The American Presidency and the Transformation of Arab Defeatism

The heat from the American presidency is causing sleeplessness and fever in the entire international community. As the American presidential race divides up its constituencies and with international transformations and flare-ups hanging over their heads, the candidates compete with all their might, twisting and turning, until it appears to observers that the American elections are a fantastical political film – not one produced by Hollywood, but rather by the American campaign with all of its contradictions and dissimulations. Because the candidates have no real knowledge of the world outside of America, sometimes push the limit of foolishness.

The anxiety about the American election emanates, first and foremost, from the effects on various international communities from the winning party – be it Democrat or Republican – and its political plan. Really, the candidate’s positions are not that important. A candidate may be elected because he is handsome, or comes from a prominent political family, or because of any of the other superficial concerns the American public has about its leadership. The candidate – whoever he may be – is nothing more than a front man, a face for the election platform of one of the two major parties. As usual, the Arab-Islamic world just sits back and watches. We wait for the Presidential Film to wrap up and for the election decision to be made so that we can begin to bear the lesser of the two evils. On the contrary, the Jewish establishment is always successful. They successfully push election topics and direct the votes, as well as investing in and drafting the platforms themselves. They resolve their issues by making small nudges and shifts and doing so without seeming to get involved in American internal affairs. They are so successful that even Arab and Muslim Americans vote for the candidates chosen by the Jewish lobby.

The Arab-Islamic world has always been divided over how to deal with our crucial issues on the International plane. Hence the Palestinian issue, which continues unresolved these many long years, even as candidate after candidate committed to its resolution, only to do nothing. The latest of these candidates, George Bush (the son), promised a Palestinian State. Day after day slipped away. Indeed the authority was granted to the winning party in 2005, but, by breaking ranks and offering partial solutions Congress passed over Arab and Islamic issues. And so, by increasing pressure on Congress, the problem of international peace was relegated to minor status. As if it took a half a brain to see the position of Jews in the American administration – welcomed in by the White House – waiting to form the platforms of the next President. But this is a kind of protectionism and defeatism, for our Jewish adversaries and their successful pushing of their issues surpass us in all ways.

In Stupid White Men, Michael Moore summed up the American mentality over the last few years. The White House is not a holy place, but rather a citadel where the puppet strings of conspiracy join together – damaging America internally and destroying the legacy of Democracy, under whose auspices America damages the interior life of other peoples. For, officials from the State Department, at the behest of Kennedy, then Johnson, then Nixon, and then Reagan, justified policy after policy in terms of opposition to dictatorial regimes. They used two contradictory reasons: either the regime has socialist leanings or they do not properly incorporate the people together behind one hallowed concept. In this same way, by perpetrating an increase in political intrigue and a withdrawal from political morality, the contradictory American political behavior continues to deprive the world of its stability and its security. It is not possible to have a worthwhile morality and massive power at the same time: isn’t that so?

Massive power does not necessarily bring with it a capacity for responsibility. That capacity is penned up in the American administration’s international attitudes, which have always inclined towards colonial behaviors. The impression of its power and a sense of violent empire in the American popular memory exacerbate American dependency on an image of itself as a world dominator. The hubris of the American disposition increased commensurate with the American Administration’s polarization of the American people and its programs. According to Michael Moore’s “Dude! Where’s My Country?”, the American citizen who depends on the television news as his primary source for information was exposed to opinions in support of the War in Iraq, increasing their unwillingness to consider opposing standpoints by a factor of 25. Moore added that the justification of the war as the agent of Democracy (and thus that there was no other choice), turned America into a body under threat, whose national security was at stake. The American Administration concerns itself with security according to its interests. Once an American president is chosen and enters the political horizon, he is invested in fixed notions of the issues. Then he is surrounded and pressured by special groups, drawing the lines in the divisive battle between the believers and the barbarians.

But we have no right to reproach fate or the American people on their election of this or that candidate, for we do nothing. We wait to figure out their intentions and throw our lot in with whoever will be the least painful and do the least damage to our interests. And this, to no avail.