...how we arrived at this bizarre place. The individual in this letter does not operate in the world of reason or rationale thought. This letter typifies a pre-Enlightment type of worldview, and is something the founders of this nation fought hard to expunge from political discourse. You simply can not have a rationale conversion with this individual anymore than you can have a rationale conversation with a fundamentalist Islamist, a point that would be obvious to many, but not to the irrationale mindset.
Anyhow, a few weeks ago I bought a book by David Domke that offers a meticulous analysis of what has happened over the last 3 years in this country. We are witness the emergence of what the founding fathers feared - the merging of politics with a righteous religious framework to form what Domke calls "political fundamentalism." This development is the very antithesis of what Jefferson, Madison and Washington stated the United States should stand for. In fact, religious fundamentalism is the enemy of democracy and freee thought.
Here's press release of a speech by Domke:
Scholar Analyzes Religious Influence, Political Impact of Bush Administration's
Strategic Communications in New Book, Sept. 30 Lecture at Whitworth College http://www.whitworth.edu/News/2004_2005/Fall/DomkeLecture.htm"George W. Bush successfully influenced media coverage and public opinion to advance his national security policy agenda by merging religion and politics like no other president in modern U.S. history, according to University of Washington communication scholar David Domke."
"...For his book, Domke and his research team carefully analyzed the language and themes of 15 national addresses and 220 other public communications by Bush during the 20 months between Sept. 11, 2001, and the end of major combat in Iraq on May 1, 2003. In addition, he analyzed more than 100 public statements by Attorney General John Ashcroft, Secretary of State Colin Powell and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld.
Next, Domke reviewed news and editorial coverage in 20 leading and geographically diverse newspapers as well as on the evening newscasts of ABC, CBS and NBC. He focused on how the news media covered the Bush administration's agenda related to combating terrorism, passage of the U.S.A. Patriot Act, creation of the Department of Homeland Security, and congressional and United Nations resolutions on Iraq.
This analysis revealed that news media consistently echoed the words and ideas of the president and other administration leaders and thereby framed public discourse along the administration's terms, according to Domke. For example, he says,
only two of more than 300 editorials responding to the president's national addresses criticized the administration's description of the campaign against terrorism as an epic struggle of good vs. evil. None questioned his explicit declarations of God's will, the research shows. (Amazon.com - 3 good reviews)
God Willing : Political Fundamentalism in the White House, the 'War on Terror' and the Echoing Pressby David Domke
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0745323057/qid=1100014359/sr=8-1/ref=pd_csp_1/104-7039696-5921549?v=glance&s=books&n=507846"U.S. news media substantially echoed the public communications of the Bush administration in the period between September 11 and the Iraq war in spring 2003. Across the wide range of administration communications examined, the news media consistently gave voice to the words and ideas of the president and other administration leaders. To be clear, news media sometimes disagreed with the administration and occasionally were strongly critical, as we saw
in the response to the administration's dissent squelching. Some press criticism was willingly tolerated by the administration, because the consistent echoing of the president's and administration's language disseminated and encouraged a certain conception of the world--a conception grounded in a conservative religious worldview that enacted a particular political agenda. Following the terrorist attacks, news coverage--and, in turn, public opinion--about U.S. politics was constructed, described, delimited and circumscribed by the Bush administration, particularly the president. The administration's strategic language choices and communication approaches were the key factors in prompting this outcome. However, certain normative and structural characteristics of the U.S. news media system also were of importance in facilitating the press' echoing of administration communications. In particular, two central features of the American news media, one regarding the routines and practices of journalism and one regarding ownership, were crucially important."
"...The ultimate loser in this relationship is democracy. When political leadership and the press both stand to benefit from the framing of an event or set of ideas as a crisis, any dissonant voices among the public are easily ignored by political leaders. Indeed, this is what happened during the buildup to the war in Iraq, when hundreds of thousands of Americans protested publicly in February 2003, the largest public demonstrations since the Vietnam War era. The press covered these protests, to be sure. But when the president dismissed these demonstrations (claiming that he welcomed their right to protest, but that their views were wrong) and made clear that the administration would not veer from its impending conflict with Iraq, the press returned to echoing the administration's messages--and not the dissonant public outcry. The implication is substantial: opinions of the public, inevitably lacking the authority inherent in the voices of government officials, have little realistic chance to challenge a governmental narrative in news discourse. In particular, news coverage in crisis contexts will almost always be supportive of the government; only after the crisis diminishes will the press exert independent authority to examine governmental claims and actions, as indeed occurred in summer and autumn 2003 when the U.S. mainstream press began to inspect the administration's claims regarding Iraq and alleged weapons of mass destruction. While such press scrutiny is still useful even at the later date, it comes far too late for military members committed to the field and for individuals or nations who are on the receiving end of an administration's actions. An echoing press, therefore, is not a neutral press.
#####
Here's an ironic yet tragic reminder of why the founder's warned against the mixture of poltics, religion, and coprorate power...
“But besides the danger of a direct mixture of Religion & civil Government, there is an evil, which ought to be guarded against in the indefinite accumulation of property from the capacity of holding it in perpetuity by … corporations. The power of all corporations ought to be limited in this respect. The growing wealth acquired by them never fails to be a source of abuses."
- James Madison, Detached Memoranda