The demonization of the Soviet Union in the post-World War II era was the basis for America’s reputation as the defender of freedom and democracy. Some historians and commentators deny that the United Sates deserved its reputation. The point to America’s destruction of native inhabitants, to the theft of Spanish territories in Texas and what become the Southwest of the United States, to the internment of Japanese-American citizens during World War II, to the apartheid existence of black Americans who participated very little in freedom and democracy for most of American history, and to Washington’s refusal to tolerate the rise of reformist governments in Central America.
Whether or not America ever deserved its reputation, during the last few years of the 20th century under the Bill Clinton regime and during the 21st century neoconservative regimes of George W. Bush and Barak Obama, Washington threw away America’s reputation in order to better pursue its agenda of hegemony over the world.
The Soviet Union had constrained and limited American power. The collapse of the Soviet Union unleashed American hubris and arrogance. Having declared itself to be the “world’s only superpower,” Washington began reorganizing the world in its own interest, which Washington disguised as “bringing freedom and democracy to the world.”
The September 11, 2001, attacks on the World Trade Center and on the Pentagon provided the “new Pearl Harbor” that the neoconservatives had written was necessary in order to launch their wars of conquest. The history of the 21st century has been the consequence of 9/11.
The government’s account of 9/11 has been effectively by 2, 000 high-rise architects and structural engineers, by physicists and chemists, by firefighters and first responders, by pilots, and by numerous former government officials. No aware and informed person believes that the US national security state and the intelligent services of Washington’s NATO allies and Israel’s Mossad were outsmarted by a handful of Arabs operating independently of any government and intelligence service.
Washington’s argument has been that terrorists must be killed “over there” before they come “over here” and attack America again. This argument has never made any sense, because Washington acknowledges that terrorists are stateless. According to Washington, almost all of the 9/11 terrorists were Saudi Arabians. Yet, Washington attacked Afghanistan and Iraq. Washington arranged the overthrow of Gaddafi in Libya despite the absence of any relationship to 9/11. Almost every day Washington murders with drones people in Pakistan und Yemen, countries with which America is not at war. Washington has sent Kenyan troops to fight Islamists in Somalia, and has sent French and Nigerian troops to Mali to fight the Washington-armed Islamists who drifted there after helping to overthrow Gaddafi.
Mao said power comes out of the barrel of a gun. Washington says freedom and democracy come out of bombings. Mao is reviled, but Washington is praised or praises itself.
The second part of Washington’s argument is that in order to be safe, Americans must give up the civil liberties granted to them by the US Constitution. In order to be safe, Americans must consent to citizens being thrown into prison indefinitely without any evidence presented to a court and without any executive branch accountability to due process.
Americans must also consent to their government’s murder of citizens without due process of law. Mere suspicion or unproven accusation by some unaccountable executive branch official is enough to snuff out the life and liberty of American citizens and to confiscate all of their property and assets.
To be safe, Americans must also consent to being spied on – every email, every Internet site visited, every telephone call, every letter written, every credit card used and purchase made, as William Binney and Edward Snowden have proven. On September 28, 2013, The New York Times reported that the NSA is even mapping the social connections of US citizens. Washington’s argument is that unless Americans accept the most complete police state in human history, they are not safe.
Consequently, today no American is safe from his own government.
In public discourse in the United States facts are no longer permitted. Propaganda reigns. Washington, despite conclusive evidence to the contrary, ruled that Saddam Hussein in Iraq possessed “weapons of mass destruction” and that his possession of such weapons justified Washington’s invasion of Iraq.
When chemical weapons were used in Syria, Washington instantly blamed the Assad government and attempted to organize support for intervening against the secular Syrian government in behalf of the Islamists. Washington claimed to have conclusive evidence but refused to share it. The ploy did not work. The world saw through it. The Russian government challenged it. The British Parliament, long an American puppet, voted against Obama’s war against Syria, declaring that Great Britain would not serve as cover for another American war crime. All of NATO except the French “socialist” president abandoned Obama’s war scheme, as did the American people and the US Congress. […]
The columns in this collection from August 2008 through December 2013 [The French edition “L’Amérique Perdue” was published in 2017] document America’s descent into a Stasi Police State domestically and into a warfare state whose aim is world domination. The individual incidents and travesties presented in this collection are most likely forgotten, assuming Americans ever knew of them. When massed together they document the descent of the US into the lawlessness of tyranny. There is some repetition. I was faced with the decision to eliminate the repetition so that the individual selections would read more like chapters in a book or to leave the repetition so that the individual selections could stand independently of the book as a whole. I decided to retain the individual selections largely as written as that presents the reader both with a book and with a collection of essays. •
* Paul Craig Roberts (1939) is an American economist and publicist. He was a high official in the US Treasury during the Reagan government and is known as a co-founder of the Reagan government’s economic policy program (“Reagonomics”). He was co-editor and columnist for the “Wall Street Journal”, columnist of the Business Week and of the Scripps Howard News Service. He was asked for expert reports in 30 Congress occasions about economic policy. His criticism of the neoliberal economic policy, which he considered led to the financial crisis in 2008, has mainly been reflected in his work “The Failure of Laissez-Faire Capitalism and the Economic Erosion of the West” (2012).
Unsere Website verwendet Cookies, damit wir die Page fortlaufend verbessern und Ihnen ein optimiertes Besucher-Erlebnis ermöglichen können. Wenn Sie auf dieser Webseite weiterlesen, erklären Sie sich mit der Verwendung von Cookies einverstanden.
Weitere Informationen zu Cookies finden Sie in unserer Datenschutzerklärung.
Wenn Sie das Setzen von Cookies z.B. durch Google Analytics unterbinden möchten, können Sie dies mithilfe dieses Browser Add-Ons einrichten.