Welcome to the Actualization

"Irving Kristol initiated neoconservatism at least partly in revulsion at the disorder of John Lindsay’s New York. Now his son William Kristol, editor of the Weekly Standard and the single leading proponent (going back to the mid-1990s) of invading Iraq, has helped convert neoconservatism into a source of a disorder infinitely more violent than anything that once disquieted his dad. To do so, he and his fellow war proponents ignored all credible information on the actual Iraq and promised an Eden more improbable than anything that ’60s liberals ever imagined. "There’s been a certain amount of pop sociology in America," he told National Public Radio listeners in the war’s opening weeks, "that the Shia can’t get along with the Sunni and the Shia in Iraq want to establish some kind of Islamic fundamentalist regime. There’s been almost no evidence of that at all," he continued. "Iraq’s always been very secular."

He wasn’t entirely wrong. Iraqi professionals were disproportionately secular. Now they are packing up their secularism and taking it to other lands. The war, and the failure to establish order that led to the barbarism that’s driving Iraqis away, can’t be laid solely on the neocons’ doorstep, of course. These second-generation neos needed a trio of arrogant, onetime CEOs — Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld — to actualize their vision. But actualize it they did, and the ideologues whose forebears once argued that the drugged-out Bronx was a monument to liberal folly have now made blood-drenched and depopulating Baghdad the monument to their own neocon obsessions."  Mayerson


Yes.  It is the non-secular majority of Iraqis, as opposed to the very Westernised and secular minority who are now in command of the "national unity government." 

Pat Lang


This entry was posted in Current Affairs. Bookmark the permalink.

21 Responses to Welcome to the Actualization

  1. MarcLord says:

    An elderly statesman with gout
    When asked what the war was about
    In a written reply
    Said “My colleagues and I
    Are doing our best to find out.”
    Guy Liddell Diaries, Director of MI5, February 1940

  2. wtofd says:

    “onetime CEOs”
    I’m clear on the role of neoconservatism in the war in Iraq. But does their coming from the corporate sector play a role as well, or was “1time CEOs” a non sequitur?

  3. keone Michaels says:

    Well said.

  4. Eric says:

    Meyerson was cooking on that one!

  5. W. Patrick Lang says:

    I am inclined to think that a business background is not an advantage in running government where the goal ought to be effectiveness rather the bottom line.
    I have been in both worlds. pl

  6. Patrick Henry says:

    Somehow…None of this makes me feel any better..
    Yes..Myerson was “cooking'”on That One..
    But the CHEFS are still in the Kitchen..
    The Ones who Cooked the INTEL…that made all this happen..
    And everyone Ate the “Main Coarse” and..
    And GWB is still telling Us it was the Most Important thing He could do..To
    “Make the World a Safer Place”..and ALL the FOCUS is on IRAQ..Becuase the Rest of the World is SAFE..
    I want to throw Up when ever He uses the Word..”Democracy” in any of His Speechs..
    More “Drinking the Kool Aid”
    Laced with “Poison Pills”..
    and “Sweet Crude”

  7. canuck says:

    Myerson is incorrect in his article when he says, “In the beginning, neoconservatism was a movement of onetime liberals.” They have never been associated with Liberalism. Their movement is attributable to Srauss. Strassians rejected Liberalism.
    He may have confused Trotskyismwith them, It was derived from Liberalism—it’s become part of the foundation of the socialism movement.
    Philosophy aside, how will America eradicate Strassians from positions they hold? They’re now rooted in the Executive branch and have branches into the Judicial and Legislative parts of America. Their diseased fruit is making American society ill
    BTW, writers who divide people into stereotypes…strips individual identities away and sets human beings up for hate mongering.

  8. Eric says:

    writers who divide people into stereotypes…strips individual identities away and sets human beings up for hate mongering.
    The Erician Corollary to the Golden Rule:
    Do Unto Others As They Have Done Unto You, By a Factor of N, where the integer N is >=2.
    Other News: Editor and Publisher has picked up the Galloway EMail story.

  9. ked says:

    These annoited-as-CEO businessmen pretendtobees have traded access to the US treasury for personal wealth throughout their careers. They never built a business as entrepenuers or worked their way up the ladder as career professionals.
    All they know about the private sector is that they like the power-trip part, and how nice it is not to be held accountable while making a small fortune.
    So, they claim they are being good conservatives by giving lip service to applying “sound business practices” in gov, yet have no clue what that comprises – beyond allowing their friends to raid the treasury.
    They are corporatists of the worse kind. They have proven they can’t run a government properly (well, a representative democracy anyway) while perverting the principles of free market capitalism.
    I am dismayed that the business community (commercial sector, you know, the butter side of the guns & butter economy) hasn’t the courage to help the nation put a stop to the damage they are doing.

  10. Eric says:

    Colonel Lang:
    Here is a very interesting interview with Andrew Bacevich that could perhaps be dealt with on an open thread.
    The Delusions of Global Hegemony

  11. RJJ says:

    WRT Sound business practice and national security:
    what to make of this????

  12. jonst says:

    That IS intersting!

  13. Eric says:

    God, Willie Sutton and Dillinger should have had something like that.

  14. Norbert Schulz says:

    The funny thing about all these special exceptions is that they, used honestly, are basically sensible.
    Sadly, because of the secrecy involved, there is no saying wether it is used properly or not. Abuse is probable in a politicised environment.

  15. Patrick Henry says:

    Ja Vohl Norbert..

  16. Norbert Schulz says:

    I think there are still many rather significant differences between Berlin 1938 and DC 2006. Insofar the comparison is IMO not apt.
    As the bribery scandals suggest, bought favours might well include such exceptions. They quite probably have in cartell oversight deals. A practical state license to cook your books might appeal to crooks.
    I presume that the relocation of the power to give that exception to Negroponte indicates that it is to become a standard operationg procedure for defense contractors, and as such is a consequence of the Bush administration excessive secrecy.
    Whatever you think of that, it suggests the question what giving a previously quasi political oval office job to Negroponte tells about the degree of politicasation of the DNI.

  17. Norbert Schulz says:

    ‘politisation’, bleh.

  18. Patrick henry says:

    I Believe there are GOOD indicators that the comparisons are relevent..
    All we need now is for the United States to find itself in the same position of Economic and Political isolation that Germany found itself in
    during the 1930s..
    The perceived threats are there..with the Potential for the same outcomes..
    Depending on who has the “POWER”
    and how they REACT..

  19. Blue Force says:

    The Irony of NeoCons

    Harold Meyerson has an excellent opinion piece in the Post today which eloquently looks at the irony of the NeoCon’s ideology (via Pat Lang)
    Bolsheviks in the cause of their vaporous intentions, so bent on ignoring reality that they dismissed and suppress

  20. Patrick Henry says:

    Oh..One Addum..
    And How Much the American People will “Tolerate”..
    Since We Do Have History Lessons..
    For Now..

  21. Norbert Schulz says:

    See, to be able to judge how much they tolerate neccesiates to find how much they actually know, or care.
    In my perception there is a great deal of merry obliviousness as to the nature of America’s power, it’s impact, it’s limits or the amount of which it projects and so forth, let alone about history and America’s role in it. When I asked a couple of Americans about how they envision America’s role in the world, I got the response: “Strong!” was as good as it got. That alone will not suffice for a strategy.
    Sure, Bush’s opinion polls are ever plummetting, yet still he and his crew have not been held accountable for their egregious mistakes because average citizens don’t really feel the pain in any direct way.
    It’s the volunteer army that does, and, dear, they get it rough. And all that happens somewhere far away, or in baseworld which isn’t much closer. After all, the US troops in Iraq are made up of a pool of say 450.000 people out of 290 million?!
    I think Democracy works in America, it’s just that Bush still isn’t enough of a pain in the arse yet, to sufficiently mobilise America to rid herself of him.

Comments are closed.