Dogma and the Art of Bullshit

"Opposing the military action in Iraq is unpatriotic."

Democracy is an adversarial system. By it's very nature, the foundation of democracy is idea vs. idea. Without offering, defending, and rejecting ideas in pursuit of concensus, there is no democracy. In fact, speaking out against the government (or the majority) is the most patriotic of acts in a democracy. Any coward can agree with everybody. The hero stands up for what he believes is right. He doesn't even have to be right. Participation is what makes him a patriot. A turning cog in the machine of democracy. So next time you feel like taking a cheap shot at someone who disagrees with you, think it through.

"Support our troops." / "If you oppose the war you don't support the troops." / Yellow Ribbons

EVERYBODY "supports our troops". In the sixties and seventies, American anti-war sentiment was at times horrifically misdirected towards the men and women in the armed forces. That was vile, and anyone who got caught up in it needs to atone in their own way. But the lesson was thoroughly learned. Over-learned perhaps. Nobody in their right mind blames the men and women in the military rank and file for the situation in Iraq, however unpopular our presence there may be. Everybody wishes only the best for the soldiers. Mechanically reciting that fact because you are compelled to doesn't make it any truer. In fact, the sentiment is cheapened by the obligation to keep saying it. And suggesting that opposition to the "Iraq War" means one doesn't "support the troops" is cowardly and reprehensible.

The best way to "support our troops" is to value them enough to make sure that they are never ever put into harm's way except as an absolute, inescapable last resort. The rest of it is just words.

"Troops"

One incessantly hears Tony Snow, Wolf Blitzer, Nancy Pelosi, Bill O'Reilly, Katie Couric, John Edwards, John McCain, and virtually everybody in politics and the media refer to "the troops". Especially when counting the dead ones. "Three American troops were killed by an IED in Baghdad today."

No, three American SOLDIERS were killed. Three American men and women. Three American sons and daughters, brothers and sisters, mothers and fathers, friends, altar boys, girl scouts, basketball players, family Yahtzee! champs, backyard hotrod mechanics, class clowns, poets, whatever the case may be. People. Individual lives. Every death is a life ended, a family torn apart. We need to face that. The term "troops" is specifically intended to depersonalize the deaths to make them seem more palatable. Those deaths shouldn't be palatable. They should be painful and heartwrenching. Especially when deciding whether or not to send even more soldiers to Iraq. Everyone with the ability to affect the decision to send men and women into harm's way has a responsibility to face the gravity and consequences of that decision. Would you willingly sacrifice your own Mom or Dad, son or daughter in Iraq? If not, then perhaps there is some hint of hypocrisy in supporting the decision to send somebody else's. If I had my way, the numbers would be reported something like this:

"Three Americans were blown up and killed while driving down a street in Baghdad today. They were two sons and one daughter. One was a husband, one a wife, both of them had small children at home. All of them had brothers and sisters. One was engaged to be married and postponed the wedding when called up to serve in Iraq. One was studying to be a civil engineer, and worked during high school as a lifeguard at a community pool in his Pennsylvania neighborhood. One of them had worked three summers on a sailing crew in the Caribbean before joining the Marine Corps. All three of them leave behind shattered families and friends, and for all three of them, their hopes and intentions have come to an abrupt end."

If you want to send them to die, you had better be prepared to face the cost. How else can you do "is it worth it" calculation?

"War in Iraq"

It's not a war, It is an occupation, and a resistance to that occupation. This "Iraq War" lasted three days. For clarity's sake, it's not an insurgency, either. It never was. An insurgency is an organized opposition to an existing authority. The last "existing authority" in Iraq was Saddam's government. The last "insurgency" in Iraq was the one following the first "Iraq War", wherein George H.W. Bush called upon the Iraqi's to overthrow Saddam's regime, then abandoned them to Saddam's wrath when they tried. Neither the current Iraqi government nor the occupying forces constitute "existing authority", they are both artifacts of the invasion.

"War Against Terrorism" which morphed into "War Against Terror" which became "War on Terror"

These are all nonsensical terms designed to arouse fear and emotion, but lacking any rational substance. You can't wage "war" on "terror" (or "terrorism") any more than you can wage war on "drugs". You wage war on armies; countries; people. Not "terror". The tragedy of the proliferation of these terms is that they skillfully divert attention from the real problems and disempower pursuit of effective solutions.

"God Bless America"

What exactly is this intended to convey? Here's what "bless" means: "1. To make sacred by a religious rite: consecrate, hallow, sanctify." I think, based on the context in which I hear this said, that it is supposed to suggest that God somehow favor America. But favor how? And over whom? Is it asking God to intervene and make America fare better than, say, Belgium, or Bangladesh? Is it suggesting that America is more deserving of God's favor than other countries? That God should take the most privileged country on earth and tip the balance of good fortune even further in it's direction? Shouldn't God instead spread some of that favor on, say, Indonesia, which recently got washed away by a tsunami? Or Sudan, which has been torn to shreds by civil war and genocide? Or is it just that compared to us Americans, the Indonesians and Sudanese are Godless and undeserving? I'm not trying to pick a fight with anyone (God included), I just think some of these mantras that are recited all over the place deserve a moment's thought.

It would seem more "Godlike" for us to ask God to help the less fortunate, instead of ourselves. So I say may God bless everybody, everywhere, according to what they really need.

About the Words

When words are used by Power to obscure the truth, Power neither hears nor speaks it. When Power neither hears nor speaks truth, the debate is never really held. Absence of debate is absence of democracy.

Why sabu?

If you've ever wondered, here's the answer: Why sabu?