De-Nazify America-Part 3: Vindicate, Exonerate & Honor Those Who Fought 4 Freedom & The Rule of Law

by: Paul Rosenberg

Sun Apr 19, 2009 at 16:30


One thing that makes Obama's Nuremberg defense of CIA torturers all the more morally repugnant is his failure to honor, promote, respect, speak out for and defend those who, in stark contrast, refused to go along with the Bush Administration's long march into the darkness of moral depravity.  

He has retained many members of Bush's military and intelligence teams, some who continue to fight fiercely against any sort of moral reckoning. But what of Major General Antonio Taguba, whom digby wrote of just yesterday?  From the Harvard Law Record article digby linked to:

Gen. Taguba: Accountability for torture does not stop at White House door
Andrew Kalloch

Major General Antonio Taguba called for an independent commission to investigate war crimes committed by senior members of the Bush Administration in remarks in Ames Courtroom on Tuesday, April 14. The event was sponsored by Physicians for Human Rights and the Human Rights Program at Harvard Law School.

Taguba, who was pressured to resign by the Bush Administration in 2007 following the 2004 leak of his report detailing abuses by U.S. armed forces in Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq, declared in the preface of the 2008 Physicians for Human Rights publication "Broken Laws, Broken Lives," that, "there is no longer any doubt as to whether the [Bush] administration has committed war crimes. The only question that remains to be answered is whether those who ordered the use of torture will be held to account."

Why isn't Taguba a high-level member of the Obama Administration?  Why is Thomas Tamm, the former Justice Department attorney who blew the whistle on the Bush Administration's domestic spying operation still facing the threat of prosecution?  Why hasn't the case against Lt. Ehren Watada been dismissed already?  Why is the death of Alyssa Peterson, who killed herself just days after being forced to witness a violent, illegal interrogation Iraq, still shrouded in shame and darkness?  Why are those who struggled against the darkness that threatened to engulf our country still left suspended in some netherworld, rather than being embraced and honored for their courage, their integrity, their status as true American heroes?  

Paul Rosenberg :: De-Nazify America-Part 3: Vindicate, Exonerate & Honor Those Who Fought 4 Freedom & The Rule of Law
The article on Taguba continued:

While the Obama Administration has "reaffirmed its commitment to valuing human rights and international law" by officially closing CIA black sites and the detention center at Guantanamo Bay, Taguba insisted that "there are a lot of stories that have yet to be told."

In an effort to make those stories known, Taguba has been travelling the country seeking to foster dialogue between human rights advocates and the nation's armed forces. According to Taguba, the two groups "share a common denominator based on ethical considerations of democratic principles." Human rights advocates seek to ensure the preservation of democratic ideals and U.S. armed forces are trained to "provide services in a manner that exemplifies America's ideals" and to protect America's value system and its' way of life, not simply to secure its borders at all costs.

Taguba explained that the Army's core values-honor, integrity, courage, and selfless service-are but one part of a broader set of moral foundations upon which the Army operates. For example, Taguba declared that the Army is required to adhere to international laws, including all four Geneva conventions, as well as the Uniform Code of Military Justice, and to demonstrate "responsibility, accountability, and discipline."

Make no mistake: this guy totally gets it.  Why isn't he our Secretary of Defense?  This is not just an idle bit of snark.  The realization that our values are vital to our defense is one that continue to overlook at our utmost peril.

In my November 2007 diary, "Where's Obama? Questioning v Reinforcing [Foreign Policy] CW #3 (Political Duality of Rep v Dem 6c)", I wrote:

The Two Cold Wars: Kenan's and Nitze's

In a remarkable paper, "Kennan's Long Telegram and NSC-68: A Comparative Analysis," East European Quarterly, Vol. 31, no. 4, January 1998, Efstathios T. Fakiolas analyzed two key documents from the formative days of the Cold War.  Kennan's Long Telegram, which first formulated a comprehensive picture of the Soviet threat, and laid the foundations for the doctrine of containment, and NSC-68, the national security directive primarily authored by Paul Nitze, which formed the blueprint for how the US fought the Cold War throughout most of its duration....

Kennan relied on the "tectonic plates" model, in which there many other non-state actors, the world is not "zero-sum," and there is often opportunity for mutual cooperation.  Nitze relied on the billiard ball model, which sees the international system as "composed solely of egoistic sovereign states interested in maximizing their relative power capabilities at the expense of others," and sees "world politics is a 'zero-sum' game in which national security conceived of in military and territorial terms is the one and only states' national objective."

As a result, Kennan favored a strategy of containment that emphasized strengthening the West socially, economically and culturally, addressing its flaws which the Soviets exposed.  In contrast, Nitze ignored issues of the Wests internal flaws, and focused almost exclusively on military force to combat the Soviet Union.

It's my own observation, based on this analysis, that we fought Nitze's Cold War, but we won Kennan's.  It was not, in the end, our military strength that defeated the Soviet Union, it was the appeal of our culture of openness and freedom.  The history of Eastern European resistance movements, especially in Checkoslavakia and Poland, makes this abundantly clear.  Through their influence on dissident culture, Frank Zappa and Lou Reed did more to win the Cold War than any division of tanks ever did-or even a wing of nuclear armed B-52 bombers.

What's more, part of the consequences of fighting Nitze's Cold War was the creation of the al Qaeda and the Taliban--in short, our current "war on terror", however Obama may chosen to rebrand it.

To go beyond mere rebranding, and to actually secure our future--along with the rest of the world, we need to embrace Kennan's vision, which sees our adversaries criticisms as opportunities to perfect our own flaw, and sees adherence to our highest values as our greatest defense.

Major General Taguba grasps this very well.  He is clearly the one man who is both morally and intellectually ready to lead our Department of Defense in a winning direction.  Indeed, there doesn't seem to be anyone else remotely qualified who even has a clue what that direction might be.

But Obama can't even begin to see this, because he's so wrapped up in covering for those whom he ought to be subjecting to the most thorough and withering investigation and interrogation.


The same is true of Obama's action or inaction with respect to others mentioned in the introductory section of this diary.  Thomas Tamm, the former Justice Department attorney who blew the whistle on the Bush Administration's domestic spying operation still faces the threat of possible prosecution.  He was interviewed this week on Democracy Now!,  This is how Amy Goodman introduced the segment:

The New York Times is reporting the National Security Agency has been intercepting private email messages and phone calls of Americans in recent months on a scale that went beyond the broad legal limits established by Congress last year.

The Times is also reporting the NSA attempted to wiretap a member of Congress, without court approval, on an overseas trip in 2005 or 2006. But the plan was ultimately blocked because of concerns from some intelligence officials about using the NSA to spy on a member of Congress.

The article in today's Times was written by Eric Lichtblau and James Risen, the same reporters who first revealed in 2005 that President Bush had secretly authorized the NSA to intercept the phone calls and emails of Americans without a court warrant.

Out first guest today is the whistleblower who originally tipped the Times off about the surveillance operation. His name is Thomas Tamm. In 2004, he called the New York Times from a subway payphone and told Eric Lichtblau about the existence of a secret domestic surveillance program. At the time, he was a Justice Department attorney in the Office of Intelligence Policy and Review.

The decision to become a whistleblower has permanently altered Thomas Tamm's life. In 2007, the FBI raided his home, seized three computers and personal files. He's suffered from depression and is in $30,000 debt. Late last year, Thomas Tamm risked arrest and admitted to Newsweek magazine that he was the one who tipped off the New York Times. Tamm still faces possible arrest for disclosing classified secrets.

This afternoon, the Nation Institute and the Fertel Foundation are recognizing Thomas Tamm by awarding him the 2009 Ridenhour Prize for Truth-Telling. The prize is named after Vietnam veteran Ron Ridenhour, who helped expose the My Lai massacre. Thomas Tamm joins us now in Washington, D.C.

Thomas Tamm is an American hero for exposing one of the most wide-ranging cases of government lawbreaking in American history.  Barack Obama cannot recognize and admit this because he has become an apologist and an accomplice after the fact to the very same Bush Administration lawlessness that Tamm was crucial in exposing.

Obama is on the wrong side of this, just as he is on the wrong side of the "war on terror" by trying to expand the failed military-based policies of the Bush Administration into Afghanistan.

Honoring,  respecting, and listening to those who stood up to the darkness of the Bush years is a key aspect to much-needed de-Nazification of America not only because it's the right thing to do--and that's more than reason enough--but also because it is pragmatically the only way to reorient ourselves 180 degrees away from the failed policies of the Bush Administristration, as well as the deeper assumptions on which it drew.


Then there's Lt. Ehren Watada:

Ehren Watada (born 1978) is a First Lieutenant of the United States Army who in June, 2006, refused to deploy to Iraq for his unit's assigned rotation to Operation Iraqi Freedom.[1][2] Watada said he believed the war to be illegal and that, under the doctrine of command responsibility, it would make him party to war crimes. At the time, he was assigned to duty with the 5th Battalion, 20th Infantry Regiment, part of the 3rd Brigade, 2nd Infantry Division, as a Fire Support Officer. Watada was the first commissioned officer in the U.S. armed forces to refuse to deploy to Iraq.[3]

Watada's February 2007 court-martial ended in a mistrial when he argued that his orders were unlawful, because Military Judge John Head ruled that question can not be resolved within the military justice system, saying the argument was thus reduced to an admission of guilt. A second court-martial was scheduled but was stayed in October 2007 by U.S. District Judge Benjamin Settle, who issued an order stating that Watada's "double jeopardy claim is meritorious" and no evidence that it lacks merit was presented.[4] The Army challenged the injunction, and Judge Settle ruled on October 21, 2008, that Watada cannot be retried on three of the five counts, but abstained from deciding whether the remaining two charges of conduct unbecoming an officer may go forward.[5]

Watada was more than willing to fight in Afghanistan.  But he made the mistake of educating himself about Iraq before being shipped off there, and he came to the perfectly logical conclusion that it was not a legal conflict under international law, and his participation there would constitute a war crime.  Once again, Obama cannot recognize the legitimacy of Watada's position, because doing so would require a clear repudiation of the Bush Regime, when Obama is all about the blur.

This is but one more crystal clear example of why we desperately need a clean break with all of that moral depravity.  It's why we need a program of thorough de-Nazification.  Every single bit of complicity with their lawless brutality, violence and inhumanity needs to be completely repudiated.

Blurring the differences, as Obama has foolishly devoted himself to doing, is merely a way to prolong, extend, and support the future comeback of all the tragically anti-American ideas that have haunted our nation for the past 8 years.

We need to affirm the patriotism, honesty, integrity and humanity of heroes like General Taguba, Thomas Tamm, Lt. Ehren Watada and Alyssa Peterson.  They are true American heroes, and need to be honored as such, in order that our country might reclaim its soul.

We need a program of thorough-going de-Nazification.


Tags: , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
Investigations and prosecutions are the key to any de-nazification program (4.00 / 2)
As has been quoted numerous times, sunlight is the best disinfectant. Far from dividing the country, bringing these injustices to light should disgust any decent American and hopefully ensure a repudiation of these tactics, the real goal of prosecutions, not the relative sentences handed out to various individual CIA agents or military personnel (though these are important), which I think was something of a distraction from your previous diaries.

The question becomes how does this begin to happen. I believe we need some elected officials or important institutions to spearhead this effort. With the way the media marginalizes debate, I am unsure of how we can move forward on this program, besides independent events outside our control i.e. release of the torture memos, without strong voices coming from within the sphere of legitimate debate, aka the village. Some senators have been active on this, slowly. Pelosi and crew may be a nonstarter due to active complicity. The establishment seems nigh impenetrable. So wheres the crack in the wall?

Alternatively we can work along the lines of the "change comes to, not from, Washington" model. Digby's petition to impeach Bybee to the California Democratic party is a good start. Do states have any jurisdiction here, a la Spain's claim to universal jurisdiction? I am ignorant of this. What institutions in America can be mobilized? Cuomo and Spitzer before him pursue corporate crooks. What about Al-Marri, locked up in South Carolina?

And how do we present a united voice with a case for prosecution?


I missed this quick hit (4.00 / 4)
http://www.openleft.com/showQu... from Counterspin who says that Representative Nadler has called for a special prosecutor. Rep. Nadler is chairman of the subcommittee on the constitution, civil rights and civil liberties. Perhaps we can influence him and other Democrats on this committee, and on the committee on the Judiciary more generally, to begin hearings? At minimum, this would be the logical place for impeachment of Bybee to begin, seeing as how he is a sitting judge.

[ Parent ]
I don't see any other way (4.00 / 3)
Any commission will be doomed to become a politically superheated whitewash.

A special prosecutor is the only way to keep things from being "political" or based in "retribution," which is odd since those are the two words most commonly used as arguments against prosecution.

And we have always been at war with Eastasia.

"More than any other time in history, mankind faces a crossroads. One path leads to despair and utter hopelessness. The other, to total extinction. Let us pray we have the wisdom to choose correctly." -Woody Allen, My Speech to the Graduates


[ Parent ]
War with Eastasia (4.00 / 1)
is double plus good.

Montani semper liberi

[ Parent ]
My Last Diary In This Series Deals With Impeaching Bybee (4.00 / 2)
which is certainly one promising avenue.  We need to press on this along multiple fronts.

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3

[ Parent ]
Calitics is looking to take action. (0.00 / 0)
Sorry if someone else already put this up.

http://www.calitics.com/diary/...

"More than any other time in history, mankind faces a crossroads. One path leads to despair and utter hopelessness. The other, to total extinction. Let us pray we have the wisdom to choose correctly." -Woody Allen, My Speech to the Graduates


[ Parent ]
I'll Be Covering That As Well In Part 4 (0.00 / 0)
Coming after Dan's Bybee Memo #2.

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3

[ Parent ]
Good question, all,but (4.00 / 1)
Taguba is not the SOD for very good reasons: First of all, it would require so many heads to roll that the catharsis would be probably more than the country could bear, all at once. There may be some wisdom in the President's decision not to instigate such calamity in the midst of everything else. On the other hand, I think keeping Gates and not kicking the can several feet farther down the road is a mistake. Although we might excuse Obama for not completely up-ending our society in some horrific manner, we still need to pay attention to the fact that incredible wrongs have been done, crimes have been committed and, ultimately, someone needs to be held accountable and to pay. If this is not done, this period of our history will carry forward an incredibly black and open sore that we will never be able to justify. The President should come to grips with that and stop pussy-footing around.

But please can we stop with the "Nazi" rhetoric? That blurs the issues and complicates the reasoning beyond any useful purpose. Acknowledging the enormity of the immorality here is quite enough. We get it without having to invoke Hitler. This is a different time.  


I have to agree with you. (4.00 / 1)
"de-Nazification" is over the top here.

Yes.  I get it.  

Yes, I know our government tortured.  Yes, I know it's a terrible thing morally and that it's important to do what we can to insure that it never happens again.

Yes, I wish the Obama administration would punish the perpetrators.  Yes, it would be a better country and better world if he did so.  And I support those who continue to argue for this and to criticize Obama.

And yes, I know "only following orders" is the Nuremburg defense, the same defense the Nazis tried to use for their murder of millions.

But I do have a problem with accusing the administration of failing to pursue "de-nazification".  The reason is, that while at the time it was impossible not to notice some similarities between the actions of the Bush administration and those of the Hitler regime, these were overshadowed by the differences.  Ultimately, no Nazi storm troopers murdered Bush's opposition (even if their rhetoric sometimes lay in that direction).  In general, though, for the most part, "Godwin's law" stayed in effect and most of the left agreed that calling the Bush Adminstration "nazi" was over the top, counterproductive, and not to be engaged in.  So why is it necessary to call for de-nazification now?  

The actions of the Bush administration are bad enough on their own, without making overblown analogies to the crimes of Hitler that mainly trivialize the latter?


sTiVo's rule: Just because YOU "wouldn't put it past 'em" doesn't prove that THEY did it.


[ Parent ]
Godwin's Law (4.00 / 5)
Godwin's Law, imo, has done far more harm than good being used as a blanket cover for absolutely outrageous behavior and conduct.  If it walks like a duck and talks like a duck, it's a duck.  This stuff has duck written all over it.

We have no reason whatsoever to buy into Bushism.  None whatsoever.  The people voted for a change.  Let's have change.


[ Parent ]
Can you support this statement with empirical evidence of some sort? (4.00 / 4)
First of all, it would require so many heads to roll that the catharsis would be probably more than the country could bear, all at once
.

The notion that this country "can't handle" it strikes me as palpably absurd. I would like to see some evidence to support this claim. I've asked this question of quite a number of people thus far and I have yet to get a response that makes any sense whatsoever. Perhaps you can be the first.

Look, the US has a choice to make here and thus far it's making the wrong one. By siding with monsters and emasculating any notion of the Rule of Law, the Obama administration is directly subverting American democracy, it's institutions and it's very legitimacy. He is also telling the rest of the world to bend to our illegitimate will, or else. Suborning torture is a de facto act of State Terrorism, by implication if not actual practice. This is intended to scare the crap out of our friends and foes alike. It's also intended to scare us, Leona Helmsley's Little People. It also legitimates the barbarous behaviors of other nation-states, which is also part of the motivation behind this decision.

If you don't think making our government legitimate again is something the American people don't have the intestinal fortitude for, I really have to inquire as to your bias.



"More than any other time in history, mankind faces a crossroads. One path leads to despair and utter hopelessness. The other, to total extinction. Let us pray we have the wisdom to choose correctly." -Woody Allen, My Speech to the Graduates


[ Parent ]
"more than the country could bear" (4.00 / 2)
I mean, guys who think that Taguba could be SecDef probably even think that America could elect a black President.

What are they smoking?

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3


[ Parent ]
Kind of like (4.00 / 3)
how we couldn't bear to count the votes in the 2000 election?

Montani semper liberi

[ Parent ]
Thank God We Dodged THAT Bullet! (4.00 / 2)
Just think what might have happened if we had counted them all!

Gosh, Al Gore would have been President!  

We might be 8 years ahead of where we are now in combating global warming--talk about scary!

He might even have listened to Richrd Clark!  9-11 might never have happened!

And we'd still have been vulnerable to a terrorist attack!  Unlike Bush/Cheney, who kept us totally safe from 9/12 onward!

Truly frightening!

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3


[ Parent ]
Gosh. Usually nobody says nuthin'. (0.00 / 0)
Everyone who chose to jump in my face was right in their own right and wrong to some degree, at the same time. Everybody has a point, some are more focused than others, some are cutesy and some are psuedo-humorous. Almost every time I suggest to anyone that we take as measured an approach as possble to making repairs, something which is not an all-out assault on "what is"...sort of a "damn the torpedoes" approach...I get the same requests for empirical evidence,the same notions that some "absolute" action must be taken, and ridicule for not being severe enough. (I said I am not happy with Obama's limp-wristed actions, thus far) The mess we have, and the evidence of it, exists because Bush & Co. thought they  were "absolutely" right. Any ultra-stringent proposal which proposes to be "absolutely" appropriate as a corrective action can potentially be just as bad. I would like to see us work our way through this without starting a populist emotional WWIII and wreaking more new havoc than that which we are trying to rectify, in the process. I may not have empirical evidence, but I am allowed to have hunches and I have observed, over time, how people act, react and over-react when things get heated up without enough planning and forethought. When the cooling water around the fuel rods gets too low,you get the China syndrome.

Before you decide to blow open a can of toxic worms with a nuclear bomb, you should think about where the worm remnants are going to land and what the consequences may be. Knee jerk reactions invariably give you a bloody nose.

Do you want a short term session of outrage and punishment or a long-term resolution that guarantees this will never happen again? I know which one I want.  


[ Parent ]
Bored Now (4.00 / 1)
Your cable news narrative is tired beyond belief.

We've said nothing about being wild and intemperate.  What we're talking about is being forceful and resolute.

I've said over and over again, for example, that the Nuremberg Principles provide for consideration of the "only following orders" argument as post-conviction grounds for seeking a reduced sentence.  I've also expressed my personal belief in restitution as opposed to imprisonment.

You can project your inner wild-eyed madman all you want.  I'm not the guy to accept your projections.

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3


[ Parent ]
Not exactly (0.00 / 0)
The projection propensity is yours: I am only cautiously warning against "unneccesary roughness". I never said we should not be "forceful and resolute", just that we should not act with reckless abandon. And I am as intolerant of those who who will not abide any civil discussion of rational moderation as you are intolerant of entertaining same. Those who claim to be absolutely correct and above the fray all the time rarely are. And if I were cable news, I'd be calling for tea bags.  

[ Parent ]
Then Why Are You Warning Against "Unnecessary Roughness" When None Was Shown? (4.00 / 1)
Your excuse makes no sense.

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3

[ Parent ]
What, besides the Nuremburg Defense (0.00 / 0)
is sparking your call for "de-Nazification"?  

Because, as far as I know, no we had no Nazi party here, no fascist dictatorship.  We had no political murders.  Needless to add, we had no holocaust.  We did have torture which should have been unacceptable.  We did have some really repugnant people in important and powerful government positions trying very hard, perhaps, to move in that direction but they never managed to consolidate their position.  Or we wouldn't be having this discussion today, would we?

We need something to be done, but it isn't de-nazification.  That is hyperbole and I don't see how it advances the cause of accountability for the crimes that were committed by the Bush administration.

sTiVo's rule: Just because YOU "wouldn't put it past 'em" doesn't prove that THEY did it.


[ Parent ]
People have to realize what the possible consequences are (4.00 / 3)
When arguments are being made and circumstances arising that resemble those that have in the past contributed or enabled lawless antidemocratic action, they must be pointed out and repudiated.

There have been no holocausts, but there have been random killings of liberals by crazies citing authorities such as Limbaugh, OReilly, etc, and the guy in Pittsburgh who shot three cops. And what about the fact that we have enabled torture and murderous authoritarian regimes all over Latin America, Africa and Asia for the past 50 years. Or do those people not count?

There has been no Nazi dictatorship, but there is the amoral Religious Right leadership and its toxic brew of racist nationalism that we saw in the last months of the McCain campaign and now with the tea parties, letting everyone know that white supremacy is still alive in its more moderate and extreme forms.

And the bandits haven't consolidated their position? Are you dense or just willfully blind? Bybee is a federal judge. The industrialists and corporate power has not gone anywhere, see the bank bailout. Karl Rove and various other criminals are given spots on TV and in the media practically every day. The whole complex has suffered two electoral setbacks after some of the most massive fuckups in history but do you really think that will be enough to dismantle the imperial war machine?

I understand de-nazification to mean the dismantling of the conservative hegemonic structures and the radical right wing politics it enables. The open embrace of torture is poisonous in the extreme to the long term health of an open society. If we acquiesce, where will the next line be, sTiVo? And does quibbling about the relative evil of one historical example versus another matter when there are so many parallels that the difference becomes one of scale, not type? Are you so confident that great evil could never happen here? I for one am not, and I do not care to see it happen.


[ Parent ]
True but (0.00 / 0)
"de-Nazification" is not the slogan under which you're going to change that.

Argue all you want for the prosecution of the torturing criminals - I'm with you.  Call it de-nazification and you are weakening your case, making it sound more extreme than it is.

In spite of the magnitude of Hitler's crimes, had the plot of the German military to kill him in 1944 succeeded, it is doubtful that you would have had Nuremburg trials.  Without the total defeat of the Nazis from the outside, reality would have been very different.  As it was, Nuremburg was controversial and de-nazification far from complete even with Nuremburg.

sTiVo's rule: Just because YOU "wouldn't put it past 'em" doesn't prove that THEY did it.


[ Parent ]
Amnesty for torturers (4.00 / 3)
IS a guarantee that it will happen again. Is that "measured" enough for you?

Montani semper liberi

[ Parent ]
Yeah, Nobody Actually Wants To WIN The "War On Terrorism" (4.00 / 2)
So why appoint a SecDef who could win?

I gotta agree, it's pretty powerful argument.

And what with Obama not really having any sort of mandate, since, after all, it is a center-right nation.  It's all for the best that he reappointed Bush's boy.

Too bad he didn't consult with John McCain, though.  That would have been totally awesome!

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3


[ Parent ]
What's worse than Nazi rhetoric? (4.00 / 5)
This...
There may be some wisdom in the President's decision not to instigate such calamity in the midst of everything else...


What does Paul call it -- (4.00 / 4)
hegemony in action?

In this case, "both sides are to blame," one for coddling torturers and the other for calling them bad words.

I'll stand with the ones using bad words, thanks.

Montani semper liberi


[ Parent ]
Taguba for SECDEF (4.00 / 2)
Taguba also understands that beyond the obvious moral issues, there are also organizational (in terms of the legitimacy of command) and strategic issues.

Taguba explained that the Army's core values-honor, integrity, courage, and selfless service-are but one part of a broader set of moral foundations upon which the Army operates. For example, Taguba declared that the Army is required to adhere to international laws, including all four Geneva conventions, as well as the Uniform Code of Military Justice, and to demonstrate "responsibility, accountability, and discipline."

These aren't just pretty words. When we coddle bad or deficient leadership or command, we undermine the whole organization. For the military or any other org that is involved with doing dangerous things, this often has the effect of needlessly getting people killed and it directly undermines professionalism.

So if we just apply this to say, the CIA, what kind of culture is Obama encouraging when it coddles these people? What will that do to our relationships with other nation-states? Will that essentially force the conscientious professionals to bail, just leaving the criminals (who being thugs, probably aren't the most talented of the bunch anyway) in charge of everything?

Taguba was a general, who has no doubt immersed himself in all the best strategic thinkers. He understands how all this, and more, has broader strategic implications for our standing on the global stage. He knows all too well that there is a moral component to strategic superiority. It may not be overriding, but it's certainly very significant. There are times when it can be pivotal--who did the Germans want to surrender to, the Russians or us?

So to the apologists out there, I'd just like to say that you're not thinking in the National Interest in any real sense at all. The more we are collectively viewed as the "bad guys," the harder life will get for us as a nation.

This should be obvious, considering all the awful shit we got away with (Chile, El Salvador, Angola, Mozambique, etc) before simply because we were viewed as the "good guys" compared to our adversaries (USSR et al).

By deciding that it's "too painful" or "too inconvenient" to actually deal in real terms with this, which are just bullshit excuses anyway, we are undermining our own position around the globe.



"More than any other time in history, mankind faces a crossroads. One path leads to despair and utter hopelessness. The other, to total extinction. Let us pray we have the wisdom to choose correctly." -Woody Allen, My Speech to the Graduates


Clearly you anti-nazi argument people have not read Altemeyer's The Authoritarians (0.00 / 0)
Authoritarianism leads to political fascism. Adorno is clear about this and so is Altemeyer.

Here's the link for the ebook: http://home.cc.umanitoba.ca/~a...

Makes Adorno look sloppy with his precise and elegant questionaires, although Adorno was the great theorist.

Our culture is authoritarian down to the bottom. And those of us old enough to have participated in the 60's feel it terribly as we know what living is like when this iron rule gets exposed, laughed at and disregarded.

Michelle Obama raises her children like a good middle class mom. Strict rules for bedtime and homework, proper behavior,etc and gets the results, a child with allergies (compromised immune system). She makes lists and is super organized. She was a good A student, got into Princeton and went to graduate school and got a 6 figure job. She is perfect for him. Not the creative risk taker and absolutely wonderful woman his mother was. On her way to a Nobel Prize along with Grameen Bank whose micro lending she researched and got her PhD. in. An absolutely unique, remarkable woman.

So psychologically Obama in choosing at 10 to live with his authoritarian grandmother (who, he has said, was afraid of black men, didn't drive and was driven by someone  a strong symptom of agoraphobia) who was opposed to going to yet another country with his twice divorced mother while she gets her PhD, has chosen long ago his path to affluence and power.

Stop expecting otherwise from him! He is not from old money like FDR nor from the exceptional Kennedy family with Papa Joe's expectations to be obeyed or else. Obama is middle of the road where it is safe and secure. He thinks. Just wait until the financial shit flows down the road.


On the leger of human sin (0.00 / 0)
directing a child to complete homework then putting one's child to bed on schedule is not very grave.

Yet there is a bit of a Texas-Two-Step to fascism (pun intended):

1. Repress the id via an overbearing superego

2. Watch as the repressed energy spills out as destruction

Are we proposing an alternative?

Unrestrained id? That is what leads to the intervention of the fascistic superego after the inevitable breakdown of society

Being the Freudian Conservative that I am, I suggest Civilization; the gentle channeling of the energies of the id into arts and sciences.


[ Parent ]
Authoritariansim versus Free Education I guess (0.00 / 0)
directing a child to complete homework then putting one's child to bed on schedule is not very grave.

It all depends on the homework. Most homework is given because parents demand it. If you don't give homework they think you are not a serious educator. So is it that kind of homework, busy work, or is there a meaning and reason to it?

I had this argument for two years or so with my French friends in Philly. They had two boys going to a Friends' school in Philly, like the Obama girls. We would have free learning discussions (Holt, Neill, Dienes etc)and then he would turn around and say X have you finished your homework? Y, it's time to go to bed. And then I would tell him what a hypocrite he was. Both parents were mathematicians, she of the theorem order and he of math ed a la Dienes's work.

Well one day he said, You won." I took them out of school. So they were in a free school for awhile and one of them was labeled anti social because he sat and read Victor Hugo. They were about 6 and 7 1/2 or so then. So they were taken out of school again. They sat home almost a year and he was frantic because they bummed around. So he forced them to go to CCP with him and study math in his office. Then they got interested in a a course or two and sat in doing all the homework and taking all the tests on their own. No forcing. After a couple of years or so they had taken everything they wanted to take and did super well. So the father went to all the teachers and got their work legitimized. At this time the mother was teaching at a major women's college and had great fringes allowing her children to go to any university up to and including the tuition costs of the one she was teaching in. Both went to Penn as juniors at 10 and 12 or so and graduated at a very young age. A terrible auto accident delayed one of them for a year. (Not his fault.)

Now both are super people and super achievers in their fields which I won't go into here. But they are way up there.

The point I am trying to make is that they didn't stay even in a very good school learning how to dumb down their intellect and abilities. They could never have done what they did had they been constrained by even such a wonderful academic school as the Friends in Philly, as famous as the DC one.

I also taught in a supposed free school outside of Philly in 66-67. I still follow my ex students of that year on the internet. I am awed, absolutely awed, by what they have done. I do not take credit for it, but give it to them as what they accomplished that year with me doing what they were inclined to do was something I never anticipated. And today I see the seeds of that year in their accomplishments. That's all, just seeds.

And of course my private student who drove me mad until I figured out what she really needed to do: Sumi Tanooka and here she is! http://www.sumitonooka.com/

Freed from a curriculum and rebellion with me all she wanted to do was listen to my albums. All day every day when she finally arrived in the morning. I handed her over to Gary Goldschneider (now he writes books on astrology but he is a great classical musician) and so I could breathe easier as I couldn't give her what she needed. For her the rest is history.

The psychological construction you describe above is the same as Dostoievsky's, and who would want to have changed him! The American Freudians would help construct an ego for the person. Lacan's great clinician Francoise Dolto would do the linguistic magic only she has ever been able to do (read Dominique:Analysis of An Adolescent Boy-the finest case study ever)
and A.S. Neill is no slouch either.

The fallacy in your thinking is that if we don't offer structure, then we get chaos. Dienes talks of a math cafeteria where they can invent the new math of the future. Play with materials and then in a few days teach the axioms etc. when they have experientially arrived there. The students at his lab school at Cherbourg scored perfect 800's in the SAT's at 10 years of age.

Why the fuck must we hold them back? Not to mention Montessori's The Absorbant Mind which addresses what we do to infants. Sorry about this rant but it's one of my favorite obsessions.

And I love Paul Goodman! Everything by him. His Growing Up Absurd, his essays, short stories, his transparent sexual life, all of him. How wonderful he was. They have hidden him now haven't they?


[ Parent ]
You will not de-nazify America until you start with the children (0.00 / 0)
as Gandhi has so wisely said. And Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance. The structures are embedded in the brains of the young and the not so young. You are not gonna root them out unless you confront relentlessly on a daily basis. It is exhausting.

"Where do you want me to put this Mom?" Then Mom tells the child exactly where she wants it.

It's too difficult for most mothers to habitually answer, "Where do you think a good place for it would be?"

And so on. That's the way you de-nazify the future. It's the way you have to teach in a classroom as well. And with lesson plans required to be submitted 4-6 weeks in advance, how can you do that?


USER MENU

Open Left Campaigns

SEARCH

   

Advanced Search

QUICK HITS
STATE BLOGS
Powered by: SoapBlox