John Kerry’s u-turn – what has changed?

Spotter’s badge for Jeremy Poynton in the comments who links to a powerful blog post over on SayAnythingBlog.

The post shares with readers John Kerry’s 1971 testimony before Congress, where he argued America’s involvement in Vietnam was never about national security, that America lost its sense of morality by bombing villages in Vietnam and most striking of all that America should stay out of internal civil wars in other nations – no matter how bad they might be – because history shows that is the right thing to do.

The post compares these comments with his comments this week vindicating military intervention in Syria.  It lays bare the complete and utter u-turn Kerry has executed since becoming Secretary of State in the Obama administration and part of an establishment that is determined to undertake exactly the same actions Kerry railed against 42 years ago.

What has changed?

It can be argued that as Kerry’s immersion into the establishment has resulted in this change to his worldview.  It is a consequence of iving in the unhealthy political bubble that exists, separated from the realities of life and the views of ordinary people outside the ring of steel that protects the elite.  As such he and his ilk are cut off from all sources of information bar that provided by political advisers and government apparatchiks – who themselves live in the bubble and are therefore susceptible to bias confirmation and reinforcement by other narrowly focused minds.  This structure exacerbates the widening disconnect between the electorate and the political class and is perhaps the reason why the interests of the establishment always seem to be so very different from our interests.

The only way this problem can be recognised, challenged by the people and ultimately corrected is to adopt properly democratic structures.  Increasing frustration among voters suggests people are becoming more receptive to the idea of discussion about this otherwise dry topic. Make no mistake, being asked to vote for MPs, Mayors and councillors every 4-5 years is not the be-all and end-all of democracy.  A measure of a democratic society is the degree to which voters have control and influence over their representatives after they have assumed their seat in a political chamber.

Too many people believe that the act of voting delegates authority to the elected to do what they see fit in our interest.  The fatal flaw in that belief is demonstrated by the existance of the echo chamber described above and the way our interests are consistently trumped by party political interests and the wishes of highly influential individuals and groups who finance those parties.

Increasingly and even more disturbingly, we are seeing governments claim citizen involvement in the governance process because of their inclusion of membership body Non-Governmental Organisations, such as WWF and other environmental and sustainability pressure groups, as equals sitting around the table with elected politicians.

This nefarious state of affairs is highly sinister as the governments choose which NGOs they will embrace and award a seat at the table, give them funding from our pockets and allow them to dictate the rules the rest of us live under.  We have no control over the leadership of these organisations and no control over which organisations are selected to be part of the establishment club.  One member of Greenpeace cannot overturn a campaign direction of travel to ensure the NGO does not push government (such as the EU) to impose highly damaging and hugely costly policies on the rest of us.  This is a theme that will get more prominence soon.

Closing the loop, the issue of John Kerry’s re-programming therefore is symptomatic of a much wider, much bigger and much more dangerous problem with democratic structures, one that need to be addressed if the people are to again be the masters and our representatives and public officials are to be the servants.  We owe it to ourselves to bring about the necessary change.  An excellent starting point are the demands of the fledgling Harrogate Agenda.

5 Responses to “John Kerry’s u-turn – what has changed?”


  1. 1 permes 02/09/2013 at 9:41 am

    Remember that cringingly embarrassing performance that Colin Powell was forced to make about Saddam’s WMDs……he looked as though he wanted to creep away to the library with a bottle of Scotck & his .45
    Kerry is equally convincing….plus ca change

  2. 2 cosmic 02/09/2013 at 9:57 am

    Plenty of examples of similar U-turns in British politics where politicians who have been stridently anti-EU in opposition have changed their tune when in office or when the prospect of office became closer. Blair, Kinniock, Hague.

    Partly fitting in with establishment think and partly discovering which side their bread is buttered on.

    It goes back to something discussed earlier, in that leaving the EU isn’t a straightforward step in view of the way that it’s bribed its way and our own system of government has become integrated with it.

    Foreign wars have been good business for a lot of powerful factions in the US. The problem is that the machine they’ve built up is great for conventional wars with other states but not much use for ‘assymetric’ conflicts.

  3. 3 flinthesky 02/09/2013 at 2:39 pm

    It’s a phenomenon, people, often of principle, want to get into politics to change things for the better. Once incumbent they find that they have no influence and haven’t the chance to change virtually anything.
    We nominally change the party from time to time but unless you change all of them at the same time you still end up with a majority of the cross party ruling elite incumbents who are all on agenda.
    Even if we managed to change all of them at the same time we would have the established unelected mandarinocracy all to eager to nudge the new incumbents back to the agenda to protect and maintain their own positions.

  4. 4 Brian H 03/09/2013 at 2:35 am

    Kerry is a mendacious d-bag. A perfect fit for this Administration.

    But you need to read and consider JCurry’s recent post: Professors, Politics, and Public Policy.
    http://judithcurry.com/2013/09/02/professors-politics-and-public-policy/


  1. 1 Britannia Radio » Norway: more BBC lies Trackback on 03/09/2013 at 9:40 pm
Comments are currently closed.



Enter your email address below

The Harrogate Agenda Explained

Email AM

Bloggers for an Independent UK

AM on Twitter

Error: Twitter did not respond. Please wait a few minutes and refresh this page.

STOR Scandal

Autonomous Mind Archive