That
the secret and unaccountable Deep State floats freely above the gridlock
between both ends of Pennsylvania Avenue is the paradox of American government
in the twenty-first century.
Mike Lofgren, Anatomy of the Deep State, 2014
In the last two posts (‘Truth and History’, and ‘The Truth Deficit’) I’ve tried to show that while our nation’s history teaches us to feel
good about our membership of it, conspiracy theories perversely do the
opposite. Yet even as we recoil from
them they are assaulting our received historical narrative as never
before. They are, in fact, challenging
us to reappraise our relationship to the very authorities and opinion makers we
trust, and the mass media through whom they shape our collective beliefs.
These shared opinions and beliefs, shaped as they are by what
we receive from our authorities (whomever we may determine them to be) define
our membership of our community. Evidence that challenges them thus creates
acute cognitive dissonance. Our cultural
immune system will reject or ignore more fundamental truths – such as proofs of
logical inconsistency, or even the laws of physics – in order to preserve the loyalties
on which we have come to depend as a
community. Recall that the members
of the Inquisition refused to look up Galileo’s telescope, for fear of the
damage it would do to their beliefs. A
movie which challenges the man-made global warming paradigm will have the same
effect today.
Reality, I have said, is not ‘out there’. We make
sense of the world, that is, of the myriad sensory inputs that constitute the
continuity of our experience. What we continually therefore seek from our
fellow men is confirmation that our
experience tallies with theirs. If it does, we have community, if it doesn’t,
we have strife. Education is very largely the effort to get all members of a
given community on the same page. One
community’s education is another’s propaganda. Truth, therefore, isn’t
something ‘out there’, it’s an agreement. Trust is the cement in this creative
endeavor. Without trust the whole edifice collapses. (‘Trust’ and ‘truth’ come
from the same Indo-European root dru,
from which we also get the word ‘durable’. What is true is that which endures.) Since we can only trust that which is true, blind
loyalty seems to me a dangerous option in our present situation.
So I need to hammer a bit more on the evidence that says we
are being duped, big time. That evidence
unfortunately can’t come from the sources we wish to investigate, but then other sources are not our authorities. This provides a
credibility gap that our cultural immune system will waste no time exploiting to justify doing nothing. However, there are a few
authorities who come pretty close to bridging that gap, and in this post I want
to focus on one of them.
In The Secret
Government - a gripping, ‘personal essay’ researched and narrated thirty
years ago by the incomparable Bill
Moyers - the then-current preoccupation of an America in the throes of the
Iran-Contra scandal was the unwarranted power that had accumulated in the hands
of President Ronald Reagan and his advisors. Then Senator Daniel Inouye described
the so-called ‘Enterprise’ which channelled money from operations in Iran to fund
the Contras in Nicaragua, as
a
shadowy government with its own air force, its own navy, its own fund raising
mechanism, and the ability to pursue its own ideas of the national interest
free from all checks and balances and free from the law itself.
Moyers exposed a culture of profits-before-patriotism, and
the evolution of conflict into a money making business of perpetual war. The
Constitution, he concluded, was being ‘shredded’, and We the People must be
somehow alerted to set things right again. I provide a link below to the broadcast, from
which here are a few more quotations (Moyers is the speaker, unless otherwise attributed):
“Secrecy
is the freedom zealots dream of. No watchman to check the door. No accountant
to check the books. No judge to check the law. The Secret Government has no
Constitution. The rules it follows are
the rules it makes up. So [CIA Director] William Casey could dream that the
Enterprise would take on a life of its own; permanent, and unaccountable.”
“…
the only people fooled are the American people. But consent is the very heart
of our Constitutional System. How can people judge what they do not know, or
what they are told falsely?”
And, chillingly, in view of what we know now
“Just
imagine that William Casey’s dream came true. Suppose the Enterprise grew into
a super-secret, self-financing, self-perpetuating organisation.”
“We’ve
turned the war powers of the United States over to, well, we’re never really
sure who, or what they’re doing, or what it costs, or who is paying for it. The
one thing we are sure of is - this largely secret global war, carried on with
less and less accountability to democratic institutions, has become a way of
life. And now we’re faced with a question, brand new in our history: can we
have the permanent warfare state, and democracy too?”
“The
secret government had been given the license to reach all the way to every
mailbox, every college campus, every telephone and every home.” [And
this was back in 1987!]
We
start out breaking foreign rules, since every country has laws against secretly
overthrowing their governments, and then you end up breaking the law at home
and coming to feel a contempt for the law, for your colleagues and associates,
for the Congress and the public, and for the Constitution… Precisely because
they cannot get their way in public debate they are driven to seek to subvert
the democratic process.
Morton Halperin, then Director
of the Washington Office of the
American Civil Liberties Union.
Moyers: Do you think that what we’ve seen of the secret sale of arms to Iran
and the private war in Nicaragua is on a par with what we saw at Watergate?
Prof. Edwin Firmage, Univ. of
Utah: Oh, the substance of it is far
above Watergate. You have the sale of armaments to terrorist groups, which can
only foment more kidnapping and more terror, and finance it. You have the doing
of this by the armed forces; a very scary thing. You have the government a part
in this, doing things that Congress has forbidden: direct illegality. You have
constitutional abuses that are enormous… The whole fight is over means, not
ends. Every president, with every good intention, and every tyrant… has used
precisely the same argument, that is “Don’t constrain me by means and I will
get you there safely and well.” And I think any time we accept a
reason-of-state argument to justify means that are totally incongruent with the
values of state we are on the highroad to tyranny. And we deserve to be there.
“The
‘national security’ argument [i.e. invoking the National Security Act of 1947] now
interferes with every American’s right to understand its government. That’s
what secrecy’s all about these days.”
Scott Armstrong, Director of the National Security Archive.
And towards the end we hear a small-community activist –
We
have a hymn that the words go to something like ‘I wish that my eyes had never
been opened, because if they’d been opened I’d have to do something about it’,
and I think that’s a problem with a lot of people in this country. They don’t
want their eyes to be opened, because they’re very comfortable, very secure,
and if their eyes are opened they’re going to have to do something.
Thirty years on all this sounds sickeningly familiar. Fourteen years after this broadcast, on the
eve of 9/11, then Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld announced to a stunned
Congress that the Pentagon had lost track of $2.3 trillion. Another 14 years
after that the amount is estimated to
be more than $8 trillion.
In 2014 Bill Moyers broadcast The Deep State. By now it’s clear that a much more diverse group of
actors is involved. Still broadly arrayed under the rubric of ‘national
security’ – and still very much protected by the smothering blanket of the National
Security Act of 1947 – we now have Homeland Security, the Pentagon, the State
Department, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Courts, the Treasury
Department, and, bizarrely, Wall Street, in addition to the more than 3000
secretive government-funded organisations mentioned in my last post.
Moyers: If, as you
write, the ideology of the Deep State is not democrat or Republican, not Left
or Right, what is it?
Lofgren: It’s an
ideology; I just don’t think we’ve named it. It’s a kind of corporatism… The
actors in this drama tend to steer clear of social issues.
They pretend to be
merrily neutral servants of the state. Giving the best advice possible on
national security or financial matters. But they hold a very deep ideology of
the Washington consensus at home, which is deregulation, outsourcing,
deindustrialisation and financialisation, and they believe in American
exceptionalism abroad, which is boots on the ground everywhere; it’s our right
to meddle everywhere in the world, and the result of that is perpetual war… A
government within the government that operates off the visible government and
operates off the taxpayers, but doesn’t seem to be constrained in the
Constitutional sense by the government.
Pablo
Your blog is a very interesting read. The ideas you have presented are very thought provoking.
ReplyDeleteI am also trying to put up blog articles with similar concerns or topics. In case you would like to compare notes or ideas, feel free to visit my website: https://www.victoriahoffarth.com