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

The Race to Destruction
Classics in Politics: Turning the Tide Noam Chomsky
294
causes of the race to destruction are deeply-rooted in our institutions
and their commitments. Alleged security concerns serve as a cover for
something else. And tactics must be revised accordingly.
Not everyone has drawn this conclusion. The Institute for Defense &
Disarmament Studies sent out a three-page funding letter in March
1985 signed by its director, Randall Forsberg, who deserves much of
the credit for the successes of the nuclear freeze campaign. The letter
analyzes what has occurred in the following way. The Institute, which
“launched the nuclear freeze movement in 1980,” accomplished what it
set out to do: it educated the public to support a nuclear freeze. But this
popular success did not lead to “a real electoral choice on the issue in
1984.” Why? Because of “expert opposition to the freeze,” which
prevented Mondale from taking a supportive position. The conclusion,
then, is that we must devote our efforts to “building expert support”:
convincing the experts. This achieved, we will be able to move to a
nuclear freeze. 42
The underlying assumption is that the military system drives forward
because political leaders and their expert advisers do not understand
some technical points that are clear to us in the peace movement. That
is the problem, and we can overcome it by explaining to them that there
is a better way to achieve their goal of security and peace.
The consequences of this stand are predictable. Despite the
announced commitment to popular activism, the public will be
marginalized and quiescent since naturally it cannot be part of this
elevated debate. Public apathy and obedience, and faith in alleged
“experts,” will also extend to other domains. Few will understand the
definition of “expert” given by Henry Kissinger in one of his rare
moments of lucidity: the “expert has his constituency—those who have
a vested interest in commonly held opinions: elaborating and defining its
consensus at a high level has, after all, made him an expert.” 43 We need