The rhetoric of election season is here again. I pay attention to the newsletters issued by each campaign. Despite the differences in policy, the tone is the same. The word "we" and "you" is in constant usage. With every primary victory, the message broadcasted to each base contains the phrases "We did it!" or "You made the difference!".

 Perhaps some may chide my cynicism, but I cannot but help be amused by the sheer and blatant condescension so obvious in political rhetoric. Who exactly do these politicians think they are fooling when they seek to create an illusion that you are winning with them? Who are they fooling? The public, that's who. May I add, they may be forgiven if they believe they can get away with it. When the masses votes for an individual, who comes to bask in unparalleled glory, we are being told that "we made it"? Patronism at its best. When I examine the history of political behavior and the psychology of power, and compare this to the naivete of the masses, a wide chasm of perspective and understanding appear. The rhetoric that politicians utilize towards the masses are no different than the smooth talk of a car salesman to a shopper. If one is not aware of the selfish motives of those in power, you risk playing the role of the fool.

 Those in power do not share the same psychology or vested interests with those that they rule. Perhaps in the initial stage of their ascendancy, idealism and a common bond with regular folks may truly strike a cord with some politicians. But in order to continue their ascendance and preserve their power, politicians are forced by necessity to become shrewd and calculating. In order to maintain power, humans are capable of every form of rationalization in the belief that their own prestige would translate to a selfless act on behalf of the common good. When you are in power, you depend on the behavior of the masses underneath you to act in a manner compatible with your goals. You can either convince them to do this through persuasion or through force. However, because the majority of the population lacks the perspective to truly understand policy goals in its most sophisticated form, the use of political rhetoric becomes important. The message must be simple and easy to understand. Some politicians are more honest than others, but all use these tactics to some extent.

 As a case study, let's examine the War on Iraq. The invasion of Iraq was a plan concieved before 911 as a specific goal of the Project of the New American Century, primarily composed of Bush's neocon cabal. The interests of those involved for entering into this act of war were diverse, but primarily coalesced around personal profit, the advance of Israeli interests, American nationalism and the promotion of corporate hegemony. After the September 11th attacks, Bush's neocon cabal had the perfect cover to execute their plans. However, in order to sell it to the American people, the true purpose of this war could not be revealed. Instead, in the rush towards war, fear mongering was at its height, with the American public convinced that Iraq had WMD, and posed a great threat to them and their families. The power of this propaganda was quite effective. The citizens of the United States, a superpower with a $12 trillion dollar economy, a population of 300 million and a territorial empire which spanned the Atlantic to the South Pacific to the North pole, were scared out of their wits of Iraq. An Iraq of 20 million, ruled by a tinpot dictator who was strapped down by countless UN sanctions, a nation divided into three ethnic spheres where American warplanes roamed freely in its Northern and Southern skies. The propaganda was so effective that Americans believed that Iraq and Saddam Hussein had the power to determine the life and death of themselves and their loved ones.

 After the invasion, when the WMD was proved to be non-existant, the Bush administration changed its rhetoric. Now, the war was not about WMD or a grave threat to US security, but it was about spreading democracy to the Arab world. Iraq was to be a grand project, a selfless American gift to the Arab people, a flourishing democracy in a region of tyranny. American troops were told that they were now fighting for the liberation of the Muslim world, at the same time that Dick Cheney was stuffing his already bulging pockets with the profits of Halliburton. The American people were told that their country was a crusader for justice, a beacon of light in the darkness, while pseudo intellectuals and armchair generals in the likes of William Kristol and Paul Wolfowitz salivated at the humiliation of the Arab world and ratcheted up the hostilities with Iran. It is ceaselessly amazing to me that these individuals, who lack even the courage to cut their lip in a schoolyard fight, can willingly send thousands of American troops to their deaths for their own selfish interests. These troops, often from lower middle class backgrounds, are human beings with families to support and loved ones back home. True, many enter the military as a profession and as a choice. However, they also serve a profession in which they are asked to give selflessly in service of their nation. It is the minimal responsibility of those in power to reward this service with a foresight and moral backbone that would only promise to send them into harm's way to face dire threats to their nation. Instead, American troops were sent blazing to their deaths under a blizzard of lies and deceit.

 Rarely do I break with my academic reserve, but when I think of the death of young lives that held so much promise, and the anguish of families who will never see their loved ones again, my entire body shakes with unbridled anger. When you speak to regular Americans about the war in Iraq, most are only aware of it being a supposed "War on Terror" or that it may be about "Freedom and Democracy". You would never hear references to the academic language utilized by the pseudo intellectuals who brainstormed and created this war. It is quite telling that Bush and none of the architects of the war have their own children fighting this war. These cowards are more than happy to have the children of the poor and underprevileged suffer and die for their endlessly selfish greed, while they continue to live lives of previlege and banter intellectually, well, perhaps not Bush, but the rest of them, would banter intellectually around cocktail parties of the continued threats of "Islamo-fascism".

The other month, I was reading the newspaper, and the observations I picked up were quite telling. On the front page was the picture of a soldier whose appearance had been badly deformed due to severe burns from a roadside bomb in Iraq. Standing next to him was his young fiance, with the expression on her face, lifeless, as if she was attending a funeral. Now, I imagine that this girl was probably his sweetheart and they probably got engaged soon before he went to war. Now, this soldier comes back deformed and practically disabled, the life that he and his fiance were supposed to share is now filled with gloom and uncertainty. The very picture I saw was a picture of shattered dreams and the realization of a nightmare. I turn the page. A contrast between night and day. On the very next page was an article about the engagement of George W. Bush's daughter, Jenna. There was a photo on the page which showed a similing president with a glowing daughter, and a very optimistic looking future son-in-law who was marrying into the most powerful family in America. This was the very picture of happiness and joy, and a complete contrast with the picture of gloom from the front page. I thought to myself, this man, this coward, who enjoys a life of luxury and ceremonial honors, has destroyed the lives of countless hundreds of thousands of people. The lives of countless Iraqis, but also of countless Americans through his sham of a war. If someone should be experiencing the utter depths of despair, it should not be the innocent soldier on the front page. Instead, it should be the architects of war and death. This incident demonstrated to me the utter reprehensiveness of our current administration, but also of the possible extremities of the gap between political rhetoric and political reality. Although I fully believe that none of the candidates this year are as despicable as our current leadership, it is important to spread awareness of the driving motives of politicians and the true nature of their interests. However, all of this effort may be futile on my part. For as long as humans have been humans, heirarchies have existed. With every heirarchy, chains of control and power have been preserved. Perhaps political manipulation are a necessity to human society, perhaps political deceit is a necessity to the common good.

 Perhaps the common folk will always be fodder, expendible in the great game of the political elites.