Monday, January 12, 2015

War of the Worlds

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.

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.
3 Replica from Akira Kurosawa’s movie “Kagemusha – warrior’s shadow”.