Population: One

Two very important speeches were delivered today. One was delivered to the people of the United States; one was delivered to Britain’s House of Commons. I’m glad I had the chance to watch both of them.

President Bush made what we must now consider the definitive Administration case for war on Iraq. Robin Cook made what I consider to be the definitive case against. (I have not found a transcript of the latter, but there is a RealVideo archive.)

I want to encourage everyone to watch or read both. Cook’s speech is a textbook example of how to disagree with governmental policy without being unpatriotic. Bush’s speech, considered objectively, was probably the strongest he has ever made. I suspect most reading this will have read the Bush speech by now; take the time to watch Cook, too.

Edit: trimmed down Cook transcript; Bush transcript. The Cook transcript removed some of the interesting bits, so you should still watch the RealVideo.

Robin Cook and Tony Blair displayed uncommon class in their letters regarding the former’s resignation. That’s how you disagree with someone’s policies without attacking them as a person. It’d make good reading for a lot of people on both sides of the aisle.

Last night, Bush said “Tomorrow is the day we determine whether or not diplomacy can work.” Today, the US, the UK, and Spain withdrew the British resolution. Dude, it’s not even noon yet. That was a pretty short day.

I mean, OK, leaving aside the issue of whether you’re pro or anti — isn’t it a little weird that Bush can’t even stick with a diplomatic plan for 24 hours? Couldn’t he have just said, “If we don’t see a diplomatic solution by tomorrow morning, time’s up,” perhaps? You’re President of the most powerful nation on Earth. Gotta stop sending these mixed messages.

Anyhow, he’s going to address the nation at 8 PM EST. I will, no sarcasm here, be glued to my set.

Hey, looks like I called it! Chirac’s interested in the Chile proposal. I didn’t think that was actually likely, but I did note it would be a clever diplomatic move. Via Den Beste, who thinks it’s another chance to mock Chirac and rather misses the problems it might cause Tony Blair.

Over the course of the last couple of months, David Neiwert has been writing a series of articles entitled “Rush, Newspeak and facism” on the potential for fascism in the United States. He’s a journalist who has extensive experience in this field; his articles are well worth your time. I don’t really have anything to say about these, which makes me a bad blogger, but sometimes you just have to pass along the important links.

• Part 1: a discussion of the nature of fascism.
• Part 2: why the left shouldn’t abuse the term “fascist.”
• Part 3: more on what fascism really means, and the “Patriot” movement.
• Part 4: the Patriot movement as proto-fascism.
• Part 5: how the memes of the Patriot movement are transmitted to mainstream thought.
• Part 6: Bush’s relationship with the religious right.
• Part 7: more on transmitters — the people who carry ideas from the extreme right into the mainstream.
• Part 8: political and religious transmitters, from Trent Lott to James Traficant to Pat Robertson.
• Part 9: media transmitters who pick up the rhetoric of the Patriot movement and make it palatable.
• Part 10: why Limbaugh’s tactics work and how they pull the mainstream right towards the extreme.
• Part 11: the fringe doesn’t look like the fringe, and can’t be assumed to be marginal.
• Part 12: a case study in Kalispell, Montana and a call to arms.
• Postscript: the importance of understanding the word “fascism.”
• Postscript:: Robert Paxton and “mobilizing passions.”
• Postscript: fascimentalism.

3/24/2003 Addendum: I have added a link to the postscript, and will continue to update this post if the series is further updated. I very much urge anyone who finds Neiwert’s work interesting to buy his book and to buy the pamphlet he’s producing from the series in whatever form he makes it available. I feel a little guilty that people have linked to me, rather than to him — I just reformatted his links a little. Buy his stuff, and make me feel better.

7/6/2003 Addendum: He’s released a PDF version of the essays, substantially rewritten and edited. Five buck donation requested. Go, read.

Time for another quick Iraq rundown.

Bush’s promise to unveil a Middle East peace plan (despite what some in his administration think of it) may have been another favor to Tony Blair, as it seems that promise is helping Tony Blair keep Claire Short from resigning. On the flip side, a poll of Labor backbenchers showed 95 out of 129 MPs refusing to support military action without a second resolution.

Still, any talk of peace is simply avoiding reality. US bombers took out Iraqi radar systems last night — specifically, those systems which would give warning of a US attack. The Azores meeting is not a diplomatic summit, it’s a planning session for the attack.

Not so long ago, Bush said there’d be a Security Council vote “no matter what.” Apparently he lied. Chile circulated a compromise proposal that adopted Britain’s five steps — five things Saddam must do or face war — but gave him 30 days to get it done. Bush said no. I don’t think Bush can allow that resolution to get to the floor, because it would get the nine yes votes Blair needs to head off any revolt. Unfortunately for Blair, ignoring a resolution with nine yes votes is far worse than skipping another resolution altogether, so Blair and Bush have to get the war in gear before anything happens. See what trying to reach a compromise gets you?

Along those lines, if France really wanted to embarass the hell out of the US, it’d pick up the Chilean proposal and champion it. Imagine the fun if Bush found himself forced to veto a resolution that included a trigger for war? I don’t really think that’ll happen, but man it’d be interesting.

Anyhow, I’m still predicting March 21st, this coming Friday. (Doh. Was off by three.) Launching the war mid-week would pummel the markets; better to give Wall Street a couple of days to watch before they can panic. If the Security Council winds up bringing other resolutions to the floor, that might speed things up.