Republicans vs
Democrats: Two Neoliberal War Parties With the same
Economic and Foreign Policies
By Gary Weglarz
November 23,
2016 "Information
Clearing House"
- "Global
Research"
-
Perhaps it is time
to step back a bit from the immediacy of this electoral
moment to take in the broader picture. Emotional
responses to the prospect of a Trump presidency may
offer a needed level of catharsis for some, but they
certainly won’t help us understand how we got here. A
couple of questions are in order. How is it that our
two political parties engage in essentially the same
economic and foreign policies, offering
differentiation only in the realm of identity politics?
What are the dynamics of mass psychology and propaganda
that have made this reality invisible to so many for so
long?
If we hope to
understand what is happening politically in this country
today we must look beyond the obvious surface level of
events. We must examine how our perceptions, thoughts
and behavior have been manipulated in ways most
Americans are not consciously aware of. During the
presidencies of Bill Clinton and Barak Obama we have
watched a continuous and rather exquisitely
choreographed media dance between our two parties,
brought to us, of course, by the corporations of our
oligarchy.
If we allow
corporate media to create the post-election
narrative that is unfolding, we will remain as
bewildered as we have been, all while surveying a
dangerous strange new terrain. The propaganda machine
of our duopoly has kept us blind for too long. Perhaps
a little trip down memory lane can help.
If we look back
on the eight-year presidency of Bill Clinton we cannot
fail to recall the almost rabid hysterical non-stop
attacks he suffered as the target of what appeared to be
the total and complete hatred of the leading figures of
the Republican Party. That Clinton was impeached
related to a sex act in the White House made for
wonderfully emotional political theatre. Who could
resist? It was headline grabbing material around the
globe.
Lost at the
time was that his impeachment, and very vocal Republican
opposition to his presidency, were quite unrelated to
Clinton’s actual policy decisions. Democratic
politicians and many rank and file Democratic supporters
rallied around Clinton in large part due to how
continually under siege he was by these obviously vile
and odious Republican forces.
So what do we
make of the fact that an even cursory examination of the
Clinton political record from that period makes the very
public passion play of his two term presidency seem
almost incomprehensible in retrospect? After all, Bill
Clinton was essentially our first “Democratic”
Republican President. He effectively continued and
implemented the Bush I political agenda of neoliberal
economic policies and imperialist foreign policy. From
today’s vantage point it is clear that Clinton was
essentially a Republican president who had run for
office as a Democrat.
Clinton pushed
NAFTA through. He pushed through welfare reform. He
pushed for and achieved much more punitive crime
legislation. This included the infamous “three strikes”
bill that helped make the private prison system complex,
which he also supported, a shiny new investment
opportunity for oligarchy. For good measure Bill
Clinton deregulated Wall Street on his way out the door
by jettisoning the Glass-Steagall Act.
Why all the
Republican hatred?
What did Bill
Clinton actually do policy-wise that ever betrayed
Republican political values?
He certainly
had earlier clearly proved his national security
bonafides to the Republican establishment. Bill Clinton
came to national political prominence out of nowhere,
but only after having proved himself to the CIA and deep
state actors of the Republican Reagan/Bush I
administrations. He did this by playing a crucial part
in the illegal and sordid Iran Contra operation. Bill
Clinton performed a key role in that operation by
warding off Arkansas State police investigations into
the “drugs in / guns out” Republican White House and CIA
operation that was being run out of the Mena, Arkansas
airport. Without
Governor Bill Clinton running interference Mena
simply couldn’t have functioned as the cocaine import
hub in the government drugs for guns [Iran-Contra]
operation. Quite a loyalty test, but one Bill passed
with flying colors as evidenced by his rise from nowhere
to the presidency.
There are of
course other implications to Clinton’s role at Mena that
are worth contemplating as we consider his place in
history as a Democratic president. In simple ethical
terms Bill Clinton shares direct responsibility, along
with his predecessors Bush I and Ronald Reagan, for the
many tons of cocaine that flooded US inner cities during
the period.
Later as
president, Clinton signed crime legislation which
mandated expanded terms of incarceration that proved a
huge boon to the private for-profit prison system he
also championed. The victims in this scenario were
those who resided in poor disenfranchised communities,
disproportionately African American, whose crime was
simply to use the cocaine Clinton as Arkansas governor
had ensured flooded US cities. The level of moral
corruption inherent in this sequence of events is quite
breathtaking. That American voters and corporate media
have never come to honest terms with this history has
only added another chapter in the untold story of the
continuing moral corruption of our nation.
However,
Clinton’s “Republican” presidency did not end there. He
continued both the sanctions and the bombing of Iraq
initiated by his Republican predecessor Bush I. These
actions resulted in the death of over a million
civilians, including half a million children. Through
Clinton’s “Plan Colombia” he continued US support and
funding for the military and government of a nation that
defined the phrase: death squad democracy. His policies
cost the lives of many thousands of civilians, labor
organizers and those working in human rights and social
justice organizations.
With our deep
state establishment deciding to dismantle the last
vestiges of socialism in post-Soviet Eastern Europe,
Yugoslavia became a target for destabilization and
destruction. Continuing his service to the deep state
Clinton was on board and dutifully did his part,
including authorizing the NATO bombing campaign. The
policy planners of the West saw the natural resources of
Africa as suddenly up for grabs in the new post-Cold War
world. There was a need to get the right people in power
in Rwanda to ensure unfettered corporate access to
precious metal and mineral resources in the region.
Clinton was the man to paint a policy smiley face on the
workings of empire by using the aftermath of the mass
slaughter of civilians to create the new imperial mantra
called “humanitarian intervention” or “responsibility to
protect.”
The oligarchs
and the deep state loved this guy, and for good reason.
What legitimate policy critique could the Republicans
have? I mean really, what’s a guy have to do to be made
an “honorary Republican?” He is quite arguably the most
effective Republican president since Nixon, though he is
far to the right of the “Tricky” one in many policy
areas.
So the question
begging to be asked is, if Clinton was essentially
carrying out the Republican agenda of Bush I, why was he
so loudly and publicly hated and vilified by those same
forces? The answer to that question requires that we
explore and understand the media’s role in “how” our two
party / media nexus creates what becomes our shared
political “reality.”
Without those
constant media attacks by Republicans, faithfully
reported by the corporate media, rank and file Democrats
would have had no reason to tolerate Clinton’s total
betrayal of what had been long standing Democratic Party
policies and ideals going back to the New Deal. In
other words, the vociferous Republican attacks related
to Clinton’s sexual behavior acted to “legitimize”
Clinton in the minds of large swaths of Democratic and
Independent voters who otherwise would have looked
critically and actually been appalled at his traitorous
policy decisions.
Without these
loud and public Republican attacks Clinton would have
been essentially an emperor with no clothes. The logic
became, “well, if he is so roundly hated by the evil
Republicans, he must be acting somehow in our best
interests and therefore we must do our best to protect
and defend him.” I don’t doubt that such “reasoning”
occurred for many on a quite unconscious level. This is
how propaganda operations work. Since the Republicans
were obviously the enemy, the Democratic base was left
with what appeared to be the only reasonable response,
to embrace the old adage of “the enemy of my enemy is my
friend.” Clinton maintained credibility with his
Democratic base because he was hated and constantly
under attack by those whom Democrats knew were clearly
the forces of darkness, those racist, homophobic,
anti-choice, war-like Republicans.
If we fast
forward to these final weeks of the eight- year Obama
administration, we find, to quote Yogi Berra, that it’s
“déjà vu all over again.” Obama’s presidential acts
have been unburdened by anything resembling fidelity to
the campaign promises he made to his constituents. He
has in fact continued Bush II’s illegal wars in the
Middle East, expanding them across the region in the
process. He has presided over illegal coups in the
Ukraine and Honduras, and, one could argue, also played
a role in Brazil. In Libya, unleashing Hillary, he has
destroyed a secular nation that had the highest standard
of living in all of Africa. His decisions as commander
in chief then sent the same jihadi terrorists used to
destroy Libya off to Syria to continue their work in
service to our rather transparently bi-partisan US
foreign policy.
Obama declined
to prosecute any of the Bush II war criminals, instead
welcoming some to new homes in his administration. The
comment “we tortured some folks” appears to be as close
to justice and the rule of law as our Peace Prize
president plans to get.
Obama pursued
no prosecution of the amoral Wall Street financial
criminals that destroyed the lives of millions of
Americans. In fact many of these odious human beings
made their way quickly into the Obama cabinet where they
continue managing the economic system to the benefit of
the same elites who financed Obama’s rise to office.
Obama deported
more illegal immigrants than any president in US
history. He prosecuted more whistleblowers than any
president in US history. He continued and may have
expanded mass surveillance. He failed to restore habeas
corpus. He is modernizing rather than reducing our
nuclear arsenal, Peace Prize and promises be damned. He
fracked, he drilled, and he effectively continued Bush
II Republican policies under the name of a Democratic
presidency.
What’s not for
Republicans to like? What’s not for the oligarchy that
owns and operates both parties to like? What
significant policy decisions distinguish Obama as a
member of the Democratic Party rather than a member of
the Republican Party?
Yet the
Republicans despise Obama, do they not? Ah yes, in no
particular order: “Obama-care,” “the birth
certificate,” and the “he’s a closet Muslim” thing. Of
course! How could we be so blind?
These attacks
by the vile Republicans prove he is our benefactor and
champion! Look how our enemies despise and hate him!
So again the Democratic base defends Obama, right on
cue, just as with Bill Clinton before him. Not because
he is acting in their interests or living up to campaign
promises. Instead, he is defended in large part because
he is under unrelenting irrational public attack in the
oligarch owned corporate media by the dreaded
Republicans, which makes it appear that he must be
standing up for us in some way shape or form yet to be
determined.
These absurd
Republican critiques of Obama have served the same
propaganda function as the media circus surrounding the
now legendary fellatio sessions of the Clinton
presidency. They provide the illusion of legitimacy to
a political candidate and party no longer deserving of
the support of Democratic voters. While under the
cover of this relentless Republican attack Obama has
courageously and faithfully carried on the Bush II
economic and foreign policy agenda in total betrayal of
his supporters. “Since the Republicans hate him so
much, he must somehow be acting valiantly on our
collective behalf,” or so the “truthiness,” passing as
logic, appears to go for many in the base.
Routine police
murders of unarmed Black men continue to take place with
deadly regularlity. The mentally ill are also shot and
killed by police on a routine basis simply by virtue of
being mentally ill, and therefore by definition unlikely
to “follow police orders.” In North Dakota police
brutality aimed at Native American Dakota Access water
protectors continues unabated, and screams for
presidential intervention. One can only conclude that
the evil Republicans have confined Obama to the White
House and cut off his access to all media, denying him
even the lame duck “bully pulpit.” Such monsters! Know
they no shame?
We have been
had, folks. We have been bamboozled, conned, taken for
a ride, manipulated and deceived. We have fallen,
consciously or unconsciously, for the logic that the
enemy of our enemy must indeed be our friend. Not so
much, it would appear. At least if one considers the
presidential policy record to contain any meaningful
information worth assessing. If these decades of fake
party fights to the death related to sex scandals and
birth certificates, played to the hilt in the corporate
media, aren’t an actual CIA run operation, it should
be. It smells of all the subtle
media manipulation the CIA used in Europe to shape
public thought and opinion during the Cold War. It has
provided the only cover left for trying to hide the
utter corruption of what amounts to two branches of a
single neoliberal war party owned and operated by the
oligarchy. Given the direct CIA connections of both the
Bush and Clinton families, we have had 24 of the last 32
years of the presidency clearly in the hands of the deep
state. The Bush family has been the Republican face of
the CIA and the Clinton family the Democratic face. Had
Hillary been elected the charade would have continued.
Today all we are left with is the more and more
desperate theater of the absurd attempts by corporate
media to convince us we have political choices. We do
not.
What has the
Democratic base received in payment for its diligent
defense against the irrational and absurd Republican
critiques of Bill Clinton and Barack Obama? Quite
simply, sixteen additional years of Republican policies
on the domestic front and sixteen more years of deep
state / Wall Street imperial foreign policy. If actual
policy means more than rhetoric, Bill Clinton will be
remembered as the first “Democratic” Republican
president and Barack Obama will be seen as the first
“Black Democratic” Republican president.
What was
apparent to some of us at the time is hopefully clearer
to more of us today. For the Democratic Party to
effectively morph into its current form as simply one of
two neoliberal war parties has required constant
contrived political theater validated and echoed
non-stop by the corporate media. The vociferous,
illogical and relentless attacks from the Republican
Party against “liberal” Democratic presidents have acted
as “cover” for the gutting of the Democratic Party
itself. These attacks have served a propaganda function
that has facilitated and helped conceal the Democratic
party’s betrayal of its own constituents, while
promoting the lie that it is valiantly fighting against
the depredations of the Republicans. It has been a
decades long con job of the first order. This year’s
primary season and recent election pulled the curtain
back to expose for the world to see the total amoral
bankruptcy of both our parties and of our corporate
media, all of which are owned by the oligarchy which
rules us.
Meanwhile those
of us who consider ourselves progressives, or, god
forbid, radicals, have a good deal of soul searching to
do in the wake of this election. Many “progressive”
people have gone to bed each night over the last eight
years thinking that they are ethical and decent people
because they support gay marriage, freedom of choice and
multi-cultural values. However, many of these same
people lost no sleep due to concerns regarding the
plight of those left behind by another eight years of
brutal Democratically supported neoliberal economic
policies. The “deplorables,” to use the empathy-free
language of the mass murderer who until last week was
awaiting coronation as our nation’s “first female
Democratic” Republican president.
Charles de Gaulle’s comment to an aide about how the
American people would respond to the obvious State
assassination of John Kennedy seems to describe the
current mindset of many in the Democratic base regarding
the corruption of their party and the role of the United
States in continually fomenting global violence:
“They don’t
want to know. They don’t want to find out. They
won’t allow themselves to find out.”
There is a
rather grotesque schism in the psyche of many
“progressive” Democrats today. Many ardent Obama and
Hillary supporters, while acutely sensitive to identity
politics in domestic issues, have ignored, rationalized
or denied our ongoing imperial slaughter, directly and
through proxy, of people of color across the planet.
Regarding US military and economic violence in the
Middle East, Africa, Asia and Latin America, Obama has
enjoyed a free pass from the same people who rightly
applaud him for his stand on gay marriage. Many have
simply denied there is a problem and have not bothered
to educate themselves about what their president and
their country have been doing in the world. Ignorance
can only foster the illusion of “bliss” for so long.
Denial is the
most brittle of all psychological defense mechanisms.
When denial finally breaks down it can feel as if one’s
world is crumbling, when in fact that world had crumbled
long ago, its disappearance simply hidden from awareness
by our refusal to look, to see, to acknowledge what was
right before our eyes. Denial no longer works to
protect us from the truth.
With the
campaign of HRC the stage was set for not simply a
continuation of the Obama regime but a return to the
even more bizarre Dr. Strangelove neocon crazy of the
Bush II years. One could already imagine the strategy
that would be used to deflect from her “Republican”
policies. It would be that the Republicans hate her
“because she is a woman,” so of course we must support
her and her policies no matter what. No doubt a
significant portion of the Democratic base would have
watched her incinerate the planet before they’d dare
question her policies, her being the first woman
president and all.
If anyone is
still harboring thoughts that include the possibility of
“fixing” this neoliberal dumpster fire that is the
Democratic Party, there is really little more to say.
First, the oligarchs aren’t going to put their cash cow
up for sale because it’s too valuable to ensuring their
interests. Second, the Democratic base is a bit too
cash strapped given all those profits going to the top
1% to really make a competitive bid now anyway, isn’t
it? Accepting reality at this point means accepting
that the Democratic Party of many people’s fantasies or
youth simply no longer exists. Period. Sorry, but the
oligarchs aren’t going to get out of the way and let
folks do a radical makeover so they can lose money on
the deal.
It appears
we’re going to have to actually work, sacrifice,
organize, educate ourselves and each other, suffer, and
resist, as hard and painful as all of that is going to
be. The alternative is exactly what we’ve gotten for
the last 24 years – a count down to oblivion during
which we all watch Tweedledum and Tweedledee mud wrestle
each other on our video screens, 24/7, while much of the
world is left to hope, desperately, that we will finally
collectively wake up.
Gary Weglarz
recently retired from practice as a
clinical social worker. He worked with, and learned
from, Alaskan Native peoples who were attempting to heal
the damage inflicted by the collective intergenerational
trauma of colonization. Currently he is engaged in
research and writing regarding the relationship between
past mass trauma in Western societies, and the
subsequent colonial violence that has characterized
Europe and her colonies. He was actively involved in
Central American solidarity efforts throughout the
1990’s, traveling with human rights delegations to
Nicaragua, El Salvador and Colombia. He currently lives
in France.
|