(THIS ARTICLE IS MACHINE TRANSLATED by Google from Norwegian)
1. May 1966
The title of this article is not ironic. I even belong to those who have truly loved America, and I know how it feels. Like most Norwegians, I have relatives there. Because of my father's profession, I have had to do with Americans since I was a child. America was the land of dreams, freedom, opportunity and adventure. I was in New York before I was in Copenhagen or Stockholm, and that was a matter of course. For me, America was simply verden. I read American literature until fainting, went with American tie and snapped English respectively through the nose and down my throat. When the frenzy really began in Europe, with fascism in Italy and Spain, with Hitler's insanity in Germany, and while Stalin's processes raged in Moscow – the United States was again the bright spot in the world, apparently the countries of normalcy, corrupt and criminalized, albeit but large and open and far-sighted, the land of freedom and the future. (Still: for those of us who loved America!) In addition, during the final phase of the war came America's war effort, which should not be forgotten – in the equal of England and Russia. After the war, Stalin's iron and blood justice continued, which with a very gentle expression was very frightening. The United States constantly stood to me as a kind of symbol for everything that guaranteed the human freedoms that make life worth living – but diminishing. A love can begin abruptly and violently, but it dies slowly, little by little. I can't say with certainty when it was over, but one day I realized that I no longer loved the United States. It was probably in the early 50's. America had become dangerous, scary, creepy. It represented conformism, corrupt justice, violence, the world's strongest military power, and above all: the United States aspired to world domination. For a while, the United States was truly the lord of the world, until the Russian hydrogen bomb was complete.
One should look around for an otherwise little encouraging world history before finding more unilaterally brutally selfish motives than in the last twenty years of US foreign policy.
It followed the war a superpower tyranny without parallels in world history, a violence mentality and a disdain for morality and humanity that was second to none. Megaton thinking was the only political idea of the time.
All of the original image of America was gone, and the shadow sites one had always known about from American society; brutality, hypocrisy, senseless covetousness and the worship of "strong men", suddenly turned into public foreign policy and came to imprint it nuanced. I no longer believe that one or the other person, group or government is acting out optional bad, or optional good motives. Throughout it is a bit good and much evil in the real causes of people's actions. Still, one has to look around for an otherwise little encouraging world history before finding more unilaterally brutally selfish motives than in the last twenty years of US foreign policy.
Big parts of the Norwegian press has considered it sacred bread to bring facts – what is the most important task of the press – about US actions around the world. Partly for sentimental, partly for opportunistic reasons, the facts have been avoided and contented enough to reproduce the American statesmen's own statements about themselves. The result is that Norwegian newspaper readers are almost inconceivably briefed on topics such as Vietnam, Guatemala, the Middle East etc. The embarrassing submissions 'debate' that followed in some newspapers after Sara Lidman's appearance on Norwegian TV was a boring illustration of that: It was almost entirely without references to facts, and without argument. The probable reason for all of this was probably that Sara Lidman had no idea how simply and unilaterally Norwegian viewers were informed, because she herself has been used to Swedish newspapers and sources of information, which already because Sweden is outside NATO, is far more independent than the Norwegian.
Of this and many other reasons are David Horowitz's latest book The United States and the Third World a real event in Norway, a country that for twenty years has shown such a creeping servile attitude to the dollar power. Along with two previous PAX books, The Cold War and the white paper Facts about Vietnam, it provides, in concentrated form, an immense amount of necessary information about today's problems. The United States and the Third World is a necessary reference book for anyone who wants to decide on something that concerns everyone. It is in masterful form and concise form, and on its 130 pages achieves the most important data on the United States of Central America, the Middle East and the East, thus an excellent complement of The Cold War which dealt with US policy in Europe at the same time. A great advantage of the book is that you do not get lost in a million references and source assignments during the reading. It is readable just for those who need it most; people who are not professional foreign policy specialists in advance. For any awake person, the book is indispensable. One is tempted to quote old Lichtenberg's book review: Anyone who has two pants should sell one and buy this book instead. It is not "scientific" but readable, And all important things are well documented. Johan Ludwig Mowinckel's translation is excellent, clear, easy to read and accurate. So, sell your pants: David Horowitz is a unique phenomenon in contemporary political literature, immensely knowledgeable, – intelligent, courageous and truthful.
The column from the time of Ny Tids Orientering (1953–1975) edited by Line Fausko.
