June 25, 2006

Plato's Odyssey: A Story from the Poltiical Nightmare Future

PLATO’S ODYSSEY


Plato Tsukalis made his preparations carefully during the final two weeks he remained in San Francisco. Closing up the details of a long residency was clearly not something that could be accomplished responsibly without lead times, notice periods, the other obeisances to a civilized life.

It was necessary, of course, to call Sheila and tell her it was over. At fifty-two and never married, Plato was inured to this process, knew intimately its stages, progression and end point. Indeed, he made the breakup an early item on his March 15 to-do list, the first time he could remember making a bullet point of something so emotionally intimate; but the distractions which would ensue after he told her needed time to resolve so the more pressing items could be attended to with a focussed attention. This proved to be a wise course of action. He was, frankly, unprepared for the furor of her response. In the previous twelve breakups over the preceding decade, he had encountered all manner of reaction, from outrage to weepy collapse. But the vitriol, importuning, blackmail, threats and aggression which Sheila brought to the process was altogether something new.

Plato, always logical, considered the distinctions between this breakup and the prior episodes, and chalked up the difference to chronology. It was always the first place to look, when you think about it. The chief difference between our reactions to predictable events at any point in our lives relates to the passage of time, which is only to say that inevitably anything that happens now occurs at a later point in life than something which happened then. Thus, we bring to our analysis the life lessons acquired in the interim between events, and also our increasing suspicion that things of this kind don’t matter much because eventually we’ll reach the point where nothing can happen anymore. This, at least, was Plato’s sense of the inevitable.

He essayed this explanation to Sheila in the small kitchen of her two bedroom Russian Hill apartment. He was leaning against her Corian® counter top, his left palm resting on the attractively beveled edge, while he sipped a Bourbon and soda. The drink was a good idea but the condescension was disastrous.

“You think you can fucking leave me now, after more than a year! You fucking bastard! I’m forty-seven years old! You think you can just throw me off and walk out of here so you can continue your ‘life adventure,’ you fucking creep! Why didn’t I see this about you? You can’t stick to anything, you fucking jerk! You asshole, you motherfucking asshole!”

She took her own drink and threw it violently against the cabinet door just behind Plato. The cabinet door, unfortunately, was also made of glass, and shards fell loudly onto the virtually indestructible Corian® surface, leaving it unmarked but Plato shaken, as he jumped away from the counter to avoid laceration. He set his drink down and headed for the front door. Sheila slumped, head in hands and sobbing, against the Corian® on her side of the galley kitchen, the key components of which were arranged in the classic triangle pattern, the range to the right of the shattered glass cabinets, the refrigerator on Sheila’s side, and the sink to the left of the spot just vacated by Plato. He thought with a moment’s regret that he would miss this ordered habitat as he gripped the door handle for perhaps the last time.

He was very wrong about its being the last time, however, as he needed the entire two weeks of the latter part of March for negotiations, damage control, feigned capitulation and other extrication devices in order to make the separation stick. This complicated, of course, the other more quotidian processes of terminating the lease on his own Telegraph Hill apartment, quitting his job at City Hall, placing his furniture in storage, and informing those few people who needed to know that he would be gone for “an extended period.” He wanted to delay disconnecting his telephone, of course, until the very last since it was essential to accomplishing many of the items on his to-do list, but leaving the line intact entailed a serious jeopardy. The same day he walked out of Sheila’s apartment for what was not the ultimate, nor the penultimate, nor even very far down the list of last times, she began calling, frequently, at any hour, in many moods, on different tacks and at wildly varying volumes. It made Plato rethink the wisdom of relying so heavily on the Internet for introductions.

She could be cajoling: “Plato,” she might murmur into the phone at three am, as if operating on heavy doses of unprescribed prescription drugs, acquired from a spam-dealer with access to high quality shit, “I know you’re confused right now. It’s a confusing time of life for both of us, we’re afraid because we’ve been hurt before and we don’t know who to trust. We can’t walk away from every challenge, Plato.”

She could be threatening: “Plato,” she would start, more often in the business-like hours of late morning, “I don’t know if you know what ‘living hell’ actually means, but I can make your life one. You know that? You give me this bullshit about a fucking ‘extended period of absence,’ like I don’t know we both know you’re talking about a woman, a much younger woman of course, you fucking creep, and like I’m not going to find out who she is, you fucking moron, like you could actually get away with this. Give me a fucking break, Plato. Who the fuck you think you’re dealing with?”

Plato was increasingly unsure about the answer to that last one. From the language, maybe a former long-haul truck driver or steel plant foreman. She called him at work many times during those two weeks. The City Hall operator would put the call through to his department in Legal Filing, where Plato had worked for seven years. He was a valued employee in the Civil Division as the only clerk whose first language was English. Any question from a fast-talking lawyer was handed off to him by the stoic Mandarin- or Spanish-speaking junior clerks, who had particular trouble following the rapid fire cadence of transplanted Manhattanites who impatiently demanded answers about filing fees, numbers of copies, format, et cetera.

“Lemme gi’ you Misser Tsukalis,” Plato would hear Mae Wan Huang say. With averted eyes, Mae Wan would murmur that Plato had a call on line one. Plato and Mae had dated desultorily for awhile about six years ago, before Plato gave up on co-employees and focussed on dating services, the immediate precursor to the Internet.

“Who?!” Plato would hear through Mae’s phone just before Mae hung up.

“Choo-kalis,” Plato would say calmly, picking up the phone, informing the caller that clerks could not give legal advice, then answering the question in elaborate legal detail. He adopted a collegial tone when answering questions from lawyers about format, copies, even legal strategy. Plato had two years of night law school behind him and he understood the basic concepts of contract and tort law, had read thousands of legal briefs, complaints, petitions and the rest of the Dickensian costly nonsense of the lawyer’s trade, all during the many slow hours in a filing clerk’s life. The rushes were in the early morning, when the doors first opened, and around four fifteen, just before closing, when the procrastinating legal profession scrambled to avoid missing deadlines and malpractice suits. Over the course of seven years, Plato had acquired a considerable fund of practical understanding, based as it was on a vantage point from which he could follow the natural history of lawsuits from thundering advocacy in the early filings to meek, quiet, disinterested settlement at the bitter end.

“A Miz Adams on line four,” the City Hall operator would say disapprovingly, and Plato would take a deep breath, check to see if Mae Wan was, uncharacteristically, distracted with work, take a deep breath, and pick up the phone.

Before he could say anything:

“No extended absence yet, huh Plato? Still on the job, still slinking around behind my back, still lying and cheating with someone new, huh? What happens when she finds out you got a few loose ends you haven’t cleaned up yet, huh Plate-brain? What then?”

Plato had taken the precaution of placing the receiver on the ear farthest from Mae Wan, who sat about six feet away behind her gray metal desk, but the only effect of this was to involve his head as an amplifying gourd for the Volume Ten recriminations coming through loud and clear. Mae Wan looked up and gave just the slightest inscrutable smile.

“For a filing like that, I’d recommend coming in by four, I could be there to meet you. Here, to meet you. Or closer to five-thirty.”

“You fucking be here then or tomorrow it’s all day long, sucker, you read me?”

“Sure, Mr. Slamgold, that’s when it will be.”

Mae Wan smiled a little more obviously as she said, “How can anyone file anything at five-thirty, Plato? We close at four-thirty, you know.”

“It’s uh, it’s uh…what the fuck difference does it make what it is,” Plato mumbled.

Plato stopped by a Powell Street florist on his way to Sheila’s apartment and picked up a nosegay of iris and daffodil. He took the elevator up to her eighth floor apartment on Taylor Street and knocked on the heavy paneled door about five forty-five. It was a classy building. Sheila’s apartment was the residuum of a twelve-year marriage to a prominent San Francisco gynecologist, socialite, piano-and-photography amateur whom she had met while he was on the job, in 1988. Eventually, or so Dr. Mellerman said, the constant close-quarters inspection and manipulation of female anatomy dulled his sexual passion to the point where he could not bear to be around a woman in his off-hours. This pronouncement followed suspiciously close on the heels of a photography expedition to Thailand, Sheila noticed, so she wasn’t altogether surprised when Pad Nuan took up her conspicuous place in Dr. Mellerman’s life. She was young, lithe, black-haired and schooled in arts which allowed the man as much sexual satisfaction as he could possibly handle without coming anywhere near the female anatomy.

Sheila opened the door slightly and smiled coquettishly at Plato, then opened it widely to reveal the gleaming expanse of dark hardwood which led to the living room overlooking the Bay. It also revealed her short red dress, black high heels and tasty expanse of late-forties legs encased in subtle fishnet. If a higher duty had not been calling Plato so insistently, this would have been very hard to leave behind.

The view over the Bay took in the Bay Bridge and the Embarcadero skyline. Plato wondered again about the ability of women to take interior space and transform it into something so amazingly livable, so gleaming, balanced, efficient. He wondered at the subtleties of art, flowers, sideboards, sofa cushions, carpets, built-ins. Such a rich look, so far beyond the bricks-and-boards, Toulouse Lautrec poster motif he could not rise above. If only women were worth it, it would be so nice to live like this.

“A drink?” Sheila asked.

“Yes, Scotch, in a glass, a lot of it, no ice.”

She walked to the sideboard and poured a hefty slug into a Waterford tumbler, brought it to him.

“Sheila, you have to stop calling me at work.”

“You have to come to your senses, Plato. I have no intention of going quietly into that good night. And anyway, I don’t think this is really in your best interests either. What do you hope to accomplish?”

“I’m on the verge of taking you into my confidence, Sheila, if that’s what’s necessary. Something has come up that requires me to leave, for an extended period, as I’ve said. I need you to trust me. It does not really involve leaving you, per se. If you see what I’m trying to get at.”

She smiled noncommitally at him, sat in an upholstered armchair and crossed those long legs, revealing another six inches of voluminous thigh, more of the black lattice-work of the stockings, presumably going all the way up there, Plato realized.

“I wonder if you have any idea what you’re trying to get at.”

“I’m willing to return here after my mission is accomplished and to resume with you. I’m not averse to that.”

“You’re such a romantic fool, Plato. To think you’re not averse to resuming with me.”

He was a little thrown by the controlled intensity of her approach today, so unlike the glass-smashing encounter a week ago. He supposed this was the way it was with hysterics; you never saw the same spin two pitches in a row.

“I simply can’t go any further right now with an explanation. That has to be final, for your sake and mine. I recognize, however, that flitting from woman to woman may be no better an approach than remaining with one woman and working things through, more satisfying in some ways, and the strength of your feeling encourages me to think we could have the kind of commitment necessary to endure. Plus, ever since reading your profile on the Net, I’ve thought we might have that ‘soul mate’ quality that can be so elusive, so once-in-a-lifetime, if you know what I mean.”

She looked away, and the light of the equinoctial sunset burnished her well-formed profile. A handsome woman, Plato thought. He probably did underestimate her.

“I wonder if you mean that.”

“Just this once, indulge yourself in a little trust.”

“All right, Plato, I’ll do that. But for the health of your soul, you better not be bullshitting me.”

He rose and extended his hand to her, pulled her to her feet. He caught a glimpse of a crimson pressure oval beneath the fishnet of her right thigh as she uncrossed her legs. He loved details like that, the responsiveness of flesh to touch, how alive it all was. He took her in his arms, spoke softly in her ear.

“This is vital to me. Believe me, I knew nothing of this six months ago, and I’ve never misled you.”

“Don’t you want to stay?” she whispered. “Don’t you wonder where I might be going later, all dressed up like this?”

“I do, Sheila, but I’ve got to face there will be many nights like that in the coming months, and I’ve got to steel myself, beginning now. Please wait for me. I hope to be worth it.”

June 24, 2006

Gitmo & Other Sorrows

"The Road to Guantanamo" is a good movie, if unusual in its composition. It tells the story of the 3 Brithish Pakistanis who found themselves trapped in Afghanistan near the conclusion of the U.S invasion in 2001, their subsequent capture by the Northern Alliance and eventual shipment to Guantanamo. The movie is unable, obviously, to use archival film of the their actual travels in Afghanistan or incarceration as suspected al-Qaeda operatives, since none exists, so it demonstrates what happened by means of talking-head narration by the 3 Pakistanis (now at home in England) and dramatized footage based on their narration. So, to a major extent, we have to take their word for it. If 50% of what they claim is true (and independent sources suggest the percentage is probably much higher), then the United States of America has descended into a moral sewer of degradation and inhumanity which will unquestionably plague us for decades to come.

The happier parts of the movie demonstrate the close friendship and camaraderie of the four friends (one is lost in the escape from Kunduz) as they cheerfully endure the hardships of rustic travel in Pakistan and Afghanistan. One senses bonds of culture and religion that are distinctly "un-American" in their style, meaning they lack the ironic detachment more characteristic of modern American loner-ism. These bonds, I suspect, proved decisive in assuring their survival. If George Bush and Donald Rumsfeld had ever been capable of experiencing this kind of camaraderie and emotional support, it seems unlikely they would have found it necessary to preside over the sadistic freak show which the American P.O.W. system has become.

I found myself tensing up as the happy idyll in Aghanistan was apparently about to end, and I realized that my apprehension had an unusual source for a kid who grew up watching John Wayne surmount Mt. Suribachi on Iwo Jima, and Audie Murphy take on an entire German patrol in Europe. The three hapless Pakistani-Brits were about to be captured by the Americans. One of the captives voices this irony in his narration, saying, in effect, we thought everything would be okay once the Americans had us. "We were wrong," he said. Wrong because Bush & Co. are now in charge and they have instituted a program of always appearing as macho and unsparing as inhumanly possible, and these attitudes have been internalized by the Gestapo-like apparatus running American detention camps in Gitmo and abroad. Essentially, they treat the enemy, whether they have any actual proof or not (of the hundreds held at Gitmo for years, only 10 have ever been charged with anything), like vermin, pushing them around, abusing them, screaming at them, depriving them of sleep, tricking them with Photo-Shop pictures of the POW attending a bin Laden rally, placing them in stress positions in isolation chambers where thundering rap music is played at ear-splitting levels, binding them in unnecessary restraints, placing bug-like blackout glasses over their faces for any movement, etc., etc. Truly sickening.

All of this abuse is apparently in the service of something, although the Bush Administration never says what. The 19 hijackers who attacked America died in the operation, and the actual mastermind, Khallid Sheikh Mohammed, is somewhere in CIA custody, undergoing, no doubt, much worse treatment at the hands of American surrogates with even less humane inclinations. The war on terror is a massive exercise in guilt-by-association, but fundamentally it is an anti-Arab and anti-Muslim jihad. I doubt seriously this is lost on the world's 1.2 billion Muslims, and the anti-American feelings we are engendering with this mindless campaign will play out for a long, long time.

June 22, 2006

Weekly Sitdown at HQ

Time: Spring, 2008

Scene: Oval Office, Morning

Having lost all need for pretense, Capo George “Big G” Bush arrives at gang headquarters wearing a black suit, black shirt and broad white tie. He wears spats and carries a jaunty cane, which he slaps on the pool table to awaken Captain Dick “The Scowl” Cheney from a spell of hypoxia. Big G sets his black fedora on the refrigerator, opens the door and pulls out a frosty Bud. Unscrewing the cap, he looks at the long table running the length of the office.

“We got any cannoli? Where the fuck’s the cannoli?”

“Right here, right here,” mutters Don “The Torque” Rumsfeld, pushing a tray toward Big G.

G nods his head derisively.

“Real nice, real nice, Torque,” he says. “Maybe you’ll show a little more fuckin’ respect if I break your fuckin’ head for you.”

The Scowl breaks in. “What’s up today? We got somethin’ more pressing than fuckin’ cannoli to talk about?”

G gives The Scowl a long look. Sorry, didn’t know it was that time of month.”

Josh “The Shutter” Bolten strolls around G at the head of the table, taking pictures of G’s hands from different angles.

“Think you got enough fuckin’ pictures of my hands, Bolten?” G tosses his head at Bolten, his cheeks bulging with cannoli. “What’s wid dis guy?”

“What’s the body count on Iraq?” the Scowl cuts in.

“Who gives a fuck?” G says. “You and yer fuckin’ numbers.”

“5 grand and change,” John “Black Bridge” Negroponte says.

“That’s what happens when ya go to the mattresses,” G says. “No broke eggs, no omelettes. Where’s Halliburton stock? Anybody runnin’ the numbers?”

“Trew da roof,” breaks in Bolten.

G smiles, tossing his head at Bolten. "Get a load. Talkin’ like a wiseguy now, huh? Dat’s real good, Josh. Why don’t you take a picture of my ass next?”

“Hey Scowl,” G says. “You welsh on that Halliburton deal we made, and you’ll be standin on the bottom of the Potomac, capisc’?”

“Who’s welshin?” the Scowl scowls. “You’ll get your cut, same as always.”

“Sweet. Okay, what else we got? Say, Black Bridge, you oughta know. How you say ‘Our Thing’ in Eye-talian?”

“Cosa nostra,” Black Bridge answers. “Why?”

“I like that. Runnin this thing's Our Thing, huh? Anything else? Okay, I’ll be over at the social club with Lacquer Head if you need me.”

June 21, 2006

Catch-22 and Iraqi Amnesty

I can't quite help myself. I've been reading Joseph Heller's masterpiece again. I saw it on the shelf and intended only to confirm whether I remembered the very first line: "It was love at first sight." I had remembered, and now I'm on page 200. I have a facility for remembering the prose of great books verbatim which unfortunately dispels much of the pleasure of multiple perusals. I would guess this is pass #6 or #7 through Catch-22, but the prose is such absolute perfection it withstands repetition, like listening to a great monologue from early Woody Allen.

Anyway, it's a disconcerting juxtaposition to read this brilliant parody of the insanity of war, even a war as just as World War II (the last one, I suppose, in which America wholeheartedly agreed to its necessity and righteousness) while occasionally watching C-Span coverage of Congress and reading on-line news reports. Yesterday the Senate argued at length about the language of a Senate resolution expressing the "sense" of the Senate about reports the Iraqi government of al-Maliki was considering granting amnesty to insurgents who had killed American soldiers. The Senators were posturing, thundering, and declaiming like mad to make sure they appeared to be the most outraged over such a suggestion. John Warner seemed to take the whole thing personally, as if that mane of white hair should have been proof enough that no one could possibly be more supportive of America's brave young men and women, and that if any ambiguity seemed to seep from the edges of the resolution...

Well, you see, that's the problem. The Senate, in expressing its "sense," does not want to be in the position of telling the Iraqi government what to do. We would never do that, because Iraq is a "sovereign" country that we set up and are dying to preserve. And as we set it up, defend it and die to preserve it, Maliki & Co. are trying to make peace with the unrelenting insurgents who attack them 600 times a week by letting them off the hook for killing the people who are dying to preserve the Maliki government.

So I'm wondering what the great, the incomparable, the brilliant, the one-and-only Joseph Heller would do with priceless material like this. Remember Milo Minderbinder? The entrepreneur who bombed the air base on Pianosa on a for-profit basis? Well, it really happened. It's called Kellog Brown & Root, and they furnish "services" to the military on a contract basis. They constantly short-change and cheat the military. They serve them substandard food and pad their invoices. If the Administration entered a contract with KBR to kill American troops, would Congress say anything about it? Wouldn't the Republican majority rise up and defend the Bush Administration's absolute right to conduct the war under the President's constitutional war powers in any way he saw fit? And if bombing American troops using American planes is part of that conduct, does Congress really have anything to say about it? Didn't they sign an Authorization for Use of Military Force in 2001? And if bombing American troops using American bombers isn't a use of military force, what is?

And Colonel Cathcart, who Yossarian kept saying was trying to get him killed by making him fly combat missions. Isn't Donald Rumsfeld the perfect Colonel Cathcart? Isn't he trying to get Americans killed by sending them in insufficient numbers with inadequate armor against an implacable foe who are so tenacious the government wants to tell them it's okay if you only killed Americans? Doesn't the American soldier have the right to say that his enemy is anybody who's trying to get him killed? And if some Clevinger, some unthinking grunt challenges the would-be Yossarian and tells him, they're not trying to kill you, they're trying to kill everybody, isn't the rational response -- what difference does that make?

Thank you, Joseph, for letting me see it was always thus. Contextually, the Iraq War is even crazier than World War II, of course. The entire exercise has become very similar to Captain Black's Great Loyalty Oath Crusade, where airmen were forced to sign nonstop loyalty oaths to eat, to get a parachute, to get a bombing map, to move about the base. The question now is who supports the troops? Maybe they shouldn't be there at all, maybe the whole project is insane, maybe we'll go bankrupt doing this forever, but that doesn't matter. Do you support the troops or don't you? You could say you support the troops by trying to get them out of Iraq, where the government you're fighting and dying to preserve says it's okay to kill you, but that's too complicated. And anyway, nobody cares anymore. Long ago everyone forgot why we're in Iraq. We call it the "central front" in the war on terror, but it's the central front only because we're there, and if we weren't there, it wouldn't be the central front anymore.

Gee, I can see how intoxicating it must have been to write the original Catch-22. All you have to do is open your eyes and see. And be an insightful genius, of course. The world is crazy.

And getting crazier. It now develops that Iraqi troops trained by Americans have used their training to kill Americans, including two soldiers from California in 2004. The Pentagon was a little slow in delivering that news to the parents of the soldiers killed by American-trained Iraqis. We may need another sense of the Senate on that one, that it's none of our business how the Iraqi government uses the training we give their soldiers, but our sense is that we'd rather they kill the insurgents with their training, even if the insurgents who kill our American soldiers will be given amnesty for killing us directly, although it's our sense we're not too crazy about that either.

June 20, 2006

Meanwhile, back in Pyongyang

Last week's post about Stephen Hawking concentrated mostly on one catastrophe in Hawking's Unholy Trinity, the looming possibility of a runaway greenhouse effect. I suppose Hawking is one apocalyptic horse shy of a full team for his Stagecoach to Hell, but give us time - we'll devise something. After all, we're the human race.

#2 horse on the list was nuclear annihilation, and this way out (which I think I might prefer to the Venus scenario) was given a sharp whip to the rump by Bush's Arch-Nemesis, North Korea's Tyrant-for-Life, Kim Jong Il, he of the rattling sabre and botanical haircut. As a California resident (for how much longer? yikes), I was pleased to see Condi Rice rise up and protest Kim's planned missile test. Maybe this is because Taepodong-II has an enhanced range of 9,300 miles, nearly reaching to Washington, D.C. Back when we all thought it could only reach California, Bush & Co. seemed fairly sanguine about the whole thing. After all, nuclear incineration of the West Coast could only improve Bush's grip on Congress. A major Blue State: Ka-BOOM! Just like that. Would Boxer & Feinstein be permitted to continue representation of a state where all their constituents were dead? How would Scalia handle that delicate Constitutional question?

But Kim added a little juice to the booster stage and now all bets are off. One of his nukes might hit Crawford, Texas, if I'm reading the range maps correctly. So Condi is sounding very stern, or as stern as she can sound, which is not all that stern. When I watch her on Meet the Press or at a press conference, I'm always taken with her diligence. She knows exactly what she's going to say and how she's going to say it. Of course, we know exactly what she's going to say and how she's going to say it. It's as if a Spelling Bee Champion has been elevated to the post of Secretary of State. I'll bet when she plays a Bach Two-Part Invention on the piano, it is absolutely flawless, note perfect, the time impeccable. Also, completely soulless. Just my hunch.

When I think about the various ways we seem to be hurtling toward catastrophe, I can't help but wonder: is it possible the rest of the world shares the perspective of the American Troublemaking Left? That this President and his team, including Note-Perfect Condoleezza, are in way, way over their heads? That they suck at their jobs? Do you suppose A-Jad in Iran and Kim in North Korea noticed what went on after Katrina, and FEMA's grotesque mishandling of the destruction of an American city? And then said to themselves: This guy is what we've been worrying about?

I never see the media discuss that angle, although, when you think about it, it's as obvious as the crook in Dick Cheney's smile. Or grimace, I've never been sure which. Media blather, when it comes to America's reputation in the world, is limited to the question of America's loss of "moral authority." There may have also been a loss, during the last 6 years or so, of another kind of stature. Simple respect for American competence in high places. I don't think Kim and A-Jad give a shit about moral authority, but pulling the lion's tail reflects a different kind of calculation. The idea you can get away with the unthinkable. Develop your own atomic bombs and the means to deliver them, for example. Test, right out in the open, a missile which can hit Omaha. I doubt that it's been lost on these guys that Bush, with the largest defense budget in the world, a budget which is many multiples of Iran's and North Korea's combined, nevertheless managed to strand the American military in an endless street fight in a wrecked country out among the sand dunes. He can't leave and he can't stay. He can't seem to make a good decision under pressure, that he's a choke artist, that he doesn't know what the hell he's doing, in other words.

The stakes have been raised very recently by the American threat to shoot Kim's Taepodong out of the sky, a suitably war-of-the-phalluses kind of image. Now that's what I call proactive intervention. And for those of you who may have forgotten, George has kinda been itchin' for just such an opportunity. Please recall that an early act of his leadership was to withdraw the United States from the ABM Treaty of 1972, which prevented the development of anti-missile missiles. What Bush had in mind was just this kind of moment: the threat of a "rogue" state (hard to think of many countries roguer than N. Korea) or terrorist group with its finger on a nuclear-armed Button. This is Bush as Gary Cooper, strolling confidently on to that dusty street at midday, while Laura looks on in that loving, Grace Kelly way. True, because of the poofy hair, Kim Jong Il looks weird standin' down there near the entrance to the saloon. Still: Bring it on.

One note of caution, however, and it relates to the point with which we began. Bush might want someone on his staff to re-read Steven Weinberg's "Can A Missile Defense System Work?" [http://socsci.colorado.edu/~parisr/IAFS_1000/Can_Missile_Defense_Work.htm]. The ABM has a spectacular record of failure even when 1) we know when the missiles are going to be launched, 2) we know where they're going, and 3) we know (1) & (2) because they're our missiles. Then again, Mr. Weinberg is a Nobel Prize winning physicist and part of the Reality-Based community. Irrelevant, in other words.

But suppose he's right? Suppose we aim an ABM at Kim's Taepodong (it's just fun to say) and miss? Do you realize how many times the vaunted Patriot ABM missed Saddam's crummy Scud missiles in Gulf War - I: This Time We're Stoppin? Every single time. I hope they rethink it. We don't need this. If you're going to shoot something, use a cruise missile to blow Jong's 'Dong up while it's still in the silo. I know it's not "High Noon," kind of like shooting the Bad Guy while he's still asleep. But it might be good to do something smart for a change.

June 19, 2006

Bush & Hitler's Line of Work

"See in my line of work you got to keep repeating things over and over and over again for the truth to sink in, to kind of catapult the propaganda." President George W. Bush.


"The purpose of propaganda is not to provide interesting distraction for blasé young gentlemen, but to convince… the masses. But the masses are slow moving, and they always require a certain time before they are ready even to notice a thing, and only after the simplest ideas are repeated thousands of times will the masses finally remember them." -- Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf, p. 185.

There are, to be sure, critical differences between the two leaders. For one thing, I'm not aware Bush ever wrote a book or manifesto, let alone a sentence with the reasonably felicitous and evocative phrase, "...to provide interesting distraction for blasé young gentlemen..." Nor is Bush an overpowering, mesmerizing orator, and his roots, unlike Hitler's, were patrician rather than plebeian.

Hitler went from a failed career as an architect and artist to the Beer Hall Putsch, which stamped him indelibly on the pages of German history. Bush meandered his way in an alcoholic haze through failed academic and business pursuits until he found his true calling, as a Hollow Man perfectly suited to makeover by the Image Machine responsible for choosing American candidates and presidents. Lacking a discernible character or any principles of his own, Bush was an ideal vessel for media manipulation, a sort of Human Hologram on which the Conservative Right could project any laudable quality they desired. Mostly this was done through simple acts of substitution; for example, for his obvious vapidity, they could insert "straight-talking." Or, better, "talkin." For foolishly stubborn intransigence, they could sub in "resolute." As to his clear penchant for pathological lying, they could explain it away as an aspect of his sense of "loyalty" to his "inner circle." Confronted with the man's sick enthusiasm for torture and for indefinite detention of Untermenschen captured in his neverending war on terror, the Right could applaud his steely determination to do the necessary in a time of crisis.

Bush lacks Hitler's subtlety, but Bush doesn't need it. He can use the word "propaganda" openly and can even brag about misleading the American public. As one obvious and oft-cited example, Bush deliberately created the impression that Saddam Hussein played a key role in the terrorist attacks of 9-11. When confronted directly with this ruse, Bush allowed us to see the man behind the curtain in ways his stylistic mentor would have avoided: "I was careful never to say that Saddam Hussein ordered the attack on America." March 20, 2006. I suspect Goebbels did not have to worry nearly as much about Hitler's Fuss-in-Mundt tendencies. Bush's propaganda, repeated many times according to the Mein Kampf playbook, always gave the general impression that Saddam Hussein was mixed up, somehow, in the 9-11 plot. It never made any sense; there was never any proof; and none of that ever made any difference. So why was Bush being so fastidious about pointing out this trivial distinction between what he did say and what he says he didn't say?

This is where Rove has always had a harder job than Goebbels. Hitler - well, the Fuhrer you could trust with freelancing. Bush, on the stump, is likely to go sideways on you. Under pressure, trying to remember amidst the dense fog of lies he tells everyday about what the U.S. Government is up to, something he did say about Saddam and 9-11, the only thing that popped into Bush's subnormal cerebrum was Karl's admonition: "Always be careful never to say directly that Saddam ordered the attacks of 9-11." So Bush could, under the pressure of the moment, confidently remember that he must have avoided that. He was, for our amusement and dissection, reproducing faithfully and exactly how Rove talks to him when only the Inner Circle is around.

Hitler, I'm sure, would have simply made up another lie on the spot. He didn't really care whether he was lying or not. Neither does Bush, but his handlers have told him he's supposed to appear to care, so he does his best to fake it. He's punctilious that way. If you pay attention, it's all there. The man's trying to tell you -- this is how I've been programmed. I suppose it isn't really a cry for help. Hitler was made of sterner stuff, that's for sure, but then he was actually a soldier in World War I, saw combat, was wounded. He came up through the ranks the hard way and wore his ruthlessness as a badge of honor. See, it's the only way a guy like me could make it against those blasé young gentlemen. Hitler was a monstrosity forged in an iron crucible of aggrievement. Bush is from a cushy, pampered, authoritarian-lite tradition. It's difficult to think up an excuse for being like Bush, really. He is one of those blasé young gentlemen, yet he allowed himself to be molded into another Hitlerian monstrosity, while we stood by and let it happen.

What on Earth will we tell History is our excuse?










Living in Interesting Times



"It took all of human history until 1830 for world population to reach one billion. The second billion was achieved in 100 years, the third billion in 30 years, the fourth billion in 15 years, and the fifth billion in only 12 years. In 2005, world population exceeded 6.5 billion people, growing by nearly 80 million per year with virtually all of the growth taking place in the poorest countries in the world, where population already strains economies, environments and social services."

In 1950, not so long after I was born, the world population was only about 2.5 billion. My grade school memories seem to confirm I was living in a world with 3 billion people. Not so long after that, in the early 1960's, Paul Erlich began writing about a "population bomb" and the Malthusian concept of exponential growth entered the common lexicon. Erlich warned the world population would double every 35 years or so. In the rear view mirror, his mathematics look pretty spot on.

With the exception of the United States, the developed countries, the First World, have stopped growing. Did they get Erlich's message? I don't think that was it. I don't believe, frankly, that environmental concerns ever manifest themselves from the bottom up. The declining birth rates, to levels below population replacement, in Europe, Japan and (almost) the United States reflect other pressures. The disappearance of what I call Life's Margin of Ease. As life became more difficult in the First World, as its real standard of living began to decline, the citizens of the advanced West forwent family in favor of "lifestyle" advantages, a way of saying that materialism replaced kinship as the chief measure of wealth. For concerted action to be successful, it must be part of top-down, mandated policy. China's success in controlling a once-burgeoning population explosion, while Draconian in nature, explains its success in defusing its own Bomb. The rest of Asia, much of Africa, nearly all of Latin America, meanwhile continue on their Malthusian way. Children, for the most part, are what they have. Until someone makes them stop having them, they won't.

Which takes us back to our first graphic. These days, with the success of Al Gore's PowerPoint movie, the airwaves are abuzz with initiatives to arrest global warming, to hold CO2 concentrations at present levels. All language describing these efforts is in the future conditional. "We can begin to decrease emissions when..." "The technology is available now to start a transition..." While all of this talk goes on, Massachusetts-size chunks of Antarctica are breaking off and floating north, 80% of the world's glaciers are in retreat, and Hemingway, if alive today, might write "The Green Hills of Africa," but never "The Snows of Kilimanjaro."

The Keeling Curve continues to ratchet skyward, even as we talk, even as we dream of the transition. We all keep driving, keep heating and cooling our houses, keep blogging away on computers plugged into the electrical grid. No one, in America, is telling us what to do. They're busy with more important things. In Washington, they're concerned they might not get reelected, and would find themselves struggling among the hoi-polloi. No sense bumming the electorate with discussions of reality. Better to protect Americans from burning flags and marriageable gays, and above all else, to spend every dime we don't have on that stupid war in Iraq.

And high above Mauna Loa, the latest reading clicks up another notch.

June 15, 2006

The Problem With Liberal Illusions About Bush

The text for today's sermon is taken from the Huffington Post blog. These words were written by a well-intentioned University of Chicago law professor. Clearly, the sentiments expressed are sincere and the attitude they express admirable:


"It is time for President Bush to take a stand. Despite his cynical and exploitative support of a constitutional amendment that would ban gay marriage, he has long maintained that he is a compassionate and tolerant person who has no gripe against gays and lesbians, as such. He just thinks marriage is only for heterosexuals....I believe Mr. Bush truly holds these values, but thus far in his presidency has been too timid to act on them. As a lame duck with increasingly negative public opinion polls and a doubtful place in history, this is the moment for Mr. Bush to "go to China." He can restore his personal credibility and create a lasting legacy for himself as a moral leader by announcing his support for federal legislation prohibiting discrimination in housing, employment, education, and public accommodations on the basis of sexual orientation."

In the late 1930's in Europe, two attitudes prevailed concerning Adolf Hitler. One was embodied in Neville Chamberlain's "peace in our time" pronouncement following his summit with Hitler in Munich, the other in Winston Churchill's "wage war" speech. We can leave it to history to decide which of these approaches was more effective. Perhaps Chamberlain was afflicted with that persistent liberal malady, a belief in the innate perfectibility of man. Churchill did not labor under such an illusion. He knew Hitler was evil and his intentions were debased. He would be defeated in one way, through superior power.

Is Bush like Hitler? I would suggest that they share one relevant characteristic: the relentless drive to accumulate power. In Bush's case, this has been manifested in many ways, from his fetish about secrecy; to his tendency to label large groups of people who may or not have done anything wrong "enemy combatants"; his enthusiasm for torture; his unprecedented and unconstitutional use of signing statements to eviscerate acts of Congress; his open defiance of federal law concerning wiretapping and surveillance of Americans; and his refusal ever to compromise on issues such as troop withdrawal, firing his Secretary of Defense or atoning for lies about WMD, Saddam's connections to 9-11 or the disclosure of Valerie Plame's identity by his immediate staff.

And in Bush's case, there is something paradoxical about this obsession. He is quite obviously a man of very modest intellectual "gifts," little strategic vision and poor judgment. The only apparent effect of his steady drive toward power is to potentiate the damage he can do to the United States and to the world.

Nevertheless, there it is. It is pointless to appeal to Bush's "better angels." They simply don't exist except as projections of decent people. It is difficult for normal humans to imagine a life devoid of a functioning conscience, where all decisions are subsumed under an overarching desire to appear powerful and to inflict damage to demonstrate that power. This is Bush's delicate psychological construct, and it explains everything.

For a most recent example, it explains Bush's recent trip to Baghdad. The man is getting a little desperate. Suppose the House of Representatives turns Democratic in November? Bush's remaining two years in office will become a living Hell and he knows it. He absolutely HAS to hold on to power until he can get safely out of office under the protection of a blanket pardon, such as that which Arlen Specter is drafting for him in the guise of "amending" the FISA law. Bush knows that Iraq is an irremediable mess. The ruse of a Camp David "retreat" was necessary simply to make it possible for him to go there, for the first time in nearly 3 years. He spent 5 HOURS there, in Baghdad's Fortress of Solitude, the Green Zone. It is astounding that the media do not comment on the jarring contrast between Bush's resumed "swagger" and the conditions under which this President was forced to visit his greatest foreign policy "triumph."

But these illusions are everywhere in the modern Fun House America, the House of Mirrors. But liberals, please: stop asking Bush to be nice. Stop asking him to be consistent and "compassionate." Stop asking him for anything. Tell him the way it's going to be by making his life that living Hell he so richly deserves.


June 14, 2006

Yo Mars, U ready for this?

"The survival of the human race depends on its ability to find new homes elsewhere in the universe because there's an increasing risk that a disaster will destroy Earth, world-renowned physicist Stephen Hawking said Tuesday.

"Humans could have a permanent base on the moon in 20 years and a colony on Mars in the next 40 years, the British scientist told a news conference."

San Francisco Chronicle, June 14, 2006

When Stephen Hawking, the Lucasian Chair of Mathematics at Cambridge, begins sounding like a Doomsday nut, it behooves us to pay attention. You could say, without exaggeration, that our lives depend on it. Hawking is one of those seminal thinkers occuring on a semi-regular basis, say every hundred years or so, whose incomprehensible brilliance is paired with a paradigm-shifting imagination enabling outlandish predictions about remote and arcane phenomena in the Universe (black holes, for example) - that are then confirmed in the physical universe. Einstein, making up an entire new reality in his head, predicted that light would undergo bending by gravity, and then astronomers confirmed that just such a bizarre thing happened during the next solar eclipse. And Newton, whose chair Hawking now occupies at Cambridge, demonstrated that physical forces could be understood through the abstractions of mathematics. Heady company, to be sure.

My first, bar-stool reaction to colonizing Mars, the Moon or some distant Earth-like planet with a whole bunch of humans reflects, no doubt, the disillusionments of our age. Why take this sorry-ass show on the road? Haven't we sent one blue and white paradise to the FUBAR bin already? Leave the universe alone, goddamit. There might be nice animals on some likely candidate near Alpha Centauri.

Hawking seems to be talking about three likely catastrophes in the near term: nuclear armageddon, genetically-engineered viruses and the runaway greenhouse effect. He has appeared, in recent years, to devote considerable attention on this last disaster, a disturbing development when you consider how valuable his brain-time is.

I would describe the runaway greenhouse effect, or Venus Scenario, but I don't have the heart today. I don't even see the point. The United States of America, which would have to lead the way immediately with an emergency program to slash greenhouse emissions to mere fractions of current levels, is instead engaged in political games of gotcha concerning one, moderately populated country in the Middle East, an enterprise which is at bottom about releasing Iraq's one-trillion-barrel reserves of fossil fuels into the overheated atmosphere as soon as possible. And that, dear fellow humans, is the crux of the problem. Because of the egotistical demands of Homo sapiens, right here, right now, of the insecurities which must be dealt with, right here, right now, of the personality dysfunctions of one President, right here, right now, we cannot react to the danger that we may be hurtling toward a world, not so long from today, swathed in dense, steamy clouds of water vapor, where the oceans boil and dry up and tin and lead melt on the land. Where the skyscrapers will stand as mute tombstones above a world where all life has vanished, until they too ooze and melt away.

So don't worry, Mars. And goodnight, Moon. You'll be safe. Other Cosmo Men, Alan Guth, other big thinkers, seeing Hawking's (at last) exposed intellectual flank, have taken issue with his timing. We can't colonize the Moon in 20 years, or Mars in 40. Better to build subterranean caverns in Antarctica, hunker down beneath the rivers of melting ice. We can plan our Comeback there, just as soon as it's safe to go outside. A Green Zone for the entire Human Race.

Gee, I feel better already.



June 12, 2006

The Age of Vacuity

Let us return in time to those enchanted days before Muslim extremists hijacked commercial aircraft and flew them at several hundred miles per hour, fully loaded with people, jet fuel and America's destiny, into two tall Manhattan buildings, the Pentagon and Pennsylvania. Just for a moment, pretend it is September 10, 2001.

Are you there now? Okay, let me ask you a question: Are we at war? And if so, with whom?

If we are at war, why is Richard Clarke forced to run around like a man with his hair on fire in order to get even grudging attention from Condoleezza Rice, the nation's putative National Security Advisor, about al-Qaeda and the threat it poses? The Bush Administration, tough, macho, ruthless, has a different foe in its crosshairs: America's secondary school principals. Education is going to be held accountable so No Child Is Left Behind. Bush is the CEO President, after all, and his action list demands one high profile issue at a time, which he accomplishes in a methodical and efficient way, just as he learned to do when...okay, he never actually learned to do anything of the kind. But the way someone, probably the tubby guy with glasses and the nimbus of baby hair, told him that real executives get things done.

Bush is just happy to be President. All he really wants are three things: to relieve all rich people of the obligation to pay taxes, to go Poppy one better by invading Iraq again and toppling Saddam (this time), and to get reelected, something else Poppy couldn't pull off. Then call me a drinkin', snortin' ne'er-do-well, ya Poppy-injay!

Bush is not that interested in getting rich. Not really. You see what he makes, even today? Somewhere around $780,000, of which $400,000 is his Presidential salary. Which means he makes about $380,000 on his accumulations. Not exactly Big Rich by Texas standards, not at all. A man 60 years old, graduated from Yale and Harvard Business School, CEO of oil companies, an owner and president of the Texas Rangers, former Governor of Texas, beneficiary of many sweetheart loans from generous and probably bewildered older members of the Poppy-razzi, who couldn't quite believe what a colossal screw-up the Old Man's kid was - making less than a part-time plastic surgeon in the tonier sections of Dallas.

But before that mild digression, I was talking about Bush and the war on terror, and what Bush thought about on September 10, 2001. I think he was as indifferent to terrorism as he was to any other aspect of his new job. The conspiracy nuts have gone wild with Bush's Pet Goat moment, reading into it whatever they need to see. Such tea-leaf-reading is standard procedure in American hysteria. We're a spoiled people, and whenever anything goes wrong here, our entire sense of Self is thrown into disarray, and we become determined to find out Who Was Responsible. Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, Atta, and 18 other guys were responsible, that's all. KSM, the Gargling Informant, has "confessed" while in damp repose on his Jordanian waterboard. I think he was pissed off about his nephew Ramzi rotting away in SuperMax in Colorado, just like John Gotti did. And shit, the World Trade Center is still standing! Like Bush, the Sheikh is task-oriented, a box-checking freak. No Skyscraper Left Behind. So work yourself into whatever lather you want, and if you have Mommy and Daddy Issues, like most unbearably spoiled Americans, talk about "blowback" and spend your time figuring out how we deserved it.

Nah, Bush, on September 10, is indifferent to terrorist attacks. He sees them, if he "thinks" about them at all, as cyclical phenomena. The World Trade Center in 1993, the African embassies, the U.S.S. Cole. Timothy McVeigh, but he doesn't count. Too pale. Too local. Ditto the Unabomber. The reason is simple: there's not much point in thinking about them. You just get bummed out. If they happen, they happen. That's why the Bush Administration, which now proclaims, with astonishing chutzpah, its unique suitability to lead the War on Terror, paid no attention to field reports that Something Big was up. As Condi said, who ever dreamed they'd start flying planes into buildings? And if not that, they'd come up with something else we couldn't do anything about. In other words, the Bush Admin thought about terrorism in the same terms everyone else did. If it happens, it happens.

Think how easy it is. You want to blow a hole in the roadway of any American bridge? Drive a Ryder truck to the middle of the bridge, park, and detonate the load of fertilizer in the trailer. You want to freak America out and bring the consumer economy to a grinding halt? Pick ten big malls in exurbia and at Zero Hour, detonate ten car bombs in ten big parking lots. Does anyone seriously think that anything the Bush Administration, or any other political leadership, could do would have the slightest efficacy against things so simple?

It's an asymmetrical war, alright. An easygoing, freedom-loving, fundamentally lazy, essentially trusting American public, on one side, and guys with a huge sense of aggrievement, monomaniacal dedication and way too much time on the other.

America has been very lucky. Our principal foes, so far, have been a little on the dramatic side. Given to tactical histrionics. They plan for years because they think only something that plays well on TV can have a real impact on a populace geared to a 22 minute attention span, the length of a TiVo'ed sitcom. If it doesn't happen on TV, it isn't real. That's why the Iraq War can drag on forever. It isn't real. We never see it. That may be the result of Unintended Genius in prosecution of the war, to create a battlefield so dangerous, with no defined front, with nowhere Behind the Lines, so that no journalist can photograph the war as it happens.

The drama isn't necessary. America would be more effectively undone by the quotidian, by the sense we can't make our consumer rounds in complete safety. A burning skyscraper in America's richest borough is an image from a psychological distance. We can see that isn't us. It's happening to them. Unless, sad to say, them happens to be you.

So the Sheikh checked the box, eight years after his first attempt. And how about Clinton's War on Terrorism, huh? From 1993 to 2000, not a single attack within the United States by Muslim extremists, and his crack anti-terrorist operatives (the U.S. Border Patrol) foiled the Millenium Plot! Bush, so far, has kept America explosion-free for not quite 5 years. The American populace, which is not, in a broad-based sense, schooled in the scientific method or the interpretation of statistics, does not see the distinction between coincidence and causation, or the critical role played by just dumb luck. They think uploading Aunt Millie's phone bills into a vast database in Maryland will prevent a laid-off call center worker in Dearborn, Michigan from driving out to California and detonating a trunk full of Semtex in front of a Safeway in Culver City.

But it is a peculiarity of modern American life, as it is represented in public media, that no one requires anything to make sense anymore. Things get said and everyone pretends it makes sense. It's why we're all going crazy, at variable speeds. Reality is losing its integrity.

So thank goodness, so far, the world's terrorists, whoever they are, have chosen big impact scenarios, as they conceive them, as their attack of choice against America. We can survive those, blog those, make movies about those, attack each other about those, and live our lives around those. KSM & the Paradise Boys haven't quite figured it out yet. Their approach just sticks us with a lousy government, courtesy of an easily-manipulated American voting populace. That is the long term significance of their attacks against "symbols of American power." Those propel America into a narcissistic frenzy of Power Demonstration, the use of the army, navy and marines, the entire espionage apparatus, stealth bombers, aircraft carriers, cruise missiles, irrelevant wars, the wholesale rounding up of Arabs, the suspension of civil liberties and due process, the creation of a police state, the distortion of spending priorities, the dismissal of far more serious existential threats such as global warming and avian flu. All this for Something Which Has Already Happened, where 19 of the 20 perpetrators are already dead and the 20th, the Mastermind, is currently touring Eastern Europe courtesy of the Central Intelligence Agency.

So, now we must endure the debate about who's tougher in the War on Terror. In other words, who talks tougher about something we've already let happen and are powerless to prevent from happening again. The America of September 10, 2001, is gone forever. We were curiously ready to say goodbye, I suppose. So ready that we collaborated with our government, with KSM, with our own fearful selves in letting it go.

The A Team at Camp David

Cue up the music. The posse strides confidently forward, led by the Prez himself, his simian arm-swing propelling him up the rise toward the row of microphones. The national park-like cabin is behind them. Bush has on a blue blazer and light blue shirt, no tie. Condi, to his left, is cross-dressed in a severe blazer of her own. Rumsfeld is wearing a parka with a crest. The stooped mound of Dick Cheney is to Rumsfeld's right, grinning lopsidedly. General Peter Pace, Negroponte, and of course Alberto Salazar fill in the second row.

In other words, the same group of hacks who have always screwed up Iraq have gone on a retreat. They'll come up with new ways to screw up Iraq, but in Maryland, not in Washington. Now they can video conference with Maliki, far away from the irrelevant influence of Congress, the undomesticated press, and the American People. You can imagine how spontaneous and free-flowing the talk will be under the masterful leadership of George W. Bush, who will fearlessly seek out dissent in order to optimize the marketplace of ideas. Also, to help him figure out who to shitcan next. The video hookup with Maliki should be deeply elucidating, as Bush congratulates Maliki on the routine appointments to his cabinet which only took four months. He may assure Maliki he's doing a heckuva job. Maliki will express his profound gratitude for this unsolicited show of support and for the American resolve in seeing through whatever the mission is at this point. All will agree that substantial progress is being made in Iraq, or so they hear, since no one can actually go outside in the street and look.

At night the crew will gather in the Camp David game room to watch Bonanza re-runs. There will be little talk, not only because of the arduous day spent video-conferencing, but because this crew has no interest in ideas, conversation, other people or the job of governing. Bush will chug an O'Doul's and hit the hay at 9. Condi, 15 minutes later. Rummy, Cheney, Negroponte and Gonzales will then break out the tequila and get wasted.

Tomorrow: Day 2 of the Retreat!

Alice Meets the Jester in the Ex-Checker

“And as in other years, the figures exclude the effect of the surplus being run by Social Security, which uses the excess to buy government bonds that it plans to use to pay benefits later in the century. The actual difference between non-Social Security revenues and spending projected for 2005 is $541 billion, not including the expected costs for the war in Iraq and Afghanistan. The actual spending gap in 2004 was $567 billion.” New York Times January 25, 2005

“When the U.S. annual budget for defense is compared with that of other nations, the true magnitude of U.S. defense spending becomes clear. The United States alone accounts for more than one-third of the world's military spending. U.S. defense spending roughly equals the combined spending of the next 18 nations and is more than triple the combined defense budgets of the remaining 142 countries in the world. The United States outspends both Russia and China seven to one. More important, the United States spends 54 times the combined amount spent by potential rogue state threats – Iran, Syria, Libya, Cuba and North Korea.” Analysis from the (conservative) Cato Institute

Wonderland was certainly a perplexing place. For a long time, the unpleasant chortles of the Mad Hatter and the gravelly voice of the strange, rotund man who used only one side of his mouth to say disagreeable things rang in her young ears. Alice felt lucky Wonderland offered refuge from encounters like that, though you might imagine a sunlit meadow would be an unlikely place for such a loathsome collection of individuals to disport themselves. She wondered if the Colon ever made its way to safety. It was curious the Hatter seemed to pay no attention to him, either while he was in distress or as he wriggled through the high grass to the safety of the forest. Alice wished him well.

For now, Alice found herself overcome by a ravenous appetite. She came upon another hole blocked by a short wooden door. This surely could not be the same hole she’d run down initially, since she was already in Wonderland. A sign on a rope hung over the knob: “Gone till we come back. Keepers of the Queen’s Ex-Checker.” That meant nothing in particular to Alice. She tried the door and found it opened onto a steep set of stairs leading to a murky basement of sorts. Intrepid as always, she started down, listening to the hollow echo of her steps against the stone walls. In time, she could hear metallic clinks and a murmuring voice. Reaching the bottom of the stairs, she saw a diminutive man wearing a jester’s cap and green tights in a candle-lit corner. He was standing behind a long wooden table piled high with gleaming coins. On two hooks on the stone wall behind him hung two enormous burlap sacks. One was marked “Ours” and bulged heavily with its burden of coins. The other bag was marked “Theirs” and hung limply from its hook. It was apparently empty. The Jester had a large sheet of foolscap on the table and a thick pencil. He dropped coins in the heavy bag and made marks on the paper as he went.

“Hello,” said Alice.

“We’re busy here,” said the Jester.

“May I ask where I am?” Alice said.

“You can ask,” said the Jester.

“Who are you?”

The Jester made another mark and then looked up, frowning.

“If you must know, I’m the Queen’s Secretary of the Ex-Checker.”

“What’s that?”

“It’s the only game in town,” said the Jester.

“That’s not a very good joke,” said Alice politely.

“Who let you in?” said the Jester.

“The door was open,” said Alice.

“Didn’t you see the sign?”

“But you’re here after all,” Alice pointed out.

“True enough. We don’t like people to see what we’re doing.”

“What are you doing?”

“I’m counting the People’s taxes.”

“It looks like an awful lot of money,” said Alice.

“It is, though it’s never enough.”

“Why is the bag marked ‘Ours’ so heavy and full?”

“That’s the money the Queen uses to run Wonderland, to defend it from its enemies and to provide for the common good.”

“Wonderland has enemies?” said Alice.

“You ask a lot of impertinent questions,” said the Jester.

“So I’ve been told. Why is the other bag empty?”

“That’s the bag that will be used to pay for the Queen’s subjects in their old age when the money in the Queen’s bag isn’t enough to do it anymore.”

“Oh, I see,” said Alice, though not really seeing.

“Maybe you can explain it to me then,” mumbled the Jester.

“Beg your pardon?” said Alice.

“I’ve got a lot of work to do,” said the Jester.

“So when will you start filling the bag marked ‘Theirs’?” Alice asked.

“Never,” said the Jester.

“But you just said…”

“Right, I did. Later, when there isn’t enough money in the Queen’s bag to pay for the retirement of the Queen’s subjects, the Queen will use the money in the People’s bag to make up the difference.”

“But there’s no money in the People’s bag and never will be.”

“You’re a smart little girl,” said the Jester. “Maybe a little too smart.”

This was certainly not the way she had been addressed back at school in Swansea. For the second time that day, Alice felt very homesick and afraid.

“It’s just when I did my sums…” Alice began tremulously. “What I mean is, I don’t see how adding zero to anything can make it any bigger.”

“It can when the Queen says it can,” said the Jester.

“Why don’t you put some of the money into the People’s bag now so you’ll have some later when you need it?”

“Because we don’t have enough as it is, silly,” said the Jester.

“But later on you’ll have more than enough so you can put some in the People’s bag?” said Alice hopefully.

“Heavens no,” said the Jester. “If anything, things will be worse than ever. So her subjects will love her more, the Queen requires them to pay her less now than ever before.”

“That seems rather shortsighted,” said Alice.

“It would,” said the Jester. “To you. That’s why you’re not the Queen.”

“Do the People know how dire the situation is?” said Alice.

“Oh my, yes. The Queen warns them every day. She wants to avert a crisis by acting now.”

“But not by putting money in the People’s bag,” said Alice, beginning to catch on.

“Of course not,” said the Jester.

“Although that would solve the problem,” said Alice.

“Indeed,” said the Jester. “But not without making Wonderland vulnerable to its enemies.”

“I forget what you said before. It’s been such a day. Who did you say were Wonderland’s enemies?”

“You might say they’re everywhere,” murmured the Jester.

“Can I just ask you one more thing?” said Alice sweetly.

“If it really is the last thing,” said the Jester.

“What’s the fastest way to get the Hell out of Wonderland?”