The Relative Deprivation of Dick Cheney

"Patiently endured so long as it seemed beyond redress, a grievance come to appear intolerable once the possibility of removing it crosses men’s minds. For the mere fact that certain abuses have been remedied draws attention to others and they now appear more galling; people may suffer less, but their sensibility is exacerbated.’ -- Tocqueville

Political scientists and sociologists have often studied the observations of the historian and foreign minister Alexis de Tocqueville, who described the events that led to the French Revolution. The events he spoke of have been associated with a concept known as "relative deprivation." There are a number of good definitions of "relative deprivation"; however, for the sake of this discussion, we will go with Diana Kendall’s description of it being the group phenomena that occurs as a result of "unfulfilled rising expectations." (Sociology in Our Times; Thomson Wadsworth; 2005; page 530)

In general terms, this means that social change is most likely to take place not when people are oppressed beyond a breaking point, despite the fact that this is what seems to make sense to the average person. Rather, social changes are most likely to take place when things are beginning to look like they might get better for a group of people, and then the progress comes to a halt.

In many cases, it has to do with the people within the group comparing their status with that of others. Hence, the issues that spark the change are not "past events," so much as they are the reality of the moment, and the potential for the future.

Now, what does that have to do with the Scooter Libby trial ?

Good question. The Libby trial has to do, of course, with the purposeful lying that led this country to war in Iraq. In the past, the administration that lied the nation into war seemed extremely powerful. No one in Congress seemed capable of doing battle with the beast. The judicial branch betrayed the Constitution by putting this group in power to begin with. The corporate media had donned cheer leading uniforms. Rational thought was widely dismissed by the Fox News clones. Progressive democrats were considered conspiracy theorists. And when an individual like Joseph Wilson stepped up to call the administration on its lies, they harnessed the power of the executive branch in an effort to crush him completely.

Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld instituted a "shadow government," which showed their willingness -- No! eagerness! -- to trample the democratic form of government that really is the best potential of the United States. And, at that time, the vast majority of the American population was so numbed out as a result of the social novocain injected into their daily lives that they sat back, passively, and assumed the role of spectators.

Yet there were some people who recognized the dangerous drift of the Bush-Cheney administration, and who bravely challenged them. Some were people like Joseph Wilson; others were Representatives like Conyers and Waxman; but the vast majority were those people found at the grass roots level. And, of course, there were people like Mr. Eckenrode and Mr. Fitzgerald, who investigated the Plame scandal.

In the two years since George Bush was "re-elected," the war in Iraq has become recognized as the greatest failure in American foreign policy. Bush and Cheney have been largely discredited. Even most republicans recognize they are failures. Still, Americans hear President Bush speak of increasing the troops in Iraq, and they know it is because he is more willing to send soldiers to their death, than to admit that he not only was wrong to invade Iraq, but that he doesn’t have a clue how to resolve the problems he continues to cause. And Americans hear an angry, hostile, insane Dick Cheney snarl that the war is going well, and that anyone who questions him is – like Joe Wilson – an enemy of the state.

I used "google" today, to check how many newspapers across the country have articles covering yesterday’s testimony in the Libby case. There are more than a thousand. More than a thousand newspapers with articles that detail how a member of Dick Cheney’s inner circle revealed in court what a lying snake he is.

The headline in the Baltimore Sun reads: "Aide testifies Cheney joined effort to discredit war critic: She says vice president, Libby actively sought to spin news coverage." A story from KansasCity.com notes, "Martin’s unflappable testimony was a blow to Libby’s defense …. (and) also undercut Libby’s claim he was too busy with terrorism threats" to be concerned with Wilson. The article refers to Cheney as being "obsessed" and ordering his "closest aides to keep aggressive tabs" on Wilson.

The LA Times’ headline reads, "Cheney’s key role in leak case detailed." The first sentence of the article states, "In the first such account from Vice President Dick Cheney’s inner circle, a former aide testified Thursday that Cheney personally directed the effort to discredit an administration critic by having calls made to reporters in 2003."

The list goes on and on.

In November, 2006, I wrote that the time had come for the grass roots to demand that Congress begin to take action to impeach VP Dick Cheney. Many people agreed. Others expressed a belief that such action on our part would be reckless. I respectfully ask those who sincerely questioned the call to impeach Cheney to reconsider. I believe that such a step is needed to bring the madness of the Bush-Cheney Iraq policy to an end.

Thank you for your consideration.

I first saw that line of analysis applied in the days of the Civil Rights movement. It hadn't occurred to me to use it in the present context, but you're absolutely right.

K&R, of course.

the FCC, and still works at the White House, as deputy director of communications for policy and planning for Bush.

Why this seemingly unshakable testimony? She seems to be a very loyal republican. Is she afraid of perjury charges, or is there something else?

She speaks to her attorney. Her attorney is concerned with one thing: her. The lawyer doesn't represent anyone else. The lawyer would have a pretty good idea who FBI investigator Eckenrode is. And so the attorney is going to say, "You really need to be honest here. This isn't an investigation that has you in it's sites. However, if you are not honest with the investigators, that changes."

I was thinking about Fitzgerald's case against Ryan in Illinois.

He sent Fawell to jail. Fawell is from a politically connected family in Illinois.

Then, Fitzgerald was going to send Fawell's fiance to jail. To avoid that, Fawell talked about Ryan.

Fitz picks off lower people to get to those higher up. He never acts unless he has all his ducks in a row.

Maybe it is as simple as speaking to her attorney. But there are so many layers here.

Mr. Fitzgerald employs a tactic that Mark Felt described to Bob Woodward years ago: "He gave me a little lecture about breaking a conspiracy like Watergate. 'You build convincingly from the outer edges in, you get ten times the evidence you need against the Hunts and Liddys. They feel hopelessly finished -- they may not talk right away, but the grip is on them.Then you move up and do the same thing at the next level'." (The secret Man; Woodward; page 91) That description seems to fit the Ryan case more so than the Martin situation. However, there are others in the White House who folded under pressure.

and fidgety. It sounds as though in giving her testimony she was extremely uncomfortable and reluctant, but found herself in a position where she had no choice.

M The next day which was Wednesday, as is typical we talk about breaking news since the previous day. Stephen Hadley raised the evening news report by Mitchell and said that there had been suggestions that WH was pushing blame to CIA and that was not helpful. Hadley said Tenet was unhappy, Hadley said we shouldn't be saying it. About 20-some-odd people, a lot of people were on the trip to Africa. A dozen at the table and a few of us who sit behind–maybe sixteen. Who did Hadley believe was saying this–he turned around and looked at me.

F Had you spoken with Mitchell.

M Libby sitting directly in front of me. He looked down. Mr. Hadley asked me and others from the press office and Michael Anton had him join us as well, to talk about the story and told us again we should not be pointing fingers, this was not the CIA's fault in any way shape or form. Afterward I went to see the VP bc I thought the VP should know Hadley thought I had something to do with these reports. Spoke to VP, Scooter was there, thought we had something to do with this.

http://www.firedoglake.com/2007/01/25/libby-live-cathie-martin-two/


Neither VP nor Scooter were going to lift a finger to help her.

Look at how things have changed since November 7th, 2006.

Would you have EVER expected that the Dems actually would grow spine, and start giving grief to these schmucks?

Did you even dream that there actually would be committees set up to do away with all this sneaky-ass secrecy shit while purportedly doing "the people's business"?

Did you ever think some of the leading lights from Leahy to Waxman to Rangel and Conyers would be in LEADERSHIP positions, at the helm of these committees, and that they'd clamp such a strong, steady grip on the steering wheel?

Could you ever have imagined that Chuck Hagel, (Knuckledragger-Nebraska) would go off like that in committee this past week, yelling in outrage about the abuses of power of which this White House is guilty, and how every last one of the 100 Senators now in office needs to stand up and face the voters and declare where they stand and get all the facts and cut through all the lies and damned well know what they're doing BEFORE they agree to something as horrific as sending more Americans to a needless, senseless death? I mean, THAT, all by itself... Holy COW. And with SUCH emotion and such force? I thought he was gonna start foaming at the mouth when I watched him in the thick of that. And I'd bet you hard money he was yelling at himself because HE was one of the offenders, one of the appeasers, one of the collaborators, one of the enablers WHO ALLOWED THIS CRIMINAL SITUATION TO OCCUR, UNQUESTIONED, IN THE FIRST PLACE. I suspect Chuck Hagel is most angry at himself for being a sucker. At least he has the balls to come out and say so, while others still remain in deep denial and haven't figured out how to come to grips with their own personal shame about THEIR enabling of all this.

I keep harping on 11/7 - (frankly, I think we all should, the very same way the assholes out there keep harping on 9/11 - 11/7 is an EQUALLY heavyweight, historic, significant, and shattering day in our history) because IT WAS THE DAY EVERYTHING CHANGED, YET AGAIN. To those who'd whine that "9/11 changed EVERYTHING!!!!" - well, 11/7 CHANGED IT BACK!!! That's what slapped us awake, and shook us back to our senses. And what let the games begin.

bush spoke somewhat euphemistically about "global climate change." I think there's been a measurable and extremely noticeable "POLITICAL climate change." All of a sudden, it's freed up people like Chuck Hagel and a few others to feel empowered to escape the oppression that had locked us all up for awhile (willingly or unwillingly). It was an unmistakable signal that we were Under New Management. Things were gonna be different. Things were going to run differently. And there WOULD be accountability. It freed Hagel and others to surrender to perhaps that little gnawing voice in the back of their minds that they fought to suppress because they felt compelled to "support our president" without question. Now, they were free to start asking questions, because the VOTERS interrupted and woke 'em up and gave them permission by forcing a management change on Capitol Hill. They were yanked back to reality. And some of them, I think, probably had wanted to go there for awhile but didn't feel like they could. But the voters spoke and there was no mistaking what the voters said. Hard to mistake it, anyway, when YOUR friends are all escorted to the back of the room, and instructed to hand over the gavels of chairmanship and the really good seat at the head of the table and the other titles and perks and office upgrades that come with it. HARD to overlook or ignore THAT. Sorta punches 'em straight in the nose, yanno? BELIEVE ME, Chuck Hagel wouldn't have gone off like Vesuvius like that if bush had maintained full control of all of Washington, and all the committee heads were fellow republi-CONS and the status quo had somehow been reaffirmed by the voters. He woulda sat there and expressed perhaps a small twinge of uncertainty but wouldn't have made ANY of the stink about the need for accountability - the way he wound up doing. Back when the bad guys owned it all, "accountability" wasn't even a word in the dictionary.

So that's the climate in which our dear Miss Cathie Martin finds herself. She clearly can see the political climate change around her. She can see whose neck is being pushed nearer and nearer to the block. And it's not the other guys, it's her own teammates. And she and her crowd AREN'T in full control anymore. And now they've got questions to answer and prosecutors to face and some really uncomfortable shit that's been backed up like some huge case of constipation for the past six years. Well, now, the sphincter can't hold that flood back anymore.

So here is little Cathie Martin. LITTLE Cathie Martin. An underling, a good, loyal foot soldier who received the orders to make the calls and blow in the ears of reporters and drop little, subtle, murmured bombs about Joseph and Valerie Plame Wilson. She was following orders, down at her low level on the food chain. Orders from higher up. Perhaps even from at or near the very top.

And now the people in charge all over Capitol Hill are no longer gonna be burying this shit, or kicking it aside, or killing it in committee, or overloading it with other amendments that the opponents will have to oppose - and thus up-end the more important basic that is now screwed. And no longer will you have a snake like pat roberts deciding that the second part of that report - about the use of the bad intel - that was supposed to be taken up "after the election" suddenly had disappeared into thin air. Now, NOBODY is gonna sit there and shrug - "uhhhh... WHAT report???" People like Cathie Martin are seriously noticing this, and realize that this shit is ALL gonna start coming out. If Patrick Fitzgerald doesn't pry it out of somebody, some Henry Waxman type WILL. Skating season is OVER. And she knows she can't afford to be left out in the middle of the lake wearing those heavy skates while the ice is melting around her. Even sweeter, she knows that EVERYBODY is being sworn in, under oath (unlike when arlen specter was "helping" to run things). And all of a sudden, the danger of perjury is VERY, VERY real. And the people running things now aren't like arlen specter. THEIR perjury charges are going to be taken seriously, pursued, and made to stick.

One other EXTREMELY significant thing that's now obvious to all as a result of that Political Climate Change: the media is talking about it and covering it, and fairly widely. Maybe not as aggressively as they all could be, but as H2O Man noted up top, there were about 1,000 newspapers nationwide carrying something about the latest eye-popper in the libby trial. They have tons of lost ground to revisit and make up, but now, they're actually doing it, at long last. And the investigative reporters who sat back and snoozed because Clinton wasn't there to kick around anymore and the wrong-wing radio hacks didn't have as big and juicy a target to push THEM to persecute anymore, suddenly have awakened and sat up, and have noticed there's some GENUINE, UNADULTERATED SHIT going on that's beckoning them to start digging. And this is FAR more intriguing and heavily-weighted than some stupid illicit blowjob. There is, pardon the pun, a helluva lot more meat in that sandwich sitting there on the table in front of them now than EVER was the case when the servers were serving them during the Clinton era. Even Michael Isikoff seems to have realized that there's a lot juicier fruit out there to start picking than some smalltime devil with a stained blue dress.

Our Little Cathie is realizing there IS Hell to pay and the bill collectors for that are already marching up the front walkway. This is suddenly very real to someone like her, and very scary. Especially since she's sufficiently low on the totem pole that no bush or cheney would give a fuck if she got sent to prison. She's not worth a pardon. She's certainly no kkkarl rove and therefore not worth the strenuous protection efforts that have been mounted for him from the highest levels. She won't qualify for that kind of VIP treatment. Hell, even scooter libby's being thrown overboard to protect kkkarl. kkkarl will get pardoned. She, on the other hand, is a nobody and evidently knows she doesn't rate that kind of special handling. So she's singing like an opera diva, putting her hopes and her willingness to cooperate on the clemency of Patrick Fitzgerald. She has now recognized that the people she worked for, and risked serious legal troubles for, aren't the ones who are gonna butter her bread from now on. Not that it ever even was butter. Only people like kkkarl get that. And she knows it.

Political Climate Change. In this case, it's absolutely breathtaking, and long prayed for. THIS kind of "climate change" we NEED.

I find this whole sordid affair kinda like - which is it? A Mounds bar or an Almond Joy? "Indescribably Delicious!"

Aw shit - sorry this is so long. I guess turns of events like these just inspire me...

and so true...every last word!

See? I can be short-winded, too! :D

Grass roots in order to move: the reluctant media who act according to certain rules of popular readership, money and political winds of power, the cautious Democrats who sometimes forget they are moving in a ruined system, the enslaved GOP pols with whom fear is the best and sometimes only motivator by dint of their moral character. not all these things move equally or in lockstep. The resistance is different, overall a general resistance to challenging power tied to myth, a slowness and disunity and distractedness. All depends on having ENOUGH people fooled for the resistance of the upper levels to keep its grip, none of whom up there seem to have the moral courage as a group to correct the abuse of themselves and their institutions. The people, dying and pocket picked feel themselves more remote and distracted.

Leadership is a scarce commodity with zero at the top. With all this resistance and the increasing crimes of the increasingly exposed and tyrannical mis-administration the tidal wave is growing more even as its slow inevitability, repressed existence fuels it.

It will be countered by more mad wars and outrages. It may grow even larger than impeachment and that is when the GOP and the corporate hogs have to march into the Mad Tea Party and close shop. Failing that, impeachment and wilder things will wash over all. It is time for all the top equivocators to stop postponing reality and face the deficit spending of their cowardice and swallow the minimal task of impeachment and survival. ASAP.

:sarcasm:


Kidding, Kidding...

excellent article, as usual.

with any sociology course I took as a soc. major at an excellent university.

Question: am I correct that your implication is that now that the beast has been shown to be vulnerable, the frustration of those of us angered by the "de-democratization" of the government will inevitably take the form of a revolt to overthrow an order than has stymied our expectations of fair government? Or have I missed part of your point?

Thank you!

we need to remove those who believe that they are a "shadow government" from power. In that sense, I think that the Libby trial qualifies as "revolutionary."

I also believe 100% in what Martin Luther King, Jr. said about the absolute need for a revolutionary change in values in this country.

I think that we need to protect the US Constitution, and to have grass-roots active participation in the democratic process. I think that there should be a revolution in people's hearts and minds, and that all actions should be those outlined in the Bill of Rights.

Thank you.

:kick:

my thinking at the time was that that was not what they had elected the Dems to do.

My thinking has changed - I now think it would be reckless NOT to impeach. Both of them. They've already made it obvious that a Democratic Congress will have no effect on their decision-making - the Dems were elected to rein them in, and to get out of the mess we're in. Impeachment appears to be the only way to stop these dangerous and delusional people.

Was when Nixon was pardoned rather than impeached. No consequences was the message the men around him, in varying degrees on the ladder of power, carried forward. Men like Cheney & Rumsfeld. People have to learn there are and will be consequences for their criminality in general and for their silent coup on the Constitution. If we don't stop it now, we will face it again. These men were so unafraid, they didn't think it would ever come to this. The system was rigged. They had control over the WH, Congress and Media. Asscroft was covering theirs at Justice. They could act with impunity. They need to be taught they're wrong.

>>
If we don't stop it now, we will face it again.
>>

and again, and again, and again..

We need to hold them accountable NOW.

They'll sneak up on us again when we least suspect it.

is mostly worthless and more interested in having a good time. Politics is way too much work.

But I guess if she thinks she can "write" a book, we maybe better keep an eye on her.

There are still people that think Nixon did nothing wrong and even more that think Reagan committed no crime.

This problem comes from the Republics thinking that the end justifies the means. They think they are righteous so anything goes in the name of the cause. The cause seems to be complete power because they know best about what should happen.

:thumbsup:

:thumbsup:

Great article H2O Man! :applause: :hi:

First of all, the quote by de Tocqueville is so apropos, as is the idea of relative deprivation, it goes a long way in describing what has gone on over the last 6 years and explaining the conditions that have puzzled so many of us, as does the term social Novocain (so good).

As for lying snakes, that describes I Liar also. That he would allow a subordinate take the blame both publicly and in a private reaming out for something he had done and not say anything, is a big tell on his character. So much for his James Bond fantasy.

Durbin had the right word for both he and Cheney yeaterday...delusional, criminally so.

a war in Iraq. And I think/hope it will get into that, once they open the door to explore Scooter's motivation.

And what motive would the Bush family have had to broaden the War On Terra?

Research Forum & Threads 1,2,3

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_oet&address=358x192

#4

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x11772

#5

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x25384

#6

www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x35704

I go there to read, then look for the discussions here.
It's catching on at stumble upn as well
http://www.stumbleupon.com/url/h2oman.blogspot.com/
I'd like to recommend individual entries but there are no permalinks...

was spoken about on the senate floor by Senator Lautenberg. Certainly the exasperating timidity of our elected oficials is being slowly peeled away as the public has moved out front to say a dramtic change is required. Cheney does not believe in representative government, he was a totalitarian state and his vision of sugar plums is him being installed as the leader. Cheney's behavior speaks to a level of stress that has crept in uninvited to his undisclosed location and has made him quite uncomfortable.

His over-reaction and refusal to state the truth is being impeached on the witness stand by "republics" and Fitzgerald could end up embarrassing Cheney into an admission of absolute thinking that actually heaps more scorn upon the White House and impetus upon an inert Congress. Cheney may actually be the means that brings this all to an end as his testimony is becoming narrower and narrower and he's the only "character" witness that is directly involved that Libby must call. Libby has a choice save himself and cover Cheney or do time and start the path to redemption by telling the truth and making a deal. Those are horrible options, yet Libby placed himself in this position on purpose. Cheney's career hangs on Libby's state of mind.

Forgot my :popcorn:

from another location?

Will he refuse to be under oath? Can he?

if he will actually testify, and if he does, if it would be from the witness stand. Should he testify in the court or otherwise, he would definitely be under oath.

It's worth noting that lying to investigators when not under oath carries an equal charge, with an equal potential penalty, as lying under oath .... as Scooter's case illustrates.

I found an interesting and perhaps prescient blog post made by "emptywheel," aka Marcy one of the live trial bloggers, during jury selection:



Interesting, no? At the very least, Martin's testimony shows Cheney very much concerned (obsessed?) about Wilson's assertions and hands on in directing the response to Wilson, even providing talking points to senior aides, directing them what to say to the media. Contrary to the Wilson's being of no consequence to Libby, it was of significant consequence to Cheney and thus Libby. And what are the chances that the devoted Libby would stray from the instructions of his beloved boss on a matter of such importance, leaking the Valerie Wilson information on his own initiative? As Murray Waas has noted, one of Libby's close friends who served with him in the WH said Libby was not a freelancer and it was inconceivable that Libby suddenly turned into a loose cannon.

on Hardball. He provides the best coverage of the scandal to be found on tv. Waas is also fantastic.

Cheney would take the fifth?

but for security concerns it may be another location. The problem strategically is that Cheney is getting muddied even more during the trial, Libby's team may no longer think he's useful as they get further into the trial. Cheney's reputation is already in tatters and the issue is will the trial illuminate the way for Fitz to go to a Grand jury to seek additional charges - that is Cheney's biggest fear. The lawyers for Scooter are in a snit because they do not have all the information Fitz has so its a real risk every time they call a witness. Fitz is only obligated to tell them what is exculpatory or would assist their client. it truly is a game of cat and mouse and Cheney (new to him and his super-sized ego) is the mouse.

Yeam Libby is only concerned with doing the best they can for Scooter. They are not there to advocate for Dick Cheney, or Karl Rove, or anyone but Scooter. With any witness, they have to consider the pros and the cons. It may be that Dick Cheney's testimony would be considered too potentially damaging, at this point.

It's the Gift that Keeps On Giving!

:headbang:

Now, it's safe to come out from hiding. Now the bad guys can't hurt you so much anymore. It's THEY who are running for hiding places. I think it's gonna be like the cork in the bottle, or as I said somewhere else here, like the sphincter can't hold it back anymore. Six years of constipation suddenly eased. All that shit backed up - now can flow! The dam is bursting. And OUR side isn't the one that faces being washed away.

I also read somewhere else here on DU, in - I think - a thread about OldLeftyLawyer, that the presumption was/is that Fitzgerald is doing here what he did successfully in Illinois. He started at the bottom and indicted his way all the way up to the top. From the low end of things, it took him something like 50 convictions before he reached Governor Ryan. Who wound up nailed, and jailed by the time it was all over.

Wouldn't that be spectacular if it happened here?

on edit -

YAY! I found it!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=3080782&mesg_id=3080782

More than a thousand newspapers with articles that detail how a member of Dick Cheney’s inner circle revealed in court what a lying snake he is.

Impeach, then Impale his sorry ass.

Though I disagree with Isikoff, I don't think it will help Libby, too many witnesses have already testified as to when he knew about Plame

www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16832257/site/newsweek

is everything. When did Rove say that Libby mentioned the Russert business? Rove has also said that it was Libby who told him about Plame, and that was well before Scooter talked to Russert.

is throwing a Hail Mary of epic proportions if they put Rove or Bartlett up there. This would provide the intent needed to open up more charges - but the defense wants to show Libby worked on a myriad of other national security issues and they are calling his peers to testify to that postage stamp sized information. That still leaves the door wide open for Fitz to get evidence to go back to a GJ with even more charges bringing more pressure on Libby. Do you think they actually will go nukular and call them?

:popcorn: Hope nothing is on your calendar next week! ;)

we are reaching a point where the public will be stunned if the Libby convictions are the end of the case. I think that Mr. Fitzgerald is aware that Libby is not the only criminal involved in the illegal and unethical operation against the Wilsons.

in history.

http://members.aol.com/FLJOSEPHUS2/brinton.htm

THE PATTERN OF A REVOLUTION19

Crane Brinton carefully defined a revolution as the "drastic, sudden substitution of one group in charge of the running of a territorial political entity by another group hitherto not running that government"20 and added the proviso that this substitution must be by "an actual violent uprising or "some other kind of skullduggery."21 He limited his study to "'democratic' revolutions"22 or revolutions which "have a social or class . . . basis."23 He found a pattern, which he refers to as "commonalties" 24 in the four modern revolutions that he analyzed. Brinton notes that "the American Revolution does not quite fit the pattern and is therefore especially useful as a kind of control."25 Brinton noted that a revolution could be divided into three phases: the pattern of events leading up to the revolution, the revolution itself, and the aftermath.


Precursors of Revolution

The pattern of events leading up to a revolution contains several elements that are present in combination. An economic upturn creates an aura of rising expectations. The government is clearly inefficient. There is bitter class conflict between almost equal upper classes. The intelligencia and the upper class who normally support the government are alienated by its incompetence.


Revolution

Revolution occurs when government applies force to put down social unrest. The force applied, like the government that applies it, is inept and fails in its objectives. The failed use of force is a turning point that sets up the revolutionaries in power. The revolutionaries are upper class moderates who take charge of the revolutionary government. Outside pressure, mandating a "government of national salvation", and class conflict enables a lower class radical movement to overthrow the moderate upper class government and kill the upper class or drive them into exile.

The radical government suspends normal governmental procedures and protection for individuals. It implements a special police force and courts that are answerable only to the radicals. The radicals begin a reign of terror to enforce their ideology. Brinton noted that in this phase, "The little band of violent revolutionists who form the nucleus of all action during the terror behave as men have been observed to behave . . . under the influence of active religious faith."26 The revolutionaries consume each other in the reign of terror until the revolution ends.


Aftermath

Revolutions change society a lot less than revolutionaries would hope. After the revolution, society settles back into the old pattern with a shift toward a more diffuse exercise of power. Power becomes somewhat more diffused but life goes on mostly as before.

Witness his abhorrent behavior toward Blitzer, a staunch ally. Wolf barely tread into forbidden territory and Snarlin' Dick damn near tore his head off, on-air. People in the media noticed, and took note, even if it didn't make the newspapers as such. Cheney is very touchy these days. Touchy people make serious mistakes.

Also, Snarlin' Dick has never come across an adversary like Fitzgerald, and he hates Fitzgerald not only because Fitzgerald is so much more intelligent than Cheney, he can't intimidate him, and Fitzgerald is holding all the cards. Both men's reputations precede them. Cheney cannot overcome the weight of his reputation.

I keep thinking that someone who knows the entire truth is going to crack under the pressure. The ugliness of it all, the shock of being lied into war, the sense of betrayal is what will lead to more and louder calls for impeachment, not just of bush, but of Cheney. These two need the full force of the law applied to them, not just for punishment (because there can never be adequate punishment for their crimes), but to set an example to others.

=====================

H20Man, I'm just wondering how many newspapers are in circulation, and if the thousand you indicated are major papers or not. I wonder how the LA Times editor feels, watching this trial unfold.

:thumbsup:

Don't go hunting with Dick Cheney until the smoke clears....


:hide:

They can also be very dangerous. What can/will Darth Cheney do?

He'll push harder against the envelope in ever-increasing acts of defiance.

I don't know why everyone is so intimidated by Cheney. Whatever he says, I just imagine him saying it in a Peewee Herman voice, and it comes across as very petulant and selfish.

He needs to be put in his place, and fast. He is not the king of the world.

The coming surge in Iraq will only increase casualties and calls for change. What previously seemed insurmountable obstacles to impeachment will become attainable goals.

the Thief-in-Chief made his big escalation announcement in the WH library -- a speech in which he was visibly very tense and anxious. He took a defiant step but did it with no confidence whatsoever.

In line with the OP's theme, it seemed to me that many Americans may have expected him instead to show that he had finally "got it" and thus announce some sort of phased redeployment of American troops from Iraq. Instead, he may as well have spat in our faces.

Talk about thwarting the people's "rising expectations"!

Even from his isolated throne room, surely he felt the building tsunami of public outrage aimed directly at him after the seismic jolt he delivered that night....

So then in the SOTU when he spoke of the troop "surge" and virtually begged everyone to "give it a chance," I felt he revealed an awareness that his arrogant, contemptuous defiance of public will was hugely resented by the people.

Next step, Darth goes on TV but instead of following his supposed boss's lead he resorts to the only tack he ever embraces -- snarling attacks in which he declares: "THEY CAN'T STOP US!" And we all knew he wasn't talking about the insurgents or the Iraqis -- he meant every American who was against this insane failure of a war!

I don't think that most Americans have missed the Cheney/Halliburton connection, either.

But most of all, the current increase of violence in Iraq makes it clear that any U.S. escalation in this war will only worsen the situation there.

Ultimately, as you said, Martin, what escalates in Iraq will be the casualty numbers, especially of our own -- the very troops this administration has been wanting us to "support" all this time.

It is the tragic and unnecessary harm coming to them that Americans already hated most about this war....


And now, at the very same time the utter failure in Iraq is reaching a sort of visibly violent peak, the Libby trial is informing (or reminding) the public of the Dark Lord Cheney's fanatic determination to make that war happen.

So YES, I agree that a (hopefully unstoppable) "surge toward impeachment" may well result. And I fervently hope it takes aim at Cheney first, for a number of good reasons we all know.

... is that many more young Americans in uniform will have to die and the surge will have to fail. I think all of us want a stable and peaceful Iraq, but wishful thinking will not change the reality of the conflict or the futility of throwing more US troops at the problem.

The reality in the United States is that for impeachment to become politically viable the surge must fail, as it inevitably will. The American people need to be clamoring for impeachment, and a sufficient number of Republican Senators must become so fed up with a recalcitrant president and his disastrous policy that their sense of duty and political survival will result in an impeachment conviction.

Still, this will require more than a failed war effort; sufficient high crimes and misdemeanors must also be highly visible. The Libby trial opens the gate down this road, and provides grounds for the necessary first step of removing the vice president from office. Of course, this may also provide the necessary fall guy and satisfy the public clamor. Two impeachment trials may be less plausible than one, and this president may be too insulated to be convicted.

But we should never misunderestimate the Thief in Chief, including his ability to supply enough rope for his own hanging. Even with the elimination of his policy-making vice president, chimpy has a great capacity for making great mistakes. In other words, he can still do great harm to our country.

The successful impeachment of these two is a sad scenario indeed, because it is not likely to happen without a worsening of the disaster and trajedy they have wrought. It will be done when a solid majority of voters in this country finally come to realize it is absolutely necessary.

And I also appreciate the quotes with which you season these pieces. I'm always going to look at something you've posted - it consistently leavens and enlarges my thinking.

:yourock:

...but it's not too late to kick your most excellent thread to the top of the page!

:kick:

:kick:

So worth the read, and the re-read.

thanks so much for all you do, H2O man!

I find this entire trial fascinating. I was a little too young during the watergate scandal to care much about it, but this- this is history in the making.

I just got your H2O meaning after reading your blog. Very creative.