Operation Endgame - The Philanthropic Connection

"The sovereign is he who decides the state of exception..." - Carl Schmitt

"Do not hang a gun on the wall in Act I, unless you plan to use it by Act III." - Anton Chekhov

SFGate:

Since 9/11, and seemingly without the notice of most Americans, the federal government has assumed the authority to institute martial law, arrest a wide swath of dissidents (citizen and noncitizen alike), and detain people without legal or constitutional recourse in the event of "an emergency influx of immigrants in the U.S., or to support the rapid development of new programs."

Perhaps related is the return to respectability of Carl Schmitt's work: contemptuous of liberal democracy, supportive of the concentration of power in a single strong leader, the demonization of enemies, and the waging of eternal war to keep the Homeland cohesive. Interesting too is who funded the Schmitt revival. From Dick Cheney's Eminence Grise, by Barbara Boyd:

In the 1980s and 1990s Schmitt became a staple on reading lists of U.S. colleges and universities in political science and philosophy, a revival which produced English translations of most of Schmitt's works, and reams of "scholarly" articles, conferences, and presentations. Funding for this project centered in the Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation and other neo-conservative foundations. Michael Joyce, who chaired the Bradley Foundation during this period, is a Straussian who started his career with Irving Kristol and the Institute for Educational Affairs—the same Foundation that provided seed funding for the Federalist Society. The English translations of both Meier books on Schmitt were published by the University of Chicago Press under grants from the Bradley Foundation, facilitated by Hillel Fradkin. Fradkin, a Straussian, taught on the Committee on Social Thought at the University of Chicago, was vice president of the Bradley Foundation from 1988-1998, a program officer at the Olin Foundation, heads a Straussian think tank in Israel called the Shalem Center, and recently replaced Iran-Contra's Elliot Abrams as the head of the Ethics and Public Policy Center in Washington, D.C.

William Schambra of Bradley Center for Philanthropy and Civic Renewal moves in these circles. He also has excellent academic credentials (MA and PhD) in political science. And he has experience in practical politics. I wonder how he might relate the work of Carl Schmitt, conservative philanthropy via Olin and Bradley, the erosion of civil liberties, and the renewal of grassroots civil society in a time of terror.

Comments

[Keeping America Safe For As Long As Anyone Can Remember]

This thread does not exist - do not comment.

[Keeping America Safe For As Long As Anyone Can Remember]

Links are notoriously unreliable - seek better counsel.

[Gerry]

You know the Schmidt quote at the top is a tautology. Who decides that it is time for revolution? When the law and social order are pressed to the needs of power, the people may assert their right of sovereignty directly. Or at least that's what it says in the Declaration of Independence.

[phil]

Schmidt was talking about, I believe, suspending the Constitution, and if need be parliamentary bodies, so that in a state of emergency the highest level Decider could take direct control through the imposition of martial law. Dissent under those circumstances is treason and is potentially punishable without trial by jury. People fall in line pretty quickly, history shows, except for a few who may form an underground resistance. I suspect in America life would go on pretty much as normal. We would still have a free market, and a social capital market. We might still go through election exercises periodically. The mall would be open. Television news would discuss pros and cons of whatever side issues those in charge were debating. Ordinary people would know which end is up, much as they do in corporate life. They might say, "Well, in any case, nothing can be done. It is all for the best. Better to go along to get along. Things will all work out. America is one heck of a country. We have our challenges but all will be well, if you don't get sideways with the authorities. You can't be too careful. Mistakes happen. And you never know. You don't want it to be you."

[Gerry]

I know that is what he intended to talk about, I am just pointing out that his logic can be used at either end of the spectrum. If they do away with the Constitution, the Rule of Law is out the window. The rule of the day is then pragmatics, yes, but the people do not easily yield to force. It may seem quite, but it will not be. The revolutionaries are never in the majority, but they will have widespread tacit support.

I'm not so stupid as to dare them to do it, but likewise they would be stupid to try.

[phil]

Why if there was going to be a resurgence of interest in democracy has it been delayed? Why has it not come to the front over the last few years as these laws have been passed? I would read the public as asleep. They need a good bed time story. One is always provided.

[JJ Commoner]

I suspect in America life would go on pretty much as normal. We would still have a free market, and a social capital market. We might still go through election exercises periodically. The mall would be open. Television news would discuss pros and cons of whatever side issues those in charge were debating. Ordinary people would know which end is up, much as they do in corporate life. They might say, "Well, in any case, nothing can be done. It is all for the best. Better to go along to get along. Things will all work out. America is one heck of a country. We have our challenges but all will be well, if you don't get sideways with the authorities. You can't be too careful. Mistakes happen. And you never know. You don't want it to be you."

I think things are more like this than they are not, today, already.

There just hasn't been the explicit announcement yet about "suspending the Constitution, and if need be parliamentary bodies, so that in a state of emergency the highest level Decider could take direct control through the imposition of martial law. Dissent under those circumstances is treason and is potentially punishable without trial by jury."

Things are operating and progressing now as if these measures are in place tacitly, and could be made explicit over night if need be ... and the mall will still be open, with all the flat screens on the walls still shouting at people.

[Gerry]

No doubt all of this is true, and there is a saving remnant, and it is gaining strength. I hope we don't need the shock of an outright declaration of a state of emergency and explicit suspension of the Constitution. I am appalled that our leaders have not pressed the points where it has already been bent to the point of breaking.

I choose my public words very carefully precisely to align my intentions with the letter and spirit of the Constitution because whatever happens, good people will know the difference between true patriots, and those who wrap themselves in the flag to shred The People's Law. As another famous patriot said, "We must all hang together or we will all hang seperately".

[phil]

Things are operating and progressing now as if these measures are in place tacitly, and could be made explicit over night if need be ... and the mall will still be open, with all the flat screens on the walls still shouting at people. Of course, having the power to suspend the Constitution and elections too, and to seize and torture political enemies, does give a person a certain shot of confidence. You don't necessarily have to do it right now, but it is a good feeling knowing you could - and that Gerry's "saving remnant," if they have any sense know why the box cars have shackles.

Obama is fine with this. So is Hillary. McCain has reservations but changed his mind. So, it really is not a political issue.

[Gerry]

Obama is fine with this. So is Hillary. McCain has reservations but changed his mind. So, it really is not a political issue.

How do you know? We all know that appearances can be deceiving. You can't get past the finish line unless you at least appear to be fine with it. Time will tell, or maybe it won't ...

[Debbie]

Not sure if my post took. Sorry for possible duplicate.

Hope this helps, Phil.

Barack Obama The War We Need To Win

[Eventualities-R-Us]

Shackles are a nod to OSHA regs as passengers will be classified federal sub-employees (SG -1).

Without restraints sub-employees would be no safer than little children in a school bus accident.

Try to think outside the box, please.

[Debbie]

I'd also like to direcvt you here:

Senator Barack Obama's Remarks MILITARY COMMISSIONS ACT OF 2006: HABEAS CORPUS--AMENDMENT NO. 5087

and to:

Habeas Lawyers for Obama

Let me know if you need more.

[Debbie]

OK. Once more with feeling...

Sen Barack Obama Reacts to US Bill Approving Torture

[Jeff Trexler]

Russia provides a potent illustration of how the state of exception can find popular acceptance. I was listening to a Putin speech on my iPod yesterday--y'know, in a mix between the White Stripes and the Scissor Sisters--and the part that got a huge response was his celebration of how Russia has become one of the world's strongest economies, stronger even than the U.S.

Sure, Russia now has torture prisons, a monitored press and NGOs looking nervously over their shoulders. But for most people, what really counts is civic order and financial stability. When democracy was en vogue, the country had neither; firebombed shops, shootings in the streets, crushing poverty--those were the wages of freedom.

In this regard Iraq has only reinforced the lesson that freedom is too expensive to indulge. Rather than inspire a global embrace of democracy, Iraq has sent the message that the surest way to stability is through the exertion of force. This is the most important way in which the experience has been Hobbesian--not the nasty and brutish violence on the ground, but the establishment of civil society through a state that has a monopoly on violence.

[phil]

Thanks, Debbie. I was very pleased to read these links. If elected, I truly hope he will lead the effort to restore our Constiuttional liberties. There is a lot of work that needs to be done.

[phil]

Ordered liberty means economic freedom for large corporations and the suppression of civil liberties. Milton Freidman meet Carl Schmidt. Shock Doctrine plus State of Exception. The think tanks prepare the policy elements. When a crisis comes they are slammed through. Year by year in accordance with what is clearly an agenda, the Freedom sans Liberty moves forward. The person I have read who has this twin agenda clearly in view is Naomi Klein, and her work is not much discussed in the mainstream press.

I hope someone comments on the funding sources listed in this post, and on the intellectual eminences in the background. Irving Kristol started out as a Trotskyite. What we have seen in these last eight years amounts to a quiet coup d'etat. The Constitution was put aside, something the Axis could not do to us, that Russia could not do to us, and yet not one shot was fired. It took some funders and some think tanks and some policy work and a supine media and an electorate half asleep, and it took progressives who would rather talk about women's issues, or subaltern studies, or black rights, or gay rights than about human rights. Deconstruction helped too. For what is a Constitution but a Text to be deconstructed, as Stanley Fish did the Bill of Rights, for laughs? Or, as Bush is reputed to have said, "The Constitution is just a goddamn piece of paper." Now, whether the Constituion protect us or does not, whether we have elections or not, whether we are rounded up or not, whether we get a trial or not, depends on one man, sitting in the White House. We are living in a state of emergency where those who hate us for our civil liberties may well suspend them.

[Antoine Möeller]

Please note also the ID of out-groups (non-pussies) with kick-ass gubmint. The out-laws now have in-laws they can chill wid.

(cf. Cap'n BT on the WB sister channel.
cf. my cornrow-blackbelt-japanese-hispanic gangstah-when-it-pleases-me-tattoo-artist-neighbor
who IDs strong Republican. He down with the zero sum, baby, he down to the bone.)

I hope someone comments on the funding sources listed in this post, and on the intellectual eminences in the background.

I second that emotion.

[Debbie]

Phil, what would be a Yankee version of Captain Blowtorch? Not a Dick Minum type, but a gunlovin' kinda guy who is a bit less rough around the edges?

Vote break down on Dodd/Feingold Amendment. Both my senators voted Yea. Hillary Clinton was NOT there.

[phil]

Liberals are weak, dithering, ineffectual - that was the line in Vienna too. Blood and soil, manly men, the uneducated and resentful risen up as sanctioned bullies, crowd sourced justice visited upon outgroups. Bullies, narcissists, and psychopaths rise in the ranks by doing what more decent people refuse to do. "Ponerology" is the title of a book about it. I wonder if it helps or hurts a career path in the military now, or in the CIA, to be squeamish about torture.

Schmitt and Toqueville - how does someone like Schambra relate the two? Schmitt and our founding fathers? Bradley Foundation also funded The Bell Curve, apparently. What kind of Civil Renewal does these philanthropists have in store for us?

For the record, if the President does suspend the Constitution, declare martial law, suspend elections, and round up the dissidents and send them to the Halliburton Freedom Camps, I am not - I repeat - part of Gerry's crazy "saving remnant." I am on the team! Plus, if they want Gerry's email address, street address, and best time to bust down his door, I am happy to oblige. In a time of war we must take strong measures lest the enemy sap up from within. I would rather 1,000 Gerrys, nay 1 million Gerry's be rounded up "unfairly," tortured to death, and dropped in an unmarked grave, than to have even one enemy of the state left at large to undermine our way of life.

[Gerry]

But you will write letter to Amnesty International for my release, won't you? If they come for you, I probably won't cut off an ear or anything, but I promise to keep your memory alive (anomymously, from the shadows).

[phil]

Same for you, Gerry. No letter since it could be traced back to me, but I will certainly recite the prayer for the dead.

[phil]

I have heard Bill Schambra say that the conservatives who called themselves a saving remnant and who funded the early work in conservative revival felt they were not going to achieve results, rather they were dug in for a long battle for a civilization that they considered lost. I wanted to ask whether the native language of that civilization was English or German. I can see why looking at Berlin after the war, the philosophy of Schmitt might have seemed finished, but it has had a remarkable revival thanks to Bradley Foundation, where Bill was once a program officer, before founding the Bradley Center for Philanthropy and Civic Renewal. "Ideas matter," the conservatives say, and they are right. Why not drop by here and carry on the conversation? What kind of civilization does Dick Cheney want? Yoo? Bush? Irving Kristol? Is it a liberal democracy, with divided government, or it is a Decider-led, CEO style, corporate sort of entity, tipping on the verge of martial law, ruled by fear and greed, where the real powers are funders behind the scenes, and you "fit in or f*uck off," as the saying goes? Gilded lies can't be acknowledged in public and discussed openly, but these comments get few readers, and it is all among friends. Maybe we can be turned. I mean, if there is good money in it, and we don't have to go the the Freedom Camps, and we can have the inside track when they hand out the plunder, I am open to a little metanoia to offset the paranoia. I mean, make me an offer. I don't speak German, but I can learn. I am getting tired of walking around drunk and naked. I need an intellectual home where I can get paid for thinking, even if the conclusions required are not ones I would otherwise endorse.

[Antoine Möeller]

Senate Approves Symbolic Rebuke of Iran
September 26, 2007

The Senate on Wednesday overwhelmingly approved a measure sending another rebuke to Tehran, this one aimed at sending a message to the Islamic regime to end military tactics targeting U.S. forces in Iraq. It was sponsored by Sens. Jon Kyl, R-Ariz, and Joe Lieberman, D-Conn.

The measure's opponents, which include Sen. Jim Webb, D-Va., said the language is too open-ended, and could be construed as Senate authorization to use force against Iran...

...“This proposal … is Dick Cheney’s fondest pipe dream. It’s not a prescription for success. At best, it’s a deliberate attempt to divert attention from a failed diplomatic policy. At worst, it could be read as a back-door method of … gaining congressional validation for action without one hearing or without serious debate,” Webb said Tuesday.

S.AMDT.3017
Amends: H.R.1585, S.AMDT.2011

YEAS - 76    [Clinton]

NAYS - 22

Not Voting - 2    [Obama, McCain]

----

Obama Introduces Resolution to Halt Rush to War with Iran
November 2, 2007

Legislation would undo damage caused by Senate’s passage of Kyl-Lieberman amendment

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Yesterday evening, U.S. Senator Barack Obama (D-IL) introduced Senate Joint Resolution 23, a legislative proposal specifying that the use of force against Iran is not authorized by any previous action of Congress. This would include the authorization of the use of force against Iraq; the recently passed Kyl-Lieberman amendment, which states that our military presence in Iraq should be used to counter Iran; and any resolution previously adopted by Congress.

"There is absolutely no reason to trust that this Administration will not use existing congressional authorization to justify military action against Iran," said Senator Obama. "The Iraq War authorization and the recently passed Kyl-Lieberman amendment have opened the door to an attack on Iran, and Congress must now shut that door. We need aggressive diplomacy and economic pressure, which is why I support sanctions on Iran. Those efforts must not be linked to the use of our military presence in Iraq and the region, because we have seen what this Administration does when you trust them to do the right thing but give them an opening to do the wrong thing."

----

S.J.RES.23
TITLE: A joint resolution clarifying that the use of force against Iran is not authorized by the Authorization for the Use of Military Force Against Iraq, any resolution previously adopted, or any other provision of law.
SPONSOR: Sen Obama, Barack [IL] (introduced 11/1/2007) Cosponsors (None)
RELATED BILLS: H.J.RES.64
LATEST MAJOR ACTION: 11/1/2007 Referred to Senate committee.
STATUS: Read twice and referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations.

----

Interview With Daniel Ellsberg
February 4 2008

[..]

[Daniel] Ellsberg is worried Congress has not put forth an effort to demand they be informed before an attack on Iran should occur. Currently, there is a Senate resolution to demand Congress be consulted in the event of plans to attack Iran, but it has not gotten out of committee.

Instead, the Senate has virtually endorsed the president's power to begin a war with Iran, says Ellsberg, with the passage of legislation last September declaring Iran's Revolutionary Guard Corps is a terrorist organization.

"To say that the Revolutionary Guards in Iran are a terrorist organization ... is very close to saying that the president is able to attack them at his discretion. Now to give this president that discretion is inexcusable, outrageous," says Ellsberg.

[..]

Looking at the current primaries and the future presidential election, Ellsberg says the American public must create priorities that are different from those offered by the current candidates.

The changes that need to occur are drastic, and given the stakes, Ellsberg believes the American public should be willing to invest their time, so the crisis we currently find ourselves in can be met with strong action:

"If enough people simply look clearly at what we are doing in our course towards an abyss right now, they do have the power with the remaining democracy we have still in this country to turn it around."

[my emphases]

---------------------

So, Senator, can we get it out of committee?

Yes - We - Can!

Can we get it on the news?

Yes - We - Can!

Can we get it through both houses?

Yes - We - Can!

Can we get ol' Georgie's scrawl?

?

[JJ Commoner]

Nought to do with philanthropy per se, everything to do with endgames:

Antonin Scalia on BBC recently:

Justice Antonin Scalia told the BBC that "smacking someone in the face" could be justified if there was an imminent threat.

"You can't come in smugly and with great self satisfaction and say 'Oh it's torture, and therefore it's no good'," he said in a rare interview [...]

In the interview with the Law in Action programme on BBC Radio 4, he said it was "extraordinary" to assume that the ban on "cruel and unusual punishment" - the US Constitution's Eighth Amendment - also applied to "so-called" torture.

"To begin with the constitution... is referring to punishment for crime. And, for example, incarcerating someone indefinitely would certainly be cruel and unusual punishment for a crime."

Justice Scalia argued that courts could take stronger measures when a witness refused to answer questions.

"I suppose it's the same thing about so-called torture. Is it really so easy to determine that smacking someone in the face to determine where he has hidden the bomb that is about to blow up Los Angeles is prohibited in the constitution?" he asked.

"It would be absurd to say you couldn't do that. And once you acknowledge that, we're into a different game.

... and a comment on a blog where Scalia's brilliant legal interpretations were presented:

And on top of this, the Senate today just passed warrantless wiretapping and approved telecom immunity.

So now in America, we can be legally tortured, and we no longer have a Constitutional right to privacy.

And our politicians are running around asking us to make sure we vote?

What a joke. What a sham.

Do you REALLY need "them" to explicitly say you and me and everyone else you know are now under their control ?

Go ahead and vote ... see if it makes a difference.

They change the displays in department store and mall windows every once in a while, too, you know.

[Gerry]

I consider words like that from a Supreme Court Justice to be disqualifying for service on the court. Not that the current Congress would do anything even under such a theory, but impeachment is the remedy for such a situation.

They have to be hearing from their constituencies about this, but apparently the bubble is so dense nothing gets through.

[phil]

Diogenes wrote as Alexander the Great rose to power and extended his dominion. Cynicism, Stoicism, Christianity, our great moral traditions took root in that era, of Macedonian and Roman empires. Maybe as dark as things are, after the endgame comes rebirth, as the buried seeds sprout and flourish, in the stony soil. What does philanthropy have to do with it? Charity? Love of neighbor? What has that to do with brutality, torture, lies, surveillance, empire, and injustice? Not much if philanthropy is a social capital market. Everything if philanthropy is the expression of "the same force that through the green fuse drives the flower."

[Antoine Möeller]

God forgive me, I love a good debate. Anyone seen one lately?

Meanwhile, two heavyweights pirouette:

HERITAGE
U.S. Thwarts 19 Terrorist Attacks Against America Since 9/11

VS

COUNCIL ON FOREIGN RELATIONS
Is There Still a Terrorist Threat?: The Myth of the Omnipresent Enemy

Who's wholding up Who?

[herecomesnobody]

You're leaving out the popularity Schmitt has gained also among leftists. Not that they are proponents of his ideas, but he figures prominently in the work of Hardt/Negri, Agamben and other brand-name thinkers in their attempts to critique sovereignty and really-existing democracy, and step out of the Hobbes vs. Locke dynamic that characterizes liberal reactions to his work.

[Gerry]

I would love to be able to parse out the differences and commonalities in some of these idea clusters without getting bogged down in ideological arguments. Usually the best solutions integrate contrasting points as an both/and rather than an either/or.

Often the fundamental ideological disagreement is precisely this distinction between single and multi-valued logics. The mathematical tools and models that first revolutionized physics and is more and more widely applied are distinctly multi-valued. It isn't a proof, but it certainly is suggestive.

[phil]

Yes, Schmitt is much discussed all around. So are Machiavelli, Nietzsche, Heidegger, and Strauss. Real Politik. "Actually existing democracy" ain't what it was.

[Antoine Möeller]

Let's say Obama believes what he says in the statement supporting his S.J.Res.23: Bush may choose to attack Iran without consulting Congress. If Obama wants us to avoid a hot war with Iran, what should he do, and when?

[Gerry]

I think their opportunity to try Iran has passed. I would view this proposal as positioning himself for the election. If you are Hillary and McCaine, what do you do? Do support this resolution or not?

If it looks like a large and open engagement with Iran is in the offing, leadership has to stand up and say that this is not authorized. The Iraq legislation does not give the authority to start a war, but when it was clear that they were in the run-up to the invasion there was no opposition in Congress. No one standing up and clearly saying that this action would exceed what Congress authorized and attempting to put on record what was wrong and known before it went down.

If that starts with respect to Iran between now and November, it becomes wrapped up in the Presidential campaign. Unless what they actually plan is a military coup, how can they really do it? I know they might be crazy enough to try, but do you really think the military would go along with that after what they have endured?

[Antoine Möeller]

Why hasn't Obama drawn a distinction between himself and Clinton on this issue?

She voted for, he didn't vote, then drafted his own resolution to emphasize his opposition.

If there IS a real distinction between the two, I, as a citizen voter, would like to know. If there is NOT, I would like to know that, too.

This "democratic unity" god they're serving does not serve the citizen voter, in my opinion. Who does it serve?

[Antoine Möeller]

Here's a scenario: Bush announces a terrorist attack on American soil has been thwarted, narrowly avoided. It has been traced back to Iran, which, in a coordinated effort, attacked American positions in Iraq. Bush, having been authorized by Congress, acted in defense of our troops and the Homeland with precision air strikes designed to incapacitate the Guard within Iran.

What does Obama do? What does Clinton do? What does McCain do?

What does the American public do?

And who benefits?

[Gerry]

The perspective of a modern de Tocqueville?

I though I posted this earlier, but I don't see it. Hope it isn't a duplicate. Found it in my firefox history still.

[Gerry]

I do like some of what I heard from the house after they didn't pass the FISA legislation with telecom immunity (under threat from the White House of terrorist attacks).

Finally some are starting to oppose the fear mongering. I don't think anyone is jumping as high anymore when they sound the alarm.

Since he reads so many children's books, I'm surprised he isn't familiar with "The Boy Who Cried Wolf".

[phil]

Schmitt wrote the playbook. He should be included in the founding fathers of our new government, in which the Constitution must be suspended to the protect it. I believe it was in fact Schmitt who came up with the idea of a Decider who is the Protector of the Constitution, and who does that job by suspending it in time of Terror, or other threat to the country. Or at least he updated an old Roman tradition. The upshot is consolidated power, endless war, and what you saw in Berlin after the war - our old women picking through the rubble of DC. Of course, I may be a defeatest. I assume, though, that the world will rise against any power that uses Schmitt's ideas at home and abroad to create an empire based on fear and hate. We fought against those ideas last time, for them this time, but in the end the idea of endless war against a demonic enemy at home and abroad is a failed idea. It had failed in the time of Christ and will fail again and again, though people after people fall prey to that particular variant on the madness of crowds. How we live as the tragedy unfolds, that is the question.

In the Weimar cafe the Jewish comic has wonderfully sardonic jokes, and even the patriots raise a glass to toast the satire.

Come, my friends, let us drink.

[Gerry]

It's not a circle though, it is a spiral, or maybe even a strange attractor. It doesn't hit the same point each time around. Observing the cycle should make you aware of the differences between the cycles, not just the sameness.

[phil]

Right, differences. Schmitt in the America is not Schmitt in Germany. But wherever his ideas are implemented he is no John Locke or Thomas Jefferson.

[Impacted Möeller]

Willkommen, bienvenue, welcome!
Fremde, etranger, stranger.
Gluklich zu sehen, je suis enchante,
Happy to see you, bleibe, reste, stay.

[phil]

Life is a Cabaret, even in the darkest of times, or even more so then.

[phil]

Life is a Cabaret, even in the darkest of times, or even more so then.