Hors de combat.
I'm not a big fan of the notion that people in custody should be abused, beaten, or killed. Once you have them restrained, if circumstances warrant it, that should be enough. Seeing Gaddafi beaten and bloodied, then expired with a bullet hole in his head was kind of sickening, frankly. Sure, he was an autocratic asshole. But he was also defeated and in custody. If the Libyans are starting their brave new future with extrajudicial killings, it doesn't sound too promising. But then, I suppose, that would put them in the same league as their sponsors ... particularly, us.
It's been said that the Libya intervention is Iraq done the Obama way. Today kind of underlines that notion a bit. We didn't get all arrogant about it or act unilaterally. We pushed through a UN resolution - something Bush couldn't have had and probably wouldn't have wanted, since his administration was actively trying to sideline the UN. Obama is a true imperial internationalist, and the product of that is the kinds of interventions you see in Kosovo and Libya and the kinds of coups you see in Honduras, as opposed to his predecessor's far more blustering approach to wars and proxy overthrows. Sure, neither is a fly on Truman, Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon, or even Reagan when it comes to mass killing. But Obama acts to sustain the empire, not destroy it. Bush apparently couldn't care less about it.
My main concern is that we appear to be going the way of all empires. We are getting more comfortable with the trappings of imperial adventure. We are, in a sense, getting meaner as a society, more willing to mete out harsh "justice", more attached to our bloodlust. We are, it's also worth pointing out, falling apart from the inside out, the very bones of our civilization progressively embrittled by forced divestment and diversion of revenues to the maintenance of foreign wars, occupations, and forward bases. As Yeats wrote (later repurposed by Achebe), "the center cannot hold and things fall apart". Our devotion to maintaining our neoliberal empire at all costs is driving us into a period of significant decline - one that cannot be ameliorated by the deaths in custody of third-tier dictators.
This is not an inevitable process. It's a choice, and we can choose otherwise. Up to us. Imagine that.
luv u,
jp
It's been said that the Libya intervention is Iraq done the Obama way. Today kind of underlines that notion a bit. We didn't get all arrogant about it or act unilaterally. We pushed through a UN resolution - something Bush couldn't have had and probably wouldn't have wanted, since his administration was actively trying to sideline the UN. Obama is a true imperial internationalist, and the product of that is the kinds of interventions you see in Kosovo and Libya and the kinds of coups you see in Honduras, as opposed to his predecessor's far more blustering approach to wars and proxy overthrows. Sure, neither is a fly on Truman, Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon, or even Reagan when it comes to mass killing. But Obama acts to sustain the empire, not destroy it. Bush apparently couldn't care less about it.My main concern is that we appear to be going the way of all empires. We are getting more comfortable with the trappings of imperial adventure. We are, in a sense, getting meaner as a society, more willing to mete out harsh "justice", more attached to our bloodlust. We are, it's also worth pointing out, falling apart from the inside out, the very bones of our civilization progressively embrittled by forced divestment and diversion of revenues to the maintenance of foreign wars, occupations, and forward bases. As Yeats wrote (later repurposed by Achebe), "the center cannot hold and things fall apart". Our devotion to maintaining our neoliberal empire at all costs is driving us into a period of significant decline - one that cannot be ameliorated by the deaths in custody of third-tier dictators.
This is not an inevitable process. It's a choice, and we can choose otherwise. Up to us. Imagine that.
luv u,
jp
Comments