The Political Fray - Political Forum
Go Back   Political Fray > The Political Fray > Government and Politics

Government and Politics Government and Politics Forum including laws, elections, government structure, and political theory


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old May 4th, 2011, 05:17 PM   #1
Intern
 
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 29

The Cure for Terrorism

[FONT=&quot][SIZE=4] To be politically forthright here, if not exactly politically correct, the rich, dominant nations of the modern world order, with the United States as their point man, neocolonially force themselves, i.e. their will and agenda and selfish economic interests, their political system, their culture and entertainment industry, their secularism, etc. upon the disempowered peoples of so-called “underdeveloped” societies. This naturally enough results in the resentment and retaliation we see coming from the “Third World”, which unfortunately sometimes manifests as “terrorism”. [SIZE=4]

[FONT=&quot][SIZE=4] But, of course, like street gang members who feel unfairly picked on when the police aggressively target them, as if their own bad behavior hasn’t brought on the righteous reprisals of the community they prey on, we in the economically and technologically high-powered countries make out that we’re just the innocent victims of extremists and madmen. We take no portion of responsibility for the hostility and hate internationally incurred by the bad behavior of the corporate kingpins and politicians who rule us. We’re just too darn arrogantly convinced of our own moral goodness, as a society, to own up to how we engender the anti-Western ill will on the streets of Caracas, Cairo, and Kuala Lumpur. [SIZE=4]

[FONT=&quot][SIZE=4] Every society, of course, indoctrinates its citizens with a positive national self-image, and with an ideological worldview that patly rationalizes its shortcomings and sins. This is perhaps taken a bit further in the United States than in, say, Bangladesh or Belgium. For, alas, the people of the United States have a good deal more to rationalize and justify than nations without a “manifest destiny”, so to speak. The overcompensating result is that while you find national egos raging in every country, the American national ego often seems to rage more than most. In other words, Americans tend to be uncritically self-assured of their own national greatness and goodness. Being a superpower, and the only country currently enjoying bragging rights to that toplofty tag; being technologically advanced; economically powerful; militarily mighty; the light-bearer of democracy; and, last but not least, being, in the minds of its own citizens at least, a “nice” nation, a morally superior boy scout, do-gooder country, well, no wonder that many Americans can’t imagine that their grand and god-blessed land is anything other than a benevolent force for progress and freedom. [SIZE=4]

[FONT=&quot][SIZE=4] And of course the official, whitewashed version of history and current events that we’re all taught in school and by the mainstream media supports and reinforces this self-flattering national self-identity. Except for those who choose to educate themselves, the average American is blissfully insulated from the dark and damning truth of the brutally and bloodily greedy activities of his society’s ruling class around the world. Indeed, although the voracious money-hunger of the capitalist elite, and the methods and machinations by which it feasts itself on the natural and human resources of LDCs (less developed countries), constitute one of the most heinous ongoing crimes against humanity in history, we the people of the U.S., the UK, Japan, Germany, etc. get to continue fancying ourselves the harmless and humanitarian world citizens! [SIZE=4]

[FONT=&quot][SIZE=4] So, when the Howard Beales of the pauperized South shout over to us in the filthy-rich North that they’re "as mad as hell and not going to take it anymore!", when they shout this with vehement words, with public protests and the burning of American flags, or with “terrorist” bombs, we’re utterly perplexed and latch onto self-complacent explanations. We tell ourselves that they hate us because they envy us, or because they don’t want to live under the rule of law, or because they’re irrational religious fanatics, and so forth. And if these self-absolving explanations don’t pop into our minds by themselves, they’re promptly planted there by the commentators and talking heads on TV. [SIZE=4]

[FONT=&quot][SIZE=4] Believing then, naively and narcissistically, that our saintly society is a blameless target of unprovoked hate, we retreat into both a victim’s mentality – in which the big bad Third World is out to get us for no good reason – and into a righteous and retributive anger that get’s people literally dancing in the streets when one of our national bogeymen is assassinated. Instead of seeking to make anti-Western “terrorism” a thing of the past by doing the right thing, by addressing and redressing the legitimate and substantial grievances of the LDCs, instead of fighting terrorism by fighting for social, economic, and political justice at home and abroad, we beef up domestic security and claim to be fighting a global “War on Terror”. [SIZE=4]

[FONT=&quot][SIZE=4] Well, to make matters even worse, our sanctimonious “War on Terror” isn’t even a good faith campaign to “get the bad guys” – note that it took more than a decade to finally get Osama, hardly proof that we’re engaged in a sincere effort to stamp out the terrorist threat! – rather, it’s a morally phony-baloney cover for the U.S. to throw its weight around in the pursuit of a more secure lock on its status of being the only world superpower. It’s a pious pretense for stretching out the “American Century” a bit longer. It’s a dissembling, duplicitous fa?ade for American imperialism. That is, it’s further reason for “them” to feel antipathy for “us”. [SIZE=4]

[FONT=&quot][SIZE=4] And, to the extent that the “War on Terror” really is an attempt to put an end to international terrorism, well, we’re going about it in a rather counterproductive fashion. Our government’s tack, essentially, is to use fear and violence to exercise its putative moral authority as the world’s policeman. Quite simply, we’re trying to out-terrorize the terrorists. Of course we use euphemisms for our own terrorism, such as “Guantanamo Bay”, “waterboarding”, “cruise missile strikes”, “invasion”, “occupation”, and “war”. But we should know by now that, in the wise words of the movie Star Wars, fear leads to anger and hate, and anger and hate pull everyone into the dark side. And while I’m at it with the clich?s, to state a well-worn political and psychological truism, violence breeds more violence. At the end of the day of reckoning, we’re going to find that we’ve just created a more oppositional geopolitical situation for ourselves. [SIZE=4]

[FONT=&quot][SIZE=4] Oh, we can continue to torture prisoners and use privacy-invading techniques of intelligence gathering, which will give us the occasional feel-good victory, such as the recent execution slaying of bin Laden, but at the sacrifice of the very moral authority that we feel entitles us to use such methods in the first place. By playing into such an ethical paradox Americans only lower themselves in the eyes of the world, and come to look like thugs every bit as much as the “terrorists”. [SIZE=4]

[FONT=&quot][SIZE=4] Last night I saw Alan Dershowitz discussing this very question on the Piers Morgan show. He raised the issue of how America should resolve its hypocrisy about the high-handed and abusive methods it’s employed to finally find bin Laden, and to fight its asymmetrical war with its Third World enemies. Our options are three. [SIZE=4]

[FONT=&quot][SIZE=4] Option #1, we can resolve our hypocrisy by renouncing our highfalutin principles and going full-out with a ruthless modus operandi. Or, option #2, we can continue to perfidiously profess to be in favor of certain ethical and law-abiding behavioral norms while clandestinely violating those norms right and left when it serves us to do so. Or, finally, option #3, we can begin to actually walk the goody-goody talk we like to talk out of our backsides. We can forsake cruel and unusual forms of interrogation, and illegal wiretaps, etc. We can dare to genuinely respect everyone’s human rights and dignity and take our chances. [FONT=&quot]Dershowitz [FONT=&quot][SIZE=4]never really made it decisively clear which option he favors, but it’s clear which option Obama has chosen. The USA’s pres seems to prefer option #2, hypocrisy, i.e. business as usual. [SIZE=4]

[FONT=&quot][SIZE=4] You might be thinking “Surprise, surprise, he’s a politician after all!; true, but the problem is that nothing instills resentment quite like hypocrisy, and just because we’ve come to expect it from our political leaders doesn’t mean that those on the receiving end of our national hypocrisy will apathetically dismiss it the way we do. They’re more likely to be irked by it into hardening their line against America and the “First World”. Sure, our hypocrisy may garner short-term gains for us, and allow us to continue to enjoy feeling holier-than-thou, which is the temptation. But in the long run it only sends more fuming folks into the camp of the “terrorists”.

[FONT=&quot]
[COLOR=Blue]The conclusion is located directly below

Last edited by charleslb; May 4th, 2011 at 08:40 PM.
charleslb is offline  
Old May 4th, 2011, 05:19 PM   #2
Intern
 
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 29

The Cure for Terrorism

[FONT=&quot][SIZE=4]Conclusion

To wrap up, there’s a word, ressentiment, which Webster’s defines as follows, “deep-seated resentment, frustration, and hostility accompanied by a sense of being powerless to express these feelings directly”. This word and psychological concept pretty much explains the cause and nature of what we nowadays call “terrorism”. Terrorism is merely people acting out their ressentiment. [SIZE=4]

[FONT=&quot][SIZE=4] And no, ressentiment is not something that arises in people’s psyches for no justifiable reason whatsoever. It’s in the main a condition suffered by underdogs and victims of injustice. To state a fact of global sociology 101, thanks to good ole neocolonialism and globalization the peoples of the LDCs have become, en masse, victims of ressentiment at the hands of the business and political establishment that runs the rich countries. Hence the growing appeal of terrorist movements and ideology. And the catastrophic irony is that just about everything our government does to combat the terrorist menace seems designed to feed into ressentiment! Our wars of greed and gain that we dishonestly wrap in the mock-heroic mantle of being the “Free World’s” champion against the terrorist scourge; our inhumane brutalization of prisoners; our disrespect of the national sovereignty of other countries (as in the case of the recent assassination of bin Laden on foreign soil), and our hypocritical denial about our own culpability, as a society, in generating the global politico-economic environment that produces “mad as hell” extremists; all of the above is why we find ourselves besieged by a terrorist threat. [SIZE=4]

[FONT=&quot][SIZE=4] If we really wish to take a morally brave and honest step in the direction of curing the world of the ressentiment that causes “terrorism”, we need to drop the victim’s mentality, and stop thinking that “they”, the terrorist baddies, are merely violently miffed malcontents who envy our affluence and are galled by our goodness. We need to contritely and courageously step up to the plate of accountability, acknowledge the inequities we’ve visited upon the masses of Third World humanity, and begin to make things right. [SIZE=4]

[FONT=&quot][SIZE=4] Right now Obama is riding high on his recent coup, it’s eclipsed the idiotic “birther” movement; it’s distracting people nicely from his failure to rectify what was done to the economy under the previous administration, and from the fact that he’s just another establishment politician serving the moneyed elite at the working person’s expense; and it’s restored confidence in government (so they say). Whacking Osama has given Obama the gift of historical redemption, and a big snort of political meth, as it were, for his presidential ego. I seriously doubt, then, that he’s going to be the man, any time soon, to set us on a more righteous course to a ressentiment-free world. [SIZE=4]

[FONT=&quot][SIZE=4] Nor will this bill be filled by anyone the Republicans might put up against him in the next election. Conservative Republicans are the people par excellence for serving the aforementioned moneyed elite and fomenting ressentiment all over the place! No, unless you don’t mind suffocating, don’t hold your breath for conservatives to stop viewing terrorism as a national security matter, and begin recognizing it as a social justice issue. [SIZE=4]

[FONT=&quot][SIZE=4] What it comes down to then is that if our change-touting Democratic president is a long shot for bringing a real change to how the U.S. operates in the world, and the Republicans are complete write-offs as far as ushering in an era of reining in capitalist gluttony goes, our society is going to have to change its aggrieving ways from the grassroots up. It’s going to take a real people’s movement to make it a world of “justice and equality for all” – and we will never place “terrorism” behind us until we do finally make “justice and equality for all” a thoroughly reified, actualized ideal. As the slogany but spot-on saying goes, No justice, no peace. We can either begin to cooperate with that socio-ethical truth, or continue to suffer the deadly consequences. Ultimately, it’s our moral and historical choice to make.


charleslb is offline  
Old May 5th, 2011, 04:37 AM   #3
Congressional Leader
 
DodgeFB's Avatar
 
Joined: Mar 2009
From: Undisclosed
Posts: 2,751

Sounds like the old "blame America first" opinion to me. And the whole damn world needs to know America is no longer rich. We wasted most of what we had, a lot of it on those resentful countries.


I can tell you something that does cause "[FONT=&quot][SIZE=4]resentment". When someone writes a long contrary opinion in the effort to sound superior to the ones reading it. Like I am just smarter than most, I care more than most. I have all the answers.

You be as "[FONT=&quot][SIZE=4] contrite " as you want to be. But when someone decides they want to terrorize someone they take their own risk.

Last edited by DodgeFB; May 5th, 2011 at 04:40 AM.
DodgeFB is offline  
Old May 17th, 2011, 10:06 PM   #4
Intern
 
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 10

Whether you live near or far from previous terrorist activity, the fear of terrorist political acts entails many complicated emotions. That feeling of dread we experience when we hear the news of yet another attack is a potent cocktail of guilt, anger, confusion, and helplessness. When we listen to news of tragedy, we often regret how ignorant we are of what is going on elsewhere in the world.
rachard1583 is offline  
Old June 5th, 2011, 07:02 PM   #5
Intern
 
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 29

Quote:
Originally Posted by DodgeFB View Post
Sounds like the old "blame America first" opinion to me...
Sounds like the ole blame our Third World victims for not loving us mind-set to me.

charleslb is offline  
Old June 7th, 2011, 03:02 AM   #6
Representative
 
RoccoR's Avatar
 
Joined: Aug 2010
From: Reynoldsburg, OH
Posts: 211

DodgeFB, [FONT=Palatino Linotype] et al,

This, I think, might be just a little harsh.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DodgeFB View Post
Sounds like the old "blame America first" opinion to me. And the whole damn world needs to know America is no longer rich. We wasted most of what we had, a lot of it on those resentful countries.
(COMMENT)

[COLOR=#323232] Don't confuse the "Blame America First" approach with the idea of constructive criticism." There is no perfect system of government; least of all America. All nations can stand a little improvement in domestic and international affairs; especially in the realm of social-economic operations.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DodgeFB View Post
I can tell you something that does cause "[FONT=&quot][SIZE=4]resentment". When someone writes a long contrary opinion in the effort to sound superior to the ones reading it. Like I am just smarter than most, I care more than most. I have all the answers.
(COMMENT)

Communications skills in this kind of forum, and in this kind of setting, is often difficult to master. I have a most difficult time with it; myself! We certainly miss the body language and tone when we write. I wouldn't read more into a post then is really there.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DodgeFB View Post
You be as "[FONT=&quot][SIZE=4] contrite " as you want to be. But when someone decides they want to terrorize someone they take their own risk.
(COMMENT)

AH! I certainly agree that intimidation bares with it - the law of unintended consequences.

But I think [FONT=Palatino Linotype](the reverse is true in some regards) that it is also important to note that the US is an evangelistic nation. Like many religions, it goes door-to-door, knocking and asking: "have come to Democracy and found the light of Capitalism." And it just cannot be any brand of democracy. The outcome must be to our satisfaction. The US was gravely disappointed in the outcome of the Palestinian elections; and penalized the Palestinian voters because they didn't pick the party the US wanted.
REMEMBER: The US only believes in democracy if the outcome agrees with the foreign policy.

The world see this as a very one-sided view of democracy. They can vote and elect a popular government, but the US will make them suffer for it, it it doesn't agree.
This is just one-mans view.

Most Respectfully,
R
RoccoR is offline  
Old June 7th, 2011, 03:05 AM   #7
Congressional Leader
 
DodgeFB's Avatar
 
Joined: Mar 2009
From: Undisclosed
Posts: 2,751

Quote:
Originally Posted by charleslb View Post
Sounds like the ole blame our Third World victims for not loving us mind-set to me.

Well if it makes ya feel better we may be on our way to being a " Third World" country in our life time. That should make the haters very happy.
DodgeFB is offline  
Old June 8th, 2011, 03:59 PM   #8
Representative
 
RoccoR's Avatar
 
Joined: Aug 2010
From: Reynoldsburg, OH
Posts: 211

DodgeFB, [FONT=Palatino Linotype]et al,
Quote:
Originally Posted by DodgeFB View Post
Well if it makes ya feel better we may be on our way to being a " Third World" country in our life time. That should make the haters very happy.
(COMMENT)

There is a certain amount of truth in this.

Most Respectfully,
R
RoccoR is offline  
Old June 8th, 2011, 06:00 PM   #9
Vice President
 
David's Avatar
 
Joined: Jul 2009
From: Opa Locka
Posts: 5,423

Quote:
Originally Posted by DodgeFB View Post
Sounds like the old "blame America first" opinion to me.
Considering America has a history of supporting terrorism, the argument is valid in this case. We can't go around telling Iran to stop funding Hamas while the guy we sent to blow the hell out of SA now enjoys our protection from arrest. And that's just 1 terrorist, the 'bin Laden of the West'.
David is offline  
Old June 8th, 2011, 09:03 PM   #10
Congressional Leader
 
DodgeFB's Avatar
 
Joined: Mar 2009
From: Undisclosed
Posts: 2,751

Quote:
Originally Posted by David View Post
Considering America has a history of supporting terrorism, the argument is valid in this case. We can't go around telling Iran to stop funding Hamas while the guy we sent to blow the hell out of SA now enjoys our protection from arrest. And that's just 1 terrorist, the 'bin Laden of the West'.
Okay I will tell you what I wish the US would do.

1.Gather up as much of our war toys we have scattered around the world as possible.

2. Bring all out military back to the US or US waters.

3.Put some of them on our borders. Not just South, but all.

4.Stop trying to buy friends. It just makes people dependent on us. And we are broke. If we want to help some poor people send them a tractor and plow. Maybe some seed. If they eat the seed they are on their own. But don't send anyone else weapons.

5. Just try minding our own business for 5 years and see what happens.
DodgeFB is offline  
Old June 8th, 2011, 10:27 PM   #11
Vice President
 
David's Avatar
 
Joined: Jul 2009
From: Opa Locka
Posts: 5,423

Quote:
Originally Posted by DodgeFB View Post
Okay I will tell you what I wish the US would do.

1.Gather up as much of our war toys we have scattered around the world as possible.

2. Bring all out military back to the US or US waters.

3.Put some of them on our borders. Not just South, but all.

4.Stop trying to buy friends. It just makes people dependent on us. And we are broke. If we want to help some poor people send them a tractor and plow. Maybe some seed. If they eat the seed they are on their own. But don't send anyone else weapons.

5. Just try minding our own business for 5 years and see what happens.
Genocide, dictators overthrowing republics left and right and not 1 but 3 nations trying to conquer the world. That's what happened last time anyway.
David is offline  
Old June 13th, 2011, 12:04 AM   #12
Senator
 
obtuseobserver's Avatar
 
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 862

Quote:
Originally Posted by David View Post
Considering America has a history of supporting terrorism, the argument is valid in this case. We can't go around telling Iran to stop funding Hamas while the guy we sent to blow the hell out of SA now enjoys our protection from arrest. And that's just 1 terrorist, the 'bin Laden of the West'.
Yes we can.

Geopolitics is a matter of our government protecting our interests not submitting to the notion that if we assassinates political leaders like OBL Iran gets to kill the President of Lebanon. It is not a matter of quid pro quo.

Was Carlos the Jackal merely the equivalent of a Putin operative killing Litvenenko in London?

The means are not the issue but the reason for emplying them.
obtuseobserver is offline  
Old June 13th, 2011, 12:08 AM   #13
Senator
 
obtuseobserver's Avatar
 
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 862

Quote:
Originally Posted by David View Post
Genocide, dictators overthrowing republics left and right and not 1 but 3 nations trying to conquer the world. That's what happened last time anyway.
huh?

.....................
obtuseobserver is offline  
Old June 13th, 2011, 07:53 AM   #14
Vice President
 
David's Avatar
 
Joined: Jul 2009
From: Opa Locka
Posts: 5,423

Quote:
Originally Posted by obtuseobserver View Post
huh?

.....................
The last time we trying isolationism, the Fascists took over the world.
David is offline  
Old June 13th, 2011, 12:16 PM   #15
myp
Founding Father
 
myp's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2009
From: us
Posts: 5,841

Quote:
Originally Posted by David View Post
The last time we trying isolationism, the Fascists took over the world.
Correlation does not equal causation (not to mention we weren't actually isolationist). Also, if you still have free trade, it isn't exactly isolationism.
myp is offline  
Old June 23rd, 2011, 08:21 AM   #16
Representative
 
RoccoR's Avatar
 
Joined: Aug 2010
From: Reynoldsburg, OH
Posts: 211

myp, David, [COLOR="Black"][FONT="Palatino Linotype"][SIZE="3"]et al,

Yes, I agree.
Quote:
Originally Posted by myp View Post
Correlation does not equal causation (not to mention we weren't actually isolationist). Also, if you still have free trade, it isn't exactly isolationism.
(COMMENT)

There are a couple of points I think need reinforced.
  • There is a big difference between being isolationist and allowing political/governmental, military and economic situations to develop on their own; without an external influences or pressures being applied by the US. It is the theory of allowing a people to choose their own destiny.
  • It is impossible for the US to help anyone if it runs its own economy into the ground, with a stagnation in economic, commercial, industrial and scientific/educational development. No nation should follow America if, America itself, cannot rebuild its own nation. And right now, in this time, no one in Washington is worried about rebuilding America --- a set of programs we so desperately need.

Places like Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, and Yemen (just as a few examples) are not being furthered by American interference. These nations, like the Palestinians, see America as evangelistic. We are like the Jehovah Witness knocking on the door and asking: Have you come to democracy - have you praised capitalism lately? Then when they do, and don't chose the type of government we push --- we organize sanctions and trading penalties against them.

We need to allow these nations to come to their own conclusion, without US interference. This is not isolationism, this is freedom to chose their own way, allowed to make their own choices.

In the mean time, the money we waste on trying to nation build these countries should be reinvested in America; rebuilding our power grid, becoming energy efficient, making education affordable, building a scientific base for research and development. We need to be building an infrastructure that gives America a competitive advantage in the realms of industrialization and commercial enterprises. Again, this is not isolationism, but making us stronger, the envy of the world.

A nation like ours, when I step out on the porch and see my friends losing their jobs, the kids not being able to afford to go to college, the power out because we didn't repair the power grid, I know that our leadership is not something we want to export, because it is dominated by men that would line their own pockets rather then help the nation.

Think about it a minute.

Most Respectfully,
R
RoccoR is offline  
Old June 25th, 2011, 07:55 PM   #17
Banned
 
Joined: Feb 2011
From: Canada
Posts: 299

Quote:
Originally Posted by charleslb View Post
[FONT=&quot][SIZE=4] To be politically forthright here, if not exactly politically correct, the rich, dominant nations of the modern world order, with the United States as their point man, neocolonially force themselves, i.e. their will and agenda and selfish economic interests, their political system, their culture and entertainment industry, their secularism, etc. upon the disempowered peoples of so-called ?underdeveloped? societies. This naturally enough results in the resentment and retaliation we see coming from the ?Third World?, which unfortunately sometimes manifests as ?terrorism?.

[FONT=&quot][SIZE=4]But, of course, like street gang members who feel unfairly picked on when the police aggressively target them, as if their own bad behavior hasn?t brought on the righteous reprisals of the community they prey on, we in the economically and technologically high-powered countries make out that we?re just the innocent victims of extremists and madmen. We take no portion of responsibility for the hostility and hate internationally incurred by the bad behavior of the corporate kingpins and politicians who rule us. We?re just too darn arrogantly convinced of our own moral goodness, as a society, to own up to how we engender the anti-Western ill will on the streets of Caracas, Cairo, and Kuala Lumpur.

[FONT=&quot][SIZE=4]Every society, of course, indoctrinates its citizens with a positive national self-image, and with an ideological worldview that patly rationalizes its shortcomings and sins. This is perhaps taken a bit further in the United States than in, say, Bangladesh or Belgium. For, alas, the people of the United States have a good deal more to rationalize and justify than nations without a ?manifest destiny?, so to speak. The overcompensating result is that while you find national egos raging in every country, the American national ego often seems to rage more than most. In other words, Americans tend to be uncritically self-assured of their own national greatness and goodness. Being a superpower, and the only country currently enjoying bragging rights to that toplofty tag; being technologically advanced; economically powerful; militarily mighty; the light-bearer of democracy; and, last but not least, being, in the minds of its own citizens at least, a ?nice? nation, a morally superior boy scout, do-gooder country, well, no wonder that many Americans can?t imagine that their grand and god-blessed land is anything other than a benevolent force for progress and freedom.

[FONT=&quot][SIZE=4]And of course the official, whitewashed version of history and current events that we?re all taught in school and by the mainstream media supports and reinforces this self-flattering national self-identity. Except for those who choose to educate themselves, the average American is blissfully insulated from the dark and damning truth of the brutally and bloodily greedy activities of his society?s ruling class around the world. Indeed, although the voracious money-hunger of the capitalist elite, and the methods and machinations by which it feasts itself on the natural and human resources of LDCs (less developed countries), constitute one of the most heinous ongoing crimes against humanity in history, we the people of the U.S., the UK, Japan, Germany, etc. get to continue fancying ourselves the harmless and humanitarian world citizens!

[FONT=&quot][SIZE=4]So, when the Howard Beales of the pauperized South shout over to us in the filthy-rich North that they?re "as mad as hell and not going to take it anymore!", when they shout this with vehement words, with public protests and the burning of American flags, or with ?terrorist? bombs, we?re utterly perplexed and latch onto self-complacent explanations. We tell ourselves that they hate us because they envy us, or because they don?t want to live under the rule of law, or because they?re irrational religious fanatics, and so forth. And if these self-absolving explanations don?t pop into our minds by themselves, they?re promptly planted there by the commentators and talking heads on TV.

[FONT=&quot][SIZE=4]Believing then, naively and narcissistically, that our saintly society is a blameless target of unprovoked hate, we retreat into both a victim?s mentality ? in which the big bad Third World is out to get us for no good reason ? and into a righteous and retributive anger that get?s people literally dancing in the streets when one of our national bogeymen is assassinated. Instead of seeking to make anti-Western ?terrorism? a thing of the past by doing the right thing, by addressing and redressing the legitimate and substantial grievances of the LDCs, instead of fighting terrorism by fighting for social, economic, and political justice at home and abroad, we beef up domestic security and claim to be fighting a global ?War on Terror?.

[FONT=&quot][SIZE=4]Well, to make matters even worse, our sanctimonious ?War on Terror? isn?t even a good faith campaign to ?get the bad guys? ? note that it took more than a decade to finally get Osama, hardly proof that we?re engaged in a sincere effort to stamp out the terrorist threat! ? rather, it?s a morally phony-baloney cover for the U.S. to throw its weight around in the pursuit of a more secure lock on its status of being the only world superpower. It?s a pious pretense for stretching out the ?American Century? a bit longer. It?s a dissembling, duplicitous fa?ade for American imperialism. That is, it?s further reason for ?them? to feel antipathy for ?us?.

[FONT=&quot][SIZE=4]And, to the extent that the ?War on Terror? really is an attempt to put an end to international terrorism, well, we?re going about it in a rather counterproductive fashion. Our government?s tack, essentially, is to use fear and violence to exercise its putative moral authority as the world?s policeman. Quite simply, we?re trying to out-terrorize the terrorists. Of course we use euphemisms for our own terrorism, such as ?Guantanamo Bay?, ?waterboarding?, ?cruise missile strikes?, ?invasion?, ?occupation?, and ?war?. But we should know by now that, in the wise words of the movie Star Wars, fear leads to anger and hate, and anger and hate pull everyone into the dark side. And while I?m at it with the clich?s, to state a well-worn political and psychological truism, violence breeds more violence. At the end of the day of reckoning, we?re going to find that we?ve just created a more oppositional geopolitical situation for ourselves.

[FONT=&quot][SIZE=4]Oh, we can continue to torture prisoners and use privacy-invading techniques of intelligence gathering, which will give us the occasional feel-good victory, such as the recent execution slaying of bin Laden, but at the sacrifice of the very moral authority that we feel entitles us to use such methods in the first place. By playing into such an ethical paradox Americans only lower themselves in the eyes of the world, and come to look like thugs every bit as much as the ?terrorists?.

[FONT=&quot][SIZE=4]Last night I saw Alan Dershowitz discussing this very question on the Piers Morgan show. He raised the issue of how America should resolve its hypocrisy about the high-handed and abusive methods it?s employed to finally find bin Laden, and to fight its asymmetrical war with its Third World enemies. Our options are three.

[FONT=&quot][SIZE=4]Option #1, we can resolve our hypocrisy by renouncing our highfalutin principles and going full-out with a ruthless modus operandi. Or, option #2, we can continue to perfidiously profess to be in favor of certain ethical and law-abiding behavioral norms while clandestinely violating those norms right and left when it serves us to do so. Or, finally, option #3, we can begin to actually walk the goody-goody talk we like to talk out of our backsides. We can forsake cruel and unusual forms of interrogation, and illegal wiretaps, etc. We can dare to genuinely respect everyone?s human rights and dignity and take our chances. [FONT=&quot]Dershowitz [FONT=&quot][SIZE=4]never really made it decisively clear which option he favors, but it?s clear which option Obama has chosen. The USA?s pres seems to prefer option #2, hypocrisy, i.e. business as usual.

[FONT=&quot][SIZE=4]You might be thinking ?Surprise, surprise, he?s a politician after all!; true, but the problem is that nothing instills resentment quite like hypocrisy, and just because we?ve come to expect it from our political leaders doesn?t mean that those on the receiving end of our national hypocrisy will apathetically dismiss it the way we do. They?re more likely to be irked by it into hardening their line against America and the ?First World?. Sure, our hypocrisy may garner short-term gains for us, and allow us to continue to enjoy feeling holier-than-thou, which is the temptation. But in the long run it only sends more fuming folks into the camp of the ?terrorists?.


[FONT=&quot] The conclusion is located directly below
[SIZE=4] @ the moron who would suggest that terrorism is OUR FAULT.
[SIZE=4]
[SIZE=4] ****ing liberals. No wonder we fascists wish to line up the lot of you and empty lead shells into your skulls. This is absolutely one of the dumbest posts I have ever read.
Fascist Canuck is offline  
Old June 25th, 2011, 07:57 PM   #18
Banned
 
Joined: Feb 2011
From: Canada
Posts: 299

Quote:
Originally Posted by myp View Post
Correlation does not equal causation (not to mention we weren't actually isolationist). Also, if you still have free trade, it isn't exactly isolationism.
[SIZE=4] You WERE indeed 'isolationist'. This is just your bullshit way of covering up your cowardly asses whilst my relatives had bombs dropping around them in Britain.
Fascist Canuck is offline  
Old June 25th, 2011, 07:59 PM   #19
Banned
 
Joined: Feb 2011
From: Canada
Posts: 299

Quote:
Originally Posted by David View Post
The last time we trying isolationism, the Fascists took over the world.
[SIZE=4] No, they didn't. They TRIED. If not for the communists, sadly enough, they would have succeeded. I am none too happy about democracy and communism surviving fascism.
Fascist Canuck is offline  
Old June 25th, 2011, 08:18 PM   #20
Vice President
 
David's Avatar
 
Joined: Jul 2009
From: Opa Locka
Posts: 5,423

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fascist Canuck View Post
[SIZE=4] No, they didn't. They TRIED. If not for the communists, sadly enough, they would have succeeded. I am none too happy about democracy and communism surviving fascism.
They failed because Japan provoked the US into joining the war. The Soviets (Russians today) claim they won the war, they didn't. They ended it quicker then it would have but the only reason they didn't get overrun was because the US had taken out Italy and was steamrolling France thus dividing their forces. My point still stands, had the US not joined the war Spain, France, Italy, Britain and Germany would be the only nations in Europe today, all fascist except Britain.
David is offline  
Reply

  Political Fray > The Political Fray > Government and Politics

Tags
cure , terrorism



Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Is Terrorism a Form of Pure Evil? charleslb Philosophy 13 October 3rd, 2017 12:56 PM
Lets define terrorism ... netanyahoo Philosophy 11 October 28th, 2011 11:11 AM
What step you need on Terrorism by GOVT of India????? bunty Government and Politics 7 January 22nd, 2009 09:28 AM


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed



Copyright © 2009-2013 Political Fray. All rights reserved.