![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
Previous Entry | Main | Next Entry April 03, 2004 Sorrows Of Empire I’ve been struggling for several days trying to find a suitable introduction to Chalmers Johnson’s new book “The Sorrows Of Empire”. Every time I sit down to write about the book I find myself either distracted or disgusted. The book is that hard to read. There is nothing pleasant or easy about it. Take, for example, his first sentence: “As distinct from other peoples on this earth, most Americans don’t recognize—or do not want to recognize—that the United States dominates the world through its military power.” One could write a thousand words of exegesis on that sentence alone. Now imagine what the next 312 pages were like, for Johnson tells us everything we never wanted to know about our country. I almost threw the book across the room several times. "No, that's a crock," I found myself mumbling. Then I would go to the endnotes (yeah, I'm a nerd that way) and Johnson would be citing a DOD memo or some other unimpeachable source. Strangely, I found the book more of an emotional challenge than a factual one. Reading it I felt like a visit to a cruel psychotherapist who proceeds to point out every character flaw of my personality. I realized about halfway through the book that I had to pause and listen carefully to that deep, instinctive feeling we all have when we know the truth. A wise man once said: "The truth will set you free." He forgot to add, "it ain't easy." No one likes to look into a mirror like this, yet we must. By Johnson’s estimate there are over 700 military and intelligence bases across the globe employing over 254,000 military personnel in 38 different countries. Johnson describes American bases with golf courses, hospitals, theatres, fast-food restaurants and a host of other typically American conveniences. I myself have seen this. I lived for a year in South Korea and knew many soldiers stationed at Yongsan. Johnson writes that it is a “monument to American cultural insensitivity, [as] it is located on the site of Japan’s old military headquarters, created in 1894 and a symbol of Japan’s hated occupation of Korea.” He adds, “originally on the outskirts of old Seoul, it [now] occupies 630 prime acres in the center of the densely populated capital.” The contents of the base are what the Koreans find most offensive. Not only is Yongsan the headquarters of our forces in Korea it includes the Dragon Hill recreation center which houses a huge shopping arcade, modern hotel (subsidized by rank for members of the military), a fitness center, and so much more. The luxury and opulence available to the common American soldier is far beyond that attainable by the average Korean who daily walks past the complex on his way to work. This is just one of many examples. There are many, many more. Too many. Another key point he discusses is what, in the 19th and early 20th centuries, were called “extra-territoriality” arrangements. Colonists, soldiers and businessmen were subject to European law, not local law. Extra-territoriality was a motivator in many of the 3rd world revolutionary movements during the 50s and 60s. Today’s extra-territoriality arrangements are called SOFAs (status of forces agreements) and they tend to provoke more resentment than anything else. The problem is not solely limited to 3rd World countries, either. A few years ago Italians were enraged that our soldiers were not subject to Italian law when they flew their jet around and into a prime ski resort and clipped the cable of a ski lift plunging several skiers to their deaths. They were tried by a military court and found not guilty. The Italians were outraged. But it’s worse in other countries, as Johnson points out, rape being the most common crime. U.S. soldiers are rarely, if ever, tried in a local court, and are usually found not guilty in a military court, or shipped off to another duty post before local law enforcement officers can bring charges. Johnson writes about this eloquently and passionately, prolifically as well. Another major issue Johnson delves into is one that has made headlines recently: the role of mercenaries in our armed forces, and the ongoing privatization of just about everything our forces do except wage war. He write about some of the national security and public oversight issues with mercenaries thusly, “Since these companies are private contractors, they are not subject to military discipline and their operations remain the proprietary secrets of the companies, not subject to any form of public oversight.” He adds that our military’s privatization isn’t limited to mercenaries alone. “The World War II and Cold War days of KP (“kitchen police”), cleaning barracks and latrines, and guard duty are almost totally unknown to contemporary soldiers,” writes Johnson. Of course, someone is benefiting and Johnson tells us: “Kellog Brown and Root, it should come as no surprise, continue to do everything . . . except perform military duties.” Why is everything being privatized? Can it really be cheaper to pay a private company to provide mercenaries at $1,000 a day than paying a Marine $2,500 a month? Something is clearly wrong with this picture. These two issues would be troubling on their own, but Johnson senses more serious developments rising on the historical horizon. It’s one I have alluded to before. You can read about it here. In essence our republican character as a nation is fraying. And Johnson is trying to tell us that the stakes in the contest for power in Washington have grown grave and the future consequences even more so. He writes, "Roman imperial sorrows mounted up over hundreds of years. Ours are likely to arrive with the speed of FedEx. If present trends continue, four sorrows, it seems to me, are certain to be visited on the United States." His four sorrows are: a state of perpetual war, a loss of democracy "as the presidency eclipses Congress", truthfulness will be replaced "with propaganda and disinformation" and bankruptcy. Look around and ask yourself, honestly, what do you see? Look at the networks, look at the multiple scandals brewing in the executive branch and congress, scandals that would have taken Clinton down in a heartbeat. Look at the budget. And lastly look at the War on Terror. Does it have an end? Has the president ever told us what the conditions for victory are? There are other writers who scoff at Johnson’s warnings, a host of people engaging in a giant bout of American triumphalism. Wave the flag. Use patriotism as a cudgel. Curtail our civil liberties in the interest of our own safety. All of it is happening. And Johnson’s simple genius lies in the fact that he is holding up a mirror for us to look at. Whereas other writers like Lee Harris (and Francis Fukuyama before him) tell us who we want to be, Johnson tells us who we are. Posted by Sean-Paul @ 04/03/2004 06:45 PM | TrackBack |