Activism Works

Geopolitix

I am a lifelong liberal and I will definitely vote for Kerry-Edwards. Bush is a lightweight and a phony, and Dick Cheney is a has-been. Their strategic failure in Iraq tells me they are too dumb to win the war on terror, which is a battle of the wits. Bush-Cheney like to pretend it's a battle of military power, but that's just wishful thinking. Obviously, American military power is lightyears beyond anything. But Al Queada, the Saudis and Iran think they can outplay America in the battle of the wits, in the intelligence war and in geopolitix. So far the miserable, meatheaded blundering by Bush-Cheney can only embolden Al Queada.

My friends think I'm crazy, but if Nixon were running for President today, I would vote for Nixon. The geopolitical mastery Nixon showed in whipping the Soviets and the Chinese is exactly what we need to win the war on terror, and exactly what is mssing in the Bush-Cheney fiasco administration.

While studying American history in college, I had a dream about Nixon. In my dream, I was watching a baseball game. Nixon was running the bases in a shirt and tie. He got caught trying to steal second base, and then I woke up. Why I would dream of Nixon trying to steal second base in a business suit? I realized that, in my dream architecture, I had substituted Nixon for myself. It was actually me trying to steal second base (I have no idea what second base symbolized). But why would I use Nixon as a symbol for myself in my dream architecture?

The answer reveals the key to Nixon's political success, despite his lack of style vis-a-vis the utterly cool Kennedys. Millions of Americans substituted Nixon for themselves in their subconscious dream architecture because Nixon, like so many of us, was uncool, socially awkward, the social underdog. Yet he married the woman of his dreams. He had loyal, loving children, and he rose to world supremacy. Nixon's public career was the political equivalent of the wheelchair Olympics.

Consider this: Nixon defeated the Soviet Union without ever firing a single shot (let alone a missle) at a Russian soldier. And Nixon, the most powerful man in the world, was removed from power without a single shot being fired (that we know of). That's the American way.

Great events determined through brains, structure, and process, with extreme violence as a strategic last resort. That used to be the American way. George Bush is the Anti-Nixon and the Anti-Kennedy as well. Bush-Cheney is the most non-American presidency in our history. They both belong in the old stupid Soviet bureaucracy, not running the United States in the 21st Century.

Like Bill Clinton, Nixon was precisely the kind of man James Madison envisioned as American president in the Federalist Papers. Fucked up, half-crazy, corrupt but brilliant. All the right ingredients for Madison's potluck mish-mosh of checks and balances that, all in all, hasn't worked that badly.

Nixon would make geopolitical mincemeat out of Al Queada, Saudi Arabia and Iran, leaving them isolated, submissive and without world influence. By contrast, Bush-Cheney's Iraq tragedy is more typical of the geopolitical absurdity of the stupid old Soviet Union that lead to their collapse within less than a human lifetime of the Bolshevik Revolution.

Bush-Cheney are a disgrace to the modern American legacy of foreign policy mastery. We need another Nixon.

In geopolitix, the closest thing we've got to Nixon today is Hillary Clinton. Hillary is 'Nixon without the issues', and she's a liberal Democrat to boot. She's smart as a fox, tough as a chrome bolt and she's essentially a single working mother. She's the one to kick Al Queda's ass.

posted by 10-K @ 1:45 PM (permalink)