18 minutes of this post are missing
Jun. 1st, 2005 02:04 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
sabotabby"Woe betide that man of power who takes the side of those who have no power." -- St. Augustine
I wonder if Ann Coulter’s handlers are composing for her a “controversial” and “provocative” op-ed about the glorification of snitches as I type this. I’ve encountered one such rant (I can’t remember where, but it was priceless) about corporate whistleblowers, and how the Liberal Media is teaching us to prize people who really ought to be condemned as traitors to their companies/governments. In someone’s analysis, Felt will be recast as such, and I can’t wait to read it.
Anyway, this morning I caught a bit on CBC about Deep Throat and wished I’d gotten to hear the whole thing. I love the Watergate story as much as the next raving leftie conspiracy nut, so it’s nice to see loose ends being tied up and all that. But the guy they were interviewing had a good point: Watergate was less about a corrupt government being brought down and more about cementing the sort of mythology that allows those sorts of governments to thrive in the first place.
There are two intertwining mythologies in question here. The first is that The System Works. The second is that the mainstream media is the ally of the American people and serves to expose The System when it’s not working, and we all live happily ever after.
The guy’s argument, briefly, was that while the Watergate burglary was pretty darned criminal, it was far from being Nixon’s worst crime. In fact, there’s not even a national consensus that Vietnam was a crime at all. (And besides, Nixon was pardoned for Watergate, proving once again that those in power are never truly punished by those in power. It always amazes me when governments, armies, and police agencies investigate themselves and find themselves clear of any wrongdoing.)
The Watergate narrative, he went on to state, also excludes the value of the alternative or underground press, which was far more influential back then than it’s ever given credit for. It elevates those working within the mainstream to a heroic status at the expense of everyone else. One can see where this mythology fails today: It requires a relatively free press, which is non-existent in the US as far as I can see. He brought up the example of Gary Webb, who tried to break the story of the CIA’s involvement with drug smuggling in Latin America. And we all know how that ended. No doubt Woodward and Bernstein would have faced a similar fate had they been exposing government secrets today.
Felt, too, is central to this analysis – he had no ethical problem with illegal break-and-enters when it came to the Weather Underground. But Watergate was just going too far. Again, the system perpetuates itself, allowing for the violation of the rights of those outside of it while protecting people who ought to have nothing to worry about, since they have nothing to hide.
This all seems self-evident and obvious, which was why I was surprised to hear it on Metro Morning, but it got me thinking. If all of this is self-evident, if Watergate was just a blip, comparatively speaking, if the story does reinforce the very system it appears to challenge, why the hell is it still so compelling? (And it is compelling; I’ve been reading your journals, too, and you’re all just as fascinated.)
I know why it is for me. My own myths are more literary than political in nature: One overriding motif is of repentance and redemption. I’m drawn to stories of powerful people who have done horrendous things in the name of duty, and draw the line somewhere. (Not to give anything away, but that’s a plot point in almost every story I’ve written/am writing currently.) There’s a line in the sand where even the most terrible man can look in the mirror and says, “No, that’s going too far. I can’t be part of this.” It’s not just in fiction – the refuseniks have the same appeal for me, as does Gen. McNamara. Felt certainly fits that role, although there’s the suggestion that he became Deep Throat less out of ethical compulsion than out of professional jealousy. But still. Chalk it up to my enduring faith in humanity or something.
The second myth, I hope, is less of a myth, and that is that it does make a difference. When news of the sponsorship scandal first broke, I remember being shocked that my co-workers at the time were so shocked, that they actually expected the government to not be corrupt. One woman, who had faithfully and consistently voted Liberal, exclaimed, “But we’re supposed to be able to trust the government!” (Cue missnegativity laughing for a good ten minutes.) Growing up post-Nixon as I did, I’m happy to say that I have never suffered from those sorts of illusions.
That came out a bit more cynical than I intended.
I wonder if Ann Coulter’s handlers are composing for her a “controversial” and “provocative” op-ed about the glorification of snitches as I type this. I’ve encountered one such rant (I can’t remember where, but it was priceless) about corporate whistleblowers, and how the Liberal Media is teaching us to prize people who really ought to be condemned as traitors to their companies/governments. In someone’s analysis, Felt will be recast as such, and I can’t wait to read it.
Anyway, this morning I caught a bit on CBC about Deep Throat and wished I’d gotten to hear the whole thing. I love the Watergate story as much as the next raving leftie conspiracy nut, so it’s nice to see loose ends being tied up and all that. But the guy they were interviewing had a good point: Watergate was less about a corrupt government being brought down and more about cementing the sort of mythology that allows those sorts of governments to thrive in the first place.
There are two intertwining mythologies in question here. The first is that The System Works. The second is that the mainstream media is the ally of the American people and serves to expose The System when it’s not working, and we all live happily ever after.
The guy’s argument, briefly, was that while the Watergate burglary was pretty darned criminal, it was far from being Nixon’s worst crime. In fact, there’s not even a national consensus that Vietnam was a crime at all. (And besides, Nixon was pardoned for Watergate, proving once again that those in power are never truly punished by those in power. It always amazes me when governments, armies, and police agencies investigate themselves and find themselves clear of any wrongdoing.)
The Watergate narrative, he went on to state, also excludes the value of the alternative or underground press, which was far more influential back then than it’s ever given credit for. It elevates those working within the mainstream to a heroic status at the expense of everyone else. One can see where this mythology fails today: It requires a relatively free press, which is non-existent in the US as far as I can see. He brought up the example of Gary Webb, who tried to break the story of the CIA’s involvement with drug smuggling in Latin America. And we all know how that ended. No doubt Woodward and Bernstein would have faced a similar fate had they been exposing government secrets today.
Felt, too, is central to this analysis – he had no ethical problem with illegal break-and-enters when it came to the Weather Underground. But Watergate was just going too far. Again, the system perpetuates itself, allowing for the violation of the rights of those outside of it while protecting people who ought to have nothing to worry about, since they have nothing to hide.
This all seems self-evident and obvious, which was why I was surprised to hear it on Metro Morning, but it got me thinking. If all of this is self-evident, if Watergate was just a blip, comparatively speaking, if the story does reinforce the very system it appears to challenge, why the hell is it still so compelling? (And it is compelling; I’ve been reading your journals, too, and you’re all just as fascinated.)
I know why it is for me. My own myths are more literary than political in nature: One overriding motif is of repentance and redemption. I’m drawn to stories of powerful people who have done horrendous things in the name of duty, and draw the line somewhere. (Not to give anything away, but that’s a plot point in almost every story I’ve written/am writing currently.) There’s a line in the sand where even the most terrible man can look in the mirror and says, “No, that’s going too far. I can’t be part of this.” It’s not just in fiction – the refuseniks have the same appeal for me, as does Gen. McNamara. Felt certainly fits that role, although there’s the suggestion that he became Deep Throat less out of ethical compulsion than out of professional jealousy. But still. Chalk it up to my enduring faith in humanity or something.
The second myth, I hope, is less of a myth, and that is that it does make a difference. When news of the sponsorship scandal first broke, I remember being shocked that my co-workers at the time were so shocked, that they actually expected the government to not be corrupt. One woman, who had faithfully and consistently voted Liberal, exclaimed, “But we’re supposed to be able to trust the government!” (Cue missnegativity laughing for a good ten minutes.) Growing up post-Nixon as I did, I’m happy to say that I have never suffered from those sorts of illusions.
That came out a bit more cynical than I intended.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2005-06-01 06:21 pm (UTC)It was obvious the government was rotten when Jackie was collecting her husbands thoughts....off of the back of her car...in dallas, texas.
McNamara was too late. I have a hard time with Sympathy....which is ironic.
no subject
Date: 2005-06-01 08:20 pm (UTC)I don't feel much sympathy for McNamara, I just find him a fascinating character.
no subject
Date: 2005-06-01 08:36 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-06-01 10:24 pm (UTC)But...cool, I think.
no subject
Date: 2005-06-01 10:39 pm (UTC)http://www.nuclearpolicy.org/
no subject
Date: 2005-06-01 06:58 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-06-01 06:58 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-06-01 08:28 pm (UTC)I dig the FBI/CIA rivalry.
no subject
Date: 2005-06-01 08:12 pm (UTC)I loved Tom Tomorrow's Ann Coulteresque analogy about Time Magazine's puff piece on Ann Coulter.
I haven't read the details of the story just yet, but I see that it was a top man at the FBI. This confirms an Atlantic Monthly story which suggested just that some years ago. The author speculated that the leaker was trying to stop Nixon from reorganizing the FBI in the wake of J. Edgar Hoover's death; hence, the motive was preserving institutional continuity rather than any duty to democracy. It was about bureaucratic turf rather than the rule of law.
no subject
Date: 2005-06-01 08:20 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-06-01 10:26 pm (UTC)Shall read the article when I get a second to spare. In the meantime, I have laundry to do and a chapter of someone's book that just arrived in the mail. ;)
no subject
Date: 2005-06-01 11:50 pm (UTC)Well, as Arnold Schwarzenegger shows, being a former foreigner is not a problem - which I suppose shows some progress on their part. But I imagine Ida Amin would have the same problem getting elected as Alan Keyes. Conservatives love Keyes because he is 99% one of them. He even disowned his daughter when she came out as a lesbian, which Dick Cheney hasn't done. But there's that other superficial 1% which makes it hard for many of them to vote for him and Amin has that same political liability.*
In the meantime, I have laundry to do and a chapter of someone's book that just arrived in the mail. ;)
That was fast! Enjoy. Read chapter one first, since some of the revisions I have made make them flow into each other better.
How do you like the shirt art? There may be a snag on the shirt front, as we can't seem to locate the local union printer who did our branch shirts last time and we may have to have them printed out of state on short notice.
* By which I mean skin color. To use a typical conservative rhetorical gimmick, I have no evidence that Alan Keyes has ever actually eaten anyone.
no subject
Date: 2005-06-02 12:42 am (UTC)Referring to Republicans, not foreigners.
no subject
Date: 2005-06-02 03:42 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-06-02 03:29 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-06-02 07:30 pm (UTC)Again, no rush: you don't have to have it all read by the time we meet up in Chicago. Obviously, I'd like to discuss how you liked some of the stuff; but I don't want to add a box full of books to my carry-on luggage, so take your time. That's way more than a month's worth of cultural consumption.
no subject
Date: 2005-06-02 07:35 pm (UTC)I'm sure I'll get it read well before, but if nothing else, there's a plane flight to look forward to. Is it bad that I'm looking forward to the plane flight?
no subject
Date: 2005-06-02 08:21 pm (UTC)Remember to clip the yellow wires before the red ones.
Okay, seriously now: are you talking about the price sticker on the can of Boss Coffee? I toyed with the idea of soaking it with Goo Gone (tm) or some other citrus based anti-adhesive solvent, but decided it was too much work. I stuck that can in there to keep the video tapes from shifting around because I was out of other packing material and I thought you might be amused by the name and like the logo design. The coffee was pretty tasty as I recall. The good ex got it for me on her last trip to Seattle. At first, I was confused when you said you were fighting with the tape since you said you had already taken a peek inside the box.
no subject
Date: 2005-06-02 08:54 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-06-02 10:20 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-06-03 02:19 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-06-02 10:42 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-06-01 09:47 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-06-01 10:27 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-06-01 11:58 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-06-02 12:19 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-06-02 03:30 am (UTC)The Kids in the White House
Date: 2005-06-02 12:27 am (UTC)Have you seen Dick (1999)? It explains everything you need to know about Watergate and stars Dan Hedaya as Richard Nixon along with Will Ferrell and Bruce McCulloch as Woodward and Bernstein. Dave Foley plays H.R. Haldeman, so it is a partial Kids in the Hall reunion.
Re: The Kids in the White House
Date: 2005-06-02 03:30 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-06-02 12:59 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-06-02 03:31 am (UTC)