Left and Right Against Fascism 12

This interview with Naomi Wolf gives a good overview of the real problems with the police state that has arisen from the terror war. Read it here. Wolf is actually a pretty good antidote to the histrionics of the Glenn Beck and/or Alex Jones crowd. She actually provides solid intellectual arguments, firmly supported by evidence, as to how the police state continues to grow and expand, rather than relying on conspiracy theories and over the top rhetoric based on assertions from questionable sources.

The only problem I have with Wolf is that, from what I can tell, she doesn’t give much of a back story on how the modern American police state actually began to develop long before the terror war. It really has its roots in the FBI’s COINTELPRO program in the late 1960s, and was further expanded by Nixon’s initiation of the drug war. The drug war was later intensified by Reagan, and his successors expanded the drug war to a war on “crime” generally. The culmination of all this was the terror war that began after September 11. As Wolf points out, Obama is now institutionalizing the provisions of Bush’s terror war and making them into permanent features of American political life.

Also, this analysis of Obama by Pat Buchanan is right on target. Buchanan debunks the hysteria of the FOX Newsians who insist Obama is an American Hugo Chavez or Robert Mugabe. Rather, he’s more comparable to an ambitious corporate executive who finally makes it to the CEO’s chair and is more interested in protecting his own position rather than imposing some far-reaching ideological agenda. His personal opinions are obviously left of center, and he’s arguably the most liberal president the US has ever had, but the claim of the Glenn Beckians that he’s a Marxist revolutionary is insanity.

12 comments

  1. [Wolf] is actually a pretty good antidote to the histrionics of the Glenn Beck and/or Alex Jones crowd. She actually provides solid intellectual arguments, firmly supported by evidence, as to how the police state continues to grow and expand, rather than relying on conspiracy theories and over the top rhetoric based on assertions from questionable sources.

    I don’t watch Beck but occasionally listen to Jones. He almost always cites his source for any claim he makes, frequently mainstream media. What claims did you have in mind?

    the modern American police state actually began to develop long before the terror war. It really has its roots in the FBI’s COINTELPRO program in the late 1960s, and was further expanded by Nixon’s initiation of the drug war. The drug war was later intensified by Reagan, and his successors expanded the drug war to a war on “crime” generally. The culmination of all this was the terror war that began after September 11. As Wolf points out, Obama is now institutionalizing the provisions of Bush’s terror war and making them into permanent features of American political life.

    And was all of this pursued openly and by only one person, or is it a conspiracy theory?

  2. “I don’t watch Beck but occasionally listen to Jones. He almost always cites his source for any claim he makes, frequently mainstream media. What claims did you have in mind? ”

    Jones is generally of the FEMA camps-black helicopters-911 truther crowd. Wolf focuses on matters that are, shall we say, more easily identiable and more immediately tangible, e.g. the provisions of the USA PATRIOT Act, military commissions, detention without trial and so forth.

    “And was all of this pursued openly and by only one person, or is it a conspiracy theory?”

    It was pursued openly by a series of regimes for whom the individual presidents acted as figureheads.

  3. Jones is generally of the FEMA camps-black helicopters-911 truther crowd.

    I asked what claims he makes that he doesn’t back up.

    It was pursued openly by a series of regimes for whom the individual presidents acted as figureheads.

    Openly? Can you point to any American regime or its figurehead declaring in terms the institutionalisation of a ‘police state’ on the back of the drug/ crime/ terror wars?

  4. “I asked what claims he makes that he doesn’t back up.”

    Well, I’ll just say that I think the arguments made by the proponents of the FEMA camps, black helicopters, and “911 Truth” are dubious, and leave it at that. Those are not subjects I wish to spend an extensive amount of time debating.

    “Openly? Can you point to any American regime or its figurehead declaring in terms the institutionalisation of a ‘police state’ on the back of the drug/ crime/ terror wars?”

    Well, of course no political authority is going to come out and say, “My fellow Americans, we’re building a police state.” But the holy wars on drugs/crime/terror are policies that have been pursued openly, not in some clandestine manner, and the growth of the police state has been the practical result of the pursuit of those policies, e.g, the creation of the DEA and paramilitary police forces like SWAT teams in the early 70s, the escalation of the drug war under Reagan and George H.W. Bush, Clinton’s anti-terrorism legislation and the crime war of the 90s, and the war on terrorism of the 2000s and related legislation and polices such as the PATRIOT Act.

  5. Well, I’ll just say that I think the arguments made by the proponents of the FEMA camps, black helicopters, and “911 Truth” are dubious, and leave it at that. Those are not subjects I wish to spend an extensive amount of time debating.

    That’s a solid intellectual argument. Looks like your asserions about Jones are firmly supported by evidence. No question of OTT rhetoric in the original post. No, sir.

    Well, of course no political authority is going to come out and say, “My fellow Americans, we’re building a police state.”

    Exactly so — the institutionalisation of a police state was not pursued openly. It was pursued clandestinely and by multiple people over decades.

    This, clearly, is a conspiracy theory, and, just as clearly, the theory appears correct.

  6. “Exactly so — the institutionalisation of a police state was not pursued openly. It was pursued clandestinely and by multiple people over decades.

    This, clearly, is a conspiracy theory, and, just as clearly, the theory appears correct.”

    The present day police state is the result of legislation enacted by Congress, executive and administrative policies, and judicial rulings that came about through a series of regimes beginning largely with President Nixon and continuing through the present day. There is no “Protocols of the Elders of the Police State.” If you want to see the history of how all of this came about, check out the works of Richard Lawrence Miller and James Bovard.

    On FEMA camps:

    http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military/news/4312850

    On black helicopters and related theories:

    http://www.thenewamerican.com/index.php/usnews/politics/2604-sifting-reality-from-alarmist-rumors

    On 9-11 Truthers:

    http://www.debunking911.com/

    If you’ve read any of this blogsite at all, you know that I hate the regime that rules us as much as anyone out there, but it’s important to have a truthful account of its misdeeds rather than regurgitating urban legends and unproven speculations if we are going to mount an opposition that anyone is going to take seriously. If this kind of stuff is what motivates some people to join the resistance, that’s all well good. But a leadership group of the kind we aspire to be here needs to stand above that kind of thing.

  7. I understand the desire to not look like a kook. I don’t talk about any of my many heretical thoughts with strangers unless I have a prior indication they’re inclined to sympathy. But I posted in this thread and in the one about the BANA statement on anti-Semitism precisely to point out basic errors that undermine you guys’ general credibility.

    BANA sought to distance themselves from the un-named but ubiquitous people who blame Jews for everything, and you criticised Alex Jones for serving up 1) conspiracy theories and 2) weak arguments lacking supporting evidence.

    The problem with the BANA position is that no-one blames Jews for everything, it’s a silly and dishonest accusation that serves only to prejudice all criticism of Jewry, most of which is perfectly valid and tends to generally desirable ends. Same goes for your ‘Protocols’ crack. The problems with your criticism of Jones are twofold: 1) your outline of the development of a police state is itself a conspiracy theory and 2) you find fault with Jones for making groundless assertions – but this turns out to be a groundless assertion, you’re unable to cite any specific examples of Jones making unsupported claims.

    Stay out of controversial and complex debates altogether if you don’t want to engage with the research but hope to retain your credibility and look leaderly. No-one expects you to have a position on everything. The simplest thing is the world is to be non-committal and say ‘I don’t know’ or ‘I don’t have an opinion’.

  8. FEMA camps and black helicopters are of no interest to me. But I’ve looked into the 9/11 controversies surrounding WTC7 and the Pentagon and I’m aware that the theory of the ‘collapse’ of WTC7 presented at that debunking site – as resulting from a combination of damage by debris from Tower one and fire – is one that both FEMA and NIST, the two official investigators, have separately contested on distinct grounds. Who’s right — your guy or the government?

    I’m being facetious and don’t really expect an answer. I suspect you haven’t seriously studied the subject and probably don’t even understand the question. Or why would you offer up that link in defence of the official version of events?

  9. “But I’ve looked into the 9/11 controversies surrounding WTC7 and the Pentagon and I’m aware that the theory of the ‘collapse’ of WTC7 presented at that debunking site – as resulting from a combination of damage by debris from Tower one and fire – is one that both FEMA and NIST, the two official investigators, have separately contested on distinct grounds. Who’s right — your guy or the government?”

    Well, what’s your explanation for what happened on September 11?

  10. Well, what happened on September 11?

    You probably believe a 757 hit the Pentagon. It didn’t.

    So then I start to think psy-op because if a genuine and unexpected attack had been launched as advertised by terrorists that day USG would not have needed to nor been in a position to start putting out very elaborate false evidence to support that story immediately the events began happening.

    And there is no question that such operations did begin then, including the false claim that a 757 hit the Pentagon, the stories of phone calls from the planes talking about Arab hijackers, the planting of aeroplane debris at the Pentagon and WTC sites, and more, including claims that appear plausible but that I haven’t looked into in any great detail because there’s no point flogging a dead horse.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s