Ship of fools
Johann Hari
sets sail with America's swashbuckling neocons
The Iraq war has been an amazing success, global warming is
just a myth – and as for Guantanamo Bay, it's practically a
holiday camp... The annual cruise organised by the 'National
Review', mouthpiece of right-wing America, is a parallel
universe populated by straight-talking, gun-toting,
God-fearing Republicans.
By Johann Hari
07/13/07 "The
Guardian" --
-- I am standing waist-deep in the Pacific Ocean, both
chilling and burning, indulging in the polite chit-chat
beloved by vacationing Americans. A sweet elderly lady from
Los Angeles is sitting on the rocks nearby, telling me
dreamily about her son. "Is he your only child?" I ask.
"Yes," she says. "Do you have a child back in England?" she
asks. No, I say. Her face darkens. "You'd better start," she
says. "The Muslims are breeding. Soon, they'll have the
whole of Europe."
I am getting used to these moments – when gentle holiday
geniality bleeds into... what? I lie on the beach with
Hillary-Ann, a chatty, scatty 35-year-old Californian
designer. As she explains the perils of Republican dating,
my mind drifts, watching the gentle tide. When I hear her
say, " Of course, we need to execute some of these people,"
I wake up. Who do we need to execute? She runs her fingers
through the sand lazily. "A few of these prominent liberals
who are trying to demoralise the country," she says. "Just
take a couple of these anti-war people off to the gas
chamber for treason to show, if you try to bring down
America at a time of war, that's what you'll get." She
squints at the sun and smiles. " Then things'll change."
I am travelling on a bright white cruise ship with two
restaurants, five bars, a casino – and 500 readers of the
National Review. Here, the Iraq war has been "an amazing
success". Global warming is not happening. The solitary
black person claims, "If the Ku Klux Klan supports equal
rights, then God bless them." And I have nowhere to run.
From time to time, National Review – the bible of American
conservatism – organises a cruise for its readers. I paid
$1,200 to join them. The rules I imposed on myself were
simple: If any of the conservative cruisers asked who I was,
I answered honestly, telling them I was a journalist.
Mostly, I just tried to blend in – and find out what
American conservatives say when they think the rest of us
aren't listening.
I. From sweet to suicide bomber
I arrive at the dockside in San Diego on Saturday afternoon
and stare up at the Oosterdam, our home for the next seven
days. Filipino boat hands are loading trunks into the hull
and wealthy white folk are gliding onto its polished boards
with pale sun parasols dangling off their arms.
The Reviewers have been told to gather for a cocktail
reception on the Lido, near the very top of the ship. I
arrive to find a tableau from Gone With the Wind, washed in
a thousand shades of grey. Southern belles – aged and
pinched – are flirting with old conservative warriors. The
etiquette here is different from anything I have ever seen.
It takes me 15 minutes to realise what is wrong with this
scene. There are no big hugs, no warm kisses. This is a
place of starchy handshakes. Men approach each other with
stiffened spines, puffed-out chests and crunching
handshakes. Women are greeted with a single kiss on the
cheek. Anything more would be French.
I adjust and stiffly greet the first man I see. He is a
judge, with the craggy self-important charm that slowly
consumes any judge. He is from Canada, he declares (a little
more apologetically), and is the founding president of
"Canadians Against Suicide Bombing". Would there be many
members of "Canadians for Suicide Bombing?" I ask. Dismayed,
he suggests that yes, there would.
A bell rings somewhere, and we are all beckoned to dinner.
We have been assigned random seats, which will change each
night. We will, the publicity pack promises, each dine with
at least one National Review speaker during our trip.
To my left, I find a middle-aged Floridian with a neat
beard. To my right are two elderly New Yorkers who look and
sound like late-era Dorothy Parkers, minus the alcohol
poisoning. They live on Park Avenue, they explain in precise
Northern tones. "You must live near the UN building," the
Floridian says to one of the New York ladies after the
entree is served. Yes, she responds, shaking her head
wearily. "They should suicide-bomb that place," he says.
They all chuckle gently. How did that happen? How do you go
from sweet to suicide-bomb in six seconds?
The conversation ebbs back to friendly chit-chat. So, you're
a European, one of the Park Avenue ladies says, before
offering witty commentaries on the cities she's visited. Her
companion adds, "I went to Paris, and it was so lovely." Her
face darkens: "But then you think – it's surrounded by
Muslims." The first lady nods: "They're out there, and
they're coming." Emboldened, the bearded Floridian wags a
finger and says, "Down the line, we're not going to bail out
the French again." He mimes picking up a phone and shouts
into it, "I can't hear you, Jacques! What's that? The
Muslims are doing what to you? I can't hear you!"
Now that this barrier has been broken – everyone agrees the
Muslims are devouring the French, and everyone agrees it's
funny – the usual suspects are quickly rounded up. Jimmy
Carter is "almost a traitor". John McCain is "crazy" because
of "all that torture". One of the Park Avenue ladies
declares that she gets on her knees every day to " thank God
for Fox News". As the wine reaches the Floridian, he
announces, "This cruise is the best money I ever spent."
They rush through the Rush-list of liberals who hate
America, who want her to fail, and I ask them – why are
liberals like this? What's their motivation? They stutter to
a halt and there is a long, puzzled silence. " It's a good
question," one of them, Martha, says finally. I have asked
them to peer into the minds of cartoons and they are
suddenly, reluctantly confronted with the hollowness of
their creation. "There have always been intellectuals who
want to tell people how to live," Martha adds, to an almost
visible sense of relief. That's it – the intellectuals! They
are not like us. Dave changes the subject, to wash away this
moment of cognitive dissonance. "The liberals don't believe
in the constitution. They don't believe in what the founders
wanted – a strong executive," he announces, to nods. A
Filipino waiter offers him a top-up of his wine, and he
mock-whispers to me, "They all look the same! Can you tell
them apart?" I stare out to sea. How long would it take me
to drown?
II. "We're doing an excellent job killing them."
The Vista Lounge is a Vegas-style showroom, with glistening
gold edges and the desperate optimism of an ageing Cha-Cha
girl. Today, the scenery has been cleared away – "I always
sit at the front in these shows to see if the girls are
really pretty and on this ship they are ug-lee," I hear a
Reviewer mutter – and our performers are the assorted
purveyors of conservative show tunes, from Podhoretz to
Steyn. The first of the trip's seminars is a discussion
intended to exhume the conservative corpse and discover its
cause of death on the black, black night of 7 November,
2006, when the treacherous Democrats took control of the US
Congress.
There is something strange about this discussion, and it
takes me a few moments to realise exactly what it is. All
the tropes that conservatives usually deny in public – that
Iraq is another Vietnam, that Bush is fighting a class war
on behalf of the rich – are embraced on this shining ship in
the middle of the ocean. Yes, they concede, we are fighting
another Vietnam; and this time we won't let the weak-kneed
liberals lose it. "It's customary to say we lost the Vietnam
war, but who's 'we'?" the writer Dinesh D'Souza asks
angrily. "The left won by demanding America's humiliation."
On this ship, there are no Viet Cong, no three million dead.
There is only liberal treachery. Yes, D'Souza says, in a
swift shift to domestic politics, "of course" Republican
politics is "about class. Republicans are the party of
winners, Democrats are the party of losers."
The panel nods, but it doesn't want to stray from Iraq.
Robert Bork, Ronald Reagan's one-time nominee to the Supreme
Court, mumbles from beneath low-hanging jowls: "The coverage
of this war is unbelievable. Even Fox News is unbelievable.
You'd think we're the only ones dying. Enemy casualties
aren't covered. We're doing an excellent job killing them."
Then, with a judder, the panel runs momentarily aground.
Rich Lowry, the preppy, handsome 38-year-old editor of
National Review, says, "The American public isn't concluding
we're losing in Iraq for any irrational reason. They're
looking at the cold, hard facts." The Vista Lounge is, as
one, perplexed. Lowry continues, "I wish it was true that,
because we're a superpower, we can't lose. But it's not."
No one argues with him. They just look away, in the same
manner that people avoid glancing at a crazy person yelling
at a bus stop. Then they return to hyperbole and accusations
of treachery against people like their editor. The ageing
historian Bernard Lewis – who was deputed to stiffen Dick
Cheney's spine in the run-up to the war – declares, "The
election in the US is being seen by [the bin Ladenists] as a
victory on a par with the collapse of the Soviet Union. We
should be prepared for whatever comes next." This is why the
guests paid up to $6,000. This is what they came for. They
give him a wheezing, stooping ovation and break for coffee.
A fracture-line in the lumbering certainty of American
conservatism is opening right before my eyes. Following the
break, Norman Podhoretz and William Buckley – two of the
grand old men of the Grand Old Party – begin to feud.
Podhoretz will not stop speaking – "I have lots of
ex-friends on the left; it looks like I'm going to have some
ex-friends on the right, too," he rants –and Buckley says to
the chair, " Just take the mike, there's no other way." He
says it with a smile, but with heavy eyes.
Podhoretz and Buckley now inhabit opposite poles of
post-September 11 American conservatism, and they stare at
wholly different Iraqs. Podhoretz is the Brooklyn-born,
street-fighting kid who travelled through a long phase of
left-liberalism to a pugilistic belief in America's power to
redeem the world, one bomb at a time. Today, he is a
bristling grey ball of aggression, here to declare that the
Iraq war has been "an amazing success." He waves his fist
and declaims: "There were WMD, and they were shipped to
Syria ... This picture of a country in total chaos with no
security is false. It has been a triumph. It couldn't have
gone better." He wants more wars, and fast. He is "certain"
Bush will bomb Iran, and " thank God" for that.
Buckley is an urbane old reactionary, drunk on doubts. He
founded the National Review in 1955 – when conservatism was
viewed in polite society as a mental affliction – and he has
always been sceptical of appeals to " the people,"
preferring the eternal top-down certainties of Catholicism.
He united with Podhoretz in mutual hatred of Godless
Communism, but, slouching into his eighties, he possesses a
world view that is ill-suited for the fight to bring
democracy to the Muslim world. He was a ghostly presence on
the cruise at first, appearing only briefly to shake a few
hands. But now he has emerged, and he is fighting.
"Aren't you embarrassed by the absence of these weapons?"
Buckley snaps at Podhoretz. He has just explained that he
supported the war reluctantly, because Dick Cheney convinced
him Saddam Hussein had WMD primed to be fired. "No,"
Podhoretz replies. "As I say, they were shipped to Syria.
During Gulf War I, the entire Iraqi air force was hidden in
the deserts in Iran." He says he is "heartbroken" by this "
rise of defeatism on the right." He adds, apropos of
nothing, "There was nobody better than Don Rumsfeld. This
defeatist talk only contributes to the impression we are
losing, when I think we're winning." The audience cheers
Podhoretz. The nuanced doubts of Bill Buckley leave them
confused. Doesn't he sound like the liberal media? Later,
over dinner, a tablemate from Denver calls Buckley "a
coward". His wife nods and says, " Buckley's an old man,"
tapping her head with her finger to suggest dementia.
I decide to track down Buckley and Podhoretz separately and
ask them for interviews. Buckley is sitting forlornly in his
cabin, scribbling in a notebook. In 2005, at an event
celebrating National Review's 50th birthday, President Bush
described today's American conservatives as "Bill's
children". I ask him if he feels like a parent whose kids
grew up to be serial killers. He smiles slightly, and his
blue eyes appear to twinkle. Then he sighs, "The answer is
no. Because what animated the conservative core for 40 years
was the Soviet menace, plus the rise of dogmatic socialism.
That's pretty well gone."
This does not feel like an optimistic defence of his brood,
but it's a theme he returns to repeatedly: the great battles
of his life are already won. Still, he ruminates over what
his old friend Ronald Reagan would have made of Iraq. "I
think the prudent Reagan would have figured here, and the
prudent Reagan would have shunned a commitment of the kind
that we are now engaged in... I think he would have
attempted to find some sort of assurance that any exposure
by the United States would be exposure to a challenge the
dimensions of which we could predict." Lest liberals be too
eager to adopt the Gipper as one of their own, Buckley
agrees approvingly that Reagan's approach would have been to
"find a local strongman" to rule Iraq.
A few floors away, Podhoretz tells me he is losing his
voice, "which will make some people very happy". Then he
croaks out the standard-issue Wolfowitz line about how,
after September 11, the United States had to introduce
democracy to the Middle East in order to change the
political culture that produced the mass murderers. For
somebody who declares democracy to be his goal, he is
remarkably blasé about the fact that 80 per cent of Iraqis
want US troops to leave their country, according to the
latest polls. "I don't much care," he says, batting the
question away. He goes on to insist that "nobody was
tortured in Abu Ghraib or Guantanamo" and that Bush is "a
hero". He is, like most people on this cruise, certain the
administration will attack Iran.
Podhoretz excitedly talks himself into a beautiful web of
words, vindicating his every position. He fumes at Buckley,
George Will and the other apostate conservatives who refuse
to see sense. He announces victory. And for a moment, here
in the Mexican breeze, it is as though a thousand miles away
Baghdad is not bleeding. He starts hacking and coughing
painfully. I offer to go to the ship infirmary and get him
some throat sweets, and – locked in eternal fighter-mode –
he looks thrown, as though this is an especially cunning
punch. Is this random act of kindness designed to imbalance
him? " I'm fine," he says, glancing contemptuously at the
Bill Buckley book I am carrying. "I'll keep on shouting
through the soreness."
III. The Ghosts of Conservatism Past
The ghosts of Conservatism past are wandering this ship.
From the pool, I see John O'Sullivan, a former adviser to
Margaret Thatcher. And one morning on the deck I discover
Kenneth Starr, looking like he has stepped out of a
long-forgotten 1990s news bulletin waving Monica's stained
blue dress. His face is round and unlined, like an immense,
contented baby. As I stare at him, all my repressed
bewilderment rises, and I ask – Mr Starr, do you feel
ashamed that, as Osama bin Laden plotted to murder American
citizens, you brought the American government to a
stand-still over a few consensual blow jobs? Do you ever lie
awake at night wondering if a few more memos on national
security would have reached the President's desk if he
wasn't spending half his time dealing with your sexual
McCarthyism?
He smiles through his teeth and – in his soft somnambulant
voice – says in perfect legalese, "I am entirely at rest
with the process. The House of Representatives worked its
will, the Senate worked its will, the Chief Justice of the
United States presided. The constitutional process worked
admirably."
It's an oddly meek defence, and the more I challenge him,
the more legalistic he becomes. Every answer is a variant on
"it's not my fault" . First, he says Clinton should have
settled early on in Jones vs Clinton. Then he blames Jimmy
Carter. "This critique really should be addressed to the
now-departed, moribund independent counsel provisions. The
Ethics and Government [provisions] ushered in during
President Carter's administration has an extraordinarily low
threshold for launching a special prosecutor..."
Enough – I see another, more intriguing ghost. Ward Connerly
is the only black person in the National Review posse, a
67-year-old Louisiana-born businessman, best known for
leading conservative campaigns against affirmative action
for black people. Earlier, I heard him saying the Republican
Party has been "too preoccupied with... not ticking off the
blacks", and a cooing white couple wandered away smiling,
"If he can say it, we can say it." What must it be like to
be a black man shilling for a magazine that declared at the
height of the civil rights movement that black people "tend
to revert to savagery", and should be given the vote only
"when they stop eating each other"?
I drag him into the bar, where he declines alcohol. He tells
me plainly about his childhood – his mother died when he was
four, and he was raised by his grandparents – but he never
really becomes animated until I ask him if it is true he
once said, "If the KKK supports equal rights, then God bless
them." He leans forward, his palms open. There are, he says,
" those who condemn the Klan based on their past without
seeing the human side of it, because they don't want to be
in the wrong, politically correct camp, you know... Members
of the Ku Klux Klan are human beings, American citizens –
they go to a place to eat, nobody asks them 'Are you a
Klansmember?', before we serve you here. They go to buy
groceries, nobody asks, 'Are you a Klansmember?' They go to
vote for Governor, nobody asks 'Do you know that that person
is a Klansmember?' Only in the context of race do they ask
that. And I'm supposed to instantly say, 'Oh my God, they
are Klansmen? Geez, I don't want their support.'"
This empathy for Klansmen first bubbled into the public
domain this year when Connerly was leading an
anti-affirmative action campaign in Michigan. The KKK came
out in support of him – and he didn't decline it. I ask if
he really thinks it is possible the KKK made this move
because they have become converted to the cause of racial
equality. "I think that the reasoning that a Klan member
goes through is – blacks are getting benefits that I'm not
getting. It's reverse discrimination. To me it's all
discrimination. But the Klansmen is going through the
reasoning that this is benefiting blacks, they are getting
things that I don't get... A white man doesn't have a chance
in this country."
He becomes incredibly impassioned imagining how they feel,
ventriloquising them with a shaking fist – "The Mexicans are
getting these benefits, the coloureds or niggers, whatever
they are saying, are getting these benefits, and I as a
white man am losing my country."
But when I ask him to empathise with the black victims of
Hurricane Katrina, he offers none of this vim. No, all
Katrina showed was "the dysfunctionality that is evident in
many black neighbourhoods," he says flatly, and that has to
be "tackled by black people, not the government. " Ward, do
you ever worry you are siding with people who would have
denied you a vote – or would hang you by a rope from a tree?
"I don't gather strength from what others think – no at
all," he says. "Whether they are in favour or opposed. I can
walk down these halls and, say, a hundred people say, 'Oh we
just adore you', and I'll be polite and I'll say 'thank
you', but it doesn't register or have any effect on me."
There is a gaggle of Reviewers waiting to tell him how
refreshing it is to "finally" hear a black person "speaking
like this". I leave him to their white, white garlands.
IV. "You're going to get fascists rising up, aren't you? Why
hasn't that happened already?"
The nautical counter-revolution has docked in the
perfectly-yellow sands of Puerto Vallarta in Mexico, and the
Reviewers are clambering overboard into the Latino world
they want to wall off behind a thousand-mile fence. They
carry notebooks from the scribblings they made during the
seminar teaching them "How To Shop in Mexico". Over
breakfast, I forgot myself and said I was considering
setting out to find a local street kid who would show me
round the barrios – the real Mexico. They gaped. "Do you
want to die?" one asked.
The Reviewers confine their Mexican jaunt to covered markets
and walled-off private fortresses like the private Nikki
Beach. Here, as ever, they want Mexico to be a dispenser of
cheap consumer goods and lush sands – not a place populated
by (uck) Mexicans. Dinesh D'Souza announced as we entered
Mexican seas what he calls "D'Souza's law of immigration": "
The quality of an immigrant is inversely proportional to the
distance travelled to get to the United States."
In other words: Latinos suck.
I return for dinner with my special National Review guest:
Kate O'Beirne. She's an impossibly tall blonde with the
voice of a 1930s screwball star and the arguments of a 1890s
Victorian patriarch. She inveighs against feminism and
"women who make the world worse" in quick quips.
As I enter the onboard restaurant she is sitting among
adoring Reviewers with her husband Jim, who announces that
he is Donald Rumsfeld's personnel director. "People keep
asking what I'm doing here, with him being fired and all,"
he says. "But the cruise has been arranged for a long time."
The familiar routine of the dinners – first the
getting-to-know-you chit-chat, then some light
conversational fascism – is accelerating. Tonight there is
explicit praise for a fascist dictator before the entree has
arrived. I drop into the conversation the news that there
are moves in Germany to have Donald Rumsfeld extradited to
face torture charges.
A red-faced man who looks like an egg with a moustache glued
on grumbles, " If the Germans think they can take
responsibility for the world, I don't care about German
courts. Bomb them." I begin to witter on about the Pinochet
precedent, and Kate snaps, "Treating Don Rumsfeld like
Pinochet is disgusting." Egg Man pounds his fist on the
table: " Treating Pinochet like that is disgusting. Pinochet
is a hero. He saved Chile."
"Exactly," adds Jim. "And he privatised social security."
The table nods solemnly and then they march into the
conversation – the billion-strong swarm of swarthy Muslims
who are poised to take over the world. Jim leans forward and
says, "When I see these football supporters from England, I
think – these guys aren't going to be told by PC elites to
be nice to Muslims. You're going to get fascists rising up,
aren't you? Why isn't that happening already?" Before I can
answer, he is conquering the Middle East from his table,
from behind a crème brûlée.
"The civilised countries should invade all the oil-owning
places in the Middle East and run them properly. We won't
take the money ourselves, but we'll manage it so the money
isn't going to terrorists."
The idea that Europe is being "taken over" by Muslims is the
unifying theme of this cruise. Some people go on singles
cruises. Some go on ballroom dancing cruises. This is the
"The Muslims Are Coming" cruise – drinks included. Because
everyone thinks it. Everyone knows it. Everyone dreams it.
And the man responsible is sitting only a few tables down:
Mark Steyn.
He is wearing sunglasses on top of his head and a bright,
bright shirt that fits the image of the disk jockey he once
was. Sitting in this sea of grey, it has an odd effect – he
looks like a pimp inexplicably hanging out with the apostles
of colostomy conservatism.
Steyn's thesis in his new book, America Alone, is simple:
The "European races" i.e., white people – "are too
self-absorbed to breed," but the Muslims are multiplying
quickly. The inevitable result will be " large-scale
evacuation operations circa 2015" as Europe is ceded to al
Qaeda and "Greater France remorselessly evolve[s] into
Greater Bosnia."
He offers a light smearing of dubious demographic figures –
he needs to turn 20 million European Muslims into more than
150 million in nine years, which is a lot of humping.
But facts, figures, and doubt are not on the itinerary of
this cruise. With one or two exceptions, the passengers
discuss "the Muslims" as a homogenous, sharia-seeking block
– already with near-total control of Europe. Over the week,
I am asked nine times – I counted – when I am fleeing
Europe's encroaching Muslim population for the safety of the
United States of America.
At one of the seminars, a panelist says anti-Americanism
comes from both directions in a grasping pincer movement –
"The Muslims condemn us for being decadent; the Europeans
condemn us for not being decadent enough." Midge Decter,
Norman Podhoretz's wife, yells, "The Muslims are right, the
Europeans are wrong!" And, instantly, Jay Nordlinger,
National Review's managing editor and the panel's chair,
says, " I'm afraid a lot of the Europeans are Muslim,
Midge."
The audience cheers. Somebody shouts, "You tell 'em, Jay!"
He tells 'em. Decter tells 'em. Steyn tells 'em.
On this cruise, everyone tells 'em – and, thanks to my
European passport, tells me.
V. From cruise to cruise missiles?
I am back in the docks of San Diego watching these tireless
champions of the overdog filter past and say their starchy,
formal goodbyes. As Bernard Lewis disappears onto the
horizon, I wonder about the connections between this cruise
and the cruise missiles fired half a world away.
I spot the old lady from the sea looking for her suitcase,
and stop to tell her I may have found a solution to her
political worries about both Muslims and stem-cells.
"Couldn't they just do experiments on Muslim stem-cells?" I
ask. " Hey – that's a great idea!" she laughs, and vanishes.
Hillary-Ann stops to say she is definitely going on the next
National Review cruise, to Alaska. "Perfect!" I yell,
finally losing my mind.
"You can drill it as you go!" She puts her arms around me
and says very sweetly, "We need you on every cruise."
As I turn my back on the ship for the last time, the Judge I
met on my first night places his arm affectionately on my
shoulder. "We have written off Britain to the Muslims," he
says. "Come to America."
A version of this article has appeared in 'The New Republic'
(www.tnr.org)
Click
on "comments" below to
read or post comments
Comment
Guidelines
Be succinct, constructive and
relevant to the story.
We
encourage engaging, diverse and
meaningful commentary. Do not
include personal information such
as names, addresses, phone
numbers and emails. Comments
falling outside our guidelines
those including personal
attacks and profanity are
not permitted.
See our complete
Comment
Policy and
use
this link to notify us if you
have concerns about a comment.
Well promptly review and
remove any inappropriate
postings.
Send Page To a Friend
In accordance
with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material
is distributed without profit to those who have
expressed a prior interest in receiving the
included information for research and educational
purposes. Information Clearing House has no
affiliation whatsoever with the originator of
this article nor is Information ClearingHouse
endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)
|