When The Playing Field Is Skewed To The Right: Part Two

by tristero

The comments to my post on Goldberg’s cynical partisan query were mucho thought-provoking. Just a few clarifying thoughts:

1. Goldberg’s formulation – which is becoming a right wing blather point and makes it worthwhile to examine – conflates two entirely unrelated ideas. It’s a false dichotomy – either the US must torture or we are not serious about keeping ourselves safe. It’s also a bait and switch. Liberals will immediately seize upon the mention of Geneva as an invitation to affirm their committment to human rights. At which point the right easily trumps that because that’s not the topic theyv’e chosen – repeat, they’ve chosen – to discuss. The real subject under discussion is keeping the country safe: Human rights conventions do not require a country committing suicide if that’s what it takes to uphold them.

My point is that there is no reason to fall for this bait and switch. These are two separate issues, for one thing. Nothing helpful is learned by trying to discuss both together. I’m sure someone can tweeze a small association between any two topics, but there’s no serious insight to be gained unless there is a genuinely significant one. And once again, there simply is no positive association between government torture and the safety of the citizens of that government. On the contrary, torture seems to make many country’s citizens less safe, especially from abuses by their own government.

2. As an American citizen, I naturally, and strongly, believe this government has a solemn obligation to protect me, my family, my neighbors, and my fellow citizens. That is a self-evident responsibility.* It is vital that serious thought, not Bush-league bloviations, be given to the importance of protecting this country’s citizens abroad. This is a very important topic (and I don’t need people the caliber of Jonah Goldberg to tell me so). More “humint” inside the rightwing militia movement, inside North Korea, inside the Middle East – those are serious important discussions to elaborate on.

3. I am utterly opposed to the use of torture under any and all circumstances. I support the Geneva conventions and believe that all American politicians should proudly say so. The hypotheticals such as the ticking bomb scenario are just tv show plots, and cheap ones. The real world doesn’t act that like that. The mindset that assigns serious importance to such hypotheticals is all of a piece with the kind of mentality that thinks, “Hmmm, invading Iraq just might lead to flowers, cakewalks, and democracy.” Back here on planet Normal, we know better.

But Jonah’s question did not address Geneva and to respond to that deliberately placed distraction is to make a spectacular rhetorical error. It was a question about government’s responsiblity to protect American citizens. The mention of Geneva was a red herring. Of all the sub-topics subsumed under the topic of keeping Americans safe, re-examining human rights as a way to us safer is among the least direct and least helpful. A competent computer database at FBI and CIA and a thorough re-examination of American policy priorities are serious concerns. Permitting the use of torture is not; it will make no one safer and will almost certainly lead to more Daniel Pearls.

That Goldberg would conflate the two concerns is prima facie evidence of his intellectual incompetence. That he would pose a discussion about security in such a fashion demonstrates that he understands nothing about the seriousness of the issues involved, or has any insight in how to grapple with them.

4. It’s true, I am often not terribly good at speaking TeeVee – ie, short bites. Anyone care to make these points in a succinct fashion?

5. In re: Lakoff. I’m not a Lakoffian for many, many reasons. But that doesn’t mean I discount rhetoric. On the contrary, it is crucially important that Dems and liberals get their act together. They need to understand what people like Goldberg, et al, are actually saying – as well as why they are saying it and whom – if they are going to be effective in devising a strategy to fight them. I know, I know, they’re saying nothing. But the way they are saying nothing – that plus some creative ballot counting has helped lead this country into an early form of American fascism. It behooves us to listen very, very carefully and never unwittingly accept their framing of any issue. Never.

6. The Hero who dunnt speak much but speaks the truth, as opposed to the slick-talkin’ hair-splitters is an ancient Western myth, going back at least to Moses and Aaron. But it is a myth.

Yeah, yeah, yeah, I know: Lincoln and Paine. Don’t kid yourselves. They knew the rhetoric of the English language as thoroughly as my daughter knows all the diifferent Pokemon. ‘Tis a gift to be simple, it’s true. But most of us ain’t LIncoln. So if you don’t work hard at being simple, you’ll more likely end up a fool. Or, at the very least, talk like one.

——–
*The present government has done a spectacularly bad job of making us safe. My city suffered a horrible attack. Many of my friends had co-workers and neighbors who died a horrible death. In part because Bush in the nine months prior to 9/11 had shifted focus from al Qaeda to his obession with Saddam. And I needn’t mention Katrina or Bush’s dismissal of global warming. Or Iraq.