Contact
Lifestream
The BBC is broadcasting a three part documentary series, starting next Wednesday, titled The Power of Nightmares: The Rise of the Politics of Fear that takes on the terror myth and adds a fair bit of social analysis.
Adam Curtis presents a world gone terribly wrong and examines what many have been taking for granted. And how a “jittery media-driven democracy” and political opportunists have made the most of the situation, eating away at the very things that are good and honorable in society.
Adam Roberts, professor of international relations at Oxford, says that governments often believe struggles with terrorists “to be of absolute cosmic significance”, and that therefore “anything goes” when it comes to winning. The historian Linda Colley adds: “States and their rulers expect to monopolise violence, and that is why they react so virulently to terrorism.”
The Power of Nightmares seeks to overturn much of what is widely believed about Osama bin Laden and al-Qaida. The latter, it argues, is not an organised international network. It does not have members or a leader. It does not have “sleeper cells”. It does not have an overall strategy. In fact, it barely exists at all, except as an idea about cleansing a corrupt world through religious violence.
Source: The Guardian
I wonder who it was that flew four planes at American iconic buildings?
It was either terrorists or it was Oxford professors.
If you start with the conclusion, its easy to prove that conclusion.
These are nevertheless important questions to ask oneself. Unless one wishes to throw away one’s own life, civil liberties and the financial and moral greatness of an entire country - for nothing. Phantoms perhaps. Or a really minor and not so intimidating group of religious fanatics at best. At any rate, not worth the attention. It might be, as hinted, a general fault of all states. Someone might have an agenda or it might just be an innate reflex of the republic.
And has it ever occurred to you that your government might not wish you entirely well? Nor any of us. It is my experience that governments rarely act in the best interest of its citizens. That is the first general fault one has to see beyond in order to possibly peer through the fog of this story.
I am sure the program will make everything clear. More so than the article.
A program titled "…The rise of the politics of fear" is likely to ‘prove’ that there is such politics an that there is a rise in it.
The only myth is that so many people believe that 9/11 never happened.
1) 9/11 DID happen to Americans.
2) A revenge reaction is demanded by Americans.
3) Only after that can and do we worry about our and other governments’ wishes.
But a president that uses terminology like "axis of evil" is right up on the same level. I agree that the conclusion shines thru. But so would any piece of academic work. If that is really the conclusion and they can back it up then the title is fitting. Is it bad journalism as such? Maybe.
Also bear in mind that social theorists like Nietzsche, Durkheim .. even Freud and more modern thinkers would have most likely subscribed to the idea of "political fear". And the illusion of the good and caring government. IT is no myth.
And even if YOU want revenge and even if everything is exatly the way we’ve been told, that revenge is going to be exacted by the government. Much in the same way taxes are being collected and distributed at the discretion of the government in question. Point is, much is squandered and god knows if the money ends up where it’s supposed to. Either you are with your governemt or not. You can’t go both ways. If there is a doubt in your mind about the honesty of those elected (which is a possibility you obviously do not want to face at the point) then acknowledge the prospect that you are being hyped up, lied to and manipulated. It would be the conspiracy of the decade. An allegation too serious to brush off and say "we demand revenge, we’ll get back finding the truth later".
Ok … hmmm …
1) Yes. That can’t be disproven. The actual event did take place. But beyond that all we have is what the media has been feeding us. And in turn what the government has told them.
2) Revenge on that scale is not acceptable. I would have though we were beyond that. If Americans harbour such inappropriate emotions and call of equally inappropriate action, then we obviously have a problem with you. Maybe these fundamentalists had a point after all. Self-fulfilling prophecies sort-of. You just failed the test. BEEEP.
3) I believe it is the duty of a reasonable man (woman) to think ahead. The only thing you can be sure of is that you as a people have played it exactly the way your government wished you to.
What should the world do about:
1) Iran
Bin Ladin
2) North Korea
3) Iraq
4) China
5) Indonesia
6) India
7) Pakistan
9) Zarqawi
10) Sweden
11) France
12) Germany
Who all mean us harm.
The quote I like from Freud is "Sometimes a cigar is just a smoke"
Translation for the nuanced: "Sometimes things are just as they appear to be"
Sorry, can’t seem to find "Zarqawi" and "Bin Ladin" on the map .. hehe.
Understand this. People are your "enemies" because you make them so.
For such a young contry as the USA, you have attracted a fair share of enemies. Mostly because you meddle in other people’s affairs. Your attempts at diplomacy has ALWAYS been a scam and a farse. And your foreign policy has NEVER ONCE been honest. It has been stopping communism this and topple home-baked dictators that. For 150 years you have chased your deamons across the sea and land (and soon in space I hear) and we, the world, have let you. Either you’ll start to play ball or we’ll make you. Again, with the circular prophecies. We had patience for a very long time and only because the times and attitudes were right for it in a battle weary post-WW2 Europe. Modern mass media and the newfound fascination with social action and affiliations has exposed the high and mighty moralist America for what it really is.
By "us" I assume you mean the "us" as in "you". Well then that is a might impressive list, but in reality it would include every nation on the planet should you use the parameters I have now learned that you live by.
But no, you are not wrong in making that list, keep up the work, you’ll soon have more enemies than you’ll possibly be able to fight.
And continuing on your logic of what countries mean you harm and of revenge …
I think it would be ok if Japan deployed nuclear weapons over, say New York or Los Angeles, to make up for the difference in casualities of Pearl Harbor and Hiroshima / Nagasaki.
And I could kill George Bush based on the (fictitious example) logic that his great, great, great, great, great, great, great grandfather served as a mercenary in the service of the Hapsburgers during the Thirty Years’ War (1618-1648). Whatever.
The logic of revenge is so sweet it’s no wonder people fall for it.
You didn’t answer the question. The question is:
What should the world do about that list of enemies of the world?
There were 50 odd Swedes killed at the World Trade Center on 9/11.
What are you doing?
At very least you should try to prevent future occurrences. Maybe call back all Swedes that are in the USA.
It wasn’t 9/11/1654. It was 9/11/2001.
I’m curious. Is there anything worth fighting for?
We shouldn’t do anything. You make it sound like it’s our collective problem when it’s really YOUR problem. And don’t try to wriggle out of this. We don’t have any part in this dirty business. Haha. It’s amusing to see how easy the US shifts stance. All of a sudden your enemies are ours. Wow. You sure managed to create those enemies without our help or consent in the first place.
If 50 or so Swedes were killed on 9/11 (I’m gonna trust you on that, never looked into the exact number though) I certainly don’t care. Why should I? Do Swedish lives mean more than anyone else’s. No. More like just as little as everyone else’s. And don’t try to make me think those supposedly 50 indirect deaths makes me somehow part of your dirty witch hunt and obligated to act. It’s pretty obvious that most that died were americans and there can be no doubt about who was targeted and why.
There might be a time for recalling swedish citizens from the US. Not becasuse of "terrorist" threats but because of other developements in the internal structure of the US government. But I’m in no position to make calls like that. Yet.
What am I doing about it? I’m arguing with you aren’t I? Because I feel that your attitude (which is probably shared in one way or another by most americans) is the real problem. Everything else is just symptoms.
Sure, there are things worth fighting for. Even violently. Don’t mistake me for a "liberal" just because I’m not sharing your outlook. But given a choice, peace and quiet is always preferable to fighting. But THAT end will require examining the entire american political system and disassembling most of it together with public opinion.