Keeping the American Dream

With George W. Bush’s departure from the White House, the conventional wisdom was that the days of presidents who operated in a make-believe reality were over. People in leadership positions would no longer make statements like then-Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld did at the outset of the second Gulf War. He was asked whether U.S. troops would “be welcomed by the majority of the civilian population of Iraq.” He was quick to reply: “There is no question but that they would be welcomed.”

Nothing has changed: Now Barack Obama increasingly invents his own idea of reality— and many progressively-oriented Americans are stunned speechless. Some defend him because they feel he has enough conservative, racist enemies who think he’s a Muslim socialist. But that’s a dangerous attitude.

However, Obama’s escape into the unreal world of semi-truths is most evident on the subject of National Security Agency snooping. Obama assured us in an article published by The Guardian newspaper that the NSA activities were “transparent” and on the Jay Leno show he claimed, “We don’t have a domestic spying program.”

In the second week of August, the president announced he would appoint a high-level group of experts from outside the government to examine intelligence and communications technologies because, as he said, “We need new thinking for a new era.”

A Spy-Free America

What happened after that deserves the highest marks for stupidity. Obama picked General James Clapper, America’s intelligence coordinator, to put the committee together. That would be the Clapper who, when asked five months earlier whether the NSA collected data on millions or hundreds of millions of Americans, scratched his head and answered, “No, sir.”

Clapper’s appointment sparked alienation. The White House complained critics had misunderstood their action: Of course the White House would make the committee selections, and Clapper was involved only for “administrative reasons.”

Meanwhile, the names mentioned inspired little confidence. Foxes shouldn’t be picked to guard the hen house. As ABC reported, terrorism expert Richard Clarke should have a place on the panel. Clarke warned of Chinese cyberattacks in the New York Times in 2012 and recommended more monitoring. According to existing law, Clarke said, the Department of Homeland Security was charged with examining what came into and went out of the country via cyberspace.

Conspiracy Theories Galore

Also mentioned for inclusion on the committee were the previous deputy CIA director Michael Morell and Cass Sunstein, a law professor who had already fallen out of favor in 2008 because of his views on conspiracy theory. He wrote that the government could neutralize such theories via “cognitive infiltration.” One would send “secret agents” into chat rooms on the internet and into social networking sites and even physically into actual group meetings. In addition, he proposed the government secretly financially support “independent” experts.

Of course this goes far beyond just Obama. Political scientist Samuel Huntington, best known for his thesis on the supposed “clash of civilizations,” advised his friends in U.S. government that they should construct power structures that could be effective while remaining invisible. Huntington, who died in 2008, believed power was strongest when it remained hidden. That may not sound very democratic, but power has an easier time of it if those governed think they still have the ability to make independent decisions.

In view of the persecution of Edward Snowden and the sentencing of Chelsea Manning, we are discovering how sensitive those in power are when someone turns the spotlight on them. They’re sensitive because those who accrue data accrue power. If the accrual takes place in secret, their power is multiplied because those spied upon have no idea what information those in power have. They can only hope that in a democracy, there is no evil intent.

An American Phenomenon

Which brings up the perhaps heretical question of why many politicians are so tame in their approach to the question of government snooping. Could it have something to do with the possibility that the NSA has something on them?

In any case, it appears that challenging the power structure in America is a high-risk undertaking. FBI director J. Edgar Hoover insured his position by way of secret files in hidden file cabinets. In the 1970s, a Senate investigation by the so-called Church Committee, named for its chairman, Senator Frank Church, investigated misdeeds by the secretive organization. As early as that time, warnings were issued that the NSA was capable of turning its power away from foreign affairs and concentrating them on the American people.

Obama’s world extends beyond the intelligence service issue. They don’t torture prisoners in Guantanamo any longer, they just force-feed them. When Obama proposes cuts in social security, they are called measures designed to preserve the program. At the end of a July presidential tour, Obama gave a speech about middle class jobs in one of Amazon’s warehouses. The wages Amazon pays are so notoriously low that many of its employees barely live above the official poverty line.

It’s an American phenomenon. In the wake of disasters like the Iraq War and the collapse of the U.S. economy at the end of George W. Bush’s presidency, the elites always promise Americans a new beginning. That might even happen for some, at least on a cultural level. Under Obama, there is more tolerance in social norms such as what constitutes a traditional family and more acceptance regarding “other” religions and cultures.

But the bottom line shows that as far as the nitty-gritty of life is concerned, the new rulers aren’t much different from the old. They also construct Potemkin villages in order to keep people believing in the American dream.