| |
 |
January 25, 2004 |
In the NY Times today, Frank Rich discusses Robert McNamara, subject of the compelling documentary The Fog of War, as the precursor for the era of CEO politicians.
As a national role model at the dawn of Camelot, Robert McNamara was Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld and, yes, Paul O'Neill before it was cool. He entered the cabinet as an exemplar of "American certitude and conviction" who could use "his rationality with facts" to intimidate bureaucratic dissenters, David Halberstam wrote in "The Best and the Brightest" in 1972, after Mr. McNamara had come to his bad end. Among Mr. McNamara's virtues, Mr. Halberstam wrote, was loyalty — but "perhaps too much loyalty, the corporate-mentality loyalty to the office instead of to himself."
McNamara may be the exemplar of the kind of bureaucratic functionalism that has hijacked our civic life in North America.
In the Kennedy administration, Mr. McNamara's background was something of a novelty. The Bush administration boasts more C.E.O.'s in top jobs than any administration in history — as well as the first president with his own Harvard M.B.A.
With the "business" of government ceded to cynical opportunists such as those who populate the Bush White House, the true character of governance and citizenship are to be found not in the model of government forwarded by people like Bush, Cheney, and Rumsfeld, but in the nuances of documentaries such as The Fog of War, and two other successful American documentaries from 2003, Spellbound and Capturing the Friedmans.
The Fog of War has more to teach the general public about proper governance (via the mistakes of Vietnam-era bureaucrats like McNamara) than any State of the Union Address and its partisan jingoism. As Rich points out, the lessons of McNamara's follies in The Fog of War share many parallels with current American foreign policy:
The greater debate has been over the degree to which the follies of Vietnam are now being re-enacted in Iraq. Though Mr. Morris started interviewing Mr. McNamara before 9/11 and his film never mentions current events, the implicit parallels between then and now are there for the taking. In the Johnson administration's deceptive hyping of the Gulf of Tonkin incident as a provocation to war, we see the Bush administration's deceptive hyping of the supposedly imminent threat of Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction for the same purpose. In Mr. McNamara's stern warnings against waging war unilaterally and against trying to win the hearts and minds of a foreign land without understanding its culture first, we find historical lessons we didn't heed as we blundered into the escalating chaos of our "postwar" occupation of Iraq.
Similar lessons about the nature of democracy and some of its failings in contemporary America might be taken from Spellbound, a documentary about the national spelling bee competition. Whereas The Fog of War contains lessons about the absence of empathy in US foreign policy, Spellbound examines "otherness" on the domestic front. Why do kids from various geographical regions, races, and classes enter the seemingly mechanical intellectual exercise of a spelling bee? On one level, the film (almost unknowingly, it seems at times) lays bare the American drive to turn everything into a competition, even spelling, as if to offer an intellectual analog for athletic and militaristic agones. Even in the passive pursuit of learning, Americans want to see winners and losers. Does this type of activity produce future CEO politicians, as much as the other violent competitions that characterize being American and being young?
It's not clear if the filmmakers of Spellbound recognize the fine line they are walking between jingoism and satire. For Capturing the Friedmans, however, the ambiguity of the central subject matter is what creates the essential tension that drives the film. Capturing the Friedmans examines the life of a family as it unravels following the arrest of the father and one son on child molestation charges. By the end of the film the question of "did he do it?" is supplanted by issues of the process of American justice and the life of a community in a democracy. What kind of justice system does bureaucratic functionalism create? What kind of community does it create, and how do such communities deal with misplaced trust and abuse?
Documentaries such as these remind us that art still has more to offer the public sphere than business and the people who populate it. Art does not reduce human beings to their exchange value, but instead gives expression to the uncertainties and possibilities of public and private life. The General salutes these documentary filmmakers for showing the frailty, uncertainty, and often erroneous character of human perception in a year in which programmatic rationality and religious zealotry were celebrated by some as strengths of character instead of the bastions of fascism that they are.
1:07:19 PM 
|
|
This one is courtesy of FarrFeed. It seems that Bush's discharge from military service has raised some questions:
1. Pilot George W. Bush did not simply "give up flying" with two years left to fly, as has been reported. Instead, Bush was suspended and grounded, very possibly as a direct or indirect result of substance abuse.
2. The crucial evidence – a Flight Inquiry Board – that would reveal the true reasons for Bush's suspension, as well as the punishment that was recommended, is missing from the records released so far. If no such Board was convened, this raises further questions of extraordinary favoritism.
3. Contrary to Bush's emphatic statements and several published reports, Bush never actually reported in person for the last two years of his service – in direct violation of two separate written orders. Moreover, the lack of punishment for this misconduct represents the crowning achievement of a military career distinguished only by favoritism.
Michael Moore and Wesley Clark have questioned Bush's apparent desertion, and hopefully as the election draws near more press coverage will be granted to this issue. Conservatives harp about the apparent indiscretions of liberals as "character flaws" whenever it helps the conservative cause. Well, it seems to me like skipping out on military service for two years -- perhaps because of substance abuse, but certainly because of favoritism -- is indicative of a significant character flaw, if one chooses to believe in such things. Conservatives are ready to label opposition to the invasion of Iraq "treasonous." Well, what do you call being suspended from military service for being a booze hound? Or hiding from Vietnam in the National Guard?
Competition for the few openings in the National Guard was intense, and there was a waiting list of 100,000 nationally at the time. Bush took the Air Force officer and pilot qualification tests on January 17, 1968. He scored 25%, the lowest possible passing grade on the pilot aptitude portion. On his application form, he listed his "background qualifications" as "none." But despite the waiting list, his low score and his lack of qualifications, Bush was given a highly-coveted spot and was sworn in on May 27 for a six-year commitment, taking a solemn oath to protect and defend the U.S. Constitution and the United States of America.
Bush and his father have adamantly denied that he received preferential treatment, despite the fact that his father was then a U.S. Representative from Texas and his grandfather Prescott had been a prominent U.S. Senator from Connecticut. But the Speaker of the House in Texas at the time, Ben Barnes, admitted under oath last year that he had received a request from a longtime Bush family friend, Sidney Adger of Houston, to help Bush get into the Air National Guard. Barnes further testified that he contacted the head of the Texas Air National Guard, Brig. Gen. James Rose, to pass along Adger's request.
When asked about this sworn testimony, Bush was evasive: "I have no idea and I don't believe so," he said. But according to the Boston Globe, Bush "vaulted to the top of a waiting list of 500."
This preferential treatment in gaining entry to the Air National Guard set the pattern for Bush's treatment throughout his six-year obligation, including his rapid promotion to pilot and 1st Lieutenant, his sudden disappearance from the skies with two years left to fly, and his failure to report for a single day of duty in his final two years contrary to two specific orders.
2:37:49 AM
|
|
The CIA revolt against the White House. Former intelligence official Larry C. Johnson blasts the Bush administration's "outright pattern of bullying." [Salon.com]
The latest salvo was launched this week when a group of respected former CIA officials, led by decorated analyst Larry C. Johnson, sent a letter to Republican Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert demanding that Congress hold the White House accountable for deliberately revealing the identity of undercover CIA operative Valerie Plame. Johnson, who also served as deputy director for the State Department's Office of Counter Terrorism, says the administration's political tactics are clear. "With this White House, I see an outright pattern of bullying," he told Salon in an interview Thursday. "We've seen it across different agencies, a pattern of going after anybody who's a critic. When people raise legitimate issues that may not be consistent with existing administration policy, those people are attacked and their character is impugned."
2:14:56 AM
|
|
Super-Sized, With Everything [Washington Post: Front Page]
The General is both amused and baffled by the hysteria and excess of the Super Bowl every year, but especially this year since the two teams involved represent a collective anticlimax to the season the likes of which will dwarf the dud that was the Stanley Cup final last year (Anaheim? Sweet Jesus...). Consider this:
Luxury suites at Reliant Stadium are selling for $175,000 on the Internet. Ticket brokers are charging fans $2,000 for a basic seat and $7,750 for a 50-yard line seat. For those who have them, tickets have a face value of $400 to $600.
I realize the Super Bowl is the "big American party of the year," but $2,000 to watch the Patriots and the Carolina Panthers? I guarantee every one of the fans in that stadium will feel like I feel after watching a porno and realizing that the film was nothing like the DVD cover art: dirty, depressed, and cheated. But surprisingly relaxed, as well. Go figure.
Anyway, I'm amused by the Super Bowl because I appreciate the almost violent ways (as in, masochistic ways) in which Americans can enjoy themselves. I can't imagine a Canadian event of any kind having the same sense of reckless abandon that Americans produce for, say, a high school football game, let alone the Super Bowl. Americans know how to let loose better than Canadians do. Of course, the flipside of this is that Americans may need to let loose in ways unlike Canadians because their society is just that much more angry and competitive, just that much closer to the edge in so many ways. Maybe Americans generate their own excessive excitement over mundane things because they have to? I don't know. But I'll at least credit them with the ability to have fun in ways they can't afford, for reasons they don't understand, and for the benefit of everyone (Canadians included).
2:07:38 AM
|
|
© Copyright 2004 General Stuff.
|
|
|
|
|
