Naomi Klein on the War on Terror

[arisbe]

" What I mean is that on September 11, George W Bush went looking for a political philosophy to guide him in his new role as “War President,” a job for which he was uniquely unqualified. He found that philosophy in the Likud Doctrine, conveniently handed to him ready-made by the ardent Likudniks already ensconced in the White House. No thinking required. In the three years since, the Bush White House has applied this imported logic with chilling consistency to its global “war on terror” — complete with the pathologising and medicalising of the “Muslim mind”. It was the guiding philosophy in Afghanistan and Iraq, and may well extend to Iran and Syria. It’s not simply that Bush sees America’s role as protecting Israel from a hostile Arab world. It’s that he has cast the United States in the very same role in which Israel casts itself, facing the very same threat. In this narrative, the U.S. is fighting a never ending battle for its very survival against utterly irrational forces that seek nothing less than its total extermination.

"And now the Likudization narrative has spread to Russia."

Comments

[winegodeatsyou.livejournal.com]

You know, I really like Noami Klein, even if she is a hard leftist.

[richardf8]

Naomi is engaging in speculation here more than anything else. The reason that Sharon proceeds from the assumption that the goal these organizations have is the destruction of Israel is that Hamas and Islamic Jihad have DECLARED these as goals.

That said, Sharon's response is the wrong response because terrorism is rooted in anger. Escalation of hostilities breeds it rather than crushing it. But Putin, like Bush and Sharon, is prone to fascist tendencies.

No it is not anger motivated

[rawmr.livejournal.com]

Terrorism is rooted primarily in megalomania. The dupes that do the dirty work for these ruthlessly power hungry individuals are the many disenfranchised that you can find in any society. People so desperate for a moments perceived glory to asuage their unhappy existance that they can be talked into going to almost any extreme in order to acheive it. Such people can be found in all walks of life.

Re: No it is not anger motivated

[arisbe.livejournal.com]

And very poor people who have been promised a better life for the families if only they would die for the cause.

Yes, also an example of...

[rawmr.livejournal.com]

grabbing a moment of perceived glory, and emotions over-ruling reason.

Obviously poor living conditions is not were it begins or stops. Note the 2 French journalist kidnapped over a broad religious pariphenalia headscarf ban that of course had to included head scarves. Concessions could be made without limit, and it would never be enough.

"And very poor people who have been promised a better life for the families if only they would die for the cause."

[seraphimsigrist.livejournal.com]

I do not care for phrases like likudization which
strike me as coming out of some argumentation driven
by obscure hatreds. well in general I dislike schematic
phrases but this has a dark flavor to me taste more
than most. I doubt its ingestion is good for us.
+Seraphim.

[arisbe.livejournal.com]

It has the virtue of making it clear that the problem is not Israel or even Zionism, but one faction of the present government of Israel, a faction too much influenced by American intellectuals.

[seraphimsigrist.livejournal.com]

this is not a line of thought that I accept,
without any claim that I know I am right in
not doing so or with any other thought, but I
can understand that if one thinks this than that
is a way one might speak. anyhow... just the
occasional harrumph from russia with love
and hi to Maya. +Seraphim.

Tell me arisbe

[rawmr.livejournal.com]

Is S. not a master of speaking his mind purely and abstractly, while at the same time making any confrontation quite impossible? ;-)

[seraphimsigrist.livejournal.com]

well if I did it often it would be downright
annoying wouldnt it? but perhaps once in a while
is ok? +S.

Re: Tell me arisbe

[arisbe.livejournal.com]

+S doesn't seem to see much good ever coming out of confrontation as such, and there are days I agree with him.

I do not care for phrases like likudization

[rawmr.livejournal.com]

It does smack of reactionism.

[ex-prima237.livejournal.com]

I don't know if "likudizing" is a word or even a valid concept but I'll
spot you the vision thing. Bush was basically the anti-Clinton when he
started, then 9/11 gave him one, monomanical, over-riding purpose. I'm
not unhappy with it but I'm not always comfy with the one eyed view like
that either.