My OperaWhat does lawlessness mean?
Friday, December 7, 2007 5:01:44 PM
http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2007/12/07/cia_evidence/index.html
Now - why is that a problem? To evaluate that, we would first need to challenge the idea that rule of law equals rule by wise leaders. Or that the law is only useful insofar as it enables the wise and good leaders to make good decisions. Which, obviously, is how quite large parts of the US bureaucracy functions. As most of us who follow this disaster tend to say: the intelligence does not matter. The facts do not matter. What matters is the safety and certainty offered by the commands of those in power. And this dependency is reflected so deep that even those who would otherwise be independently- minded are forced to adapt to the "reality" of the glorious leader's commands. Because that is how the machine functions.
I used to laugh about this kind of thing, and used to believe that no one could truly "love Big Brother", even with the kind of treatment Winston receives in 1984 - but it is wrong. Given the right circumstances, people are fully capable or rationalising their submission to authority with much less incentive than being faced with their worst fears. "There has to be a reason", they usually say. Simply because to believe otherwise is dreadful; It means that their mindless support is insignificant.
But there's an interesting aspect of this that often gets completely ignored. It's the fact that in traditionally oppressed societies, you give up something when you submit. You do not, as a rule, simply fall away into a slave- existence because that's how it's always been. No, in those cases, to submit to authority demands a choice. It may be a difficult one - such as burying any form of pride you might have had for your country. Or it may be an easy one, where you have the choice between death or submission. But nevertheless there is a choice. And it is conditional. You do not simply give your freedom away.
A complementary behavioural analysis could be performed on beleaguered Christians. They usually have to, even if they grew up in repressive homes that forbade questioning of the faith as a rule, make a conscious choice to throw away their faith. It's something substantial they give up - whether it would be the moral philosophy, the world- view, their outlook on life, or the belief in goodness and comeuppance. So it's something there - it's not just a question of buying a pair of new shoes.
But that's not what is involved here. There is no substance beyond following the leader. They take cues from the leader that are contradictory from one day to the next, and are asked to defend narratives that are flatly false. They are asked to compile selections of facts that they know does not tell the entire story. And they do it.
And for what? The grand belief in the greatness of the nation? In their belief that greatness is built on lies and trickery? As a form of sacrifice for the greater good? It's tempting to assume this, but that is not it - those are just rationalisations from day to day. And the truth is that there just is no conscience involved. There is just submission and pitiful weakness.
It is just axiomatic that when high government officials can break the law with impunity, the country no longer lives under the rule of law. That has been the United States for the last six years.
Now - why is that a problem? To evaluate that, we would first need to challenge the idea that rule of law equals rule by wise leaders. Or that the law is only useful insofar as it enables the wise and good leaders to make good decisions. Which, obviously, is how quite large parts of the US bureaucracy functions. As most of us who follow this disaster tend to say: the intelligence does not matter. The facts do not matter. What matters is the safety and certainty offered by the commands of those in power. And this dependency is reflected so deep that even those who would otherwise be independently- minded are forced to adapt to the "reality" of the glorious leader's commands. Because that is how the machine functions.
I used to laugh about this kind of thing, and used to believe that no one could truly "love Big Brother", even with the kind of treatment Winston receives in 1984 - but it is wrong. Given the right circumstances, people are fully capable or rationalising their submission to authority with much less incentive than being faced with their worst fears. "There has to be a reason", they usually say. Simply because to believe otherwise is dreadful; It means that their mindless support is insignificant.
But there's an interesting aspect of this that often gets completely ignored. It's the fact that in traditionally oppressed societies, you give up something when you submit. You do not, as a rule, simply fall away into a slave- existence because that's how it's always been. No, in those cases, to submit to authority demands a choice. It may be a difficult one - such as burying any form of pride you might have had for your country. Or it may be an easy one, where you have the choice between death or submission. But nevertheless there is a choice. And it is conditional. You do not simply give your freedom away.
A complementary behavioural analysis could be performed on beleaguered Christians. They usually have to, even if they grew up in repressive homes that forbade questioning of the faith as a rule, make a conscious choice to throw away their faith. It's something substantial they give up - whether it would be the moral philosophy, the world- view, their outlook on life, or the belief in goodness and comeuppance. So it's something there - it's not just a question of buying a pair of new shoes.
But that's not what is involved here. There is no substance beyond following the leader. They take cues from the leader that are contradictory from one day to the next, and are asked to defend narratives that are flatly false. They are asked to compile selections of facts that they know does not tell the entire story. And they do it.
And for what? The grand belief in the greatness of the nation? In their belief that greatness is built on lies and trickery? As a form of sacrifice for the greater good? It's tempting to assume this, but that is not it - those are just rationalisations from day to day. And the truth is that there just is no conscience involved. There is just submission and pitiful weakness.
