War of the
Worlds
Catalysis of world
orders’ fears
“Yes, man is
mortal, but that would be only half the trouble. The bad thing is
that he is sometimes unpredictably mortal…”
Mikhail Bulgakov,
Master and Margarita
The analysis of
the conflict between the New World Order (NWO) and “Islamic
terrorism”, which I do not assign to Islamic religion, but to
certain state of spirit, succumbed under the pressure of certain
emotions and escaping from them, positions this conflict outside of
personal plane which, denying so itself, projects into the
history-wise and statistically redundant vertigo of this multi-named
present of “ours”.
The end of
history, postindustrial society, Information’s Simulacrum,
postmodern, NWO, cyberspace, the age of pre-Martian colonization,
joystick-diplomacy and, under the pressure of inductive terrorism,
scanner-wise, totalitarian service of public transportation, biometry
– all in function of a secure order, versus that constant and
unavoidable threat of, which contemporary, so-many-named society
wants to get rid of once and forever – death! However, killing as
such is not a problem, the problem is unauthorized killing…
In one hand, life
is wanted, spread through the multi-verses, the production of which
is the forte of contemporary economy, incessant flow of
impressions-information, total oblivion of that point in which there
is no movement left, and from the other hand, the life is being
destroyed, which with its contents disrupts micro-historical
sequences of the recognizable territory in which everyone abides.
This applies to both sides, despite the fact that fundamentalist
conservatives incline towards the image of unchangeable contents –
the point is that “under control” is only such contents which can
be anticipated. In modern western society it is under control because
it is being produced as such, and in conservative systems it is, one
and the same, just being replicated.
Taking life, as
the basis of the organized perception, is a radical way of preserving
world-image, and detention, i.e. arresting and isolating individuals
or whole groups, even peoples, is just a provisory, “non-final”
solution. In radicalized moments of recent history, which is already
being forgotten, the basket is full of such final solutions. Today
the clash with terrorism replaced final solutions on the level of
leading nations, and even though the physical levels of destruction
of those who are “incompatible” are much smaller, by blowing up a
concrete event into a mass-media super-event, the catalytic processes
is used by both sides, and in good measure at their own harm.
The basic
difference of western perception and perception of conservative
nature is in that, that in the West rules the feeling of “private
property”, on which the whole western order rests, and in the (now
only conditionally said) East, traditionalism rules, spiced in good
measure with, especially when Islam is in question, fatalism – by
accepting the fact of men’s mortality and predestination. This
different relation towards death generates unbridgeable
misunderstanding of these two orders, that is, cultures. Since the
emotion is the foundation of West, its absence with others, causes
contempt and loathing in the Westerners. If a terrorist kills in
orderly fashion and without sympathy, adults and children, in order
to accomplish a change in the existing world order (that is, in
attempt to destroy it), West will react sharply by defensive and
preventive measures. If, like in Rwanda, happens a mass slaughter
after Hitler’s recipe of final solution, West will react only with
a delay, reflexively, by disturbing photos, appeals – totally
inadequate. Such slaughters have no place in world’s history, as
the one at Madagascar doesn’t have it, nor many other mass
slaughters, committed by today’s world’s leading nations and
companies – they were understood as authorized, all those movements
of the Cherokees, Armenians, Greeks, Tibetans, Serbs and Kurds…
This is the unstoppable march of history, and all critics is in vain.
Jean Baudrillard,
for instance, thinks that here is in question clash of the two
fanatism’s.1
The truth is that both systems are fanatical, and worse – they are
paranoid in their expression, but by origin they are emotional, i.e.
fatalistic.
I have already
mentioned the emotional essence of “private property”, and
private property is the cornerstone of, for instance, American
system. The feeling of being threatened – a man who yields to such
feeling, to use the vocabulary of ancient sages, “craves to
things”, and every attempt to touch into his things, is understood
as an aggressive act. The characteristics of this feeling is that it
projects itself upon the others, and because of this it is assumed
that others also take precautions and resort to protective actions,
often aggressive – homo homini lupus est. This feeling
within those on the other side, who I called Islamist terrorists,
exists in rudimentary form, mostly in regards to the quantity and
variety of contents, but since Islam is based on metaphysical
understanding of God, the contents of Islamist ideology does not
spring our of the emotional, but from fatalistic state, that is,
Islamic order origins in the concept of the superior authority and
projects itself as unquestionable and unchangeable upon the people.
The only thing that Islamist terrorist possesses is this ideology, an
it is totally unacceptable and irrelevant for a Westerner because in
itself it doesn’t have any resource or economic value. And economy
is the machinery which produces “dreams without which we cannot
be”.
I will move to a
concrete example of clash with Islamic terrorism, whether we call it
Al Quaida or Saddam Hussein, and maybe even Imam Khomeini, who for
sure left an emotional black hole in the soul of America. Two wars
are presently conducted on the concrete territories, in Afghanistan
against the Taliban, and in Iraq. The war in Iraq was quickly won as
a military operation, but it turned into something completely
different, new dimensions have opened, more in accordance with the
NOW which does have this property to open in all directions, as some
fractal, and so it appears as many dimensions. The basic remark from
one part of American public in regards to the war in Iraq is the
non-consistency and inability of American administration to explain
it. Although everyone knows that this war had started because of the
clash with terrorists, reducing the problem to the concrete conflict
with one state, Iraq, demanded material ground – which is missing
here. It has never been proved that Iraq was a threat to America,
i.e. that it possessed weapons of mass destruction, nor had it been
proved that it was and ally to Al Quaida. Nevertheless, that war was
inevitable. The problem of this war is exactly the articulation –
Western system does not know how to articulate its enemy by
materializing it. That enemy isn’t material at all – but, how can
a system, which is basically empirical, materialist, insert into
itself something metaphysical?
To say that the
war started because of the ideology is an anachronous explanation.
Those times, like the time of Cold war, have been rendered obsolete
by history and they can not come back. It is even worse to say that,
because it would be a declaration of war to all Muslims. And so West
fettered itself because it is not capable to clearly point out the
goal. West is not capable to openly say that it is at war with Islam
as such. Islam, however, knows this very well, and Islamist terrorist
say this clear and loud. Here they are one step ahead, because their
way and goal are clear. The choice of means to wage this war, before
and now, is another matter. To great extent Islamist terrorists are
using western system as a catalyst of their actions. From the
military point of view, destruction of few train or subway cars, is
irrelevant. But multiplying the images of these diversions in the
media constitutes a good part of the consumed contents. In such a
context these actions weigh heavy. How they reflect on the
functioning and adapting of the whole Western system, is obvious. New
radical and very strict, so to say ideologically branded, measures of
protection are being introduced into almost all areas of public
communication, especially transportation and security of public
objects. Hit on the WTC was a military victory par excellence. But
even more the nightmare, which simply never ends.
In Iraq, Iraqis
are in conflict among themselves, paying no attention to American
military presence. Their confrontation is ideological, projected on
religious factions, and Americans don’t know what else to do, but
to prepare for new military victories, maybe against Syria or Iran.
However, what is really important to them, the “contents” of Iraq
is totally evasive. The naïve idea that democracy will be planted
there has been dispersed, this was just another of those inadequate
arguments in favor of this war. Total incompatibility of Eastern and
Western perceptions has culminated here, because it is in the focus
of the media. The media is full with reports of Iraqis killing each
other, the dead are piling up, but no one in those media can explain
why is this happening and what’s that got to do with the
Coalition’s presence in Iraq. The job of Coalition is not to
appease the struggling Iraqis, nor could it succeed in that even if
it wanted to. If it chooses to support one side, it would not be
there for its own interests. This is why this war, for Americans and
allies, is a total fiasco, since the very beginning, because they
didn’t clearly set, that is, marked their enemy. The enemy who is,
just because of that, elusive.
Emotional and
statistical approach to the clash with an ideology cannot bring any
result. Fatalism has no root in media contents. The roll of such
contents in recruiting terrorists is minimal and quite formal. In
Muslim countries, the variety of contents isn’t really a fact, in
Islamic culture restricted norms are mandatory for everyone. Facing
of the East with Western values constantly threatens the established
order, its “private property” – “sameness”, is threatened
by variety. This feeling of being threatened is easily replaced by
indoctrination for which “the rich living standard of the West”
is not something that is preferred. To be already dead, that is, not
to be hungry for new contents, is a huge advantage against those who
“value” life. Martyrdom is a state of spirit which prevails among
indoctrinated terrorists. It is both the means and the goal – and
this concept of martyrdom is almost totally missing in the Western
contents, in the retinas of the idealized Westerner. In philosophy we
can talk about the ascetic, meditative refusal to be conditioned by
perception and all the charms of the mottle, and such a parallel does
exist in Islamic religion, but it stops there where man is ascetic
for ideological reasons and not out of his conscious decision. A real
ascetic would never react violently vs. deprivation, and terrorist
does exactly that – he is affected by impossibility to keep
meditating in his simplistic system. This disturbance caused by
imposing of Western values destroys Islamic order and frees a huge
amount of energy, which is often expressed exactly as “hatred”.
That emotion which
applies to everyone, the feeling of self pity, which has a property
to transform into may apparently different emotions, in the West
appears as a feeling of being threatened, and at the other side it
appears with the similar effect, but within the context of the
feeling of “injustice”. Justice is nothing else but the feeling
of balance, inertia, at which all change is characterized as
“injustice”.2
Baudrillard’s interpretation is psychological, but I think that
energy based interpretation gives more precise answer in relation to
the mechanics of the events. Psychology describes phenomena rather
than explaining them. East is used to create systems which energy
level barely varies. Hegel remarked to the Indians for not having the
concept of linear history, but linear history demands changes. When
system doesn’t change for a long time, flow of time has no meaning
at all. In the West change is reflected as growth of quantity of
energy which is at disposal of certain civilization. Western
civilization is always hungry for energy, and in this concrete clash,
West feeds on the ‘hatred’ fo the East, because this Eastern
hatred is nothing else but the surplus of the energy which East
doesn’t need. That’s why this ‘hatred’ is just an expression,
and not the cause of the existing state – I would say, the
situation is normal.
For Easterners
injustice is total and there is no hope that things will go back to
the wanted order – that’s why there’s giving up of the emotion
of private property and embracing of fatalism, which itself is no
more an emotion, but state of being. Although fatalists are subjects
to emotional attacks, they pay no attention to them and keep going,
fatalism has the quality of faith. On the other side, in the West,
matter is far from being exhausted, it is only ‘threatened’. A
functionary of the NWO functions because he receives a pay. He is a
professional, he is just doing his job, when he kills you – it’s
nothing personal, it’s an authorized murder. When ‘terrorist’
murders, he does that in the name of metaphysical authority. His
action is also impersonal, because he is just a program of one God.
But although both of them kill without difference, the authority
standing behind those killers is different in appearance – one is
the impersonal system, which doesn’t recognize personality but only
function, and the other is a metaphysical God who doesn’t see
himself in man, for whom man is just part of some system which is
lacking of divine essence. And to see a man as nothing, if there is
no divine essence in him – is the basic force which moves Islamic
terrorists. And this force is stronger of the one which sees a man as
part of the varied multiplicity – in plurality one.
Since the NWO is
an American brand, as it is engraved on the dollar banknote, below
the pyramid at which top is the omniscient eye, it is clear that this
project lasts for more than two centuries, that is, it isn’t some
novelty. Islam and Western world were better off together in feudal
times, they were more alike, they did fight, but at those times
everyone fought everyone. Today one superpower prevails, which puts
ideologies into a unique multiplicity, and it is opposed by Islam,
which doesn’t posses in itself a visible concept of what is
valuable. It only knows of arabesque. Vivacious dead geometry.
I can only guess
what kind of problem Western intelligence agencies have when trying
to find informers, because when the fatalists are in question, the
one that everyone has his price is not applicable. And even if this
saying is correct, it is the question whether the West has at its
disposal the adequate, metaphysical currency to bribe a potential
terrorist. The problem of prevention of terrorist actions, as in the
case of this last, at the airport in London, is that immediately
there arise the doubts that this could be a simulation, by which
Western system terrifies its subjects and so easily implements
totalitarian measures into one call it democratic system. Bush’s
‘patriotic’ policy is also being attacked for keeping people in
prisons spreading all over the world, without trial and right to
defense. Terrorism uses these ‘successful’ actions of its
enemies. In Western justice system there is no generalization of
guilt, collective can not be accused, that system is aiming at the
individual, and it is known that the ‘cell’ system is very
efficient in preventing of uncovering bigger groups of conspirators.
So imprisonment of the ‘suspects’ is a huge blow for the Western
system. On the other hand, terrorist don’t care at all who they are
going to kill and whether they themselves are going to be killed. The
important thing is that their effect is obvious. Their goal is not
some concrete individual. In the recent attack on American embassy in
Damascus, more than ten people were killed, none of them American.
Still, it was the attack on American embassy. Thesis are being
constantly switched, and those who switch them never notice it.
This brings things
back to the problem of ‘authorization’. Who can and who can not
kill.
The one who can
kill, or start the war, like war in Iraq, can give totally inadequate
reasons, and still do what he intended to do, and he will not be
responsible to anyone. Nobody will call that terrorism, that is
someone will, but such opinion, again, is not ‘authorized’. The
basic fear of America, in regards to its private property essence, is
that someone else could have that property at his disposal. And since
the ideology of private property is global, nothing in this world is
without American sphere of interest. Everyone who devaluates or
changes the calibration of American perception directly threatens
America. The blow in New York kicked America out of its tracks, the
mountain moved.3
With which of the devils Bin Laden made pact and started a war with
America – is a question without an answer so far. This theme is
imposing itself with great force, and it will be actual for long. Bin
Laden was American ally in clash with Soviet Union, is he now
someone’s ally? If he was an American ally, pawn, how come he got
out of control? To which measure is America responsible for the
occurrence of one such opponent?
American attempt
to throw the crisis outside of itself ended up, for now, as sowing
the crisis to already crisis-pregnant Middle East, but also to
Europe, Spain, Great Britain, Russia… The intention of terrorists
was to bring the conflict into focus, America reacted by creating a
metastasis of focuses. But good part of American military might is
now not in America. Remember the problems with the evacuation of
people who were victims of Katrina hurricane, there were not enough
helicopters. Terrorist attack anywhere in the world brings America
into the focus, because each such attack is perceived also as an
attack on America, as an echo of the 9.11. Al Quaida created a
conditioned reflex in American system. Since September 11th 2001, Al
Quaida hasn’t lost the initiative.
The relation of
perception towards the metaphysical is the relation of matter towards
vacuum. Matter tends to spread and so negate the empty space, but the
true activity belongs to the metaphysical – movement of matter is
just an effect of some force’s action. In this war by conquering
territory one loses positions. Does America understand this?
Security measures which have been introduced threaten or cancel basic
civil and personal rights. The system conquers new territories at the
expense of personal. Is the conquest of those new territories a
success, and if it is, whose success is it? Yes, there is a threat
that someone will place a bomb into your supermarket, but there are
so many more threats which can be realized any moment. In traffic
accidents many more people are being killed, than in many wars. And
yet, there is no such strict and immediately tangible control. The
problem of death still is the problem of authorization. If the system
‘functions’, incidental accidents are possible and that is
acceptable, because system will not turn against itself. If in
America per year die tens of thousands people in traffic accidents,
ten times more than in Iraq war, Americans did not destroy their
traffic system or canceled obviously ineffective traffic norms and
replaced them by something better. Although American security and
intelligence agencies failed in regards to the 9.11. blow, those
agencies were not dismantled, on the contrary, they were granted more
resources. System protects itself above all, but who really profits
from that?
Fear is an
integral part of the feeling of being threatened, the feeling of
private property, and something must support that system so it will
not fall apart when hit by fear. Because the effect of fear in man is
destructive, for man as such, feels the force, the surplus of energy
in his own system, anxiety, and that surplus must be directed so to
produce something, some perception – and if the body can not
contain that surplus, there is tendency to broaden the body, to
improve perception, to surf through fractals, virtual worlds. The
whole Western system is doing exactly that, opens new spaces and so
uses the surplus of energy. Each loss of control releases a huge
amount of energy. And the bigger the system which must be controlled,
the more energy is being spent on control, and if control fails,
there is free, destructive energy instead. The situation is reverse
with fatalists, conservatives, in principle. Their reduced system,
the smaller the better. The surplus of force isn’t problem at all,
because any surplus of force goes West. And West will use this
force to produce many, many more new shows, icons, spots, games, and
survive as such.
The effect of
terrorist actions is in this that such blows bring things out of
control, energy which is normally spent on production and maintenance
of the system is freed and then the functionaries of the system try
to create new modes – and all that happens under sign of fear, the
one experienced and the one that could be experienced, and that one
is being experienced right now. Thus terrorism became constitutional
part of the Western system, it has been absorbed as an unexpected,
new source of energy and now the West can not be without terrorism.
2006
1
“Sentence and verdict of our society” (?)
2
Baudrillard sees this problem in this manner: “Hatred which
non-westerners express towards the West is not hatred of people from
which everything has been taken. This is the hatred of those who
received everything, but it was never allowed to them to return the
favor in the same manner. This is not the hatred of those who were
left without their possessions, or the hatred of the exploited ones,
this is the hatred of the humiliated – those who can give nothing
in return. This is the symbolical understanding which explains the
attacks in September 11th 2001 – this is an act of humiliation
which reacts to humiliation.” ibid.
Posts
