This is about lies, and delusions, and treason. The Dixie Chicks have unwittingly become the morphogenetic seed at the heart of a strange attractor bound and determined to reach period three. [Decided to get the scientific stuff out of the way so I can get on to my Clinton Tantrum.]
Like so many things, the intense hatred turned against the Dixie Chicks after Natalie's London remark makes sense only in retrospect. For those uninformed, who probably wouldn't be in here anyway, she said "Just so you know, we're ashamed the president of the United States is from Texas". Crucial to understanding the intensity of the reaction to Natalie's remark is knowing something demographically about the Chicks former fan base. The Dixie Chicks were generally classified as a country band and most of their fans were more, well, countryfied than average. Rednecks, as these folks are frequently called, have been reinventing themselves in recent years, shifting away from segregationist issues (witness the token blacks popping up in country music videos) and moving more toward the economic mainstream. The new image is personified by folks like Grechan Wilson and Toby Keith* --- the image of rowdy, hard drinking, hell raising folks tolerating the occasional bar room brawl, but basically good hearted folks who are what they are and don't give a damn who likes it. Just good 'ol boys and girls being patriotic Americans. They are kind of fun to watch, and god bless'em, but the emergence of a more mainstream social facade is just that---- a facade.
*Toby Keith said that Natalie has a "big mouth". Most years that would have made him a strong contender for the Pot Calling the Kettle Black Award, except this year the Pope has that locked up.
Our redneck neighbors are typically less educated and less socially cultivated than most folks, but I don't think that is the source of their intense reaction to the Dixie Chicks. They are not given to sustained thought about social issues. God terms form a large part of their vocabulary, and they have a hair trigger recitation response. "I don't vote". "Then you have no right to complain". Stimulus/response. This automatic process is a little more complex than simply stating an opinion. The hegemonic bottom line is the finality of the term. No room for discussion, the matter is settled. Second, it is a common term, known by many and its commonality gives it authority, especially when the term has been used by people in power. It is not really just the response of the speaker, it cloaks the speaker with irrefutable expertise, and relieves the speaker of the need to defend (or even understand) the issues. In other words, the process is an example of conceptual cowardice, much like the bravado shown by Omega types when they are in the company of a protective Alpha type.
Another characteristic of the archetypical redneck is their combative propensity. Maybe it's a genetic carryover from the Hatfields and McCoys but "I beg to differ" is not part of their vocabulary. As one country song says it "when you are running down my country, you are walking on the fighting side of me". Give a redneck an opportunity to defend his country by whopping up on anyone who questions our national behavior and you really have made his day, or rather his self esteem. Threatening to kill Natalie if she didn't "shut up and sing" was a bit extreme even for these folks, although it is not totally inconsistent with the redneck philosophy. Actual physical attacks as a form of social disapproval are not as prevalent as they once were, but the passive aggressive gene is alive and well. Aaron Tippin was quoted as saying about the Dixie Chicks "if they had said that about Saddam, they would be dragging their headless bodies through the streets of Bagdad". Aaron, if the CMT awards show has an award for the stupidest thing said all year by a country singer you might as well start working on your acceptance speech. Although they do contribute to it, I don't want to try and lay too much blame for our current societal problems on the rednecks. They generally are not a powerful group, just loud, and their primary role is simply to fill in the seats. There are far more culpable groups in our midst, and I will get to them later.
Traditionally, the "liberal" response to this "conservative" harshness has been to placate; to reduce the emotional intensity. I think maybe its time for us to switch responses. But before I get to that, I want to try and clarify what I mean by this god term thing. I have developed a variation of Jeff Foxworthy's if you ...you might be a redneck routine. This is a very scientific test to determine whether you can avoid thinking like a redneck.
THE REDNECKEDNESS AVOIDANCE TEST
The object of the test is for you to examine the validity of a given god term. Take a god term and try to validate it without using a term or variation of a term you have heard someone else use. Use any source you have access to that might provide documentation relating to the issue. Using only your own words and your evaluation of the evidence you have discovered, see if you can support the term. There is not really a right way and a wrong way to go about this, and the only wrong move is supporting one god term with another god term. For example "if we don't learn from history, we will have to repeat it", supported by "a stitch in time saves nine", or any conceptually equivalent term already in use.
GOD TERM EXAMPLE:
"We are fighting terrorism in Iraq so we don't have to fight it in America".
Possible procedures:
For example, if someone you know is fighting in Iraq, ask them if they have seen any evidence that the people they are fighting would be attacking America if they were not pinned down in Iraq. Have they found any caches of fake passports, airline schedules from Bagdad to anywhere in America, or maps of American facilities ? How about a rash of visa applications? Discovered any clandestine classes teaching English or American customs?
Have them ask around to see how sectarian violence might fit in with plans to attack America. Heard of any Shiite plans to attack the Sunni population in Chicago? If their real goal is to attack America, how does killing each other help them do that? How about blogs originating in Iraq. Any cyber traffic soliciting recruits to divert efforts from getting Americans out of Iraq to training for an attack on America?
Naturally these suggestions reflect my own biases and are used here only as examples of the kinds of information that might be useful. Use whatever methods you normally use when you are making everyday choices. If you normally use a Ouija board to make decisions, go for it. Just make it your own personal evaluation---- don't be a parrot.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To re-reiterate, my purpose here is not to defend the Dixie Chicks, they are quite well qualified to take care of themselves. To whatever degree the term "patriotic" refers to the values and behaviors of our 1770 predecessors who declared their independence and were personally and individually prepared to pay whatever price their personal freedom might entail [; : , .---- choose one] the Dixie Chicks have lived far closer to that model than their flag waving, god term spouting hypocritical carpers who think they can pay for their freedom with another's life, and think they are fulfilling their personal responsibility by condemning those who actually exercise their freedoms. "Just so you know" where I am going with this is that the patriotic god terms we are bombarded with might better be called devil terms, because what lies behind them are lies, delusions and the betrayal of the very foundations upon which our colonial ancestors sought to build a new nation. We all know the precarious world we now face did not come upon us unawares. But those who knew better protested only with feeble whimpers while our freedoms, the respect of the world, and our own humanity were slowly drained away by the power mongers our leaders have become. And it is a little too late to get organized now-- a five million person march on Washington, a massive get out the vote drive, even a few more Clinton Tantrums can't get us off this slippery slope. But as a start, we can take some good advice from the Dixie Chicks and get "mad as hell". Here's a tiny bit of one reason why.
godterm:
Support our troops...
frequently followed by the rhetorical admonition to protestors
what kind of message does that send our troops?
The apparent intent of this deceptive game of "tag, you're it" is to imply that those who protest the war in Iraq are being disloyal to our troops, and are both increasing the danger they face and encouraging our enemies. The more abstruse goal of this fiasco is to shift attention away from what is becoming the most destructive scam our government has ever run on we American citizens; to cover up a lie so vile most Americans could not even imagine it possible . It is our government that does not support our troops. Never in our history have our troops been so unsupported and so betrayed by the government they serve and whose orders they must obey.
Despite the promise of college education and career training as motivational attractions, every person who joins our armed services knows that armies are, after all, about war- that they might be required to kill others, and to risk being killed. For a few misfits, that might be the primary attraction, but most probably hope to get in and out without facing combat. And surely the vast majority trust that if they are called upon to fight, it will be to protect their country, that their lives will be valued and not placed in harms way unless the danger to our country is clear and present. That trust was betrayed, whether they were sold out through ignorant, but blameless misjudgements, or because a scheming son wanting to show his father how it was done, or any number of reasons between those two extremes is an issue that will never be fully resolved. And frankly, my dear, it's too late now to give a damn.
By now it is clear to all with open eyes that Saddam was not a threat to America. He was no longer even a credible threat to any of the neighboring countries. He had no weapons of mass destruction, no chemical warfare capability. The first Gulf war had left him with little but bravado. Judging by the rapid collapse of his allegedly worshipful army, he did not even have a strong hold on his own country. The same people who deserted him then show no lack of resolve now. My own misinformed belief at the time was that at the very least he would have built an impregnable last ditch sanctuary deep under the desert that would have put the Pharos to shame. What a pitiful shell of danger our troops were sent to fight.
That was just the start of our governments betrayal. Not since Valley Forge have our troops been so poorly equipped for the dangers they faced. Tossing their useless chemical protection suits aside, they set about welding scrap pieces of metal to their humvees to get some makeshift protection from the real secret weapon Iraq had so cleverly concealed---- the futuristic roadside bomb. Driving through the desert in vehicles that would have looked at home on the set of a Mad Max movie, our troops were soon milling around in a logistical nightmare. They were told they would be welcomed as liberators, not hated as infidel invaders. But after the battlefield danger is past, the true depth of their abandonment, their Ira Hayes saga, will begin.
I heard just yesterday that there are eight times as many wounded veterans returning form Iraq as there were from Viet Nam. You won't catch me complaining about the huge cost of caring for their medical needs. They were wounded in the service of our country, the justice of the war is not relevant to their care. At least it should not be, but once the costs really start multiplying watch how fast the government starts backpedaling on their benefits. Remember Agent Orange? Remember the First Gulf War Syndrome? Thousands of untreated veterans remember, though I am sure they would like to forget. I heard one reporter on TV say that the government is beginning to treat Post Traumatic Stress Disorder as a disciplinary problem, hence no benefits. And it is not just the government that abandons them. The unemployment rate for returning veterans is four times the national average, and problems related to that are going to be with us for decades.
There is a much more subtle and insidious danger in this flag waving support our troops by telling them they are our heros defending our freedom frenzy. They are not children, and they can't fool themselves long with the belief that Santa Claus is coming down the chimney just because the folks back home say so when they see hell around them every day. Anthropologist Gregory Bateson first described the double-bind as a major contributor to the development of schizophrenia. While research on the cause of schizophrenia is shifting more toward a chemical cause rather than a situational cause, there is no doubt that the double-bind is a very powerful influence. A simple approach to this complex phenomenon requires an authoritative but ostensively benevolent source(s) (e.g. parents, commanding officer) that sends two messages (for lack of a better metaphor) to the bindee that are mutually exclusive but both must be believed. If the bindee believes A, B cannot be believed, and if the bindee belives B, A cannot be true. But because both messages come from the same powerful source(s), the source cannot be doubted. Caught in this irresolvable dilemma, all too often the bindee can only internalize the conflict and mistrust his/her own perceptions. And in Iraq, there no even momentary escape from this impossible reality. Unlike our troops in Viet Nam, they can't go into town, get drunk and maybe get laid. The psychological damage to these troops will exceed anything we have ever seen before. They have to try and believe they are fighting for a just cause---- the world they live in is far too dangerous to be distracted by doubt. But that false belief is a fragile shell that is doomed to break---- their self deception will wane, and they will know they have been had. For some of them, it breaks while they are there and they become the ones who rape and torture and murder. Most of them can wait until they get back home where they can try and share their internal horrors with friends and family, and far too many of them will share their rage as well.
In this minuscule sliver of the complex world in which we live we can make out the outlines of an ominous pattern. We have an out of control, power hungry government that is doing more harm to the country our colonial ancestors envisioned, and so bravely set out to find, than any outside enemy. The despicable cynicism that drives their actions knows no boundary, and the dispirited efforts within our government to bring about any semblance of self reform are quickly engulfed in the bloated, stagnate machinations of a broken system that can make noise, but can produce nothing.
The view of this travesty is partially obscured by the throngs of xenophobic redneck groupies shouting their patriotic mantras, and at the same time condemning those practicing what they preach. The voice of the timorous band of citizens who protest much to civilly goes unheard. The Dixie Chicks had to pay dearly for acting freely, and they will "keep paying". And if we can save the country we love we too, all of us, will have to pay---a lot. In this changed world, the lives of our sons and daughters is no longer a viable currency. The payment required is right in front of us, all of us.
Because it's just like that good old godterm says- freedom is not free.
Like so many things, the intense hatred turned against the Dixie Chicks after Natalie's London remark makes sense only in retrospect. For those uninformed, who probably wouldn't be in here anyway, she said "Just so you know, we're ashamed the president of the United States is from Texas". Crucial to understanding the intensity of the reaction to Natalie's remark is knowing something demographically about the Chicks former fan base. The Dixie Chicks were generally classified as a country band and most of their fans were more, well, countryfied than average. Rednecks, as these folks are frequently called, have been reinventing themselves in recent years, shifting away from segregationist issues (witness the token blacks popping up in country music videos) and moving more toward the economic mainstream. The new image is personified by folks like Grechan Wilson and Toby Keith* --- the image of rowdy, hard drinking, hell raising folks tolerating the occasional bar room brawl, but basically good hearted folks who are what they are and don't give a damn who likes it. Just good 'ol boys and girls being patriotic Americans. They are kind of fun to watch, and god bless'em, but the emergence of a more mainstream social facade is just that---- a facade.
*Toby Keith said that Natalie has a "big mouth". Most years that would have made him a strong contender for the Pot Calling the Kettle Black Award, except this year the Pope has that locked up.
Our redneck neighbors are typically less educated and less socially cultivated than most folks, but I don't think that is the source of their intense reaction to the Dixie Chicks. They are not given to sustained thought about social issues. God terms form a large part of their vocabulary, and they have a hair trigger recitation response. "I don't vote". "Then you have no right to complain". Stimulus/response. This automatic process is a little more complex than simply stating an opinion. The hegemonic bottom line is the finality of the term. No room for discussion, the matter is settled. Second, it is a common term, known by many and its commonality gives it authority, especially when the term has been used by people in power. It is not really just the response of the speaker, it cloaks the speaker with irrefutable expertise, and relieves the speaker of the need to defend (or even understand) the issues. In other words, the process is an example of conceptual cowardice, much like the bravado shown by Omega types when they are in the company of a protective Alpha type.
Another characteristic of the archetypical redneck is their combative propensity. Maybe it's a genetic carryover from the Hatfields and McCoys but "I beg to differ" is not part of their vocabulary. As one country song says it "when you are running down my country, you are walking on the fighting side of me". Give a redneck an opportunity to defend his country by whopping up on anyone who questions our national behavior and you really have made his day, or rather his self esteem. Threatening to kill Natalie if she didn't "shut up and sing" was a bit extreme even for these folks, although it is not totally inconsistent with the redneck philosophy. Actual physical attacks as a form of social disapproval are not as prevalent as they once were, but the passive aggressive gene is alive and well. Aaron Tippin was quoted as saying about the Dixie Chicks "if they had said that about Saddam, they would be dragging their headless bodies through the streets of Bagdad". Aaron, if the CMT awards show has an award for the stupidest thing said all year by a country singer you might as well start working on your acceptance speech. Although they do contribute to it, I don't want to try and lay too much blame for our current societal problems on the rednecks. They generally are not a powerful group, just loud, and their primary role is simply to fill in the seats. There are far more culpable groups in our midst, and I will get to them later.
Traditionally, the "liberal" response to this "conservative" harshness has been to placate; to reduce the emotional intensity. I think maybe its time for us to switch responses. But before I get to that, I want to try and clarify what I mean by this god term thing. I have developed a variation of Jeff Foxworthy's if you ...you might be a redneck routine. This is a very scientific test to determine whether you can avoid thinking like a redneck.
THE REDNECKEDNESS AVOIDANCE TEST
The object of the test is for you to examine the validity of a given god term. Take a god term and try to validate it without using a term or variation of a term you have heard someone else use. Use any source you have access to that might provide documentation relating to the issue. Using only your own words and your evaluation of the evidence you have discovered, see if you can support the term. There is not really a right way and a wrong way to go about this, and the only wrong move is supporting one god term with another god term. For example "if we don't learn from history, we will have to repeat it", supported by "a stitch in time saves nine", or any conceptually equivalent term already in use.
GOD TERM EXAMPLE:
"We are fighting terrorism in Iraq so we don't have to fight it in America".
Possible procedures:
For example, if someone you know is fighting in Iraq, ask them if they have seen any evidence that the people they are fighting would be attacking America if they were not pinned down in Iraq. Have they found any caches of fake passports, airline schedules from Bagdad to anywhere in America, or maps of American facilities ? How about a rash of visa applications? Discovered any clandestine classes teaching English or American customs?
Have them ask around to see how sectarian violence might fit in with plans to attack America. Heard of any Shiite plans to attack the Sunni population in Chicago? If their real goal is to attack America, how does killing each other help them do that? How about blogs originating in Iraq. Any cyber traffic soliciting recruits to divert efforts from getting Americans out of Iraq to training for an attack on America?
Naturally these suggestions reflect my own biases and are used here only as examples of the kinds of information that might be useful. Use whatever methods you normally use when you are making everyday choices. If you normally use a Ouija board to make decisions, go for it. Just make it your own personal evaluation---- don't be a parrot.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To re-reiterate, my purpose here is not to defend the Dixie Chicks, they are quite well qualified to take care of themselves. To whatever degree the term "patriotic" refers to the values and behaviors of our 1770 predecessors who declared their independence and were personally and individually prepared to pay whatever price their personal freedom might entail [; : , .---- choose one] the Dixie Chicks have lived far closer to that model than their flag waving, god term spouting hypocritical carpers who think they can pay for their freedom with another's life, and think they are fulfilling their personal responsibility by condemning those who actually exercise their freedoms. "Just so you know" where I am going with this is that the patriotic god terms we are bombarded with might better be called devil terms, because what lies behind them are lies, delusions and the betrayal of the very foundations upon which our colonial ancestors sought to build a new nation. We all know the precarious world we now face did not come upon us unawares. But those who knew better protested only with feeble whimpers while our freedoms, the respect of the world, and our own humanity were slowly drained away by the power mongers our leaders have become. And it is a little too late to get organized now-- a five million person march on Washington, a massive get out the vote drive, even a few more Clinton Tantrums can't get us off this slippery slope. But as a start, we can take some good advice from the Dixie Chicks and get "mad as hell". Here's a tiny bit of one reason why.
godterm:
Support our troops...
frequently followed by the rhetorical admonition to protestors
what kind of message does that send our troops?
The apparent intent of this deceptive game of "tag, you're it" is to imply that those who protest the war in Iraq are being disloyal to our troops, and are both increasing the danger they face and encouraging our enemies. The more abstruse goal of this fiasco is to shift attention away from what is becoming the most destructive scam our government has ever run on we American citizens; to cover up a lie so vile most Americans could not even imagine it possible . It is our government that does not support our troops. Never in our history have our troops been so unsupported and so betrayed by the government they serve and whose orders they must obey.
Despite the promise of college education and career training as motivational attractions, every person who joins our armed services knows that armies are, after all, about war- that they might be required to kill others, and to risk being killed. For a few misfits, that might be the primary attraction, but most probably hope to get in and out without facing combat. And surely the vast majority trust that if they are called upon to fight, it will be to protect their country, that their lives will be valued and not placed in harms way unless the danger to our country is clear and present. That trust was betrayed, whether they were sold out through ignorant, but blameless misjudgements, or because a scheming son wanting to show his father how it was done, or any number of reasons between those two extremes is an issue that will never be fully resolved. And frankly, my dear, it's too late now to give a damn.
By now it is clear to all with open eyes that Saddam was not a threat to America. He was no longer even a credible threat to any of the neighboring countries. He had no weapons of mass destruction, no chemical warfare capability. The first Gulf war had left him with little but bravado. Judging by the rapid collapse of his allegedly worshipful army, he did not even have a strong hold on his own country. The same people who deserted him then show no lack of resolve now. My own misinformed belief at the time was that at the very least he would have built an impregnable last ditch sanctuary deep under the desert that would have put the Pharos to shame. What a pitiful shell of danger our troops were sent to fight.
That was just the start of our governments betrayal. Not since Valley Forge have our troops been so poorly equipped for the dangers they faced. Tossing their useless chemical protection suits aside, they set about welding scrap pieces of metal to their humvees to get some makeshift protection from the real secret weapon Iraq had so cleverly concealed---- the futuristic roadside bomb. Driving through the desert in vehicles that would have looked at home on the set of a Mad Max movie, our troops were soon milling around in a logistical nightmare. They were told they would be welcomed as liberators, not hated as infidel invaders. But after the battlefield danger is past, the true depth of their abandonment, their Ira Hayes saga, will begin.
I heard just yesterday that there are eight times as many wounded veterans returning form Iraq as there were from Viet Nam. You won't catch me complaining about the huge cost of caring for their medical needs. They were wounded in the service of our country, the justice of the war is not relevant to their care. At least it should not be, but once the costs really start multiplying watch how fast the government starts backpedaling on their benefits. Remember Agent Orange? Remember the First Gulf War Syndrome? Thousands of untreated veterans remember, though I am sure they would like to forget. I heard one reporter on TV say that the government is beginning to treat Post Traumatic Stress Disorder as a disciplinary problem, hence no benefits. And it is not just the government that abandons them. The unemployment rate for returning veterans is four times the national average, and problems related to that are going to be with us for decades.
There is a much more subtle and insidious danger in this flag waving support our troops by telling them they are our heros defending our freedom frenzy. They are not children, and they can't fool themselves long with the belief that Santa Claus is coming down the chimney just because the folks back home say so when they see hell around them every day. Anthropologist Gregory Bateson first described the double-bind as a major contributor to the development of schizophrenia. While research on the cause of schizophrenia is shifting more toward a chemical cause rather than a situational cause, there is no doubt that the double-bind is a very powerful influence. A simple approach to this complex phenomenon requires an authoritative but ostensively benevolent source(s) (e.g. parents, commanding officer) that sends two messages (for lack of a better metaphor) to the bindee that are mutually exclusive but both must be believed. If the bindee believes A, B cannot be believed, and if the bindee belives B, A cannot be true. But because both messages come from the same powerful source(s), the source cannot be doubted. Caught in this irresolvable dilemma, all too often the bindee can only internalize the conflict and mistrust his/her own perceptions. And in Iraq, there no even momentary escape from this impossible reality. Unlike our troops in Viet Nam, they can't go into town, get drunk and maybe get laid. The psychological damage to these troops will exceed anything we have ever seen before. They have to try and believe they are fighting for a just cause---- the world they live in is far too dangerous to be distracted by doubt. But that false belief is a fragile shell that is doomed to break---- their self deception will wane, and they will know they have been had. For some of them, it breaks while they are there and they become the ones who rape and torture and murder. Most of them can wait until they get back home where they can try and share their internal horrors with friends and family, and far too many of them will share their rage as well.
In this minuscule sliver of the complex world in which we live we can make out the outlines of an ominous pattern. We have an out of control, power hungry government that is doing more harm to the country our colonial ancestors envisioned, and so bravely set out to find, than any outside enemy. The despicable cynicism that drives their actions knows no boundary, and the dispirited efforts within our government to bring about any semblance of self reform are quickly engulfed in the bloated, stagnate machinations of a broken system that can make noise, but can produce nothing.
The view of this travesty is partially obscured by the throngs of xenophobic redneck groupies shouting their patriotic mantras, and at the same time condemning those practicing what they preach. The voice of the timorous band of citizens who protest much to civilly goes unheard. The Dixie Chicks had to pay dearly for acting freely, and they will "keep paying". And if we can save the country we love we too, all of us, will have to pay---a lot. In this changed world, the lives of our sons and daughters is no longer a viable currency. The payment required is right in front of us, all of us.
Because it's just like that good old godterm says- freedom is not free.
Dixie Chicks and Rednecks
Back to Dixie Chicks Table of Contents
