How Hating America Becomes Perfectly Rational And Even Necessary
by Transmontanus, 25 September 2007
When I was watching this Bill Maher show segment I was immediately struck by how it captured perfectly, in just a few short minutes, everything that I despise about the American mass media, and about American “liberals.” Maher’s guest is the human bacillus Michael Scheuer, until recently most famous for having been utterly unqualifed to do his job for the CIA in tracking Osama Bin Laden. Rehabilitated as a turn-to “expert” on American foreign policy dans les affaires des jihadistes after having warmed the hearts of Fox News viewers with his rallying cry to hunt down America’s waylayers “without a great deal of concern for civilian casualties”, and more recently endorsed by Bin Laden himself, Scheuer has Maher slobbering on his slippers straight away.
Utterances proceed from Scheuer’s cakehole in the following sequence:
“I hope Israel flourishes. I just don’t think it’s worth an American life or an American dollar.”
Applause. Some muffled grumbles. Maher interjects, flaccidly, and Scheuer elaborates.
“Not only Israel, sir, but Saudi Arabia or Kuwait or Bolivia.”
Maher offers another lame interjection, and Scheuer waves old glory.
“What I’m telling you, sir, is I’m most interested in the survival of the United States.”
Raucous applause. Hoots. Maher pleads Israel’s special case as a democracy, and Scheuer scoffs.
“So what? Sir, it doesn’t matter to Americans if anyone ever votes again. We’ll get by just fine, sir.”
Maher gets a bit teary for poor old Israel, winning aaws and claps from audience. Scheuer then displays astonishing illiteracy on America’s role in Israel’s survival, and then this:
“I think it earns America tremendous pain, and increasingly dead Americans, fighting wars that are not ours to fight.”
Scheuer then confirms for Maher that he still thinks it’s okay to kill America’s enemies without particular regard for civilian casualties, and then he doffs his cap to that backward jackalope of a Republican, the “antiwar” Ron Paul, on the point that America should “stop intervening in their world except where it’s absolutely necessary.”
Maher: “Yeah. I would agree with that.”
Lovely, then. Bipartisan American consensus all round, concluding comment to the effect it was all about oil after all, something weird about daylight savings time, closing gag about guineas - you know, Italians - and. . . cue applause.
And that, my dear American comrades, is how we come to hate you.
Because no nation, Israel or Bolivia or Kuwait or anywhere else, is worth less than an American dollar, and an American life is not worth more than someone else’s, and the people you call your “allies” notice it when you cheer at the proclamation that the survival of the United States is all that counts.
Because it does matter if the rest of us never get to vote again, and you will not get by just fine, and if “their” wars aren’t yours to fight, then your wars aren’t ours to fight, and you will pay dearly for your disregard for civilian casualties, and it is not their world, because there is only one world, and you will be hated and reviled and detested in it.
You will be hated by democrats, freedom fighters, feminists, students, teachers, people who like to paint portraits, people who like to play musical instruments, queer people, kite-flyers, and people like me, or you will be hated by jihadists, obscurants, misoginysts, lynchers, tyrants, fascists and the scum of the earth.
Suck it up, American liberals. Decide.
Tuesday 25 September 2007 at 8:30
Hating 300 million people because two of them are assholes? So is it OK to hate all Canadians because of (among many other possible examples) Naomi Klein?
Yes, yes, we know you’re not being entirely serious, and you’re making valid points about US media and US politics, but why give ammunition to people who (unlike you) really do harbour an irrational hatred of all things American?
Oh, and who gives a toss what American liberals think anyway?
Tuesday 25 September 2007 at 8:34
What siaw said. Including the semi-continent-sized hateability of Naomi Klein.
Tuesday 25 September 2007 at 9:00
Terry, you’re an American too. I know you’re trying to make valid points using a tried and tested rhetorical device, but you abandon real US liberals by writing off the entire country in this way.
Scheuer is a dick. A dick who has created a lucrative niche for himself in US medialand. And there are many like him, on both sides of the Pond, and with a broad spectrum of dickedness. We have a problem with this yah-boo soundbite political commentary everywhere, not just in the US. It’s this we should be addressing in general terms, not wasting time on imbecilic individuals such as Michael Scheuer.
Yes, I know - pots, kettles and all that. But it really is futile, and for me it no longer has the cathartic value it once had. Call a dick a dick, but I wouldn’t expend more than, say, 50 words doing so. Have a pop instead at those who possess real power and influence.
Tuesday 25 September 2007 at 9:38
Many Americans favor helping out other countries but oppose sending troops for a number of reasons.
First, it usually doesn’t work. Americans die, innocent civilians die and then some asshole rises to replace the asshole we’ve deposed. The only difference is the new asshole has to build a nation in the smoldering rubble and usually to save his own skin he blames the evil occupiers.
Second, no matter what are intentions are we end up being the bad guy.
Si it’s not that Ron Paul is saying screw the third world, it’s that he realizes that government and, more specifically war, is not always the best answer to what’s wrong with the world.
But Ron Paul is certainly not an isolationist. He is for free trade with all and no entangling alliances.
I share your frustration with most of the politicians running the United States.
I see Ron Paul as the only candidate willing to face up to several facts.
1. US foreign policy affects the way we are viewed by other nations.
2. When we befriend Israel by giving them tons of money that they in turn use to kill their neighbors we should expect retaliation. (Note that this is specifically an entangling alliance).
The United States has problems of its own to solve without taking responsibility for being the world’s policeman.
Personally I would quadruple the size of the Peace Corps through additional private funding and I would bring every single soldier home from an country in the world that is not the United States. The best way to spread democracy abroad is to be a shining example of democracy at work.
Tuesday 25 September 2007 at 10:13
No point in blogging if you can’t indulge in an angry rant from time to time, it suits the immediacy of the medium.
I think that the important point is in the last paragraph, it is about discrimination, something that has been a weakness in American foreign policy. I think that Terry has expressed that powerfully. When America supports grubby regimes around the world we get angry at the bolstering of oppressors against the oppressed. But, for example, when we hear the words of support for the pro-democracy campaigners in Burma, and especially if there is intelligent action to support them, we should cheer America to the rafters.
This failure of discrimination is the grievous fault of the liberal left. Isolationism and example is not the way either. Activism is required and if dictators, murderers and fascists hate the USA we should rejoice that the Americans have chosen their enemies well.
Tuesday 25 September 2007 at 10:43
That guy was odious. I’ve never heard Sheuer speak, but he should speak less.
Tuesday 25 September 2007 at 10:52
When I was watching this Bill Maher show segment I was immediately struck by how it captured perfectly, in just a few short minutes, everything that I despise about the American mass media, and about American “liberals.”
Be fair, man, you could watch any segment of any of his shows and get struck in that way.
And throw in that goddam Jon Stewart while you’re at it.
If aliens are getting our TV broadcasts, we’re doomed.
Tuesday 25 September 2007 at 13:15
Great post
Tuesday 25 September 2007 at 16:25
This was a post about how people end up hating America, and how Americans who think they’re liberals get it wrong.
Gadgie gets it exactly. Jura got it wrong from the first sentence. Especially his first sentence.
I just linked to an abbreviated version of the segment. You should have seen what happened when Salman Rushdie and Jeanane Garofalo came on. Enough to make you want to put your boot in the tube.
Tuesday 25 September 2007 at 17:30
Correct me if I’m wrong, Terry, but you moved to Canuckistan as a small child, no? Surely that makes you a (continental) American, just as I’m an Antipodean turned European.
Tuesday 25 September 2007 at 18:18
John Foster:
It was very illuminating to hear Paul Watson, the Canadian photo journalist who took the famous pictures of the dead American soldier’s body being mutilated by the crowds in the streets of Mogadishu who has written a book, being interviewed on the CBC last night. In short, he regrets the terrible lesson Al-Qaeda took about how few deaths the American public will tolerate before running from a fight as that event was what gave such a free hand to the genocidal government of Rwandan, etc.
Tuesday 25 September 2007 at 18:22
Dear Jura:
No. Being a Canadian from an immigrant family (Irish via England) does not somehow make me an American, anymore than it’s sensible to call an American a Canadian just because Canada occupies more of the continent than the United States does, or to call an Irishman British just because some Englishman thought up the term “British Isles” and included the island of Ireland in them.
You don’t call a Brazilian a Peruvian just because they share the same continent. You don’t call a Greek Cypriot a Turk just because he’s surrounded by Turks, and you don’t call a Canadian an American just because the Americans couldn’t think of a better name for themselves.
But mainly, it just doesn’t contribute to anything. And it’s all beside the point I was making.
To be clear: I like Americans just fine. They are noisy neighbours, but I wouldn’t want to share a border with anyone else (I know, that sounds a bit off but you get my meaning), and I can’t abide the reflexive anti-Americanism that has become a substitute for rational analysis throughout much of the Left. But if you think American liberals of the type Maher represents have no “real power and influence” in the United States, you should pay closer attention. Their primary power and influence is in shaping the critique, and indeed the entire political vocabulary, of the anti-conservative opposition to the Bush regime.
That’s real power. That’s real influence. It matters.
Tuesday 25 September 2007 at 18:29
“This was a post about how people end up hating America”: OK, then - but it still would have been a better post if it was made clear that (a) you are not one of those people and (b) people who do end up hating *any* whole nation, or other group, whether because of the assholery of some of its members or on any other pretext, are themselves assholes. Gadgie’s absolutely right that there’s “no point in blogging if you can’t indulge in an angry rant from time to time”, but the corollary is that it’s a good idea to ensure that your angry rant isn’t mistaken for a different and stupider kind of angry rant.
But this is slipping from footnoting an interesting post into expounding The Laws of Blogging as Handed Down at Sinai, so it’s time to stop.
Tuesday 25 September 2007 at 18:44
Okay, my dear SIAW, then stop.
But first understand that it is actually possible to hate America without hating Americans. It’s a kind of hatred that has seized all sorts of people. Vietnamese, Chileans, Guatemalans . . . it’s a long list.
As for making clear that I am not one of “those people” etc., I trust the intelligence of readers here not to mistake my point for some stupid assertion I didn’t come even close to making.
See previous comment for elucidation. Starts with “Dear Jura.”
xoxoxo
tg
Tuesday 25 September 2007 at 20:12
“it is actually possible to hate America without hating Americans”: Sorry, you got us started again - what does “America” in that sentence even mean? You want us to hate a section of a landmass? If you mean the US government or the US ruling class, or even just US liberals, why not say that?
Apologies for being stupid and all, but, for fuck’s sake, please don’t lump us in with the Jura Wankmaker.
Tuesday 25 September 2007 at 21:05
Dear Saskatchewan In An Age of Waiting:
I’m not asking anyone to hate anything. I don’t even want you to call Jura funny names. But in the examples I cited - the Vietnamese, Chileans, Guatemalans - it was America that ended up being hated. There’s not much intellectual parsing going on when the bombs are falling. You just end up hating what “America” means in your life. America becomes its function, and its content recedes into irrelevance.
America will be hated, and Americans should get over it. What Americans can decide is whether to be hated by good guys or bad guys.
Is all I’m saying.
Tuesday 25 September 2007 at 21:14
“Jura Wankmaker”. Do you both feel the same amount of comtempt towards Francis or will the one who didn’t write that feel that he / she has been misrepresented?
Surely this “siaw” - so uniformly opinionated and consistently up its own arse - cannot comprise two people?
Tuesday 25 September 2007 at 21:22
Terry: Thanks for the further clarification. Didn’t mean to nag.
frank: Your devastating wit is just so - well, kinda pathetic. We’re commenting on a blog - should we *not* be opinionated?
And yes, we do both feel the same about Cde Sedgemore - if we didn’t, one of us would have used a different pseudonym. We also both doubt that we are the only two readers of this blog who feel that way. Not really so very amazing, after all.
By the way, whose arse do you think we should be up instead?
Tuesday 25 September 2007 at 22:22
“It is better to be feared than loved, if you cannot be both.” - Niccolo Machiavelli.
Tuesday 25 September 2007 at 23:18
Number 20.
Really excellent posting Terry. Great stuff — as usual.
I see what you mean about the other parts of the stupid pish on the telly:
from 4 mins in:
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=4GY9rVnh6CM
carried on here:
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=tdPamVhZEIA
TG has won the argument hands down here. Don’t know what other fuckers are whingeing about — pretty fucking obvious to me what TG is saying in the post and following comments, and why he’s saying it.
Anyway - too much pettiness and pedantry about here today…
SIAW, you’ve spent so much time arguing against mindless pseudo-lefty anti-American crap that you don’t recognise anything that’s critical of either US political culture or stupid dumb pissant liberals who have a particularly American way of viewing the world (i.e. because they are American) — everyone should grow either a) a fucking spine or b) some fucking balls or c) both or d) agree with me.
Unaha Closp: Machiavelli also recognised we have, what he called, virtù - the capacity for collective action and historical vitality. So get a fucking grip man will you. We are not passive creatures!
Can I have a biscuit now?
Wednesday 26 September 2007 at 3:46
(d).
Garibaldi or Rich Tea?
Wednesday 26 September 2007 at 4:24
Well, speaking as an American liberal, I also can’t stand Scheuer and don’t at all believe in this left-wing isolationism, which is just the same as right-wing isolationism in ignoring the fact that we Americans live in the same world as everyone else.
Wednesday 26 September 2007 at 17:42
Isn’t there equally an internationalist impulse in the contemporary American political landscape? I’m thinking particularly about the mobilisation around Darfur, or that bands like System of a Down are making documentaries about genocide and genocide prevention. TG and Gadgie are absolutely right about the inability of the so-called American left to discriminate, though. I’ve been watching a lot of shit American TV lately (the curse of moving into a place that has a still-working cable hookup) and the level of political debate in the American media is shocking. Thomas Friedman was on The Colbert Report the other night talking a whole mouthful of nonsensical pish about how the world is flat but then when he mentioned that the US should withdraw troops from Iraq, he got a round of applause. I’m beginning to get the impression that Americans have a pavlovian response to certain concepts or key phrases. See also Will’s link to that dailykos site.
Wednesday 26 September 2007 at 23:01
Hi Graeme. I’d love to be wrong about this but I see no internationalist impulse in America, on the left anyway, that is “equal” to the reactionary isolationists of the left or the right. But the case of Darfur is interesting. American liberals come off way better than we Canadians do (so hello to you too, Rebecca).
Last year I interviewed Clement Apaak, founder of the Canadian Students for Darfur, and he told me that Darfur activism had failed to gain any traction in Canada: “I consider myself centre-left, and I have been very active and vocal on a lot of issues, but I have to admit I have been very disappointed about the blatant silence of the left on this issue.”
Here’s the irony, given the post these comments are following. Apaak blamed the Canadian left’s knee-jerk anti-Americanism for the problem (the US administration has been a bit stern about Khartoum). “The left is being very hypocritical, and they are not willing to see the issue for what it is. It has nothing to do with whether the U.S. is supporting Darfur or not,” Apaak said.
There was another problem Darfur activists faced in Canada, and that was an irrational suspicion about the involvement of Jewish organizations in Darfur advocacy, Apaak said.
“If you can find out why the left has been so silent about this, I would like to know.”
So kudos to the Yanks on Darfur activism. But you’re going to have to try harder, because, I’m ashamed to say, you’re not getting much help from us Canucks.
Thursday 27 September 2007 at 23:09
I’ve never before watched a debate involving Bill Maher where I found myself siding more with Maher than his counterpoint. Not much more–somewhat along the lines of enjoying a teeth cleaning more than a root canal–but a little. Thank you for that new experience.
There are still a few good sources of American news commentary. I’m partial to Dave Despain.