LENIN'S TOMB

 

Saturday, March 17, 2007

Triumph of unreason. posted by Richard Seymour


If there is a better example of magical thinking than the supposition that "will trumps wealth" and that the main cause of America's disaster in Iraq is media pessimism, I don't know of it. Those arguments and that phrase are attributed to Andrew Roberts, the far right British historian, at a literary salon run by the Bourbon monarch a while ago. The account of Irwin Stelzer, himself the editor of a slight volume on neoconservatism, is intended to electrify the faithful. He tell us of how nonpartisan historians will recall an era in which the President flattered the literati (such unimpeachable intellects as Norman Podhoretz and Gertrude Himmelfarb, as well as a Wall Street Journal editor and a right-wing theologian), and issues such stirring sentiments as "History informs the present". Bush circulates Natan Sharanksy and Mark Steyn books. No lame duck, he is "a man who believes the constituency to which he must ultimately answer is the Divine Presence". He has not, then, got round to the Thomas Paine that Hitchens has been sending to him.

There is much ado about Good and Evil, and the President engages in a sort of theological debate with his bedazzled admirers. Most interesting, however, is the account of Andrew Roberts' perorations. He insisted that Bush should look to a future alliance with Gordon Brown, rather than the Tory leader, because "Brown admires America, is unlikely to pull troops out of Iraq and Afghanistan, and will continue to support Britain's nuclear submarine program" and Cameron couldn't be trusted on either of those fronts because he once said something about Britain's 'slavish' devotion to US policy, and because William Hague said that Israel's attack on Lebanon was 'disproportionate'. Roberts' reassures Bush that British "anti-Americanism" is nothing to bother about, and urges him to take note of five lessons from what he has the nerve to refer to as 'history'. They include the recommendation not to set a timetable for withdrawal from Iraq, because a timetable for departure caused up to a million deaths in India; not to be sapped by media pessimism because "will trumps wealth", and the rich Romans only lost to the barbarians because they lacked the will to fight and survive; not to "hesitate to intern our enemies for long, indefinite periods of time. That policy worked in Ireland and during World War II. Release should only follow victory"; to cling to the alliance of "English-speaking peoples" (those societies based on English colonialism) or risk allowing the perfidious French and Germans to lead Britain astray; not to "appease" the bad guys.

This is interesting because here the historian offers, appealing to the authority of his profession, a quite conscious and deliberate set of contemporary political myths. Roberts is presumably aware that in the last quarter of the 19th Century, British colonialism killed on average at least one million people in India each year. He is presumably also aware that the reason for the communal violence that killed one million people was not a hasty timetable, as per Winston Churchill's claim at the time: it was that the British had decided upon the partition of the country, a policy which Bush will impose either de jure or de facto. He will be perfectly well aware that internment during the war in the north of Ireland did not 'work' even on its own brutal assumptions, with most of those interned never convicted of anything; while the internment of 120,000 people of Japanese descent in World War II was promulgated by politicians who were perfectly aware at the time, because their reports from the FBI and the State Department told them as much, that the people they were locking up were utterly innocent of espionage of any character. And Roberts will know of important legal cases resulting from those episodes, and of the reparations that have had to be made. And the thought that Rome declined because of an absence of 'will' would make Gibbon blush, even if Roberts is clearly drawing on the tradition of 'tragic' Roman decline initiated by Gibbon. (If anyone is interested, Michael Mann has an interesting account in Volume I of The Sources of Social Power, which is only slightly better than Perry Anderson's account in Passages from Antiquity to Feudalism). Roberts is a competent, that is to say trained, historian. He knows all this.

Of course, he was talking to the President, so perhaps you would assume he condescended a little bit. I think it's more likely, however, that he was selling his wares to fellow reactionaries whom he knew would get to hear of his 'provocative' stylings through such outlets as the Weekly Standard. He has tapped into something, a product, a set of convenient solutions whose claim to veracity is neither historical nor empirical: it is simply, tautologically the case that, no matter how bad conditions are, one can always win by killing more people, imprisoning more people, ignoring dissent, sustaining one's 'will' at all costs. With a sort of Bernaysian mastery, he has tapped into the growing unreason, the despair, the search for Godlike assurance among the Brahminical 'intellectuals' of the American right. Each component of the product is carefully hardwired to reactionary desire - selling barbarism as necessary tough-mindedness, alleviating guilt; providing a narrative of civilisational combat ranging from the Hellenocentric to the Anglocentric, thereby sustaining the 'nobility' of the purpose; providing an easy solution while flattering traditional neocon nostrums such as the necessity of 'resolve' and the demand that one make necessary moral distinctions (even though he unmistakeably draws a moral equivalence between empires based on slavery and genocide and the current American empire). Bush himself may even believe some of this shit, it's very hard to tell, but his policymaking team certainly doesn't.

No, this was a hard sell for the punters, probably co-drafted by his wife, a flak at the Brunswick PR group alongside former Sun editor, David Yelland. It doesn't do to reduce this to the confounded hubris of a few liver-spotted warmongers. We shouldn't forget Marx's insight that the root of modern irrationalism doesn't reside in some strange atavism, but in commodity fetishism, in which social relations between people acquire the character of objective relations between things. The products of social labour appear as the real causal agents. Had he survived until the age of propaganda, Marx would have witnessed another kind of fetishism, in which the pioneers of 'public relations' sought to embed the products of their clients in the unconscious desires of the public, so that cars and soap and toothpaste were saturated with contrived connotations in ways that were demystified by Barthes - for the purpose of the fullest realisation of surplus value possible. It did not, clearly, stop with 'planned obsolescence'. Products, institutions, policies and ideas have all entered the orbit of the flak, and there is not a single outlandish, cultic notion that has not been provided with a mass audience in this fashion. Irrationalism is a necessary condition for the accumulation of capital and for the acceptance of policies designed to enhance that procedure, and that is why there are huge multinational industries devoted to the cause of making human beings unreasonable.

8:45:00 pm | Permalink | Comments thread | | Print | Digg | del.icio.us | reddit | StumbleUpon | diigo it Tweet| Share| Flattr this

Search via Google

Info

Richard Seymour

Richard Seymour's Wiki

Richard Seymour: information and contact

Richard Seymour's agent

RSS

Twitter

Tumblr

Pinterest

Academia

Storify

Donate

corbyn_9781784785314-max_221-32100507bd25b752de8c389f93cd0bb4

Against Austerity cover

Subscription options

Flattr this

Recent Comments

Powered by Disqus

Recent Posts

Subscribe to Lenin's Tomb
Email:

Lenosphere

Archives

September 2001

June 2003

July 2003

August 2003

September 2003

October 2003

November 2003

December 2003

January 2004

February 2004

March 2004

April 2004

May 2004

June 2004

July 2004

August 2004

September 2004

October 2004

November 2004

December 2004

January 2005

February 2005

March 2005

April 2005

May 2005

June 2005

July 2005

August 2005

September 2005

October 2005

November 2005

December 2005

January 2006

February 2006

March 2006

April 2006

May 2006

June 2006

July 2006

August 2006

September 2006

October 2006

November 2006

December 2006

January 2007

February 2007

March 2007

April 2007

May 2007

June 2007

July 2007

August 2007

September 2007

October 2007

November 2007

December 2007

January 2008

February 2008

March 2008

April 2008

May 2008

June 2008

July 2008

August 2008

September 2008

October 2008

November 2008

December 2008

January 2009

February 2009

March 2009

April 2009

May 2009

June 2009

July 2009

August 2009

September 2009

October 2009

November 2009

December 2009

January 2010

February 2010

March 2010

April 2010

May 2010

June 2010

July 2010

August 2010

September 2010

October 2010

November 2010

December 2010

January 2011

February 2011

March 2011

April 2011

May 2011

June 2011

July 2011

August 2011

September 2011

October 2011

November 2011

December 2011

January 2012

February 2012

March 2012

April 2012

May 2012

June 2012

July 2012

August 2012

September 2012

October 2012

November 2012

December 2012

January 2013

February 2013

March 2013

April 2013

May 2013

June 2013

July 2013

August 2013

September 2013

October 2013

November 2013

December 2013

January 2014

February 2014

March 2014

April 2014

May 2014

June 2014

July 2014

August 2014

September 2014

October 2014

November 2014

December 2014

January 2015

February 2015

March 2015

April 2015

May 2015

June 2015

July 2015

August 2015

September 2015

October 2015

December 2015

March 2016

April 2016

May 2016

June 2016

July 2016

August 2016

September 2016

October 2016

November 2016

December 2016

January 2017

February 2017

March 2017

April 2017

May 2017

June 2017

July 2017

August 2017

Dossiers

Hurricane Katrina Dossier

Suicide Bombing Dossier

Iraqi Resistance Dossier

Haiti Dossier

Christopher Hitchens Dossier

Organic Intellectuals

Michael Rosen

Left Flank

Necessary Agitation

China Miéville

Je Est Un Autre

Verso

Doug Henwood

Michael Lavalette

Entschindet und Vergeht

The Mustard Seed

Solomon's Minefield

3arabawy

Sursock

Left Now

Le Poireau Rouge

Complex System of Pipes

Le Colonel Chabert [see archives]

K-Punk

Faithful to the Line

Jews Sans Frontieres

Institute for Conjunctural Research

The Proles

Infinite Thought

Critical Montages

A Gauche

Histologion

Wat Tyler

Ken McLeod

Unrepentant Marxist

John Molyneux

Rastî

Obsolete

Bureau of Counterpropaganda

Prisoner of Starvation

Kotaji

Through The Scary Door

Historical Materialism

1820

General, Your Tank is a Powerful Vehicle

Fruits of our Labour

Left I on the News

Organized Rage

Another Green World

Climate and Capitalism

The View From Steeltown

Long Sunday

Anti-dialectics

Empire Watch [archives]

Killing Time [archives]

Ob Fusc [archives]

Apostate Windbag [archives]

Alphonse [archives]

Dead Men Left [dead, man left]

Bat [archives]

Bionic Octopus [archives]

Keeping the Rabble in Line [archives]

Cliffism [archives]

Antiwar

Antiwar.com

Antiwar.blog

Osama Saeed

Dahr Jamail

Angry Arab

Desert Peace

Abu Aardvark

Juan Cole

Baghdad Burning

Collective Lounge

Iraqi Democrats Against the Occupation

Unfair Witness [archive]

Iraq Occupation & Resistance Report [archive]

Socialism

Socialist Workers Party

Socialist Aotearoa

Globalise Resistance

Red Pepper

Marxists

New Left Review

Socialist Review

Socialist Worker

World Socialist Website

Left Turn

Noam Chomsky

South Africa Keep Left

Monthly Review

Morning Star

Radical Philosophy

Blogger
blog comments powered by Disqus