I was listening to a Government spokesman talk about how we had a "determined enemy" in Al Qaeda. This is true. We have any number of determined enemies to democracy, and Al Qaeda, the Taliban, some of the ideas of Wahabiism, some strains of Shiism, Hamas and Hezbollah, all embrace ideological notions that are inimical to Democracy and that target our country.
Unfortunately, they aren't our Country's only enemies. Timothy McVeigh represented another radical stream that was inimical to our country as well. His direction of attack was from the right. Now, mostly sidelined groups like the Weather Underground, represented still another. If we go by how people feel about the United States currently, we will find ourselves pretty alone. If we were really serious about prophylactic invasions and spreading Democracy by force, we don't have the resource and manpower material to accomplish such a Sysiphian task.
But of course the most severe threat to our way of life, right now comes from within. It comes from the far right, the "Timothy McVeigh" wing of the Republican Party, which is seeking to do away with our rights in the name of fighting "terrorism." There is a serious campaign, with serious legwork and preparation having been done long in advance (most of it in the Reagan Administration and before), designed to undermine and undercut the influence of what the Far Right Considers "liberal" forces at work in Society. This is all fact, but the paranoid presentation, spin, and hyperbole, about the subject by some on the left doesn't provide us with tools to fight this movement.
For example, the left, and folks like Rhandi Rhodes are rightly worried about the ideas of thinkers like Leo Strauss, but unless they understand those ideas thoroughly they will never be able to deal with them. Leo Strauss is influential because he followed in the footsteps of and understood the ideas of Georges Sorel, and he is popular with the Right, not because he started some unholy conspiracy, but because those ideas outline how to use religious mythic imagery, propaganda and merchandizing to get power, money and influence.
Some of these people understand this material on a practical level and apply it selfishly. Others understand it on an unconscious level and use it while denying the manipulative elements in their preachings. The ideas are not new, they are the lessons of the PaRDeS I talked about some time ago, applied in what most sages (Buddhists or Judaic) would agree is an evil manner. It is why the subject was on the list of "Forbidden lectures" not to be given until a person was spiritually ready to receive them. Very smart people, penetrating the "emptiness" of most tales, instead of reaching the next level of their personal spiritual development, use their knowledge to manipulate and rule others.
Manipulating language is something most partisans do. For example, I hate to have to fact check people on both sides of the spectrum. But these issues are nuanced and over simplifying them the wrong way does nobody any good. I was listening to Air America and Stephanie Miller made comments about Bill Frists speach on bringing Tribal Leaders into the government in order to undermine their influence yesterday. She was saying that he was advocating the Government cut and run by compromising with the Taliban. What he actually said was more nuanced:
"Giving the native tribes often targeted by Taliban recruitment a voice in the government will promote peace and prosperity in the region. Senator Frist does not believe Taliban fighters – often foreign fighters who come to Afghanistan to further conflict – should be brought into the reconciliation process."
He is perfectly right. We should be putting more effort into "raising up Afghanistan" and "undermining the Taliban" where we had a genuine causus bellus to attack. It was almost even self defense. We should be "fighting the Taliban" figuratively, and with money, education, infrastrcuture, and consciousness raising. But of course folks like the President and Bill Frist see the need as simply to involve them in the government. If women are denied schooling and have to take the vail, why that is just fine, these Dominionist Republicans are jealous and want the same capabilities here. That is why they couldn't see the Taliban for what it was until it's Al Qaeda allies struck at us. The difference between the Taliban and most of these tribal leaders is small. They helped bring the Taliban to power in the first place. The Taliban came to power largely because these ex-Mujaheedin "tribal leaders" had divided the country up into Poppy (Opium) growing warring states.
So Stephanie Miller is half right. Working with these leaders is what got us 9/11 in the first place. The point is, she used "Taliban" imagery to convey a point, which wasn't entirely accurate, but easier than going through the whole confusing history I just laid out. She'd have been accurate if she had said "he justified working with the same people who brought the Taliban to power in the first place."
The other point is, that Frist and company, are finally realizing something students of World History and Political Science have known since at least the days of Rudyard Kipling; "You can bring a horse to water, but you can't make him drink." We can help Afghanistan become a modern country. They will welcome that. Democracy, Freedom, Womens Rights, we can't do that for them. And we certainly cannot create Democracy by invading countries and with the barrel of a Gun. If as the Republicans are saying diplomacy and police work approaches don't work, military solutions to socio-political issues not only don't work but actually cause more trouble than they are worth. As long as no one is actually attacking us (as Al Qaeda did) the best approach is to be neither "friends nor foes" to the Governments, but always friends to the common folks and to business.
the final point is that while manipulating language is something that partisans do, those seeking enlightenment and a better world, would be well advised to understand what they are doing when they use mythic language, similar, metaphor and religious imagery. It is impossible to counter a spin with a spin in the same direction. The only way to counter spin is to let it grind against reality. Friction will eventually stop any spinning ball, if the fires of reality don't melt it.
The friction generated by the far right exist because what they teach is a pack of lies. Every single one of the radical right concepts that are plaguing Moderns represents three overlapping forces; one is religious extremism and literalism (really ignore-ance), and the other deception and manipulation by people who have trained themselves in those techniques. And the third force represents people who understand only partly reality, either because they live in the fantasy world of the religious extremists, or they are burned out on the BS but trapped in their world and profiting from it.
Because they don't know what they are doing, and the people promoting those ideas are sophists -- and usually very powerful or soon to be powerful, the ideas seem plausible and people are deceived by them. Dogmas arise because of such deception and acquire power because the deception is coupled with force and fear. After years of such power, who would challenge the Catholic Church? Only a Martin Luther. Could he challenge the core ideas that were the real roots of his existential problem? No, he was not even aware of them and bought into confusions and deceptions that had been propagated 1200 years before his birth. When Nichiren talked about Kobo Daishi, he was talking about a man who lived almost 400 years before his time.
When we look at religion and politics today we have to be as fearless as Martin Luther, Martin Luther King, Mohandis Gandhi, or Nichiren, because "unspinning" lies is mighty hard once they are turned into Dogmas. Without being aware of the spin, the odds are that we'll have our own heads spinning the wrong way. To turn the "wheel of the law" one has to be aware that in a society such as ours everybody is spinning. It is just as easy to spin right, or to turn upside down and spin left. We get going if we spin from the middle.
Dominionism and the Republican far right, are only the latest manifestation of an ancient phenomena. All that Sorel and Strauss did was to put it in a modern context and reveal secrets that had remained hidden largely because those guarding them knew their danger and their power -- or were using them profitably themselves. The danger is that, just like early Christian Messianism was replaced by a Roman Anti-Messianism (figuratively and literally), so our Democratic nation could be replaced by an "Anti-Democratic" nation preserving the rhetoric while locking us up in authoritarianism. To fight that danger, we need the genuine thing -- religion and politics that are spiritual, truthful, true, and that use myth and imaging wisely.
More on Strauss, Sorel:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leo_Strauss
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georges_Sorel
(and you can find some of this in prior posts)
Chris