Date: Sat, 15 Sep 2001 08:20:19 -0500 Subject: War Crimes Here is a point of view that is currently being ignored in the American media: FOLKS OUT THERE HAVE A "DISTASTE OF WESTERN CIVILIZATION AND CULTURAL VALUES"Edward S. Herman One of the most durable features of the U.S. culture is the inability orrefusal to recognize U.S. crimes. The media have long been calling for theJapanese and Germans to admit guilt, apologize, and pay reparations. But theidea that this country has committed huge crimes, and that current eventssuch as the World Trade Center and Pentagon attacks may be rooted inresponses to those crimes, is close to inadmissible. Editorializing on the recent attacks ("The National Defense," Sept. 12), the New York Times doesgive a bit of weight to the end of the Cold War and consequent "resurgent ofethnic hatreds," but that the United States and other NATO powerscontributed to that resurgence by their own actions (e.g., helping dismantlethe Soviet Union and pressing Russian "reform"; positively encouragingSlovenian and Croatian exit from Yugoslavia and the breakup of that state,and without dealing with the problem of stranded minorities, etc.) is completely unrecognized.The Times then goes on to blame terrorism on "religious fanaticism...theanger among those left behind by globalization," and the "distaste ofWestern civilization and cultural values" among the global dispossessed. Theblinders and self-deception in such a statement are truly mind-boggling. Asif corporate globalization, pushed by the U.S. government and its closestallies, with the help of the World Trade Organization, World Bank and IMF,had not unleashed a tremendous immiseration process on the Third World, withbudget cuts and import devastation of artisans and small farmers. Many ofthese hundreds of millions of losers are quite aware of the role of theUnited States in this process. It is the U.S. public who by and large havebeen kept in the dark.Vast numbers have also suffered from U.S. policies of supporting rightwingrule and state terrorism, in the interest of combating "nationalisticregimes maintained in large part by appeals to the masses" and threateningto respond to "an increasing popular demand for immediate improvement in thelow living standards of the masses," as fearfully expressed in a 1954National Security Council report, whose contents were never found to be"news fit to print." In connection with such policies, in the U.S. sphere ofinfluence a dozen National Security States came into existence in the 1960sand 1970s, and as Noam Chomsky and I reported back in 1979, of 35 countriesusing torture on an administrative basis in the late 1970s, 26 were clientsof the United States. The idea that many of those torture victims and theirfamilies, and the families of the thousands of "disappeared" in LatinAmerica in the 1960s through the 1980s, may have harbored some ill-feelingstoward the United States remains unthinkable to U.S. commentators. During the Vietnam war the United States used its enormous military power totry to install in South Vietnam a minority government of U.S. choice, withits military operations based on the knowledge that the people there werethe enemy. This country killed millions and left Vietnam (and the rest ofIndochina) devastated. A Wall Street Journal report in 1997 estimated thatperhaps 500,000 children in Vietnam suffer from serious birth defectsresulting from the U.S. use of chemical weapons there. Here again therecould be a great many people with well-grounded hostile feelings toward theUnited States.The same is true of millions in southern Africa, where the United Statessupported Savimbi in Angola and carried out a policy of "constructiveengagement" with apartheid South Africa as it carried out a hugecross-border terroristic operation against the frontline states in the 1970sand 1980s, with enormous casualties. U.S. support of "our kind of guy"Suharto as he killed and stole at home and in East Timor, and its long warmrelation with Philippine dictator Ferdinand Marcos, also may have generateda great deal of hostility toward this country among the numerous victims.Iranians may remember that the United States installed the Shah as anamenable dictator in 1953, trained his secret services in "methods ofinterrogation," and lauded him as he ran his regime of torture; and theysurely remember that the United States supported Saddam Hussein all throughthe 1980s as he carried out his war with them, and turned a blind eye to hisuse of chemical weapons against the enemy state. Their civilian airliner 655that was destroyed in 1988, killing 290 people, was downed by a U.S. warship engaged in helping Saddam Hussein fight his war with Iran. Many Iranians mayknow that the commander of that ship was given a Legion of Merit award in1990 for his "outstanding service" (but readers of the New York Times wouldnot know this as the paper has never mentioned this high levelcommendation).The unbending U.S. backing for Israel as that country has carried out along-term policy of expropriating Palestinian land in a major ethniccleansing process, has produced two intifadas-- uprisings reflecting thedesperation of an oppressed people. But these uprisings and this fight forelementary rights have had no constructive consequences because the UnitedStates gives the ethnic cleanser arms, diplomatic protection, and carteblanche as regards policy.All of these victims may well have a distaste for "Western civilization andcultural values," but that is because they recognize that these include theruthless imposition of a neoliberal regime that serves Western transnationalcorporate interests, along with a willingness to use unlimited force toachieve Western ends. This is genuine imperialism, sometimes using economiccoercion alone, sometimes supplementing it with violence, but with manymillions--perhaps even billions--of people "unworthy victims." The Timeseditors do not recognize this, or at least do not admit it, because they arespokespersons for an imperialism that is riding high and whose principalsare unprepared to change its policies. This bodes ill for the future. But itis of great importance right now to stress the fact that imperial terrorisminevitably produces retail terrorist responses; that the urgent need is thecurbing of the causal force, which is the rampaging empire.-----Messaggio originale-----Da: owner-aut-op-sy-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu [mailto:owner-aut-op-sy-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu]Per conto di AnttiRautiainen Inviato: venerd́ 14 settembre 2001 14.55A: alter-ee-AT-most.org.pl; organise-AT-lists.tao.ca;aut-op-sy-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu; mai-not-AT-flora.org; caravan99-AT-mail.nadir.orgOggetto: AUT: Time to fight back for the globalization Time to fight back for the globalizationI wrote this in the aftermath of tragic events of Tuesday 11thOf September. It is still unclear who were behind these awful attacks, but it is hard to imagine who else might haveinterest to hit these targets except opponents of the globalization.Anti-globalists have been behind all major terrorist attacks donein the USA during last ten years, such as first WTC bombing 1993,Oklahoma bombing 1995 and Atlanta bomb attack 1996. Enemies of the globalization are divided to many different groups ofinterest hostile to each other, only common nominator is that there isnothing in common. The movement is negation of the ideas of universalfreedom and equality. Thus movement against the globalization isdestructive first of all to itself, and the danger is that mutualhostilitieslead finally to destruction of the whole planet. But what is this movement,who are these people who murder thousands of people with massiveterrorist attacks, hundreds of thousands of people with economic sanctions and millions of people by marketing breastmilk substitutesto poor countries?First of all, movement consists of opponents of globalization of the human possibilities. They are organized in form of nation states alliedtogether to formimperiums. They resist idea to give everyone equal opportunities tomake their own lives better. They build border controls, personalregisters, military alliances and geopolitical interests. The purpose is toisolate the rich from the poor, and to create artificial common interestsbased on common history and language, against other people. Sad buttrue, this movement has often managed to take over the workers movement,which wasonce the most internationalist movement on Earth. Many participators of theenvironmental movement have been mislead as well. This movementseems not to suffer in Finland although the state of Finland hasvanished as an independent subject of the global economy. The state ofFinland continues its existence as a reservation of ice-hockey players and a Formula1 car riding endless cycle and hunting tobacco sponsorship millions, tryingto maintain illusionthat nothing has changed.Another branch of the movement are opponents of the globalization ofself-governance and self-sufficiency. They fight against universal humandemand of secure and independent livelihood. They are organized ina form of multinational corporations, common interest groups of multinationalcorporations and international organs claiming to "liberate" the worldtrade.Their purpose is to secure the supply of cheap raw materials to richcountries,and to divide world to consumers and producers. Their ethics is that ofanti-universalism, that some have right to consume more than the others.Third branch of the movement are enemies of the globalization ofidentities. They believe that in one place nature of human being isto grow a beard and walk veiled, in another to cut a short hair andwear a necktie. It is nowhere OK to be a gay, since it is "unnatural", whatever it means. At first sight these groups seem to be marginal,but then one realizes that protestant and Islamic fundamentalists organizingmassive terrorist attacks are just a peak of the iceberg. More moderateforms of these movements exist everywhere - Freedom party of Austria,National Front of France, right-wing republicans of the US, Progress partyOf Norway, Communist Party of Russian Federation. groups trying tocreate prisons of identities inside of which people are forced to uniformbehavior. Real multi-culturality and ethnicity means that identities travelaroundthe world crossing all the borders, and everyone may pick from thepack what they like. One should have as much right to be mushroom eating shaman in Finland as a computer hacker in Siberian taiga.Fourth wing of the movement are enemies of the globalization of theequality -such as many economists and creditor institutions such as London and Parisclubsand IMF. They believe, that international financial institutions workingwith commercial principles may increase equality. They believe, that a company should beallowed to go bankrupt, but states from which citizens expect to receive socialbenefits should never be able to clean their debt. They believe that wealth createdby economicgrowth trickles down to poor, and that no other means of creating equalityexists.There is no space for conspiracy theories here - the anti-globalist movementis dangerous due to difference of its interests, not because it has somesecret agenda. For us fightingfor globalization it is also no use to look anti-globalists only arrogantly.We do representuniversal values of freedom and equality against relativism and egoism ofanti-globalists,but still our ideas also include controversies and goals such asself-sufficiency, freedom andequality are often difficult to unite. However, idea of universal humanityis our onlylight in the darkness, and after 11th of September 2001 it is more clear than never before thatwe have no any other hope.
Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005