Driving on the expressway recently, I watched a tiny morality play unfold. A guy in a hulking green Explorer — big American flag taped to the rear window — ran up behind a silver Volvo. The SUV driver got right on the Volvo's bumper, backed off and then macho-menacingly sped up to the bumper again.
His bully-boy tactics unsuccessful, the Explorer's driver whipped around the Volvo, flipping the bird and shouting obscenities as his flag-bedecked car disappeared into the traffic.
This wasn't a bad metaphor for 20th century America. We get our way, or we angrily kick butt. And, it's worked. We're rich; we're fat; we're usually happy. That we see Uncle Sam as a benevolent big daddy to the world, even though many of Earth's citizens see only our foot on their neck has been, from within our safe continental ramparts, merely a perceptional problem.
Until Sept. 11.
Ruthless, godless — but don't call them mindless — killers delivered to America its most tormented day since Pearl Harbor.
Cassandras had been warning us that much of the world despised America. We tuned out, preferring to be mesmerized by Survivor or to be titillated by Gary Condit's sexual exploits. Nothing new there. While our leaders pounded global politics into a wholly unjust New World Order, we put on blinders and watched O.J., Bill and Monica, and JonBenet Ramsey.
Now all channels have the same images, horror and tragedy beyond anything Hollywood, Tom Clancy or sensation-soaked "news" shows could deliver.
There is no plausible justification for what the terrorists wrought. It was simply pure evil whose only goal was to create chaos — much as if the Volvo driver had decided to stomp on his brakes, indifferent to whether he killed himself and a dozen other motorists as long as he wrecked the Explorer.
That is how much of the world feels about the United States.
We know deeply in our souls that we didn't deserve Sept. 11, 2001. We know that God, a.k.a. Allah, reserves the hottest cells, the cruelest barbs for those who kill the blameless. We know we've been blindsided and wounded, but we know our reserves of strength are barely touched.
Our outpouring of charity to the victims has been overwhelming. Our churches, mosques, synagogues and temples have been packed. A thousand media tongues have chorused that the sleeping giant is awakened.
All that's left is the "what" and the "how." If cowboy politicians, their bravado a calculation of potential votes, lead us into a spiral of violence, the terrorists who flew the four planes will indeed become the Apocalyptic Horsemen.
But if we rigorously examine what we have become, how far we've strayed from our founders' ideals, and if our retaliation is one of self-control and law, we will righteously triumph.
First, we must learn.
It's not hard to examine history books and find the stories that in our consumer and media stupor we've ignored. The countries we've left in ruins. The regimes, many democratic, that we've overthrown. The millions of bodies.
Whatever the spin, in most cases our lethal adventures were also assaults on the virtues we preach as a nation. We have been far more successful at making the world safe for our pet dictators than for democracy.
There's Chile, Vietnam, Nicaragua. El Salvador. East Timor. Guatemala. Panama. On and on.
Under Bill Clinton, we waged in Kosovo what has come to be called the "Coward's War." As a much more honorable ex-President, Jimmy Carter, described to Emory University students: With "complete impunity, we dropped bombs from 30,000 feet and then went back to our bases." A small nation was devastated, the "collateral damage" (dead civilian bodies) was horrific. Not an excuse for terrorism, Carter sternly admonished, but it could explain any animosity.
Clinton, with no credible proof or justification (other than to deflect attention from his dallying with Monica) also bombed the Sudanese pharmaceutical factory. Low estimates from the resulting deaths — slow, agonizing deaths from diseases — are in the thousands, maybe tens of thousands.
Israel/Palestine? What many in the world, especially Arabs and Muslims, see is America propping up a 34-year-old military occupation in violation of international laws and United Nations' resolutions. Without our money and weapons, Israel long ago would have been forced to begin the process of crafting a real peace. No dispute: The Palestinian suicide bombings are despair-driven perversions of Islam. Terrorism is never justified. Yet America and its media see only the sins on one side of the barricades, and never the slaughter of thousands by the other side. We are hardly "honest brokers."
Let's not forget our very own Great Satan, Iraq, ruled indisputably by a lizard, but where our rage has been vented on the common citizens, not on their detestable master. When former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright was asked in 1996 on 60 Minutes about the 500,000 children who have died in Iraq because of America's embargo, she icily responded: "We think the price is worth it."
Albright's successor, Colin Powell, commenting on the mega-crimes of Sept. 11, condemned the terrorists' "destruction of buildings" and "murder of people" to "achieve a political purpose." As human rights activist Kathy Kelly, of Voices in the Wilderness, gently scoffed: "Mr. Powell is correct. But … he holds up a mirror to U.S. policy of causing massive civilian suffering" to achieve political ends.
It doesn't fit our national self-image, but to much of the developing world, we are the perpetrators or abettors of terrorism on a massive state scale. That we can do so because no one else can lick us hardly elevates America to the moral high ground.
So our policies kill a half-million babies. The price is worth it, our leaders say. Can't you understand that? What's the big deal?
This is not, repeat not, an indictment of America.
We are, indeed, a great and noble country. We have many faults, many sins to atone for, but in sum, we have done so much for justice and liberty. Our imperfections create struggle, and struggle is necessary to build a better society.
Now we have suffered a vile injustice. With callousness beyond imagination, terrorists have propelled planes full of innocents into great buildings full of more innocents. The death toll has climbed above a sense-numbing 6,000.
Yet, one thought is nagging. In war, the first casualty is truth. In terrorism, I fear, the most grievous death will be that of liberty.
Right now, America is in shock. But much of the nation is immersed in rage. Arab-Americans and Muslim Americans are facing a mounting onslaught of racist attacks — a new eruption of that same malignant disease that has so often plagued our nation. Mosques are desecrated, by people with the same insect mentality of the swastika scribblers of a few years ago or the Kluxers of a few years before that.
Moreover, we have firmly enshrined Osama bin Laden as the maximum bogeyman. In the finest tradition of George Orwell's "Two Minutes of Hate," we target our fury at that face on the screen, wiping out any reason and restraint. Big Brother's foil was Immanuel Goldstein; bin Laden is ours. And, just as Goldstein was a construct of "the party," so too is bin Laden a creation of ours. He was recruited, nurtured, trained and funded by the CIA to help the Afghans fight the Russians — our government applauded bin Laden's terrorism then (and, little noted, the Bush administration gave his hosts, the thoroughly repugnant Taliban, $43-million this year). Very deadly moral relativity.
This is what I fear.
Our military will get a blank check. The generals and admirals, before the attack, had demanded $344-billion — an extortionate sum that's three times the war budgets of all potential foes, including Russia and China. By comparison, our pittance for education is $42-billion.
We'll continue to scuttle international treaty after international treaty. The nuclear race will crank up to a fevered pitch.
Minorities — not just those of Middle East descent — will have bull's-eyes painted on them. Whoever is different will be deemed dangerous. Xenophobia will become a national catechism; racial profiling will be a national pastime.
Likewise, we'll see a chilling of our nation's lifeblood — free expression. Dissent will be declared treasonous. Commentators who are reluctant to join the "kill 'em all" stampede were quickly targeted. Corporate critic, author and film producer Michael Moore, got this e-mail: "If you are the anti-Capitalist film producer Michael Moore who has made public statements favoring the assassins who attacked the WTC and the Pentagon, I would love to be the one introducing you to a Roman Candle up your ass." Moore, of course, made no statement "favoring" the terrorists. He merely questioned the wisdom of the incendiary rhetoric that dominates the debate on how we should respond to the murderers.
Mainstream columnists and chattering heads on the tube have drawn the line. Once sensible to the point of timidity, every newspaper and network is dominated by out and out ranting. Calls for immediate and overwhelming military action (and to hell with those who get in the way) are the rule of the day. Alexander Haig opined that to debate the morality of our attacks killing innocent bystanders or to bemoan diminishing our liberties was to "quibble." Quibbling, Haig is clear, is just downright un-American.
In President George W. Bush's speech Sept. 20, eloquent testimony to the skill of his writers, he attempted to draw a picture of world unity, citing by name numerous countries that have expressed sympathy at our tragedy. Bush went out of his way to soothe the angst of Muslims, both here and around the world. Unity was the word of the day. Sen. Tom Daschle and Sen. Trent Lott, in joint speeches after Bush's address, made it clear there was no opposition party. The media can't seem to find a single "expert" who's even slightly skeptical at the war drums.
Unity sounds good, and is, to a point. But Bush also drew a line that signals a never-ending roster of Kosovos and Colombias. You're either totally with the United States and its policies, or you're totally against us, Bush made clear.
There's real danger there. In Ecuador, for example, U.S. companies working for our nouveau Vietnam "Plan Colombia" have dumped tons of poison on legitimate farmers, killing crops, livestock — and many people, including babies, according to litigation filed in Washington, D.C., this month by American labor groups. If Ecuador protests that the American mercenaries have no right to cross its borders and lay waste to its land, does that mean the South American country is against us as we fight (allegedly) Colombian narco-terrorism? Under the Bush Doctrine, do we then have the (self-declared) right to invade Ecuador or bomb it from six miles in the skies?
And, if some nations see an overreaction in the killings of innocent civilians as we pursue bin Laden, does the Bush Doctrine turn those nations into enemies?
After the Oklahoma City bombing in 1995, Big Brother's acolytes in the Congress and law enforcement were quick to push through the 1996 anti-terrorism act. Although it obviously did little to deter the events of Sept. 11, it did unleash the FBI to infiltrate groups, undermine due process, and to engage in odious affronts to the Constitution — such as using "secret evidence" to toss people in jail for indefinite terms without disclosing evidence, accusers or charges. The next anti-terrorism law will be a blitzkrieg on remaining safeguards for liberty. Guilt by association, speech, writing and even thought — that's what awaits an unwary and fear-driven nation.
Bush, in his speech, announced that a Cabinet-level post to lead defense of the "homeland" would be created under a civilian chief — which, at least, was far better than a military regime that had been proposed. He gave us no details of what legislation will be sought — but it's a sure bet that the First, Fourth, Fifth and Sixth amendments will take a beating.
Here's what I hope.
We have an immediate job: to bring those responsible for the attacks on New York and Washington to justice. By justice, I mean that we should react to crime as a nation built on law. Former President Carter said we should reply to the villains with restraint and intelligence — not through massive and poorly targeted military belligerence whose "collateral damage" will provoke only more hostility toward America. Carter recommended employing political and economic pressures to force the surrender of, presumably, bin Laden and friends. If force is needed, Carter said, it should be restrained and multi-national, a firm but civilized statement of the world community.
The trouble is that we've been hijacked by politicians and a corporate environment that have little use for Carter's wisdom or American principles. We don't tell the truth; we spin. Justice is relative (largely to race and class). Tolerance is less and less tolerated. Fair play is a joke. Equality remains elusive. And the people who should be defending our personal liberties — the government and cops — constantly try to chip away at rights.
There's only one road to peace: making peace. We'll never get there by killing for peace.
We need to run off the Albrights and stop listening to fools like Rush Limbaugh and corruptors of the Constitution like Oliver North.
We need to question authority. Historian Howard Zinn explains: "The images on television horrified and sickened me. Then our political leaders came on television, and I was horrified and sickened again. They spoke of retaliation, of vengeance, of punishment. I thought: they have learned nothing, absolutely nothing, from the history of the 20th century, from a hundred years of retaliation, vengeance, war, a hundred years of terrorism and counter-terrorism, of violence met with violence in an unending cycle of stupidity."
We must take a hard look at the lobbyist and special interest brothel our political system has become. Americans think they're "free" and have "choice" because there are 200 brands of breakfast cereal on the shelves. Yet, when it comes time to have real options — on Election Day — the candidates are indistinguishable and subservient to the same moneyed power-brokers.
If we stand for democracy, we can't support brutal dictatorships. If we stand for human rights, we can't be pals with governments that murder en masse their own citizens. If a Castro is evil, so are our newfound friends the Chinese. If we despise a Hussein or a Kaddafi, we should be equally dismissive of the Pinochets, Somozas and other client butchers of the United States. We cannot be the quartermaster for regimes when they commit atrocities and attempt genocide on peoples under their rule. We cannot afford another Vietnam in Colombia.
We need to use our massive clout to bring a just peace to the Palestinian/Israeli conflict, recognizing that Israel will not have security until Arabs have justice. A harmonious Middle East — or, at least, a Middle East where the bloodshed is slowed — would defuse much of the animus directed at America.
While it would be ham-fisted on our part to dictate the form of governance to other nations, there is no need for the United States to bestow friendship and largesse on what we call "moderate" Arab regimes but what are really brutal authoritarian violators of their own citizens' rights. Likewise, with Israel, we must not allow silence to be interpreted as acceptance of the use of torture, mass reprisals, assassinations and expansion by "settlement."
If "globalization" and "free trade" mean building our prosperity by impoverishing most of the rest of the world — and increasingly undermining our own citizens' wealth — we'd better realize it's time to change. Or it's time to accept we're going to have plenty of enemies.
We should lead the world in being the bulwark for international treaties that address the environment, human rights and disarmament. We should halt trashing pact after pact, swaggering as we trumpet our "right" to pollute, strip-mine the Earth's resources and, to my mind the most egregious, flood the world with weapons.
Most of all we should protect our freedoms, slamming the door on those who tell us that it's worth giving up just a "little" liberty to "fight terrorism." It isn't, and if we do, when the terrorists' next bombs explode, the only difference is that we'll be slaves and not free women and men.
Creative Loafing Senior Editor John Sugg can be reached at 404-614-1241 or at john.sugg@creativeloafing.com.
This article appears in Sep 27 – Oct 3, 2001.
