Can we do anything about gun violence in the U.S.?

Seems like we have to reset this one every few weeks and that's not normal or OK.

Seems like we have to reset this one every few weeks and that’s not normal or OK.

Once again, Americans are reeling at the sight of another mass shooting. In what’s become all-too-commonplace, we react with horror, sorrow, anger, and discussion, but at the end of the day, we all know this will happen again. President Obama said as much during his remarks addressing the shooting in Oregon, and regardless of your politics, every American probably agrees with Obama when he said it’s likely he’ll have to address another mass shooting before his term is over. However, in our efforts to end the horrific violence caused by guns, we address a few key issues: the ease in which potential shooters access guns, how we handle mental illness in the United States, and whether any reasonable limitations on gun ownership are appropriate if it means preventing another mass shooting like we’ve seen across the country, year after year.

The following piece attempts to address a few key issues. First, we must try to find a way to prevent mass shootings from ripping apart communities across the country and if reasonable gun legislation is off the table (despite overwhelming support in most parts of the country), we need another solution. We simply cannot accept mass shootings as normal, or something that cannot be prevented because the Second Amendment prohibits the adoption of any legislation preventing some individuals from accessing firearms. The piece takes a look at perhaps a key psychological reason why it’s so challenging to pass reasonable legislation aimed at ending the scourge of gun violence affecting Americans every single day. Additionally, we must consider our rhetoric towards guns–especially the paranoid notion that someone is coming for them–which may–or may not–be contributing to gun-related violence in the United States.

What’s laid out here isn’t a series of concrete solutions to gun violence, but perhaps it will provide us with an outlet for deeper discussion–on both sides of the aisle–on what can be done to make sure we can end the evils of gun violence and mass shootings in the United States.

Continue reading

Advertisements

Overcoming Through Forgiveness?

We shall overcome.
We shall overcome.
We shall overcome some day.

 

I always loved that song as a child. I believed it, too. My family is what my son calls a “patchwork quilt”…a little of everything. Growing up, I surrounded myself with all kinds of people, because people are people to me. We all bleed red, right? The idea people were people informed my entire young life. Aging came with knowledge and awareness that my child’s brain could not process. I’ve learned, through experience, that color blindness is a slogan. It’s also a weakness.

The recent events in a South Carolina church are possibly a result of that weakness.

For those unfamiliar with me, I am a fellow traveler through life who happened to be born with ovaries and not quite white skin. By not quite white, I mean dark -VERY dark- skin. I am a black woman. Yes, black! No hyphenated American here. Move along. Those travelling alongside me are as diverse and colorful as a rainbow. There is one who holds my hand, nudges me forward, and even carries me some days. He is a wonderful man who happened to be born with not quite dark skin. Not quite meaning as white as a cloud, but he’s MY cloud, and I love the caring person that he is underneath the not quite dark skin. With him, I share four of Heaven’s sweetest angels. Speaking of Heaven and angels, yes, I believe in a High Power.

And that brings me to my question. Every headline I’ve read lately has zeroed in on the fact that the families of the victims have forgiven the terrorist who killed their loved ones. Yes, I said terrorist! If you don’t recognize racism as an ideology rife with terroristic tendencies and methods, read a book. But back to my question. Is immediate forgiveness the answer?

On one hand, I applaud -admire even- these families. They have experienced a tragedy the likes of which I can not fathom. Forgiving the terrorist may be a crucial part of their grieving process, and I pray comfort and peace over them, however that’s accomplished. As a fellow believer, I know that love, compassion, and forgiveness are expected. Likewise, I know that truth and justice are required in any truly free and equal society.

On the other hand, I wonder if it is healthy for us, as a nation, to focus on the forgiveness of a killer without much care for the conditions that lead to such forgiveness-needing acts?

I don’t think it is. As it is, in order to be heard, black Americans must react in a certain (submissive?) way to events involving race. We must make the disclaimer that we know all white people aren’t racist. We must exude grace through our pain. We must speak softly. We must condemn ‘black on black’ crime in Chicago and openly plea for less fatherless homes. We must criticize Al Sharpton. We must march, sing, and quote Dr. Martin Luther King. We must do any and everything except…

BE ANGRY. Even after this most horrible and OBVIOUS racially motivated hate crime, we must not show anger. We should forgive immediately? A hate-filled terrorist slaughtered people who welcomed him with open arms, literally responding to an olive branch with a gun, and shows no remorse should be immediately forgiven? He asked not for forgiveness, but for a living witness to what he hoped would be the beginning of a race war…and this is the conversation we’re having? This is after the conversation about motivation, because saying “I’m here to shoot black people” has SO many meanings.

My faith is strong, but I’m not at Forgiveness Avenue yet. I am angry. I am sorrowful. I am angry. I am filled with worry over the state of the nation my children have to live in. I am weary of our cowardice in regards to repairing race relations. Did I mention how mad I am? I wanted to look around and see that others were as disgusted as I was. That everyone was as disgusted as I was.

I’m comforted that I saw some of that. Thank God for good people! I saw other things, too. I saw that far too many of us would rather keep sweeping shit into a corner and spraying Febreeze than to go on and deal with the busted sewage pipe. I saw that far too many of us still don’t recognize the power of language (thug vs mentally ill) and symbols (heritage vs symbol of oppression). Thank you, South Carolina for recognizing that some divisions are bigger than a flag. I saw that in 2015, far too many of my fellow Americans ignore the reality hundreds of years worth of bigotry created, and expect me to forgive in order to overcome.

Someday.

 

 

The Covert Action Virus

Twenty or so years ago, I had a conversation with a soil scientist of my acquaintance, who had recently returned from an extended trip through Central America. He had been teaching alternative farming techniques to peasant farmers being squeezed into less and less available land, as part of a private aid group. It sounded to me like an ideal gig for the Peace Corps, so I was surprised when he answered: “Uh-uh. No way. If you’re in Central America with the Peace Corps, everyone just assumes you’re CIA. Nobody will talk to you, and you can’t get anything done.”
I was taken aback, given that, as the Peace Corps itself says:

Persons who have been employed by an intelligence agency, or otherwise have been associated with intelligence activities, are ineligible to serve as volunteers. This exclusionary policy is one aspect of the broader, long-standing policy of maintaining an absolute separation between Peace Corps and intelligence activities conducted by the U.S. government. This absolute separation is necessary to protect volunteers’ safety and to maintain the trust and confidence of the people in the countries in which volunteers serve.

The inverse, however, is also true. Because of this exclusionary policy, the Peace Corps would in fact make an excellent cover for an agent. This goes to the very nature of the deception that is the core of what intelligence agents do: it does not matter what lie is believed, as long as a lie is believed. As long as the target believes something that is not true, he/she can be manipulated. Which means that everything is a potential cover story, a legend, and a potential target for infiltration and exploitation. Every bureau, every commercial outlet, every information source is a potential target. Every cell of the body politic is susceptible to this, either proactively or by being compromised; a virus of deceit, secrecy, and covert action.

The problems with this are obvious, and became apparent to me again this morning, when I opened Firedoglake and saw USAID Fake HIV Center in Cuba Undermines Global Health Efforts. I followed the links; the gist, as reported by the AP, is that “Over at least two years, the U.S. Agency for International Development — best known for overseeing billions of dollars in U.S. humanitarian aid — sent nearly a dozen neophytes from Venezuela, Costa Rica and Peru to gin up opposition in Cuba.” These untrained agents, supplied with encrypted flash drives, and codes for communications, “posed as tourists, visited college campuses, and used…[a]n HIV-prevention workshop one called “the perfect excuse” to recruit political activists.” Perhaps not surprisingly, the operation was set up by the same contractor that dreamed up the failed “Cuban Twitter” project.

This program is being defended by the Obama Administration: according to State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki, the program “enabled support for Cuban civil society, while providing a secondary benefit of addressing the desires Cubans express for information and training about HIV prevention.” Note the moment of honesty: the secondary benefit of the HIV awareness program was HIV awareness. The first was covert action.

This type of covert action is not rare, as Peter at FDL goes on to elaborate; nor is it just medical aid being used as cover. The fake NGO that was used to decapitate a FARC unit in Columbia is missing, but he includes the fake hepatitis vaccine program in Pakistan that helped identify Usama bin Laden-since then, the Pakistani Taliban has outlawed polio vaccination and killed 60 vaccination workers, allowing polio to make a robust comeback. Another one Peter could have pointed to was the role of the NED-the National Endowment for Democracy-in Ukraine, where it has spent tens of millions of dollars on a wide variety of programs. As  One of the founders of the NED-“whose purpose is to support foreign organizations sympathetic to US foreign policy goals” explained it in 1991“A lot of what we do was done 25 years ago covertly by the CIA.” And so it is: whether it be Nicaragua, Bulgaria, Ukraine, Albania, Iran, Cuba, Mongolia, or Venezuela, the NED is there. No wonder Putin was pissed about US operations in Ukraine. Every dollar spent there was intended to lessen Russian influence. Every single aspect of the “civil society” NED is supporting there can be considered a covert operation targeted on Russian interests.

And that’s the real issue-the meta-issue. The effect of using everything as a cover for covert operations is the certain destruction of the ability of people to have faith in institutions that, in a democracy, require faith to operate (rampant conspiracy theory-the guaranteed response to pervasive secrecy-has the same effect). You can have democracy-or you can have deceit and covert action. You can have citizen participation-or you can have counterintelligence programs designed to “expose disrupt, misdirect, discredit, or otherwise neutralize…” You can have journalism-or you can have Operation MOCKINGBIRD, in which the CIA compromised dozens of journalists and fed them CIA propaganda. You can have community policing-or you can have Phoenix Program-style counterinsurgency as law enforcement, in which pervasive surveillance, secret and unconstitutional police methods, and Special Operations teams combine to “neutralize threats.” Radley Balko reports an average of fifty thousand SWAT raids annually in the US…we have come a hell of a long way from “to serve and protect.”

And that’s the point-when everything is a covert action bureau, or cover, that is all it is. It cannot be an institution that operates by deceit and covert violence, AND be a democratically-controlled institution responsive to citizens’ needs. You can have democracy, and freedom, and all the messy processes that democratic institutions require to operate; or you can have the expediency, secrecy, deception, and violence of government-by-secret-police-agency. When your service providers collect and sell your information; when your cell phone is tracked by retailers in the mall; when your movements are tracked via car tracking, facial recognition programs, and ubiquitous cameras; and when your police subvert oversight by deceiving responsible authority, your institutions have become spy agencies, whose tools are secrecy and deception: anathema to self-government in a free society. A paradigm of covert action, or a representative democracy. You cannot have both.

You cannot have both, and there will be no progress until this question is answered, definitively. Subverting change in defense of the status quo, after all, is what intelligence agencies do. Our government is infected with a virus, that has seemingly moved into every cell; healing America will require, first, a robust immune response from a citizenry that will not be able to suspend the necessary weight of disbelief much longer, and second, an intense vaccination course to keep the patient from  relapsing.

 

A Most Dysfunctional House

So we are experiencing a government shut down.

The last time we had one, I was an adolescent and news via internet, blogs, and the like weren’t popular. (Cue the sound of your modem . . . )

I actually had health insurance 17 years ago, and I was (unfortunately) using it.  (I say “unfortunately” because being sick and in the hospital = not fun).  So yes–I spent one shut-down (1995) in the hospital. I would ask my parents and nurses about the effects, but I gathered from my sources it wasn’t really hurting anyone too much. I still really don’t know, but I gather I was being spoon-fed some information so I could focus on recovering—?

Now, I’m not yet insured (not my choice). I have two children.

And I know what it’s like to be poor.

The shutdown hurts the poor.
It hurts children.
It hurts the barely-existing middle-class.

. . . and more . . .

My friend and fellow blogger found this gem:

“We’re not going to be disrespected, We have to get something out of this. And I don’t know what that even is.”

— Rep. Marlin Stutzman (R-IN)

I know. Sigh. Deep breaths.

WTF!?!?!

Let’s review:

  1. The Executive Branch approves the ACA/Obamacare, which was drafted by the Heritage Foundation.
  2. The Judicial Branch of the government, the Supreme Court, has ruled that the ACA/Obamacare is Constitutional.
  3. HALF of the Legislative Branch has approved the ACA/Obamacare. Sure, some of the members of the Senate may not like it, but they realize that it is, in fact, law.

Could this be the most dysfunctional House in a century? It certainly seems to be in my three decade lifespan.

Olympic National Park, May 2005. (Photo by me)

The National Parks are gated shut. You can look at the nice photograph, but don’t expect to be able to see anything like it in person right now.

Headstart funding is killed.  Meals-on-Wheels and WIC are slaughtered.  Crucial scientific research on all sorts of things–including pediatric cancer–has ceased because the NIH is gone.

And there’s more we’re not investing in because Rep. Stutzman, Rep. Yoho and others have a point to prove.

I’m sure they’ll figure out what their point in a few weeks.  I’m also sure people directly impacted by this tantrum-led shutdown won’t care, won’t get their medication, their food, their education, etc. These aren’t things you just “make up for” with more later.

So while we wait for the House majority to figure out what the hell their point is, we’re hurting our most vulnerable citizens first.

Investing in the future of this country is clearly not a priority.

Be sure to thank your Representative if they did their best to prevent this.

If you’re in a situation like me, then make your voice heard and call/email your Representative of this sad, dysfunctional House.

I posted the what follows earlier this week. Sadly, it bears re-posting:

(transcript below video):


[clip begins partway through former Vice-President Al Gore’s speech at the Brookings Institution this morning] …I will have more to say about this [climate change report] on many other occasions, but, because this report was released just hours before we gathered here, I would not have felt right about not addressing it.

Now, I’m gonna talk about the potential for a shutdown in just a moment, but, uh, I think the only phrase that describes it is political terrorism. “Nice global economy you got there. Be a shame if we had to destroy it. We have a list of demands. If you don’t meet ’em all by our deadline, we’ll blow up the global economy.”

[pause] Really? Um. Where are the American people in this? Why does partisanship have anything to do with such a despicable and dishonorable threat to the integrity of the United States of America?

Political Terrorism

The House of Representatives isn’t terribly fond of the ACA/Obamacare.  They have voted 42 times to repeal it. Many of the most outspoken members of the House regarding the health care law happily identify as Tea Party members/supporters, even when Tea Party support is at an all-time low.

Now, some members of the House are actively committing what Al Gore labeled best: political terrorism.  (More on this below.)

I live in an incredibly liberal college-town. The county I call home is always a blue dot in the red seas when looking at electoral maps. Over the past years, gerrymandering and dividing the blue to ensure far more red has created, shall we say—interesting–districts for House, on a State and Federal level.

Consequently, someone who proudly identifies with the Tea Party is my representative.

Surely you’ve heard of him. His name is Ted Yoho. Prior to this, he was a veterinarian and I have heard wonderful things about his veterinarian skills.

Sadly, those skills haven’t carried over to governing.  Representative Yoho believes, among other things, that the ACA’s implementation of a tax on tanning at a tanning salon is racist against white people.

This is my Representative.

It seems Rep. Yoho, with his fatuous remarks on tanning, was just warming up. It was all foreshadowing to what’s happening now in Washington DC.

Let me just pause here and note that I have never been a fan of the ACA, which is a modified draft of a conservative solution to the fact Americans really do pay too much for their a la carte medical care. (Single-payer would be best but that’s a different blog post to come.)

The Senate has provided the funds to get the ACA going. The Supreme Court upheld (most) of the ACA as Constitutional. The President is pushing for it.

The judicial branch supports it. The executive branch supports it. Half the legislative branch supports it, but the other half–?

C’mon, this is America, we’ll risk our credit rating among other things to prove a point, dammit!

“So what if others suffer? I got mine.”

Yesterday, I visited Rep. Yoho’s facebook page. He has made some rather bold claims on the page, including:

Capture
Too bad the job claim is patently false in his district, as numerous people in the thread have noted. It also seems fiscally irresponsible and IS unconstitutional (14th Amendment) to not raise the debt ceiling to pay for debts already incurred.

I’m a citizen and I know this.

Yoho is my district’s representative and either:
1. Knows this (it’s fiscally irresponsible/violates the Constitution)  and doesn’t care
2. Doesn’t know it, and that’s terrifying too.

Later yesterday, *my* representative in the House of Representatives proudly boasted about a solution while strategizing to keep the blame off of himself and his fellow House members for a possible impending government shutdown:

Look, it's not *my* fault . . .

Look, it’s not *my* fault . . .

I am a person who can’t obtain affordable health insurance because of pre-existing conditions. The ACA has caused insurance estimates for me to drop from over $600 a month (with riders to not have to cover what care I need most),  to below $200 a month. And the ACA hasn’t even been implemented yet!

I have been forced to feel miserable and suffer because I can’t afford over $500 for one medicine that I would only take for about 2 weeks.  Instead, I’m spacing one medication out (every other day instead of every day because it’s between $200-$300 a month) and hoping that works well enough until the exchange opens and I can sign up.

I’m annoyed, to put it mildly, so I leave you with Mr. Gore’s spot-on words concerning this (transcript below video):


[clip begins partway through former Vice-President Al Gore’s speech at the Brookings Institution this morning] …I will have more to say about this [climate change report] on many other occasions, but, because this report was released just hours before we gathered here, I would not have felt right about not addressing it.

Now, I’m gonna talk about the potential for a shutdown in just a moment, but, uh, I think the only phrase that describes it is political terrorism. “Nice global economy you got there. Be a shame if we had to destroy it. We have a list of demands. If you don’t meet ’em all by our deadline, we’ll blow up the global economy.”

[pause] Really? Um. Where are the American people in this? Why does partisanship have anything to do with such a despicable and dishonorable threat to the integrity of the United States of America?

Preach it, Gore.
Stop the terrorists in the House.

(And please, feel free to let Rep. Yoho know how you feel.)

State Terror in the Twentieth Century, IV: Beyond the Century of Terror

This is the fourth and last in a series. Earlier installments are The Century of Terror, Internal Security, and Foreign Policy. A companion video can be found here.

Over the course of this series, we have looked at the practice of state terror in the twentieth century from several different vantage points. I have tried to make the point, that from the outset, mass state terror is a defining characteristic of twentieth century political evolution. In internal security matters, states such as Nazi Germany, Stalin’s Russia, and Pinochet’s Chile embodied internal terror structurally, publicly, and deliberately, on a massive scale, while the Western democracies adopted a less-intense, and covert form, a paradigm necessary if they were to maintain their public’s faith in their own national identities and Enlightenment foundations. This is a fundamental point, especially for the United States: the adoption of the methods of covert warfare requires the democratic government to lie to its citizens, and subverts the basic ideals upon which democracy-whether parliamentary, republican, or whatever-depends.

There is certainly an irreducibly complex set of causes for this: the death of reason amidst the mindless carnage of the First World War, the technological perfection of the means of mass terror in the Second, the importation of  colonial counterinsurgency tactics and strategy into the domestic spheres of the Western democracies, the collapse of the Empires, the embrace of a ruthless “no rules” ethic, and most importantly, the fear. Fear of communism, of Stalin, of Hitler, of the nukes, but mostly a strange, formless, all pervasive, low-grade fever of worry about a future shrouded in doubt and uncertainty. This fear was both the reason for and the result of terror: a feedback loop, in which a general terror of the unknown became a the rationale for specific terror to counter that which cannot be defined; the integration of state terror as internal security policy in the US that began with the Palmer raids and the organized campaigns against labor and social movements was professionalized by the foundation of the FBI, the House Un-American Activities Committee, and the OSS; the passage of the National Security Act in 1947 provided the framework of secrecy that would enable this combination of secrecy and lawlessness to grow slowly over time, like all evolutionary processes do, until something new suddenly shifts the paradigm. The punctuated-equilibrium model of the evolution of state terror.
In the US, this punctuation-this shift- was COINTELPROthe nationwide “Counter-intelligence Program” by the FBI to infiltrate, disrupt, and destroy progressive organizations and movements across a wide spectrum, including civil, women’s, and gay rights organizations, anti-nuclear weapons groups, anti-war and a whole spectrum of other New Left organizations. The tools-the infiltrator, the informer, the agent provocateur, break-ins, false charges, set-ups, fake documents, “snitch jackets,” legal harassment, intimidation,and killings that resulted bear no resemblance to law enforcement, but a lot of similarity to the way an intelligence agency attacks a hostile enemy agency. This is fundamental: the enemy to be destroyed were citizens of the US, mostly just trying to exercise their rights. Believing that the government would play by its own rules was only their first mistake.

What Cointelpro really represents is the institutionalization of terror in the US; by the time of  its revelation and shut down in 1971, it didn’t really matter anymore. The means and methods of counterintelligence, including, first and foremost, deceit, became standard in police departments across the country, and the FBI maintained a national coordinating capability in any event, as seen in the subsequent destruction of the American Indian Movement (AIM), the infiltration of the anti-nuclear power movement, and the covert infiltration of anti-US Latin American policy groups like CISPES well into the Eighties.

Draconian anti-drug laws and the establishment of a parallel secret police agency, the Drug Enforcement Agency in 1973, added a whole new dimension to the US covert-terror infrastructure, and further brought the tools of counterinsurgency, the agent network and the strike team, into the domestic sphere. The incredible proliferation of paramilitary forces called SWAT teams, by several orders of magnitude, has created tens of thousands of available  troops for these covert forces. The NKVD in 1937 could hit a million homes in a night. How much more capable is the US now than the Soviet Union was then?

Much like the NKVD, it is important to note the erosion of anything like compartmentalization between the various local,State, and national intelligence agencies in the US; this means that there is no real separation, that they are all, really, in effect, one force. Local law enforcement SWAT and antidrug forces cross train with counter-terror and federal authorities with great regularity. Another good example of this is the reciprocal relationship between the NYPD and the CIA, in which the CIA maintains an office inside the NYPD despite  legal prohibitions against CIA operations inside the US-they have to say that, because, like everything else, it is a cover story. The further metastasis of this condition that occurred with the establishment of the Department of Homeland Security, the Total Information Awareness program (the brainchild of Iran-Contra conspirator John Poindexter), the DoD’s CIFA program, the NSA’s multiple warrantless wiretapping programs, and the privatization of intelligence agencies into private enterprises with a vested interest in war and terror.

I have largely avoided mention of Russia this week, for a very simple reason: state terror in Russia is an enduring feature of the culture, and has been for several centuries. The relatively normal secret police operations against the Left by the Okhrana both foreshadowed later US efforts against its own leftists, and also trained the Bolshevks in secret police methods. Lenin’s Cheka added revolutionary Communist fervor to the Tsar’s tradecraft and created the first real, modern secret police agency, whose structure and operations would be copied by like-minded authoritarians around the world. The point is, that for Russia, state terror has been a constant, ubiquitous feature, whether it be the Cheka or the NKVD or the KGB or the SVR or the FSB (in an echo of US structure, after the fall of the USSR, the Russian government, rather than abolish the KGB, divided it into the SVR, the successor agency to the First Chief Directorate (Foreign Intelligence) of the KGB, and the FSB, the internal security service). In the years since, the Russian government has ran a relentless campaign of terror against Chechen separatists, domestic whistleblowers, dissidents, and uncooperative leaders, assassinating people at a rate not seen since the 1950s. The tragedy is, of course, that this is nothing unusual in Russia.

It is, however, something unusual in the United States, at least in the United States of the Constitution, of laws, of citizen self-government–or at least it should be. However, covert operations-state terror-is now a permanent feature of US government. It has been, as we’ve seen in previous weeks, for a long time; only now, decades too late, is it becoming so apparent that even the apathetic public finally notices. The reforms that followed the Church Committee were largely an illusion, as seen by US action in El Salvador, Nicaragua, and against critics of policies in both. The surveillance laws of the 1990s, CALEA, the Antiterrorism Act of 1996, and the subsequent creation of the CARNIVORE and ECHELON monitoring programs created the foundation for the drastic upscale of the surveillance after 9/11. The USA PATRIOT Act, the subsequent reauthorizations and extensions, and PRISM just extend it further, protestations of restraint notwithstanding: as has been revealed just lately, their public statements cannot be believed.

And now? The continued coordinating ability of the FBI was again visible during the destruction of Occupy Wall Street. A remarkably peaceful, populist movement that was mostly just demanding that Federal financial regulators do their jobs was destroyed by a national program of infiltration, subversion, and police violence. In other words, the covert action authority worked exactly as it was supposed to. What is happening  under the current Administration is not so much the creation of a covert terror apparatus as cracking of the shell of deniability around it, and the same industrial process that occurred in US industry 30 years ago: the replacement of humans with robots,as the armed, remote-piloted drone has become the most capable assassination weapon ever, and the symbol of technological state terror raised to a whole new level… Here it is, in all its foul glory: The National Covert Security State, where there is no problem that cannot be solved by the appropriate covert action, where there is no problem, foreign or domestic, that cannot be addressed through an appropriate dose of state terror. A few liters in some cases, gallons in others.

This is the world, the covert political world of the 21st Century. We are beyond the Century of Terror now; what made mass state terror so noteworthy in the 20th century was its alien nature, the way it obviously violated every principle of government or law, and was yet enthusiastically adopted across the ideological spectrum, for its sheer, brutal utility. It was a conflict between the constraints of an Enlightenment-inspired democracy and the efficacy of force; and in the end, the normalization of terror in the 21st century represents the triumph of force over reason, of fear over hope, of reaction over progress, and of exploitation over cooperation. The conflict was settled, when the last chance to roll back the NCSS passed in the 1990s. This is the 21st Century; state terror is the new normal, worldwide. Future cultural historians will have to look for some other distinguishing feature to differentiate it from its fellows.

State Terror in the Twentieth Century, II: Internal Security

(This is the second in a series on the history of state terror in the 20th century. Part 1 is here.)

Among the most pressing concerns of states is security, both from internal subversion and external attack. Terror in the name of internal security is the classical definition of the term “state terror,” before the prevalence of state-sponsored terror as foreign policy and the collapse of plausible deniability in the latter-twentieth century forced an expansion of the term. The list of 20th century leaders who embraced terror is long: Hitler. Stalin. Mao. Pinochet. Mobutu. Mengistu. Pol Pot. Hussein. Ceaucescu. Rhee. Diem. Suharto. Marcos. Khrushchev. Ulbricht. Brezhnev.Castro. Somoza. Karimov. The Duvaliers. The Assads. The Kims. And this list is by no means complete. It is this ubiquity and geographic totality that make “the century of terror” such a fitting moniker for the 20th century, because during the 20th century the practice of state terror as internal security was normalized as standard practice on every continent, among every type of government. The same features emerge over and over again: secret police, controlled mass propaganda, mass incarceration, show trials, official corruption, gross inequality, and frequent capital punishment.

This can be a difficult thing for Westerners, particularly Americans who’ve been force-fed a steady diet of propaganda for generations, to accept. It is, nonetheless, true. Even Americans who will accept the limited use of terror overseas by the US, in places like El Salvador and Nicaragua, and justify it as necessary in fighting guerillas who themselves used terror, can have  trouble with the notion. Although the tempo and intensity of the terror campaigns in the US never approached those of Germany or especially the Soviet Union, these campaigns were nonetheless continuous, bipartisan-and effective. A basic difference between the US and the USSR was the way the elements of a state terror apparatus were superimposed upon a liberalizing US in the early twentieth century, in contrast to the way Lenin and the Bolsheviks embraced terror from the outset of the founding of the Soviet Union, and included terror in both their governing philosophy and their administrative structures, such as police.

This brings us to the first of the elements common to states that practice internal terror: secret police, often backed by paramilitaries or regular forces. In the Soviet Union, the Lenin-era Cheka, trained by the Tsar’s brutal secret police, the Okhrana, was reorganized first as the OGPU, and then, under Lenin’s successor, Josef Stalin, as the NKVD. The NKVD, like secret police everywhere, were the principal agents of  Soviet terror, both domestic and foreign, at once uniting the secret police and foreign intelligence. This structure, domestic intelligence/secret police, foreign intelligence/covert forces, under one roof, would be copied many times over. Leaving aside the NKVD’s considerable success in foreign intelligence, it was the NKVD that carried out some of the deadliest of all Soviet policies designed to terrorize the Soviet people into passive acquiescence, the ultimate point of every exercise of internal state terror. Probably the best examples of this is seen in its role in enforcing the policies that ensured and aggravated the Ukrainian famine of 1932-33, the Holodomor, in which approximately 5.5 million Ukrainians, Moldavians, Russians, and Kazakhs starved to death, and its role as Stalin’s executioner during the Great Terror of 1936-38, in which at least another three-quarters of a million were shot and yet another million imprisoned.

In the US, the secret police are constructed of a mixture of federal and state agencies. Heading this list is the FBI; popularly perceived as an investigative agency, the FBI grew out of the Palmer Raids, the federal dragnets which swept up and deported thousands of leftists, immigrants, trade unionists, and other reformers, during the post WW1 Red Scare. The FBI also spent a great deal of time breaking into foreign embassies, stealing codes and ciphers, and compiling dossiers on Americans, especially useful if a President wished to blackmail an uncooperative Congressman with his knowledge of said Congressman’s corruption. This corruption was easy to find, since the leaders of terror states often tolerate pervasive corruption; corrupt officials are more easily controlled, and their loyalty assured, by blackmail. This fear of blackmail is largely responsible for FBI Chief J. Edgar Hoover’s longevity in the position, as no President was willing to risk his wrath by replacing him. After hunting down supposed Communists and anarchists during the interwar years, and Nazis during the war, the FBI emerged from the war years into a newly-reinvigorated Red Scare, with its invulnerable director, courtesy of Senator Joseph McCarthy. Seeing Communist subversion everywhere, Hoover’s FBI launched one of the most extensive exercises of state terror ever seen in the US: COINTELPRO.

COINTELPRO, Hoover’s COunter-INTELligence-PROgram, was a vast program designed to use the tools of counterintelligence against Americans that were deemed a threat. Break-ins, blackmail, and infiltration of suspected groups were common; informers, criminals, and agents provocateurs were deployed across the country. This program targeted civil rights groups, women’s rights groups, black nationalists, peace groups, antinuclear activists, and others. The Black Panthers were a priority target of COINTELPRO, as were the Students for a Democratic Society and the Vietnam Veterans Against the War. COINTELPRO was only revealed in 1971, after revelatory documents, ironically, were stolen from the FBI. The true legacy of COINTELPRO may be its normalization; while the flagrantly-illegal program was ostensibly shut down after its exposure, in fact many of its assumptions, techniques, and targets were adopted at all levels by police agencies, and became standard throughout the US. This process was augmented by the intelligence community’s experience with using computerized blacklists compiled by agents and informers to covertly target civilians in Vietnam, the PHOENIX program.

The normalization of COINTELPRO/PHOENIX is easy to see, if one looks closely. Even as the Church Committee investigation of US intelligence activities was ongoing, agents were infiltrating the antinuclear power movement and the disarmament movement, and  conducting surveillance of outspoken critics, using the same tactics, including provocations, entrapment, and false arrests. These same methods were then, in the Eighties, turned on anti-apartheid activists, nuclear-freeze activists, and especially outspoken critics of US activities in Nicaragua and El Salvador, where terrorist armies and death squads killed tens of thousands. The model is now standard-human intelligence from agent and informer networks, cross-referenced with surveillance data, is used to compile blacklists. In Vietnam, these targets would then be targeted for capture or assassination by a special ops team; in civilian parlance in the US, these are known as SWAT teams, and they perform largely the same function.

Another structure common to terror states is a robust propaganda apparatus. The use of propaganda by states against their own populations flows organically from this, whether as a founding principle (as in the USSR), or through the importation of covert warfighting and counterintelligence doctrine into domestic policy (as seen in the US). The relationship between propaganda and internal terror is complex, and determined by the character of the state: in the USSR, in which terror is structural and fundamental, news of state terror, such as arrests, deportations, Gulag sentences, and executions was disseminated as widely as possible, and sometimes in great detail, as were their “crimes,” consistent with its intent to induce terrified acquiescence of the public. In contrast, in the US, the principal goal of the propaganda effort that supported the secret police was to convince the public that the secret police did not exist, all evidence to the contrary notwithstanding. Terror also represents a failure of propaganda, as a population properly conditioned by effective propaganda will act correctly without having to be terrorized into it. Propaganda and terror, the justification and the threat, the tools of terror states across the world.

Another element common to terror states is a system of mass incarceration, the most infamous being the Soviet Gulag, although all have some variation on the theme. The Gulag was a vast system of forced-labor camps, first revealed to the world by dissident Soviet author Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn. The first of the camps that evolved into the Gulag were built not long after the Bolsheviks seized power, and the system was a mainstay of Soviet life until Khrushchev’s liberalization campaign in the Fifties, although they were never totally abolished during the Soviet period (although the names were changed). During the Stalin years alone, at least 18 million people passed through Stalin’s gulags, and at least 2 million died there, although, since gulags frequently released prisoners nearing death both to minimize administrative headaches and keep their mortality figures lower, the actual total, though unknown, is certainly far higher.

In the US, a mass-incarceration system was probably the slowest-growing of all the tumors that have now metastasized. While the FBI grew out of the post-World War I Red Scare and the newspapers, radio, and TV networks were firmly under US government control by the end of World War II, it was not until the social unrest of the Sixties and early Seventies that the infrastructure for such a thing became a realistic possibility, and not until the drug war of the Eighties and the privatization of the Nineties did sufficient numbers of prisoners and private capital become available to drive the explosion of the US prison population seen in the last twenty-five years. As this is written, the US has 30% more people in prison than China, which has over four times the US population.

A major terroristic feature of the US mass-incarceration system is a pervasive rape culture. This culture has wide public knowledge and approval, and public expressions of desire by citizens to see criminals raped in prison are  common. In the US, if you are convicted of a crime, being raped in prison is effectively part of your sentence. The utility of this culture as a social-control mechanism is difficult to overstate; added to the terror of rape is the terror of lethal and incurable STDs, such as AIDS and hepatits-C, that are epidemic in the US prison system, and the certainty that not even a brief stay was protection from horrific assault. Prison rape as a  social control mechanism threatens every age group,  every level of non-compliance, from the most mild to the most severe, and conditions behavior both outside the prison and in; its official but tacit approval and enthusiastic public support make the maintenance of US prison-rape culture, a subset of the larger US rape culture used to oppress women, an essential structural-terror feature of the US mass-incarceration system, and thus a bedrock feature of the US system of internal state terror, as is the frequent execution of convicts.

It is not necessary to draw up a list of all the strongman dictators who emulated Stalin on their way to infamy, like Saddam Hussein and the Kims, or used the US model of internal covert terror, like Britain did in Northern Ireland, to make a compelling case based on the data. The use of  terror by states to govern and then control their own populations is not unique to the 20th century; Sargon of Akkad, Alexander the Great, Caesar, and Genghis Khan would all have understood the concept perfectly. State terror, though not unique to the 20th century, IS characteristic of the 20th century, and perhaps the defining characteristic, given its ubiquity, intensity, ideological blindness, and casualty totals. Certainly, at the very least, no discussion of 20th century history is complete without a detailed examination of terror, and no discussion of the 21st is complete without a consideration of how to undo the paradigm in which state terror is the new normal.

See you next week, when we will look at the practice of state terror in the 20th century as a foreign policy option.