Date: Thu, 15 Apr 2004 16:51:17 -0700 From: David Harvey <dharvey-AT-unr.nevada.edu> Subject: Re: BHA: Re: Bulding bridges to clarity--JCP's reply Good luck with Herzik. Alexander Berkman? Dave John Carson Pettey wrote: > David, > I couldn't through all the screed; so I skipped around. Sounds like Emma > Goldmann's first boyfriend, Bergmann (?), who tried to kill Frick--except > this guy's got some truly scarred libidinal problems. > Danke, JCP > P.S.--I have an appointment with the Dean on Monday -AT- 10AM. I'm bringing > him a list of my work for both semesters (a total of 1085 pieces of grading > in 30 weeks). > That won't impress him, since it sounds like he wants to raise my FTE no > matter what. > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Mervyn Hartwig" <mh-AT-jaspere7.demon.co.uk> > To: <bhaskar-AT-lists.village.Virginia.EDU> > Sent: Tuesday, April 13, 2004 3:56 PM > Subject: BHA: Bulding bridges to clarity > > > Hi all, > > > > Apologies for cross-posting, but I think the following deserves widest > > dissemination. I post it here in particular because it echoes some of > > the leading motifs of the spiritual turn -- global interconnectivity and > > responsibility in the present epoch and the primacy of > > self-referentiality (nobody can act for us, and we have to 'leap over > > [our] old self' in order to do it) -- and to remind ourselves that > > spirituality isn't just about hugging and kissing babies, highly > > important though that is. > > > > Mervyn > > > > > > From www.freedomroad.org : > > > > The Bridge â^À^Ô A Rant > > > > by Stan Goff > > > > WARNING: This commentary may cause anxiety. > > > > The United States government has initiated a chain reaction that it can > > no longer control. The stalled vengeance assault on Fallujah is merely a > > symptom. So is the uprising triggered by the US closure of a Shia > > newspaper in Sadr City, Baghdad, followed by the gunning down of the > > demonstrators who protested. (Ah, yes, we don't even hear about that > > when they talk about the latest demon, Muqtada al-Sadrâ^À¦ Memory is so > > short.) > > > > The chain reaction is far broader and deeper than the battlefield fiasco > > in Iraq right now. Once brown people start to pick up guns, other brown > > people follow suit. The myth of invincibility of the United States > > military - called into question even before the Bush Doctrine arrived at > > this particular Iraqi cul-de-sac - is shattered. No one is shocked. No > > one is awed. > > > > Nothing left now but plain grimy brutality. Apache helicopters are > > buzz-sawing through neighborhoods with chain guns and rockets. Bombs are > > being released onto mosques. The hospitals and morgues are receiving a > > rich harvest. > > > > I remember a sign at the entrance of Camp Mackall in North Carolina, > > where I began Special Forces training. "Rule #1: There are no rules. > > Rule #2: Obey the first rule." > > > > The post-9/11 renewal of ground wars in Southwest Asia swept me up into > > a new role. A career soldier who is a leftist; a leftist who is a > > retired soldier. I became a trump card that antiwar activists could play > > against the patriot-baiting of the right, so I've been trotted out in > > front of one audience after another, from town halls to CNN, as a > > spokesperson against the Bush Doctrine's militarism. > > > > But people transform their roles. They deviate from the scripts. > > > > I'm a leftist who carried a gun, in a culture where what passes for the > > left is terrified of guns. So people pay attention to me. In audience > > after audience, I have noted that people pay attention to me. They are > > engaged before I even speak, because they know that I can kill, and that > > gives me an immediacyâ^À¦ not because I am different than them, but > > because I am so very much the same. I laugh at good jokes. I rock > > babies. I take an interest in the weather. > > > > This is more than morbid fascination. > > > > We are a culture insulated from our own basis. It is a condition of > > metropolitan modernity, even more so of post-modernity. In a consumer > > society, where general-purpose money has eaten away every bond of > > community, where alienation - and even narcissism - is defined as > > normalcy, where nature is seen as something apart from and below us, the > > very personhood of each of us is deracinated and left to drift through > > the retail landscape like a grieving banshee. Planned obsolescence > > applies even to our identities. > > > > We really have no idea who pays for this privilege of superficiality, > > but those billions who are doing the paying - far out of our reified > > view - are getting a clearer idea all the time. > > > > Of course, this culture is pure charade. We can pretend we are as > > disembedded as we like, but we are invariably physical - diaphragms > > heaving incessantly, articulating gases in our guts, dissipating heat, > > concentrating urine, sloughing off dead cells, yawing and eating and > > scratching and sleeping and fucking and finally, dying. > > > > Inside-Outside. > > > > Inside of this whole charade, where money "grows" and media-stunned > > young women aspire to be models for Victoria's Secret, resides liberal > > hypocrisy. Outside of it resides imperial militarism - the last refuge > > of capitalism as it devours its own social and material bases like a > > vampire stranded alone on a desert island. > > > > Soldiers who were raised inside this cultural charade are now outside > > it, in Southwest Asia getting blood on their hands so we can have malls > > and road trips and household appliances and climate control. The > > personhood of soldiers (mostly male) has become a battleground, too, > > between masculinity and cognitive dissonance. Warfare is the practice > > and masculinity is achieved in the practice, but they are confronted now > > with other persons - people who are first reduced in the media, then > > defined in training (The Enemy), then dehumanized in the word > > (Raghead!), then commanded by the occupier as subjected persons, then - > > if obedience is not swift - erased. This is where the soldier either > > recognizes or denies the hypocrisy, because the fuller reality of the > > system is right there before his eyes. Now he has a choice to make. > > > > I'm talking to you, soldier, and not judging you. This is an invitation > > to take back your personhood. This is an invitation to confront every > > fear, breach every obstacle, take every risk; to leap over your old self > > and enter into a deeper struggle. > > > > Capitalism has to build bridges from its metropolitan hypocrisy to the > > scenes of its imperial crimes, and that bridge is made with the backs of > > soldiers. We have to build a bridge from the scene of the crime to > > clarity. > > > > To do that, we can't back away from this gun-question, this whole issue > > of violence. > > > > When the guerrilla picks up the gun, the imperial soldier must pay > > attention. When an alienated teenager in Columbine picks up a gun, we > > metropolitans pay attention. We should. > > > > People with guns should be taken seriously. People who have lived with > > guns should be taken seriously, and they are. Some of us are not going > > to be bothered with Victoria's Secret or any of that other bullshit. We > > are looking right through those mirages, right through to our animal > > actuality, right through to the horror vacui of a world where people can > > and do erase other people, and no deity descends to make things right. > > There are no decrees from on high, and you are still responsible. > > > > Many of my associates in the antiwar movement talk about "reaching out" > > to the military. They want to convert them. They want to transform them > > from robotic killing machines into Gandhians. These are the liberals. > > > > Soldiers don't listen to liberals, and neither do the majority of > > people. They intuit the their detachment, their other-worldly > > abstraction, their desire to have their cake and eat it too. When people > > are frightened or angry, they may be confused about the source of their > > fear and anger, but they know they want to be with someone who will > > fight. Liberals have never learned this. > > > > A young woman I met recently was surprised by her own first encounter > > with several soldiers. She is not a Nation Magazine "leftist," but a > > revolutionary young woman who recognizes that social transformation is > > neither painless nor bloodless, and she has no illusions about that. > > What astonished her about these young soldiers was her own recognition > > that they were, like her, willing to take tremendous risks - up to and > > including the loss of their own lives - to fight for what they thought > > was right. It was the very quality that she had been seeking from her > > own political allies. > > > > She wondered aloud whether it is easier to turn a person with > > intellectual clarity into a courageous person, or whether it was easier > > to help a courageous person to achieve greater clarity. > > > > "Should we be trying to make smart people into fighters, or fighters > > into smart people?" > > > > Damn good question. May have the elements of a false dichotomy, but it's > > still a good question. She is a hell of a lot closer to the mark than > > those who see the military as brainwashed androids in need of a > > religious epiphany. She knows that soldiers are not robots, and she > > doesn't want to empty them of their belligerence, which is an > > appropriate attitude for our Umwelt. She wants to free them from the > > bonds of their illusions. The cruelty to which these soldiers have been > > inured has the potential to be turned against hypocrisy, then against > > the system. Clarity is often cruel; cruelty is often clear. > > > > The imperial soldier is constrained by the superstitions of patriotism, > > and the soldier becomes a danger to power when he recognizes the > > speciousness of patriotism. For now, he mimics the confident acceptance > > of the official narratives, but he experiences the contradiction like a > > recurrent rash. A friend of mine said that soldiers are political > > scientists. They are embryonic political scientists at least, waiting > > for midwives... the right questions, perhaps, or the right nightmares. > > > > I think soldiers need to reach out to the left as well. Maybe we > > soldiers have a contribution to make to your clarity. Academic leftists > > can talk to you until they are blue in the face about reification - be > > it the reification that confuses the transient with the eternal, or that > > substitutes the abstract for the specific. But every military leader, > > beginning with a 19-year-old corporal, knows that before every task > > there must be an assessment of the situation - one that takes account of > > the mission, the enemy, the population, the terrain and weather, one's > > own capacity in technology and personnelâ^À¦ and the time availableâ^À¦ as > > a unified and changing whole. Dialectics, anyone? > > > > While metropolitan leftists will extol the virtues of the Vietnamese NLF > > - rightly so - some of us saw them dying for their struggle. Their > > corpses were us. And we have seen ourselves as corpses. Politics doesn't > > happen in clean, well-lighted places. It happens in the sand and mud. It > > happens in the rivulets of blood coursing into the edges of an Iraqi > > hospital floor. It's happening in the head of some unnamed Marine or > > Green Beret or tank gunner, who is looking out over the truth of the > > imperial landscape in Sadr City or Fallujah or Kut and recognizing that > > he has been thrust into this drama anonymously and that he now shares a > > more intimate space with his "enemy" than he ever will with the oil > > companies and military contractors and politicians who sent him here. > > > > Ani DiFranco says, "Those who call the shots are never in the line of > > fire." > > > > Non-violence can be an effective tactic, but so can violence. It's only > > liberal hypocrisy that denies the latter. For Iraq, it is the only > > tactic. And the armed resistance in Iraq - regardless of its methods or > > ideologies - is doing more to halt the runaway train that is global > > capitalism than anything else in the world right now. (You want white > > hats and heroes, go by a cinema ticket.) > > > > We cannot imagine the sheer joy of rediscovery being felt throughout the > > region right now as people see these fighters striking back at the > > source of their long humiliation - imperialism, and by extension against > > imperialism's local attack dog, Zionism. > > > > Gandhi and King were important people, courageous people, people who > > embraced non-violence as a core principle, yet that non-violence as a > > tactic is worked for them. It worked in a specific time and context. The > > notion that this tactic is a generalized principle, that it can work > > now, fails to account for that context. Without the Soviet Union, warts > > and all, there would have been no Gandhi, and there would have been no > > King. Had the struggle for credibility in the global periphery not been > > engaged by the US and the USSR, non-violence would have been suicidal. > > Even that struggle was based - at the contextual end of the road - on > > the military power of the Soviet Union that stood eye-to-eye with > > imperialism until it collapsed from the effort. > > > > There is a difference between imperial thuggery and armed resistance to > > imperialism, and in this era of exterminist imperialism, armed > > resistance has become for more and more people the synonym of > > self-defense. The occupying soldier fragments his personality with the > > gun. The resistance reclaims its humanity with it. > > > > It was Sartre, in his introduction to Fanon's The Wretched of the Earth, > > who said, "The native cures himself of colonial neurosis by thrusting > > out the settler through force of arms. When his rage boils over, he > > rediscovers his lost innocence and he comes to know himself in that he > > himself creates his self. Far removed from his war, we [the privileged > > white metropolitans -SG] consider it as a triumph of barbarism; but of > > its own volition it achieves, slowly but surely, the emancipation of the > > rebel, for bit by bit it destroys in him and around him the colonial > > gloom. Once begun, it is a war that gives no quarter. You may fear or be > > feared; that is to say, abandon yourself to the disassociations of a > > sham existence or conquer your birthright of unity. When the peasant > > takes a gun in his hands, the old myths grow dim and the prohibitions > > are one by one forgotten. The rebel's weapon is the proof of his > > humanity." > > > > As a soldier, I needed this history to understand my own, and to come to > > terms with my own, and to transform my own into this project. And as a > > soldier, Sartre's words, and Fanon's, have special meaning for me > > precisely because there is nothing abstract about them. I was part of > > that history - it doesn't matter on what side; that was a pure accident. > > > > And so I started helping build this bridge. > > > > Soldier, I am saying, here is the cause, here is the side of history > > your grandchildren will want to see you were on. Soldier, study this > > history and this movement, so your courage and your blood aren't sent > > into space like those idiotic capsules full of snapshots and mementoes > > for some alien life form to discover. > > > > And to my comrades now, I have grim news from those places where > > soldiers go. > > > > You will not win with non-profits. You will not win with non-violence. > > You will not win with non-committal. To win you must become effective, > > and when you do, you will be attacked. Then you will fight or you will > > be exterminated. You may even fight and still be exterminated. No > > guarantees. We are responsible. > > > > You will never make a revolution behind the bourgeoisie's back, because > > the bourgeoisie has eyes in the back of its panopticon head. You will > > never make a revolution while the ruling class sleeps, because it never > > sleeps. You will not sneak up on necessity, and no one can evade it. > > > > Soldiers have seen it. > > > > That's why they don't listen to liberal platitudes about morality in the > > abstract. They know about the power from the barrel of the gun. It ends > > debates. It forces people to pay attention. > > > > People listen to me, and I see them peering at me, trying to imagine > > what I am the way people sometimes try to imagine others having sex. I > > am arguing against imperialism, and I can talk about commodity fetishism > > with the best of them - because I applied myself to it with the same > > rigor and intensity that I did to trauma protocols as a Special Forces > > medic or marksmanship fundamentals as a sniper. Yet these audiences can > > hear about imperialism from a host of others. > > > > But there in front of them is someone who has been willing to take life > > or to give it away. And they are paying attention. > > > > Only it's not me. I'm not arrogant enough to believe that. I'm just a > > circumstance. What they are really paying attention to is themselves, to > > the questions they haven't confronted, to the doubts that plague them > > about their politics, to the incessant whisper of mortality. > > > > And I'm paying attention to them. I study Rosa Luxemburg, Alf Hornborg, > > Robert Connell, Joy James, Robin D. G. Kelley, Mao Zedongâ^À¦ and I study > > the academic research and the social theory and science and philosophy. > > Because simply understanding the final argument of the gun is not > > enough. We soldiers need to understand before and after the gun, and we > > need to understand - as much as we can - where our personhood is rooted > > in social constructions and where society is rooted in the biosphere and > > how there is no clear line of demarcation between biology and symbols. > > We need the context. > > > > So as a leftist I build this bridge toward my brothers and sisters under > > arms. I don't judgeâ^À¦ I can't. > > > > The ultimate liberal hypocrisy is the one that shuns the soldier as if > > the soldier lives in a parallel system, not recognizing that militarism > > doesn't float over history any more than the make and model of your > > automobile. If you turn on your lights with a wall switch and drink > > clean water from your tap, if you walk in the park, if you wear a stitch > > of manufactured clothing, if you've shopped on a vacation overseas, if > > you so much as breathe in the United States of America, you are as much > > a part of the body of actually-existing imperialism as any nervous, > > trigger-happy Marine killing a family at a Baghdad roadblock. > > > > Different rooms, same house. > > > > Deforested Haiti cooks on charcoal so you can cook with electricity. A > > child in Botswana dies of AIDS so I can work on this computer. And > > personal ethics will not transform this. > > > > It's a system, an expression of an immensely complex and dynamic web of > > relationships and realities, and it will default to its basic program - > > capital accumulation - again and again and again, until it is destroyed. > > > > And it will go down like a raving beast, if the reader will forgive this > > metaphorical shift. > > > > We need this bridge between the left and the military, because when the > > time comes, when the hypocrisy fails at last and confronts us with the > > painful reality of transformation, when the gun is all that is left and > > the choice is to seize or diminish our humanity, the soldier will need > > to become a revolutionary, and the revolutionary will have to become a > > soldier. > > > > The time will come when we are all participants. Most of the world > > already is. > > > > Soldier, leftistâ^À¦ "abandon yourself to the disassociations of a sham > > existence or conquer your birthright of unity." > > > > Fallujah lives! > > > > > > > > > > --- from list bhaskar-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu --- > > > > --- from list bhaskar-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu --- --- from list bhaskar-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---
Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005