What do you think?
Rate this book
Perpetual War for Perpetual Peace: How We Got to Be So Hated
The United States has been engaged in what the great historian Charles A. Beard called “perpetual war for perpetual peace.” The Federation of American Scientists has cataloged nearly two hundred military incursions since 1945 in which the United States has been the aggressor. In a series of penetrating and alarming essays, whose centerpiece is a commentary on the events of September 11, 2001 (deemed too controversial to publish in America until now), Gore Vidal challenges the comforting consensus following both September 11th and Timothy McVeigh's bombing of the federal building in Oklahoma City [that] these were simply the acts of “evil-doers.”
—from the back cover of the book
—from the back cover of the book
160 pages, Paperback
First published April 10, 2002
63 people are currently reading
1793 people want to read
About the author
Gore Vidal
422 books1,867 followersWorks of American writer Eugene Luther Gore Vidal, noted for his cynical humor and his numerous accounts of society in decline, include the play
The Best Man
(1960) and the novel
Myra Breckinridge
(1968) .
People know his essays, screenplays, and Broadway.
They also knew his patrician manner, transatlantic accent, and witty aphorisms. Vidal came from a distinguished political lineage; his grandfather was the senator Thomas Gore, and he later became a relation (through marriage) to Jacqueline Kennedy.
Vidal, a longtime political critic, ran twice for political office. He was a lifelong isolationist Democrat. The Nation, The New Yorker, Vanity Fair, The New York Review of Books, and Esquire published his essays.
Essays and media appearances long criticized foreign policy. In addition, he from the 1980s onwards characterized the United States as a decaying empire. Additionally, he was known for his well publicized spats with such figures as Norman Mailer, William F. Buckley, Jr., and Truman Capote.
They fell into distinct social and historical camps. Alongside his social, his best known historical include Julian, Burr, and Lincoln. His third novel, The City and the Pillar (1948), outraged conservative critics as the first major feature of unambiguous homosexuality.
At the time of his death he was the last of a generation of American writers who had served during World War II, including J.D. Salinger, Kurt Vonnegut, Norman Mailer and Joseph Heller. Perhaps best remembered for his caustic wit, he referred to himself as a "gentleman bitch" and has been described as the 20th century's answer to Oscar Wilde
Also used the pseudonym Edgar Box.
+++++++++++++++++++++++
Gore Vidal é um dos nomes centrais na história da literatura americana pós-Segunda Guerra Mundial.
Nascido em 1925, em Nova Iorque, estudou na Academia de Phillips Exeter (Estado de New Hampshire). O seu primeiro romance, Williwaw (1946), era uma história da guerra claramente influenciada pelo estilo de Hemingway. Embora grande parte da sua obra tenha a ver com o século XX americano, Vidal debruçou-se várias vezes sobre épocas recuadas, como, por exemplo, em A Search for the King (1950), Juliano (1964) e Creation (1981).
Entre os seus temas de eleição está o mundo do cinema e, mais concretamente, os bastidores de Hollywood, que ele desmonta de forma satírica e implacável em títulos como Myra Breckinridge (1968), Myron (1975) e Duluth (1983).
Senhor de um estilo exuberante, multifacetado e sempre surpreendente, publicou, em 1995, a autobiografia Palimpsest: A Memoir. As obras 'O Instituto Smithsonian' e 'A Idade do Ouro' encontram-se traduzidas em português.
Neto do senador Thomas Gore, enteado do padrasto de Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis, primo distante de Al Gore, Gore Vidal sempre se revelou um espelho crítico das grandezas e misérias dos EUA.
Faleceu a 31 de julho de 2012, aos 86 anos, na sua casa em Hollywood, vítima de pneumonia.
People know his essays, screenplays, and Broadway.
They also knew his patrician manner, transatlantic accent, and witty aphorisms. Vidal came from a distinguished political lineage; his grandfather was the senator Thomas Gore, and he later became a relation (through marriage) to Jacqueline Kennedy.
Vidal, a longtime political critic, ran twice for political office. He was a lifelong isolationist Democrat. The Nation, The New Yorker, Vanity Fair, The New York Review of Books, and Esquire published his essays.
Essays and media appearances long criticized foreign policy. In addition, he from the 1980s onwards characterized the United States as a decaying empire. Additionally, he was known for his well publicized spats with such figures as Norman Mailer, William F. Buckley, Jr., and Truman Capote.
They fell into distinct social and historical camps. Alongside his social, his best known historical include Julian, Burr, and Lincoln. His third novel, The City and the Pillar (1948), outraged conservative critics as the first major feature of unambiguous homosexuality.
At the time of his death he was the last of a generation of American writers who had served during World War II, including J.D. Salinger, Kurt Vonnegut, Norman Mailer and Joseph Heller. Perhaps best remembered for his caustic wit, he referred to himself as a "gentleman bitch" and has been described as the 20th century's answer to Oscar Wilde
Also used the pseudonym Edgar Box.
+++++++++++++++++++++++
Gore Vidal é um dos nomes centrais na história da literatura americana pós-Segunda Guerra Mundial.
Nascido em 1925, em Nova Iorque, estudou na Academia de Phillips Exeter (Estado de New Hampshire). O seu primeiro romance, Williwaw (1946), era uma história da guerra claramente influenciada pelo estilo de Hemingway. Embora grande parte da sua obra tenha a ver com o século XX americano, Vidal debruçou-se várias vezes sobre épocas recuadas, como, por exemplo, em A Search for the King (1950), Juliano (1964) e Creation (1981).
Entre os seus temas de eleição está o mundo do cinema e, mais concretamente, os bastidores de Hollywood, que ele desmonta de forma satírica e implacável em títulos como Myra Breckinridge (1968), Myron (1975) e Duluth (1983).
Senhor de um estilo exuberante, multifacetado e sempre surpreendente, publicou, em 1995, a autobiografia Palimpsest: A Memoir. As obras 'O Instituto Smithsonian' e 'A Idade do Ouro' encontram-se traduzidas em português.
Neto do senador Thomas Gore, enteado do padrasto de Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis, primo distante de Al Gore, Gore Vidal sempre se revelou um espelho crítico das grandezas e misérias dos EUA.
Faleceu a 31 de julho de 2012, aos 86 anos, na sua casa em Hollywood, vítima de pneumonia.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 131 reviews
October 24, 2018
Very brave, very unstructured, very eye-opening, extremely passionate perusal of state as it is in the modern times.
Q:
Drugs. If they did not exist our governors would have invented them in order to prohibit them and so make much of the population vulnerable to arrest, imprisonment, seizure of property, and so on. (c)
Q:
One of the problems of a society as tightly controlled as ours is that we get so little information about what those of our fellow citizens whom we will never know or see are actually thinking and feeling. This seems a paradox when most politics today involves minute-by-minute poll taking on what looks to be every conceivable subject, but, as politicians and pollsters know, it’s how the question is asked that determines the response. Also, there are vast areas, like rural America, that are an unmapped ultima Thule to those who own the corporations that own the media that spend billions of dollars to take polls in order to elect their lawyers to high office. (c)
Q:
Drugs. If they did not exist our governors would have invented them in order to prohibit them and so make much of the population vulnerable to arrest, imprisonment, seizure of property, and so on. (c)
Q:
One of the problems of a society as tightly controlled as ours is that we get so little information about what those of our fellow citizens whom we will never know or see are actually thinking and feeling. This seems a paradox when most politics today involves minute-by-minute poll taking on what looks to be every conceivable subject, but, as politicians and pollsters know, it’s how the question is asked that determines the response. Also, there are vast areas, like rural America, that are an unmapped ultima Thule to those who own the corporations that own the media that spend billions of dollars to take polls in order to elect their lawyers to high office. (c)
July 31, 2014
Gore Vidal was outraged when he wrote this book, as well he should have been. Anger can be a good thing in driving a person to take (peaceful) action, particularly to speak out as is our primary right as free people.
The style of writing used by Vidal shows he is indignant, and I can't find fault with his message, but the delivery grated on me. It's the reason I can't give the book five stars.
Though Vidal was undoubtedly writing as a result of 9/11, more of the content of the book is about Timothy McVeigh's attack in Oklahoma City. The book is out to view motivation apart from the reaction of horror when awful events occur. Vidal sees a connection between Ruby Ridge, Waco, Oklahoma City and 9/11 in government actions that are anathema to the rights that Americans are given by the Constitution.
What struck me repeatedly is that Vidal was right on target in 2003 with his analysis, one fully supported by what has been learned since (see my review of Jane Meyer's "The Dark Side"). He rightly points out that the War on Terror at the expense of individual rights began in the Clinton years, and that the national security state began in 1947 with Truman. 9/11 gave the green light to what had been accelerating, but with caution, until that date.
The case of McVeigh puts me in mind of Edward Snowden. Both men were driven to action by outrage at actions taken by the government. Snowden, of course, took peaceful action and continues from a foreign land to promote his worthy cause in a sane way. McVeigh choose violence and killed innocent people with an equal dedication to protesting what he saw as injustice, but that took the path of insanity.
Vidal looks at McVeigh's motivation, apart from the insanity that it drove him to, and sees merit in it. Vidal correctly points out that the government and media will inevitably play up horror and play down reason and motivation whenever some horrific act occurs. This is because the public must be directed in a manner that will not cause reflection and action on well-founded criticism of what the government is doing.
And what is the government doing? Vidal believes it is betraying the ideas of liberty and justice, defying the principles that it is supposed to be guarding in favor of the pursuit of unlimited power, expansion of empire and the prerogatives of bureaucracy.
If you can put up with the irate, ranting nature of the text, this book is loaded with truth.
The style of writing used by Vidal shows he is indignant, and I can't find fault with his message, but the delivery grated on me. It's the reason I can't give the book five stars.
Though Vidal was undoubtedly writing as a result of 9/11, more of the content of the book is about Timothy McVeigh's attack in Oklahoma City. The book is out to view motivation apart from the reaction of horror when awful events occur. Vidal sees a connection between Ruby Ridge, Waco, Oklahoma City and 9/11 in government actions that are anathema to the rights that Americans are given by the Constitution.
What struck me repeatedly is that Vidal was right on target in 2003 with his analysis, one fully supported by what has been learned since (see my review of Jane Meyer's "The Dark Side"). He rightly points out that the War on Terror at the expense of individual rights began in the Clinton years, and that the national security state began in 1947 with Truman. 9/11 gave the green light to what had been accelerating, but with caution, until that date.
The case of McVeigh puts me in mind of Edward Snowden. Both men were driven to action by outrage at actions taken by the government. Snowden, of course, took peaceful action and continues from a foreign land to promote his worthy cause in a sane way. McVeigh choose violence and killed innocent people with an equal dedication to protesting what he saw as injustice, but that took the path of insanity.
Vidal looks at McVeigh's motivation, apart from the insanity that it drove him to, and sees merit in it. Vidal correctly points out that the government and media will inevitably play up horror and play down reason and motivation whenever some horrific act occurs. This is because the public must be directed in a manner that will not cause reflection and action on well-founded criticism of what the government is doing.
And what is the government doing? Vidal believes it is betraying the ideas of liberty and justice, defying the principles that it is supposed to be guarding in favor of the pursuit of unlimited power, expansion of empire and the prerogatives of bureaucracy.
If you can put up with the irate, ranting nature of the text, this book is loaded with truth.
May 29, 2010
Gore Vidal really knows how to "cut the fat" when it comes to writing a book where every sentence is of importance and has some intrinsic value. In this compilation of essays, Vidal exposes how the criminals that run the USA government (with the help of the "free" media) have been fighting a "Perpetual War for Perpetual Peace" since the end of World War II against contrived (and made up) enemies so that they can expand government and further enslave U.S. "citizens."
Vidal also dedicates a good part of the book to Timothy McVeigh and how the media merely portrayed him as a deranged "lone nut" when in fact his bombing of the Oklahoma City building was primarily revenge for the massacre at Waco executed by the manly man Janet Reno. Of course, Vidal in no way endorses McVeigh's actions, he merely shows how the government and the media work together to disguise the facts.
Essentially, Vidal makes it clear that the war against drugs, communism, etc. have been all tools used to expand the criminal federal government. Unlike most people writing on these subjects, Gore Vidal does it in an eloquent and collected manner making "Perpetual War for Perpetual Peace" a pleasurable read despite the infuriating content.
Vidal also dedicates a good part of the book to Timothy McVeigh and how the media merely portrayed him as a deranged "lone nut" when in fact his bombing of the Oklahoma City building was primarily revenge for the massacre at Waco executed by the manly man Janet Reno. Of course, Vidal in no way endorses McVeigh's actions, he merely shows how the government and the media work together to disguise the facts.
Essentially, Vidal makes it clear that the war against drugs, communism, etc. have been all tools used to expand the criminal federal government. Unlike most people writing on these subjects, Gore Vidal does it in an eloquent and collected manner making "Perpetual War for Perpetual Peace" a pleasurable read despite the infuriating content.
November 18, 2008
I saw Gore Vidal talking about this book a while back and realized a good deal of what he is saying mirrored my own thoughts about our country and its government, in particular. I'd wager a lot of Americans feel the same way but we seem to have lost our voice and our willingness to question our government. A recent interview I saw with Studs Terkel on Phil Donhue's show commented directly on that very subject. He said he felt that until a major voice comes out and addresses an issue, we are prone to sit quietly. Vidal's voice needs to be heard and wouldn't have been if American publishers had any thing to say about it. After this collection of essays became a best seller in Italy, he was then approached about an American publication and voila!---we can read what some might call an unpatriotic and ungrateful voice about America. A fundamental right we have as Americans is the privilege to question our government's decisions yet we seem to sit around quietly and compliantly while our presidents act aggressively toward other nations, deeming our country the international policeman for the world community. These opinions are called unpatriotic especially after the events of 9-11 but there is nothing unpatriotic about what Mr. Vidal is saying. The people who have blinders on and think that we, these United States of America, are never wrong should read this book. We, like any other nation, have flaws. It is time to look at those flaws, address the issues and hold our government responsible for its actions. This government represents the people and we should have our say. Unfortunately, with good ole Dubya and his cowboy mentality, we have four years that should inspire us to speak out against injustice. I highly recommend this book to anyone who cares about the direction our nation is taking.
September 1, 2021
أعتقد أنه حان الوقت للتخلي عن دورنا الذي يذمه الجميع، كشرطي على العالم.
March 29, 2011
This book was part of a bundle of books I bought on ebay, but even if I didn't choose to buy it, I was quite interested in reading it. A book that promised to take a critical look at the US' recent wars and the reasons for them seemed to be an interesting, and consequent, addition to the series of military and war-themed books I'd been reading recently.
Unfortunately, it wasn't.
I don't know anything about Gore Vidal except for what I read about him on Wikipedia, so I didn't really know what to expect. I guess I was expecting a critical, probably somewhat negative look at the wars the US have been fighting these past decades. After all, the German subtitle of the book is "How the US harvest the hatred it has sowed" (somewhat stronger than the original "How we came to be so hated", isn't it?), and that's a pretty clear statement. Then there was the fact that this book, from what I read, hadn't originally been published in the US, for political reasons, I assume, but still, it sounded like a preventive censorship to me, and that always gets me interested. Anyway. I didn't have any prejudices against Gore Vidal when I started reading this book, and it's not because of anything that I had read or heard before that I didn't like it.
I didn't like it because it isn't critical at all. It's not anything, really, except a list of statements against US foreign policies, and, no, even that is not really true. Vidal just states things. His opinions, I supposed, but without any context other than he obviously disliked the the-current Bush administration, and without any analysis of the reasons why he does, his statements are worthless to me. Some of them are also quite wrong, but hey, I'd be willing to listen even to the wrong ones, if he at least explained them to me.
And yes, I do expect critics of any kind to show me that they at least know that other opinions exist, and that they have thought about them, and decided that these opinions don't work for them. And then to tell me why.
In other words, if you tell me that chocolate is the only icecrea, flavor worth eating, and then reveal, however subtle, that you have never even tried another ice cream, and aren't sure that other flavors exist at all, you are not very likely to convince me.
And then I had to discover that more than half of the book isn't about any kind of critical dialogue about US war policy, but about Timothy McVeigh, the whacko (sorry) responsible for the 1995 bombing in Oklahoma City. And, well, let's just say that a) I was rather surprised to find that story in this book (which maybe have been the fault of wrong advertising rather than Vidal's writing), and b) I really really disliked that part of the book.
Because whatever Vidal's reason for putting these essays into this particular book was, all I could see was that he was given a very detailed, careful analysis of McVeigh's life and motives, and - putting that into context with the rest of the book - it all came down to: the US deserved to be bombed by someone like McVeigh, because of the way they have been behaving (in wars and at home).
And really, that cannot be what Vidal wants to say, can it? Can it?
Because that is so plain wrong and STUPID that it wants to make me hit the guy (Vidal) over the head with his stupid book.
Which is probably the reason why he wrote such a short book in the first place - less pain when people hit him with it.
See, there is one reason, and one reason only, why I would want to read about someone like McVeigh: it is to understand his, however absurd, reasoning, in order to prevent something like that from happening again. And with prevent from happening again I don't mean "oh, he saw the news on Waco and decided to built a bomb, let's not have a Waco situation again". I mean "oh, there's a homocidal maniac growing up, let's try to stop the next one before he actually kills people".
Because in my humble opinion, and this is one of the few opinions that I hold to be absolutely right and will not argue about with anyone ever, it is NEVER right to kill people. Never.
I am not naive, and I know that there may be reasons to kill people, and trust me, there are people I would like to kill, but whatever your reasons are, it is NEVER right. It may be your only option (just think of self-defense), but that doesn't make it right.
(I know, that seems a rather odd statement coming from someone who has read so many books about war as I have lately).
And Vidal, arguing that McVeigh had valid reasons to did what he did, offends me deeply as human being.
I don't care how much you disagree with politics. I don't care what your reasons are. Killing cannot be right, and killing innocent people on top of that, like McVeigh did, is so wrong that there should not even be a discussion about the questions if he maybe had a (good) reason. Because there is none.
Mind you, I'm not totally sure that that was what Vidal wanted to say, but he sure didn't avoid giving the impression that that was exactly the conclusion he wanted his readers to get. And if he didn't, then why write about McVeigh in that much detail and in that context in the first place?
So, in conclusion, the book wasn't anywhere nead good from a general perspective, but it was also highly offensive to me from a personal perspective.
Wow. The more I think about it, the more I want to give it zero stars.
ETA: I was going to say that I cannot ofer my copy up for trade, because I don't want anyone else to read the crap that Vidal wrote, but that would be censorship, and I'm also very very strongly against censorship. So, may copy (German) is up for trade, let me know if you want it.
Unfortunately, it wasn't.
I don't know anything about Gore Vidal except for what I read about him on Wikipedia, so I didn't really know what to expect. I guess I was expecting a critical, probably somewhat negative look at the wars the US have been fighting these past decades. After all, the German subtitle of the book is "How the US harvest the hatred it has sowed" (somewhat stronger than the original "How we came to be so hated", isn't it?), and that's a pretty clear statement. Then there was the fact that this book, from what I read, hadn't originally been published in the US, for political reasons, I assume, but still, it sounded like a preventive censorship to me, and that always gets me interested. Anyway. I didn't have any prejudices against Gore Vidal when I started reading this book, and it's not because of anything that I had read or heard before that I didn't like it.
I didn't like it because it isn't critical at all. It's not anything, really, except a list of statements against US foreign policies, and, no, even that is not really true. Vidal just states things. His opinions, I supposed, but without any context other than he obviously disliked the the-current Bush administration, and without any analysis of the reasons why he does, his statements are worthless to me. Some of them are also quite wrong, but hey, I'd be willing to listen even to the wrong ones, if he at least explained them to me.
And yes, I do expect critics of any kind to show me that they at least know that other opinions exist, and that they have thought about them, and decided that these opinions don't work for them. And then to tell me why.
In other words, if you tell me that chocolate is the only icecrea, flavor worth eating, and then reveal, however subtle, that you have never even tried another ice cream, and aren't sure that other flavors exist at all, you are not very likely to convince me.
And then I had to discover that more than half of the book isn't about any kind of critical dialogue about US war policy, but about Timothy McVeigh, the whacko (sorry) responsible for the 1995 bombing in Oklahoma City. And, well, let's just say that a) I was rather surprised to find that story in this book (which maybe have been the fault of wrong advertising rather than Vidal's writing), and b) I really really disliked that part of the book.
Because whatever Vidal's reason for putting these essays into this particular book was, all I could see was that he was given a very detailed, careful analysis of McVeigh's life and motives, and - putting that into context with the rest of the book - it all came down to: the US deserved to be bombed by someone like McVeigh, because of the way they have been behaving (in wars and at home).
And really, that cannot be what Vidal wants to say, can it? Can it?
Because that is so plain wrong and STUPID that it wants to make me hit the guy (Vidal) over the head with his stupid book.
Which is probably the reason why he wrote such a short book in the first place - less pain when people hit him with it.
See, there is one reason, and one reason only, why I would want to read about someone like McVeigh: it is to understand his, however absurd, reasoning, in order to prevent something like that from happening again. And with prevent from happening again I don't mean "oh, he saw the news on Waco and decided to built a bomb, let's not have a Waco situation again". I mean "oh, there's a homocidal maniac growing up, let's try to stop the next one before he actually kills people".
Because in my humble opinion, and this is one of the few opinions that I hold to be absolutely right and will not argue about with anyone ever, it is NEVER right to kill people. Never.
I am not naive, and I know that there may be reasons to kill people, and trust me, there are people I would like to kill, but whatever your reasons are, it is NEVER right. It may be your only option (just think of self-defense), but that doesn't make it right.
(I know, that seems a rather odd statement coming from someone who has read so many books about war as I have lately).
And Vidal, arguing that McVeigh had valid reasons to did what he did, offends me deeply as human being.
I don't care how much you disagree with politics. I don't care what your reasons are. Killing cannot be right, and killing innocent people on top of that, like McVeigh did, is so wrong that there should not even be a discussion about the questions if he maybe had a (good) reason. Because there is none.
Mind you, I'm not totally sure that that was what Vidal wanted to say, but he sure didn't avoid giving the impression that that was exactly the conclusion he wanted his readers to get. And if he didn't, then why write about McVeigh in that much detail and in that context in the first place?
So, in conclusion, the book wasn't anywhere nead good from a general perspective, but it was also highly offensive to me from a personal perspective.
Wow. The more I think about it, the more I want to give it zero stars.
ETA: I was going to say that I cannot ofer my copy up for trade, because I don't want anyone else to read the crap that Vidal wrote, but that would be censorship, and I'm also very very strongly against censorship. So, may copy (German) is up for trade, let me know if you want it.
September 17, 2012
It isn't enough to read this book and say it's interesting or eye-opening. I suspect that Vidal knew that much of what he wrote would be criticized as left-wing or un-American. But what he was telling us is far more patriotic than silence; he saw the loss of our freedoms as the death-knell of our democracy. There is nothing wrong with seeing what needs to be fixed about America and taking a stance in favor of fixing those things. We will not see Mr. Vidal's like again any time soon. He admired this country and wanted it to be everything it can be.
August 29, 2023
"The American People are as devoted to the idea of sin and its punishment as they are to making money"
Gore Vidal has some absolute bangers in this book. It at times feels very current for the fact that it was written 20 years ago, with the notable exception of his takes on airplane travel.
This comes right on the heels of 9/11 and as someone whose first flight was in 2003, I can't sympathize with his panic over having to go through security or show an ID to get in a plane. But then again that could just be me being conditioned not to question it. I don't know any different.
He is bang on the money when it comes to why we, as the US, have become so hated in the last 70 or so years. We've taken on wars of attrition that will never be won to the detriment of ourselves and the world. Only two people win the war on drugs, the people who make drugs and the people who put drug addicts in jail.
"War is the no-win all-lose option"
Gore Vidal has some absolute bangers in this book. It at times feels very current for the fact that it was written 20 years ago, with the notable exception of his takes on airplane travel.
This comes right on the heels of 9/11 and as someone whose first flight was in 2003, I can't sympathize with his panic over having to go through security or show an ID to get in a plane. But then again that could just be me being conditioned not to question it. I don't know any different.
He is bang on the money when it comes to why we, as the US, have become so hated in the last 70 or so years. We've taken on wars of attrition that will never be won to the detriment of ourselves and the world. Only two people win the war on drugs, the people who make drugs and the people who put drug addicts in jail.
"War is the no-win all-lose option"
December 21, 2016
It is very difficult to say that I enjoyed this book, although I infinitely respect those that incessantly question the propaganda that passionately fuels the ignorant. It is all too easy to point a finger and label a person, group, or country as "the bad guy"--the typical dark-skinned Disney villain that hates freedom and lurks in the darkness, waiting to devour all that America deems American. It was hard to get through a whole page without clenching my fists and cursing the blind nationalism that has nearly assassinated common sense. I don't condone terrorist acts, but I do understand the mentality behind them. When one is consumed in war, not only with a country that justifies its own power at whatever cost, but also with others that once were brethren until foreigners came, colonized, and drew borders wherever they wished, I can see the icy hatred that replaces joy and contentment. I hope against hope that power-hungry scavengers of profit will take a look in the mirror and realize that they would hate a hegemonic oligarchy that believes it is divinely ordained to slaughter men, women, and children in the name of socio-cultural and economic imperialism.
January 5, 2017
The collection feels a little slap-dash, lacking the coherence I associate with Vidal’s work. First, American hubris doesn’t need to have its lily gilded (so to speak) and Vidal occasionally goes over the top. Let me give you two examples:
Responding to the Bush (43) critique of Islamic terrorist, “They hate our freedoms…our freedom to vote and assemble and disagree with each other;” Vidal stir-fried his metaphors: “At that plangent moment what American’s gorge did not rise like a Florida chad to the bait?” (Yes, I did have to go to my dictionary for “plangent.”)
To Clinton’s MTV defense of the Anti-Terrorism Act, “A lot of people say there’s too much personal freedom. When personal freedom’s being abused you have to move to limit it;” Vidal rejoined, “On that plangent note he graduated cum laude from the Newt Gingrich Academy.” (No, I didn’t have to look it up again, so I owe Vidal for having expanded my vocabulary).
My point is that, in places, the writing sounds a little tired. In fairness, Vidal turned seventy-seven the year this was published, an age at which H. L. Mencken had grown curiously silent.
Responding to the Bush (43) critique of Islamic terrorist, “They hate our freedoms…our freedom to vote and assemble and disagree with each other;” Vidal stir-fried his metaphors: “At that plangent moment what American’s gorge did not rise like a Florida chad to the bait?” (Yes, I did have to go to my dictionary for “plangent.”)
To Clinton’s MTV defense of the Anti-Terrorism Act, “A lot of people say there’s too much personal freedom. When personal freedom’s being abused you have to move to limit it;” Vidal rejoined, “On that plangent note he graduated cum laude from the Newt Gingrich Academy.” (No, I didn’t have to look it up again, so I owe Vidal for having expanded my vocabulary).
My point is that, in places, the writing sounds a little tired. In fairness, Vidal turned seventy-seven the year this was published, an age at which H. L. Mencken had grown curiously silent.
May 24, 2010
160 pages. Donated 2010 May.
The United States has been engaged in what the great historian Charles A. Beard called "perpetual war for perpetual peace." The Federation of American Scientists has cataloged nearly 200 military incursions since 1945 in which the United States has been the aggressor. In a series of penetrating and alarming essays, whose centerpiece is a commentary on the events of September 11, 2001 (deemed too controversial to publish in this country until now) Gore Vidal challenges the comforting consensus following September 11th and goes back and draws connections to Timothy McVeigh's bombing of the federal building in Oklahoma City. He asks were these simply the acts of "evil-doers?" “Gore Vidal is the master essayist of our age.” — Washington Post ”Our greatest living man of letters.”—Boston Globe “Vidal’s imagination of American politics is so powerful as to compel awe.”—Harold Bloom, The New York Review of Books.
The United States has been engaged in what the great historian Charles A. Beard called "perpetual war for perpetual peace." The Federation of American Scientists has cataloged nearly 200 military incursions since 1945 in which the United States has been the aggressor. In a series of penetrating and alarming essays, whose centerpiece is a commentary on the events of September 11, 2001 (deemed too controversial to publish in this country until now) Gore Vidal challenges the comforting consensus following September 11th and goes back and draws connections to Timothy McVeigh's bombing of the federal building in Oklahoma City. He asks were these simply the acts of "evil-doers?" “Gore Vidal is the master essayist of our age.” — Washington Post ”Our greatest living man of letters.”—Boston Globe “Vidal’s imagination of American politics is so powerful as to compel awe.”—Harold Bloom, The New York Review of Books.
December 23, 2014
"Representative government of, by and for the people is now a faded memory. Only corporate America enjoys representation by the Congresses and presidents that it pays for in an arrangement where no one is entirely accountable because those who own the government own the media. Although we regularly stigmatize other societies as rogue states, we ourselves have become the largest rogue state of all. We honor no treaties. We spurn international courts. We strike unilaterally wherever we choose. We give orders to the United Nations but do not pay our dues. We complain of terrorism, yet our empire is now the greatest terrorist of all. We bomb, invade, subvert other states. Although We the People of the United States are the sole source of legitimate authority in this land, we are no longer represented in Congress Assembled. Our Congress has been hijacked by corporate America and its enforcer, the imperial military machine."
-Gore Vidal, 2000.
-Gore Vidal, 2000.
March 5, 2016
The title is not appropriate for the book, which is really just a collection of his essays from Vanity Fair in the late 90's. A lot of time is spent on Timothy McVeigh and his actions in Oklahoma City in '96. This is very engaging subject matter, however, it was the last thing I was expecting with the subtitle "How we got to be so hated". I would not recommend this book to those seeking to find the details of America's foreign policy blunders, of which there are many. Worth the read nonetheless, for those hoping to expand their understanding of the bureaucracy that plagues the United States. Slightly disappointing, Vidal's critique of the US is more often than naught very insightful, the content of this book was just very unexpected.
January 24, 2011
Very intriguing book - the majority of this book investigates the Oklahoma City bombings. As being personally invited by Timothy McVeigh to be witness to his execution, Gore Vidal has a certain unparalleled outlook on the subject. Mr. Vidal sheds light on a situation that was otherwise rather neatly reduced to being a crazy person's revenge for the federal attack on Waco. Fascinating to read an open conversation in the form of an essay regarding the 'why' of the bombings and to consider how the actions of U.S. federal law enforcement, the executive order, news/politics media, and a former member of the U.S. Army gone traitor, reflect on our suffering democracy.
March 7, 2014
Re-read this quickie this past weekend (Mar 1, 2014) because nothing new on the stack. In the first section GV talks about the Middle East objectives and how we set ourselves up for the attack on 9/11 and in the second section clarifies his relationship with Timothy McVeigh and the Vanity Fair piece he wrote about his interaction with him. Like I wise old sage, he reminds us that we have lost control of our government and have allowed the powers that be to corrupt the laws our forefathers so eloquently laid out for us. Is there hope for our future? Probably not if changes do not happen now.
April 26, 2016
I love Vidal's erudition and his intellectual fearlessness is inspiring. This book was ahead of its time, questioning the American government's tendency to trample constitutional liberties before the War on Terror even began.
July 3, 2023
The cover of this book in goodreads is bonkers, but the content was great. Vidal is so startlingly intelligent and irreverent, and his commentary on the United States descent into a fascist militaristic police state is horrifyingly accurate still 23 years later.
October 4, 2025
“When Osama was four years old I arrived in Cairo for a conversation with Nassar.
“We are studying the Koran for hints on birth control.” A sigh.
“Not helpful?”
“Not very. But we keep looking for a text.”
Nassar wanted to modernize Egypt. But there was a reactionary, religious element… Another sigh. Then a surprise. “We’ve found something very odd, the young village boys - the bright ones that we are educating to be engineers, chemists, and so on, are turning religious on us.”
“Right wing?”
“Very.”
“Traditionally, in war, the president is totemic like the flag. When Kennedy got his highest rating after the debacle of the Bay of Pigs, he observed, characteristically, “it would seem that the worse you fuck up in this job the more popular you get.””
“Those of us who are in the why-business have a difficult time getting through the day.”
“It is nicely apt that the word terrorists (according to the OED) should have been coined during the French Revolution to describe “an adherent or supporter of the Jacobins, who advocated and practiced methods of partisan repression and bloodshed in the propagation of the principles of democracy and equality.”
“90 percent of all American paper currency contains drug residue. This means that anyone carrying, let us say, 1000 dollars in cash will be found with “drug money,” which must be seized and taken away to be analyzed and, somehow, never to be returned to its owner, a way the state and police have been stealing from innocent citizens for centuries.”
“Those who benefit from the present system will never legislate themselves out of power.”
“We are studying the Koran for hints on birth control.” A sigh.
“Not helpful?”
“Not very. But we keep looking for a text.”
Nassar wanted to modernize Egypt. But there was a reactionary, religious element… Another sigh. Then a surprise. “We’ve found something very odd, the young village boys - the bright ones that we are educating to be engineers, chemists, and so on, are turning religious on us.”
“Right wing?”
“Very.”
“Traditionally, in war, the president is totemic like the flag. When Kennedy got his highest rating after the debacle of the Bay of Pigs, he observed, characteristically, “it would seem that the worse you fuck up in this job the more popular you get.””
“Those of us who are in the why-business have a difficult time getting through the day.”
“It is nicely apt that the word terrorists (according to the OED) should have been coined during the French Revolution to describe “an adherent or supporter of the Jacobins, who advocated and practiced methods of partisan repression and bloodshed in the propagation of the principles of democracy and equality.”
“90 percent of all American paper currency contains drug residue. This means that anyone carrying, let us say, 1000 dollars in cash will be found with “drug money,” which must be seized and taken away to be analyzed and, somehow, never to be returned to its owner, a way the state and police have been stealing from innocent citizens for centuries.”
“Those who benefit from the present system will never legislate themselves out of power.”
September 2, 2019
Vidal against the US government--but is he right?
Some of this book is about Osama bin Laden and the war on terror, and some of it is about Timothy McVeigh. Vidal finds some similarity in their motives. But this is not so much a defense of McVeigh (or bin Laden) as it is an "appreciation"--that is, an appreciation of their frustration with the (sometimes) violent behavior of the United States government.
There are seven "chapters" (they are not numbered as such) amounting to seven essays by a past and present master of the form. Some of the material appeared in Vanity Fair or The Nation, and some of it was--Vidal suggests--not published because of prior censorship (after 9/11) by the corporate-sponsored American media.
Vidal argues (1) that McVeigh did not act alone; (2) he was not crazy or mentally deranged; and (3) what he did was at some level understandable. With the same logic, one could say that what bin Laden and Al Qaeda did was understandable; indeed Vidal intimates as much. He quotes McVeigh's psychiatrist as saying that McVeigh killed all those people in Oklahoma City partly in revenge for what the Janet Reno-led feds did at the Branch Davidian compound in Waco, Texas, and partly "to make a political statement about the role of the federal government and protest the use of force against the citizens." (p. 104)
Consequently, from his summer villa in the south of Italy, the one-time enfant terrible of American letters sees McVeigh and his heinous crime as a consequence of what our government is doing to us. He writes that "Since V-J Day 1945...we have been engaged in what the historian Charles A. Beard called 'perpetual war for perpetual peace.'" He adds that "each month we are confronted by a new horrendous enemy at whom we must strike before he destroys us."
In support of this contention, Vidal lists all the military operations that America has been involved in since WWII beginning with the Berlin Airlift (1948-49) to the bombing of Kosovo in 1999. It takes 20 pages to list them all. They include the Korean War, the Vietnam War, operation "Desert Storm," and the various "drug war" operations, and even some continental US operations with which I am not familiar. The credits the Federation of American Scientists with compiling the list.
It can be seen that this interpretation of American foreign and domestic policy is straight out of Orwell's 1984 in which Big Brother, in order to perpetually solidify his power and keep the citizenry in constant fear and distraction, maintained a state of constant war with a foreign enemy. This psychology works well on the tribal mind that we all share. We consciously and subconsciously feel that first comes defense of the nation (our tribe right or wrong!) against foreign enemies, and then, and only then, do we turn our attention to what our government is doing to us. However, if the war is perpetual, then we never confront our leaders because to do so would be unpatriotic. Vidal notes that only congresswoman Barbara Lee of California voted against giving President Bush additional powers to fight terrorism.
This mass psychology seems so simple and so totalitarian that we cannot believe (1) that it fools anybody, and (2) that our democratically-elected government would dare to use such a tactic. But Vidal is here to assure us that it's real, that the totalitarian state is in the making right before our very eyes. The culprits are the masters of corporations who have acquired the ability to buy and keep all politicians so that they might do the corporate bidding. Vidal notes that the present Bush administration is just the current instrument of this conspiracy (a somewhat unplanned, de facto and unconscious conspiracy, by the way) of socially conservative Christians, empire-dreaming neocons, and the corporate power structure. He observes, "The Bush administration...[is] eerily inept in all but its principal task, which is to exempt the rich from taxes..." while it goes about its "relentless plundering of the Treasury..." (pp. 10-11) I guess I should observe that this is in some sense "fortunate" since Bush's general incompetence will probably prevent him from being the first dictator of the United States--not that he doesn't otherwise have the Right Stuff.
Okay, the real question here is, what if Vidal is right? Are we headed the way of Imperial Rome, toward dictatorship and the inevitable decline and fall? Will our children and grandchildren live in a country under heavy surveillance while their standard of living plummets because of the weighty burden of maintaining an empire from which we gain little tribute, an empire maintained at a frightful cost in dollars and lives lost?
Personally I already see the decline of American power and influence. Already, as the Euro rushes past us in value (drug dealers in Latin America are reported as now preferring the Euro to the greenback--will Japanese investors be next?) we can see our civilization crumbling with the potholes in the streets, the growing slums of our cities with the homeless at nearly every downtown corner, with a looted treasury, a frightfully weak dollar, and a soon-to-be worthless social security. Who is watching the store? It used to be said that when the democrats get into office they give it away, while the republicans steal it. Now it would appear that there is little difference between one party and the other. There is only the subversion of democracy by the power elite. And how long can this republic in name only exist hated by most of the rest of the world? Shame, shame on you, our cowardly bought and sold politicians!
Okay, maybe the case is being overstated. (Whew--I hope so!) But I recommend you read Gore's rant as an introduction to this scary point of view and decide for yourself.
--Dennis Littrell, author of “The World Is Not as We Think It Is”
Some of this book is about Osama bin Laden and the war on terror, and some of it is about Timothy McVeigh. Vidal finds some similarity in their motives. But this is not so much a defense of McVeigh (or bin Laden) as it is an "appreciation"--that is, an appreciation of their frustration with the (sometimes) violent behavior of the United States government.
There are seven "chapters" (they are not numbered as such) amounting to seven essays by a past and present master of the form. Some of the material appeared in Vanity Fair or The Nation, and some of it was--Vidal suggests--not published because of prior censorship (after 9/11) by the corporate-sponsored American media.
Vidal argues (1) that McVeigh did not act alone; (2) he was not crazy or mentally deranged; and (3) what he did was at some level understandable. With the same logic, one could say that what bin Laden and Al Qaeda did was understandable; indeed Vidal intimates as much. He quotes McVeigh's psychiatrist as saying that McVeigh killed all those people in Oklahoma City partly in revenge for what the Janet Reno-led feds did at the Branch Davidian compound in Waco, Texas, and partly "to make a political statement about the role of the federal government and protest the use of force against the citizens." (p. 104)
Consequently, from his summer villa in the south of Italy, the one-time enfant terrible of American letters sees McVeigh and his heinous crime as a consequence of what our government is doing to us. He writes that "Since V-J Day 1945...we have been engaged in what the historian Charles A. Beard called 'perpetual war for perpetual peace.'" He adds that "each month we are confronted by a new horrendous enemy at whom we must strike before he destroys us."
In support of this contention, Vidal lists all the military operations that America has been involved in since WWII beginning with the Berlin Airlift (1948-49) to the bombing of Kosovo in 1999. It takes 20 pages to list them all. They include the Korean War, the Vietnam War, operation "Desert Storm," and the various "drug war" operations, and even some continental US operations with which I am not familiar. The credits the Federation of American Scientists with compiling the list.
It can be seen that this interpretation of American foreign and domestic policy is straight out of Orwell's 1984 in which Big Brother, in order to perpetually solidify his power and keep the citizenry in constant fear and distraction, maintained a state of constant war with a foreign enemy. This psychology works well on the tribal mind that we all share. We consciously and subconsciously feel that first comes defense of the nation (our tribe right or wrong!) against foreign enemies, and then, and only then, do we turn our attention to what our government is doing to us. However, if the war is perpetual, then we never confront our leaders because to do so would be unpatriotic. Vidal notes that only congresswoman Barbara Lee of California voted against giving President Bush additional powers to fight terrorism.
This mass psychology seems so simple and so totalitarian that we cannot believe (1) that it fools anybody, and (2) that our democratically-elected government would dare to use such a tactic. But Vidal is here to assure us that it's real, that the totalitarian state is in the making right before our very eyes. The culprits are the masters of corporations who have acquired the ability to buy and keep all politicians so that they might do the corporate bidding. Vidal notes that the present Bush administration is just the current instrument of this conspiracy (a somewhat unplanned, de facto and unconscious conspiracy, by the way) of socially conservative Christians, empire-dreaming neocons, and the corporate power structure. He observes, "The Bush administration...[is] eerily inept in all but its principal task, which is to exempt the rich from taxes..." while it goes about its "relentless plundering of the Treasury..." (pp. 10-11) I guess I should observe that this is in some sense "fortunate" since Bush's general incompetence will probably prevent him from being the first dictator of the United States--not that he doesn't otherwise have the Right Stuff.
Okay, the real question here is, what if Vidal is right? Are we headed the way of Imperial Rome, toward dictatorship and the inevitable decline and fall? Will our children and grandchildren live in a country under heavy surveillance while their standard of living plummets because of the weighty burden of maintaining an empire from which we gain little tribute, an empire maintained at a frightful cost in dollars and lives lost?
Personally I already see the decline of American power and influence. Already, as the Euro rushes past us in value (drug dealers in Latin America are reported as now preferring the Euro to the greenback--will Japanese investors be next?) we can see our civilization crumbling with the potholes in the streets, the growing slums of our cities with the homeless at nearly every downtown corner, with a looted treasury, a frightfully weak dollar, and a soon-to-be worthless social security. Who is watching the store? It used to be said that when the democrats get into office they give it away, while the republicans steal it. Now it would appear that there is little difference between one party and the other. There is only the subversion of democracy by the power elite. And how long can this republic in name only exist hated by most of the rest of the world? Shame, shame on you, our cowardly bought and sold politicians!
Okay, maybe the case is being overstated. (Whew--I hope so!) But I recommend you read Gore's rant as an introduction to this scary point of view and decide for yourself.
--Dennis Littrell, author of “The World Is Not as We Think It Is”
December 22, 2021
But then for Americans morality has nothing at all to do with ethics or right action or who is stealing what money- and liberties- from whom. Morality is sex. sex. sex. (139)
There is no sense of cause/effect when these geese start honking. (142)
Although we regularly stigmatize other societies and rogue states, we ourselves have become the largest rogue state of all. We honor no treaties. We spurn international courts. We strike unilaterally wherever we choose. We give orders to the United Nations but do not pay our dues. We complain of terrorism, yet our empire is now the greatest terrorist of all. (159)
There is no sense of cause/effect when these geese start honking. (142)
Although we regularly stigmatize other societies and rogue states, we ourselves have become the largest rogue state of all. We honor no treaties. We spurn international courts. We strike unilaterally wherever we choose. We give orders to the United Nations but do not pay our dues. We complain of terrorism, yet our empire is now the greatest terrorist of all. (159)
January 8, 2026
Tja, geschreven in 2002 en actueler dan ooit. Hoe kon de vaandeldrager van de democratie afglijden tot een chaotisch ongeregeld zooitje....met moord, buitenlandse agressie en terrorisme, oorlogstaal en het einde van de rechtsstaat tot gevolg? Is enkel een machtlustige demente man voldoende?Nee, want de tekenen waren al lang aan de wand. Lees dit boek maar eens. Die tekenen werden echter genegeerd....Gore Vidal draait zich om in zijn graf.
April 17, 2016
Vidal writes about the increase in the power of the police state in the U.S., among other topics. In particular he focuses on Waco and Ruby Ridge, and the Oklahoma City bombing that occurred after those incidents. His basic premise is that the increase in police power is damaging the fabric of American society, and that people shouldn't be surprised if this provokes violent responses. Overall, the book raises some interesting questions about the power structure in the United States, but at times Vidal skirts a little too close to conspiracy theories for my comfort.
August 13, 2007
I happened to buy this book just after September 11 while at school in Ireland. It's a good thing I did since it wasn't released in the States until months later, and I've heard that the American version is slightly edited. Vidal cuts right through the bull and gets the heart of what's wrong with American foreign policy. This book is well-written, informative, and intelligent. It's almost a must-read for U.S. citizens who wonder how our country got to the position it's in now.
January 14, 2009
What a odd little book. I am not sure what to think about Gore Vidal of all people endorsing the conspiracy theory that Timothy McVeigh was framed for the Oklahoma City bombing, made a patsy for a government plot to consolidate the Clinton police state. Not that I don't find the theory completely plausible (I was raised on the fringes of the survivalist right, after all), but it seems like a very unusual place to encounter it.
January 16, 2012
Well written; knowledgeable and acerbically satirical.
A discussion of why America has enemies with particular focus on the FBI and ATF's abuse of the bill of rights during the Branch Davidian massacre and Timothy McVeigh and his motivations for the Oklahoma Bombing.
We all know that American Federal government adopts corrupt and immoral practices, Gore Vidal is in possession of the facts.
June 21, 2012
EXCELLENT--Vidal is able to transport you back to that very time and place when
a still relatively young nation is on the verge of perhaps dying a premature death and gives the reader and up close and personal view of Lincoln struggling mightily to come up with a "treatment plan" to save the "patient". Gore makes Lincoln and all of the others players in the drama very real and vivid.
a still relatively young nation is on the verge of perhaps dying a premature death and gives the reader and up close and personal view of Lincoln struggling mightily to come up with a "treatment plan" to save the "patient". Gore makes Lincoln and all of the others players in the drama very real and vivid.
October 21, 2007
I want to believe in a fair democratic process but there is a subworld underneath the surface. What is exposed isn't wholesome or good or even christian. If destiny is written on stone I am not optimistic of the outcome.
December 14, 2015
I enjoyed this book ... Waco and the Oklahoma bombing feature strongly ... Struggled a little with the American Style of writing ... That's not a criticism of the book ... It's just a little different from the UK ... Much written in journalistic style ...
April 7, 2016
You should attend - critically, of course - to all of Vidal's warnings
He always had keen insight and a delightful writing style. It's a shame so few Americans appear to have paid even the least attention.
He always had keen insight and a delightful writing style. It's a shame so few Americans appear to have paid even the least attention.
March 7, 2008
Tim McVeigh as martyr? Really, Gore?
Displaying 1 - 30 of 131 reviews