Myths of Our Time
morality vs. material interests
It is
conventional wisdom that it was the draft that ended the
Vietnam war. According to this explanation,
cowardly college students subject to the draft and their
unpatriotic families, forced an end to the war.
This is Karl Marx's explanation. Material
interests, not empty morality, are said to have brought
the war to an end.
That
fact that in those days the US still had an independent
media of sorts that sometimes framed the war in moral
terms is ignored. Are we sure, for example, that
the film of the naked little girl
running in terror
down the road burning with napalm was ineffectual in
arousing moral opposition to the war? Are we
certain that it wasn't an aroused moral conscience that
brought about the end of the war but was college
students' fears for their lives and limbs?
If we
ascribe ending the war to material interests, it makes
ending the war look as unworthy as the war itself.
Yet,
virtually every conservative columnist, commentator,
newsperson and politician, as well as today's antiwar
protesters and apparently the Pentagon, believes that a
military draft would reduce Americans' toleration for
wars because of body bags coming home to middle and
upper class parents. Apparently, the lower class doesn't
mind its kids coming back in body bags.
Those
in thrall to this explanation, which derives from Marx's
materialist explanation of history, do not notice that
Vietnam was our longest war. It apparently took
almost forever for the material interest of students and
their parents to realize itself and stop the war.
Why
are we afraid to say that the war stopped because
American troops and the American population got tired,
offended even, from killing women, children and
noncombatants? Vietnam had not attacked the US.
The US had interjected itself into a civil war in a far
off place, as it has done in Afghanistan.
By
invading Iraq the US started a civil war between Sunni
and Shi'ite. In Pakistan the US has started a
civil war between the religious tribal population and
the secular US puppet state. In Palestine the US
started a civil war between Fatah and Hamas.
One
continuously reads from those Americans opposed to
America's wars of aggression that the wars are possible
because they don't affect Americans, just those few who
sign up for the voluntary military. Thus, there
are insufficient material interests at stake to stop the
war. This is a common explanation for the weakness
of the antiwar movement.
One
could argue instead that it is the triumph of Karl
Marx's materialist thinking that has made moral protests
impotent. What is morality? You can't weigh
it, define it, measure it. It can be dismissed as
the whining of material interests. In contrast,
material interests, such as lives, limbs, and bank
accounts are real.
For
whatever the reason, morality has shown itself to be an
impotent force in 21st century America. Americans
show no remorse at over one million dead Iraqis and four
million displaced Iraqis due entirely to an American
invasion based on lies and deception. The lies and
deception are now well proven. Yet, there has been
no apology for the horrors that Americans inflicted on
Iraq.
Afghanistan is another example. Intentional lies
conflated the Taliban with al Qaeda and
"terrorists."
The diverse peoples in Afghanistan who were first
ravaged by Soviet bombs are now ravaged by American
bombs. Weddings, funerals, children's soccer
games, people waiting for fuel or food, people asleep in
their homes, people attending Mosques have all been
murdered and are murdered routinely by US and its NATO
puppets.
Each
time civilians are murdered, the US denies it, only to
be contradicted every time by the evidence.
Why
is the president of the United States contemplating
sending yet tens of thousands more US troops to kill
people in Afghanistan?
The
answer is that the United States is an immoral country,
with an immoral people and an immoral government.
Americans no longer have a moral conscience. They
have gone over to the Dark Side.
Humanity has endeavored for millennia to control evil
with morality. In the American
"superpower,"
this effort has collapsed and failed.
The
United States needs to be censured for its immoral
behavior, not have that behavior rationalized as being
in its material interests.
Paul Craig Roberts [email him] was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury during President Reagan's first term. He was Associate Editor of the Wall Street Journal. He has held numerous academic appointments, including the William E. Simon Chair, Center for Strategic and International Studies, Georgetown University, and Senior Research Fellow, Hoover Institution, Stanford University. He was awarded the Legion of Honor by French President Francois Mitterrand. He is the author of Supply-Side Revolution : An Insider's Account of Policymaking in Washington; Alienation and the Soviet Economy and Meltdown: Inside the Soviet Economy, and is the co-author with Lawrence M. Stratton of The Tyranny of Good Intentions : How Prosecutors and Bureaucrats Are Trampling the Constitution in the Name of Justice. Click here for Peter Brimelow's Forbes Magazine interview with Roberts about the recent epidemic of prosecutorial misconduct.