The Brownshirting of America
by
Paul Craig Roberts
by Paul Craig Roberts
James
Bovard, the great libertarian champion of our freedom and civil
liberties, recently
shared with readers his mail from Bush supporters. For starters
here are some of the salutations: "communist bastard,"
"asshole," "a piece of trash, scum of the earth."
It goes downhill from there.
Bush’s
supporters demand lock-step consensus that Bush is right. They regard
truthful reports that Saddam Hussein had no weapons of mass destruction
and was not involved in the September 11 attack on the US truths
now firmly established by the Bush administration’s own reports as
treasonous America-bashing.
As
well, Bovard is interpreted as throwing cold water on the feel-good,
macho, Muslim butt-kicking that Bush’s invasion of Iraq has come
to symbolize for his supporters. "People like you and Michael
Moore," one irate reader wrote, "is (sic) what brings
down our country."
I
have received similar responses from conservatives, as, no doubt,
have a number of other writers who object to a domestic police state
at war with the world.
In
language reeking with hatred, Heritage Foundation TownHall readers
impolitely informed me that opposing the invasion of Iraq is identical
to opposing America, that Bush is the greatest American leader in
history and everyone who disagrees with him should be shot before
they cause America to lose another war. TownHall’s readers were
sufficiently frightening to convince the Heritage Foundation to
stop posting my columns.
Bush’s
conservative supporters want no debate. They want no facts, no analysis.
They want to denounce and to demonize the enemies that the Hannitys,
Limbaughs, and Savages of talk radio assure them are everywhere
at work destroying their great and noble country.
I
remember when conservatives favored restraint in foreign policy
and wished to limit government power in order to protect civil liberties.
Today’s young conservatives are Jacobins determined to use government
power to impose their will at home and abroad.
Where
did such "conservatives" come from?
Claes
Ryn in his important book, America
the Virtuous, explains the intellectual evolution of the
neoconservatives who lead the Bush administration. For all their
defects, however, neocons are thoughtful compared to the world of
talk radio, whose inhabitants are trained to shout down everyone
else. From whence came the brownshirt movement that slavishly adheres
to the neocons’ agenda?
Three
recent books address this question. Thomas Frank in What’s
the Matter With Kansas, locates the movement in legitimate
conservative resentments of people who feel that family, religious,
and patriotic values are given short shrift by elitist liberals.
These
resentments festered and multiplied as offshore production, jobs
outsourcing, and immigration took a toll on careers and the American
dream.
An
audience was waiting for rightwing talk radio, which found its stride
during the Clinton years. Clinton’s evasions made it easy to fall
in with show hosts, who spun conspiracies and fabricated a false
consciousness for listeners who became increasingly angry.
Show
hosts, who advertise themselves as truth-tellers in a no-spin zone,
quickly figured out that success depends upon constantly confronting
listeners with bogymen to be exposed and denounced: war protesters
and America-bashers, the French, marrying homosexuals, the liberal
media, turncoats, Democrats, and the ACLU.
Talk
radio’s "news stories" do not need to be true. Their importance
lies in inflaming resentments and confirming that America’s implacable
enemies are working resolutely to destroy us.
David
Brock’s The
Republican Noise Machine lacks the insights of Thomas Frank’s
book, but it provides a gossipy history of the rightwing takeover
of the US media. Brock is unfair to some people, myself included,
and mischaracterizes as rightwing some media personalities who are
under rightwing attack.
Brock
is as blindly committed to his causes as the rightwing zealots he
exposes are to theirs. Unlike Frank, he cannot acknowledge that
the rightwing has legitimate issues.
Nevertheless,
Brock makes a credible case that today’s conservatives are driven
by ideology, not by fact. He argues that their stock in trade is
denunciation, not debate. Conservatives don’t assess opponents’
arguments, they demonize opponents. Truth and falsity are out of
the picture; the criteria are: who’s good, who’s evil, who’s patriotic,
who’s unpatriotic.
These
are the traits of brownshirts. Brownshirts know they are right.
They know their opponents are wrong and regard them as enemies who
must be silenced if not exterminated.
Some
of Brock’s quotes from prominent conservative commentators will
curl your toes. His description of the rightwing’s destruction of
an independent media and the "Fairness Doctrine" explain
why a recent CNN/Gallup poll found that 42% of Americans still believe
that Saddam Hussein was involved in the September 11 terrorist attack
on the US and 32% believe that Saddam Hussein personally planned
the attack.
A
country in which 42% of the population is totally misinformed is
not a country where democracy is safe.
Today
there is no one to correct a lie once it is told. The media, thanks
to Republicans, has been concentrated in few hands, and they are
not the hands of newsmen. Corporate values rule. If lies sell, sell
them. If listeners, viewers, and readers want confirmation of their
resentments and beliefs, give it to them. Objectivity turns listeners
off and is a money loser.
In
his book, Cruel
and Unusual, Mark Crispin Miller, professor of media studies
at New York University, explains how rightwing influence has moved
the media away from reporting news to designing our consciousness.
"The Age of Information," Miller writes, "has turned
out to be an Age of Ignorance."
Miller
makes a strong case. His description of how CNN and Fox News destroyed
the credibility of Scott Ritter, the leading expert on Iraq’s weapons,
reveals a media completely given over to propaganda. Ritter stood
in the way of the neocon’s invasion of Iraq.
CNN’s
Miles O’Brien, Eason Jordan, Catherine Callaway, Paula Zahn, Kyra
Phillips, Arthel Neville, and Fox News’ David Asman and John Gibson
portrayed Ritter as a disloyal American, a Ba-athist stooge on the
take from Saddam Hussein, and compared him to Jane Fonda in North
Vietnam.
With
this, the rightwing talk radio crazies were off and running. Anyone
with the slightest bit of real information about the state of weapons
development in Iraq was dismissed as a foreign agent who should
be shot for treason.
By
substituting fiction for reality, the US media took the country
to war. The CNN and Fox News "journalists" are as responsible
for America’s ill-fated invasion of Iraq as Cheney and Rumsfeld,
Wolfowitz and Perle.
With
a sizable percentage of the US population now addicted to daily
confirmations of their resentments and hatreds, US policy will be
increasingly driven by tightly made-up minds in pursuit of unrealistic
agendas.
American
troops are in Iraq on false pretenses. No one knows all the fateful
consequences of this mistaken adventure. Bush’s reelection would
be seen as a vindication of aggression, and more aggression would
likely follow. A continuing expenditure of blood, money, alliances,
good will, and civil liberties is not a future to which to look
forward.
October
16, 2004
Dr.
Roberts [send him mail]
served
as Assistant Secretary of the Treasury in the Reagan administration.
During the Cold War era, he was a member of the Committee on the
Present Danger. He is a former Associate Editor and columnist for
the Wall Street Journal editorial page and a former contributing
editor of National Review. During 1986-87 he assisted the
French government’s privatization of socialized firms and was awarded
the Legion of Honor. He is the co-author of The
Tyranny of Good Intentions.
Copyright
© 2004 Creators Syndicate
Paul
Craig Roberts Archives
|