Encephalon

The Limits of Power: The End of American Exceptionalism by Andrew J. Bacevich author of The New American Militarism I snatched this up at the LA Library used bookstore for fifty cents and finished it in two days. It was breathtaking. Much has been written about the dark side of American profligacy and consumer culture - I cited a small portion of it for my graduate thesis - but this is the first time I've seen the subject treated by a retired Army colonel, currently a professor of history at Boston University and the author of four other works. I typed out this excerpt from the concluding chapter. I would like to believe that it could offer some clarity and resolution. He will no doubt be regarded as a fool by some for having the temerity to speak truth to power, but he does it so well. Conclusion: The Limits of Power (2008) Victorious in snowy Iowa, the candidate proclaimed – to wild applause – that “our time for change has come.” If elected president, he vowed to break the power of the lobbyists, provide affordable health care for all, cut middle-class taxes, end both the war in Iraq and the nation’s dependence on foreign oil, and “unite America and the world against the common threats of the twenty-first century.” In an earlier age, aspirants for the highest office in the land ventured to promise a chicken in every pot. In the present age, candidates like Senator Barack Obama set their sights on tackling “terrorism and nuclear weapons, climate change and poverty, genocide and disease.” The agenda is an admirable one. Yet to imagine that installing a particular individual in the Oval Office will produce decisive action on any of these fronts is to succumb to the grandest delusion of all. The quadrennial ritual of electing (or reelecting) a president is not an exercise in promoting change, regardless of what candidates may claim and ordinary voters believe. The real aim is to ensure continuity, to keep intact the institutions and arrangements that define present-day Washington. The veterans of past administrations who sign on as campaign advisers are not interested in curbing the bloated powers of the presidency. They want to share in exercising those powers. The retired generals and admirals who line up behind their preferred candidate don’t want to dismantle the national security state. They want to preserve, and, if possible, expand it. The candidates who decry the influence of money in national politics are among those most skilled at courting the well-heeled to amass millions in campaign contributions. No doubt the race for the presidency matters. It just doesn’t matter nearly as much as the media’s obsessive coverage suggests. Whoever moves into the White House on January 20, 2009, the fundamental problem facing the country – a yawning disparity between what Americans expect and what they are willing or able to pay – will remain stubbornly in place. Any presidential initiatives aimed at alleviating the crisis of profligacy, reforming our political system, or devising a more realistic military policy are likely, at best, to have a marginal effect. Paradoxically, the belief that all (or even much) will be well, if only the right person assumes the reins as president and commander in chief serves to underwrite the status quo. Counting on the next president to fix whatever is broken promotes expectations of easy, no-cost cures, permitting ordinary citizens to absolve themselves of responsibility for the nation’s predicament. The same Americans who profess to despise all that Washington represents look to – depending on partisan affiliation – a new John F. Kennedy or a new Ronald Reagan to set things right again. Rather than seeing the imperial presidency as part of the problem, they persist in the fantasy that a chief executive, given a clear mandate, will “change” the way Washington works and restore the nation to good health. Yet to judge by the performance of presidents over the past half century, including both Kennedy and Reagan, (whose legacies are far more mixed than their supporters will acknowledge), a citizenry that looks to the White House for deliverance is assured of disappointment. “Everybody in politics lies, but they do it with such ease, it’s troubling.” When the Hollywood mogul David Geffen offered this stinging assessment of Bill and Hillary Clinton as the 2008 presidential campaign began, he made headlines. To some, Geffen’s assessment smacked of cynicism. In fact, he was expressing an essential truth. Politics requires artful dissembling. Those who aspire to the presidency offer large promises, while delicately skirting any complications that might call into question their ability to translate promise into reality. The Big Lies are not the pledges of tax cuts, universal health care, family values restored, or a world rendered peaceful through the forceful demonstrations of American leadership. The Big Lies are the truths that remain unspoken: that freedom has an underside; that nations, like households, must ultimately live with their means; that history’s purpose, the subject of so many confident pronouncements, remains inscrutable. Above all, there is this: Power is finite. Politicians pass over matters such as these in silence. As a consequence, the absence of self-awareness that forms such an enduring element of the American character persists. At four-year intervals, ceremonies conducted to install a president reaffirm this inclination. Once again, at the anointed hour, on the steps of the Capitol, it becomes “morning in America.” The slate is wiped clean. The newly inaugurated president takes office, buoyed by expectations that history will soon be restored to its proper trajectory and the nation put back on track. There is something touching about these expectations, but also something pathetic, like the battered wife who expects that this time her husband will actually keep his oft-violated vow never again to raise his hand against her. For the abused wife, a condition of dependence condemns her to continuing torment. Salvation begins when she rejects that condition and asserts control over her life. Something of the same can be said of the American people. For the United States the pursuit of freedom, as defined in an age of consumerism, has induced a condition of dependence – on imported goods, on imported oil, and on credit. The chief desire of the American people, whether they admit it or not, is that nothing should disrupt their access to those goods, that oil, and that credit. The chief aim of the U.S. Government is to satisfy that desire, which it does in part through the distribution of largesse at home (with Congress taking a leading role) and in part through the pursuit of imperial ambitions abroad (largely the business of the executive branch). From time to time, various public figures – even presidents – make the point that dependence may not be a good thing. Yet meaningful action to reduce this condition is notable by its absence. It’s not difficult to see why. The center of authority within Washington – above all, the White House and the upper echelons of the national security state – actually benefit from this dependency: It provides the source of status, power, and prerogatives. Imagine the impact just on the Pentagon were this county actually to achieve anything approaching energy independence. U.S. Central Command would go out of business. Dozens of bases in and around the Middle East would close. The navy’s Fifth Fleet would stand down. Weapons contracts worth tens of billions would risk being canceled. So rather than addressing the problems of dependence, members of our political class seem hell-bent on exacerbating the problem. Rather than acknowledging that American power is not limitless, they pursue policies that actually accelerate the depletion of that power. Certainly, this has been the case since 9/11.

You first.

http://www.nbc.com/saturday-night-live/video/Sci-Fi-Cold-Open/1383274 Can't get the video to display!

It sounds like it might be a little too early to be thinking. Perhaps a library card and a little reflection on the literature would be a good place to start.

I think this conversation can include beliefs that we construct from our inner experience, but I'd like to broaden it to include ideas that we build from external information as well, since arguing about subjective material is relatively futile. Scotty, that escape hatch you built at the very end of your point - "Or maybe not" - seemed awfully convenient, did it not? I'm not sure I followed your dialogue completely but allow me another example. There was an ex-army intelligence guy, "Bob," in our dept. when I was an undergrad. He wanted to learn GIS. One day I brought up the story of how the Clinton Administration was hungering for a means of retribution for the embassy bombings in Africa. They decided to fire 12 cruise missiles at the Al-Shifa pharmaceutical plant in Khartoum, Sudan, citing spurious intelligence that suggested it was a chemical weapons factory. "Bob" insisted that the intelligence was sound, that he had seen it himself, and that the decision to destroy it was a legitimate one. His need to believe in the legitimacy of his nation's intelligence service and the work of his peers compelled him to accept his views (he struck me as an eminently thoughtful and bright young man, not your typical grunt). The only problem was that the owner of the pharmaceutical plant, a wealthy Sudanese banker, did in fact run a medicine factory and successfully sued for compensation under the legal assistance of Vernon Jordan, a member of Bill Clinton's legal team. But Bob could not "hear" any piece of data that conflicted with the enormity of his worldview. (At the time I was working as an intern with "PROJECT CENSORED," which included reading just about everything not cited by the American mainstream media, and I caught the story monitoring alternative radio. But I don't pretend that every American can come home from work and find the time to be a media analyst.) I'm suggesting that what we often need in order to rectify our blind spots is beyond our scope, even when we feel secure in the validity of our erroneous views.

Oh, right. Now you're the sage, waxing poetic for our edification. Your transparency is boundless!

I figured you take it as much. I guess we have a choice between getting our informtion from the likes of Bob Altemeyer, an author/scholar who has studied and written extensively about right wing authoritarianism for decades, or a young, uneducated social darwinist who looks up to the likes of Sarah Palin. The choice for many of us, Joe, is easier than you might think. All the best.

nyet

Laura Nyro, to be introduced into the R&R Hall of Fame this spring!!

I've been on an herbal regimen for awhile consisting of schizandra, horsetail, hawthorn berry, and olive leaf extract, for a number of reasons; adaptogenic, heart health, immunity, post-surgery. Today I snatched up bottle each of ashwagandha and Shilajit at my local Indian food store as the price was right. I got home and took all this stuff together, opened up the gelcaps and mixed it all together and slammed it down with in water, along with my Divya Mukta Vati, which is an extremely effective Ayurvedic compound for curing high blood pressure. Right now a little over an hour has passed and I'm feeling pretty damn good. There's no way to factor out the responsible agent, but I have to say that the two products I bought today are the likely one(s). I bought the ashwagandha because a really effective sleep aid is made with it, along with theanine and 1mg of melatonin, which I already have. They say it's also a good anti-depressant, but I feel like I just took something closer to a mood elevator. What say you, Bums? Any narcotic-like herbal concoctions out there that are safe for ex pot-heads like me?

You should save a few words for the populace too, Joe. BTW, there is also a preponderance on the right of people who don't want your champion Gingrich, either, for reasons that have been getting a lot of attention recently. what say you about that, JB?

An elderly man in Louisiana had owned a large farm for several years. He had a large pond in the back. It was properly shaped for swimming, so he fixed it up nice with picnic tables, horseshoe courts, and some apple and peach trees. One evening the old farmer decided to go down to the pond, as he hadn't been there for a while, and look it over. He grabbed a five-gallon bucket to bring back some fruit. As he neared the pond, he heard voices shouting and laughing with glee. As he came closer, he saw it was a bunch of young women skinny-dipping in his pond. He made the women aware of his presence and they all went to the deep end. One of the women shouted to him, 'we're not coming out until you leave!' The old man frowned, 'I didn't come down here to watch you ladies swim naked or make you get out of the pond naked.' Holding the bucket up he said, 'I'm here to feed the alligator...'

Really? No kidding? As if anyone would. So much for the joke about my unquenchable ego.

None of these threads have anything to do with me. Therefore, I cannot sign off on any of them.

Yep, I have to subscribe to this reasoning. I did pose a question and H-E did answer it but I really wasn't looking for herbal ways to get high, and I apologize for framing the question that way. What a difference a day makes. I'm still glad I purchased the ashwagandha; I took it again last night and had a very high quality of sleep without any hangover. But for a mild anti-depressant I think I'll stick with L-theanine. It completely mellows you out without any sleepiness or vicodin-like feelings I got from ashwagandha. It's just nice to know that there are herbal sources of mild euphoria that are non-addicting for those times when you need a little lift... like when your in-laws drive down and spend the entire bloody weekend with you.

Yeah, I've already ransacked the house for the rubber hose and the hypodermic.

I'm pretty sure it's the ashwagandha. Love this stuff!!

OMG, which grade school did you go to, Joe? Or were you homeschooled with fundamentalist christian history textbooks? The Great Depression of the 30s only hit America!! FDR made it worse!! Everybody hear that!? And you call people on their alleged lack of historical awareness. What a joke. What a pathetic, jaw-dropping joke.

I did the Master Cleanse 3 times last year, at the start of each quarter, so I'm slightly overdue, partially because of a bunionectomy in December which left me with some limited movement. but now I'm good to go. I'm still going to use the Master Cleanse but this time I'm adding a twice daily concoction of 1 TBS of psyllium with 1 tsp of Super Colon Cleanse, just to flush out all the chocolate, carnitas tacos, and vicodin over the holidays. I also plan to continue an abbreviated workout for the 12-14 day regimen; kettlebell swings and clubbell workouts on day 1, yoga with Steve Ross (video) on day 2, and hill climbing or elliptical work on day 3, repeating. I currently weigh 25 lbs more than I care to. Yuck. I think that with a little discipline I can get back to where I was 5 years ago - 135 lbs @ 10% bodyfat. I looked like a kickboxer back then! To minimize muscle loss I am supplementing with organic hemp seeds, 3TBS a day, and for an evening meal, I'm sprouting my own sprout salad of mung bean, wheat berry, lentil and fenugreek. I'm also maintaining my regular daily herbal regimen of hawthorn berry, horsetail, schizandra and olive leaf extract, but I'm dropping the vitamins. I'm also sticking with my 7-Keto every other day because it makes old men like me feel like we're in our 30s again.

M - 157.0 T - 155.6 W - 154.4 T - 153.4 F - 152.2 this am OK, this is working. The more disciplined I am with diet and menu planning and portion control, the closer I get to actually "cleansing" with food on a sustainable, long term basis. Right now if feels like I could simply introduce chef salads at night, keep the fruit & veggie regimen going during the day and I'd be okay. Talk is cheap! "Does it mention a relationship between gut health and mental/emotional health? You know 'second brain' (hint, everything is another 'brain' now" The Second Brain is an excellent book for simple anatomy for cultivators, but no, I was referencing some colon cleanse powder. I will not subject you to this indignity again.

I started taking schizandra for the same reasons everyone else did: the data. But I also started taking horsetail with it. The results were pretty impressive. Schizandra alone causes the skin to hold more moisture, so small wrinkles start to disappear. But with the horsetail I found the results even better. I jumped on schizandra for my second 100 day run but without the horsetail. There wasn't much difference. But I'm on my third 100-day run with both and sure enough, it's really working. You have to drink plenty of water, to be sure. I'm still trying to cure the eczema that I broke out with when overheating with Gary Clyman's DVDs a couple years ago, but it's just about completely gone and I rarely need the cortisone cream Rx.