HOME
DV NEWS
SERVICE ARCHIVE LETTERS SUBMISSIONS/CONTACT ABOUT DV
War,
Social Justice, Media and Democracy
by
Norman Solomon
Dissident
Voice
November 6, 2003
Prepared text of speech at the Brazilian
Social Forum,
November 8, 2003, Belo Horizonte, Brazil
I
am very glad to be here to participate in the Brazilian Social Forum.
For
me and the grassroots activists who I work with every day in the United States,
many events have caused us to feel discouraged during the last few years. But I
have often remembered words that I heard in early 2001 at the World Social
Forum in Porto Alegre. Speaking there, Eduardo Galeano mentioned a statement
that he saw written on a wall on a street in a South American city. The
statement said: “Let’s save pessimism for better times.”
To
people on this planet who are striving to overcome the destructive priorities
of neoliberalism, the transition that has occurred in Brazil this year offers
hope. We see in the present day that the struggles of millions of people, for
years and decades, can bring uplifting changes that once seemed very unlikely
or even impossible.
But
in the United States -- and for the people elsewhere in the world who have been
in the main line of fire of U.S. policies -- the times have gotten worse in
recent years.
I
live in California, a state where a bad actor can become governor. And I live
in a country where the presidents are bad actors.
In
Washington, the job description for presidents is to act like humanitarians
while functioning as world-class exploiters and thugs.
Ten
months ago, I visited Baghdad while accompanying Denis Halliday, the former
United Nations assistant secretary general who had been director of the UN’s
“oil for food” program in Iraq. I felt in January that I was at the scene of a
crime against humanity -- a crime that had not yet occurred, but that was being
proudly proclaimed on the agenda of the leaders of the U.S. and British
governments.
Before
the launching of cruise missiles and two-thousand pound bombs against Baghdad
and other heavily populated urban areas, before the “cluster munitions” that
would be scattered across cities and towns in Iraq, before the depleted uranium
shells that would be fired with the subsidies of U.S. taxpayers -- before the
all-out unleashing of the Pentagon’s lucrative firepower -- there were the
weapons of mass deception.
In
the cross-hairs of these weapons of mass deception were any people who could
perhaps be persuaded to be gullible. The propaganda armaments were endless
phony claims about seeking diplomatic solutions. The propaganda armaments were
speeches at the United Nations where President George W. Bush and Secretary of
State Colin Powell fervently presented false claims about Iraqi weapons of mass
destruction and links to Al Qaeda. But most of all, the arsenals of propaganda
— enabling the war on Iraq to proceed — were the news media.
And
in many ways, the most powerful technique of deception continues to be silence
about truth.
In
the United States, very few prominent journalists are willing to mention that
President Bush has the blood of many Iraqi children on his hands after
launching an aggressive war in violation of the U.N. Charter and the Nuremberg
principles established more than half a century ago.
Anti-democratic
news media are hostile to history. And so, the same propaganda machinery says
little about the suffering that results from the class war constantly waged by
the wealthy — and avoids telling much about the human consequences of
militarism.
The
writer Mark Twain once said that “None but the dead are permitted to speak
truth.” And often that seems literally to be the case.
In
the United States, certain vital statements by Twain — who’s often considered
to be the nation’s greatest writer — are excluded from corporatized media
culture.
* A hundred years ago, he wrote: “Who are the
oppressors? The few: the king, the capitalist and a handful of other overseers
and superintendents. Who are the oppressed? The many: the nations of the earth;
the valuable personages; the workers; they that make the bread that the
soft-handed and idle eat.”
* He wrote: “Why is it right that there is not
a fairer division of the spoil all around? Because laws and constitutions have
ordered otherwise. Then it follows that laws and constitutions should change
around and say there shall be a more nearly equal division.”
* And he wrote: “I am an anti-imperialist. I
am opposed to having the eagle put its talons on any other land.”
In
current times, for the government that is pleased to proclaim itself “the
world’s only superpower,” the media bias that prepares the path for war must
avoid certain inconvenient realities of history. One of those realities, for
the U.S. media, has been the profound verdict rendered 58 years ago at trials
in the German city of Nuremberg.
Despite
such deafening media silences this year, the fact remains that judgments at
Nuremberg and precepts of international law forbid launching an aggressive war
-- an apt description of what the U.S. government inflicted on Iraqi people in
the spring of 2003.
“We must make clear to the Germans that the
wrong for which their fallen leaders are on trial is not that they lost the
war, but that they started it,” said Supreme Court Justice Robert L. Jackson, a
U.S. representative to Nuremberg at the International Conference on Military
Trials at the close of World War II. He added that “no grievances or policies
will justify resort to aggressive war. It is utterly renounced and condemned as
an instrument of policy.”
When
a country -- particularly “a democracy” -- goes to war, the passive consent of
the governed lubricates the machinery of slaughter. Silence is a key form of
cooperation, but the war-making system does not insist on quietude or
agreement. Mere passivity or self-restraint will suffice to keep the missiles
flying, the bombs exploding and the faraway people dying.
We
now face an emboldened regime in Washington which sees military actions as
reliable solutions.
To
devote billions more dollars to weaponry while so many people are hungry and
dying from preventable diseases is a sin and a crime.
No
part of the world is spared the impacts. The excellent news agency Inter Press
Service reported in late September that “levels of U.S. military aid to Latin
America have more than tripled over the last five years.” The news agency
added: “At a time when the region’s economies are stagnating or even shrinking,
throwing millions more people into poverty, total U.S. military aid to Latin
America now almost equals the amount of money Washington is devoting to social
or economic development there.”
The
backing for the U.S. war on Iraq and the occupation of that country cannot be
understood apart from the economic imperial designs known as “neoliberalism”
and “globalization” — the eagerness to create optimum conditions for investment
and maximally profitable trade arrangements.
Today
— despite all that has been revealed and all the splits that have developed
among U.S. elites about the occupation of Iraq — the media supporters of it
include the New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman. We should consider what
the esteemed journalist Friedman had to say in his 1999 book titled “The Lexus
and the Olive Tree.” He wrote: “The hidden hand of the market will never work
without a hidden fist. McDonald’s cannot flourish without McDonnell Douglas,
the designer of the U.S. Air Force F-15. And the hidden fist that keeps the
world safe for Silicon Valley’s technologies to flourish is called the U.S.
Army, Air Force, Navy and Marine Corps.”
That
declaration was written in a spirit of enthusiastic approval. The visions of
hegemony — with their geopolitical, economic, cultural and media components —
are driven by the specter of a kind of “united corporate states of the world”
... a world in which the preeminent sovereignty belongs to the likes of
American Express and Citicorp and McDonalds and Burger King and Monsanto. And
Disney and CNN.
Seriously
distorted reporting tells us that the leaders in Washington are eager to
achieve peace. But this is true only in the context of subjugation.
The
U.S. government wants peace — on its own terms.
The
man with a boot on another person’s neck may speak loudly of desiring peace. So
does the Israeli government as it maintains a brutal and flagrantly illegal
occupation of Palestinian territory, now in its 37th year.
As
the Prussian general Karl von Clausewitz remarked two centuries ago: “A
conqueror is always a lover of peace.”
Last
weekend, the shooting down of a helicopter in Iraq resulted in the deaths of 16
members of the U.S. armed forces.
On
Monday [November 3] the organization that I’m part of, the Institute for Public
Accuracy based in the United States, released a statement from a California
resident, Fernando Suarez del Solar, whose son Jesus Alberto Suarez del Solar
Navarro died in Iraq on March 27, a week after the start of the war. The
bereaved father said: “These attacks are the tragic result of the illegal
occupation of Iraq by the U.S. military. Our young people are exposed to death
every day. They are wounded in faraway lands for the whims and lies of
President Bush.... The military does all kinds of things to recruit Hispanics,
Africa Americans and poor Anglos. How many children of congressmen or CEOs are
in Iraq?”
But
the U.S. news media cannot accept very much of such candor. The debates about
policies are tactical, not fundamental. Certain perspectives — prevalent in
elite circles and promoted by most government officials — are heard again and
again. Other outlooks, questioning not only the strategic wisdom but also the
moral basis of government policies, are heard only once in a while.
In
the mass media, the power to include and exclude is the power to shape and
manipulate public opinion. As dominant media corporations grow larger in size
and fewer in number, the major means of mass communication are engaged in a
“corporatization of consciousness.”
And
in times of war, there is often a parallel militarization of consciousness. In
a country with democratic forms of government, this is what makes possible the
manipulated consent of the governed for war based on lies.
Now,
the occupation of Iraq is imposing new economic models of privatization for the
benefit of U.S. corporate interests. This is neoliberalism at gunpoint.
Iraq
has an estimated 112 billion barrels of oil under the sand. The news media of
the United States like to pretend that the oil there has little or nothing to
do with the war and the occupation. But can anyone seriously believe that the
U.S. government would have 130,000 troops in Iraq today if that country did not
have a single drop of oil reserves?
Thirty-six
years ago, the civil rights leader Martin Luther King Jr. identified the U.S.
government as “the greatest purveyor of violence in the world today.” That
statement was accurate in 1967. And it is accurate in 2003.
So,
too, we are still living with the truth that Dr. King expressed as he said:
“When machines and computers, profit motives and property rights are considered
more important than people, the giant triplets of racism, militarism and
economic exploitation are incapable of being conquered.”
The
struggle over media and the flow of information -- whether in the United States
or Brazil or anywhere else -- is inseparable from the battle for democracy. It
is impossible for democratic participation to breathe freely while the heavy
weight of capital sits on the windpipe of open expression and wide-ranging
debate.
It
is necessary but it is not enough to ensure freedom of speech. All people must
also have the freedom to be heard. Otherwise, “free speech” can be -- and often
is -- the freedom to speak to the walls.
The
major news outlets are like walls with cracks. Every day the confining
structures of big media loom large.
Yet
we have countless opportunities to find, utilize and widen the cracks in the
corporate media’s barriers to democratic communication. Meanwhile, we need to
grow non-corporate media institutions capable of effectively promoting social
change.
Steadily
worsening concentrations of ownership and the hefty clout of advertising
combine to severely limit the range of information and debate in news media.
Ongoing pressures -- economic, ideological and governmental -- constrain the
work of mainline journalists, whose efforts routinely suffer from skewed
priorities and self-censorship.
Self-censorship
is a huge problem in our societies with freedom of the press. As George Orwell
observed: “Circus dogs jump when the trainer cracks his whip, but the really
well-trained dog is the one that turns his somersault when there is no whip.”
The
profit-driven ideology of the “free market” is in sync with the agendas of top
management and advertisers. The tilt against truly independent media and
wide-ranging discourse is extreme when corporations are the owners who hire the
managers who hire the journalists and producers.
While
no individual or single organization can take on more than a fraction of the
necessary endeavors, the overall work to create a democratic media environment
must run a wide gamut. Popular movements now face the imperative of struggling
for democratic media.
Sustained
efforts to challenge the corporate media and support independent media outlets
can reinforce each other with continuous synergy -- to establish, sustain and
expand progressive movements’ media organizations; to spread deft criticism of
rancid mass media; to push for better reporting and much wider debate in
mainstream media; to fight for structural reform of government agencies so that
the airwaves can be reclaimed by the public; to lambast, debunk and satirize
the insidious junk that so often passes for journalism and cultural uplift.
In
the long run, no campaign for basic media reform can succeed apart from broader
social-justice movements -- and vice versa. The degradation of journalism and
mass entertainment is entwined with pervasive corporate power that severely
damages virtually every facet of political and social life.
Media
criticism becomes profoundly useful in combination with media activism. Too
often we’ve held onto theories about what is and is not possible. But analysis
and action become much more powerful when they constantly inform each other --
when assessments shift due to on-the-ground experiences that benefit not only
from the results of trial and error but also from insightful up-to-date
analysis.
We’ve
discovered that it’s not nearly enough to put out a powerful expose or release
a cogent analysis in a few print outlets or on some web pages or on a few radio
stations -- or to briefly surface in a large national media venue. Such
achievements, while important, are insufficient. They need to draw strength
from each other -- while simultaneously finding ways to reach broader
audiences, including via mass media, where there are cracks in the corporate
walls.
Some
journalism students are taught the noble theory that journalists should
“afflict the comfortable and comfort the afflicted.” But under corporate
control, news media outlets are routinely engaged in comforting the already
comfortable and afflicting the already afflicted.
On
an ongoing basis, major news outlets participate in class warfare, from the top
down. And they often condemn those who engage in class warfare from the bottom
up.
In
many countries, the routine is for the mass media -- the daily newspapers, the
biggest magazines, the radio and TV networks, the cable stations -- to side
with those who “have” against those who “have not.”
In
the United States, every daily newspaper has a Business section. Not one has a
Labor section. Apparently the dominant media assumption is that wealth creates
all labor, instead of the other way around.
Popular
movements urgently need to boost the resources and improve the coordination of
their media work. It should be possible to attain the creative advantages of
sharp analysis, institutional growth, coordinated planning and agile
cooperation while encouraging a decentralized, democratic, grassroots approach
to social action.
Right
now the cracks in the media walls are much too thin and much too scarce. The
long haul of our struggle involves bringing down the institutional barriers
that, in effect, “soundproof” much of the media world and suppress the voices
of those without privilege.
Any
campaign for media democratization will encounter massive opposition from those
who own the big newspapers and large magazines and the radio and television
networks. And they’re determined to also dominate the Internet as much as
possible.
The
corporate media are committed not only to their exorbitant profits but also to
propagandizing the society to accept an economic order based on fundamental
injustice.
We
can have corporate domination of media or we can have genuine democracy -- but
we cannot have both.
Under
the ownership of enormous corporations, heavily influenced by the main sources
of advertising revenue, often functioning in tandem with state power -- the
major media outlets cast a massive shadow over our lives, wherever we live.
Every
day, when the voices of the rich and powerful dominate what is loudly broadcast
and widely publish, the media managers are doing what they’re paid to do.
But
it is possible to create democratic media. Possible -- and absolutely
necessary.
Norman
Solomon is Executive Director of the Institute for
Public Accuracy (www.accuracy.org) and a
syndicated columnist. His latest book is Target Iraq: What the News Media
Didn’t Tell You (Context Books, 2003) with Reese Erlich. For an excerpt and
other information, go to: www.contextbooks.com/new.html#target. Email: mediabeat@igc.org
* The Iraq
Trap: Watch Out What You Ask For
* The
Steady Theft of Our Time
* The
Politics of Media Filtration
* Brand
Loyalty and the Absence of Remorse
* Media
Tips for the Next Recall
* Unmasking
the Ugly “Anti-American”
* California's
Populist Revival
*
“Wesley
& Me”: A Real-Life Docudrama
* The
Get-Rich Con: Are Media Values Better Now?
* The
Political Capital of 9/11
* The
Quagmire of Denouncing a “Quagmire”
* The
Ten Commandments: Are They Fair and Balanced?
* Dean
Hopes and Green Dreams: The 2004 Presidential Race
* If
Famous Journalists Became Honest Rappers
* Schwarzenegger
Run May Trigger Tremors in GOP
* NEWS
FLASH: This is Not a "Silly Season"
* Too
Err is Human, To Truly Correct is Divine
* US Media
Are Too Soft on the White House
* Green
Party Taking the Plunge for 2004
* Media’s
War Boosters Unlikely to Voice Regret
* Summertime
. . . and the Politics of Money is Easy
* Tilting
Democrats in The Presidential Race