FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

The World According to Jesse Helms

Death is rarely well timed and often inconvenient.  In the case of North Carolina Senator Jesse Helms, the timing was immaculate.  He would surely not have picked a better day.  For liberals, no departure could have been convenient enough.  At 86, on July 4, Helms exited the scene of American politics.

His childhood background might have been written by John Steinbeck.  But instead of going the way of the Joads, the boy from Monroe, North Carolina went into war and journalism.

Bigotry was something he openly entertained as an emerging public figure.  Campaigns against the impediments of segregation made him queasy.  The 1964 Civil Rights Act was labelled accordingly as ‘the single most dangerous piece of legislation ever introduced in the Congress.’  When he wasn’t venting his spleen on the march of the civil rights movement on local television, he was scribbling homophobic commentaries and dabbling in some good old hippie-bashing.

His views were given considerable currency through the National Congressional Club, organised ostensibly to pay off the debts of his Senate campaign in 1972.  The suitably vicious campaign propelled him further into a state of reactionary splendour.

Through a direct-mail system that revolutionised campaigning, Helms hectored constituents with attacks on liberal ‘agendas’ that would undermine a frail Republic – funding for the arts, schools, a dangerous indifference to the march of world communism.  With that came questionable donations, demonstrating Gore Vidal’s maxim that bright, enterprising Americans would rather buy a Congressional office than run for one.

But it is his indignant, obstructionist role on the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations that he will perhaps most be remembered for.  It’s not always the best recipe for a country to have arch-conservatives and reactionaries on the benches of foreign affairs committees.  An individual literate in world affairs might be deemed more suitable.

This, however, is not a prerequisite. It has not prevented the Committee, established in 1816, from having the stewardship of individuals such as Senator William Borah of Idaho, an ‘irreconcilable’ on the issue of U.S. participation in the League of Nations after the First World War.

For Borah opposition against Woodrow Wilson’s League of Nations was automatic.  He accused it of being the vile offspring of the Versailles Treaty, a product of ‘militarism and imperialism, oppression, and exploitation.’  An international facility to secure world peace and deter the recurrence of conflict such as the league was lethal to American independence, a poison for the ‘first principles of the Republic’.

A refusal to engage in international institutions is not a commitment that should be dismissed out of hand.  George Washington may have been a markedly inept military commander, successful only because his enemies were more spectacularly inept, but he did come up with the occasional morsel of wisdom.  On foreign policy, America would resist the temptation of entangling, thorny engagements that might stifle the new republic’s vitality.

Resisting a signature that might involve a country in onerous obligations is one thing.  But a cultivated sense of xenophobia, notably from the officials of a superpower, is quite something else. Helms adopted the most noxious element of that policy.  Entanglements with foreign institutions were venal undertakings; support for murderous authoritarian juntas in South America were, of course, quite something else.

The UN was always an organisation Helms loved to hate.  ‘As it currently operates,’ wrote Helms in a 1996 issue of Foreign Affairs, ‘the United Nations does not deserve continued American support.’  On the one hand, the UN did too much – in his wisdom, it was ‘expanding beyond its mandate’ hungering for a standing army and the collection of ‘direct’ taxes.  On the other hand, it did too little, paralysed in a web of bureaucracy and ‘spiralling’ costs.

But his warbling on matters of UN reform was merely an excuse for evasion (the payment of dues owed by the US, the observance of international obligations).  It is fine to blame the demise of an institution for internal problems.  But the UN is only as good as its members, a fact often forgotten by truculent unilateralists and worshippers of ‘hegemony’.  Besides, the UN was never designed to attain heaven but prevent one from, as one of its Secretary Generals once said, going to hell.

The world according to Helms was not a pleasant place, one of racial and political divisions, bloated corporate interests, and well-fed malice.  But his views had that stamp of ideological, if hypocritical certitude.  Liberals will be pondering what to do with this sudden, expansive vacancy in America’s political landscape.

BINOY KAMPMARK was a Commonwealth Scholar at Selwyn College, Cambridge.  He can be reached at bkampmark@gmail.com

 

 

 

 

 

 

More articles by:

Binoy Kampmark was a Commonwealth Scholar at Selwyn College, Cambridge. He lectures at RMIT University, Melbourne. Email: bkampmark@gmail.com

April 25, 2018
Stanley L. Cohen
Selective Outrage
Dan Kovalik
The Empire Turns Its Sights on Nicaragua – Again!
Joseph Essertier
The Abductees of Japan and Korea
Ramzy Baroud
The Ghost of Herut: Einstein on Israel, 70 Years Ago
W. T. Whitney
Imprisoned FARC Leader Faces Extradition: Still No Peace in Colombia
Manuel E. Yepe
Washington’s Attack on Syria Was a Mockery of the World
John White
My Silent Pain for Toronto and the World
Dean Baker
Bad Projections: the Federal Reserve, the IMF and Unemployment
David Schultz
Why Donald Trump Should Not be Allowed to Pardon Michael Cohen, His Friends, or Family Members
Mel Gurtov
Will Abe Shinzo “Make Japan Great Again”?
Binoy Kampmark
Enoch Powell: Blood Speeches and Anniversaries
Frank Scott
Weapons and Walls
April 24, 2018
Carl Boggs
Russia and the War Party
William A. Cohn
Carnage Unleashed: the Pentagon and the AUMF
Nathan Kalman-Lamb
The Racist Culture of Canadian Hockey
María Julia Bertomeu
On Angers, Disgusts and Nauseas
Nick Pemberton
How To Buy A Seat In Congress 101
Ron Jacobs
Resisting the Military-Now More Than Ever
Paul Bentley
A Velvet Revolution Turns Bloody? Ten Dead in Toronto
Sonali Kolhatkar
The Left, Syria and Fake News
Manuel E. Yepe
The Confirmation of Democracy in Cuba
Peter Montgomery
Christian Nationalism: Good for Politicians, Bad for America and the World
Ted Rall
Bad Drones
Jill Richardson
The Latest Attack on Food Stamps
Andrew Stewart
What Kind of Unionism is This?
Ellen Brown
Fox in the Hen House: Why Interest Rates Are Rising
April 23, 2018
Patrick Cockburn
In Middle East Wars It Pays to be Skeptical
Thomas Knapp
Just When You Thought “Russiagate” Couldn’t Get Any Sillier …
Gregory Barrett
The Moral Mask
Robert Hunziker
Chemical Madness!
David Swanson
Senator Tim Kaine’s Brief Run-In With the Law
Dave Lindorff
Starbucks Has a Racism Problem
Uri Avnery
The Great Day
Nyla Ali Khan
Girls Reduced to Being Repositories of Communal and Religious Identities in Kashmir
Ted Rall
Stop Letting Trump Distract You From Your Wants and Needs
Steve Klinger
The Cautionary Tale of Donald J. Trump
Kevin Zeese - Margaret Flowers
Conflict Over the Future of the Planet
Cesar Chelala
Gideon Levy: A Voice of Sanity from Israel
Weekend Edition
April 20, 2018
Friday - Sunday
Paul Street
Ruling Class Operatives Say the Darndest Things: On Devils Known and Not
Conn Hallinan
The Great Game Comes to Syria
Jeffrey St. Clair
Roaming Charges: Mother of War
Andrew Levine
“How Come?” Questions
Doug Noble
A Tale of Two Atrocities: Douma and Gaza
Kenneth Surin
The Blight of Ukania
Howard Lisnoff
How James Comey Became the Strange New Hero of the Liberals
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail