|
February
13, 2003
Excuses
and Justifications
Lies,
False Gods, and the Health of the State
Being
the most destructive endeavor humanity has ever practiced,
it is difficult to comprehend why wars seem like such a common
phenomenon. That is, unless one realizes that the very root
of the civic
religion permeating the modern world is in human gullibility,
and through it the vulnerability to the sort of mass hysteria
war propaganda was designed to produce. Democracy
has meant more than just abdication of property rights; it
has also brought about the abdication of reason and responsibility.
Dragging
any people into war is not an easy task. It is sometimes less
difficult if the enemy is willing to fight, as FDR realized
to his delight in 1941. But what does one do if the chosen
enemy is trying to avoid war? A modern democratic despot needs
not fear: there are always excuses and justifications.
Faking
History
Though
the terms are often used interchangeably, the purpose of excuses
is to invest a pending action with a semblance of legitimacy,
while justifications are usually conjured after the
fact.
For example,
the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution of 1964 was an excuse. Lyndon
B. Johnson invented
an incident in the Gulf of Tonkin to get congressional
approval for intervention in Vietnam. Though that particular
adventure ended in disaster, no one bothered to explain the
Resolution's role in it to a great many Americans, who still
believe the structure of lies built on it to justify
a decade of bloodshed in Southeast Asia.
Even if they
are later proven false, excuses accomplish their purpose if
they actually manage to help a country slide into war. Once
the shooting starts, questions tend to stop – which is why
governments love war. As Randolph
Bourne put it, "War is the health of the State."
This is also when excuses can give way to justifications,
which are even more dangerous.
Re-faking
History
Justifications
are easier to identify and refute, though usually not in time
to avert the damage based on their acceptance. Two of the
most infamous such misconceptions are that the American Civil
War was fought to abolish slavery, and that World War Two
was about stopping Hitler's genocide against the Jews. The
former dates to the War Between the States itself, and Lincoln's
misleading
Emancipation Proclamation. The latter has been concocted relatively
recently, both as a justification of World War Two for the
ignorant masses, and as an excuse for the sinister doctrine
of 'humanitarian intervention'. This is, incidentally, why
every designated enemy of the Empire is declared to be Hitler
Incarnate.
The ongoing
Balkans crisis is not the exception to these phenomena, but
rather a not-so-shining example of their practice. One could
start with Kosovo, 1999. While the Rambouillet
ultimatum was used as an excuse to being the bombing,
justifications for it changed several times during the 78-day
campaign. At first, the bombs were supposed to force the acceptance
of Rambouillet, then to stop the 'humanitarian catastrophe,'
then to stop the made-up 'genocide', then to 'return the refugees
home.' The war
crimes accusations leveled against Milosevic and top Yugoslav
officials were in service of justifying the attack as well.
Almost four years later, it is not uncommon to hear that the
purpose of NATO's attack was to 'liberate' Kosovo. Well, if
they meant to 'liberate' it from its original inhabitants,
cultural and religious heritage and all
semblance of civilization, then NATO can chalk up a formidable
success…
But who is
now even mentioning Rambouillet, the KLA's terrorist nature
(or even the KLA itself, for that matter)? The occupation
of this Serbian province is treated as a perfectly normal,
acceptable and even desirable state of affairs – even by those
who purport to challenge it.
A
Cover for Treason
Zoran
Djindjic's recent, well-publicized campaign
to open the discussion about the final status of Kosovo definitely
falls into the realm of both excuses and justifications. What
he claims are efforts to stop the province's "slide into
independence" are really exercises in electoral
posturing and attempts to secure
a partition of the province, if one is to believe pro-Albanian
sources close to the Empire. There is no trace of a principled
stand here, no indication that anyone in Belgrade is willing
to remind the occupiers that despite NATO's power and UN's
resolutions justifying the present situation, Kosovo remains
an illegally occupied territory. But by accepting the legitimacy
of the occupation, Belgrade has effectively already given
up Kosovo.
Something few
seem to have noticed is that by pretending to champion Serb
interests in Kosovo, Djindjic is both justifying his previous
treachery, and crafting excuses for more to come. After
all, the Empire and the Hague Inquisition need more Serb heads
for their process
of justification.
Polemikophilia
It
doesn't really matter that Djindjic is not actually intent
on waging war in order to increase his power. If is the power
itself that matters, and if Djindjic can get more by sacrificing
his people, he will. Other Balkans leaders have done much
the same: Croatia's Tudjman, Bosnia's Izetbegovic, the KLA,
the surrendering Macedonian regime, and on several occasions,
Slobodan Milosevic. Countless people they claimed the right
to lead suffered greatly, and for what? Without war, it would
have been impossible for Croatia to become Serbenfrei
as it is today. Without Izetbegovic sacrificing thousands
of his compatriots, his ideas
would have never had as much influence among the Bosnian Muslims.
Without a campaign of terror, a mass exodus and a NATO aggression,
the KLA would have never gained dominion over Kosovo. Without
supporting war and then surrendering, Milosevic would have
never stayed in power for nearly 13 years.
Being weak
and constrained by geography, all of them had to sacrifice
their own people. In contrast, the Empire's power gives it
the luxury to sacrifice others. Hence the campaign
to invade and occupy
Iraq, half the world away. But both the Emperor and his Balkan
vassals belong to the same brotherhood of politicians, the
disciples of polemikophilia – a love of War. And if
the health of the state is really the woe of its subjects,
well, why would they care? The notion that they should only
occurs to the deluded worshippers of Democracy.
False
Gods
As
yet another orgy of polemikophiles approaches, excuses
and justifications are popping up daily, and are almost as
soon unmasked as lies.
Yet in its arrogance and supreme self-righteousness, the Emperor
would rather sacrifice the lives of millions than admit the
possibility of being wrong. Gods do not err.
Gods, and false
at that – for the false religion of democracy enthrones flawed
individuals into positions of near-absolute power every couple
of years, and crowns them with a perception of God-like infallibility.
Only when those 'gods' are cast down are their misdeeds exposed;
but they are replaced by others, and the process continues.
Just as the
rulers need excuses and justifications to perpetuate their
reprehensible behavior, their subjects buy into these rationalizations
to avoid facing the harsh fact that they've abdicated their
responsibilities as human beings. For without their worshippers,
the polemikophiles would be powerless.
And wouldn't
that be something to celebrate?
–
Nebojsa Malic
|
comments
on this article?
|
|
|
Please Support Antiwar.com
Send
contributions to
Antiwar.com
520 S. Murphy Ave., Suite #202
Sunnyvale, CA 94086
or
Contribute Via our Secure Server
Credit Card Donation Form
Your
contributions are now tax-deductible
|
