Useful Idiots of the Empire

  posted by Reverend Chuck0 on Friday March 15 2002 @ 09:46PM PST



The new empire loyalists
Former leftists turned US military cheerleaders are helping snuff out its 
traditions of dissent
Tariq Ali
Saturday March 16, 2002
The Guardian
Exactly one year before the hijackers hit the Pentagon, Chalmers Johnson, a 
distinguished American academic, staunch supporter of the US during the 
wars in Korea and Vietnam, and one-time senior analyst for the CIA, tried 
to alert his fellow-citizens to the dangers that lay ahead. He offered a 
trenchant critique of his country's post-cold war imperial policies: 
"Blowback," he prophesied, "is shorthand for saying that a nation reaps 
what it sows, even if it does not fully know or understand what it has sown.
"Given its wealth and power, the United States will be a prime recipient in 
the foreseeable future of all of the more expectable forms of blowback, 
particularly terrorist attacks against Americans in and out of the armed 
forces anywhere on earth, including within the United States."
But whereas Johnson drew on his past, as a senior state-intellectual within 
the heart of the American establishment, to warn us of the dangers inherent 
in the imperial pursuit of economic and military domination, former critics 
of imperialism found themselves trapped by the debris of September 11. Many 
have now become its most vociferous loyalists. I am not, in this instance, 
referring to the belligerati - Salman Rushdie, Martin Amis and friends - 
ever-present in the liberal press on both sides of the Atlantic. They might 
well shift again. Rushdie's decision to pose for the cover of a French 
magazine draped in the stars and stripes could be a temporary aberration. 
His new-found love for the empire might even turn out to be as short-lived 
as his conversion to Islam.
What concerns me more is another group: men and women who were once 
intensely involved in leftwing activities. It has been a short march for 
some of them: from the outer fringes of radical politics to the 
antechambers of the state department. Like many converts, they display an 
aggressive self-confidence. Having honed their polemical and ideological 
skills within the left, they now deploy them against their old friends. 
This is why they have become the useful idiots of the empire. They will be 
used and dumped. A few, no doubt, hope to travel further and occupy the 
space vacated by Chalmers Johnson, but they should be warned: there is 
already a very long queue.
Others still dream of becoming the Somali, Pakistani, Iraqi or Iranian 
equivalents of the Afghan puppet, Hamid Karzai. They, too, might be 
disappointed. Only tried and tested agents can be put in power. Most 
one-time Marxists or Maoists do not yet pass muster. To do so they have to 
rewrite their entire past and admit they were wrong in ever backing the old 
enemies of the empire - in Cuba, Vietnam, Angola, Afghanistan or the Arab 
East. They have, in other words, to pass the David Horowitz test. Horowitz, 
the son of communists and biographer of the late Isaac Deutscher, underwent 
the most amazing self-cleansing in post-1970s America. Today he is a 
leading polemicist of the right, constantly denouncing liberals as a bridge 
to the more sinister figures of the left.
Compared to him, former Trotskyists Christopher Hitchens and Kanaan Makiya 
must still appear as marginal and slightly frivolous figures. They would 
certainly fail the Horowitz test, but if the stakes are raised and Baghdad 
is bombed yet again, this time as a prelude to a land invasion, how will 
our musketeers react? Makiya, recently outed in this paper as "Iraq's most 
eminent dissident thinker", declared that: "September 11 set a whole new 
standard... if you're in the terrorism business you're going to start 
thinking big, and you're going to need allies. And if you need allies in 
the terrorism business, you're going to ask Iraq."
Makiya's capacity to spin extraordinary spirals of assertion, one above 
another, based on no empirical facts and without any sense of proportion, 
becomes - through sheer giddiness of fantastical levitation - completely 
absurd. Not a single US intelligence agency has managed to prove any Iraqi 
link with September 11. For that reason, in order to justify a war, they 
have moved on to other issues, such as possession of "dangerous weapons". 
Not even Saddam's old foes in the Arab world believe this nonsense.
Hitchens reacted more thoughtfully at first to the New York and Washington 
attacks. He insisted that the "analytical moment" had to be "indefinitely 
postponed", but none the less linked the hits to past policies of the US 
and criticised George Bush for confusing an act of terrorism with an act of 
war. He soon moved on to denounce those who made similar, but much sharper 
criticisms, and began to talk of the supposed "fascist sympathies of the 
soft left" - Noam Chomsky, Harold Pinter, Gore Vidal, Susan Sontag, Edward 
Said et al. In recent television appearances he has sounded more like a 
saloon-bar bore than the fine, critical mind which blew away the haloes 
surrounding Henry Kissinger, Bill Clinton and Mother Teresa.
What unites the new empire loyalists is an underlying belief that, despite 
certain flaws, the military and economic power of the US represents the 
only emancipatory project and, for that reason, has to be supported against 
all those who challenge its power. A few prefer Clinton-as-Caesar rather 
than Bush, but recognise this as a self-indulgence. Deep down they know the 
empire stands above its leaders.
What they forget is that empires always act in their own self-interests. 
The British empire cleverly exploited the anti-slavery campaigns to 
colonise Africa, just as Washington uses the humanitarian handwringing of 
NGOs and the bien pensants to fight its new wars today. September 11 has 
been used by the American empire to re-map the world. European continental 
pieties are beginning to irritate Cheney and Rumsfeld. They laugh in 
Washington when they hear European politicians talk of revitalising the UN. 
There are 189 member states of the UN. In 100 of these states there is a US 
military presence. For UN, read US?
Neo-liberal economics, imposed by the IMF mullahs, has reduced countries in 
every continent to penury and brought their populations to the edge of 
despair. The social democracy that appeared an attractive option during the 
cold war no longer exists. The powerlessness of democratic parliaments and 
the politicians who inhabit them to change anything has discredited 
democracy. Crony capitalism can survive without it.
At a time when much of the world is beginning to tire of being 
"emancipated" by the US, many liberals have been numbed into silence. One 
of the most attractive aspects of the US has always been the layers of 
dissent that have flourished beneath the surface. The generals in the 
Pentagon suffered a far greater blow than September 11 in the 1970s, when 
tens of thousands of serving and former GIs demonstrated in front of it in 
their uniforms and medals and declared their hope that the Vietnamese would 
win. The new empire loyalists, currently helping to snuff out this 
tradition, are creating the conditions for more blowbacks.
Blowback: The Costs and Consequences of American Empire by Chalmers Johnson 
(LittleBrown). Tariq Ali's book, The Clash of Fundamentalisms, is published 
by Verso in April and his Unholy Warriors is broadcast by BBC4 tomorrow at 
11.30pm END.Horowitz,Hitchens...jamesd?He's an idiot allright,but useful?

Reply via email to