-Caveat Lector-

From
http://128.121.216.19/justin/pf/p-j102000.html

}}>Begin

Behind the Headlines
by Justin Raimondo
Antiwar.com
October 20, 2000
HILLARY,
    THE WAR GODDESS
If the Kosovo war, the bombing of the USS Cole, and the growing hatred of the
US around the world is not enough to give American conservatives second
thoughts about our policy of global intervention, then surely Hillary Rodham
Clinton's recent attack on "isolationism" ought to clinch the case for the
America Firsters. The US, said Hillary in a speech given at the Manhattan
headquarters of the prestigious Council on Foreign Relations, must "avoid
isolationism" and follow a doctrine of "international engagement." What does
this mean? The Hill, as the New York Post likes to call her, did not get very
specific: instead, she sternly addressed the (presumably) Republican opponents
of global meddling:

"To those who believe we should become involved only if it is easy to do, I
think we have to say that America has never and should not ever shy away from
the hard path if it is the right one. I believe America needs a renewed
internationalism, not an old isolationism."

NEWFANGLED LIBERALS
Old is bad, of course, and new is good. Having abandoned (indeed, reversed)
their onetime antiwar stance, today's liberals have at least retained their
loyalty to the newfangled. But, hey, wait a minute: what's so "new" about
internationalism, anyway? The American people have been handed this line since
1914, for god'ssakes, ever since Woodrow Wilson dragged us into a European war
that soon led to another. Heck, the Roosevelts, both Teddy and Franklin,
derided non-interventionists as cowards, sissies, traitors, and worse – and the
same line of guff was handed out during the cold war, this time by
conservatives. In the post-cold war era we are hearing it from the left again,
straight from the pursed lips of the First Lady Herself. In her most extensive
treatment of foreign policy issues to date, Hillary Rodham greeted her fellow
warmongers at the CFR by thanking the Council "for what you have done and stood
for over the last century.

To challenge the forces of isolationism and champion internationalism,
reflecting both in our enduring values and our strategic interest." In short,
there's nobody here but us interventionists, so let's get down to brass tacks.

MURKY WATERS
God, how ungrammatical and deadly dull a speech it was! Filled with
malapropisms – "But these are albeit a necessary, but not sufficient
understanding of the world in which we live and lead" – the speech was the
verbal equivalent of a startled squid secreting a protective cloud of murk. The
murk, however, was lit up with strings of bright code words and catch-phrases:
"This new internationalism must be shaped, of course, to meet new challenges,"
and "Second, new challenges require new thinking about national interest and
security."

But of course. Our "core values" determine that we must "stand by Israel"
during the current Middle East crisis. Ad infinitum, ad nauseum. The  effect
was to give Hillary's talk a hectoring and sloganeering style, as if it had
been written in some Orwellian Newspeak of her own invention, an abbreviated
staccato language known only to internationalists.

STYLE AND SUBSTANCE
Why is it that us isolationists always have the best orators? One thinks of
Senator William C. Borah ("the Lion of Idaho"), William Jennings Bryan, and
Patrick J. Buchanan. The other side hasn't had a star performer since Franklin
Delano Roosevelt went on to his just reward: one thinks of the pipsqueakish
Harry Truman (a terrible speaker), the tin-mannish Al Gore, and, worst of all,
the grim harridan Hillary Rodham Clinton. But the interventionists rarely
address the people directly, and so they don't have to worry so much about the
niceties of style: just as long as politicians like Hillary get their message
across to the people who really matter – don't worry, guys, I'm with you all
the way.

A TERRIBLE RIGHTEOUSNESS
The Council on Foreign Relations is, of course, the organizational incarnation
of the foreign policy establishment, a bipartisan alliance of big business,
big government, and bigtime academia that traces its roots back those well-born
Anglophiles and New York banking circles so eager to get us into World War I.
Sizing up her audience, like any New York City ward-healer, Hillary told them
what she thought they wanted to hear: she attacked the "refrain" that "that we
should intervene with force only" in the cases of "wars that we surely can win,
preferably by overwhelming force in a relatively short period of time." Clearly
presenting herself as the Joan of Arc of a newly militant internationalism,
she pronounced anathema on those evil "isolationists" and scolded them for
their lack of her own terrible righteousness:

"To those who believe we should become involved only if it is easy to do, I
think we have to say: America has never and should not ever shy away from the
hard task if it is the right one. Just because we are living in a new and
uncertain world, it does not mean we cannot continue to exercise our
leadership."

NONE TOO THRILLED
While this received hearty applause from the mandarins in attendance, the New
York Post reports that
"Not everyone in the audience was thrilled with her speech. One man said her
doctrine amounted to a 'new imperialism' and asked her if she believed in
President Kennedy's vow at his 1961 inaugural to "pay any price, bear any
burden" in helping other countries. Clinton replied: 'I do not believe we
should pay any price or bear any burden. That is an extreme statement that I
certainly could not ascribe to. I think we should pay appropriate price for
appropriate return in advancing our interests.'"

It may come as a surprise to her fellow Democrats to learn that John F. Kennedy
was an extremist, but then this startling revelation didn't seem to bother
members of the Kennedy clan who later joined her on the campaign trail.

MARBLES AND MARMALADE
"An appropriate price for appropriate return" – a curiously empty and soul-less
formulation, a cold phrase that may one day come back to haunt her,
especially if she fulfills her long-rumored presidential ambitions. How many
American lives is, say, Israel worth? What about Kosovo? How is this amoral
calculus to be calculated? By what standard are we to judge when a "return" on
our investment in lives and treasure is "appropriate"? Just who is getting this
"return," anyhow – and what form does it take? So many questions, and so few
answers. Does she mean campaign contributions – or just the intangible psychic
reward of watching our "core values" – as she puts it – "spread all around the
world" like marmalade oozing over a marble?

THE ORACLE SPEAKS
Like the ancient Sibyl who presided over the Delphic Oracle, Hillary often
speaks in riddles and her language is meant to obscure rather than illuminate
her ultimate goals. But of one thing we can be sure: this Amazon has a warlike
agenda, and she has to be stopped – yes, even at the price of voting
for the prepubescent Rick Lazio.

SHE'S NO FOOL
She may be evil, but Hillary is no fool. She knows that the constituency for
our foreign policy of global intervention is narrow. The First Lady bemoans the
lack of support for overseas "engagement" – she never uses the word "war,"
of course, although her husband started more than any President in modern
history – and she scolds the business elite for not being internationalist
enough:
"If we are serious about combating any of our long term global challenges then
would have to create a broader, deeper, stronger constituency for engagement.
I think one of our greatest threats to an international leadership is not just
opposition to those who probably don't have passports, but apathy of those who
do. And this is from polling data and research information from the 1960s. And
it was striking to me how business leaders understood clearly the need for a
bipartisan foreign policy and a very strong presence in support of American
leadership. That has certainly changed over the last decade. That's where
people's eyes often glaze over when we are talking about foreign policy issues
we clearly need to bring home the stakes in these issues put human faces on
them but we need leadership in the private sector and the public sector to do
that."

HILLARY'S "MARSHALL PLAN"
Hillary is right to be worried about the popularity of her husband's foreign
adventures: support for the Clintonian "humanitarian" version of global
interventionism is narrow, shallow, and weakening among the very classes it is
meant to benefit: the elites in business and academia, who, in the past, have
provided a key base of support for our bipartisan policy of global meddling.
Business wants to know why we have to export our wealth to Eastern Europe and
the third world, and redistribute US tax dollars in the name of a new Marshall
Plan. This is what Hillary is touting, along with Al Gore, but the Marshall
Plan was specific to the time and place in which it occurred. Postwar Europe
was in ruins, and, while critics maintained that the only path to European
recovery was in freeing up markets, and that the plan amounted to a windfall
subsidy for US exporters, at least a superficially plausible case was made for
massive US aid in the wake of a devastating world war. But what is the
justification this time? There has been no devastating war in Europe, except
the one started by her husband against the people of a sovereign state who had
never attacked us – and who were subjected to devastating economic sanctions,
up until very recently. If she is talking about paying reparations to the
people of Yugoslavia for the effects of the barbaric bombing and the brutal
sanctions, then yes, I'm all for it – but what do we need a "Marshall Plan" for
a post-cold war Europe in which the Soviet bloc imploded without a shot being
fired?

. . . AND THE MOURNERS
That is why peoples' eyes glaze over when the old-fashioned rhetoric of
interventionism is rolled out once more, and Uncle Sam assumes his aspect as
the Bulwark of the West, the Defender of Global Peace, the Great Humanitarian
Interventionist. They listen politely, but aren't fooled. They know we cannot
save the "problem" peoples of the world, not from their own Byzantine history,
and surely not from themselves. Those Arab boys will be heaving rocks at
Israeli occupiers unto eternity, or however long the occupiers decide to stay,
whichever comes first. The Kosovars will always hate the Serbs, and vice-versa,
inter-tribal warfare will wrack Africa far into the foreseeable future, and all
plans to suburbanize Colombia will come to naught. Furthermore, there is
nothing Hillary Rodham Clinton – and all the gathered might of the United
States armed forces – can do about it. But oh, the misery they will cause in
the process of proving themselves wrong: the trouble and the bloodshed, the
body-bags – and the mourners, who will ask: What did they die for?

PRESIDENT HILLARY – THE NIGHTMARE UNFOLDS
It is no secret that Hillary Rodham wants to be President: in playing with her
Ouija board, communing (as she often does, according to her own account) with
Eleanor Roosevelt, one can only imagine the conversation:
" Eleanor, why didn't you run for President?"
"I didn't have to, my dear. . . ."

HILLARY'S BOMBS OVER BELGRADE
But Hillary is not one to stay at home baking cookies, nor is she content to
play the power behind the throne. Remember, it was she who really bullied
her hapless husband into ordering the bombing of Yugoslavia: she called him up
and argued that the Serbs were engaged in "genocide" on the scale of the
Holocaust – and reportedly threatened him with some pretty dire but unspecified
consequences if the air raid sirens weren't wailing over Belgrade and soon.
What she clearly wants, most of all, is not to have to get on the horn with
anybody but the Joint Chiefs of Staff – and then only long enough to give the
order to attack. . . .

TRICK OR TREAT!
As a member of the US Senate, representing the key state of New York, she will
be within striking range of reaching her goal. If and when she reaches it, God
help us all. The rigid righteousness of this woman, combined with the armed
might of the US, would constitute a lethal and immediate threat to all the
world's peoples. For no one would be safe from her "humanitarian"
ministrations, from bombing to outright invasion, from Inner Ruthenia to Outer
Mongolia. It is scary, this Halloween season, to ponder the ominous prospect
of President Hillary Rodham Clinton, but it is a possibility that cannot be
discounted. If Gore fails, who will face Bush in 2004? Isn't it time for a
woman President: and not just any woman, but Hillary the amazonian War Goddess,
Pallas Athena in full armor and wielding a sword?

PAY ANY PRICE
She must be stopped. In pursuit of that end we must be willing to pay any
price, bear any burden – yes, we must even be willing to vote for Lazio, whose
foreign policy positions are for the most part either incoherent or
indefensible – to make sure this amazon never leaves her tent and ventures
forth on the field of battle. The peace of the whole world depends on it.

Please Support Antiwar.com
A contribution







  of $50 or more will get you a copy of Ronald Radosh's out-of-print classic
study







  of the Old Right conservatives, Prophets on the Right: Profiles of
Conservative







Critics of American Globalism. Send contributions to
Antiwar.com
520 S. Murphy Avenue, #202
Sunnyvale, CA 94086

End<{{
A<>E<>R
Forwarded as information only; no endorsement to be presumed
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this material
is distributed without charge or profit to those who have
expressed a prior interest in receiving this type of information
for non-profit research and educational purposes only.
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
Integrity has no need of rules. -Albert Camus (1913-1960)
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
The only real voyage of discovery consists not in seeking
new landscapes but in having new eyes. -Marcel Proust
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The libertarian therefore considers one of his prime educational
tasks is to spread the demystification and desanctification of the
State among its hapless subjects.  His task is to demonstrate
repeatedly and in depth that not only the emperor but even the
"democratic" State has no clothes; that all governments subsist
by exploitive rule over the public; and that such rule is the reverse
of objective necessity.  He strives to show that the existence of
taxation and the State necessarily sets up a class division between
the exploiting rulers and the exploited ruled.  He seeks to show that
the task of the court intellectuals who have always supported the State
has ever been to weave mystification in order to induce the public to
accept State rule and that these intellectuals obtain, in return, a
share in the power and pelf extracted by the rulers from their deluded
subjects.
[[For a New Liberty:  The Libertarian Manifesto, Murray N. Rothbard,
Fox & Wilkes, 1973, 1978, p. 25]]

<A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/">www.ctrl.org</A>
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic
screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please!  These are
sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis-
directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with
major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought.
That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and
always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no
credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply.

Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html
 <A HREF="http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html">Archives of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]</A>

http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
 <A HREF="http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/">ctrl</A>
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Om

Reply via email to