I know this might sound boring, but I am here yet again to bash nationalism, only this time a topic within that is more worthy of criticism than any of nationalism's symptoms: Totalitarianism. Throughout history, we have seen the rise and fall of totalitarian regimes, from Claudius of Rome to Jozef Stalin. Totalitarian regimes have carried with them bad reputations, with their trademark being the virtual impossibility to criticize the policies of a state without criticizing the country, the people and the culture. The idea was that whoever criticized Stalin and Hitler also criticized Germany, its people and its culture. Totalitarianism, a nationalistic ideology, seeks to eliminate objective views and tends to polarize the views of a nation towards favoring the nation and its "benevolent" leader. It is strange, though that people think totalitarianism has died.
In fact, we're still living in it.
Subliminally, we have succumbed to the policies that are working against us instead of with us. These policies that are being implemented by the regimes around the world are rapidly becoming an integral part of the national legislatures that make up governments. It is said that much of these policies have been implemented by the people of the said nation, and thus attacks against such policies are distorted into attacks against the people and the nation that implemented the said policy. Moreover, criticizing the policy of a certain nation might lead to criticizing the state religion, such as in cases of totalitarian "Islamic" rule (Islam is against totalitarianism, really) and another example that I will outline in the coming paragraphs.
Totalitarianism is actually a last resort for those who can't escape from the fact that a certain policy implemented by a certain nation is really a bad one, and has led to much more negatives than positives. It is also used by those who have ran out of arguments for defending a certain policy or those who want to expose personal weaknesses of those who are attacking such a policy. Then there is the idea of criticizing the state, culture, religion and nation of those who are attacking the said policy!
Let's take a look at one of the most inherent and racist totalitarian regimes: that of the United States of America. Many American nationalists have turned to blindly following their culture and nation to the extent that they are superior above all else, and that any policy implemented by the government is above any sort of criticism. Such totalitarian nationalists have also become arrogant in the sense that all they view is inferior to them, and thus they work extremely hard (min tahht la tahht as we say in Arabic) to exploit the "weaknesses" or what they perceive as "weaknesses" of the nations of the critics of the American government. For example, there is the false perception that Arabs and their culture are "barbaric" and nothing but bloodthirsty fighters who "fight for Allah", or that their news networks (notably Al Jazeera) are hate propaganda machines that brainwash their viewers (funny, I still consider FAUX news a crock of bullocks and Rush Limbaugh an anti-Arab racist). Anyways, where were we? Right. Of course, such notions against the Arabs are entirely false, as can be seen by their excellent worldwide news coverage (Al Jazeera and Al Arabiya), and the open-mindedness of most Arabs (face it: every nation of people has its black sheep).
Such arguments, no matter how baseless, are still used against those who criticize the American government, and such arguments are used to make such critics feel weak or insulted. However, personal and cultural affairs should be held outside such debates (yes, damn political correctness because it is the only thing that separates idiots from geniuses). Returning to our argument, it is said by many Americans that since America is a "representative republic" through which the leadership is democratically elected, the people are responsible for the government and what it does. This is easily done by separating the public from the government, and bringing out the main point that the people are not responsible for what the government does in that the government may or may not choose to abide by the policies demanded by the people. Moreover, there is the inherent corruption in the Big Government that the Bush Administration is. Thus, we can't assume that the people and the government are the same, and such an argument is easily disposed of.
There's another form of totalitarianism that seeks to shut out other voices: Zionism. No, not Christian Zionism or Muslim Zionism, but I'm talking about hardcore Jewish political Zionism: that implemented by the State of Israel. However, in this case, it associates anti-Zionism - antagonism against a political philosophy - with anti-Semitism - racism against Jews -, and such associations can be dangerous. However, there was this article in the Guardian that caught my eye, written by Emanuele Ottolenghi, who wrote
Returning to the topic, I don't think that the Jews want a domination of the world, and I don't criticize their appearances (everyone was created by God, and in everyone is a beauty of one's own). Neither do I think of them as Christ-killers: even if they did kill Christ in the past (as a Muslim, I don't believe Christ died), you can't hold those in the present accountable for what their ancestors did. Does that make me an anti-Semite? Not at all. However, when I see the effect of Zionist policies being implemented, you can't assume that I would criticize it because of the religion of Judaism or its people, as there are many anti-Zionist Jews out there who actually have a basis for their argument that Zionism and Judaism are indeed not the same thing. Pro-Israelis argue, though, that if you don't criticize other nations for what they do, but criticize Israel all the while when massacres are taking place in Darfur, or the Uyghur Muslims of China are being persecuted, then you are an anti-Semite in the sense that what Jews do is worse than what others do. Such, of course, is not the case; however, the case of Israel is special because it is a modern-day occurrence of a racist crime known as ethnic cleansing, and the fact that I'm a Palestinian and am much into the issue brings out the most in me in criticizing the policies of Israel.
Totalitarianism seeks to shut out opposing views. Like Dubya once said, "You're either with us or with the terrorists". What if I don't want to be with either? I'm anti-war, but I'm also anti-terrorist. I mean, if I criticize the war, does that make me a terrorist anti-American thug? Well, you get the idea. Such totalitarian policy evolved from a Cold War mentality, when it was between the U.S. and the Soviets; in other words, in the 60's and 70's, you were either a hippie or a communist. Such short-mindedness came about as viewing the world in a black and white. We're living in an age of technicolor, people: there are people who support the war in varying degrees and for different reasons, and the same goes for those who opppose it (war on Iraq, that is). Totalitarianism, suggesting by its name, seeks to totalize points of view: it's either black or white, and you can't have different shades of grey or whatever color or non-color out there.
Unfortunately, such a plague reached to Muslim and Arab countries as well, with cries for reform being shut out as criticisms against the state, such as in Egypt as a most notable example.
So, what can we do to combat totalitarianism? The first is to assure totalitarian politicians that any criticism against the policies of a state is not against the state of its people. Another is to convince them that totalitarianism is itself a plague of reason, like nationalism, and that reforming policies is the only thing that helps a government progress. Moreover, you should be well-convinced that you, too, love your state, and that the only thing to make it better is to trim it a bit, and shear out the weeds that are growing on the garden of legislation (metaphorically speaking, but yeah, I suck at poetry, really). Another method of combating totalitarianism is allowing political correctness to guide totalitarians into reforming their views and avoid the trap of nationalism, and pretty much the same advice I gave on combating nationalism itself.
Totalitarianism must die. Without it, the world would be a much better place.
Oh, and LONG LIVE DISSENT!
Salaam, from
Saracen
In fact, we're still living in it.
Subliminally, we have succumbed to the policies that are working against us instead of with us. These policies that are being implemented by the regimes around the world are rapidly becoming an integral part of the national legislatures that make up governments. It is said that much of these policies have been implemented by the people of the said nation, and thus attacks against such policies are distorted into attacks against the people and the nation that implemented the said policy. Moreover, criticizing the policy of a certain nation might lead to criticizing the state religion, such as in cases of totalitarian "Islamic" rule (Islam is against totalitarianism, really) and another example that I will outline in the coming paragraphs.
Totalitarianism is actually a last resort for those who can't escape from the fact that a certain policy implemented by a certain nation is really a bad one, and has led to much more negatives than positives. It is also used by those who have ran out of arguments for defending a certain policy or those who want to expose personal weaknesses of those who are attacking such a policy. Then there is the idea of criticizing the state, culture, religion and nation of those who are attacking the said policy!
Let's take a look at one of the most inherent and racist totalitarian regimes: that of the United States of America. Many American nationalists have turned to blindly following their culture and nation to the extent that they are superior above all else, and that any policy implemented by the government is above any sort of criticism. Such totalitarian nationalists have also become arrogant in the sense that all they view is inferior to them, and thus they work extremely hard (min tahht la tahht as we say in Arabic) to exploit the "weaknesses" or what they perceive as "weaknesses" of the nations of the critics of the American government. For example, there is the false perception that Arabs and their culture are "barbaric" and nothing but bloodthirsty fighters who "fight for Allah", or that their news networks (notably Al Jazeera) are hate propaganda machines that brainwash their viewers (funny, I still consider FAUX news a crock of bullocks and Rush Limbaugh an anti-Arab racist). Anyways, where were we? Right. Of course, such notions against the Arabs are entirely false, as can be seen by their excellent worldwide news coverage (Al Jazeera and Al Arabiya), and the open-mindedness of most Arabs (face it: every nation of people has its black sheep).
Such arguments, no matter how baseless, are still used against those who criticize the American government, and such arguments are used to make such critics feel weak or insulted. However, personal and cultural affairs should be held outside such debates (yes, damn political correctness because it is the only thing that separates idiots from geniuses). Returning to our argument, it is said by many Americans that since America is a "representative republic" through which the leadership is democratically elected, the people are responsible for the government and what it does. This is easily done by separating the public from the government, and bringing out the main point that the people are not responsible for what the government does in that the government may or may not choose to abide by the policies demanded by the people. Moreover, there is the inherent corruption in the Big Government that the Bush Administration is. Thus, we can't assume that the people and the government are the same, and such an argument is easily disposed of.
There's another form of totalitarianism that seeks to shut out other voices: Zionism. No, not Christian Zionism or Muslim Zionism, but I'm talking about hardcore Jewish political Zionism: that implemented by the State of Israel. However, in this case, it associates anti-Zionism - antagonism against a political philosophy - with anti-Semitism - racism against Jews -, and such associations can be dangerous. However, there was this article in the Guardian that caught my eye, written by Emanuele Ottolenghi, who wrote
If Israel's critics are truly opposed to anti-semitism, they should not repeat traditional anti-semitic themes under the anti-Israel banner. When such themes - the Jewish conspiracy to rule the world, linking Jews with money and media, the hooked-nose stingy Jew, the blood libel, disparaging use of Jewish symbols, or traditional Christian anti-Jewish imagery - are used to describe Israel's actions, concern should be voiced. Labour MP Tam Dalyell decried the influence of "a Jewish cabal" on British foreign policy-making; an Italian cartoonist last year depicted the Israeli siege of the Church of the Nativity in Bethlehem as an attempt to kill Jesus "again". Is it necessary to evoke the Jewish conspiracy or depict Israelis as Christ-killers to denounce Israeli policies?Funny... I have never thought of such stuff. However, what the Italian cartoonist did might be some sort of emotional surge in the sense that he sees Israel's policies as racist, but excusing racism in the name of what one perceives as racism is bullocks.
Returning to the topic, I don't think that the Jews want a domination of the world, and I don't criticize their appearances (everyone was created by God, and in everyone is a beauty of one's own). Neither do I think of them as Christ-killers: even if they did kill Christ in the past (as a Muslim, I don't believe Christ died), you can't hold those in the present accountable for what their ancestors did. Does that make me an anti-Semite? Not at all. However, when I see the effect of Zionist policies being implemented, you can't assume that I would criticize it because of the religion of Judaism or its people, as there are many anti-Zionist Jews out there who actually have a basis for their argument that Zionism and Judaism are indeed not the same thing. Pro-Israelis argue, though, that if you don't criticize other nations for what they do, but criticize Israel all the while when massacres are taking place in Darfur, or the Uyghur Muslims of China are being persecuted, then you are an anti-Semite in the sense that what Jews do is worse than what others do. Such, of course, is not the case; however, the case of Israel is special because it is a modern-day occurrence of a racist crime known as ethnic cleansing, and the fact that I'm a Palestinian and am much into the issue brings out the most in me in criticizing the policies of Israel.
Totalitarianism seeks to shut out opposing views. Like Dubya once said, "You're either with us or with the terrorists". What if I don't want to be with either? I'm anti-war, but I'm also anti-terrorist. I mean, if I criticize the war, does that make me a terrorist anti-American thug? Well, you get the idea. Such totalitarian policy evolved from a Cold War mentality, when it was between the U.S. and the Soviets; in other words, in the 60's and 70's, you were either a hippie or a communist. Such short-mindedness came about as viewing the world in a black and white. We're living in an age of technicolor, people: there are people who support the war in varying degrees and for different reasons, and the same goes for those who opppose it (war on Iraq, that is). Totalitarianism, suggesting by its name, seeks to totalize points of view: it's either black or white, and you can't have different shades of grey or whatever color or non-color out there.
Unfortunately, such a plague reached to Muslim and Arab countries as well, with cries for reform being shut out as criticisms against the state, such as in Egypt as a most notable example.
So, what can we do to combat totalitarianism? The first is to assure totalitarian politicians that any criticism against the policies of a state is not against the state of its people. Another is to convince them that totalitarianism is itself a plague of reason, like nationalism, and that reforming policies is the only thing that helps a government progress. Moreover, you should be well-convinced that you, too, love your state, and that the only thing to make it better is to trim it a bit, and shear out the weeds that are growing on the garden of legislation (metaphorically speaking, but yeah, I suck at poetry, really). Another method of combating totalitarianism is allowing political correctness to guide totalitarians into reforming their views and avoid the trap of nationalism, and pretty much the same advice I gave on combating nationalism itself.
Totalitarianism must die. Without it, the world would be a much better place.
Oh, and LONG LIVE DISSENT!
Salaam, from
Saracen
Comments
Post a Comment