It has been suggested that I am one of those who subscribes to conspiracy theories. Actually, I believe more in complicity and consensus. All human endeavors requiring the work of more than one are conspiracies; it is simply a matter of determining criminality that makes the primary difference for most people. The difference is also found in premeditation; if the actions, as usually discovered to be, are the consequence of correcting or covering mistakes, then complicity is the more likely definition. We see complicity in all manner of everyday occurrences. Professional courtesy, codes of silence, not “rocking the boat” are all examples of complicity.
The lack of a meaningful American public school education in history, social studies, and civics (political science) is not caused by some grand conspiracy; it is caused by a relatively uniform desire to not offend parents of the majority demographic bloc. That majority bloc remains white, and has the greatest influence through greater representation in taxation and voting. Primary and secondary school textbooks are not written in a vacuum, they are crafted with excessive influence by organizations which are white, Christian, conservative, and rabidly pro-American. Only recently have these organizations lost their absolute stranglehold on textbook publishers. These organizations want their distorted views preserved, and textbook publishers want their books sold. Meanwhile, the best meaning of teachers are held captive to time, resources, and, sadly, politics. If a teacher expands beyond the text and curriculum, the teacher faces all sorts of possible consequences at the hands of the community and system. Without meaning or even necessarily wanting to do so, publishers and teachers alike are held captive to what has, for over half a century, been viewed as the “standard” view of American history wherein America is land of the free and home of the brave, ever struggling, however imperfectly, to attain a lofty goal of egalitarianism, justice, and liberty. This lack of American school children learning the truth in American history is not the result of conspiracy; it is the result of complicity in an environment of threatened sales and careers.
In politics, the case is not well made for many incidents being conspiratorial; the most common events resulting in an appearance of conspiracy are usually the consequence of honest or unthinking mistakes needing correction. The aftermath is stream of efforts to “fix” a problem created, most likely, by insufficient attention to detail. These efforts usually require a broader base of action than the original mistake, so it looks as if more people are involved. To the average citizen viewing such mistakes and their necessary corrective action, it looks as though the entire government was involved, when, in fact, the entire government only became active after the error. Of course, “mistakes” and “corrections” don’t begin to address the Bush Administration’s actions with regard to Iraq, the War on Terror, the EPA and global warming, the Department of Justice firing of US Attorneys, Valerie Plame being exposed, rise of fuel costs beginning immediately after the Bush “tax rebate”, unilateral no-bid contracting, and other scandals plaguing this administration and benefiting its benefactors. Regrettably, all of the preceding list can be termed conspiracy; there is simply no other appellation that fits. However, the mistake and correction explanation does work quite well for hurricane Katrina and the tragedy of error in its aftermath.
A good example of complicity rather than conspiracy in politics comes from the Clinton administration. Bill Clinton claimed during the campaign for his first term that he would impose economic sanctions on China for that country’s human rights abuses. After entering office, he was informed of the huge amount of trade conducted between the U.S. and China, which, at the time, happened to be one of the few places where the U.S. was not running a deficit on trade. Realizing that economic sanctions on China, stopping the flow of billions of dollars into the U.S., would be detrimental to the U.S. economy, the Clinton Administration chose instead to embark upon denouncement of Chinese human rights abuses while attempting to persuade the Chinese government to have greater care in that area. So, the Clinton administration, choosing to act upon the consensus view of what was best for the interests of the U.S., was complicit in allowing Chinese human rights abuses to go unchecked, even if protested.
In law enforcement, as well as medicine and big business, things are often more hazy due to the intrinsic codes of silence and professional courtesy and a “don’t rock the boat” mentality. Power corrupts, we know. Granting power to those who belong to a fraternity of arms, to which many in law enforcement believe they do, is even more risky. Groupthink allows members of a group to minimize their individual and collective errors. While there are too many who actively pursue criminal activity while engaged in the business of law enforcement, medicine, or business, these reprehensible individuals still represent a tiny minority of those in their respective fields. Unfortunately, in efforts to protect the overall image and standing of their honorable selves and fellows, not enough is done internally to prevent and punish abuses. As in any human activity, there are cases of innocent practitioners being vilified unnecessarily while the guilty go free. But then too, there are situations, such as in northern Arkansas, where whole communities of “professionals” have evolved defensive and offensive strategies to protect entrenched criminal activity under the guise of law enforcement. While looking after one’s own self-interest through seeking to protect one’s group is merely complicity should that result in the concealment of misdeeds, actively seeking to promote a culture wherein such misdeeds may deliberately go unpunished is conspiracy.
In all of this, I tread a middle ground wherein the benefit of the doubt may accrue over isolated or minor incidents. Frequent and outrageous abuses must usually be seen as conspiratorial in nature. The defining questions could, perhaps, be put in these following ways. If the question after the fact appears to be, “How do we clean this up?” then the course is simple complicity. But, if the apparent question, before the fact, is, “How do we get away with this?” then it seems obvious that conspiracy is the case. If a group, going into an endeavor- such as the War in Iraq- is demonstrated to have utilized deceit to gain acceptance, then the case for criminal conspiracy is made.
No comments:
Post a Comment