GUESS WHAT?! I am FINISHED with my PaPeR!!! Who is relieved?? None other than myself of course! Let me share its 10 pages of finishedness with you. ;)
Prompt: Are the news media conveying the reality of the economic and military reality of the US today and the vision of its immediate future to the American people? Why do media act this way? Are media actions leading the country toward a democracy or a military empire?
Comm 264
October 1, 2007
"We are on the cusp of losing our democracy for the sake of keeping our empire." Chalmers Johnson speculates in his latest book, Nemesis: The Last Days of the American Republic. Due to the government's incessant and demanding imperialistic agendas and the lack of a genuine, democratically-oriented media system, we are being led down a path of ultimate destruction. The United States has chosen to build an empire without the consent of its informed citizenry and will inevitably fail. The safeguards put forth by our Founding Fathers in the writing of our constitution have become jeopardized by the secrecy and lies contributed, ironically, by the very system that was designed to protect our interests. Beyond that, the media that once provided its people with accurate, thoroughly investigated journalism can no longer be relied upon to document the reality of situations occurring within the political system. The profit-driven media, awash in corruption, deceit, and bias, has failed to maintain a well-informed decision making body. Mass media has developed into a profit-driven corporate machine. Thus, denoting less time to accurately informing our public, and, therefore disrupting the democratic aspirations of our founders.
The protections the Founding Fathers sought in writing the United States Constitution were defiant in their absolute opposition to monarchy or any form of government resembling a dictatorship. Their deliberations emphasized the checks and balances designed with the Republic of Rome in mind. This system also provides for the participation of the entirety of the society--a democracy. That is, multiple voices within a well-educated and active society contributing to its government attentively and with scrutiny. The media system was designed to present the public with thorough and accurate information regarding the activities of the government and its agenda to ensure prosperity. This prosperity should be fully reliant on the informed public.
Media is essential for the well-being of any democratic society. As of late, the intentions of the government, including the reality of events currently being carried out in the name of the United States government, are not being put forth to the public actively, or effectively. Since the Telecommunications Act of 1996, promotion of competition between media super powers has allowed for the concentration of ownership. In other words, a majority of media outlets, including radio, television, and newspapers are grouped in an increasingly small number of hands. This concentration gives way to less possibility of regulation in the public interest (McChesney 53). Consolidation of powers has brought about corruption and is a large contributor in destroying any hope of continuing the system of protection the forefathers laid before us. Journalistic media is not exhibited in its true democratic definition any longer, meant to create a more informed, correctly educated, and decisive people. It simply cannot be fulfilling its calling while the public remains grossly unfamiliar and misinformed of circumstances involving the United States government and its activities.
The media has reported on a select few examples of the torture and beatings that take place overseas. Johnson refers to the CIA as the “President's personal military" always present to do his bidding, as well as take the blame for any unforeseen consequences. Johnson speaks of several occasions when the President has taken advantage of the power he has over the CIA including the "renditions" that are carried out. These so-called renditions are, more befittingly, the kidnappings of suspected terrorists. These people, targeted as supposed terrorists are taken to other countries, in secrecy, to be tortured and usually killed. These horrible acts of inhumanity are carried out under the radar and will never make their way into our history, nor will the general public even be aware of their occurrence. By manufacturing an ill-informed society, the media creates a sense of justification of governmental actions. The information that would cause such obvious outrage among the public (or that should ignite under such circumstances) is completely swept under the rug, so that we remain in justifiable ignorance. Numerous documented instances have shown the United States measle its way into situations that ultimately further the "promotion of democracy in the favor of lesser countries" or "protection of our freedom." The establishment of military bases in various countries around the world are further representation of our government's imperialistic tendencies.
Johnson puts it best, "Once upon a time, you could trace the spread of imperialism by counting up colonies. America's version of the colony is the military base; and by following the changing politics of global basing, one can learn much about our ever more all-encompassing imperial "footprint" and the militarism grows with it (Johnson 138). Our country has hundreds of military bases in other countries. "The fact that the Department of Defense regularly goes through the elaborate procedures to close domestic bases but continues to expand its network of overseas ones reveals how little interested the military is in actually protecting the country and how devoted it is to what it calls "full spectrum dominance" over the planet (Johnson 138)." The armed forces residing in the military bases have been known on many occasions, although virtually unknown here at home, to have raped and beaten several of the women and girls living in neighboring villages. The soldiers have been given DUIs, robbed stores or villagers in the streets, caused vandalism, and been generally disruptive throughout foreign occupation. The United States has refused to give several known suspects over to the village or towns that crimes were committed in. For fear of its own people becoming aware of what is taking place, these instances are overlooked and go unreported. The administration clearly lacks consideration for the villages or towns they occupy and by fully condoning: a direct reflection of our government's perspective. These acts only further demonstrate their dominance in the areas occupied, as well as the influence spreading throughout the entire world.
Our government desires, only, to impose itself on other countries for the resources it can ultimately to its empire. These intentions, ideally, would have been displayed across the media, had the investigative journalists fulfilled their calling as reporters of the news. Instead, the coverage of our news has focused predominantly on a supportive perspective of the war in Iraq, another attempt to further our imperial agenda. The war was never portrayed as this imperialistic agenda, but as an attempt at retribution. As evident in the case of September 11, 2001, we must realize that we were led to believe in the false reality that the war in Iraq was to seek reprisal and bring freedom to the oppressed.
The attacks on September 11, were in themselves, an act of vengeance. The attacks were fueled by our country and the wrongs our government has allowed us to--no, in which our government has artlessly led us into the dark. The government guides the media and what issues are allowed airtime. In addition, it often gives open-ended statements, never reveals information that would be too disturbing, controversial, or that characterizes any type of morally unacceptable behavior. The focus reflected on the limited number of casualties given by the government itself, sparsely informed on the actual consequences the war in Iraq could possess, the destruction of historical monuments and artifacts, or the number of Iraqi civilian casualties. It was not even that these numbers and consequences were underestimated, it was that they were completely exempt from the coverage or drowned in a sea of useless information. The indisposed information was difficult to obtain after the start of the Iraq war due to the government's refusal to allow such information to be publicly available in direct opposition to the Freedom of Information Act.
In fact, Johnson, states that almost all the information that is now available publicly about the prisoner torture and abuse overseas and elsewhere came from FOIA requests (Freedom of Information Act passed in 1966) although reluctantly and were originally denied by government agencies and as a result of a court order (Johnson 246). It can be reasoned then, that journalists do not have the final voice to put forth the material they deem necessary for public knowledge. The government controls much of the news journalists to release.
The relationship between media conglomerations and the United States government is tightly knit. The media firms expect their staff to fully comply with any views the corporation and act with their interests in mind. The failure to do so could result in termination. In fact, McChesney says, "If they [journalists] are obsessed with advancing a progressive political agenda, they tend to become freelancers or leave the profession because the professional constraints on their work would be too great (McChesney 109)." Later, he adds, "After all, anytime a journalist pushes the conservative agenda they are justified because they are balancing the "liberal bias" of the dominant media (McChesney 109)."
McChesney goes on to add that the criticisms hardly find themselves pointed toward the conservative parties in our government. Bill Clinton received considerably more attacks than did George W. Bush (McChesney 109). The media caters to the more elite members of our society. They have a not so conspicuous relationship in providing each other with money or publicity. As long as the publicity is in favor of the far right conservative agenda. This, once again, defeats the democratic purpose of our journalistic institution. With the concentration of ownership into fewer hands, namely, hands supporting a conservative agenda, there is no room for a diversified number of opinions and arguments ranging from far left through the center and on to the right side of the political spectrum. Citizens are informed, unknowingly, with a specific political agenda in the mainstream media and very few are aware that they may seek other alternatives to this practice.
Moreover, few realize the need to seek further alternatives to the mainstream media. A lesson in our political ignorance, perhaps, or just a result of politicization, the apathy of citizens in the political system (McChesney 72). The journalism we are given today does not empower us, one of the direct assumptions of its founders in the eighteenth century. Public knowledge on issues has declined considerably and our voice within the our own government has been severely sequestered. We blindly contend with what the government is leading us to believe is the way of the righteous. This is evident in the comparisons our country has had to the empires of Great Britain and Rome.
Within, Nemesis, Johnson makes several claims in relating the United States to the empires of Rome and Great Britain. Such comparisons include the unrestricted powers granted to the President by Congress in 2002. This gave the President unchecked powers to do as he wished. All the power resting solely in the hands of the President is highly symptomatic of a dictatorship. Secondly, the Roman Republic was said to have "grown tired of antique virtues, preferring the comforts of easy slavery and pace (Johnson 60)." It can only be speculated that the United States government has been using its power to easily conquer other nations and slowly force its peoples into assimilation. This evidently, appears to be part of the ultimate goal. In addition to unchecked powers and submissive peoples, our establishment of bases in various countries puts forth, quite openly, our imperialistic agenda.
It cannot be ignored that at its peak Britain's empire contained thirty-six naval bases and army garrisons and in 2005, the United States, was the proud owner of thirty-eight large and medium-sized American facilities, mostly air and naval bases for our bombers and fleets (Johnson 138). When the British empire decided to give up its stake as an empire, it freed its colonies, but remained a strong power within the world. As Hannah Arendt noted when writing about British imperialism, "British imperialists knew very well that 'administrative massacres' could keep India in bondage, but they also knew that public opinion at home would not stand for such measures. Imperialism could have been a success if the nation state would have been willing to commit suicide and transform herself into a tyranny (Johnson 88)." To continue its imperialistic capabilities would have made it oppressive to its own people. In giving up a range of power, Britain was able to stay as one of the few most dominant countries in the world. Our government is known to seek out governments to overthrow them (even democratic nations), to support insurgents, and to aid or fund illegal activities in other countries. Most of these endeavors usually find one way or another to benefit the United States and its dominance within the world. Although, as seen during 9/11, these actions can backfire.
One such case, occurred early in the Reagan Administration's takeover of office in 1980. The Reagan Administration supported the El Salvadoran government which was receiving opposition. The support of the U.S. included "death squads" who took out peasant leaders, student activists, and members of the clergy. At first the Reagan administration denied having any involvement with the "death squads." However, upon further investigation by the UN truth commission, it was found that the United States government was supplying arms, training, and intelligence to the Salvadoran military and was most definitely aware (Baker 84-85).
Additionally, the sale of arms to Iraq during the Iran-Iraq war, proved to be yet another scandal, one Reagan claimed not to have known about. The sale of the weapons was used to fund the Contra attempting to overthrow the Nicaraguan government. The Contra was blamed for over 30, 000 deaths in the eighties (Baker 85). The Reagan administration had been hopeful of overthrowing Nicaragua's government as demonstrated by Regan's action early into his presidency. Furthermore, he was fully supportive of the war between Iran and Iraq because it would provide a better grasp on the region of Saudi Arabia, rich in oil.
Yet another example of the United States power endeavors comes from the first written instance in which the government used the CIA to covertly overthrow a fellow democracy. The defeat of Salvador Allende was the ultimate goal of the CIA, whether of assassination, coup, or general elections. The CIA overwrote $2.6 billion in support of the Christian Democratic Candidate during the elections and proudly distributed pamphlets, fliers, and posters inducing a scare campaign. It also sought and hired "dissendent Chilean forces" to assassinate the General of the Chilean Military, Rene Schneider. He was wounded during the attack and died three days later. The CIA covered its tracks by paying "hush money" and retrieving the guns used in the operation (Johnson 107). The shooting resulted in further support for the current government instead of fostering the goal of change. Continuing its quest, CIA found the "cruel, ruthless, corrupt General Augusto Pinochet (Johnson 108). Under his direction, Allende was exiled and later committed suicide allowing Pinochet to rule as a hostile dictator for almost two decades bathed in U.S. support.
The United States never ceases to promote itself as the saving grace to the “darkest, dreariest, most needing countries.” In reality, those countries never asked for the hundreds of military bases occupying them, the rape and beating of their wives and daughters, the destruction of their beloved historical sights and artifacts, or even their own liberation. The liberation they were promised and instead the hopelessness and the despair thrust upon them compliments of the ever-raging United States Empire. The empire is sure to face the same question asked before it by the British and Roman empires. Is the price of imperialistic conquest worth overturning the democratic system?
Based upon my inferences, I have come to the conclusion that the mainstream media is grossly misinforming the public regarding the current state of our government and its near future. Journalism, in its correct terms, is simply not available today because of the corporate schemes and profit-driven hunger of the major media conglomerates. The lack of instruction to the peoples of our country is the greatest danger toward allowing our nation's democratic inclinations to be defeated by the military aspirations of the government. The policies and intentions of our government will remain unchecked for as long as the gravity of the situation is ignored by our politically apathetic society.
Works Cited
Baker, Dean. The United States Since 1980. Cambridge University Press. 2007.
Johnson, Chalmers. Nemesis: The Last Days of the American Republic. Metropolitan Books. 2006.
McChesney, Robert. The Problem of the Media:U.S. Communication Politics in the 21st Century. Monthly Review Press. 2004
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment