Tom-Jan Meeus van de NRC 14

Tom-Jan Meeus, dit is wat wijlen Howard Zinn stelde:

'The more widespread education is in a society, the more mystification is required to conceal what is wrong; church, school, and the written word work together for that concealment. This is not the work of conspiracy; the privileged of society are as much victims of the going mythology as the teachers, priests, and journalists who spread it. All simply do what has always been said, to believe what has always been believed.'

Zo werd Howard Zinn terloops omschreven in de NRC: 'Howard Zinn, bestselling veteraan van de Amerikaanse vredesbeweging, krijgt halverwege zijn lezing een glas water aangeboden. Zinn bekijkt de beker met wantrouwen. Wat kunnen ze daar nou in hebben gedaan? Het tot de nok gevulde auditorium van Columbia University in New York heeft groot plezier in zijn paranoia. De saamhorigheid van de counter culture tegen de CIA, de ugly Americans.'

'Bestselling veteraan'? Nee, een van de meest vooraanstaande Amerikaanse historici van de laatste halve eeuw, die nooit door de NRC werd geinterviewd omdat zijn visie onacceptabel was voor deze neoliberale krant. Zijn feiten passen niet in de NRC-propaganda.

Hoewel Zinn niet, zoals Tom-Jan, claimde te weten wat Obama allemaal bedoelde, wist hij maar al te goed wat Obama deed, zoals uit zijn laatste commentaar bleek:

Howard Zinn

Historian

I' ve been searching hard for a highlight. The only thing that comes close is some of Obama's rhetoric; I don't see any kind of a highlight in his actions and policies.

As far as disappointments, I wasn't terribly disappointed because I didn't expect that much. I expected him to be a traditional Democratic president. On foreign policy, that's hardly any different from a Republican--as nationalist, expansionist, imperial and warlike. So in that sense, there's no expectation and no disappointment. On domestic policy, traditionally Democratic presidents are more reformist, closer to the labor movement, more willing to pass legislation on behalf of ordinary people--and that's been true of Obama. But Democratic reforms have also been limited, cautious. Obama's no exception. On healthcare, for example, he starts out with a compromise, and when you start out with a compromise, you end with a compromise of a compromise, which is where we are now.

I thought that in the area of constitutional rights he would be better than he has been. That's the greatest disappointment, because Obama went to Harvard Law School and is presumably dedicated to constitutional rights. But he becomes president, and he's not making any significant step away from Bush policies. Sure, he keeps talking about closing Guantánamo, but he still treats the prisoners there as "suspected terrorists." They have not been tried and have not been found guilty. So when Obama proposes taking people out of Guantánamo and putting them into other prisons, he's not advancing the cause of constitutional rights very far. And then he's gone into court arguing for preventive detention, and he's continued the policy of sending suspects to countries where they very well may be tortured.

I think people are dazzled by Obama's rhetoric, and that people ought to begin to understand that Obama is going to be a mediocre president--which means, in our time, a dangerous president--unless there is some national movement to push him in a better direction.'

Zie: http://www.thenation.com/doc/20100201/forum/6#zinn