 How Can You Laugh at a Time Like This? is a Dream Machine SiteThe Dream Machine --- The Imagination of the World Wide Web |
| How Can You Laugh at a Time Like This? is a Dream Machine Site The Dream Machine --- The Imagination of the World Wide Web |
| Home | Current Column | Previous Columns | Other Sites | Libertarian | Feedback |
From my knowledge and experience, I was able to point out quite a few differences. First of all, the use of the word "War" (with a capital "W") to describe WW II, while the lower case "war" in the Vietnamese case, goes a long way in explaining what had changed. In 1941, the nation of Japan launched actual attacks against the U.S. territory, not only in Hawaii, but all along the West Coast. Germany, saving F.D.R. a great deal of political trouble, openly declared war upon the U.S.A. shortly after Japan's assaults. This led to a very quick declaration of war by the U.S. congress, satisfying the constitutional requirements for our engaging in open warfare and creating a great deal of political cover for those who felt it absolutely necessary for the U.S. to enter the war on the side of the allies. It also effectively muzzled all the critics.
The critics did not just consist of isolationists, although this was perhaps the prevailing reason for dissent about the war. That is, those that felt that the U.S. should stay completely out of WW II since we were isolated from European and Asian conflicts comprised the majority of dissenters. Of course, the Japanese attack on Pearl harbor ended that illusion. There were also those who felt, as did Joseph Kennedy (John F. Kennedy's father) at one time before the war, that we should have helped the other side...The Axis. They too had their protests silenced by Japan's and Germany's subsequent actions. Finally, there were the out-and-out pacifists who felt that war is NEVER right.
The fact that congress had declared war and invoked a state of emergency also gave the government greatly expanded power to suppress dissent, although, after Pearl harbor, this was scarcely necessary. My recollections of that time were that it wasn't until after the war ended that people again felt safe to vent their feelings about the wisdom of our entering the conflict...on either side. Before that time...although I was very young and thus not subject to much adult conversation...I can recall hearing no complaints whatsoever about the U.S. action. After was a different story. Most people correctly surmised that active dissent during the war would have been viewed, both by the government and most of their neighbors, as outright treason.
The Korean "police action" was the beginning of a completely new era of U.S. warmaking. Congress never declared war on North Korea...which was regarded rather like a flea crawling up the elephant's ass with intentions of rape. Instead, the conflict was justified as an effort to stop the expansion of communism. There were a great many people who did not approve of this, since the Soviet Union and China had in fact been our allies in WW II. The Democrats on the "left," and Joe McCarthy's forces on the "right" resorted to smear tactics and semi-legal suppression rather than the force of law and police power to suppress dissidence. This was the beginning of the so-called Cold War, which was to continue until the collapse of the Soviet Union. During this period, verbal intimidation pretty much replaced police power as a way of letting the military have its way.
Nevertheless, the anti-communist lever grew ever less powerful as time went on. The fact that it was only applied to rather small and underdeveloped adversaries caused a great many people to have second thoughts about this methodology of opposing the rise of communism. Also, the ability of television to quickly bring events into our living rooms gave us even more pause about the wisdom of this course. Children aflame with napalm is a stark reminder indeed to the actual reality of warfare. Still, the government, under the stewardship of Richard Nixon, used every trick it could think of to put down protests to the war in Vietnam. Remember, it wasn't until nearly 85% of the American people disapproved of the war that it was even de-escalated, much less brought to a halt.
Even during the recent Gulf War (talk about fleas with intentions of rape!), when public disapproval was evident before, during and after, the amount in the "during" phase was muted and subdued. Nobody is ever completely comfortable with trash-talking the military when our "boys" (and now "girls") are in harm's way. But, there is no doubt that opposition to military adventurism is almost completely open and permitted by official forces in our society.
Indeed, I had to say to my son that...compared to what might have occurred in most other countries of the world in the face of active dissent to warmaking...the U.S. had never in my recollection been very repressive. I also had to say that despite the frequent use of the FBI, CIA or other government agencies in covert operations against dissenters, the U.S. never felt the need to create an open and explicit police force to stifle antiwar activity.
Then it hit me...like a thunderbolt! We have EXACTLY such a force RIGHT NOW! It exists and is growing stronger, more repressive and more dangerous each year. It is called the Drug Enforcement Agency and it is explicitly formed and authorized to fight opposition to a war...the War on Drugs. It's tactics are unconstitutional, secretive, ruthless and brutal. Despite the fact that it has NEVER been the slightest bit effective in stemming drug use or abuse, it HAS BEEN ALMOST COMPLETELY EFFECTIVE IN SUPPRESSING DISSENT!
Despite the fact that almost every living American has at one time in his or her life used a mind altering drug...either purchased on the black market or prescribed by the only legal "army" of drug pushers, medical doctors...despite this, almost every poll on the matter "suggests" that an overwhelming majority of Americans are in favor of continuing to increase the funding and power of this secret police force whose sole duty is to supposedly to reduce drug use!
You don't believe this? Take a look at my article of April 13, 1998 (Oh my God! They killed Kenny!) in which I mention the travails of one Peter McWilliams of California, an author, AIDS sufferer and medical marijuana user (or see his article in Liberty Magazine called The DEA Wishes Me a Nice Day). If THAT item doesn't horrify you enough, then how about THESE ditties, taken from the Freedom Network News of the International Society for Individual Liberty.
How can this be? Are Americans so stupid that we can not see how ineffective this Gestapo force has been at stopping drug use? I don't think so. But, daring to SAY SO or to OPENLY DEFY this perverted use of police power is quite another thing. How else to explain the astonishingly primitive and brutal measures being put forth by Pooblioob "leaders?" Alas, if it were only the Pooblioobs who were guilty of this mass political psychosis. The following poem by Calvin Trillin of The Nation (one of the few treasures still owned by that sold out Liberal rag) puts the Demidupe Profiles in Courage in perspective as well...
This is beginning to change, but ever so slowly. I must admit that I too, until very recently, was afraid to voice my true feelings about drug use (I actually think it does, or could do, more good than harm). And I am an aging ex-convict, all of whose children are adults, with little to lose! How much more difficult must it be for a mother or father of young children to admit that they too think the war on drugs sucks? That it is none of the government's fucking business what they do or do not ingest into their bodies or minds? They risk losing their jobs or even their lives for speaking out. Why take the risk?
So those billions and billions of dollars squandered on the drug wars really have "worked." They have allowed the perverted drug warriors to build giant empires, complete with armies of brutal thugs to enforce their will, whatever that might be. They have forced the dialog about mind altering drug use so far away from reality as to give it an Alice in Wonderland quality. The closest anyone dares come to advocating drug use is to try to "medicalize" it. Ugh! Give the legal drug pushers one more monopoly! Just what we need.
Newt Gingrich has recently declared that the Pooblioob congressional campaign this year will STRESS increased funding for "drug prevention strategies." One of the leading Pooblioob candidates for governor in California this year (Dan Lundgren) is basing his campaign on reversing the legal medical marijuana law enacted by the majority of California voters. These demented psychos, joined by the likes of Bill Bennett, tell us that they are doing this for the "sake of the children." The cartoon at the left, by SACK of the Minneapolis Star/Tribune, tells it all.
Have we gone COMPLETELY NUTS? Do we really want to keep encouraging these bastards to keep telling us what is or is not good for us? And REWARD them for doing so? I say it is time for all these perverts to get honest jobs. It is time to dismantle our secret police. It is time to JUST SAY NO to the war on drugs! What about you?
Talk to you later...
...the best independent ISP in the Twin Cities
The Dream Machine --- Network Services
A newspaper near you.