FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

The Blurring of Act and Audience

 

“It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends upon his not understanding it.”
— Upton Sinclair

“It is possible to wake a man even from soundest sleep. But no amount of effort can wake one who is pretending to sleep.”
— Old Tamil saying

Together, these quotes just about sum up the second presidential debate and, in a larger sense, the tragedy of our politics.

When a voter asked him to identify three mistakes he had made, Bush hemmed and hawed before producing a wholly unsatisfactory reply. He had had ample time to prepare for this question: several months ago at his press conference in the White House, a reporter asked him the same question (to be fair, the reporter asked for just one mistake, not three — but the president was unable to come up with any). Forget Iraq. He could easily have used the opportunity to say, “Well, I take responsibility for everything that goes on in my watch. Obviously, 9-11 was a great failure, and the fact that none of us were aware of the magnitude of the threat does not make it any less of a burden for me…I have spent the rest of my term correcting that error.”  That would not only have put Kerry’s Iraq tap dance squarely centerstage, it would have also helped clear an atmosphere reeking of inanity.

Watching Bush’s challenger, one is reminded of what happens to many of us when balancing our checkbook. Unable to make the figures match, we eventually resign ourselves to the existing discrepancy, resolving to balance the numbers from here on out. No one believes his claptrap about ‘giving the president the authority’ and then being blindsided by him using it. But such is the power of Bush’s vapid struttings that they are willing put away Kerry’s fantastic explanation (in a lockbox?) and rejoice that the old veteran has at last begun to speak out on Iraq.

There is, of course, the frightening prospect that the president does think he is right. To echo what Al Sharpton said in one of the primary debates, “Let us hope he was lying, because the alternative is even scarier.”

Why, for example, six months after he made the “I voted for the bill before I voted against it” statement, is Kerry still unable to explain something so completely understandable and logical? A friend of mine gave a crisp explanation in 30 seconds. “I wanted to support the 87 billion dollar appropriation, but I wanted it to come out of the tax breaks we were giving to the rich, not from outside the budget. In the first resolution, such a proposal was included — I supported it. In the second case, they took out this provision, and so I voted against it”.

But no! Kerry’s explanation: “I was wrong in the way I spoke about the war. The president was wrong in the way he took us to war. Which is worse?” God alone knows what focus group hatched this gem. It occurred to me that a simple test could be applied by asking Kerry, “Would you vote for a similar resolution today authorizing the use of force against Iran? North Korea?” I suspect Bush too would be stymied by the same question.

Great leadership calls for talking truth to the people. When that happens, elections can become uplifting and didactic. Paul Craig Roberts wrote an eloquent piece in Counterpunch [1] why Kerry needs to speak the truth in the third debate (sadly, he expressed no such expectation of Bush). In an article some months ago, I recounted Gandhi’s sense of responsibility [2] demonstrated in taking full blame for something for which he bore no direct part.

In our time, the lies, misstatements, obfuscations, half-truths, evasions, diversions and the rest are now piled so high as to rival the fallen twin towers themselves. The truth lies buried beneath this wreckage. In the end, all we know is that there are two figures standing — a president who perhaps believes the nonsense he speaks, and speaks it fluently at any rate; and an opponent who is well-informed but has trouble simply stating the simple truth.

It is easy enough to blame Bush and blast Kerry, but is it not just as important to ask why the candidates feel they have to craft their image with such elaborate care, why there cannot be about them even the whiff of a mistake? And if the candidates really think so, does not the neurosis at the top reflect a more widespread malady? It would seem that the people would rather their leaders entertained them, rather than educated them on the realities. Far better to treat the election as gladiator sport and sneer at ‘politics’. Do we want to be told that a bomb, paid for with our tax dollars, crippled an Iraqi child who had nothing to do with Saddam Husain, Al Sadr, Al Qaeda, Zarqawi, or the Baathists? (In a different life, would John Edwards have not, even at this moment, been suing the perpetrators?) Or that the country has a debt that threatens its very sovereignty?

Why bother? Far more convenient to cheer brave talk of smarter wars, coalitions of the willing or billing (though perhaps not killing or drilling), flip-flops, and the like. That way, we are safely past the potential trauma of a national soul searching. Perhaps it was ever so. As Kipling wrote a long time ago, “If you can talk with crowds, and keep your virtue…”

All the same, voting rights in a superpower carry a terrible responsibility, and this is no ordinary election. In our own way, we are handing the next administration — and Congress — the power to determine whether innocent people in remote region of the world live or die [3]. To say we gave them this power to use wisely is to emulate John Kerry’s credulity in the matter of the Iraq War resolution.

Paul Craig Roberts is right. Kerry needs to find his voice. But far more importantly, America needs to find hers.

NIRANJAN RAMAKRISHNAN is a writer living on the West Coast. His writings can be found on http://www.indogram.com/gramsabha/articles. His blog is at http://njn-blogogram.blogspot.com. He can be reached at njn_2003@yahoo.com.

References

[1] “To Escape from Blunder, First Admit Reality“, Paul Craig Roberts, Counterpunch, Oct 11, 2004

[2] “Gandhi’s vision of Responsibility: The Great Trial of 1922“, NIRANJAN RAMAKRISHNAN, CounterPunch March 20, 2004

[3] “Civilians and Combatants“, NIRANJAN RAMAKRISHNAN, Swarajya, November 11, 2001

 

More articles by:

/>Niranjan Ramakrishnan is a writer living on the West Coast.  His book, “Reading Gandhi In the Twenty-First Century” was published last year by Palgrave.  He may be reached at njn_2003@yahoo.com.

Weekend Edition
June 15, 2018
Friday - Sunday
Dan Kovalik
The US & Nicaragua: a Case Study in Historical Amnesia & Blindness
Jeremy Kuzmarov
Yellow Journalism and the New Cold War
Charles Pierson
The Day the US Became an Empire
Jonathan Cook
How the Corporate Media Enslave Us to a World of Illusions
Ajamu Baraka
North Korea Issue is Not De-nuclearization But De-Colonization
Andrew Levine
Midterms Coming: Antinomy Ahead
Louisa Willcox
New Information on 2017 Yellowstone Grizzly Bear Deaths Should Nix Trophy Hunting in Core Habitat
Jeffrey St. Clair
Roaming Charges: Singapore Fling
Ron Jacobs
What’s So Bad About Peace, Man?
Robert Hunziker
State of the Climate – It’s Alarming!
L. Michael Hager
Acts and Omissions: The NYT’s Flawed Coverage of the Gaza Protest
Dave Lindorff
However Tenuous and Whatever His Motives, Trump’s Summit Agreement with Kim is Praiseworthy
Robert Fantina
Palestine, the United Nations and the Right of Return
Brian Cloughley
Sabre-Rattling With Russia
Chris Wright
To Be or Not to Be? That’s the Question
David Rosen
Why Do Establishment Feminists Hate Sex Workers?
Victor Grossman
A Key Congress in Leipzig
John Eskow
“It’s All Kinderspiel!” Trump, MSNBC, and the 24/7 Horseshit Roundelay
Paul Buhle
The Russians are Coming!
Joyce Nelson
The NED’s Useful Idiots
Lindsay Koshgarian
Trump’s Giving Diplomacy a Chance. His Critics Should, Too
Louis Proyect
American Nativism: From the Chinese Exclusion Act to Trump
Stan Malinowitz
On the Elections in Colombia
Camilo Mejia
Open Letter to Amnesty International on Nicaragua From a Former Amnesty International Prisoner of Conscience
David Krieger
An Assessment of the Trump-Kim Singapore Summit
Jonah Raskin
Cannabis in California: a Report From Sacramento
Josh Hoxie
Just How Rich Are the Ultra Rich?
CJ Hopkins
Awaiting the Putin-Nazi Apocalypse
Mona Younis
We’re the Wealthiest Country on Earth, But Over 40 Percent of Us Live in or Near Poverty
Dean Baker
Not Everything Trump Says on Trade is Wrong
James Munson
Trading Places: the Other 1% and the .001% Who Won’t Save Them
Rivera Sun
Stop Crony Capitalism: Protect the Net!
Franklin Lamb
Hezbollah Claims a 20-Seat Parliamentary Majority
William Loren Katz
Oliver Law, the Lincoln Brigade’s Black Commander
Ralph Nader
The Constitution and the Lawmen are Coming for Trump—He Laughs!
Tom Clifford
Mexico ’70 Sets the Goal for World Cup 
David Swanson
What Else Canadians Should Be Sorry For — Besides Burning the White House
Andy Piascik
Jane LaTour: 50+ Years in the Labor Movement (And Still Going)
Jill Richardson
Pruitt’s Abuse of Our Environment is Far More Dangerous Than His Abuse of Taxpayer Money
Ebony Slaughter-Johnson
Pardons Aren’t Policy
Daniel Warner
To Russia With Love? In Praise of Trump the Includer
Raouf Halaby
Talking Heads A’Talking Nonsense
Julian Vigo
On the Smearing of Jordan Peterson: On Dialogue and Listening
Larry Everest
A Week of Rachel Maddow…or How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love Ronald Reagan
David Yearsley
Hereditary: Where Things are Not What They Sound Like
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail