Noam Chomsky - Turning the Tide U.S. intervention in

The Fifth Freedom
Classics in Politics: Turning the Tide Noam Chomsky
128
when it is launching its terrorist war against them. 90
A fundamental reason for the great successes achieved in
“brainwashing under freedom” is that the essential premises of the state
terrorists are widely shared, even among their most ardent critics within
the mainstream; as Jonathan Steele puts it more harshly, the problem is
that “journalists share the same narrow, ignorant assumptions as the
policy-makers.” To take one example, consider the Boston Globe,
perhaps the most consistent critic of Reagan’s thuggery in Nicaragua, as
they correctly describe it. Randolph Ryan of the Globe staff, the most
outspoken of these critics, writes that critics have so far failed because
they have not succeeded in putting forth their belief that “America’s
strength grows from the force of its moral example.” Adopting the
terminology of Kissinger and others (see section 4 above), he writes that
in 1980-81 “there was an impression that the revolutionary left was on
a roll in Central America. The administration correctly saw that
infectious spirit as a ‘virus’ that had to be stopped.” But now Nicaragua
is “no longer a subversive ‘virus’” and has become just an opportunity to
win a cheap victory. 91
Illustrated here are some of the essential contributions of the critics to
reinforcing state terror. First, we have the reference to “the force of
[America’s] moral example,” as if history demonstrates any such truth.
Second, the absurd Administration claim that the attack on Nicaragua
was motivated by its alleged role in arming the guerrillas in El Salvador
is accepted; and more important, it is explicitly assumed that if
Nicaragua were indeed providing arms to people being massacred by US
clients, then this crime would merit retribution—just as writers in
Pravda no doubt thunder about the crimes of Pakistan and the US in
aiding the feudal “bandits” who are “terrorizing” Afghanistan. But most
important is the shared belief that the “infectious virus” must be
stopped, by force if necessary. The “virus,” of course, was never the flow