Class War in the Windy City

In the April 9th issue of The Nation Naomi Klein reports on Conrad Black's trial for fraud in a Chicago courthouse. The process of jury selection, it seems, revealed a deep antagonism toward the rich:

Asked what they thought of executives who earn tens of millions of dollars, jurors answered almost uniformly in the negative. "Who could possibly do that much work or be that much capable?" one asked. A union mechanic's apprentice pointed out that no matter how much he works, "I'm barely getting by as it is, living at home."

"I just don't think anyone should get that amount of money from any company, example Enron and WorldCom," one juror wrote. Others said, "I feel that there is corruption everywhere"; anyone paid as much as Black "probably stole it"; "I am sure this goes on all the time and I hope they get caught." John Tien, a 40-year-old accountant at Boeing, launched into such an elaborate lecture about the accounting scams endemic in corporate America that Black's lawyers asked the judge to question him in private, to prevent his views from influencing the other potential jurors.

As for Black, his level of class arrogance isn't likely to win him many friends in the city that gave us the Haymarket Square Riots (right). In a fruitless effort to get his trial dismissed Black's lawyers argued

that their client could not get a fair trial because the average Chicagoan "does not reside in more than one residence, employ servants or a chauffeur, enjoy lavish furniture, or host expensive parties."

Better Than YouTube?

Watch a block of cheddar cheese age - in real time!

Is That a "Surge" in Your Pants, or Are You Just Happy to See Me?

According to today’s Los Angeles Times, the US military has a back-up plan just in case the troop "surge" in Iraq fails - a Plan B, as it were. And what is it? Simple, turn the country into El Salvador.

American military planners have begun plotting a fallback strategy for Iraq that includes a gradual withdrawal of forces and a renewed emphasis on training Iraqi fighters in case the current troop buildup fails or is derailed by Congress.

Such a strategy, based in part on the U.S. experience in El Salvador in the 1980s, is still in the early planning stages and would be adjusted to fit the outcome of the current surge in troop levels…

The article continues:

In El Salvador, the U.S. sent 55 Green Berets to aid the Salvadoran military in its fight against rebels from 1981 to 1992, when peace accords were signed.

Years after, the U.S. role in El Salvador remains controversial. Some academics have argued that the U.S. military turned a blind eye to government-backed death squads, or even aided them.

Oh yeah, this is a good plan. No way it could fail or bite us in the ass. Uh-uhn.

In fact, based on the caliber of Plans A and B, I think we can safely assume that Plan C is something equally brilliant, say, something along the lines of..I dunno..maybe invading Russia in winter.

Ay Caramba!

In an article from yesterday’s New York Times about Bush’s upcoming trip to Latin America I came across the following interesting passage:

As a candidate in 2000, Mr. Bush vowed that ''should I become president, I will look south, not as an afterthought but as a fundamental commitment.'' But after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, the United States quickly relegated Latin America to the ancillary role it played during most of the cold war, creating openings that Mr. Chavez, China and even, more recently, Iran have moved to exploit.

So Latin America played an “ancillary role” in US policy during the Cold War? That’s news to me. And I think it would be news to millions of Latin Americans, too.

Let’s review the history, shall we? The US overthrew Guatamala’s government in 1954. In 1973 we overthrew the democratically elected government of Chile. In the 1980s we financed and trained death squads in El Salvador. Then we set up the contras to fight against Nicaragua. In 1990 we invaded Panama; their President now sits in an American jail. We also set up the School of the Americas to train whole generations of Latin American military leaders in torture and killing. Yet according to the NYT our interest in Latin America was “ancillary.” If only. (And keep in mind I’m not even counting all our exploits in the Caribbean basin – Cuba, Grenada, the Dominican Republic, etc.)

The Times’ assertion is ridiculous. It’s like saying that Eastern Europe was "ancillary" to Russian behavior during the Cold War.

Eerily Relevant

From Thomas Carlyle's On Heroes, Hero-Worship and the Heroic in History, written in 1841. Carlyle says the following about Muhammad and Islam:

His Religion is not an easy one: with rigorous fasts, lavations, strict complex formulas, prayers five times a day, and abstinence from wine, it did not "succeed by being an easy religion." As if indeed any religion, or cause holding of religion, could succeed by that! It is a calumny on men to say that they are roused to heroic action by ease, hope of pleasure, recompense,--sugar-plums of any kind, in this world or the next! In the meanest mortal there lies something nobler. The poor swearing soldier, hired to be shot, has his "honor of a soldier," different from drill-regulations and the shilling a day. It is not to taste sweet things, but to do noble and true things, and vindicate himself under God's Heaven as a god-made Man, that the poorest son of Adam dimly longs. Show him the way of doing that, the dullest day-drudge kindles into a hero. They wrong man greatly who say he is to be seduced by ease. Difficulty, abnegation, martyrdom, death are the allurements that act on the heart of man.