XPost: soc.culture.russian, soc.culture.usa, alt.anti-war   
   XPost: soc.rights.human   
   From: hayesstw@telkomsa.net   
      
   Chomsky: US Push to "Reign Supreme" Stokes the Ukraine Conflict   
      
   Irrational political panic is as American a phenomenon as apple pie.   
   It often arises as a result of a potential inability on the part of   
   the powers-that-be to control the outcome of developments that may   
   pose challenges to the interests of the existing socioeconomic order   
   or to the status quo of the geostrategic environment. The era of the   
   Cold War speaks volumes about this phenomenon, but it’s also evident   
   in earlier periods — for example, the first Red Scare in the wake of   
   World War I — and we can see clear parallels in the present-day   
   situation with reactions to Ukraine and the rise of China as a global   
   power.   
      
   In the interview that follows, world-renowned public intellectual Noam   
   Chomsky delves into the phenomenon of irrational political panics in   
   the U.S., with an emphasis on current developments on the foreign   
   policy front — and the dangers of seeking to maintain global hegemony   
   in a multipolar world.   
   Stay in the loop   
      
   C.J. Polychroniou: The political culture in the United States seems to   
   have a propensity toward alarmism when it comes to political   
   developments that are not in tune with the economic interests,   
   ideological mindset and strategic interests of the powers-that-be.   
   Indeed, from the anti-Spanish panic of the late 1890s to today’s rage   
   about Russia’s security concerns over Ukraine, and China’s growing   
   role in world affairs and everything in between, the political   
   establishment and the media of this country tend to respond with   
   full-blown alarm to developments that are not in alignment with U.S.   
   interests, values and goals. Can you comment about this peculiar state   
   of affairs, with particular emphasis on what’s happening today in   
   connection with Ukraine and China?   
      
   Noam Chomsky: Quite true. Sometimes it’s hard to believe. One of the   
   most significant and revealing examples is the rhetorical framework of   
   the major internal planning document of the early Cold War years,   
   NSC-68 of 1950, shortly after “the loss of China,” which set off a   
   frenzy in the U.S. The document set the stage for huge expansion of   
   the military budget. It’s worth recalling today when strains of this   
   madness are reverberating — not for the first time; it’s perennial.   
      
   The policy recommendations of NSC-68 have been widely discussed in   
   scholarship, though avoiding the hysterical rhetoric. It reads like a   
   fairytale: ultimate evil confronted by absolute purity and noble   
   idealism. On one side is the “slave state” with its “fundamental   
   design” and inherent “compulsion” to gain “absolute authority over the   
   rest of the world,” destroying all governments and the “structure of   
   society” everywhere. Its ultimate evil contrasts with our sheer   
   perfection. The “fundamental purpose” of the United States is to   
   assure “the dignity and worth of the individual” everywhere. Its   
   leaders are animated by “generous and constructive impulses, and the   
   absence of covetousness in our international relations,” which is   
   particularly evident in the traditional domains of U.S. influence, the   
   Western hemisphere, long the beneficiary of Washington’s tender   
   solicitude as its inhabitants can testify.   
      
   Anyone familiar with history and the actual balance of global power at   
   the time would have reacted to this performance with utter   
   bewilderment. Its State Department authors couldn’t have believed what   
   they were writing. Some later gave an indication of what they were up   
   to. Secretary of State Dean Acheson explained in his memoirs that in   
   order to ram through the huge planned military expansion, it was   
   necessary to “bludgeon the mass mind of ‘top government’” in ways that   
   were “clearer than truth.” The highly influential Sen. Arthur   
   Vandenberg surely understood this as well when advising [in 1947] that   
   the government must “scare the hell out of the American people” to   
   rouse them from their pacifist backwardness.   
      
   There are many precedents, and the drums are beating right now with   
   warnings about American complacency and naivete about the intentions   
   of the “mad dog” Putin to destroy democracy everywhere and subdue the   
   world to his will, now in alliance with the other “Great Satan,” Xi   
   Jinping.   
      
   The February 4 Putin-Xi summit, timed with the opening of the Olympic   
   games, was recognized to be a major event in world affairs. Its review   
   in a major article in The New York Times is headlined “A New Axis,”   
   the allusion unconcealed. The review reported the intentions of the   
   reincarnation of the Axis powers: “The message that China and Russia   
   have sent to other countries is clear,” David Leonhardt writes. “They   
   will not pressure other governments to respect human rights or hold   
   elections.” And to Washington’s dismay, the Axis is attracting two   
   countries from “the American camp,” Egypt and Saudi Arabia, stellar   
   examples of how the U.S. respects human rights and elections in its   
   camp — by providing a massive flow of weapons to these brutal   
   dictatorships and directly participating in their crimes. The New Axis   
   also maintains that “a powerful country should be able to impose its   
   will within its declared sphere of influence. The country should even   
   be able to topple a weaker nearby government without the world   
   interfering” — an idea that the U.S. has always abhorred, as the   
   historical record reveals.   
      
   Twenty-five hundred years ago, the Delphi Oracle issued a maxim: “Know   
   Thyself.” Worth remembering, perhaps.   
      
   As in the case of NSC-68, there is method in the madness. China and   
   Russia do pose real threats. The global hegemon does not take them   
   lightly. There are some striking common features in how U.S. opinion   
   and policy are reacting to the threats. They merit some thought.   
      
   The Atlantic Council describes the formation of the New Axis as a   
   “tectonic shift in global relations” with plans that are truly “head   
   spinning”: “The sides agreed to more closely link their economies   
   through cooperation between China’s Belt and Road Initiative and   
   Putin’s Eurasian Economic Union. They will work together to develop   
   the Arctic. They’ll deepen coordination in multilateral institutions   
   and to battle climate change.”   
      
   We should not underestimate the grand significance of the Ukraine   
   crisis, adds Damon Wilson, president of the National Endowment for   
   Democracy. “The stakes of today’s crisis are not about Ukraine alone,   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)