says touch Formosa
at your peril; which first arm Israel against the Arabs and then
the Arabs against Israel; which denounces the Russians for refusing
to disarm and then denounces them for offering to disarm. The
net effort of these and many other contradictions is that, while
we are undeniably feared, we are no longer either respected or
admired abroad. And, which is more to the point, we are certainly
both confused and uneasy here at home.
The fundamental difficulty that gives rise to this painful and
dangerous confusion is, I think, clear. We are trying to make
a federal republic do an imperial job, without honestly confronting
the fact that our traditional institutions are specifically designed
to prevent centralization of power. With this direct contradiction
between the traditional form of our government and the current
purposes of our government, a sort of political schizophrenia
is inevitable. It is revealed in wavering, wobbling, and wasteful
policies. The wealth of this country is so great, and its power
so enormous, that we can stagger around for a long time, like
a drunken giant, with relative immunity. At some time and at some
point, however, this fundamental conflict between our institutions
and our policies will have to be resolved.
Thus, it is
clear that the transformation of republic to empire was occurring
more than 50 years ago. Furthermore, with the Bush regime’s continuous
onslaught of the Constitution in favor of the unitary executive
and a series of horrible blunders at home and abroad that are leading
to national collapse, perhaps the point in time that this “fundamental
conflict between our institutions and our policies” that Morley
suggested is now.
April
26, 2008
Ira
Katz [send him mail] lives
in Paris and works as a research engineer for a French company.
He is the co-author of Handling
Mr. Hyde: Questions and Answers about Manic Depression and
Introduction
to Fluid Mechanics.
Copyright
© 2008 LewRockwell.com
Ira
Katz Archives
|