The Norway terrorist attacks, political violence and the politics of fear

By titling this post as being about political violence, I don't minimize the role religion may have played in the killings to which Christian extremist Anders Behring Breivik has confessed. Extremist Christian and Jewish hatred of Muslims clearly played a role in his ideology. But his act was very much a political act, aimed at the ruling social-democratic party of Norway.

What we need in response to terrorist acts like Breivik's is realism more than fear. Juan Cole, in an otherwise thoughtful column on Breivik and far-right terrorism (When Extremism Learns to Blow things Up Informed Comment 07/24/2011) writes:

But when you hear people talking about lumping all these issues together; when you hear them obliterating distinctions and using black-and-white rhetoric; when you hear them talk of existential threats, and above all when you see that they are convinced that small movements that they hate are likely to have an immediate and revolutionary impact, then you should be afraid, be very afraid. That is when extremism learns to hate, and turns to violence. [my emphasis]

That's not good advice: it's one thing to understand the real danger of far-right violence; but the reaction shouldn't be based on "be afraid, be very afraid." Cole himself even make that point in a following paragraph:

Unfortunately, some unscrupulous billionaires, Rupert Murdoch and the Koch Brothers prominent among them, have honed their propaganda skills in the media and public life. The promotion of hate, panic, and fear, especially if it is tied to specific political, ethnic and religious groups, always risks violence. [my emphasis]

But he goes for the lets-all-look-at-ourselves approach in his concluding sentence, "The real message of Breivik is that we should all take a deep breath and step back from the precipice."

If this were the late Weimar Republic and the political parties had to have effective combat wings to survive, then advice like that might be appropriate. But at least in the US, there is currently no significant political violence coming from "the left." But, as Dave Neiwert and others have documented, during the last three years we have had repeated instances of overtly political violence coming from people acting on radical-right notions. Fortunately, we've had nothing on the Breivik scale since the Oklahoma City attack of April 19, 1995.

In this case, it's important to remember that far-right groups operate within in a particular context. I've seen a bit of hair-splitting by writers trying to say that of course those who only advocate hate should not be equated with those who commit murder.

But what's good about Cole's column is that he focuses on the particular combination of qualities of political demagoguery that lead to violence. This silly compulsion to equate "both sides" is just that, silly. It comes from a particular social and political milieu. The milieu of far-right political violence (with which the US has a serious problem) and that of leftwing political violence (which currently is effectively non-existent in the US) are very different. A thug like Scott Roeder, the antiabortion zealot who murdered Dr. George Tiller in his church in 2009, is not going to listen to what a liberal might have to say. Only if other antiabortion activists made it clear to him that they thought that murdering health providers was wrong, a sin, and a thoroughly un-Christian way to oppose abortion would be likely to have some effect on him.

Yousef Munayyer, executive director of Executive Director of the Jerusalem Fund for Education and Community Development, writes in Lessons drawn from the blonde bomber Ajazeera English 07/26/2011 has some good advice, and it's not "be afraid, be very afraid":

The only thing worse than failing to anticipate right-wing terrorists like Breivik because of short-sighted assumptions is failing to do so again, now that we've witnessed what they are capable of. Western nations must take this opportunity to reflect on the attacks in Norway and ask what is being done to prevent this from happening again.

First, there needs to be a serious rethinking about the Islamist boogeyman and a reevaluation of the share of security and intelligence resources dedicated exclusively to it.

Second, Breivik's attacks should put to rest the idea that complex networks or cells are necessary to pull off massive and devastating attacks. [This comment was probably premature; we don't know what kind of network he may have had. - Bruce]

Third, Breivik's ethnic background and the fact that he knew it would help him "escape the scrutiny often reserved for young men of Arab descent" should put to rest any discussion about racial profiling as an effective or efficient security measure.

Fourth, serious attention must be paid to the radicalisers on the right and the Islamophobes who preach a dichotomous worldview. Explicit calls to violence are clearly not necessary to inspire violence against civilians, and thus right-wing chat forums should receive every bit as much scrutiny from terror analysts as so-called jihadi web sites.

The lives of the victims of the tragedy in Norway are lost forever, but we mustn't let their blood be spilt in vain. Instead, we must adjust our assumptions and policies about terrorism and Islamophobia at this critical moment.

Breivik wanted to send a "wake-up" call. Let's make sure we're never asleep when Islamophobia or right-wing terrorism tries to shake our societies again.

I'll add one reservation that I suppose seems "quaint" in these days of massive NSA data sweeps. But there should be some legitimate law-enforcement reason to monitor websites. There are privacy concerns. Yes, I'm old-fashioned that way. And wading through mountains of cyberjunk rantings from grumpy rightwingers could waste an enormous amount of time that law-enforcement could be devoting to something more useful.

Having anti-terrorism personnel spending their time reading some old fool like Chuckie fantasizing online about various forms of violence and children being dismembered is unlikely to tell them more than that Chuckie is a weird old has-been country singer still trying to market records to elderly Tea Party types. But it's unlikely that either he or his small handful of fans have either the brains, guts or energy to do anything more dangerous that give themselves strokes ranting about whatever their momentary obsessions are.

Tags: chuckie, charlie daniels, charlie daniels soapbox, norway attacks 2011, radical right, terrorism

Chuckie Watch 122: Chuckie in the Tea Party age

I haven't checked in with our old would-be Nashville arbiter of Patriotic Correctness Chuckie (CHARLIE DANIELS) for a long time. But after Townhall August, I though I should see how Chuckie's holdin' up.

He was over the deep end already. Now I think he's being sucked into the quicksand underneath the deep end. In Food For Thought 10/05/09, Chuckie goes all-in on the conspiracy theories, from the Illuminati to the Council on Foreign Relations. His bottom line is:

And who would profit by America losing her place as world leader, why the people who are trying to engineer a global government.

Just think, when there is national pride and patriotism, the world is split up into sovereign nations, as it should be, the people in those nations will always find a way to have a say in it's policies.

They will not settle for being ruled by some monolithic government in some foreign city.

But if all the world had only one government it would be ruled by a few elitists and would be nothing but a dictatorship, pure and simple.

If God had not wanted us to be divided into different nations why would he have given the people at the Tower of Babel different languages.

Something is going on out there folks, I'm not saying that this is it, but it certainly bears watching.

I sort of think that if God wanted Chuckie to post on the Internet, he would have given him a functioning brain. But then who am I to say?

I hope hearing about Obama getting the Nobel Prize doesn't drive ole Chuckie to immolate himself in front of the Grand Ole Opry or something.

Chuckie has also discovered that there is no more racism in American. Except for, you know, all them thar black people playing the "race card" (Race Farce 09/18/09). Chuckie proceeds to give us his 100&-free-of-white-racism analysis of the real problems of them blacks:

The philosophy of Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton and their ilk is that the black community's problems can only be solved by big government programs, and massive spending of taxpayer's dollars in ways that have proven fruitless for generations.

You can give people entitlements and subsidies until the end of time and it is not going to solve the problem of ghettos and poverty and all the other misery that goes along with depending on a government allowance.

If Jesse and Al and all the others who are so quick to accuse anybody with a lighter skin of racism really wanted to do something about the plight of their race they'd start a campaign to cut teenaged pregnancy, try to see that the punks who father these children are made to pay for their upbringing until they reach the age of majority, try to persuade parents to make their children finish school and take advantage of college programs, work with the police to get the crack dealers off the corners and in prison where they belong and stop telling people that they can't improve themselves without the government's help.

Unfortunately government entitlements only create dependence, not independence.

This is actually why I stopped checking in on Chuckie on a regular basis. Because he pretty much recycles the same stuff over and over. It's just sometimes when he swings into a grumpy cycle, it gets a nuttier than usual, like in the Illuminati piece.

Tags: charlie daniels, chuckie, chuckie watch

Chuckie Watch 121: Revisiting Chuckie

Well, y'all, it's been quite a while since we stopped in to visit ole Chuckie. Eight whole dang months, as a matter of fact!

But being one of the country's leading experts on ChuckieThought and all, I don't see how I can turn down the call of duty.

This week, Chuckie's writin' about Confrontation 04/09/07.

Chuckie's heard about that there Nancy Pelosi woman goin' over to Syria when Bush done told her not to. And Chuckie don't like it:

As far as I'm concerned Nancy Pelosi's name can be put alongside Jane Fonda as someone who has no trouble delivering a slap to the face of every man and woman serving in the military.

To think that the Speaker of the House of Representatives of the United States would go to a terrorist state, play patty cake with a dictator who is directly or indirectly responsible for the deaths of scores of service men and women serving in Iraq is past disgusting, it's downright sickening.

And all this in defiance of the Commander and Chief.

I hate to be the one to break it to you, Chuckie. But let's start from the bottom and work back up.

First of all, I'm guessing by "Commander and Chief" you mean your Chief and Commander, Dear Leader Bush, Liberator of Peoples and Scourge of the Heathen. And we all understand how you fell about Dear Leader, Chuckie, we really do. We git it.

But, you know, there's this paper called the Constitution. And it's, well, the legal basis that defines our government. I know this seems real abstract and all, but it really works that way!

Now, this Constitution thang defines the President as the Commander-in-Chief of the armed forces when their on active service. Armed forces, that's soldiers and sailors and people like that, Chuckie. Not members of Congress, unless they also happen to be on active duty military service. Pelosi's not. That means Dear Leader ain't her Commander-in-Chief. Or mine, or anybody else's except the active duty armed forces. I mean, unless you just want to adopt him as your own Commander-in-Chief, or Commander and Chief, or Chief Commander, or whatever.
Now about this playing patty cake with dictators and all, I have a request for everybody. Please, don't nobody show Chuckie that photo of Don Rumsfeld shaking Saddam Hussein's hand. Pore ole Chuckie might have a stroke or something.

And, Chuckie, I know you have special contacts in the foreign policy field. But you
must be gittin' behind on your FOX News watching. It's Iran that the Party says is "indirectly responsible for the deaths of scores of service men and women serving in Iraq" and is, you know, all "past disgusting" and "sickening" and stuff. That's IraN, Chuckie, it's on the other side of IraQ. You can call IraN "Persia" if it helps you keep it straight.

But Chuckie, Chuckie, Nancy Pelosi is like "Jane Fonda as someone who has no trouble delivering a slap to the face of every man and woman serving in the military"? Oh, it hurts to have to do this. But we have it on good authority that Chuckie has praised Jane Fonda his own self! Back when Jane announced that she had had a born-again Christian religious experience, ole Chuckie wrote:

And there will be those in the Christian community who will question your commitment. Yes Jane, you’re probably going to catch it from all sides, from people who are supposed to be your friends. And those, who a few short years ago were lauding you with honors and Academy Awards may very well turn their backs on you. So be it. That’s just the way of the world. What you have received is the most precious thing in existence. What does it profit a man if he gains the whole world and loses his own soul. So hold on, Jane. Through criticism, ridicule and doubt. You just keep holding on to Jesus because he is the way the truth and the life. I will bepraying for you Jane. Welcome to the family my sister.

Yes, it's true. Chuckie himself has praised the woman "who has no trouble delivering a slap to the face of every man and woman serving in the military". Yep, back then, Chuckie said, "So hold on, Jane. Through criticism, ridicule and doubt." Even called her "my sister"! Why, Chuckie, why? What will we tell the children?

Chuckie also writes in his current sharing of wisdom:

Some in Congress and the Senate actually want to set a date for withdrawing the troops from Iraq. That's about the dumbest thing I've ever heard. It's like telling a burglar what time you¹ll be leaving your house so he can come in and take every thing you own.

Now, Chuckie, I just ain't that good at analogies. But wouldn't it be a better comparison to say it would be like leaving somebody else's house and leaving the owners of the house there to deal with their home security issues? I'm just sayin'.

Chuckie also says:

The only kind of diplomacy people like Assad and the mullahs in Iraq understand is strength and Pelosi has taken a giant step in demonstrating that there is a breach in the American armor, There are people who had rather placate and run instead of standing and fighting.

Chuckie, I know that Syrians and Iraqis are both Arabs. Well, except for the ones who are Kurdish and stuff. But just because we're fighting Arabs in Iraq doesn't mean that the Syrians are preparing to land commandoes on the East Coast of the US.

Iraq, Syria, Iran, I know they're all Arabs and foreigners and Muslims and so on. You know, except for the Kurds. Well, and the Iranians are mostly Persians. And, they're foreigners to us but they're natives in their own country. The point is, you gotta try to keep up which countries it is we're at war with.

And when I read this:

I guess she has grandiose imaginings of being some great statesman but all she has done is pour gasoline on the burning determination of the radical maniacs
who have no problem with slaughtering women and children or hacking an infidel's
head off.

Chuckie, you might want to scratch the itch for these kinds of fantasies by going to a horror movie or something instead of stewing it around all which-a-ways in your head. Check out that new double-movie Grindhouse. It has exploding pus-zombies getting gunned down all over the place. It even has a woman with a machine-gun leg! Try it, Chuckie. I bet you'll think it's almost as much fun as listening to 10 hours of Rush Limbaugh at a stretch.

See also my Chuckie Watch index.

Tags: charlie daniels, charlie daniels soapbox, chuckie

Chuckie Watch 11: "Washington" according to Chuckie

Yep, I was right. Chuckie (CHARLIE DANIELS) is trashing "Washington" now, in full swing back to the Dark Side. The would-be Nashville guru of Patriotic Correctness apparently thinks that the American form of democratic government is totally comtemptable, at least by the imagery of his latest rant.

Washington - where the press corp is like a school of insatiable sharks who can smell blood in the water all the way across the Potomac, always anxious to tear some poor soul apart regardless of innocence or guilt.

Where political correctness is an avocational religion and a slight slip of the tongue can put an end to a brilliant career no matter how illustrious, no matter how beneficial, no matter how honorable.

Like pore ole Trent Lott, for instance. Dadgum, it just ain't "politically correct" no more to praise segregationists and kiss up to white supremacist creeps, huh, Chuckie?
But Chuckie finds some things more "politically correct" than others from his point of view:

The most often heard phrases in Washington are,"A tax break for the wealthy," "We are currently studying the matter," "The President said---" "I have no knowledge of the situation". And, "A woman's right to choose."

Least heard phrases, "Term limits", "A salary cut for Congress," "School vouchers", and "A baby's right to life."

For more on Chuckie's concern for babies, see Chuckie Watch 6, linked above at Trent Lott's name.

It's a serious question, though: What do self-styled superpatriots like Chuckie really mean when they claim to love America - when it's a question of sending soldiers off to kill and die in wars - but seem to have total contempt for our democratic government?

Tags: charlie daniels, chuckie, chuckie watch, trent lott

Chuckie Watch 10: Chuckie and Jesus

CHARLIE DANIELS is in full swing away from the Dark Side in his latest. So in another few days, we can expect him to be back again raging against the infidels, loose women and anybody who's not 100% Patriotically Correct by his somewhat particular standards.

But right now, Chuckie wants us all to git saved. His piece is oddly named "Ire." But he's all full of "love and compassion." It's actually a bit spacy. He seems to be hung up on the risk of "man's own brilliance." But I don't think he means it to be a comment on the male viewpoint as opposed to others.

Now, you can see why Chuckie might be in a religious mood at the moment. His Regnery Press hard-right worldview has been taking a beating lately, especially last week. The daily news from Iraq is showing that his sure-fire ideas for winning wars don't work. His hero Sheriff Bush is involved in a scandal that involved ratting out a CIA undercover agent working on "weapons of mass destruction," exposing her to danger and her network in other countries to arrest, torture and death.

The latest spokesperson of the Republican Party of God, Arnie the now-Governator-elect, has been slapped around in the press for that groping thing and for saying nice things about Hitler. And, worst of all for the Chuckies of the world who idolize him, Rush Limbaugh not only exposed himself on national TV as a racist blowhard, but he's under investigation for allegedly pumping himself so full of controlled substances that he may have actually believed some of his own broadcasts.

No wonder Chuckie's in a prayerful mood this week. At least he's not in fire and brimstone mode.

Tags: charlie daniels, chuckie, chuckie watch

Chuckie Watch 9: Chuckie vs. the Casinos

CHARLIE DANIELS still seems to be in the mid-point of a mood swing. His latest is about gambling. Chuckie thinks it's bad. Well, sort of. Being a Regnery Press political hack, it's not surprising that he parses his words rather oddly. So, on the issue of whether gambling is good or bad, Chuckie hedges his bets. (Sorry, I couldn't resist!)

What really bothers Chuckie, though, is people who bring lawsuits against respectable businesses instead of taking responsibility for their own actions. In other words, he's promoting the notion of "tort reform," which in its Enron Republican incarnation means protecting negligent businesses against lawsuits from consumers. And in the familiar anecdote-driven manner of presenting the idea, he mentions a seemingly ridiculous lawsuit against a casino:

This is just another example of people simply not accepting responsibility for their own actions.

Should we make the liquor stores responsible for problem drinking, the fast food shops responsible for obesity, society liable for nervous breakdowns? Can we sue the sun for causing skin cancer? ...

When are we going to wake up to the fact that each person has been given free choice to choose what they want to do? Why is it so hard to realize that the blame belongs to the individual?

Now, I guess it's not entirely fair to criticize Chuckie for what he doesn't say in his rant. But it seems pretty obvious that Bill Bennett, the Republicans' professional scold for the last decade or more, would be a good example here of people with compulsive-gambling issues. Or, in the days preceding Chuckie's column, the papers were full of Rush Limbaugh's alleged drug problemsand hisESPN indiscretion. Another current case illustrating the need to take responsibility for bad habits and their consequences.

Tags: charlie daniels, chuckie, chuckie watch, gambling

Chucke Watch 8: Chuckie vs. "The Media"

CHARLIE DANIELS' mood seems to be swinging back a bit away from the Dark Side in his latest, "Media Missing." It's about a theme he's hit before, claiming that things in Iraq are just ducky, except that The Media keep reporting bad news. This is a theme we've been hearing more and more lately from defenders of the Bush policy.

Chuckie relies on a device popular on rightwing Web sites of quoting from anonymous letters allegedly from soldiers in Iraq, which just happen to mirror the official line of the moment on the war. This routine is dubious for a number of reasons. Especially since there are a number of news outlets that vet soldiers' letters according to normal journalistic criteria. There's plenty of credible sources for such quotes without this anonymous-soldier schtick, especially when the quotes are totally supportive of official policy.

Yeah, the news from Iraq is great. Except for the one or more American soldiers killed each day. And the daily ambushes. Or check out this story from Robert Fisk of the London Independent, one of the few Western reporters in Iraq who speaks Arabic, about a guerrilla attack in Baghdad (click on "Missles Strike at Heart of US Occupation):

[O]ne eyewitness described how - after firing the third rocket - the man left four more missiles lying on the road and then drove away as slowly and calmly as he arrived. Dozens of American troops arrived in the street minutes later but their attacker was gone, his missiles killing no one but making headlines round the world. The message was obvious: now even the very centre of the US occupation, the most fortified compound in Iraq with the Rashid, the former Presidential Palace - now home to US proconsul, Paul Bremer - and a conference centre, is unsafe.

Maybe Chuckie is getting letters from soldiers who know how to say "hi" in Arabic and they get nice smiles from Iraqi children. But the story that's driving the fate of the occupation is more likely to be found elsewhere. Not reporting it would just make it easier to cover up for policy failures.

Chuckie ends all his rants by asking us, "Pray for our troops." Maybe before the next war, Chuckie could also pray for a little better judgment before he cheers mindlessly for putting American troops in harm's way.

Tags: charlie daniels, chuckie, iraq war, robert fisk

Chuckie Watch 7: Chuckie vs. single mothers

CHARLIE DANIELS must have mood swings or something. He'll post a few fairly mellow or inocuous posts in a laid-back "long haired country boy" mood. Then he'll be raging like a John Bircher who's just found out his daughter's marrying a Communist. Chuckie's latest, "Social Shenanigans", is complaining about welfare. He ends up blaming it all on immigrants, somehow, I'm not quite sure how. But we already know that Chuckie don't much like immigrants. But the main thing that's worrying Chuckie's Christian conscience is loose women:

And you've also heard the stories about the welfare mothers who have five different children by five different men and turns them out on the street to run wild and end up in jail by the time they're teenagers and she gets a welfare allowance for each one of them.

But I don't think Chuckie is worried about hiring more auditors at the social services department:

They [politicians who support welfare] encourage the very things which corrode the fabric of society. Teenaged mothers, out of wedlock birth, children who grow up wild on the street without parental guidance or nurturing and eventually end up behind bars or lying in a pool of blood in some intercity back alley.

So according to Chuckie, real men don't want their tax money being spent on feedin' no children. What kind of wuss would support something like that? Real men want those little bastard babies to go hungry to teach their mommas some decent morals. Real men want their taxes to go to Halliburton and Bechtel.

I don't know how we Americans got so far off into goofball thinking that someone could even imagine that this kind of rant would appeal to anyone but half-senile White Citizens Council members. The European Union countries all provide considerable basic assistance to new mothers, on the very sound notion that it's in society's general interest to make sure babies get adequate food and clothing. And by any measurable standard of sexual morality, they certainly are no worse off than the United States.

And, for some odd reason, not even the conservative parties in Europe complain that feeding children is undermining the morals of their mothers.

Tags: charlie daniels, chuckie, chuckie watch, immigration, nativism

Chuckie Watch 6: Chuckie scolds the (Democratic) politicians

Nashville's avatar of Patriotic Correctness CHARLIE DANIELS is off his mellow-Soapbox streak. In his latest, "People, Politicians and Foolishness", Chuckie's telling us how he don't like politicians that do things that damage the country. You know, politicians like Tom Daschle, Charles Rangle, and Hillary Clinton (double dose). His intro to the whole thing is pretty cute:

I believe that the form of government we have in the U.S.A. is the best in the world. The only thing wrong with it is the politicians.

Let's see, we have the Best Government in the World but the politicians that make it up are all screwy. Now, how does that work? Oh, yeah, there's a definite pattern to the politicians he thinks are irresponsible. If we could just git rid of them there Democrats, everything would be fine.

And given Chuckie's, uh, less than thorough knowledge about basic American values like freedom of religion, I have to wonder just how extensive his knowledge of comparative politics is. But we'll let that slide.

And Chuckie don't like Charles Rangle's talkin' about no draft for the military. He says, "I take Congressman Rangle's proposal as a slap in the face of our military." I don't exactly follow that. But I wonder how Chuckie will react when Bush and Rummy reinstate the draft. Which they will have to do soon after the 2004 election if they win and intend to keep on with their current foreign policy.

Wild guess here: Chuckie will be all for it.

Let's be fair. Chuckie does mention a Republican:

And how about the big to do about Trent Lott. I'm not defending what he did, it was political suicide and he should have known it. But how about Hillary Clinton hugging that Middle Eastern leader's wife? Guess it just depends on who's doing the hugging.

Translation from Chuckie-speak: Nah, I ain't defendin' ole Trent. (Ain't criticizin' him either.) But it was political suicide because there's a lot of, you know, certain kinds of people who'll criticize you for kissing up to white supremacist groups. But, hey, look! Hillary Clinton hugged an A-rab!!!

And there's some other stuff about spotted owls and dead babies and wasting money and stuff. Yeah, Chuckie's back on the Dark Side this week.

Tags: charlie daniels, chuckie, chuckie watch, trent lott

Chuckie Watch 5: "America the Apostate"

Why is it that self-appointed guardians of Patriotic Correctness like CHARLIE DANIELS are ready to trash the patriotism of anyone who criticizes a war they're cheering for, but have no hesitation about making the most sweeping condemnations of America themselves?

Chuckie is at it in his Soapbox column of 09/19/03, which he titles "America the Apostate." It's really a pretty whacked-out rant about how God's gone git us because America is so mired in sin that total destruction is all we deserve.

Am I exaggerrating? "Sodom and Gomorra were totally destroyed for their rampant sins. ... Why will America be any different?" This is what you call a "fire and brimstone" message.

What sins are bothering Chuckie? Well, let's see, there's separation of church and state, a gay Episcopal bishop, homosexuality in general, revisionist history, "new age", abortion, the if-it-feels-good-do-it attitude, and "man's own brilliance." Mentioning Thomas Jefferson and George Washington, Chuckie also says the Founders' generation wanted the government to be thoroughly religious:

So did our forefathers, the framers of the Constitution intend for us to do away with the Judeo Christian principles on which this country was founded? There is not one shred of evidence in any of our federal papers which say so.

Actually, Chuckie, America's first confrontation with Muslim terrorists (the Barbary pirates) was resolved under the Administration of President Washington and Secretary of State Jefferson with the Barbary Treaties. Article 11 of the Treaty of Tripoli of 1797 says [emphasis mine]:

As the government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian Religion,-as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion or tranquility of Musselmen [Muslims],-and as the said States never have entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mehomitan [Muslim] nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries.

Sorry, Chuckie. Washington and Jefferson didn't see things your way.

Tags: charlie daniels, christian right, christian dominionism, chuckie, chuckie watch

Chuckie Watch 4: Chuckie wins the war

CHARLIE DANIELS, would-be arbiter of Patriotic Correctness for country performers and fans, has a book out called Ain't No Rag, published by the rightwing Regnery Press. One of the essays is called "Veterans," which recycles a blowhard "lesson" of the Vietnam War, one that anyone who grew up in America has heard a few dozen times. And to let us know where this fits in the culture wars, he writes:

When I think about brave men and women being spit on by dirty, stoned-out, jobless, pseudo-intellectual hippies whose only contribution to this nation had been to burn their draft cards, it makes my collar get about two sizes too small.
Now, Chuckie's not too big on citing sources. But presumably he knows about some incident in which a couple of intoxicated unemployed guys with poor personal hygiene who read Hermann Hesse novels and had burned their draft cards spit on some veterans. Or maybe they were just drunk and threw up on them.

However that may be, Chuckie knows about fightin' wars:

We could have won that war [Vietnam], if it would have been fought on the battlefield instead of the halls of Congress and the Oval Office.

Now, I'm not quite sure how it is that the US could fight a war without the President and Congress being involved. But anyway, Chuckie says:

In my book, when you go to war you shoot at the enemy every time you see him and you keep on shooting until he either surrenders or doesn't exist any more. You throw everything you've got at him every hour of every day until you grind him into the dust. Bomb him; shoot him; overrun his positions; cut his supply lines, and do it consistently until you pound him into submission.

Now, this sounds to me more like a description of an antebellum Southern slave patrol going after some planter's human property who had absconded from the plantation than like guerrilla warfare.

But here in the real world where American troops are involved in guerrilla wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, that's not very useful advice. One of the particular challenges of counterinsurgency warfare is to find ways of protecting your troops while targeting guerrillas, avoiding civilian casualties and proceeding with normal government and development, all at the same time.

Yeah, it'd be grand if them there "Baathist diehards" and "Taliban remnants" would come out and fight like a regular army so we could kill 'em quick. But they just don't seem to be cooperating in that plan.

And just identifying the enemy is also a big factor in counterinsurgency. If you go blasting away indiscriminately at small bands of guerrillas ("shoot at the enemy every time you see him and you keep on shooting"), especially in urban settings, the troops are likely to kill civilians or friendly police. Which has already been happening in Iraq way too much as it is. And large-scale guerrilla warfare requires lots more than quick-and-easy battles that make exciting stories on Fox News. It requires police, paramilitaries and a regular army from the country where the insurgency is going on.

But Chuckie thinks they all need to be quick and easy:

And then, after he is thoroughly beaten and you can deal from a position of absolute authority, sit down at the peace table with him, work out something sensible, and get our troops the heck out of there.

If we're not willing to go all out to define and attain victory, we should never, ever get into another war.

"Absolute authority" - there's that Old South touch again. But isn't that what Bush and Rummy have already done in Afghanistan and Iraq? In both cases, the enemy government collapsed so completely there was no one to sit down with at the peace table. But our troops haven't been pulled "the heck out of there." Bush and Rummy also still seem to be working on that defining and attaining victory part. Does anyone know how to tell when we've won in either Iraq or Afghanistan?

Yet Chuckie's still cheering for both wars. And I can't help thinking that reconstructing Iraq to be a model democracy for the Middle East - which Chuckie's hero Bush still says we're going to do - may be a little more complicated than "working out something sensible."

In other words, Chuckie's macho formula for winning wars is just a bunch of bluster and hot air.

Tags: charlie daniels, charlie daniels soapbox, chuckie, chuckie watch, iraq war

Chuckie Watch 3: Chuckie and Johnny

The latest (9/12/03) Soapbox piece by CHARLIE DANIELS, country singer and Regnery Press political ranter, is as vapid as his previous one. But thinking and writing about Johnny Cash made me think of the differences in his approach to religion and that of Johnny. (We could compare them as musicians, but why bother? Chuckie just isn't in the same league as Johnny was.)

Johnny was open about his Christianity, which always seemed to be the kind that was concerned about feeding the hungry, caring for the sick and visiting the prisoners.

Chuckie, on the other hand, wears his religion on his sleeve. But his religious beliefs seem to only encourage him in promoting hostility to immigrants, Muslims, war correspondents, Europeans and pretty much anyone who doesn't agree with his hard right political positions.

Chuckie don't think much of people who try to make peace in the land where Jesus lived either. He says it's against God's will:

There will be no peace in the Middle East until Jesus Christ comes back to earth. Oh there will be a three and a half year period of peace under the rule of the satanic antichrist, but only the return of Jesus will bring peace in Israel.

I'm sure Jesus would have recognized in Johnny Cash a common sense of religion and humanity. Chuckie would have just made him want to throw up.

Hearing: Johnny Cash, "Mister Garfield" (Rambin' Jack Elliott)

Tags: charlie daniels, chuckie, johnny cash

Chuckie Watch 2: Chuckie vs. California

CHARLIE DANIELS, Nashville's self-appointed guardian of Patriotic Correctness, has a book of his rants that's been published by the staunchly rightwing Regnery Publishing. It's called Ain't No Rag, the title being a reference to "raghead," which in Chuckie's crowd means A-rab.

But there are many samples of his Christian thoughts available at his Soapbox on his Web site. His entry for 9/8/03, "Things," is even less worth mentioning than most. It sounds like he's working on his own version of "My Favorite Things." Needs a lot of work, Chuckie.

But in an earlier rant, Chuckie explains what the problem with California is. A big part of it is all them there immigrants, he tells us:

Could California be a microcosm of what this whole country is going to become if we don't stem the tide of illegal immigrants and get some people in congress who realize that it's not their money they're spending[?]

Apparently the Republican majorities in both houses of Congress aren't good enough for Chuckie. Although I'm sure his immigrant-bashing is done in the spirit of Christian love.

What Chuckie doesn't say is what everyone in California has known for so long we hardly think about it. California agribusiness is dependent on illegal immigrant labor. Specifically illegal immigrant labor. So are significant parts of the textile, construction, canning and personal services businesses.

Most of those big growers who create the massive market for illegal immigration and the scandalous smuggling business that is an inevitable part of it are good Republicans, mostly Christian (although one may wonder about the depth of their religious convictions). And their faithful Republican politicians will go to the wall to block any actions that threaten to interfere with their market for illegal and underpaid labor.

Sure, some of them will back an immigrant-bashing measure like the notorious Proposition 187 several years ago. As long as, like that measure, it imposes hardships on individual immigrants and doesn't threaten their labor pool.

So if Chuckie wants to stop all this here illegal immigration, he needs to talk to his Christian Republican brothers and sisters among the big growers of California.

- Bruce Miller

Tags: charlie daniels, chuckie, immigration

Hearing: Arlo Guthrie, "Do Re Mi" (Woody Guthrie)

Chuckie Watch 1: Chuckie and the Muslims

Our friend CHARLIE DANIELS likes to talk about what a devout Christian he is. But he's not really into all this ecumenical nonsense you hear talk about. Chuckie's Soapbox column of 09/02/03, "Not the Same" is about Islam versus the True Religion (Chuckie's version of Christianity). Chuckie says, well, heck, the Christian God's name is Jehovah, and them there Muslims call their god Allah. So they obviously ain't the same!

This is all silliness, of course. Jehovah is an English translation of the Hebrew name for God in the Hebrew Bible (Old Testament), more commonly rendered now as Yahweh. "Allah" is just the Arabic word for God. The Hebrew Bible uses other names for God, too, such as El Shaddai and Adonai.

Yes, Islam borrowed elements of pre-Mohammedan "pagan" religion. But so did Judaism borrow from Canaanite, Egyptian and Babylonian religious ideas. Just as Christianity was later influenced in various way by Greek philosophy and other religions with which it came into contact and competed.

Chuckie illustrates his theological depth by asking, "Why do the Arabs hate the Jews?" And answers by explaining that Abraham's son Ishmael was banished from Abraham's household, a biblical story which he evidently reads quite literally as history. "Ishmael became the father of the Arabs and [Abraham's other son] Jacob became the father of the Jews and the enmity has existed every since."

The irony of this explanation is entirely lost on Chuckie, I'm sure. But in crudely identifying Arabs with Islam and tracing their history back to Abraham and Ishmael, he is closer to conservative Muslim claims about the origins of their religion than to most modern Christian readings, not to speak of secular historians.

But Chuckie, promoting hostility between Muslims and Christians, can't admit the common origins of the three "Abrahamic" religious traditions. Actually, the ideas of Jewish Christian communities may have influenced Mohammed's religious ideas. Anyone who reads the Koran can see the influence of the Hebrew scriptures.

Instead, Chuckie promotes a crudely ethnic and unhistorical notion of the present-day hostilities between many Arabs and Jews, and specifically between Israel and its Arab neighbors, that is offensive to good sense and to any kind of honest Christianity.

- Bruce Miller

Hearing: Jackson Browne, "Casino Nation"

Tags: charlie daniels, charlie daniels soapbox, chuckie, chuckie watch

Introducing the Chuckie Watch

One of the things I plan to do here regularly is the Chuckie Watch. This will be a commentary on the ravings of the country singer CHARLIE DANIELS, which he posts regularly in his Soapbox at his Web site.

I capitalize his name because he is known for writing e-mails in all caps. Which fits, because he's basically a loudmouth blowhard.

So why would I want to write about him? For one thing, Chuckie seems to picture himself as a Nashville political guru, especially for determining what's Patriotically Correct.

For another, Chuckie's Soapbox rants show one stage of how rightwing ideas get dissiminated, from the superficially respectable forums like Fox News and the American Enterprise Institute and the Weekly Standard through the Rush Limbaughs and his many clones on hate radio to the kind that you find tossed in your face, usually by people who should know better.

Of course, Rush and Chuckie and the rest of that crowd don't represent regular folks. They represent a nasty minority who spew rightwing fantasies over the airwaves and the Internet.

If the Republicans want to try to make country music a partisan affair, as they did with the ludicrous campaign against the Dixie Chicks, regular country fans certainly don't have to sit still for it. Chuckie may think that Enron Republicanism and mindless jingoism represents the spirit of country music. But anyone who loves the music of Jimmie Rodgers and the Carter Family and the many others who gave birth to this form of music will find that hard to accept.

First installment: Chuckie and the Muslims

- Posted by Bruce Miller

Hearing Hearing Shakira Mebarak, "Moscas en la Casa"

Tags: charlie daniels, charlie daniels soapbox, chuckie, chuckie watch