Glenn Greenwald and the "climate of fear"

By Michael J.W. Stickings

Much of the political world has been talking about the Arizona shooting the past few days, but there remains a larger and more troubling development, namely, the U.S. government's manufacturing of a "climate of fear" that allows it to advance its interests both at home and abroad.

I highly recommend this essential post from Glenn Greenwald. Key passage:

So much of what the U.S. Government has done over the last decade has been devoted to creating and strengthening this climate of fear. Attacking Iraq under the terrorizing banner of "shock and awe"; disappearing people to secret prisons; abducting them and shipping them to what Newsweek's Jonathan Alter (when advocating this) euphemistically called "our less squeamish allies"; throwing them in cages for years without charges, dressed in orange jumpsuits and shackles; creating a worldwide torture regime; spying on Americans without warrants and asserting the power to arrest them on U.S. soil without charges: all of this had one overarching objective. It was designed to create a climate of repression and intimidation by signaling to the world -- and its own citizens -- that the U.S. was unconstrained by law, by conventions, by morality, or by anything else:  the government would do whatever it wanted to anyone it wanted, and those thinking about opposing the U.S. in any way, through means legitimate or illegitimate, should (and would) thus think twice, at least.

That a large percentage of those brutalized by this system turned out to be innocent -- knowingly innocent --  is a feature, not a bug:  that one can end up being subjected to these lawless horrors despite doing nothing wrong only intensifies the fear and makes it more effective. The power being asserted is not merely unlimited and tyrannical, but arbitrary. And now, the Obama administration's citizen-aimed, due-process-free assassination program, its orgies of drone attacks, its defense of radically broad interpretations of "material support" criminal statutes, and its disturbing targeting of American anti-war activists with subpoenas and armed police raids are all part of the same tactic. Those contemplating meaningful opposition to American action are meant to be frightened. The anguished, helpless cries of 18-year-old American Gulet Mohamed, after a week of being disappeared and brutalized by America's close ally, serves an important purpose.

Make sure to read the whole thing. You'll notice that Greenwald is not engaging in demagoguery and is not using violent rhetoric to whip his readers up into a mouth-frothing frenzy. He is simply doing what the media are not, which is reporting on what is actually going on in the world, including what the government is doing, and encouraging people to educate themselves and to demand that their democratically-elected government not engage in undemocratic and illiberal practices that violate America's purported principles and ideals:

There has been much talk over the last several days, in the wake of the Arizona shooting, about attempts by some citizens to instill physical fear in elected officials. That's a worthwhile and necessary topic, but the fear that government officials are attempting to instill in law-abiding, dissenting citizens is far more substantial and sustained, and deserves much more attention than it has received.

Indeed.

Michael Barone writes, hilarity ensues

By Michael J.W. Stickings

I think it's quite hilarious that Michael Barone, never a stranger to hyperbole or outright falsehood, claims that liberals are anti-dissent:

It is an interesting phenomenon that the response of the left half of our political spectrum to criticism and argument is often to try to shut it down.

It's also hilarious that he writes this without a trace of irony.

It is true that the Democratic Party seeks loyalty. What political party doesn't? Even here, though, it is nothing like the Republican Party, which demands lockstep marching, opposes difference, and gives the boot to those who do not play along. This is the party, after all -- the GOP, that is -- that effectively turned itself into a great huge rubber stamp during the Bush years.

But take partisan politics out of it. The problem with liberals -- if it is indeed a problem, which is not clear -- is not opposition to dissent altogether but too much dissent, often so much that the liberal-progressive coalition, including in the Democratic Party (which of course also includes many not on the left at all), breaks apart over key issues, unable to get anything substantive done. The left, broadly speaking, is full of difference, that is, and never shy about publicizing it, even to the point of internal conflict. Where the right is all about power, and just wants to do things to maximize its power, the left is all about justice. The right wants to do, the left wants to do right, and to get it right. This is why there is often so much bickering on the left.

It is simply ridiculous to assert, as Barone does, that liberals seek to silence dissent. Simply, there is enormous respect for dissent, and difference, among liberals. Indeed, liberals are nothing if not tolerant. We even tolerate dissent from the right, often to our political detriment (see health-care reform, for example). The same cannot, I would argue, be said about the right, which equates dissent with treason, and which demands not just unity but conformity (see Iraq War, war on terror, national security, taxes, "values" issues like abortion, etc.)

Liberals are not "violent," and do not simply want to "shut [dissent] down." Quite the reverse.

If it's the stifling of criticism Barone wants, he need look no further than his own kind.