Sunday, March 22, 2015

The GOP Vision of Holy War, Or, Why I Dare Call Tom Cotton A Traitor

By now, you have probably seen this somewhere on the Web.  Its transparently obvious goal is to end all conversation regarding the patriotism, to say nothing of the wisdom, of Senator Tom Cotton's letter to the Iranian government regarding the alleged ability of Congress to stop a nuclear arms agreement dead in its tracks.  It reflects the basic way in which conservatives argue.  They don't discuss ideas.  They just deal in personalities.  And so, from their perspective, Senator Cotton's military and academic record exempt him from any possible criticism that his anti-Obama tactics could attract, legitimately or otherwise.  (Isn't it interesting, by the way, that an Ivy League degree is an asset in a conservative's eye if the holder of the degree is another conservative?  Always remember, IOKIYAR.)

Except that they don't exempt him, admirable as those accomplishments are.  Because of this.  And because it is far from unfair to consider the two events--the letter and the speech--unrelated.  In fact, the opposition to Obama's negotiations with the Iranian government generally is an important part of the GOP's last ditch efforts to hold together the remnants of the Reagan coalition.

Introducing the new Republican Party:  The Party of Holy War.

Keep in mind that the Reagan coalition had three key components:  Wall Street, the military, and evangelical Christianity.  Back in the 1970s and early 1980s, it was relatively easy to hold that coalition together in the face of a common enemy:  the Soviet Union.  Doing so in the post-Cold War world, however, has been a much trickier process.  Without an obvious rallying point to bring these three constituencies together, those constituencies have tended to go their own way--and, in the process, provided Democrats with opportunities to make inroads of their own with them.  As a consequence, Wall Street now divides its political contributions much more evenly between Democrats and Republicans than it used to (with disastrous results for progressive goals, unfortunately), and young evangelicals tend toward the left on social issues (like gay marriage and climate change) more than do their elders.

But Holy War against Islam changes all of that.  Holy War can be pitched to Wall Street, as a vehicle for job creation and ensuring the steady supply of oil.  It can be pitched to the military, as a way of ensuring enormous amounts of defense spending.  And it can be pitched to evangelicals, as a means of fighting for their faith against their spiritual enemies.  In short, it permits the creation of a new common enemy to hold together the coalition that, without which, there might not be a Republican Party.

It should surprise no one, therefore, that both Bush Administrations engaged in wars with Iraq, the first time after our ambassador to Iraq all but invited the country to invade Kuwait, and the second time after needed a post-9/11 proxy for combating the terrorists who had attacked us.  We couldn't attack the country that actually provided those attackers--Saudi Arabia--because we needed Saudi oil, and the Bush businesses needed their Saudi connections.  So, we went for Iraq and its invisible WMDs.  And you know how that went.

And now, to prove that they can learn nothing, the Republicans want to take America back to what's left of Iraq--and beyond, into Iran.  An all-but-open invitation to a nuclear nightmare, not only for the United States, but perhaps the world.  Do you expect the party of Holy War to care?  Not when the next election is at stake.

Senator Cotton's letter, and Senator Cotton's speech the next day to defense contractors, are part and parcel of the same organized effort to push the world into the Apocalypse simply for the sake of "being on top" at the end.  This is madness.  This is the worst sort of hubris and vanity.  This is as evil as anything can be.  And it is surely not patriotism.

So yes, I dare call him a traitor.  Him and his co-conspirators.  And I dare to ask every patriotic American to stand in their way during the next election--before it's too late to dare anything.

No comments: