from the hands of any U.S. Ambassadornor anyone representing the governmentnKennan replied: “I understand and respectnyour feelings for not accepting thencitation and insignia from our ambassadornto Chile. This does not in any waynnegate your election. If you are planningnto be in the United States any time in thennear future it would be my pleasure tonpresent the insignia and citation to you.nIf, however, you should be in anotherncountry… [such] as Mexico … I mightnbe able to fly down to make the presentationnto you there.”nRocking a Leaky BoatnRobert Sdieer: With Enough Shovels:nReagan, Bush and Nuclear War;nRandom House; New York.nbyDanielJ.OTVeiln1 here exists a formula that might benemployed to destabilize virtuaUy anynpolitical system. It can effectively underminensystems irrespective of ideologicalnunderpinning and can be utilized againstnregimes of left, center, and right orientation.nSome contribute to the formula outnof failure to appreciate man’s propensityntoward anarchy and the difficulty of maintainingnan ordered society, others out ofna desire to radically transform some targetnsociety. The formula involves bothndomestic and external ingredients thatncoUectively form a pattern that might bentermed the destabilizatton syndrome.nDomestically the device involvesnoverloading the system. This is accomplishednby making demands upon it thatn—given its history, culture, and availablenresources—it cannot possibly satisfy.nOne frequently employed technique isnto command that the target society, frrespectivenof consequences, conform tonthe democratic model. Little credencenDr. O’Netl is with the department ofnpolitical science at the University ofnArizonan14nChronicles of CulturenCan anyone imagine a parallel culturalngroup in the U.S.S.R. extending thosenhonors to say, Arthur Koestler, and, withnhis refusal to accept them from the handsnof any government official, having thenpresident of the group fly to Sweden tonbestow them personaUy? Not long ago Insaw advertised a button that read: “Justnbecause I have a Ph.D. doesn’t mean I’mnstupid.” Perhaps another one should benmanufactured for the Nerudas, the Kennans,net al., which would say: “Just becausenI’m an intellectual doesn’t mean Inhave any sense.” Dnis accorded the fact that, in terms of historicalnsurvey and comparative analysis,ndemocracies are few and far between.nNor is there concern for the prerequisitesnshared by virtually aU viable democracies.nInstead, democracy is used as an absolutennorm against which to condemn the targetnsociety and thus to deprive it of externalnsupport. (One wonders what thenresult of World War II would have beennhad Stalinist Russia been so critiqued.)nThe current rendition of the democracynargument involves a selective intoxicationnwith human rights. The target societynmust be unadulterated; considerationsnof tradition, order, domestic ornforeign threats are frrelevant. There arenabsolutist demands for free elections,nuncontroUed media, and tolerance ofndissent. Anglo-American democracynmust bloom in the Third World. Everyninfringement or imagined infringementnof human rights must receive maximalnattention; every rumored atrocity mustnbe proclaimed. The probable end resultnis not the democratization of the targetnsociety, but a diminishing number ofnavailable aUies and the weakening ofnauthoritarian regimes in the face of thentotalitarian threat.nOften the demand for human rights isnmade selectively, as demonstrated bynthe Latin American application. Manynpersons obsessed with human rights innnnGuatemala and El Salvador M to demonstratenthe slightest concern for the nonexistencenof those rights in Cuba andnNicaragua. The numerous committeesndevoted to human rights in Latin Americanseldom provide literature or speakersncritical of the two Marxist states. Indeed,nthere are thousands of Cuban and Nicaraguannrefugees who could speak of thentotalitarian reality, but they are notnheard. Instead, the human-rights committees,nwhile condemning Americannallies, provide public lectures by thenperermial academic pilgrims who returnnto wimess after the usual two weeks inn”liberated” Cuba or Nicaragua. Cuba hasnforced into exile 10 percent of its population—^antragedy that would be akin tonan American regime that would banishnthe entire black population. One wouldnhave to return to the I6th century for anLatin American parallel to this Cuban atrocity.nSuch a selective application ofnthe human-rights norm suggests thatnsystemic destabilization rather thannhuman rights is the primary objective ofnmany critics. Should a “legitimate” radicalnregime replace the “iUegitimate”ntraditional one, the demand for ordernthen becomes primary and the humanrightsnconcerns subside: Who now talksnabout human rights in Vietnam?nA, second domestic opportunity forndestabilization relates to the potentialnfor encouraging cultural conflict. Mostncontemporary societies are culturallynpluralistic; seldom do the componentnentities attain the same levels of affluencen—or productivity. Different culturesnfoster different approaches to work, discipline,nresponsibility; not all are supportivenof the work ethos. Thus a culturallynmixed society offers numerousnopportunities for invidious comparison.nMan apparentiy has an unlimited capacitynto blame others for his own limitations;nhence, it is no problem to implantnin the minds of the less affluent groups ansense of exploitation. Charges of domesticncolonialism coupled with excessivendemands and counterdemands can benencouraged. (Both sides during Worldn