That is just what Fourth Generation opponents strive for, a systemic breakdown in their state adversary. The danger sign in America is not a hot national debate over the war in Iraq and its course, but precisely the absence of such a debate — which, as former Senator Gary Hart has pointed out, is largely due to a lack of courage on the part of the Democrats. Far from ensuring a united nation, what such a lack of debate and absence of alternatives makes probable is a bitter fracturing of the American body politic once the loss of the war becomes evident to the public. The public will feel itself betrayed, not merely by one political party, but by the whole political system.
The primum mobile of Fourth Generation war is a crisis of legitimacy of the state. If the absence of a loyal opposition and alternative courses of action further delegitimizes the American state in the eye of the public, the forces of the Fourth Generation will have won a victory of far greater proportions than anything that could happen on the ground in Iraq. The Soviet Union’s defeat in Afghanistan played a central role in the collapse of the Soviet state. Could the American defeat in Iraq have similar consequences here? The chance is far greater than Washington elites can imagine.
It could do something that has not happen in US politics for alomst 150 years?
Bring about a Third Political party both in Congrees and the Whithouse..
THe last election saw the biggest amount of states with Thirdy parties registered to urn in elections..
And one Thirdy party had almost the full electorial college number to make a presiedncy cnadiate run actually valdi in the voting booth..
From the right look for the message to chang eto we lost the battle in Iraq but are gettig close ot the vistory in the war..
Posted by: Fred Grott | September 24, 2005 at 11:12 PM
I wonder why the Democrats were so "cowardly".
Is it Democrat "nature"? Or is it due to a viciously right-wing media who would use any opposition as yet another stick to beat the left but who actually give people like Lind, anti-war but reliably conservative in other ways, a relatively free pass?
Posted by: phil jones | September 25, 2005 at 04:28 AM
Here is another loss on the moral front...
http://www.eastbayexpress.com/Issues/2005-09-21/news/news.html
Wait till the Middle East media get a hold of this one.
Posted by: D. | September 25, 2005 at 05:10 AM
jameswolcott.com is also running this.
We're seeing an accelerating fracture. It's kind of hard to tell because each day it's just a little bit more, but things are breaking down on the frontless front, the home front and the administration's shirtfront.
It also sounds like the Bush boy is cracking under pressure. A president who's reportedly drinking and on antidepressants-- and who knows what other prescription or nonprescription drugs-- a president who takes five-week vacations and can find time to play guitar while cat5 hurricanes are hitting-- this is not a man who is capable of pulling the United States out of its nosedive.
Recently, my aging mother asked me what kind of AK she should buy. What river did we pass a while back, was that the Rubicon?
Posted by: jeremiah | September 25, 2005 at 10:50 PM