What the World Needs Now
Uncategorized - - Posted on December, 15 at 6:28 am by Eric Martin
Maybe Jonah Goldberg would like to take a spot in line behind the three aspiring fascists pictured here. This is just remarkable:
I THINK ALL intelligent, patriotic and informed people can agree: It would be great if the U.S. could find an Iraqi Augusto Pinochet. In fact, an Iraqi Pinochet would be even better than an Iraqi Castro. [ed note: why, oh why, is there never an option "C"?]
Both propositions strike me as so self-evident as to require no explanation. But as I have discovered in recent days, many otherwise rational people can’t think straight when the names Fidel Castro and Augusto Pinochet come up. [...]
An Iraqi Pinochet would provide order and put the country on the path toward liberalism, democracy and the rule of law. (If only Ahmad Chalabi had been such a man.)
Where do I begin? It’s almost a morale-crushing amount of ignorance to ponder.
I’ll take note of one thing in brief, and otherwise leave Goldberg’s dubious sense of morality alone since judgment of this latter point seems to be, as Jonah might say, “self evident.” (more here for a debunking of some of Jonah’s other fallacies):
Now consider Chile. Gen. Pinochet seized a country coming apart at the seams. He too clamped down on civil liberties and the press. He too dispatched souls. Chile’s official commission investigating his dictatorship found that Pinochet had 3,197 bodies in his column; 87% of them died in the two-week mini-civil war that attended his coup. Many more were tortured or forced to flee the country.
But on the plus side, Pinochet’s abuses helped create a civil society. Once the initial bloodshed subsided, Chile was no prison. Pinochet built up democratic institutions and infrastructure….But today Chile is a thriving, healthy democracy.
Here we see the “Pinochet brought democracy to Chile” myth that is rather prevalent amongst the Pinochet apologists. This ahistorical claim is just not true though. Chile was Latin America’s longest standing democracy prior to the coup that toppled the democratically elected leader, Salvador Allende. Pinochet’s dictatorial rule interrupted Chile’s democratic trajectory, he did not initiate it. And by what measure does one get credit for razing democratic institutions, and then allowing their incremental, gradual reconstitution?
In a related note, to the extent that Pinochet “seized a country coming apart at the seams,” it should be noted that the CIA (under the guidance of Nixon and Kissinger) was taking serious measures to create conditions of chaos and destabilization in order to facilitate the coup itself. In other words, Pinochet was complicit in helping to tear the country apart at the seams, so that he could swoop in and…sew it back up? Viva the tailor of Santiago, father of Chilean democracy.
In addition, Goldberg puts forth the utterly bizarre claim that “once the initial bloodshed subsided” - the vast majority of which he limits to the “two-week” period surrounding the coup itself - Chile was not an authoritarian state (”no prison” as Jonah put it). I don’t know what standard Goldberg is using to make such a proclamation, but I’d love to hear about it. So too, I imagine, would many Chileans who were terrorized by the repressive society Pinochet crafted. For a brief, though relatively innocuous, look into Goldberg’s liberal paradise, read this.
I always wonder how someone like Jonah Goldberg would react if he were to find himself, transported in time and space, to a country like Chile in the mid to late 1970s. Do you think he would be so enthusiastc, so flip, so apologetic, so sycophantic?
Is the answer self-evident?
(hat tip to Kevin Drum)
Posted in Uncategorized |
December 15th, 2006 at 8:22 am
“The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact, non-Westerners never do.”
~Samuel P Huntington
This sentiment should not be restricted to non-Westerners. ANY nation which has the will of it’s people fucked around by self-serving, meddling outsiders would have the same reaction. It is any wonder we’re seeing a massive rise in anti-Americanism around the globe?
December 15th, 2006 at 8:37 am
One of my favorites of all time. Someone asked Gandhi what he thought of Western Civilization, he replied, “I think it would be a good idea.”
December 15th, 2006 at 8:47 am
These latest Goldberg variations on disaster are almost beyond mockery. Talk about objectively pro-Saddam Hussein.
December 15th, 2006 at 8:57 am
Goldber variations - HA.
And no Tim, Pinochet is like so way better than Saddam and like that’s self evident if you’re smart and stuff.
What-ever.
December 15th, 2006 at 9:24 am
What a total moron Goldbug is. They already had a Pinochet, but got rid of him. His name was Saddam.
December 15th, 2006 at 9:41 am
Eric,
Personally, I too find warmongering right-wing windbags (like Goldberg, Ledeen, Dershowitz) beyond a joke these days, but there is probably not much point in continually expressing exasperation with them, given the nature of the beast.
We should really be expressing our exasperation with the people who - despite their abyssmal records - keep giving them column inches and airtime.
Who do guys like Bill O’Reilly and Alan Jones still get airtime? Or why did the WaPo hire John Solomon? Or why hasn’t Miranda Devine been dumped by the SMH, or Greg Sheridan from the Australian?
You don’t have to be a conspiracy theorist to see that the Powers That Be (Sulzberger, Murdoch et al) want these people in place for a reason that goes beyond mere journalism.
Even if you think publishers just run such columns to generate a bit of controvery and boost sales, that is still irresponsible (and people are dying for it).
To use a sports analogy, we should be playing the game, not the man. Next time you get annoyed by one of these fools, go to the source and challenge their employers, advertisers and other financial sponsors.
December 15th, 2006 at 11:17 am
Sorry gandhi, too busy surviving to play the game and take on mighty Murdoch himself, but we all enjoy speaking back to his dancing bears, and I actually reckon some of them are sounding a little tremulous these days, even Shanahan! And Alan Jones’ ratings were sliding downwards last time I looked! Play up, play up, and play the man, I say.
December 15th, 2006 at 11:57 am
grace,
“Surviving”? Sorry, lady, but go tell that to the Iraqis.
Like it or not, we are empowered to change our world in ways that others (e.g. Iraqis, Ethiopians) are not. And those of us who have the knowledge of what is happening in our name also have a duty to bring it to an end.
That is why I do not visit Tim’s new blog at News Ltd: even if Murdoch rotates the talking heads from time to time, he still controls the game.
Sure, it’s fun to play the man from time to time, and I am probably as guilty as anyone here (stepping down from my high horse!) but surely too there comes a time when we all get tired of banding our heads against the wall?
Every hit at news.com.au is a boost for Murdoch’s advertising revenue. Every vodal critic of Goldberg et al only proves the old saying: “There’s no such thing as bad publicity.”
December 15th, 2006 at 11:58 am
Gandhi, I think there is a value in a multi-pronged approach. It’s just as important to discredit and provide correctives for the thinkers/ideas as it is to target their paymasters.
You can get results both ways.
December 15th, 2006 at 12:00 pm
PS: banding = “banging”, vodal = “vocal” (and no, I am not drunk).
December 15th, 2006 at 12:04 pm
gandhi, what have you done for the Iraqis lately?
December 15th, 2006 at 12:43 pm
I do what I can, grace.
I wasn’t launching a personal attack on you, just highlighting your use of the word “survival” in a broader context. Excuse me if I did so too rudely or clumsily.
December 15th, 2006 at 2:37 pm
[...] What the world needs now - Eric Martin with further detailed analysis of some American neocon efforts to rewrite history in the wake of the death of former Chilean dictator Augusto Pinochet. [...]
December 17th, 2006 at 11:18 am
I and War Nerd agree. But Iraq did have its own version of Augusto Pinochet, and could still do. His name is Saddam Hussein.