Skip to content

CHARADE YOU ARE

January 28, 2013

GEORGE THAYER AND THE GAME HE PLAYED

It is clear to me now that understanding Thayer and his book, The War Buisness (1969) is to have a clear or better understanding of the true relationship between The  US Senate and House of Representatives, and the Pentagon.

And through a better understanding of this relationship, it would be easier to ascertain what the true relationship the Pentagon has with the White House.

Because it is clear that Thayer wrote for the Senate, and specifically under the official or publicly understood protection of Senator Fulbright.

And it is clear from books by both these individuals that they wrote and poised themselves to a great degree in opposition to the Pentagon itself.

And the possibility of Thayer actually composing The War Business with the depth of analysis that he did, was because he had so much data.

And the possibility he had of getting this data, I understand now, is due essentially to the fact that you cannot snub or stonewall a sitting United States Senator so easily, especially at the time.

People like Samuel Cummings or Henry Kuss probably had no choice but to give some kind of access to Thayer because of his connection to Fulbright; and probably because of a certain systemic awareness on their part-or coming from the concerted interests of other components of that system-they understood that appearances had to be kept.

And we have a sort of Tom and Jerry cat and mouse game at the heart of Washington and US government, as what appears to have been a vying of interests and positions, with one side, however, shrouded to a great degree in the secrecy of “national Interests”, “top-secret clearance” and the “need to know” stuff that we are all so familiar with now, mostly through films.

And Thayer shows, more than on one occasion in The War Business, his frustration with this circumstance.

And quickly I am dragged by my shirt collar, through the next logical series of inferences, to the concept of civilian government as a Pentagon plaything, and an understanding of the office of United States President as merely a positional function within a wider Pentagon structure of power.

And the person that occupies this functional position as president, becomes nothing more than an eminent and pampered accomplice of the Pentagon power structure; that every US president must be broken into this new situation which he surely can’t understand in its entirety until he actually occupies the oval office.

But his job, in its underlying function, is to serve as a cloak of legitimacy for the Pentagon itself, as business as usual continues on in its usualness.

And I have never read or heard of any US President ever speaking frankly on the subject of to whom or what he was in anyway beholden to as a president.

And what then of public opinion itself?

What of the US Senate and Congress?

How is the business of government, then, actually conducted?

What of the question of individual’s awareness and to what extent of this?

How does a certain duplicity as rationalization really work within individuals of this power structure and the community they form?

How do they rationalize to themselves the nature of their relationship in this community with the rest of society?

And this needs to be understood as of WWII, and especially after January 17th, 1961.

But I am, as an individual, before the problem of dealing with a charade; and I say as an individual in reference especially to my childhood understanding of the country I thought I lived in, and that even when I was abroad for so many years, I still held for a positive and essentially just guarantor of world stability.

And it is the shock of being forced to abandon that childhood vision and take responsibility for accepting the reality that I see and understand before me.

And when it is a duck because it walks and quacks like a duck, responsibility is not turning away to count chickens.

But this is what I find everybody essentially does around here.

So, what I got on my work table right now is a rubber duck, in miniature-but it’s a duck, this is clear.

And the day it comes to life as a 3 foot-high Mallard in all its shedding plumage and nastiness, I’ll just get Ducks Unlimited to come over and deal with it.

Because I don’t own a duck caller, myself.

And I won’t have any use for a shotgun at that point, either.

Quack-quack, mother*ucker!

(I am addressing the rubber ducky on my work table when I say this last line!)

Advertisements
Leave a Comment

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s