Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
100 words for 100 days: submit your 100 word essay and get published on AlterNet
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Excerpt: The Bush Agenda

By Antonia Juhasz, AlterNet. Posted May 5, 2006.


Bush believes that 'free trade' and 'free markets' are synonymous with 'freedom' -- and he's willing to implement this theory with military force.
050506_story2
Bush-Agenda-Cover
Advertisement

[Editor's Note: This is an edited excerpt from Antonia Juhasz's new book, The Bush Agenda : Invading the World, One Economy at a Time, published by Regan Books.]

An uncharacteristically somber George Walker Bush approached the podium of the Great Hall of the United Nations on Sept. 14, 2005. As the president stood in midtown Manhattan to address the gathered members of the General Assembly, much of the U.S. Gulf Coast lay buried beneath a sea of water, mud, waste, sand and debris. Two days before, the bodies of 45 people had been discovered in a flooded New Orleans hospital, adding to a death toll that already exceeded a thousand. Over one million people were without homes, including tens of thousands just recently released from the New Orleans Convention Center and Superdome, where they were forced to stay for almost a week without food, water or electricity while outdoor temperatures exceeded a sweltering 100 degrees.

This would be President George W. Bush's fifth address before the U.N. General Assembly. Two months after Sept. 11, 2001, he established an annual tradition of addressing the Assembly within days of the anniversary of the terrorist attacks and just miles from ground zero. The president has used each speech to put forward his international agenda squarely within the context of 9/11. It was with these speeches that Bush made the case for war beyond Afghanistan, into Iraq, and against all states that harbor terrorists; he laid out the criteria for those who are "with us" versus those who are "against us" as he built a "coalition of the willing"; and he affirmed his commitment to expanded international trade policies in the name of fighting terrorism and spreading freedom.

The president, visibly tired, spent much of the speech looking down at his notes. His familiar easy swagger, comfortable grin and animated gestures were all but missing. True to form, however, he made no alteration to his message. Bush spent a mere 95 seconds of the 25-minute speech discussing the hurricane. He noted the devastation, thanked the gathered nations for their support and moved on. Then, as he had done every year for the previous four years, the president devoted the bulk of his address to just two topics. The first, not surprisingly, was the war on terror, including the war in Iraq. The second was the expansion of free trade. Once again, Bush offered these two policies, war and free trade, as twin solutions to virtually all of the world's problems -- from global poverty to international health crises, including AIDS, malaria and the Avian flu -- and as the means to achieving a better world.

The president described the benefits of war and his administration's commitment to it by assuring his listeners that "all of us will live in a safer world" if we stay the course in Iraq and complete the war effort. The United States and all "civilized nations" would "continue to take the fight to the terrorists" and "defeat the terrorists on the battlefield." As for free trade, Bush explained that the United States would also defeat the terrorists by fighting poverty and "the surest path to greater wealth is greater trade. … By expanding trade, we spread hope and opportunity to the corners of the world, and we strike a blow against the terrorists. … Our agenda for freer trade is part of our agenda for a freer world."

The agenda has been refined by President Bush and leading members and allies of his administration over decades, dating back most notably to the administration of his father, George Herbert Walker Bush. Its leading framers include men who served in the administrations of both father and son, such as Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz, Zalmay Khalilzad, Robert Zoellick and Scooter Libby. Decades of joint writing, refining and advocating for a set of clear economic and military principles reached its fullest articulation and most aggressive implementation under the administration of George W. Bush -- what I call the "Bush Agenda." This agenda predates the current president, however, and its advocates certainly hope it will outlast him.

Within the Bush Agenda, "freer trade for a freer world" refers to specific economic policies designed especially to support key U.S. multinational corporations that are used as veritable weapons of war, both in the war on terror and in the administration's broader struggle to spread its vision of a freer and safer world. Often, these economic policies are applied in tandem with America's military forces, as was the case in the March 2003 invasion and ongoing occupation of Iraq. To date, the Iraq war represents the fullest and most relentless application of the Bush Agenda. The "freer and safer world" envisioned by Bush and his administration is ultimately one of an ever-expanding American empire driven forward by the growing powers of the nation's largest multinational corporations and unrivaled military.


Digg!

Antonia Juhasz is a Foreign Policy In Focus scholar who is based in San Francisco and working on a book about the economic invasion of Iraq. She is currently on tour with The Bush Agenda and you can view her schedule on her web site, TheBushAgenda.org.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »

Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Are we not Americans?
Posted by: Tom Degan on May 5, 2006 2:36 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Howdy, Folks! Welcome to Facist country! The combined strength of American corporate and military power, forcing itself down the throats of the entire world is nothing new. It has, in fact, been done before. Do you remember a guy by the name of Adolf Hitler? Remember Benito Mussolini? Does that sound like an extreme example? Consider this quote:

"Facism should more proplerly be called 'corporatism' because it is the total merging of corporate and state power".

Study that quote very carefully. Change the term "Facism" with "Globalism" and it could have come right from the pages of the Project for a New American Century. But that particular quote didn't come from the pen of Paul Wolfowitz. It came right out of the mouth of Mussolini, the father of the facist state. Toto, I don't think we're in Kansas anymore.

The term "American Century" was coined at the end of World War II by Time magazine founder Henry Booth-Luce. At that time it was clear that the US was going to be the king of the hill, militarily and economically, for a long time to come. Slightly over ten years ago, when it became obvious that the "American Century" was coming to an end, both literally and figuratively, I wondered aloud how the United States, with its history of being a little too reactionary at times, would handle the natural shifts in ecomomic superiority. Would it act like grown ups and step aside as England did during the first quarter of the 20th century when it became obvious that it was no longer number one on the world stage and that the US was the new super power? Or would go into complete denial, get crazy and try to seize everything it could get its hands on?

The administration of George W. Bush gave us the answer to that question.

Pray for peace.

Tom Degan
Goshen, NY
tomdegan@frontienret.net

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» That's PNAC for you Posted by: qrswave
» RE: Are we not Americans? Posted by: packer29
» RE: Are we not Americans? Posted by: sausage
» RE: Are we not Americans? Posted by: symcokid
» RE: Are we not Americans? Posted by: dave236412
» RE: Are we not Americans? Posted by: douglashoyt
» RE: Are we not Americans? Posted by: Killerkane
» RE: Are we not Americans? Posted by: YANIRA06_66
What is "The War on Terror"?
Posted by: scott balogh on May 5, 2006 8:01 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I read and hear every day the phrase,"war on terror". Please, someone here explain what this means. I am earnestly seeking enlightment on this subject. Thank you.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: What is "The War on Terror"? Posted by: woodford54
» RE: What is "The War on Terror"? Posted by: douglashoyt
» RE: What is "The War on Terror"? Posted by: axolotl_helix
» RE: What is "The War on Terror"? Posted by: scott balogh
» RE: What is "The War on Terror"? Posted by: YANIRA06_66
Blaming free trade for immigration controversy
Posted by: Wells on May 5, 2006 11:21 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
NAFTA free trade harmed US and Mexico economies to the point where republicans now have a sense that something ain't right. "How come them Mehicano darkies that talk funny come here and take our jobs?" A simple statement blaming free trade will upset some republican talking points. "Free Trade caused our illegal immigration?". Right wing talking heads will not present propaganda depicting the immigration problems this way.

All 2006, the immigration issue will inflame republican resentment. What better way to difuse that issue than to place blame where it belongs, as the result of RW policy on free trade?



"the American Eugenics Society was never disbanded"

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Sounds like George Bush, alright
Posted by: owleyes on May 6, 2006 1:54 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Does any of this come as a surprise or as news to anyone? These people have been in this game for the money and the power from the beginning. They try to acheive their goals through evangelistic persuasion and bribery. When that doesn't work, they resort to violence. They have been called out and their nefarious deeds exposed for all to see on multiple occassions. That has not stopped them. One hopes that the natural consequences of their actions will catch up to them sooner or later, but who knows? They wouldn't be the first fuckfaces in history to get away with murder.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

American imperialism must be addressed. Iraq is only the most recent and egregious example.
Posted by: Sojourner on May 6, 2006 6:11 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
All the discussion about how the Bush foreign policy does not make sense ignores the fact that it makes sense in the larger Pax Americana sense. Imposing American domination on the world overrules the body-counts, violations of international law, etc.

For journalists to make fun of Rummy or Condi or Shrub is child's play. When are journalists going to become adults.

This book is for adults, American adults. America has become an ogre and unless we resist from within, our offspring are condemned.

Just as Ghandi organized his people against the British and their hired guns, Americans need to be organized against the war-mongerers. I have now joined "NotInOurName" as a first step in locating and training leadership. If we all must go on a hunger strike to shut our nation down, then so be it.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Hey what happened to Joshua's interview?
Posted by: qrswave on May 7, 2006 12:37 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
and all the previous comments?

what's going on?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: WHAT'S GOING ON? Posted by: Cathyc
China anybody?
Posted by: Llama11 on May 7, 2006 6:58 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
When's the last time you checked the labels on your clothes? Awww, you feel so bad for those third world laborers yet you enjoy the cheap shit they make. Nikes from Vietnam? Cocoa from the Ivory Coast where slave labor is used? Shirts from China? If you feel the plight of these people so much, don't buy the shit.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Welcome everybody to world corporate domination
Posted by: saywhat? on May 7, 2006 8:01 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
You've got a job and that's ok...
now just keep you nose down and your tail up and everything will work out fine...you'll get your royal penace of slave wages when you earn your keep here on this planet...meanwhile we will try to salvage the oxygenation to go somewhere else. so good luck!!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]