Crybaby Says Bye to Me

Steve B has convinced me that Michael Cohen of Democracy Arsenal is a pretty fascinating specimen. So let's drop him into the bell jar, if you please. 

Glenn Greenwald has launched quite the missive about the Foreign Policy Community. My colleague, Shadi Hamid as well as Daniel Drezner have provided insightful critiques, but here are my two cents. Greenwald asserts:

The Foreign Policy Community -- a term which excludes those in primarily academic positions -- is not some apolitical pool of dispassionate experts examining objective evidence and engaging in academic debates. Rather, it is a highly ideological and politicized establishment, and its dominant bipartisan ideology is defined by extreme hawkishness, the casual use of military force as a foreign policy tool, the belief that war is justified not only in self-defense but for any "good result," and most of all, the view that the U.S. is inherently good and therefore ought to rule the world through superior military force.

Even though I am supposedly a member of the Very Serious People (VSP) Foreign Policy Community (FPC) I feel obliged to say that I don't agree with any of these sentiments (well except for the part about America being "inherently good.")

Stop the tape. Hold up. Wait. Did he really mean that "inherently good" part...?

Sadly, yes.

I believe that America is inherently good. That goodness, if you will, comes from the basic values that I believe underpin this nation, from not only our founding documents and in particular the Bill of Rights, but from the ongoing efforts to ensure the spread of freedom and opportunity to all our citizens. If you think this sounds hackneyed that is your right - you have as much right to hate America as I do to love it, but I apologize to no one for my patriotism and basic faith in America and its people.

Good grief. You almost feel bad for the boy, watching him trot out the "hate America" line. How 2002. And what's up with the egregious flag-waving? It comes across like the rhetorical strategy of a candidate for Fifth Ward Assistant Alderman holding forth on the subject of global terrorism because he's desperately dodging questions about a minor garbageman scandal.

It's all very silly. But it does get us to the thing that really bugs my tits about the Foreign Policy Community or Clerisy or whatever. And that is what appears to be an overwhelming impulse to ascribe agency to abstract categorical concepts as opposed to specific actors. What I mean is, well, Goodness Inheres in America, in its Founding Documents, in Its Spirit... well, maybe it does, maybe it doesn't, and how could you tell either way anyway, but what the hell does that have to do with why American politicians do certain things at certain times?

It's the apparently obsessive drive towards abstract categorization that I object to, and I think is the actual cause of the Foreign Policy Community's inability to cope with the Bush administration. More on that later.

But for now:

If America is an empire, well then we're pretty damn benign empire. Compare us to the British Empire, the Roman Empire, the Soviet Union, hell even the Belgians put us to shame . . . frankly there is no comparison between the American Empire and those empires of the past. We're a heck of a lot better than those guys.

Well, hooray for us and may Santa blow coke off our asses.

Of course, on the other hand, accepting this "benign empire" stuff, it's worth observing that empires only get to be empires by being extremely nasty. A benign empire is, essentially, undemocratic democracy combined with  overwhelming military force that could never actually be used to overwhelm anyone and keep them overwhelmed.

We're living in an oxymoron. Kinda sucks...

Comments

[GWPDA]

A benign empire is, essentially, undemocratic democracy combined with overwhelming military force that could never actually be used to overwhelm anyone and keep them overwhelmed.

Well, not really. But you know that.

Otherwise, not bad for an English major.

[cynic]

even taking the dude at his word, if the inherent goodness of america comes from the Bill of Rights and stuff, what does that say about the current level of inherent good when the bill of rights is being raped willy nilly?

[nashtbrutusandshort]

Hmm. So this guy's thinking seems to rely on the following assumption:

Either you believe that America is inherently good or you hate America.

A truly rank, stupid false dichotomy. Granted, he doesn't come right out and say this, but the speed with which he moves from "I believe America is inherently good" to "you opponents can hate America if you wish" suggests that it must be there, underpinning his "thinking." Such as it is.

[Pope Ratzo]

There's a lot about America that I do believe is "inherently good", but our foreign policy and increasingly ignoble use of military ain't it.

So shoot me.

Thanks, Thers.

[rea]

He doesn't seem to understand what the word "inherently" means, If America is good, not because of some intrinsic quality, but because we have the Bill of Rights and we engage in "ongoing efforts to ensure the spread of freedom and opportunity to all our citizens", then if we stop doing those things, we lose our claim to being good. Nothing inherent about it--it's a matter of being good because we do good things, not being "inherently" good. And if, hypothetically, we continue to respect the Bill of Rights and to strive for freedom and opportunity for our citizens, but also embark on wars of agression and torture foriegners--well, then, our record in the "goodness" catagory would be decidedly mixed.

Those who speak of America being "inherently" good are usually engaged in reasoning, "America is inherently good, America did X; therefore, X is good."

[SB]

"...ongoing efforts to ensure the spread of freedom and opportunity to all our citizens."

Clearly Drezner does not believe that the USA requires "the spread of freedom" to itself. So then is he saying that ALL of the people of the world are "our" citizens, to do with as we please?

[Mark]

"If America is an empire, well then we're pretty damn benign empire. Compare us to the British Empire, the Roman Empire, the Soviet Union, hell even the Belgians put us to shame . . . frankly there is no comparison between the American Empire and those empires of the past. We're a heck of a lot better than those guys."

This is ok--for a speechwriter. But Cohen no doubt wants to be major bureacratic player in the forthcoming Clinton/Obama administration. Unfortunately, top policy people as a rule are a bit shrewder and more restrained and unsullied by interaction with the hordes. They float above the fray (lecture, not blog), while Cohen persists in mucking about, making embarrasing noises. No, I'm afraid Cohen's career trajectory will be a low one: an appointment yes, but something sufficiently middling--a return to UN speechwriting perhaps, or an assistantship to the undersecretary for Near Eastern Affairs. Something like that.

[cavjam]

If America is an empire,
With American military bases in ~ 130 countries, you can pretty much drop the "if."
well then we're pretty damn benign empire.
Tell that to the people of Mexico, Honduras, Guatemala, Nicaragua, Panama, Chile, Argentina, Iran, the Philippines, etc.

Utter falderol.

[pseudonymous in nc]

It's all very Calvinist, isn't it? Except that Calvin wouldn't have gone so far as to consider an abstract entity -- a 'nation' -- among the elect.

[madamab]

Dear Michael Cohen,

"America! FUCK YEAH!" is not a foreign policy.

Thank you,

The Reality-Based Community

[Dorothy]

even taking the dude at his word, if the inherent goodness of america comes from the Bill of Rights and stuff, what does that say about the current level of inherent good when the bill of rights is being raped willy nilly?

Thank you! I was thinking the exact same thing!

[Harold]

It makes you realize how the doctrine of original sin came about! Also, the antinomican heresy, which says: "It doesn't apply to me!"

[Northern Observer]

Mikey Cohen might as well be a wingnut. After all he is using the same world view, faith above reason. He takes it on faith that America is inherently good and so refuses to look at the reasons why America should be considered good. Because of this he screens out all contrary evidence and helps amplify the unfolding tragedy, the unfolding darkening of America's soul that is occuring right now.

Because Mikey Cohen has faith. Mature nations don't have journalistic, policy or political elites who believe self deluding falsehoods, sooner or later reality smacks them or the country into the real. Ask the Serbs or the Germans about that.

An inherently good country would not have a political party that blithly used the federal department of justice to influence election results in their favor. An inherently good country would not have an influencial foreign policy faction openly advocating agressive unilateral war against Iran.

Inherently good countries don't have these characteristics, but Mikey Cohen's blind faith keeps him happy and oblivious. Pity. America could use some clear sighted leaders.

[blogenfreude]

And don't forget the Hawaiians - we massacred thousands.

[GRS]

I like our inherently good CIA black prisons. You know, the ones where they take you after you've been stripped naked, hooded, bound, and tranquilizing suppositories have been forcibly crammed up your ass.

Then, our inherently good torturers chain you into a stress position and spread the blessings of democracy all over you until can hardly stand it anymore!

[ppg]

I agree with all of this, except the part about "abstract categorization." Resorting to this "you America hater" stuff is really just an ad hominem, and characterizing America as an essentially infallible entity, etc. is just a dressed-up ad hominem as well. Someone capable of systematically using abstract categories and actually thinking about things wouldn't talk in this lazy manner. I would go so far as too say that the problem is exactly the opposite--too many VSP's in the media are too concrete, refusing to think complex thoughts, labelling everyone a goodie or a baddie. This applies to our domestic politics as well; everything abstract is always instantly translated into something personal--sure, global warming, but is Al Gore reinventing himself again? etc.

[someotherdude]

During the country's early national period this took the form of declarations that America should withdraw from world affairs into moral isolation (to preserve the chaste new nation from the depravities of the Old World and the miserable lands beyond) that was uttered in the same breath as the call to export the "Rising Glory of America," to bring democracy and American-style civilization to less fortunate corners of the earth. Less than a century later, during the peak era of American imperialism, the same contradictory mission presented itself again: while those Americans who most opposed expansion into the Philippines shared the imperialists' belief in the nation's predestined right to rule the world, they resisted efforts to annex a nation of "inferior" dark-skinned people largely because of fears they had of racial contamination. Charles Francis Adams, Jr., said it most straightforwardly when he referred to America's virulent treatment of the Indians as the lesson to recall in all such cases, because, harsh though he admitted such treatment was, it had "saved the Anglo-Saxon stock from being a nation of half-breeds." In these few words were both a terrible echo of past warrants for genocidal race war and a chilling anticipation of eugenic justifications for genocide yet to come, for to this famous scion of America's proudest family, the would-be extermination of an entire race of people was preferable to the "pollution" of racial intermixture.

From:
Sex, Race and Holy War
excerpted from the book
American Holocaust
by David Stannard
Oxford University Press, 1992

[chuck]

There is no country or government on earth that is "inherently good."

I will say one thing, though. All empires maintained this belief, and justified their conquest of other countries through this belief, enabling horrific mass murder in the name of "spreading Christianity" (Spain), "bring civilization to the natives" (Rome and Britain), "fighting Bolshevism" (Nazi Germany), and in our own day and age "spreading democracy" (US).

EVERY empire thinks of itself as benign or inherently good. That is the ideological underpinning of empire. But ask the Vietnamese how benign we are. Or the Salvadorans. Or Cuba. Or Iran.

Or Iraq.

[Potato Head]

Kinda interesting that the Americans who advocate invading and killing start from the premise of America's "inherent goodness", while the ones who opppose it, don't. And that makes the latter bad Americans for not believing in invading and killing for the sake of our inherent goodness.

[onceler]

don't read too much into this kind of thinking - its a very important and indicative thing that this idiot has said here. if America does it, it is good. no matter what, inherently good. its hard for us, who don't think such a statement has any logical foundation, to imagine just exactly how much thinking such a belief gets you out of. can you imagine how much analysis of the current political situation you would NOT have done if you just simply believe that any activity undertaken by America is good no matter what? really try to wrap your head around that. to this guy, there is no contradiction. Bill of Rights - inherently good. "America" acting to curtail the Bill of Rights - inherently good as something "America" has chosen to do. that's it, no further thought necessary. the establishment media & PR conglomerates pay very, very good money to find people who are willing to only think things through this far. and it gives us people like joe scarborough, wolf blitzer, chris matthews, glenn beck, loud dobbs, etc whereas we once had ted kopell, dan rather, murrow, cronkite, etc. this whole debate has never been a question of "why do people so stupid have jobs analyzing this important stuff?" - it has always been a case of "they are there BECAUSE they can't/won't analyze."

[Genore]

Actually, the "inherently good" stuff was also part of Jimmy Carter's approach to foreign policy. In his 1976 campaign he said it more specifically about the American people (the American people are inherently good) in the sense that we had some sort of moral superior to citizens of other countries. Arrogant and delusional you say? And it worked so well as a foreign policy precept during the Carter Admin.

[Hogan]

Either you believe that America is inherently good or you hate America.

It's not even that. It's:

If you think my trite expressions of mindless jingoism are trite, then you hate America.

Well, Mr. Cohen, I apologize to no one for having more highly developed rhetorical taste than you have. Now shut up.

"It reminds me of a string of wet sponges; it reminds me of tattered washing on the line; it reminds me of stale bean soup, of college yells, of dogs barking idiotically through endless nights." - H. L. Mencken

[Bugboy]

Our country's biggest freaking problem is that we trot around the world with this huge chip of inherent goodliness on our shoulder. Lebanon (up until the recent war) has been cited as some great economic success story, for what? For having megamalls and McDonalds? Is that really what the People of the Middle East want? How can anyone call that enlightenment?

I wouldn't want to live any where else in the world than the US, but inherently good? Just ask the family with the burning cross in their yard about the inherent goodness of this country, ask the family with the swastikas spray painted on the sides of their house about the inherent goodness of this country.

Intolerance is rampant in this country, racial, gender, sexual preference, economic class, religious, you name it, I am convinced if somehow we were all magically given the same physical characteristics it would be in our natures to find some small detail to rail against in some subgroup of individuals in our society. Is that limited to our country? Probably not, but we seem to be unable to rise above it.

Before we trot off trying to export our goodliness to the rest of the world, we should take look in the mirror.

[theo]

Shorter Michael Cohen:

My mother, drunk or sober.

[KH]

"Reification" is the concept in historical analysis that refers to what you describe -- the treating of concepts like "democracy," which command our loyalty but are in practice indeterminate -- as concrete realities that trump analysis of actual policy, conduct, human consequences, etc.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reification_%28fallacy%29

[someotherdude]

Shorter Michael Cohen:

My Father, rapist or pedophile.

[Christian in NYC]

Self-esteem comes from DOING esteemable acts.

Likewise, goodness comes from DOING good deeds.

The U.S. has the tools to do good [our Constitution and Bill of Rights] but that does not make this country "inherently" good. It merely sets forth a framework in which good can be done. But it up to our leaders, in every generation, to do the right and good thing.

Being "good" doesn't mean crap if through your actions you are a bully and a thug. As the current "administration" has acted.

[tubino]

The abstract categorization is essential to the denial of facts. If you point out that the unprovoked invasion of Iraq has caused the internal and external exile of some four MILLION Iraqis, and more additional deaths than the Khmer Rouge caused in Cambodia, these folks will look at you hurt or condescending, and remind you that the inherent goodness of Americans excuses that as an unintended and unfortunate consequence. In other words, any amount of evil results can be wiped clean by the unchallengeable goodness of Americans. In this context, Bush's citing The Quiet American is too much to stomach. Rove may be gone, but accusing your critics of exactly your own flaw is what he does, and what Bush did in that speech, by claiming that his critics would make a bad situation worse with short-sighted good intentions.

One of the wierdest jujitsu moves was to hear Bush blame the Khmer Rouge on the US(!) That fits with the right's caricature of the left as Blame America First... but to ignore the even more numerous deaths in Iraq since 2003?!?! And claim that the occupation adn deaths must continue in order to avoid... deaths?!?!

Psychopath territory.

[mikefromtexas]

I think this guy wants Doug Feith's title.

[the dryyyyyyy cracker]

Thers, you have no idea what you're talking about.

I don't mean the Cohen stuff--that, you nailed. But you're way off about how to do coke.

[Molly Ivors]

Self-esteem comes from DOING esteemable acts.

Likewise, goodness comes from DOING good deeds.

No, no, you're missing the current Christianist perspective on good and bad. If you're a righteous person, saved, you have grace and can *do* whatever you want, without fear. If you're *not* saved, or skeptical, or, God forbid agnostic or even atheist, then all the good deeds in the world won't make you a good or righteous person. Grace vs. Works.

And there is a left-leaning reason to blame the US for the Khmer Rogue--much as we're seeing in Iraq now, destabilizing a region allows many of its worst elements to rise to power--though Cambodia was always something of an afterthought.

[harold]

Forgiven in advance by God!
-- Everyone should read Scotsman James Hogg's 1824 book "Confessions of a Jusstified Sinner," a gripping horror story about one of the self-appointed "elect" who goes about settling scores.

From NYRB Publishing:

"The Private Memoirs and Confessions of a Justified Sinner [1824]
By James Hogg

The Private Memoirs and Confessions of a Justified Sinner is a startling tale of murder and madness set in a time of troubles like our own. Robert Wringhim is a religious fanatic: one of God's chosen who believes himself free to disregard the strictures of morality — a view in which he is much encouraged by the elusive, peculiarly striking foreigner who becomes his dearest friend. Describing the seductive mutual dependence of these soulmates and the way—efficient at first, then increasingly intoxicated—they go about settling scores with their (and of course God's) enemies, James Hogg presents a powerful picture of evil in the world and in the heart and mind. This work of black humor, acute psychological insight, and, in the end, deeply compassionate humanity is one of the masterpieces of literature in English."

[Henry Holland]

Pace Cavjam's post: I live in a part of Los Angeles I call Little Guatemala. If I tried any of that shit on the dude in the panaderia across the street that I buy my yummy eggs, black beans and bread from every weekend, he'd laugh in my face. He moved here for a girlfriend and stayed, but he has no illusions, not after the CIA-engineered coup in 1954.

As the Mark Eitzel song goes:

America is beautiful
But it's people are ugly