One of Ward Churchill's recurring complaints about the U.S. relates to a projection of American power. He never acknowledges that the cause aided by that projection of power may well be just. Such is the case in his misuse of a key quote from the 41st President, George H. W. Bush.
Churchill, in his much-criticized piece written on 9-11, "Some People Push Back: On the Justice of Roosting Chickens" writes:
The reason for this holocaust was/is rather simple, and stated quite straightforwardly by President George Bush, the 41st "freedom-loving" father of the freedom-lover currently filling the Oval Office, George the 43rd: "The world must learn that what we say, goes," (my emphasis) intoned George the Elder to the enthusiastic applause of freedom-loving Americans everywhere.
As it turns out, President George H. W. Bush did use similar words, though not that exact quote, in a speech in 1991. Context, however, is key. In Remarks to Community Members at Fort Stewart, Georgia, February 1, 1991, President Bush said:
It began with Kuwait, but that wouldn't have been the end. (my emphasis) What we've witnessed these last few weeks removed any last shred of doubt about the adversary that we face: the terror bombing, without military value -- the terror bombing of innocent civilians with those Scud missiles; the brutal treatment -- that brutal, inhumane treatment of our POW's; the endless appetite for evil that would lead a man to make war on the world's environment. All of us know what we're up against. All of you know why we're there.
We are there because we are Americans, part of something that's larger than ourselves. (my emphasis) Our cause is right. Our cause is just. And because it is just, that world's cause will prevail.
And when we win -- and we will -- we will have taught a dangerous dictator and any tyrant tempted to follow in his footsteps that the U.S. has a new credibility, and that what we say goes, and that there is no place for lawless aggression in the Persian Gulf and in this new world order that we seek to create. And we mean it. And he will understand that when the day is done.
What Bush is saying is that the United States will not stand idly by while a "dangerous dictator's" aggression threatens the Middle East. Not that you must do what we say, but that you must not attack your neighbors and foment terror among the region's civilians. What we say goes. And in that context, shouldn't it?
Churchill is upset that his comment about the "little Eichmanns" gets taken out of context, and seeks to defuse that bombshell (though he still calls the people in the towers by that epithet). Here he commits the same effrontery, taking the President's words out of context to support his own thesis.
Note: In a comment to an earlier Churchill post, Mirramele points to a wonderful blog compendium of Churchill links and information. If you seek additional links and information it's likely you can find them at PirateBallerina.com.
UPDATE: Charles at Little Green Footballs links to a Robert Jensen defense of the original 9-11 article by Churchill. There's a lot of silliness within it, perhaps best typified by this:
For me, left politics — resistance to unjust impositions of authority and the struggle for a sustainable world that balances a deep yearning for individual freedom and a deep sense of responsibility for each other — is fueled by anger at the world as it exists, along with a love for people and an appreciation for the beauty of the non-human world. That righteous anger is powerful, as long as it does not slip into self-righteousness and stays in balance with that love. We can be glib about that struggle, but in reality the tension — inside of each of us and inside our movements — is not always easy to cope with. I wrestle with it every day.
"Resistance to unjust impositions of authority?" Do you think he's referring to Lenin, Stalin, Pol Pot, Ho Chi Minh, Castro? Err, didn't think so. Jensen has made some previous statements of note, for instance, as Mike Adams reported, "The United States has lost the war in Iraq, and that's a good thing." As Yogi Berra could advise him, that statement may have been a bit premature. There's also, from the same article "I welcome the U.S. defeat," "it's essential the American empire be defeated and dismantled," and "In Iraq, the Bush administration invaded not to liberate but to extend and deepen U.S. domination."
The evidence to support these statements is, sadly, lacking.
Comments