Usually, very little happens in America during the month of
August in a year that is not having a mid-term or presidential election. At
least, this is the commonly held view, which is why journalists of opposite
sides on the ideological spectrum accuse each other of running banal stories to
fill the space on this “slow summer day.” But as usual, there is some truth and
some falsehoods in the perception of that matter.
The corollary of this situation is that you don't need a
slow or fast-paced day in any season of any year to see banal opinion pieces
fill the space of little known as well as prestigious publications, be they in
the print or the audio-visual business. This is because the quality of opinion
pieces depends on the quality of the culture, and this does not change from
season to season or even year to year. Culture takes a long time to go from one
stage to another; and right now, it is going through a period of intellectual
drought in America.
You can see an example of this in the piece that was
produced by the editors of the Wall Street Journal under the title: “Putin's
Westward March” and the subtitle: “Revisionist powers are rising as Obama and
Europe fail to respond.” It was published in the Journal on April 19, 2014.
They begin the editorial in a manner that suggests they want
to impress the reader with the power and the high quality of their intellect.
This is how they do it: “Diplomacy is useful when it prevents bad outcomes.”
And so, they proceed to explain themselves, but end up demonstrating how
shallow, how lacking in energy and how contradictory they are. They do it to
themselves by pointing the finger at one person, Obama: “diplomacy as practiced
by President Obama...” then go on to name 4 groups of nations which, together,
are producing close to 100 percent the diplomatic drama that is occupying world
attention at this time: “this week's agreement among Ukraine, Russia, the EU
and the U.S.”
And this is not all because the opening paragraph goes on to
describe the agreement for which they express an unlimited amount of dislike by
placing the blame for its production on the man for whom they harbor an
unlimited level of contempt: their own President. And then, they make the fatal
mistake of revealing the hidden reality of their inner sentiments … not
realizing what they just did. It happens when they describe the agreement
which, in their view, claims to “prevent war but largely advances Vladimir
Putin's strategic objectives.”
What they mean to say is that if the choice comes down to
having a war on the one hand, or seeing Vladimir Putin succeed at advancing his
objectives on the other hand, they prefer to see a war that will involve the
U.S., Russia, the EU, Ukraine and whomever else will be dragged into what will
quickly become a war of the mushroom clouds; one that will make World War II
look like the festive celebration of a joyful era.
So you want to know what it is that lurks hidden deep inside
these people which makes them harbor horrific sentiments of this nature and
this intensity. To that end, you go through the article in a slow and
deliberate manner where you get the feeling that – sentence after sentence and
paragraph after paragraph – you're only hopscotching from one banal idea to
another banal idea. But when you come close to the end of the piece, you bump
into what seems like the telltale of what you're looking for.
And the following is what hits you in the face like a
baseball bat: “Obama's second term has been marked by the advance of powers
seeking to rewrite the global order. Iran is attempting to do this on nuclear
weapons, retaining a capability just short of exploding a weapon with a goal of
dominating the Middle East.” In other words, the editors of the Wall Street Journal
say they prefer to blow up the entire planet rather than see a situation – they
can only speculate about – come true.
But what is the basis of that imagined situation? It is the
so-called policy of ambiguity with regard to nuclear weapons that Israel is
said to pursue. If you go by the logic of the Journal's editors, it means that
Israel is now dominating the Middle East. But their fear of Iran supplanting
Israel in this regard is so intense, they prefer to burn the planet and
everyone in it rather than allow Iran to wrest that spot from Israel.
And there is only one way by which this nightmare can become
reality in their view. It is that they see what they claim even Putin sees
which is the following: “Mr. Putin sees Western leaders preoccupied with domestic
concerns with no appetite for a great power showdown ... Until that changes,
Mr. Putin will march on.”
Thus, having chosen to serve the people that elected them
rather than serve the interests of Israel is what stirs the volcanic acid
inside the belly of these charlatans. And this is what makes you ask the
question: Who are they, and what are they made of?