Joho the Blog
An Entry from the Archives

I think the problem is that people find it difficult separating the integrity of the state from their instinctive inclinations as an individual. And even those who don't have much difficulty, consider they'll get more votes appealing to the baser instincts of their constituency than demonstrating statesmanlike fidelity.

Suspicion is separated from guilt by a mere formality. And guilt is separated from truth by a mere quibble.

Perhaps the McCarthy era gives a clue that the US is emotionally unstable, prone to bouts of paranoia and constitutional alienation.

It'll all blow over after a couple of decades. Just batten down the hatches and feel sorry for the guys taking an impromptu trip to sunny Cuba. No, scrub that. Sympathisers are next. Don't feel sorry for them. They're getting what they deserve - the scum. Lock 'em up and throw away the key.

I know it's nothing new, but it's great to hear more and more voices speaking out about this and what is at stake. Nice work.

When you look closely, the torture bill actually has language that retroactively legalizes all of the "war crimes" that have occurred to date. When the democrats take even one house of congress, they can investigate the administration. The administration is making sure that the investigations will not lead to prosecutions of Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice, etc. As a note, I believe that this is the argument that persuaded McCain. If there is a criminal investigation of the entire chain of command, then McCain's 2008 bid is much less likely to be successful.

"there goes what's left of America's claim to moral uprightness."

No, America's claim to moral uprightness is now that it engages in kinder and gentler torture (i.e. suffocation and exposure, rather than maiming and burning). And that all the torturees are really bad guys.

"How does he justify to himself giving an inch ..."

Oh, I think it's pretty clear - saying you've got to pick and choose your battles, if you don't make some compromises, you won't be in power, and the people who follow will be worse, politics is the art of the possible, etc. Very standard and widely applicable :-(.

Seth, I can see him thinking that for any issue except this one. Five and a half years in a cage, and permanent damage he must notice every day. How does he tell himself that that's ok?

You're probably right. I just can't understand it.

To re-iterate, my guess, purely a guess, at what's going through his mind: "If I make a stand here, I'll lose anyway, and torture will still happen. If I go along, I might be President in just two years, and then I'll have the power to reverse the policy and stop the torture. So the cause of less torture is clearly served by not huring my Presidential prospects.".

The problems here can be left as an exercise for the reader. But the rationale seems very seductive for an ambitious politician.

Remember the fundamental problem: People who stand up for principle when it conflicts with political expediency don't remain in positions of political power (they are defeated by rivals willing to put political expediency over principle).

I don't like it, but I've got no idea how to make it any better.

Seth'll like this: ;-)

Create a public web site that let's everyone collaboratively rank all politicians on an integrity index.

Every single visible choice any politician makes can be judged for consistency to the politician's current manifesto, political agenda, stated principles, etc.

People may then at least have a clue as to how likely their chosen representative will stick to principle or be swayed by expediency.

David, I think what's going on is, that human rights in the US lose their meaning. It's a nightmare, that a Government can get such a bill through parliamant and there is no turmoil through the American people. Suspicion and organized angst go so far, that even torture isn't a tabu anymore. Organized Angst has helped to reelect that Government. But the system works so good, that the control mechanisms of the state and what is still called Democracy, may it be press, may it be the people themselves are collapsing, at least it seems that way from over the Atlantic. What a nightmare.

What a nightmare, that a state, that calls itself democratic can legalize torture like in a banana republic. But there is something much worse on that: it is much worse that so many people follow someone that decreases more and more of the democracy and of the legal state and that all in the name of democracy. But to make it worse. In a banana republic people know, that it has nothing to do with right and justice, when people are tortured, but people don't stand up because they are afraid of the consequences. But in the US now, there will be many people, who feel right about torture, that's the subtile but meaningful difference. This lack of awareness is much behind a banana republic, because most of the people think this is legal and right. What a nightmare.
Are the comments on your Article a mirror of that lack of awareness?

Do you use 'mirror' in the sense of inversion or true reflection?

If you observe a quiescent bull in a china shop of ethical delicacies and a vandal throws a stone through the window, do you merely express dismay at the tragedy of its instinctive mobilisation, or do you also wonder if the bull had been pining for potency? Either way, whether it was the initiative of the vandal or not, the bull is wrecking the china shop as it heads for the door. Someone has got what they wanted.

Meanwhile we hope that some of the priceless and centuries old antiques trampled underfoot are not as irreparable as they seem.

Anyone who thinks that these despicable acts are going to be confined to those accused of being the nation's enemies, is sadly unaware of the relation of ends to means. Unless there is a rapid reversal, it will not be long until the methods they legalize will be employed in police stations across America, "extra-officially" at first, before they become accepted, then expected.

It's impossible to act like a banana republic without becoming one. But perhaps I will live to see Bush and bin Laden in the dock at the Hague.