← Autodidact Archive · Original Dissent · TexasAnarch

America not for Americans

Thread ID: 16521 | Posts: 1 | Started: 2005-01-31

Wayback Archive

TexasAnarch [OP]

2005-01-31 14:48 | User Profile

sent to the NYTimes [url]http://lists.topica.com/lists/psychohistory/read/message.html?mid=1718283706&sort=d&start=9636[/url]

WHEN AMERICA IS NOT AMERICAN


Can something be what it is not?  ….




…WHEN THE TERM FOR the whole, and what defines it, has been included under itself, as one of its designates (as in hyphenated-americanism – not-quite-being what it is), antinomy results.

This is illustrated in logic by the so-called Grelling paradox (online key words).  “Heterological”, defined as a term that does not describe itself, is heterological if and only if it is not heterological.  This tortured self-description rests on the error of allowing unrestricted application of   texts to tokens in sign-use.  These, in turn, may generate facetious quips, as in “Chalabi’s vote illustrates the democracy of democracy in Iraq.”

It is also the form taken politically, now, by those who speak of America after it’s transcendentals have been co-opted, corrupted, and Americans forced to speak in contradictory terms about themselves.

“Faith”, “morals”, “values”, “god”, even “evil”. One might find it ‘unbelievable” that the following could be downloaded as serious reflection on sin and homosexuality, as opposed to having been invented by a wagging philosophy professor: “I have given much thought to whether I believe God is displeased with homosexual conduct. I find that I believe God takes as much joy in the love..” etc. “I think religious tradition is just plain mistaken on this issue. I just can’t get to the idea that God hates homosexual conduct any more than he hates the eating of chocolate.” However, if in fact eating chocolate were a sinful indulgence no one could tell him otherwise, now could they. It is, for dogs.

Those once proudly calling themselves “American” have been

induced to join reference with something wearing the appendage “—Enterprise Institute”, intimately involved in pushing the Iraq war. The “American Enterprise Institute”, a Washington lobby group calls itself. A “cult of eight or nine neo-conservatives” as Seymour Hersh describes them, “have grabbed the government”. Lord knows how and why, he sighs, disingenuously. “Have to wait for much later historians and better documentation than we have now” on that one, he says “we” say.

No we don’t. We’ve got names, dates, deeds and documentation aplenty. It started in 1996 with the “clean break” sign-offs on the Oslo Palestine-Israeli peace deal. Gingrinch, Netanyahu, Falwell, and Robertson come to mind, beefing up the cult stew of AEI associates including: Frum (the evil axis man), Libby (cheney’s earpiece), Feith (State-Pentagon ‘special plans’ man), Perle (not Daniel, but close), Abrams (does good death-squad work), Cambone (tort scholar),
Wolfowitz, Rumsfelt, Senor…

It is no more than common sense that you cannot communicate with people who are calling things what they are not without falling into contradiction with what one knows they are.  This puts Hersh himself beyond the pale because we not only know who the neocons are – they were identified as a cult on Original Dissent Forums two years ago.  We know, from that source and the record of events, how and why.

How is by the hyphenated doubling of American identity against itself, as in David Brooks’ “Ideals and Reality”.  (New York Times 1.22.’05 A15)  Writing on whether the pomp and circumstance surrounding G.W. Bush’s inaugural was really us or not, “The people who detest America,” he says, “take a look at the odd conjunction” of “the lofty and the vulgar cheek to cheek”, the mingling together of high ideals and gross materialism”, and “they insist the money-grabbing, resource-wasting, TV-drenched, unreflective bimbo of the earth” is “the real America.”  “But of course they’ve got it exactly backward,” he is there to say.  “It’s the ideals that are real.”

This is how they do it, someone should tell Seymour.  Just declare the ideal real; only pessimistic haters will deny that.  That amounts to putting “values” – the talk – along side what it is about, as all good heterologicals must.  Bully for the good guys.

Again, Caroline Glick’s “Jewish advocates of the new anti-Semitism” (Townhall online, 1.30.05) shows this “how”, as well as “why” by referring to critics of U.S. policy toward Israel by Anthony Lippman, Tony Judt, Daniel Barenboim, as anti-Semitic.   The “why” driving the neocon child sacrifice cult is to defend Zion by smearing  such critics with self-hatred.  “Today the vast majority of anti-Semities are not calling for Jews to be departed to death camps.  They are not  calling for Jews to be shot before mass graves.  They are calling for the destruction of the Jewish state,” she writes.  Instead of condemning “anti-Semites who are burning synagogues, defacing Jewish cemeteries and beating up rabbis and Jewish school children”, these critics blame “the policies of America and Israel”,  amplifying “the poisonous message of jihad.”  When Tom Friedman adds that the Iraq street identifies “the Jewish Israeli American” as the enemy, this shows how the hyphen plays out externally.  This cult lumps together whoever hates and will kill Muslims, and that’s “us”.

Of course those who allow this must be brought to hate and kill themselves, America and Americans, too.