I've wanted say something about the state of the union and the world for a long time now but I haven't found any way to articulate my feelings on the matter. I'm more scared and more at sea than I have been in a long time. Things seem to have gone terribly terribly awry, both here at home and abroad.

I am embarrassed to be an American right now (although, in some sense I suppose that it could be argued that I should have been before). While our self-elected role as global peacekeeper could at least be backed by lofty and noble-sounding rhetoric I don't believe a stance of global aggression can be. Nor do I think it defensible that our government and corporate powers unwittingly conspire to limit the freedoms we have so long claimed as the foundations of our supposed superiority.

Perhaps I'm overreacting but I think it would be negligent to not question the new american direction.

Iraq. What to say about this? I question our motives. No matter how I think about it I can't convince myself it's not about oil. I know that there are a lot of reasonable people who would claim otherwise but I just can't believe it. Sure, it's nice to say that we want to go in to Iraq to eliminate a real threat to our well-being. But the question I would ask is why us? Why do we believe we have the authority to dictate the politics of the world?

Weapons of Mass Destruction. If I hear or read that phrase one more time I will puke. What power represents the biggest potential for destruction in the world right now? Answer honestly. North Korea claims it has to reinstitute its weapons programs in order to defend itself from open American aggression. Who's to say that Iraq (or any other country in the world) doesn't feel the same way? We point our missiles at them... we never stopped. Why should they not be free to respond in kind?

The War on Terrorism. War on Drugs v2.0. Give it up. Neither "war" is winnable. Terrorism is something that happens because someone somewhere has a chip on their shoulder and the charisma to bring similarly minded individuals around to their views. Wanna know how to make joe average in to a terrorist? Bomb his country and claim the death of his family and loved ones was "regrettable collateral damage". Now admittedly that's not going to work 99.99% of the time but .01% could potentially represent a lot of terrorists. Anyone with determination can kill people. I think we should call it a War to Make Terrorists.

Can you trust the government? Can you trust the media to help you decide if you trust the government?

Don't get me wrong. I am incredibly fortunate to be an American. I have more freedoms and a better standard of living than almost anyone anywhere. I just don't think that we're on the right track right now.

I understand a few things that might not be readily apparent in this little diatribe. First, I realize that the world is not really a friendly place. There is always gonna be someone somewhere that wants a piece of us. Perhaps for legitimate reasons, perhaps not. I would advocate that we not actively set out to increase the number of those someones. A nation of this power and wealth has some real potential for making friends.

Another thing that I understand is that it takes a lot of raw capital to maintain a country like this. I would suggest, though, that rather than take those resources by force or means of opression, we should concentrate on using developing new sources and using what we have more efficiently. Perhaps as a more realistic (if equally utopian) scenario we could find some way to equitably trade for the resources we need. As a country we have a lot to offer. Gap sweatshops and placing a puppet government in Iraq look like two faces of the same beast to me.

I guess what it all boils down to for me is the following sentence: Where is the money (power) going? It's that simple. Any time our government does something, or a big corporation does something, or the media says something, I wonder that. That's why I don't believe the rhetoric about Iraq. That's why none of the books (plays/music/etc) that I enjoy now will never enter the public-domain in my lifetime. That's why an economic stimulus package that favors the rich and corporations will never make any real lasting difference in the economy.

Enough of that. How do you feel about the state of the world today?

...

I've been doing some light reading. Beanie gave me her criticism and theory anthology. It's interesting stuff, if hard reading at times.

Extra

m4dd4wg has been doing some vegetarian cooking that looks quite promising.

phil has been doing some navel lint-gathering (and not calling me when he's in town :P) that strikes a chord. Good futility-of-the-ratrace stuff.

I picked up a new cookbook. The modestly titled Essential Vegetarian Cookbook. It's ok. I do have to wonder, though, after attempting the chunky vegetarian burritos, if anyone tested the recipes. On the upside it features good nutrition information for every recipe (including the all-important protein). I'll let you know if any of the other recipes are more workable.

As an aside, the burritos had great texture but no flavor. They were also a huge pain in the ass to make. The house smelled wonderful during the cooking process, though. It has been suggested that a touch of salt and fresher spices might be the key to making it work. Even if that's the case the recipe is too much work for anything other than entertaining, imo (if you can interest your average dinner guest in burritos that contain, among other things, tofu and cabbage).

Links

...one more time, we wanna celebrate, oh yeah, don't stop the dancing...
fathom
back to zero
personally the post 9-11 world has me even more down on politics than normal. while our american lifestyle is coveted and hated by many people around the world, it's probably because of missunderstanding more than anything else. if you really think about it, where is most of the world going to get their impressions of america? from our media, and we're likely to get the same in turn. i don't think it's a good representation of any country or culture for that matter. our culure is seeping into just about every walk of life on the planet. i'm surprised the distaste for america isn't more widespread.

so what's the answer to it all? i don't know. but for some reason it has me thinking of themes from fight club. the consumer lifestyle really needs some rethinking. he/she who dies with the most toys still dies.
beanie
Brain goodies
I'm so glad you like that book.  I hated the sucker when I  had to read it for class, but that's because I didn't want  to read it then.  I might try it again sometime in a few  years, though.    I'm not forgetting to comment about the American state at  the moment, but I'm short on time and I need to think about  it anyway.  I'll be back...
phil
News
Fathom's comment about american media being the source for information for the global community is pretty humorous, at least in my opinion.

I've found that in most cases, if I want to keep abreast of news in our country, the best sources are overseas. BBC, Telegraph, and Guardian Unlimited, to name a few (there are others but I'm drawing a blank at the moment.) All have better U.S. news than our own sites (CNN, MSNBC, etc.)

In writing this, I wonder if the reverse is also true. Does CNN have better news coverage of Britain? You've got to love "unbiased" media outlets. :P
fathom
bollocks!
phil has a good point and i don't know why i didn't think of that considering when i'm in loophole's car, if the raido is on, half the time i hear the bbc.

but then again i'm not a big fan of the news media. these days it's pretty much tell me the body count and what's the weather going to be like tomorrow?
m4dd4wg
Unbiased news
Since I'm a grad student in media studies, I probably spend a lot more time thinking about this crap than most people, so I have no idea if this is common knowledge or not. Anyway, in Britain and many European countries, there are national newspapers that serve the political slants of their readers. The closest we have to national papers in the US are The Wall Street Journal and The New York Times, both of which are fairly conservative institutions, but for the most part our papers are considered local instituitions, especially when you factor in the other two papers of record, The Washington Post and The Los Angeles Times. Anyway, I know The Guardian is definitely is a paper that caters to the left, and, if my memory serves me correctly, the Telegraph does as well, so its not quite correct to call these outlets biased. The BBC, as an instituion, has long been dominated by paternalistic members of the upper middle class, which introduces its own problems and creates consternation among the working class, but I have no idea how that affects its reporting.

One other tidbit you might find interesting is that what we consider "journalistic ethics", that is to say not reflecting the view of one political party, etc. really didn't come about in the US (the only place its codified) until the rise of the telegraph. When the wire services emerged, the needed to sell stories to papers across the political spectrum, so the reporters and editors were exhorted to make their stories as inoffensive as possible. As the years went on, young journalists were trained in this style that we now expect from American news outlets. I don't know if that clarifies anything.
m4dd4wg
Weapons of Mass Distortion
I just thought of that subject line after I posted and wished I had earlier. Maybe I can use it in a paper or on my blog.
AVERAGE JOE
Works both ways...
One of the things I try to do is not assume we're the only country that's guilty of any of the above.

Just like you'll get vastly different reads of the same story from the New York Times, San Francisco Chronicle and Dallas Morning News, you'll get a skewed read on events from the BBC, CBC or any other media source. You don't think we're painted in uglier shades in the Paris media than Toronto's?

FYI - I tend to like the International Herald Tribune for news, although they are affiliated with the NY Times.

As for the oil in Iraq - yes, that plays a part in it. Not just for us, though. Why are Americans the only guilty ones?

Specifically, France and Russia have trade agreements in place with Saddam that will flush those countries with oil riches as soon as economic sanctions are lifted AND Saddam remains in power. Who were the two biggest pains in the ass at the UN Security Council summits on weapons inspectors in Iraq? What two countries have lobbied for lifting the economic sanctions on Iraq for shaky "nation-building" reasons? What two countries want to negotiate with Saddam and oppose any attempt to remove him from power? Take a guess.

Funny, though. We all assume France's motives are pure and right, when they have as many oil stains on their shirt sleeves as we do.

These are not made-up innuendos from the fringe. All this was reported in prime time on 60 Minutes.
loophole
Not to be contentious...

I certainly didn't mean to imply that everyone else was innocent and wonderful.... nor do I think I did so.

AVERAGE JOE
You didn't...
You didn't, loop. Just making a point that our evil ways are not unique. That always helps me put things in perspective. I get down a lot less that way.