Menu
Paynal © 2008
How Perverted Have We Become? By Butler Shaff er
(2011-05-10 at 21:18:20 )
How Perverted Have We Become? By Butler Shaff er
Michael: My father is no diff erent from any powerful man, any man with
power, like a president or senator.
Kay Adams: Do you know how naive you sound, Michael? Presidents and
senators do not have men killed.
Michael: Oh, who is being naive, Kay? - The Godfather (1972)
When I was in high school, one of my teachers showed the f ilm The Ox-Bow
Incident. For those unfamiliar with the movie, it is a western that takes
place in 19th century Nevada. Three strangers are captured by townsfolk -
who had formed a posse - and accused of having murdered a local cattleman
and stolen his cattle. The three are in possession of the cattle, but
claim they had bought them from the owner. As the sale took place out on
the range, no bill of sale accompanied the transaction. In due course,
most members of the posse conclude these men were guilty of the crime,
and decide to hang them, which they summarily do. Shortly thereafter, the
posse meets up with the sheriff who informs them that the cattleman had
been wounded, but not murdered, and that the wrongdoers who had shot him
had been caught.
I recall no lengthy discussion of this f ilm once it ended. Its message
was as evident to each of us as it was to theater audiences; its meaning
stood on its own. Unlike so much of the public response to the killing of
Osama bin Laden, there was no post-lynching praise of the posse for
having performed a community service; no bestowal of "hero" status upon
the perpetrators.
Like most Americans - and, perhaps, people in general - I have no defense
to make of bin Laden. Outside of his own circle of operatives, the only
person I can recall who had good words to say about this man was Ronald
Reagan. It was during his presidency that the U.S. government helped to
create and fund Al Qaeda - with bin Laden in a leadership role - to help
drive the Soviet Union out of Afghanistan. For those of you who derive
your sense of history from motion pictures, you might want to watch
Charlie Wilsons War.
Having been established to serve American Cold War interests, when Al
Qaedas success in evicting the Soviets was no longer useful to such
purposes, it pursued other foreign invaders (i.e., its creators)! Once
again Boobus Americanus is confronted with Newtons "third law of motion"
which, in matters political, is known to thoughtful minds as "blowback."
My criticism of bin Ladens killing has less to do with what was done to
him, than with the morally depraved character of so many Americans who,
once again, react to the crimes of its leaders by waving f lags and
chanting "USA, USA!" My children and grandchildren will have to live in -
and, hopefully, not have to escape from - this country whose fate is so
utterly a matter of indiff erence to most of their neighbors. Thanks to
the inf luence that politics, government schools, and the mainstream media
have had in anesthetizing minds to the pain of clear, self-directed
thinking, the kinds of principles that used to def ine the essence of
American Society, have become labeled "extremist ideology" or "crackpot"
thinking. After all, what do such notions as "constitutional restraints,"
the "rule of law," "due process," "individual liberty," "privacy," "fair
trials for the accused," the rejection of "torture," and other related
ideas, have to do with such "real world" matters as details of the royal
wedding, or the question "who will be the next American Idol?"
This is what America has become: a nation of people who accept what the
Nuremberg trials declared to be the most serious of war crimes, namely,
the starting of wars; people who regard "liberty" as the condition that
derives from obedience to authority; for whom "justice" means nothing
more than the redistribution of violence; and who are willing to accept
heroes on the cheap. The off icial story of how bin Laden was killed has
changed so many times that it remains uncertain what actually occurred.
What can be distilled, at this point, is that Navy SEALs were brought to
bin Ladens residence by helicopter; he was unarmed and put up no
resistance; and, having been captured, was then shot and killed, and his
body dumped into the sea.
It borders on the psychotic for Americans to cheer, as "heroes," men who,
not defending themselves from gunf ire, and having captured a now helpless
old man, would then commit such a cold-blooded atrocity. Why was he not
taken into custody, and allowed to stand trial for his alleged deeds?
Was it preordained that, no matter the circumstances, bin Laden was not
to survive his capture; that, as Noam Chomsky and others have observed,
the United States did not have concrete evidence of bin Ladens
responsibility for the crimes of 9/11? Was there, perhaps, the greater
fear that if bin Laden - a creature of American foreign policy - were to
be subjected to a public trial, the underside of such policies might be
revealed; that such evidence - coupled with the revelations coming from
Julian Assange and his Wikileaks organization - might prove embarrassing?
If American troops are to play the role of "hit men" for the political
establishment - gunning down those who might inconvenience the purposes
of Statist Godfathers - what are we to think of our neighbors who see
such behavior as a matter of national greatness?
It is now the common wisdom among the political talking-heads - whose
opinions are all too common - that Obamas criminal act greatly boosts his
reelection chances. Has the market for moral principles so bottomed out
in this country? Is it in the dregs of human character that future
historians will f ind the essence of 21st century America?
Nearly six years ago, British policemen tackled a young Brazilian man in
a subway station on his way to work. After getting him down, he was shot
five times in the head and died, for which FOX News’ witless commentator,
John Gibson, praised the police, adding "f ive in the noggin is f ine."
It was later revealed that the victim of this murder was innocent of any
wrongdoing. In a rational world, it would be the purpose of a public
trial to determine whether a suspect was guilty of a criminal offense. In
whatever form a lynch-mob appears, the society that condones - or worse
yet glorif ies - such practices destroys itself.
Hero-worship is far too overdone in this country, and is often confused
with fame. Nonetheless, those who seek heroic behavior can f ind it if
one is discriminating in where to look for it. One can sometimes f ind it
within the military, although such persons are often treated as pariahs.
One example can be found in the U.S. Army helicopter pilot, Hugh
Thompson, who came upon the systematic murdering of Vietnamese civilians
at My Lai, led by Lt. Calley. When Thompson f igured out what was
occurring, he turned his helicopter toward the American soldiers and
ordered his crew members to open f ire on them should they persist in
their slaughter. For his heroic act of decency, Thompson spent much of
his remaining years being treated more as a villain. Boobus has been too
conditioned in his support of the state to be willing to make independent
judgments, particularly about anything that lays too great burden upon
his mind.
A more recent example of military heroism is seen in Private Bradley
Manning, who has been accused of providing WikiLeaks Julian Assange with
the restricted material that Wikileaks later released. For a nation that
professes to operate on democratic principles, Manning and Assange are
providing the public with an essential service: a documented awareness
of what its government has been doing. If anyone wants to build a
monument to any of these genuine heroes, please let me know where I can
send my donation!
May 9, 2011
Butler Shaff er teaches at the Southwestern University School of Law. He
is the author of the newly-released In Restraint of Trade: The Business
Campaign Against Competition, 1918-1938 and of Calculated Chaos:
Institutional Threats to Peace and Human Survival. His latest book is
Boundaries of Order.
Copyright © 2011 by LewRockwell.com. Permission to reprint in whole or
in part is gladly granted, provided full credit is given.