The Nobility of Slaughter

[bemildred]

Tom Friedman, the Imperial Chronicler

"For globalism to work," Friedman avers, "America cannot be afraid to act like the almighty superpower that it is...The hidden hand of the market will never work without the hidden fist--McDonald's cannot flourish without McDonald-Douglas, the designer of the F-15. And the hidden fist that keeps the world safe for Silicon Valley technologies is called the United States Army, Air Force, Navy and Marine Corps." (NYTs March 28, 1999)

It's doubtful that anyone has ever written a more succinct defense of American militarism. Friedman's analysis casually mixes Machiavelli with Adam Smith; producing a poignant description of how the real world operates. Behind the illusion of "free markets" and globalization the same coercive, "hidden fist" is guiding events. For all his "folksiness", Friedman's world view is no different than that of George Bush.

---

He responds by citing a UN report that focuses on "the acute deficit of freedom and good governance in the Arab world," and "the state's firm and absolute grip on power." Friedman avers that "the report is scathing about what Arabs have done to themselves and how they must change...That's why part of every Arab hates the US invasion of Iraq--and why another part is praying that it succeeds."

The quote is vintage Friedman and shows why he gets the plaudits from his friends in high-places. In just a few terse comments, he manages to turn the tables and convince his reader that the victims of American aggression can only blame themselves. It's a familiar refrain for Friedman who likes to characterize the disastrous effects of American war-mongering as a struggle with modernity within the Arab world.

Standard colonialist apologetics for at least the last two
centuries, Tom is just a foremost current exponent.

CounterPunch

[BrklynLiberal]

1. Excellent article. Thanks for posting.

[acmejack]

2. Nothing noble about it

Friedman is a proctologist's dream

[BrklynLiberal]

3. Good diagnosis...

[teryang]

4. Hopefully this is Friedman's epitaph

Normally I won't even comment on a Friedman review. The guy isn't worth it. The best response to Friedman is to ignore him and avoid patronizing his corporate masters.

However since this may be the definitive characterization of Friedman, it is definitely worth a look. Chris Floyd author has defined Tom's ("We hate you (Arabs) too") despicable character succinctly.

Any further comment on Friedman is surplusage.

[bemildred]

5. It was a one shot deal, posting this.

I was reading Edward Said on colonialism, and it was just so right on,
the characterization here. But in most cases Friedman, like the
NYT, is best ignored, I agree.

[silverweb]

6. Ugh.

And this is the guy my uber-Libertarian brother idolizes....

:banghead:

[Dirk39]

7. But do they ignore us?

"Missile Defense and a Space Pearl Harbor

It is important to realize that the centerpiece of the "revolution in military affairs" is a program to weaponize and hence dominate space. This program will require much of the massive increase in funding for "defense" for which Brzezinski and the Project for the New American Century have called. The purpose of this program is spelled out quite explicitly in a document called "Vision for 2020," which begins with this mission statement: "US Space Command—dominating the space dimension of military operations to protect US interests and investment.">40 Its primary purpose, in other words, is not to protect the American homeland, but to protect American investments abroad. It makes this point even more explicit by comparing the importance of the Space Command today with the fact that in previous times "nations built navies to protect and enhance their commercial interests." It is to dominate space to protect the commercial interests of America's elite class that, according to current projections, over $1 trillion will be required from American taxpayers.>41

The "Vision for 2020" document engages in no sentimental propaganda about the need for the United States to dominate space for the sake of promoting democracy or otherwise serving humanity. Rather, it says candidly, if indiscreetly: "The globalization of the world economy...will continue with a widening between 'haves' and 'have-nots.'" In other words, as America's domination of the world economy increases, the poor will get still poorer while the rich get still richer, and this will make the "have-nots" hate America all the more, so we need to be able to keep them in line. We can do this through what the advocates of this program originally called "Global Battlespace Dominance." Because some people found this term too explicit, the preferred term today is "Full Spectrum Dominance" (which provided the tide for a previously quoted book by Rahul Mahajan). This term means not only being dominant on land, on the sea, and in the air, as the US military is already, but also having control of space. Discussing this "American project of global domination associated with the weaponization of space," Richard Falk says: "The empire-building quest for such awesome power is an unprecedented exhibition of geopolitical greed at its worst, and needs to be exposed and abandoned before it is too late.">42"


----------
One senior British official was quoted as saving: "Everyone wants to go to Baghdad. Real men want to go to Tehran.">30

One of those "real men" was Richard Perle, a founding member of PNAC, who has been quoted as describing America's "war on terrorism" in these words:

This is total war. We are fighting a variety of enemies. There are lots of them out there. All this talk about first we are going to do Afghanistan, then we will do Iraq.... his is entirely the wrong way to go about it. If we just let our vision of the world go forth, and....just wage a total war...our children will sing great songs about us years from now.>31
One of those "real men" was Richard Perle, a founding member of PNAC, who has been quoted as describing America's "war on terrorism" in these words:



"Total War" was invented by Goebbels. This therm can't be misunderstood.

If only we could simply ignore them?!


The quotes are from David Ray Griffin's book "The New Pearl Harbour"


Hello from Germany,
Dirk