Noam Chomsky's

"Deterring Democracy"

     It has now been sometime since I read this book and returned it to the Library. I admit to being a big fan of Noam Chomsky's work. I find his point of view becoming more and more relevant as days go by.

     Published in the early 1990's this book takes the same format of his earlier work in that each chapter is largely a standalone essay. As such they overlap and occasionally repeat. Which is probably good for us of limited intellect who can only swallow these kind of thought-crimes little by little. His arguments haven't really changed but he has amassed such a bottomless pit of apparent 'evidence' that it just beats you into submission. If you are not familiar with his line of thought then here is a brief over-view: The West has a traditional view of itself as being the "good guys". Hence it goes out into the World doing good deeds to lots of ungrateful foreigners. Noam's 'revealed truth' is that the West does the opposite of what it might think it is doing and it is deluding itself. He goes onto express his belief that this is not an accident - it is, in fact, very deliberate.

     For example - the US involvement in Vietnam. Although pretty much everyone concluded that this was a very bad thing the US has ended up convincing itself that America was the Victim of that War. Not only that - the average US Citizen lives in an environment where they have no guilt for their ten year bombing campaign in South East Asia because they had the 'best of intentions'. They were holding back Communism as part of the Cold War.

     Chomsky cleverly turns that on its head and presents the case that it is really Vietnam that was a victim of US aggression. It was the US who invaded a defenceless country in an attempt to prop up various corrupt and incompetent puppet regimes. Why did the US do this? Because it needs every country to be within the US field of influence so that trade can flow in a manner that is beneficial to the US and it allies. There are no 'best intentions'. 'Best intentions' are just the propaganda message that the US administration uses when it makes excuses to its own citizens for the decision it makes. It is either that or we make 'mistakes'.

     Another favoured topic is the establishment of the US Military Industrial Complex. Chomsky's view of this is essentially Orwellian. Indeed he does quote Orwell on several occasions and for this he is to be admired. Anyone who has yet to read a Chomsky book should actually start by reading "1984". It is for good reason that Michael Moore ended the "Fahrenheit 9/11" movie with a quote from "1984". It is a point that Chomsky would fully endorse. The point is this: the power establishment need continual war. Continual war will mean that you can scare the public. In a democracy the threat of war or terror will allow the law makers to rewrite the rules in their own favour for the sake of "security". Continual war means that you can raise taxes and budget deficits and use the money to buy armaments. This money goes towards the rich and already powerful. The rich and powerful can buy the government who will maintain continual war. Hence everyone's vested interests are maintained. Unless, of course, you are the very poor and just lost your Social Security welfare. Or, of course, you are the ones at the receiving end of all those bullets and bombs.

"....Anyone who has yet to read a Chomsky book should start by reading "1984"."

     Anyway - I digress. THIS book is actually NOT about Vietnam. This time around Chomsky is shaking his fist at the US debacle in Central America and Kuwait. Written shortly before the US Coalition liberated Kuwait, Chomsky takes no prisoners in his condemnation of western hypocrisy. He repeatedly points out just how many imaginative peace-proposals were set out by the Baghdad Government in order to settle what they thought was just a local dispute between Arab nations. Each peace offer, including one to completely withdraw from Kuwait on the basis that the US endorses a solution to the Israeli-Palestinian problem, were belittled. Washington poured cold water on every offer on the basis that Iraq had to be punished.

     Far worse, for all of us, is the US insistence that no form of negotiated settlement was possible, even if this meant the UN were involved. Chomsky points out that that is the role of the United Nations! It is NOT up to the US to unilaterally decide that this country or that country needs to be punished for whatever reason.

     Which brings us to the Invasion of Panama. Chomsky rips through the US propaganda with gusto to lift the veil upon the appalling crimes committed by the US against this small country. He draws close parallels with the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait to illustrate the total hypocrisy of the US's position on the illegal occupation of a sovereign Nation.

     Next up for treatment is Reagan and his neo-conservative agenda in the rest of Central-America, namely Honduras, Nicaragua and El Salvador. The US-suppressed news of the free and fair elections on the basis that the people in these countries wouldn't vote for the US-backed Party. Hence these people had to 'liberated' from their incorrect decisions through ten years of US-sponsored terrorism. Those wonderful US-backed 'freedom fighters' used terrorism against these countries in order to back them into a corner where the only choice to end the war was for the good citizens to vote for the "right" candidate. The "right" candidate is the one belonging to the landed gentry, ie, the pro-business and pro-US politician.

"...Governments always act with self-interest whatever they may tell the people who elected them"

     Which brings us to the title of the book. Noam Chomsky has presented a clear case, through many examples, of how consistent US foreign policy has been. Every time it acts in the interest in promoting "US-style" democracy. This means that there are two pro-Business/anti-Poor Parties. There is no real choice. Any left-wing, liberal of socialist-style Party (and, Heavens-forbid, Communists!) will end up the victim of a death-squad. There is no true democracy. Any signs of true democracy emerging, within America's sphere of influence, is ruthlessly stamped out. Which roughly translates as backing the most extreme right-wing military dictatorship in the interest of "stability". Where "stability" translates as "in the interests of US Business". As always, he is spot on.

     What is interesting is how Noam's ultimate wrath is reserved for his fellow intellectuals. He rounds on them as the 'commissars' for the traditional Western doctrine. Second in line is Western media who fail to track down the real story and who are happy to follow the propaganda trail laid out for them by the White House.

     So, is there anything wrong with Noam's reality? If I have any criticism it is that, in truth, most of what he says is an essential truism of real-politick. Governments always act with self-interest whatever they may tell the people who elected them. The problem is this; everyone prefers to live within the fantasy that it is done in their interests. Where Noam approaches controversy is that he asserts the Government acts in the interests of big Business and not the interest of the elector. The Conservative-right has pretty much convinced itself that, through trickle-down economics that this is one and the same thing. How convenient. But nothing new.

     So, what is so threatening about something so obvious? The problem is not in Western internal affairs. We delude ourselves at our own cost. No, the problem is that the West enforces these same values upon other countries on the assumption that 'what is good for Uncle Sam is good for everyone'. Once this level of extraordinary arrogance is reached by the ultra-rich and the ultra-powerful then it will result in suffering. All the fine words about encouraging 'democracy' have never been borne out by any actual deed. What "we" want from YOUR democracy is to get what WE want.

    On the day of writing these words Hugo Chavez, President of Venezuela, stood up in at the United Nations to deliver his famous "President Bush is the Devil" speech. He then picked up a very large Noam Chomsky novel and waved it at his audience. Hardly surprising really. His country has much to be bitter about being yet another victim of US foreign policy.