Word Games
What might be generically termed as 'red scares’ or to bring it up to date, the 'global terror network’ have an extremely long pedigree, some five hundred years to be exact. In fact, the idea that there are secret networks with the objective of overthrowing the 'established order’ can be traced back to the witch hunts against women that first appeared in the 15th century, not coincidentally with the rise of capitalism. Over these five centuries, the demons have changed genders, names and means, but one thing has stayed constant, 'secret terror networks’ whose one objective is the destruction of the state...
[19482]
|
Uruknet on Alexa
>
:: Segnala Uruknet agli amici. Clicka qui.
:: Invite your friends to Uruknet. Click here.
:: Segnalaci un articolo :: Tell us of an article
|
Word Games
William Bowles, I'n'I
January 10, 2006
Eighteen
forty-eight, the famous 'springtime of peoples’, was the first and last
European revolution in the (almost) literal sense, the momentary
realisation of the dreams of the left, the nightmares of the right, the
virtually simultaneous overthrow of old regimes over the bulk of
continental Europe west of the Russian and Turkish empires, from
Copenhagen to Palermo, from Brasov to Barcelona…. Henceforth there was
to be no general social revolution of the kind envisaged before 1848 in
the 'advanced’ countries of the world. – Eric Hobsbaum, The Age of Capital 1848- 1875
What
might be generically termed as 'red scares’ or to bring it up to date,
the 'global terror network’ have an extremely long pedigree, some five
hundred years to be exact. In fact, the idea that there are secret
networks with the objective of overthrowing the 'established order’ can
be traced back to the witch hunts against women that first appeared in
the 15th century, not coincidentally with the rise of capitalism.
Over
these five centuries, the demons have changed genders, names and means,
but one thing has stayed constant, 'secret terror networks’ whose one
objective is the destruction of the state.
Interestingly,
in spite of trying for five hundred years, not a single one has come
anywhere near to succeeding, indeed, as the historical record shows,
the existence of these alleged 'networks of terror’ are either totally
fictitious or actually created by the state in the first place.
Almost
without exception, such 'threats’ emerge at times of crisis, crisis
that is to the established order, either of an economic or political
nature, or, where the state needs to pursue an immensely unpopular
policy that needs a justification that the 'normal’ means of persuasion
is incapable of delivering.
For
the last two hundred or so years, the mass media has been an essential
vehicle in the process but in fact one of the first documented uses of
the printing press was the production of propaganda leaflets by the
state during the witch-hunts conducted against women in the late 15th
century.
Nobody
likes change, especially radical upheavals, and that’s a fact. It means
taking a step into the unknown—better the devil you know and all that
stuff. It takes a total loss of faith in the established order for such
radical transformations, or revolutions, to occur and such events
happen very infrequently, but when they do, especially over the past
two centuries, they tend to occur at around the same time. This is
because the world and the dominant economies are so interconnected
regardless of the different local conditions that revolutions tend to
spread like wildfire.
The
first wave of revolutions to take this form was in 1848 or the Year of
Revolutions as it was called. Not coincidentally, they happened during
a series of capitalist economic crises that swept Europe and at a time
when the newly organising industrial working classes were getting their
act together. The old order, based on the land and the artisan was
being swept away by the factory and the rise of industrial capitalism.
One
of my favourite historians is Eric Hobsbaum whose Age of… series
captures the Victorian period superbly. In the second of the trilogy, Age of Capital 1848-1875 he says
The
men who officially presided over the affairs of the victorious
bourgeois order in its moment of triumph were a deeply reactionary
country nobleman from Prussia, an imitation emperor in France and a
succession of aristocratic land-owners is Britain. The fear of
revolution was real, the basic insecurity it indicated, deep-seated. At
the very end of our period the only example of revolution in an
advanced country, an almost localised and short-lived insurrection in
Paris [1871], produced a greater blood-bath than anything in 1848 and a
flurry of nervous diplomatic exchanges. Yet by this time the rulers of
the advanced states of Europe, with more or less reluctance, were
beginning to recognise not only that 'democracy’, i.e. a parliamentary
constitution based on a wide suffrage, was inevitable, but also that it
would probably be a nuisance but politically harmless. This discovery
had long since been made by the rulers of the United States. (p. 15)
Nobody
likes change, not the least the agrarian and artisan worker, both of
whom possessed their own tools and skills which to some degree gave
them a measure of control over their own lives. Forced removals which
totalled literally millions of people via the Enclosures Acts that were
enacted by European states during this period were obviously resisted
and likewise brutally repressed by the state. Accompanying the
repression was a concerted propaganda campaign that sought to present
resistance to the Enclosures Acts as the work of 'communards’ and
typically of 'foreigners’.
One
need only look at the way the rising middle classes were conscripted by
the ruling order of the day to resist the 'anarchy’ of the 'great
unwashed’ which included arming them and using them to 'defend’ the
state including occupying bridges and city centres across England
during the 1848 Chartist Uprising.
And,
as the 19th century progressed, and the rise of organised political
parties of the working classes developed, so too did the state’s
propaganda war against 'anarchists’ and 'foreign agitators’. So there
is nothing new in the current hysteria being conducted around the 'war
on terror’, merely its scale. And indeed, during the 19th century, a
series of repressive 'sedition’ laws were passed designed to function
in exactly same way as the current 'anti-terror’ legislation does.
What
should surely be apparent is the fact that without the complete
cooperation of the corporate and state-run media the propaganda
campaign being conducted in the name of the 'war on terror’ would be
impossible to execute.
What
I think is worth commenting on is the subliminal nature of the
propaganda campaign. Firstly, unfounded assumptions are made about
fundamental facts; opinions are presented to us as a fait accomplis. A
current case in point is the way Ariel Sharon’s life has been promoted
in the corporate/state media.
The
history of Israel and Sharon’s role in the removal of Palestinians from
their land and as importantly from history is entirely missing from
'news’ accounts. Instead, Sharon is a 'hero’.
As
a young man he joined the Jewish underground military organisation
Haganah, and fought in the Arab-Israeli war in 1948-49 after the
creation of the Jewish state. news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/in_depth/middle_east/2001/
israel_and_the_palestinians/profiles/1154622.stm
This
from an alleged profile of Sharon on the BBC’s Website. No mention of
the fact that Haganah was a terrorist organisation, involved in the
bombing of the King David Hotel in Jerusalem that resulted in the
deaths of dozens of British troops and diplomats.
Under the heading of "Tough Commander" we read
In
the 1950s he led a number of punitive military operations – one
incident in 1953 when 50 houses in the village of Qibya were blown up,
killing 69 residents.
Another in 1955 resulted in the deaths of 38 Egyptian troops in the Gaza Strip.
So
instead of being presented as a mass murderer, he is as far as the BBC
is concerned merely a "tough commander". So much for the BBC’s
so-called objectivity.
So
too with Israel’s invasion and occupation of Lebanon and Sharon’s
complicity in the massacre of thousands of Palestinians in Shatila
refugee camp. Instead, the invasion is presented thus
Mr
Sharon masterminded Israel’s disastrous invasion of Lebanon in 1982 …
[it] also resulted in the massacre of hundreds of Palestinians by
Lebanese Christian militiamen in two Beirut refugee camps under Israeli
control … Mr Sharon was removed from office in 1983 by an Israeli
tribunal investigating the 1982 Lebanon invasion, finding him
indirectly responsible for the killings
That
is the sum total of the BBC’s references to Sharon’s involvement. Most
importantly, it is the context within which these facts are reported.
Sharon is the "tough commander" his only objective is considered a
noble one, namely
The one aim in life for the former soldier and veteran politician is to ensure total security for Israel on his terms.
So
illegal occupation, mass forced expulsions and mass murder are
presented to us transformed into "total security". This is rewriting
history on a massive scale.
Contrast this with BBC’s coverage of Saddam Hussein’s crimes
It
is a simple enough justification. If the job of keeping Iraq together
required it, Saddam believed, then any amount of force was justified.
He did not kill people merely because he was blood-thirsty; in fact,
unlike his unspeakable son Uday, Saddam seemed to gain no particular
pleasure from having people tortured and murdered. It was simply
something that had to be done. news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/4371490.stm
This
is from a piece by the BBC’s John Simpson titled "Saddam’s strategy for
martyrdom". And what of Sharon’s history? Can we expect John Simpson to
write a comparable piece? Was Hussein "not merely … bloodthirsty" but
merely a "tough commander" I wonder?
Of
course critics will argue that comparing Sharon to Hussein is
outrageous but both are according to accepted definitions, mass
murderers. I’ll let the reader draw the appropriate conclusions
concerning the nature of the mass media’s coverage of Sharon and his
actions, never mind his words!
Tell
me, do the baddies of this world have a bad time? If anyone tries to
touch them, the evil men cut his hands and legs off. They hunt and
catch whatever they feel like eating. They don’t suffer from
indigestion and are not punished by Heaven. I want Israel to join that
club. Maybe the world will then at last begin to fear me instead of
feeling sorry for me. Maybe they will start to tremble, to fear my
madness instead of admiring my nobility. Thank God for that. Let them
tremble, let them call us a mad state. Let them understand that we are
a wild country, dangerous to our surroundings, not normal…
Were
these words uttered by an Arab or an Iranian politician can you imagine
the hysteria in the Western media, but these are the words of Ariel
Sharon in 1982. Nevertheless, as Sharon lies in a coma, the euologies
flood the airwaves.
How
are we to explain the massive contradiction between the way different
people and most importantly, events are presented in the Western 'news’
media?
In
the case of Israel, it is most obviously a means justifying the ends
process, and down to a single phrase, "Israel’s security". Note that
John Simpson alluded to the same reasoning behind Saddam’s actions but
contextualized it in an entirely different setting. There is for
example, no use of the phrase "bloodthirsty" when referring to Sharon,
but note that Saddam’s son Uday, is "unspeakable". The implication is
that Sharon is motivated by a noble cause—Israel’s security—but Saddam
has some baser motive, I assume power, money, or even because he is a
psychopath, but obviously land is not considered as base, even if it
belongs to somebody else, especially when that someone else is an Arab.
Hence
within the rhetoric another message is embedded, one that is not
spoken, merely inferred, namely that Jews, or Israelis have rights that
Arabs, or Palestinians don’t. Rights that justify Sharon’s and the
state of Israel’s actions. These are 'rights’ that are deeply embedded
in Western thought concerning the lives of Arabs. Simply put, Arabs
have less rights than Jews, or Europeans, hence they are less human.
Once this assumption is made, it enables the John Simpsons of this
world to interpret the actions of Ariel Sharon entirely differently
than the actions of Saddam Hussein and in turn, ascribe an entirely
different set of values and motivations to them.
Once
we understand this fundamental process, it enables us to interpret
everything that gets thrown at us on the TV, on radio and in the print
media. But it does mean that we have to dump an entire universe of
assumptions about the 'Western way of life’, which in essence assumes
that we are superior, that 'our’ culture is superior, that we are not
bound by the same set of laws and values that govern 'lesser’ beings.
Let Ariel Sharon’s words speak for themselves, as at least he has the
saving grace of being open about his desires, unlike the craven
hypocrites who work for the BBC and the rest of the corporate media.
Even
if you’ll prove to me by mathematical means that the present war in
Lebanon is a dirty immoral war, I don’t care. Moreover, even if you
will prove to me that we have not achieved and will not achieve any of
our aims in Lebanon, that we will neither create a friendly regime in
Lebanon nor destroy the Syrians or even the PLO, even then I don’t
care. It was still worth it. Even if Galilee is shelled again by
Katyushas in a year’s time, I don’t really care. We shall start another
war, kill and destroy more and more, until they will have had enough…
|
|
:: Article nr. 19482 sent on 11-jan-2006 03:23 ECT
www.uruknet.info?p=19482
Link: www.williambowles.info/ini/2006/0106/ini-0383.html
:: The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this website.
The section for the comments of our readers has been closed, because of many out-of-topics.
Now you can post your own comments into our Facebook page: www.facebook.com/uruknet
[ Printable version
] | [ Send it to a friend ]
[ Contatto/Contact ] | [ Home Page ] | [Tutte le notizie/All news ]
|
|
Uruknet on Twitter
::
RSS updated to 2.0
:: English
:: Italiano
::
Uruknet for your mobile phone:
www.uruknet.mobi
Uruknet on Facebook
The newsletter archive
:: All events
|