JAZZMAN CHRONICLES IN THE AGE OF TRUMP: FEBRUARY 2018.
THE
DOUBTERS:
THE
SPLINTERING OF THE LEFT
BY
JACK RANDOM
I consider myself an objective
observer. I try not to allow my
ideological leanings and loyalties to influence my interpretation of events
even though I know that pure objectivity is an impossible ideal. During the campaign to stop the Afghan
and Iraq Wars – otherwise known as the opening act of the Global War on Terror
– I learned not to trust the New York Times, the Washington Post, NBC, ABC,
CBS, CNN or any other mainstream source of information. I learned to cultivate new sources and
alternative analysts: Democracy
Now, Common Dreams, CounterPunch, Dissident Voice and others too numerous to
name.
As our former president declared,
everything changed after September 11th 2001. The Times became a fence for White
House propaganda. The media
abandoned journalism and jumped on the propaganda bandwagon. Everyone on corporate owned television
and radio was compelled to take a patriot test. I distinctly remember Dan Rather using his platform at CBS
to pledge his allegiance to war – whatever war George W. Bush wanted to
fight.
Those of us who opposed the war
on terror from its beginning were often accused of aiding the enemy. Our opposition did not hesitate to use
the word: treason. We were
ostracized from the society of acceptable discourse. We developed new lines of communication and new alliances. We formed a resistance movement that
defied group think and reminded the American people that the best minds of our
generation were those that opposed military aggression and proposed a new way
of conducting the nation’s business.
We became an army of resistance
from San Francisco to New York, from Seattle to Miami, from Portland Maine to
Portland Oregon, and our collective voice was heard around the globe. We became a force that not even the
Democrats could ignore for long.
We could not sustain the unity
of the antiwar movement. People on
the left of the ideological scale embrace differences until they no longer
serve a common cause. The antiwar
movement yields to Black Lives Matter and the March for Women’s Rights. The fight for fair wages gives way to
the environmental movement. The
fight for equal pay gives way to universal Medicare. Universal Medicare yields to the rights of immigrants. On and on we go until the movement is
no longer a singular unifying force.
We begin to splinter and
continue to divide until some great evil arises to unite us once again.
We have arrived at the point of
division. The great splintering of
the left has begun and the source of this division is a great surprise to many
of us who naively thought it would be a unifying evil. It is the Russia-Trump divide.
Those who doubt the Russia-Trump
conspiracy include such leftist luminaries as filmmaker Oliver Stone and
journalist Glenn Greenwald in tentative alliance with the venerable
linguist-philosopher Noam Chomsky and writer-editor Tariq Ali.
I’ve grown a little tired of the
claim that those who believe there was a conspiracy to defraud our election are
suffering under some kind of delusion born of wishful thinking. The doubters repeatedly state that
there is no evidence of such a conspiracy. Since there is clearly an abundance of evidence I assume
that they mean there is no direct evidence that Donald Trump Sr. conspired with
agents of the Russian government to defraud, distort or otherwise influence the
outcome of the 2016 presidential election. They will not be satisfied with anything short of a recorded
interaction or a full confession – and even that may not be sufficient.
I’ve taken something of a survey
and found the following arguments against the importance of and/or validity of
the Trump-Russia investigation.
The
Russian collusion narrative is made for TV drama. I too am a critic
of media obsession – a practice that compromises journalistic responsibility in
favor of ratings. Simply because
the media are obsessed, however, does not mean the story is without validity. OJ did in fact kill Nicole and the LAPD
was in fact corrupt.
Every
government does what it can to manipulate the elections of other
countries. I don’t believe that every country does it though it would hardly make it more
acceptable if they did. I have
seen compelling evidence that Russia waged concerted web-based propaganda
campaigns in France, Germany and the United States. Putin exerted influence more directly in Ukraine. I have not seen evidence that France,
Germany or any other European nation has done the same – though a reciprocal
action might be understandable.
Then again, Russia does not have legitimate elections. You may well question whether the US has
free and fair elections – and I do – but comparing the US to Russia on a
democratic scale is like comparing a Cadillac to a Chevy Nova.
The
United States has a history of injecting itself into other nation’s elections –
most recently in Afghanistan, Iraq and Ukraine. Our attacks on the democratic process – whether emerging or
established – have inevitably had disastrous consequences. Think Pinochet of Chile. Whether you believe it is a common
practice or not, all attempts to thwart, manipulate or distort the will of the
people in fair elections should be condemned in the strongest terms
possible.
I
do not think Trump conspired with Putin.
Whether Donald personally
conspired with Vladimir or agents of the Russian government is almost
irrelevant. Almost. How did Putin manage to place so many
Putin loyalists – read compromised – in Trump’s campaign? Do you believe that Trump & Sons
are beholden to Russian oligarchs under Putin’s thumb? Does Putin have compromising
information on our president? Do
you believe the Steele dossier was completely fabricated? Was Trump a beneficiary in Russian
money laundering through Deutsche Bank and the Bank of Cyprus? How do you explain Trump’s pro-Russia
positions – his visionary strategic foresight? Why would Trump’s son and son-in-law take a meeting with
agents of the Russian government – in Trump Tower no less? Why did our president – with all eyes on the Trump-Putin
scandal – refuse to enforce the post election sanctions?
I believe there is compelling
evidence that Trump is in partnership with Putin and the manifestations of
their arrangement have yet to be fully seen – thanks largely to the media
magnifying glass. I believe that
Putin is a bad actor on the world stage, a corrupt politician who has stolen a
massive fortune from the Russian people, a killer of journalists and political
opponents and an avowed enemy of democracy. I also believe he is a master manipulator who has played
Trump & Sons for fools.
You
need to make up your own mind and not be swayed by mainstream media
propaganda. Agreed.
We need to gather available information and come to our own
conclusions. Lacking certainty, we
need to remain open to the possibility that we are wrong.
The specter of collusion has been so consuming it has
distracted us from the assaults on the environment, the working poor and global
peace. Once again we can object to media obsession while
acknowledging the validity of Russian interference and Trump complicity. To ignore the original sin of this
illegitimate president is like ignoring Native American genocide so that we can
give more attention to the inhuman scourge of slavery. Any discourse on inequality in America
can and must begin with the natives and any account of the Trump administration
must begin with the illegitimacy of his election.
Democrats
should consider not only the evidence but also the politics of wishful
thinking. This argument takes a pragmatic point of view and
holds that the “Russia thing” will not only fail to remove Trump from office
but will fall short of persuading those who voted for Trump not to do so again. Besides, the argument holds,
successfully impeaching Trump would only land us with Mike “The Puritan”
Pence. I am reminded of the case
of Richard Nixon. Who would have
guessed that a burglary at the Watergate Hotel would remove Nixon from
office? Who would have thought
that anyone would care? Besides,
Nixon’s removal would only land the nation with Spiro Agnew – a man not even
his Republican colleagues could support.
But Nixon did resign and Spiro Agnew was safely removed to enable a
relative moderate in Gerald Ford to take over. The electorate removed Ford from the presidency at first
opportunity. The point is: We cannot predict the future with
certainty yet it must not prevent us from doing what we believe is right. If we believe that Trump and Putin
defrauded our democracy we must fight back.
What
if Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation vindicates Trump? While all things are possible, that prospect seems increasingly
unlikely. It is difficult to prove
conspiracy beyond all doubt but Trump is on record obstructing the
investigation first by firing FBI Director James Comey and then by drafting a
cover story for his son concerning the infamous Trump Tower meeting. Moreover, would Mueller let former
National Security Advisor Michael Flynn off the hook without compelling
information to indict the president?
I think not. That Trump is
leading a campaign to discredit Mueller is a reflection of a desperate man – a
man who is going down. But let’s
say that Mueller falls short. Will
that really vindicate Trump? How
many of his underlings will go down in the process? How many will be indicted? How many will go to jail? Will the fallen include his son and son-in-law? It is hard to imagine that Trump wins
any hearts and minds with the Russia investigation no matter what conclusions
Mueller draws.
Focusing
on Russia will distract us from more compelling issues: tax reform, minimum wage, climate
change, etc. The attack on Trump in the next election – assuming
he’s still in office – should engage numerous issues, including his broken
promises on NAFTA and CAFTA and rebuilding the middle class with higher paying
jobs. But let’s not bury the
lead: Trump is an illegitimate
president elected by an antiquated, anti-democratic system with the assistance
of a foreign adversary.
Focusing
on Russia distracts from the “complete fucking disaster” the Democratic Party
has become. Once again the Russia-Trump story does
not prevent anyone from attacking the feckless opposition party on any number
of grounds. In fact, the feckless
Democrats seem to have taken their lead from the doubters. The standard line is that the voters
don’t want to hear about Russia; they want to hear about the things that affect
them directly. I disagree. The reason the media place
disproportionate attention on the Trump-Russia thing is that consumers want to
know. When is the last time you
heard anyone outside the Black Caucus use the words “treason” or even
“impeachment”? Glenn Greenwald
used to be one of the most respected left-leaning journalists in the
world. Now, he’s a rich man
yelling in the wind about the Democratic conspiracy to defraud the legitimacy
of the Trump administration. Get
real. I am reminded that Greenwald
once supported the invasion of Iraq.
Switching sides is not new to Greenwald. Like Julian Assange and WikiLeaks, we need to revisit our
assessment of those we once admired.
What
are we to think and who can we trust?
The only thing certain at this point is that if we are going to mount an
effective resistance to the current government, the power structure and the
corporate media, then we have to find common cause. We can disagree on any given issue – even one as divisive as
the Trump-Russia conspiracy – but we must come together on the greater goals of
achieving political and economic equality, justice, peace and environmental
awareness.
It
is important to recognize that there are greater things at stake than being
right.
Jazz.
SOURCES:
“The
Russia Thing” by Andrew Day. Counterpunch,
January 8, 2018.
Glenn
Greenwald of The Intercept (Formerly of The Guardian): “Does this Man Know More than Robert
Mueller?” by Simon van Zuylen-Wood.
New York Magazine, January 21, 2018.
“Noam
Chomsky’s Surprising Take on the Russia Scandal” by Paul Ratner. Big Think, August 16, 2017.
Ryan
Cristian, Founder & Editor-in-Chief
The
Last American Vagabond
