EDUCATING AMERICANS ABOUT US EMPIRE

 

Increasingly, citizens are asking why the U.S. continues to support the ongoing genocide in Gaza. The answer is simple: To our foreign policy establishment, Israel is a critical outpost of the American empire. As President Biden has often said, “If Israel didn’t exist, we’d have to invent it.”  
 
When Biden told ABC interviewer George Stephanopoulos, “I’m running the world,” he was acknowledging the fact that America is a global empire. While some will scoff at the idea, it is too late to deny it. The Empire has no clothes. 
 
It explains why we have over 800 military installations around the world and why the Pentagon budget is more than that of the world’s next 10 largest militaries combined. No nation is such a threat that it justifies spending over $1 trillion dollars per year on “defense”-related costs. 
 
It’s understandable that most Americans don’t realize they live in the heart of an empire. Media figures and politicians carefully avoid the term. We don’t learn this fact in school. Even most history teachers don’t realize it. But we must recognize it. It is the reason our government is complicit in genocide. 
 
We cannot be afraid to say this. Endless war is incompatible with self-rule. A democratic government would not defy the will of the overwhelming majority of its citizens who oppose the genocide. When the U.S. supports violence around the world, it does so in our name. In claiming to be a democracy, we take responsibility. Ask any German citizen.  
 
Martin Luther King, Jr said in 1967, “America is the world’s greatest purveyor of violence in the world.” It’s still true, but we no longer seriously question politicians and pundits who tell us we must support such violence. It’s not for freedom, democracy or self-defense. The actions of the Empire only reflect the wishes of Wall Street investors. What we are told are “American interests” are never those of average citizens.  
 
Let’s hope that U.S. complicity in genocide awakens Americans to the costs 
of Empire.  After all, average Americans are not spared its depredations. As the financial crisis of 2008 proved, we’re not the first priority of the Empire’s managers. Nothing takes priority over the unfettered pursuit of profit. Not Palestinian children. Not American workers. Not even Israelis, who will eventually realize that they, too, are victims of an empire they depend on to continue subjugating the victims of their 100-year project of dispossession. 
 
Though we’re at the highest risk of nuclear war since the Cuban missile crisis in 1962, you'd never know it from the lack of public opposition to policies seemingly designed to lead to war with Iran, Russia, North Korea and China at the same time. Those policies only make sense when you realize that the US is trying to forestall the premature end of what neocons call their “Project for a New American Century.”  
 
In 2000, a group of neocons (including Dick Cheney) published a plan for global dominance by imposing what the authors called “Pax Americana,” which called for peace through war. Those plans led to disaster in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria and beyond. Their ideological disciples have now set their sights on war with Iran. These are the empire managers. 
 
In the face of the growing climate crisis devastating the US and the world, America cannot afford to send National Guard troops into foreign wars when they are needed to help address disasters at home.  
 
Dismantling the global US Empire is the first step back from the nuclear and ecological brink. Americans must unite now to stop this mad rush to WWIII. Time is running out.

WHY GOOD PEOPLE SUPPORT GENOCIDE

 
                                                                  

Hoping to understand why good people support genocidal behavior, I invited a Zionist friend to coffee to exchange thoughts on the Israeli invasion of Gaza.

We met three times, including twice after the International Court of Justice ruled in January that there was a plausible case that Israel’s tactics constituted genocide (an opinion more than 500 genocide experts had expressed in a public letter released Oct. 15).

The ICJ ruling cited Israel’s systematic commission of war crimes in its response to the Hamas attack, crimes that continue today. This is why warrants are being prepared by the International Criminal Court for the arrest of Netanyahu and his defense minister, and why the International Court of Justice ordered Israel to stop its Rafah offensive to allow aid in.

The conversations with my friend were enlightening. She would state her opinions about why the assault on the Palestinian people was justified, and I would cite factual sources that undermined the assumptions behind her arguments.

At her request, I supplied links to the sources of my claims, including Israeli newspapers and mainstream press articles, citing Israeli sources. She said little about the information I shared. Instead, she raised new arguments each time we met for why Israel had no choice but to continue its wholesale slaughter of the population of Gaza.

I eventually realized that she was able to support the destruction of an entire people because she didn’t want to confront the facts. I think she suspected that knowing the whole truth might undermine her deeply held beliefs about Israel and perhaps Zionism itself.

I haven’t heard from my friend lately. I miss talking to her. Until Oct. 7, she always had a bright smile and a carefree, friendly demeanor. I’m sure we had much in common besides membership in a local interfaith group and concern for the lives endangered by the 100-year-old conflict that has exploded since Oct. 7.

The critical difference between us was that her concern seemed almost exclusively for the safety of Israelis. She seemed adamant that the ongoing bombardment and starvation of tens of thousands of innocent civilians was an appropriate response to a single attack by a specific group among them.

I wonder: Has she ever seen the pictures of the Palestinian children mutilated by Israeli bombs, or those emaciated as a result of Israel’s use of starvation as a weapon?

I suspect that if my friend were to acknowledge the reality that what is happening to Gazan civilians is not the result of a war but of systematic war crimes, she would understand why millions are outraged by Israel’s actions. Perhaps then she would realize that slaughtering civilians will not make Israelis safer.

Despite our differences, I still regard this person as my friend. I refuse to let a conflict between us diminish my regard for her as a human. This attitude is not based solely on my spiritual beliefs; it is an essential part of waging peace.

True peace requires us to look beyond our differences, even when seemingly insurmountable, to see the humanity of others beneath their fear and anger.

We must abandon the notion that any human is “the other” and beyond redemption. When your identity is based on membership in the human family, these illusions fall away.

A lasting peace in Palestine/Israel will require justice. There can be no justice unless negotiations are based on recognition of mutual rights and acknowledgement of facts.

However painful it may be to surrender one’s cherished fantasies, that pain is nothing compared to the suffering Zionists are causing Gazans, and all Palestinians.

This essay was originally published in the Albany Democrat-Herald on June 18, 2024 as Why good people support genocidal behavior.

OREGON FOOD BANK CALLS OUT ISRAEL'S USE OF STARVATION AS A WEAPON

          

 

                                                                                              

The Oregon Food Bank took the unprecedented step of issuing a public statement that begins, "Oregon Food Bank calls for an immediate and permanent ceasefire of Israel’s war against Palestine — as well as free and unobstructed access to humanitarian relief efforts to deliver water, food, clothing, medicine and shelter to the people of Palestine. We also call for the release of all hostages by Hamas and condemn all acts of violence that disregard the respect for human dignity and right to life. In response to feedback from our communities stressing the importance of our stance, we acknowledge the delayed release of this statement and regret Oregon Food Bank's prior silence.

We condemn the indiscriminate attacks by the Israeli army on Palestinians, including the bombardment of neighborhoods, healthcare facilities, humanitarian aid efforts and refugee camps. The Israeli army’s months of assaults have killed over 33,000 and injured over 73,000 Palestinians, putting them at risk of genocide. We also condemn the horrific attacks by Hamas on October 7, 2023, which included the killing of over 1,200 Israelis and others, the abduction of over 200 hostages and other atrocities."

In retaliation for this act of conscience, five Portland synagogues and several Jewish nonprofits, led by the Jewish Federation of Portland, announced that they would halt further aid to OFB. An Oregon Public Broadcasting report noted that the OFB letter explained its action with the statement “We remain committed to addressing the root causes of hunger and work within our scope of influence to strategically dismantle systems that perpetuate hunger and poverty,”

In response to the letter attacking the Oregon Food Bank statement, the Portland chapter of Jewish Voice for Peace released a statement of support for OFB that expanded on the justification for the reference to "risk of genocide," citing the opinions issued by the International Court of Justice and hundreds of genocide experts. 

Please read the statement of support by JVP-Portland, add your name, and contribute to the Oregon Food Bank today.

RABBIT HOLES AND MEN BEHIND CURTAINS

                                                    

If you're like me, at some point in your life you realized that many of our most cherished beliefs are lies. Westerners are taught that their governments are democratic, that they don't go to war unless they are compelled to (except for past wars, of course) and that we believe in the principles of self-determination for all nations.

As events my eyes have been opened to the fact that none of these things are true, I've embarked on a sometimes frantic search for what is true, in the hope that we can collectively still do something to change the trajectory of human history, which appears to be hurtling toward self-destruction. 

Caitlin Johnstone is a kindred spirit, a particularly gifted writer with a deep understanding of events and an inimitable style of explaining them in the context of a well thought out humanist philosophy and a deep love for all that should be held sacred. If you are not familiar with her work, you will likely be amazed at how she sums up her journey to understand the reality of the power structure of humanity and its significance in the universal scheme of things, suggesting that the only way to accept the truth is to practice a form of radical acceptance.


You dive down rabbit hole after rabbit hole, searching for the man behind the curtain. You’ve seen enough to be convinced that everything you’ve been taught about the world is false, and now it’s just a matter of finding out who’s really responsible for making such a mess of things.

And for a while, your search seems fruitful. You discover that you don’t really live in a democracy like you were taught where the public influences government behavior using their votes, or even in a separate sovereign nation like you learned in school. You discover that your country is part of a globe-spanning power structure which effectively functions as an empire — the most powerful empire ever to exist. And you discover that this empire has drivers who aren’t beholden to the electorate in any meaningful way, acting not to advance the interests of the public but to advance the agenda of planetary domination.

So who are the drivers of the empire? You dive down more rabbit holes. You discover secretive government agencies with longtime operatives who don’t leave with the outgoing official elected government, but stay on, helping to keep the gears of the empire turning regardless of who voters elect to be the face on the operation. You discover a revolving-door system in which the same empire managers are rotated in and out of positions in the official elected government, working in think tanks and military industrial complex advisory boards and mass media punditry when their party is out of office and rotating back in when their turn comes back around. You discover plutocrats who use their vast wealth to influence government policy via campaign donations, influential think tanks, mass media control and corporate lobbying, who often operate with — and profit from — a tremendous amount of overlap with government agencies. You discover organizations and institutions in which the wealthy and powerful congregate and coordinate to advance their agendas, often with a very high degree of secrecy.

But in all this rabbit holing and discovering, you still don’t find any man behind the curtain. You come to see that any of the people you’ve been looking at could die tomorrow and the imperial machine would trudge on uninterrupted. There could be a giant violent revolution and these people could be guillotined by the thousands, and unless drastic changes were made to the systems which gave rise to them, someone else would just step in to fill their shoes.

So you start researching the systems. You start researching economic systems, financial systems, how resources are distributed, how money is allocated, how labor is exploited, how wealth is extracted. You come to see how our civilization has been turned into a giant wealth-generating machine for a class of wealthy exploiters using propaganda, property laws, artificial scarcity, enclosure of the commons and theft from indigenous populations, all wound around this made-up concept of money which translates directly into political power under our current systems. Because the people who are most adept at obtaining massive amounts of wealth/power are those who are sufficiently lacking in empathy to do whatever it takes to obtain it, we naturally find ourselves ruled by sociopaths. And we always will, until those systems change.

You dig even deeper. You discover that you haven’t just been fed false information about how governments and nations work, you’ve been fed false information about even your most basic assumptions about reality. You discover in your own experience that there is no such thing as a separate self; that what we refer to linguistically as “I” and “me” are psychological delusions which underpin most of the suffering and dysfunctionality of the human species. In reality humans are inseparable from the biosphere from whence they emerged, which is in turn inseparable from the universe from whence it emerged, which is in turn inseparable from the Big-Bang-Or-Whatever-It-Was from whence it emerged. Everything is one, and the self is a lie.

And you realize that this is true of all the oligarchs and empire managers you’ve been staring at as well. They’re not separate entities acting with agency in the world, they’re clusters of conditioning and trauma which they inherited from their ancestors, which was passed down through their evolutionary heritage from the chaos and confusion inherent in existence as small prey animals who walked the earth millions of years ago. They’re just swirling eddies in a sea of ineffable energy like anyone else, sleepwalking through life being whipped around by unconscious forces within themselves that they do not understand.

And you realize then that there is no man behind the curtain, and there never was. You ripped aside curtain after curtain hoping to find the man, and all you found was a man-shaped hole in the universe.

And you’re not even mad. In fact, you find it hilarious. You laugh and you laugh at the silliness of it all. You laugh at how seriously we’re all taking this game of separateness and enmity, and how seriously you’d been taking it just moments before. You laugh at how ultimately innocent we all are in all this, even the worst among us. You laugh at our cuteness. You laugh at this play of forms. And the universe laughs back. A laughing buddha, laughing at a universe made of laughing buddhas.

And you see, as you wipe the tears from your face, that everything is unfolding as it must. The universe is becoming more and more capable of perceiving itself — first with life, then with humans, then with the steady advancements in science and technology and psychology and awakening — and there’s no reason to assume that this ongoing explosion of perception will stop. We’re going to figure things out eventually. Consciousness keeps expanding. The light keeps getting brighter. The truth can only hide for so long.

This article was originally published in Caitlin's blog on September 12, 2023.

WE DIDN'T START THE FIRE?

You can't understand what is happening in Ukraine without understanding what came before. Regardless of whether you think the invasion of Ukraine by Russia was an appropriate response to the situation at the time, to understand the way to peace requires that you understand how the war started long before February 24, 2022.

No one tells the story better than Oliver Stone.

CREATING CONSENSUS ON UKRAINE

                                                                             

     

The antiwar community has fractured at a time when it most needs to speak with one voice to end the war in Ukraine. About all we can agree on is that the war is a terrible thing that needs to be stopped. Beyond that, reasonable people disagree about messaging, and unreasonable people demonize those who disagree. The result is that average Americans who don’t usually follow politics, let alone international affairs, form opinions based on emotional responses to what they hear in mainstream media rather than what may be most likely to promote peace. This is true despite the fact that most would say that peace is what they want.

The ability to influence American thinking through emotional appeals is what those with the power to manipulate the media count on to serve imperialism’s aims.  If we can at least agree that how we frame our response is important, people who sincerely want to do something to end the war might be able to agree on what message would most effectively sway public opinion in a way that might influence our government to act in the interest of peace.

The most fundamental disagreement is over whether it’s necessary to call Russia out as solely or even primarily at fault for the war, or whether it is important to provide the context needed to understand the US role in creating the conditions that led it to decide that it had no choice but to respond to Ukrainian actions in Donbass with military force.

Given that our goal is to influence public opinion, it’s understandable that most peace groups have opted to follow the lead of politicians and mainstream commentators and preface every statement with a condemnation of Russia. After all, since they believe these accusations are justified, they fear being seen as supportive of Russia if they only focus on what the US has done that promotes war and what it hasn’t done that might have prevented it. Some peace groups go so far as to ignore clear US provocations as unimportant. Since it was Russia that invaded, they believe that their proper job is to wave Ukrainian flags and protest Russia’s actions, despite the reality that this will have no beneficial effect on the course of the war.

Other peace activists feel that either approach absolves the US of responsibility for creating conditions that led to the conflict. Believing the US actually initiated the conflict, they argue that dating its onset as February 24 is not only misleading, but false. They see the conflict as having started long before the Russian invasion and argue that knowing what choices Putin had is relevant to assigning blame.

The truth is that we don’t have to agree on who is at fault if we don’t make that an issue. As a psychotherapist with training in family therapy, I know from experience that focusing on who is responsible for a problem almost never leads to a satisfactory solution. And from a practical standpoint, placing sole blame on Russia is counterproductive not only because it splits the antiwar movement, but because to much of the public it provides a justification for an aggressive US response. Avoiding a conflict over whether Russia should be characterized as the sole aggressor is why many want to limit the message to demanding that the US 1) stop arming Ukraine, 2) declare it will never support Ukraine joining NATO, and 3) push Ukraine to negotiate without preconditions.

From a family therapy perspective, trying to keep the discussion focused on a solution would certainly be the approach to take if the US actually wanted to end the conflict. Unfortunately, that doesn’t seem to be the case. The effect of sending increasingly lethal weapons and imposing sanctions that primarily harm civilians is to prolong the war and increase casualties of both soldiers and civilians on both sides.

Recent reports indicate that the effort to help a depleted Ukrainian military drive Russia out of Donbass is futile. However, this approach is very profitable for a weapons industry that generously funds the elections of members of Congress willing to serve its interests, which is no doubt why any debate about how the US should proceed assumes that it will involve continuing a strategy that has proven to result in arming extremists when used in places like Iraq and Afghanistan. And yes, there are extremists with significant influence in Ukraine despite media denials.

Clearly, the focus on providing weapons has redirected the public’s attention from the question of how to end the war to how best to punish Russia, regardless of how US strategy affect Ukrainian civilians. This is not by accident, but by design. That’s why it is necessary to challenge the distortions, omissions and outright lies that are used to influence public opinion to conform with the goals of American imperialism. Unfortunately, the inability to agree on the facts is what has led to the stark divisions among those wanting to do something to make the war to end. That is we have to put aside our pride and listen to each other to understand why a minority firmly believes that the consensus opinion of the majority is based on misplaced trust in mainstream media.

Most Americans think they are informed if they read mainstream media and watch a variety of TV news sources. Antiwar activists know differently, because we know we have been lied into war repeatedly, at least from Vietnam through Syria. Unfortunately, like the general public, many peace proponents have no idea how information that challenges the government’s narrative is being  systematically suppressed in unprecedented ways.  

It's always been true that truth is the first casualty of war. In today’s hybrid warfare, it is more critical than ever to control the information domain. The way news is presented by government officials and approved media frames the way most people think about US foreign policy. This is why the idea of sending ever more powerful weapons to prolong a military conflict that cannot be won is never challenged. While the ultimate outcome of Russia’s invasion cannot be predicted with certainty, the one thing we know for sure is that providing increasingly lethal weaponry will lead to more death on both sides and do nothing to promote stability in the region.

Of course, there is much more that could be said about the tremendous amount of disinformation in the mainstream media regarding Ukraine. While much of it is relevant to understanding the situation, it is far beyond the scope of this essay. I can only recommend that those who are inclined to believe what they read or hear in government-approved media look at any of the credible alternative sources that present evidence of critical facts that are being withheld from them.

A good way to find them is to look at the list of websites that Prop or Not, a shadowy group that claims to be the arbiter of “reliable sources,” claims should not be trusted. Interspersed among many dubious websites listed are some of the most informative sources of information contradicting the mainstream narrative. These are sites with authors that include prominent investigative journalists and veterans of the CIA, NSA, State Department, high ranking White House positions and military intelligence.  They cite their sources, which gives their articles far more credibility than the mostly anonymous sources favored by the New York Times and Washington Post when reporting on many of the same stories.

I urge anyone interested in finding a common message to present to the public to read the statement released by the US Peace Council.

 

HOW DO WE STAND BY UKRAINE?

 

                                                                     

The unfolding tragedy of the war in Ukraine has unleashed a torrent of anger among Americans. That's hardly surprising, given the images of dead and injured civilians, especially children, that are streaming into our homes 24 hours a day. The intense emotions aroused have led to a strong urge to act to stop the violence. Demonstrations of solidarity are inspiring, but they aren't going to affect Putin's plans for Ukraine. The question thus is, how do we most effectively stand with Ukraine?

Examples of what not to do abound. Consider:

Most people support the sanctions, despite abundant evidence showing that they typically don't work and at best achieve only limited success. The logic is to punish the citizens of the sanctioned country, in the hope they will rise up and topple their governments or at least submit to Western demands. It should come as no surprise that this is not a realistic objective in authoritarian societies. The main effect of sanctions is to increase the suffering of the citizens of the targeted country. Madelaine Albright famously admitted that US sanctions on Iraq after the first Gulf War cost the lives of 500,000 children, commenting that "We think it was worth it." This begs the question of who is this "we?" I certainly hope that it is not the opinion of the majority of Americans. In the present case, why would we want to punish the citizens of Russia for Putin's actions, especially when they are protesting by the tens of thousands on the streets of Russia, putting to shame the pitiful response of Americans to US-led wars.

Most people seem to support the arming of Ukraine, even though many analysts point out that there is ultimately little hope that they can hold up against a determined Russian military whose goal does not appear to be occupation. We're told daily about Putin's willingness to use brutal tactics to achieve his objectives, but we are being assured that the vastly inferior forces of Ukraine are really winning. As a result, people who want to support Ukraine are applauding the brave citizens who are taking up arms and putting their bodies on the line confronting trained soldiers, without apparently realizing that this will not likely change the outcome but will certainly lead to more Ukrainian deaths. There has even been serious consideration of the US providing incentives to NATO countries to send war planes to Ukraine, an act of war against Russia that could lead to the US being forced to directly confront the only other nuclear superpower. More and more, we are hearing arguments for why we can't rule out direct US involvement despite the fact that it could quickly lead to nuclear war.

Anyone who still thinks a no-fly zone is a reasonable option simply isn't listening to reason. As Biden and many others have pointed out, this requires being willing to shoot Russian planes down, which would likely lead to WWIII. Anyone who wants to disregard that risk does not deserve to be taken seriously.

There's a reason that "experts" continue to push policies that are at best futile and at worst, catastrophic. The only realistic alternatives would involve allowing Russia to achieve some of its stated goals. That would lead to the career-killing charge of "appeasement." Career politicians and professional pundits in the West cower at this thought, so much so that the idea would never occur to them. Fortunately, diplomats in both Ukraine and Russia are willing to consider what would be unthinkable for these cheerleaders of imperialism.

According to this article, progress is being made on a 15-point plan that would recognize legitimate Russian security interests the West ignored in the runup to the war, despite clear warnings from Russia. Among other provisions, Ukraine would alter its constitution to guarantee that it would never join NATO. Had the US simply declared that it would never allow Ukraine to join, the invasion might have been avoided. That the US refused speaks volumes about the intent of the US in its dealings with Russia with regard to Ukraine. Unfortunately, few are listening.

Russia is also insisting on an agreement that Ukraine will not host foreign military bases. Negotiations continue on what kind of security guarantees that Ukraine might get from NATO countries would be acceptable to Russia, while the article does not mention what kind of security guarantees Ukraine would offer the Republics of Donetsk and Luhansk, which have been subjected to continuous assault since the 2014 coup that put the current government in power. The article also does not mention the status of the Russian demand that Ukraine recognize Russia's sovereignty over Crimea, which it has asserted since the region voted overwhelmingly to rejoin Russia in 2014.

Meanwhile, the battles rage, with increasing loss of life on both sides. If you want to stand for Ukraine, stand for the interests of Ukrainians and common Russians alike and demand that your government stop inflaming the situation with weapons and sanctions and allow real diplomacy to end the killing.