War,
the God That Failed
by
Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr.
by Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr.
Thinking
back to the scandals of the Clinton years, when all of America was
supposedly shocked and horrified at the thought of the president
and the intern, the 1990s seem to be the Age of Innocence.
The
Oval Office was relatively unstained as compared with the torture-sex
scenes from a Bush administration-run prison in Iraq, documented
in pictures and movies being viewed in an imperial temple by US
elected officials in the imperial capital.
It
is actually hard to think of a precedent for this: perhaps the Roman
Empire under Caligula, whose rule combined claims of godliness with
militarism, imperial marauding, political paranoia, fiscal profligacy,
and extreme decadence.
We
should add mass death to the list. We are right to wince and then
condemn pictures of naked prisoners in dog collars; not even Paul
Wolfowitz was willing to defend such practices in testimony. And
yet those private groups that bother to count civilian dead point
to figures that exceed 10,000 in this war alone. These figures rise
by 5, 10, 20, and more per day.
These
aren't deaths by injection but by machinegun bullets shot, and smart
bombs dropped, by US soldiers and paid for by US taxpayers, and
the US doesn't even bother to mention them much less count them.
Torture is awful; but should it really be necessary to point out
that the mass death of innocents is worse?
Why
do the former strike our moral conscience while the latter seems
like a bloodless number that could rise or fall a hundred or a thousand
without consequence? Perhaps because these mass deaths have produced
no lasting images that compare to those from Abu Ghraib.
Or
maybe it is what Hollywood directors have always known. Audiences
are shaken less by the image of a city being blown up than by a
dinner fork slowly penetrating the cheek of a single individual.
Our subjective reactions do not, however, change the objective reality.
Who
are these people being imprisoned and killed? The Red Cross estimated
that 9 out of 10 people being held at the prison were guilty of
nothing but being in the wrong place at the wrong time driving
while Iraqi. But just as striking is the supposed charge against
that 10th person, imprisoned for resisting an invading
foreign regime that has imposed brutal martial-law for longer than
a year. This same regime had been the reason for crippling trade
sanctions in the previous 10 years that the UN and other organizations
say account for more than a million deaths.
With
all this brutality, killing, and destruction (done in the name of
freedom and democracy!), the attention being given to officially
tolerated torture is disproportionate, to be sure, but not unwarranted.
Thanks to the prison pictures, a much-needed element has been introduced
into the calculus of US foreign policy: humanitarianism. In wartime,
the human element does tend to get lost.
If
you have seen the video clip of the US soldiers gunning down innocents
from an Apache helicopter, shooting people on the ground while looking
through viewfinders of the sort you see at the video arcade, you
gain insight into how the Bush administration has approached foreign
relations with disregard for the right to life, and how it has produced
a culture of depravity and moral degradation within the US government.
But
average Iraqis have many other images hitting them on a daily basis.
In Karbala, just yesterday, for example, US tanks rolled around
one of Islam's holiest cemeteries in one of Islam's holiest cities,
firing at anything that moved. Here is a place that is home to the
shrine to Mohammad's cousin Ali Ibn Abi Talib, and Shiite teaching
is that people buried here immediately enter paradise.
Anyone
who believes that such activities constitute "anti-terrorist" measures
is a blooming idiot. In fact, such activities, and this war in general,
could not have been better designed to create and inspire global
terrorism. If the US government needed an enemy to replace and outdistance
Communism, it is certainly doing its best to create one.
The
champions of the Iraq War are in transition phase, already assuming
that history will hold them accountable for an ongoing fiasco and
therefore trying to put the best spin on it. The way to think about
their efforts is by analogy to the early supporters of the Bolsheviks,
during the period of war communism.
The
revolution had gone badly, as evidenced by starvation, misery, death,
and no obvious way out apart from backing away from core doctrine.
This is what Lenin ultimately did, but in the meantime, the backers
of the Bolsheviks had to provide an explanation for why history's
great leap forward was straight into the abyss. The trick is to
do it without giving up the core ideological conviction. So too
with the warmongers who must concede the failure without surrendering
their attachment to the warfare state.
The
supporters of the Iraq War were no less fanatical than the Bolsheviks
in their conviction that power could accomplish miracles at the
push of a button. People like David
Brooks are now saying that the embrace of power was a mistake.
"We were blinded by idealism," he explains in a manner reminiscent
of every apologist for a fanatical despot in the history of the
world. Idealism! When your "idealism" results in military dictatorship,
mass jailings and killings, rivers of blood, and the seething anger
of half the world, you need to do more than confess that you might
have underestimated the "response our power would have on the people
we sought to liberate."
Let
us state the lesson in ways that might penetrate the brains of these
scribblers. When a person's "idealism" is contingent on issuing
a dictate that people must obey or be killed, and on the assumption
that human beings will do what they are told to do so long as the
knife is at their throat, and on the further assumption that the
people paying with their money and lives will believe every lie
you tell, it is time to rethink your ideals. Otherwise they will
end in mass suffering and devastation.
The
core problem in Iraq right now is not some rogue corporals engaged
in sadomasochistic torture; the problem is the "idealists" who think
nothing of attempting to reconstruct an entire region of the world
using bombs and bloodshed.
War
is idealism in the same way that Communism and Nazism were idealism:
the fanatical dream of people who insisted that the world conform
to their vicious imaginings, and just so happened to get hold of
the power of the state and used it to make their "ideals" happen.
They are the people who give us killing fields. War too is a god
that has failed.
People
say that the problem is too complicated, that the mess is too extensive
to be repaired. That's not true. The US could pull out today. It
could stop its imperial policies. It could end the insane levels
of military spending. It could seek peace with the world. The Bush
administration still has time to apologize to the world. The US
could seek friendship and reconciliation and trade, and genuinely
mean it and stick to it. We could become again the country that
the founders wanted us to be. Now that's an ideal.
May
15, 2004
Llewellyn
H. Rockwell, Jr. [send him
mail] is president of the Ludwig
von Mises Institute in Auburn, Alabama, editor of LewRockwell.com
and author of Speaking
of Liberty.
Copyright
© 2004 LewRockwell.com
Lew
Rockwell Archives
|