A fairy tale, once upon a time military officers honored a code of ethics. In the 21st century a few still try to live by this code, the many however, are now “rational maximizers,” short for I’m above that and what‘s in it for me.
Officers now receive advance schooling on manipulation of public opinion, lying and cover-ups. In the closed military culture senior leadership matured as a politically dynamic force in power politics. Generals hang up their uniforms and slide into civil government and military industrial complexes, carrying their outside any law attitude, infecting the national ethical infrastructures.
Junior officers see the rewards of ethical failures and either leave or embrace the culture. Colonels rationalize unethical behavior as in the interest of their greater good, a fast track to stars. Criminal behavior is justified and stamped top secret as national security issues. Victims of military abuses have long memories and there is no statue of limitations. Secret files will eventually be opened and recently the military crimes during the colonial era have begun to appear in distant courts.
The inhabitants’ of the Pentagon, America’s military citadel, are increasingly viewing themselves as a Praetorian Guard defending American mythology of exceptionalism.
Remember the Praetorians became synonymous with intrigue, conspiracy, disloyalty, assassination and the fall of Rome. History also shows that dissatisfied colonels stage coups, where better to begin than assignments to the citadel.
As the military infiltrates more and more into civil government and society Praetorians become kingmakers while defending their own prerogatives. In a step away from ethics, uniformed officers campaigned for supporters of militarization in the last election. The Pentagon lobbied for legislation authorizing military arrest and indefinite secret detention of any U.S. citizen in America. (The Commander in Chief has so far refused to authorize implementation, but the law is on the books.) While some ethical failures have recently been exposed, the military has blitzed justifications and ignored calls for reforms.
Pentagon bureaucrats have embraced a couple of political reforms. Women may now hold combat commands that are increasingly for remote controlled wars. A new high award, the DWM (Distinguished Warfare Medal) has been authorized for bravery thousands of miles from the line of fire. It is only a matter of time before the Purple Heart is awarded for paper cuts. The Medal of Honor still requires the sound of real bullets but that may soon include virtual bullets. These reforms insult the heroes and casualties of past conflicts but they will make the recipients more politically viable. Unethical behavior is rationalized while real soldiers and civilians continue to bleed.
Draft armies are not the most efficient but do reflect their social culture, rather than that of an unethical and uncontrollable military safely behind the citadel’s stone walls.
Friday, February 15, 2013
Thursday, February 14, 2013
Theocratic conflict 020413
For over five hundred years Protestants and Catholics have battled. With no one else to fight for its first 700 years, Catholics fought among themselves. During the 2000 years of Christian power both Protestants and Catholics have beat up on Jews. About 1300 years ago they began to demonize and slaughter Muslims. The stated issue in all this death and destruction is who has the inside track to paradise. These religions profess to worship the same God but can’t even agree on how.
Interestingly enough until the establishment of a Jewish state in the 20th century, Muslims respected Judaism in their lands and protected Jews from Christian pogroms. Here is a hint of understanding of religious warfare. It is not about worshiping on Friday Saturday, or Sunday. It is not about who is a prophet and who is a savior, nor is it about icons, singing, doctrines or visions of an afterlife.
Theocratic conflict is a struggle for power. Who is in control of the most land, wealth and perceived correct thinking masses that are merely chips to be played by governing oligarchs. Henry the VIII switched sides for a divorce and England suffered a Catholic pogrom. Priest and preachers can still stir up violence in Ireland. Fundamentalist Christians, Jews and Muslims incite their followers against the more moderate of their own faiths. Jews and Muslims struggle over a strip of land no one wanted until the other side claimed it. East and central Asia was desert to be crossed as quickly as possible until oil was discovered and it became the battleground for the major faiths.
To understand the differing perspectives one must walk in the other fellows’ shoes for a while and see through their eyes. From the Muslim perspective the crusades weren’t about religion, the crusaders killed more Christians and Jews than Muslims. The crusades were all about politics, a Roman Pope wanted to gain control of all of Christendom and Crusade leaders wanted kingdoms, not for God, but for themselves. The 20th century crusade is still about politics but is being sold to the masses as a struggle over faith. The Muslims see Christian invasions of their lands for natural resources and destruction of their culture. Christians’ proclamations call for destruction of an Islamic “cult.” Christians view any resistance to their divine right as terrorist activity and untold thousands of Muslims have died in the growing conflict, resulting in spreading insurgencies as proving of both perspectives.
Organized religion is not a prerequisite for theocratic warfare; oligarchs can establish themselves as an object of worship. They rewrite history proving their superiority and build a new faith that eventually becomes a totalitarian regime designating “enemies,” proper conduct and disciples to control the masses. Disciples and the masses must be fed on a steady diet of sacrifice and warfare in defense of this new faith.
Caution must be exercises when religions and regimes demand that the masses “get on board,” with buzzwords and xenophobia. Religion is philosophy some times good, some times bad in the hands of politicians. Political warfare is counterproductive, theocratic war is an ultimate waste of humanity.
Quotes:
The futurist George Orwell said, “A totalitarian state is in effect a theocracy, and its ruling caste, in order to keep its position, has to be thought of as infallible. But since, in practice, no one is infallible, it is frequently necessary to rearrange past events in order to show that this or that mistake was not made, or that this or that imaginary triumph actually happened.” “Orwell, Collected Essays, Journalism and Letters of George Orwell Volume 2 My Country Right or Left 1940 - 1943”
"This Republican Party of Lincoln has become a party of theocracy."
U.S. Representative Christopher Shays, R-CT, (New York Times 3/23/05)
Interestingly enough until the establishment of a Jewish state in the 20th century, Muslims respected Judaism in their lands and protected Jews from Christian pogroms. Here is a hint of understanding of religious warfare. It is not about worshiping on Friday Saturday, or Sunday. It is not about who is a prophet and who is a savior, nor is it about icons, singing, doctrines or visions of an afterlife.
Theocratic conflict is a struggle for power. Who is in control of the most land, wealth and perceived correct thinking masses that are merely chips to be played by governing oligarchs. Henry the VIII switched sides for a divorce and England suffered a Catholic pogrom. Priest and preachers can still stir up violence in Ireland. Fundamentalist Christians, Jews and Muslims incite their followers against the more moderate of their own faiths. Jews and Muslims struggle over a strip of land no one wanted until the other side claimed it. East and central Asia was desert to be crossed as quickly as possible until oil was discovered and it became the battleground for the major faiths.
To understand the differing perspectives one must walk in the other fellows’ shoes for a while and see through their eyes. From the Muslim perspective the crusades weren’t about religion, the crusaders killed more Christians and Jews than Muslims. The crusades were all about politics, a Roman Pope wanted to gain control of all of Christendom and Crusade leaders wanted kingdoms, not for God, but for themselves. The 20th century crusade is still about politics but is being sold to the masses as a struggle over faith. The Muslims see Christian invasions of their lands for natural resources and destruction of their culture. Christians’ proclamations call for destruction of an Islamic “cult.” Christians view any resistance to their divine right as terrorist activity and untold thousands of Muslims have died in the growing conflict, resulting in spreading insurgencies as proving of both perspectives.
Organized religion is not a prerequisite for theocratic warfare; oligarchs can establish themselves as an object of worship. They rewrite history proving their superiority and build a new faith that eventually becomes a totalitarian regime designating “enemies,” proper conduct and disciples to control the masses. Disciples and the masses must be fed on a steady diet of sacrifice and warfare in defense of this new faith.
Caution must be exercises when religions and regimes demand that the masses “get on board,” with buzzwords and xenophobia. Religion is philosophy some times good, some times bad in the hands of politicians. Political warfare is counterproductive, theocratic war is an ultimate waste of humanity.
Quotes:
The futurist George Orwell said, “A totalitarian state is in effect a theocracy, and its ruling caste, in order to keep its position, has to be thought of as infallible. But since, in practice, no one is infallible, it is frequently necessary to rearrange past events in order to show that this or that mistake was not made, or that this or that imaginary triumph actually happened.” “Orwell, Collected Essays, Journalism and Letters of George Orwell Volume 2 My Country Right or Left 1940 - 1943”
"This Republican Party of Lincoln has become a party of theocracy."
U.S. Representative Christopher Shays, R-CT, (New York Times 3/23/05)
Thursday, February 7, 2013
Animals 020113
There is an old saying that a leopard can’t change its spots. Given enough evolutionary time however, the leopard may very well lose its spots and even become a tabby cat. Political animals on the other hand change their spots from day to day.
The evolutionary periods for political animals are from embarrassing statements to lost elections, then their spots disappear under quick, slick marketing analyst’s whitewash. Of course as the media rains on menageries’ parades the whitewash fades and the same old spots show through. Political consultants however are prepared with fresh buckets of whitewash to slap on as public concerns swing. The spots don’t change under the whitewash, the animals just hope the public will forget spots they can’t see.
Political creatures hope to hide the stumbling, bungling, muddling and vicious, roaring demagoguery. The beast is supposed to have evolved into a picture perfect cuddly little tabby, but the picture still has same teeth and claws intent on ripping the hearts and guts out of the polity.
People do change; teenage ideals do evolve into seniors’ experienced realities. The beasts that roar believe they can deceive voters with a few quick purrs and an overnight declaration that they have changed their ways.
Unfortunately, to often, they get away with wearing their coats of whitewash. Never forget that many despots have been democratically elected. Stand by with fire hoses to wash off the whitewash and look for the same old spots.
The last U.S. campaign was of particular interest to international observers considering democratic regime changes. They saw candidates evolving from one public speech to the next. Integrity swung with the slightest breeze. Xenophobia, discrimination even hatred was embraced and later spun or completely denied. Billionaires bought and sold candidates and platforms. Months after the election questions still remain, what did these candidates really really stand for?
The day after the election winners and losers were busy reinventing themselves for the next election. The billionaires were already assessing the prospective field and pledging to place their bets on horses expected to pull their agenda plows to victory.
Foreign analysts evaluated the real corruption recently exposed. Emerging states noted the hypocrisy of, “do as we say, not as we do” rejecting the U.S. democratic model.
The feeling is, if we are going to be corrupt, we will embrace our own corruption rather than import that of meddling foreigners. Our corrupt politicians at least know who we are and their whitewash is from our own buckets. They will embrace a leopard, spots and all, if it a real leopard that serves their interests.
The evolutionary periods for political animals are from embarrassing statements to lost elections, then their spots disappear under quick, slick marketing analyst’s whitewash. Of course as the media rains on menageries’ parades the whitewash fades and the same old spots show through. Political consultants however are prepared with fresh buckets of whitewash to slap on as public concerns swing. The spots don’t change under the whitewash, the animals just hope the public will forget spots they can’t see.
Political creatures hope to hide the stumbling, bungling, muddling and vicious, roaring demagoguery. The beast is supposed to have evolved into a picture perfect cuddly little tabby, but the picture still has same teeth and claws intent on ripping the hearts and guts out of the polity.
People do change; teenage ideals do evolve into seniors’ experienced realities. The beasts that roar believe they can deceive voters with a few quick purrs and an overnight declaration that they have changed their ways.
Unfortunately, to often, they get away with wearing their coats of whitewash. Never forget that many despots have been democratically elected. Stand by with fire hoses to wash off the whitewash and look for the same old spots.
The last U.S. campaign was of particular interest to international observers considering democratic regime changes. They saw candidates evolving from one public speech to the next. Integrity swung with the slightest breeze. Xenophobia, discrimination even hatred was embraced and later spun or completely denied. Billionaires bought and sold candidates and platforms. Months after the election questions still remain, what did these candidates really really stand for?
The day after the election winners and losers were busy reinventing themselves for the next election. The billionaires were already assessing the prospective field and pledging to place their bets on horses expected to pull their agenda plows to victory.
Foreign analysts evaluated the real corruption recently exposed. Emerging states noted the hypocrisy of, “do as we say, not as we do” rejecting the U.S. democratic model.
The feeling is, if we are going to be corrupt, we will embrace our own corruption rather than import that of meddling foreigners. Our corrupt politicians at least know who we are and their whitewash is from our own buckets. They will embrace a leopard, spots and all, if it a real leopard that serves their interests.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)