District of Corruption

Born in a Small Town


Christopher Hitchens has recently let his feelings about Middle America be known in a recent Slate article, "Has Bachmann Met Her Waterloo?" While it's ostensibly an attack on Minnesota Congresswoman Michele Bachmann, Hitchens main accusation is that she is from and of the small-town America that is too stupid, ignorant, and antiquated to produce federal leaders.

Where does it come from, this silly and feigned idea that it's good to be able to claim a small-town background? It was once said that rural America moved to the cities as fast as it could, and then from urban to suburban as fast as it could after that. Every census for decades has confirmed this trend. Overall demographic impulses to one side, there is nothing about a bucolic upbringing that breeds the skills necessary to govern a complex society in an age of globalization and violent unease.

He's angry at America in general and Michele in particular for failing to keep up with his insatiable appetite for more wars. In a long-overdue sign of hope, conservatives in the heartland have grown war-weary, failing to follow along with the neocons' threadbare arguments for further expansion of the empire. It's become outright necessary for the Republican candidates to feign an "isolationist" position on the trail, given that positively nobody outside of a Washington think-thank gives a damn about overthrowing Qaddafi. At this rate, the neocon Masters of the Universe are even having a hard time defending their ongoing operations from the anti-imperial Zeitgeist.

The comments section of a Washington Post article on McCain, Graham, and Lieberman hosting a press conference to kvetch about the decrease of troops in Afghanistan drives home just how far public opinion has drifted away from them. While they continue to get most of their wars, they're definitively on the retreat relative to where they were a few short years ago. In a way, this most recent impotent attack on Michele and the American voters is the prelude to the final defeat of his bankrupt ideology. A neocon Waterloo of sorts.

Michele's a bit of an unfair target of his wrath. She's actually been groomed for national leadership from a young age, having done her obligatory stint on an Israeli kibbutz. She has even confirmed repeatedly that she is more loyal to Israel than to the United States, invoking the tired Zionist heresy that all nations that fail to serve the Pharisaic State are subject to an actual (no joke) curse...

I am convinced in my heart and in my mind that if the United States fails to stand with Israel, that is the end of the United States…. [W]e have to show that we are inextricably entwined, that as a nation we have been blessed because of our relationship with Israel, and if we reject Israel, then there is a curse that comes into play. And my husband and I are both Christians, and we believe very strongly the verse from Genesis [Genesis 12:3], we believe very strongly that nations also receive blessings as they bless Israel. It is a strong and beautiful principle.

But faith without works is dead. All her lapel pins and praises of Israel are for naught if she doesn't back them up with military aggression. What she's most likely doing is the same thing Obama did: She'll carry on about peace while stumping, then instigate more humanitarian operations, secretive drone strikes, and coalition projects once the trusting fools vote her in. Note that she, like Obama, continues to preach in specifics, arguing against this act of military expansionism or that one. She'll continue to refrain from actually taking a humble and sane position on foreign policy, which might prove embarrassing in the aftermath of an election victory.

I concede Hitchens's central thesis—that a woman of Michele's caliber has no business at the helm of a vast intercontinental war machine. Every few years, the awesome weapon he and his Beltway pals control is ceremonially offered up to the Dairy Queen patronizing rabble. Reeling from soaring unemployment, a spiraling economy, and a runaway budget deficit, American's just can't stomach any more freedom fries. They know we're not going to be "greeted as liberators," that the foreigners will vote in another tyrant shortly after we gift them freedom and democracy, and that it will cost us much more blood and treasure than David Frum, Christopher Hitchens, and the rest of the non-American "patriots" predict.

Hitchens, an atheist Jew who's not even from America and is far more at home in "a small but growing post-Trotskyite Luxemburgist sect" than a small town, supposedly knows what we need in a president. "We need candidates who know about laboratories, drones, trade cycles, and polychrome conurbations both here and overseas." In essence, what we supposedly need is a candidate who's versed in military R&D, loaded up with globalist “free-market” sound bites, and at home in the cosmopolitan bazaars which are alien and hostile to the authentic American people and our ideals.

He might need those candidates, but we sure as hell don't. Hitchens's federal government is a theocratic empire with a religious doctrine of Esoteric Churchillism on a transcendent crusade to impose globalism, free trade, and "democracy" on the rest of the world. The fact that it was originally created by and for a specific people, the White American people, is an archaic irrelevancy to him, sort of like how the Nokia phone company started out as a paper mill. Its ceremonial accountability to those people is an irritating distraction from the serious business of world domination.

The irony here is that Christopher Hitchens fancies himself to be a champion of democratic self-rule for voiceless nations under hostile and unaccountable regimes, yet he's convinced that our own federal government is too big and important to be entrusted to the people it purports to represent. If this regime is simply too big and important to answer to us, perhaps we should reconsider answering to it. Perhaps we mouth-breathing hillbilly retards who are unfit for participation in this government should answer to a smaller and less important government, leaving his polychrome conurbations and their cosmopolitan elites to carry on their crusade without our unwelcome participation.

I'll be joining Hitchens in enjoying the fireworks and festivities this evening. I'll also be joining him in dreaming about regime change, nation-building, and overthrowing tyrants. Though since I'm born and bred in small-town, small-minded America, I'll be plotting regime change here at home.