Most Popular Choices
Share on Facebook 38 Printer Friendly Page More Sharing
OpEdNews Op Eds    H3'ed 7/22/21

Congress-Pentagon Flap Over Critical Race Theory: A Job for Critical War Theory

By       (Page 1 of 2 pages)   No comments
Follow Me on Twitter     Message David Swanson
Become a Fan
  (141 fans)

That the United States has always been so deeply afflicted with structural and cultural racism that it sometimes goes unnoticed and needs to be addressed is hardly disputable. Who is anybody kidding? Have you seen U.S. history? Have you seen the United States?

That we should care what the head of the Pentagon says about it in dumb little sound bytes is considered hardly disputable in U.S. society, but I think it should be disputed. The U.S. military is a massive machine for bombing mostly dark-skinned foreign people with different clothing and hair and religion and language. War could not survive without bigotry, and the reverse may be true as well.

The United States, since before it was the United States, has been so deeply afflicted with structural and cultural militarism that it generally goes unnoticed and has to be addressed. "The total influence economic, political, even spiritual is felt in every city, every State house, every office of the Federal government," according to then-President Dwight Eisenhower.

Isn't that the bomb? Aren't I killing it? In the war on racism we take no prisoners! This is the language of a society that hasn't got a clue what it's talking about but has been conditioned to normalize and idolize war.

The other day a host on Russian TV tried to convince me, a guest, of the need for crazy, massive funding for the U.S. military. The host was from the United States and had previously worked for CNN. The war mania doesn't just vanish when a new employer stops requiring it. It's felt in every city, every State house, every brain cell.

Thank you for your service! What service? What the actual oh forget it. You don't know who somebody killed or why, and you want to thank them for it? But Critical Murder Theory would be inappropriate?

Imagine if the Congress and White House argued over who possessed greater Lynching Powers. But they dispute "War Powers" all the time. War is no more legal than lynching, but it's treated by U.S. lawyers as though it can be legal itself and also legalize lynching at least the lynchings conducted by missile. Lawyers will tell you with a straight face and some of their bast friends are foreigners that a "drone strike" is murder and absolutely unacceptable unless it's part of a war, in which case, you know, thank you for your service.

It seems a key Trump advisor was paid and influenced by the UAE, and that's bad because Trump is a sexist racist jackass and anything about him that can be bad should be. But what about the UAE? Why does nobody care about its role in bribing U.S. politicians? Why isn't the exposure of such crimes by the UAE or Saudi Arabia or Israel the big deal it would be if the accusation against Russia of leaking Democrats' emails were finally proven true? Why am I supposed to accuse anybody I disagree with of being paid by Putin, but never hear one word against Sheikh Mohammed bin Zayed Al Nahyan, Crown Prince of the Emirate of Abu Dhabi and Deputy Supreme Commander of the United Arab Emirates Armed Forces (MbZ)?

The short answer is war and who is buying weapons vs who is serving the critical role of enemy. Also, the United Arab Emirates funds or has funded the Center for American Progress and the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, as well as the Aspen Institute, the Atlantic Council, the Belfer Center at Harvard Kennedy School, the Brookings Institution, the Center for Strategic and International Studies, and the RAND Corporation. Putin doesn't.

The New York Times seems to publish a book-length love letter to MbZ about every six months, letting us all know that he may have faults but that one must back dictators in nations where Islamists would win in legitimate elections. I imagine you're not supposed to be reminded of how necessary and moral it used to be to back Islamists to fend off Commies.

Here's an actual section headline and text excerpt from the New York Times:

"The Perfect Prince

"Most Arab royals are paunchy, long-winded and prone to keep visitors waiting. Not Prince Mohammed. He graduated at the age of 18 from the British officers' training program at Sandhurst. He stays slim and fit, trades tips with visitors about workout machines, and never arrives late for a meeting. American officials invariably describe him as concise, inquisitive, even humble. He pours his own coffee, and to illustrate his love for America, sometimes tells visitors that he has taken his grandchildren to Disney World incognito. . . . The United Arab Emirates began allowing American forces to operate from bases inside the country during the Persian Gulf war of 1991. Since then, the prince's commandos and air forces have been deployed with the Americans in Kosovo, Somalia, Afghanistan and Libya, as well as against the Islamic State. . . . He has recruited American commanders to run his military and former spies to set up his intelligence services. He also acquired more weaponry in the four years before 2010 than the other five Gulf monarchies combined, including 80 F-16 fighters, 30 Apache combat helicopters, and 62 French Mirage jets."


According to the U.S. State Department in 2018, "Human rights issues included allegations of torture in detention; arbitrary arrest and detention, including incommunicado detention, by government agents; political prisoners; government interference with privacy rights; undue restrictions on free expression and the press, including criminalization of libel, censorship, and internet site blocking; substantial interference with the rights of peaceful assembly and freedom of association; the inability of citizens to choose their government in free and fair elections; and criminalization of same sex sexual activity, although no cases were publicly reported during the year. The government did not permit workers to join independent unions and did not effectively prevent physical and sexual abuse of foreign domestic servants and other migrant workers."


Next Page  1  |  2

(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).

Rate It | View Ratings

David Swanson Social Media Pages: Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in       Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in       Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in       Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

David Swanson is the author of "When the World Outlawed War," "War Is A Lie" and "Daybreak: Undoing the Imperial Presidency and Forming a More Perfect Union." He blogs at and and works for the online (more...)
Go To Commenting
The views expressed herein are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.
Follow Me on Twitter     Writers Guidelines

Contact AuthorContact Author Contact EditorContact Editor Author PageView Authors' Articles
Support OpEdNews

OpEdNews depends upon can't survive without your help.

If you value this article and the work of OpEdNews, please either Donate or Purchase a premium membership.

If you've enjoyed this, sign up for our daily or weekly newsletter to get lots of great progressive content.
Daily Weekly     OpEd News Newsletter
   (Opens new browser window)

Most Popular Articles by this Author:     (View All Most Popular Articles by this Author)

Obama's Open Forum Opens Possibilities

Public Forum Planned on Vermont Proposal to Arrest Bush and Cheney

Feith Dares Obama to Enforce the Law

Did Bush Sr. Kill Kennedy and Frame Nixon?

Can You Hold These 12 Guns? Don't Shoot Any Palestinians. Wink. Wink.

Eleven Excellent Reasons Not to Join the Military

To View Comments or Join the Conversation:

Tell A Friend