 |
All is for the Best, in the Best of All Possible Worlds |
 |
President Bush's mindless statements about Iraq remind me of Pangloss, a character from Voltaire's 18th century novel, Candide. Pangloss's catchphrase was "all is for the best, in the best of all possible worlds".
That seems like a pretty good way to describe Bush's own Pollyanna-ish take on Iraq. Whatever happens, it's a sign that things are going well. When violence seemed to dip, that meant the surge was going well (although violence didn't really decrease, but that's another story). Now that there is bloody fighting in Basra, Bush is happy to spin that as well, saying that's a sign that the Iraqis can stand on their own to fight against Shia militiamen. This is reminiscent of Bush administration claims last year that increased violence was a sign of success.
Thinking about this logically is likely to make you dizzy. On the one hand, when violence goes down (or supposedly goes down), the surge/escalation is working. But if violence increases, that's also a sign that the surge/escalation is working. Lewis Carroll might appreciate this, but the rest of us are left bewildered and frustrated. It's clear that the administration sees its view of the world as received truth. Events are simply twisted and turned to fit into the pre-written narrative. That's the case whether we're talking about Iraq or the economy.
The truth is that the Bush administration only has a couple of "one size fits all" ideas–invade Iraq, cut taxes. In their eyes, these "solutions" apply to every circumstance. That's one reason why we've seen so many changing justifications for the Iraq war and our mission there. The bottom line is that this administration does whatever it likes, and makes up changing rationales to present to the press.
At the end of Candide, the protagonist realizes Pangloss is full of it. The American people have reached the same conclusion about George W. Bush and Dick Cheney. Can anyone ever get through to these men of unending tunnelvision? It's hard to be optimistic.
Thanks, Chris, for being such a great thinker! Your intellectual/literary spin is definately above your antagonist's scope. Quite aprapos. Keep blogging the good work.
thank you Natalie! Glad you enjoyed the Candide reference…I knew high school French would come in handy at some point.
I should add something though. The Bush admin. has successfully moved the goalposts in assessing the surge. When the surge began, Bush set forth 18 benchmarks by which to judge the surge's success. Many of the benchmarks were political not military ones–the idea was that the surge would create "breathing room" for the Iraqi to achieve political reconciliation. That hasn't happened, and the surge has failed in its own terms, as set forth by Bush. http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2008/01/benchmark.html
What's bizarre on another level is that even when Bush moves the goalposts, his argument still disintegrates, as explained above (i.e. whether violence is up or down, the surge is still working).
The big picture point is that the surge failed to meet the benchmarks the Bush administration set to measure its success.