Becker then focused on the costs of violence. This “year of death and destruction” in a weakened Iraq is rooted in the tussle between the British and American empires for the control of oil. Becker noted the antipathy between these two allies following World War II over who would hold hegemony in the Middle East. Today, the American empire’s demand for hegemony results in callous contempt for people, including U.S. personnel, as expressed by General Tommy Franks’ comments that the deaths of “500, 5000, 50,000” troops were OK with him.

Becker referred to the “extreme agenda” of the Bush Administration. The National Security Strategy Paul Wolfowitz articulated in 2002 calls for one superpower (that would be US) controlling the planet through overwhelming military power. Becker views the current administration as pursuing the historical course of the push for empire. The costs are predictably crumbling education, infrastructure, health care, services to those in need, low cost housing, and nonmilitary jobs, and the funneling of people without those jobs into the military.

Becker highlighted the administration’s inability to manage the crisis in Iraq. Despite poor planning and ineptitude in that arena, the administration pursues aggressive “regime change” actions in Iran, Venezuela and Cuba.

While acknowledging the anti-labor, anti-women’s rights policies of the Bush Administration, Becker minimized the Administration’s assault on Constitutionally protected liberties, its unprecedented ultra secrecy, the extremely rapid degradation of the environment and the utter commitment to unilateral military domination as just part of the historical trajectory of the U.S. Given the corporate corruption of our political system, he downplayed the notion that electoral politics was a worthy avenue of change. The only solution he proposed was through a growing popular movement.

This closing part of his talk left me wondering why these issues so often are framed as either-or. I felt that further elaboration was called for. It seems to me important to examine the differences as well as the similarities between those in the political realm. If we can stop the rapid plunge into loss of our Constitutional liberties and a foreign policy based on subjugation by military dominance through the ballot box as well as the growth of a mass movement, doesn’t it make sense to do both?
**************

The Mightiest Nation

Once upon a time, there was a country that was very small and, on the whole, very good. Its citizens were proud and independent, self reliant and generally prosperous. They believed in freedom, justice and equality. But above all, they had faith. They had faith in their religion, their leaders, their country and themselves.

And, of course, they were ambitious. Being proud of their country, they wanted to make it bigger. First, they conquered the savage tribes that hemmed them in. Then they fought innumerable wars on land and sea with foreign powers to the east and west and south. They won almost all the battles they fought and triumphed in all of their wars.

It took many generations, but at last the good little country was the richest, mightiest nation in the whole wide world—admired, respected, envied and feared by one and all.

“We must remain the mightiest nation,” said its leaders, “so that we can insure universal peace and make everyone as prosperous and decent and civilized as we are.”

At first, the mightiest nation was as good as its word. It constructed highways and hygienic facilities all over the world. And for a while, it kept the peace. But being the mightiest nation meant its leader was the mightiest man in the world. And, naturally, he acted like it.

He surrounded himself with a palace guard of men chosen solely for their personal loyalty. He usurped the powers of the Senate, signing treaties, waging wars, and spending public funds as he saw fit.

When little countries far away rebelled, he sent troops without so much as a by your leave. And the mightiest nation became engaged in a series of long, costly, inconclusive campaigns in faraway lands. Many young men refused to fight for their country, and in some places, the mightiest nation employed foreign mercenaries to do battle for its causes.

And because it was the mightiest nation, it worshiped wealth and the things wealth bought. But the rich grew richer and the poor grew poorer through unfair tax laws. In the capitol, one in five were idle and on welfare.

When the poor grumbled, they were entertained by highly paid athletes and the firing of expensive rockets, which often fizzled. Even so, the poor sometimes rioted and looted and burned in their frustrated rage.

Many citizens lost faith in their old religion and turned to Oriental mysticism. And the young, wearing long hair and sandals, became Jesus freaks. Bare-breasted dancers and lewd shows, were increasingly common. And the currency was debased again and again to meet the mounting debts.

Worst of all, the citizens came to understand their leaders were corrupt—that the respected palace guard was selling favors to the rich and sending spies among the people, creating fear and distrust.

So it was that the people lost faith. They lost faith in their leaders, their currency, their rockets, their postal system, their armies, their religion, their country and eventually, themselves.

And, thus, in 476 A.D., Rome fell to the barbarians, and the Dark Ages settled over Western civilization.

Art Hoppe, late San Francisco Chronicle columnist, wrote this piece in the early 1970s around the time of Watergate. (Timeline. July/August, 2003)

At the time I checked it, the cost was $114,081,709,994.
That amount would hire an additional 2,172,984 public school teachers for one year
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Editor’s Note: This piece is excerpted from the new edition of “The Best Democracy Money Can Buy” (Plume), by Greg Palast

…So where is Secretary Baker today? On the lam, hiding in deserved shame?

Doing penance by nursing the victims of Gulf War Syndrome? No, Mr. Baker is a successful lawyer, founder of Baker Botts of Houston, Riyadh, Kazakhstan. Among his glittering client roster is Exxon-Mobil oil and the defense minister of Saudi Arabia. Baker’s firm is protecting the Saudi royal from a lawsuit by the families of the victims of September 11 over evidence suggesting that Saudi money ended up in the pockets of the terrorists.

And Baker has just opened a new office ... at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. This is a White House first: the first time a lobbyist for the oil industry will have a desk right next to the President’s. Baker’s job: to “restructure” Iraq’s debt. How lucky for his clients in Saudi Arabia. The Kingdom claims $30.7 billion due from Iraq.

Go to Page 4