Replies

...Coughlin says this is a clear example that when you commit to a narrative, you can suppress the truth and undermine our national security.

This was with respect to the bizarrely described "workplace" incident courtesy of Major Hasan, who appears at least to have been reasonably up front about his own ideological allegiance. They didn't listen before his murderous rage and they have attempted - successfully, more or less - to couch it in such terms that fit the narrative that Islam is not to blame.

The author's case is that (1) when clinging to this sort of narrative contravenes fact, the people in charge of policy prefer the narrative, and (2) that U.S. foreign policy is currently in the keeping of people for whom fact is inconvenient.

I don't have a problem with either assertion. The gooey wishful thinking that led the State Department to support the replacement of Moamar Gadaffi with *whatever* and to follow up by using that conduit to attempt to support an equally fictive Arab Spring (and getting an ambassador killed in the meantime) is exactly the sort of thing that has led the current administration to be laughed at as the pathetic amateurs they really are. Allegiance to The Narrative is what led Marie Harf to embarrass herself on the international stage by (1) solemnly invoking unemployment as not just a reason, but as a justification for people to decapitate other people, and (2) insist that anyone rightfully protesting this idiocy as being completely out of touch with reality, as simply too stupid to appreciate how "nuanced" a position it is. This is not to pretend that Ms. Harf is unique in this deliberate obtuseness, in fact, they're all pretty much like that.

The American citizen is prevented from dealing with this directly. The citizen who knows perfectly well that it is suicidal fantasizing must work through layers, each of which is intent on protecting the Department of Fantasy from any vulgar influence by those who can actually think. The stupidity has percolated through the gate keepers. We can't fire these fools.

Nor is it obvious that any incoming Republican administration is likely to clear the ideological cobwebs out of the way. There's a great deal of institutional resistance, especially within the State Department, whose inhabitants consider this sort of thing their own private preserve. Yes, they've screwed up spectacularly, but only in the eyes of those of us too ignorant to appreciate the nuance. It's not really a disaster, you see, it's all in the interest of the Greater Good.

Fire these idiots, please. They're going to get us all killed.