User Rating: 5 / 5

Star activeStar activeStar activeStar activeStar active
 

Politics Of FearIn 2004 the BBC aired a three part documentary titled "The Power of Nightmares - The Rise of the Politics of Fear". Its primary thesis was that governments, all governments, have failed. Up to recently, politicians held power based on selling optimistic illusions of the future that only they were able to deliver. However, over time and through reality those illusions proved to be just that: illusions. Since then, politicians have replaced positive promises of a bright future with promises of a dark one, they being the only ones capable of protecting us. Their primary weapon? Fear. According to them, there is a series of all powerful and all reaching dark networks out there harbouring the goal of destroy or enslave us.

THE SUMMARY

You can read the full transcript of the documentary in the attached file below, or if you prefer to watch, you can do so by going to the internet Archive and search for "The Power Of Nightmares" under Video.

As this documentary was developed after the 911 attacks, it takes us from the Cold War and into the arab-related or Muslim-related so-called threats. As such it is myopic because an argument can be put forward stating that these "threats" are not the only ones used by politicians world over; just the most current and expedient ones. The new evolution of these policies since then have been partially described in our article The Death Of Privacy. The concept is no longer to identify possible and specific threats to maintain fear (threats which could be dismissed eventually), but to make fear itself the object of fear. Politicians have so thoroughly brainwashed people that they no longer require specific threats to develop ever more controlling and invasive policies. The idea of "keeping us safe" is enough to do the trick. They have won thoroughly.

This fact in and by itself is a fascinating piece of history and warning of what happens when governments, all governments, operate as they were designed to operate: to provide job security for politicians and increased wealth for their masters of the power elite. But this is not news. This is not why we are interested in this documentary.

THE PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE

The third part of the documentary introduces the concept of the "Precautionary Principle". This concept says that certain threats are so great that we cannot wait for actual evidence; we need to act now. Not having the evidence that something might be a problem is no reason for not taking action now by imagining the worst case scenario using the data we currently have.

This is what actually interests us.

The Precautionary Principle is nothing more than an extension of an old one: "The End Justifies The Means" pushed to the extreme. It now reads:

The Imagined End Justifies Any Means Today.

This is the current principle on which most (all?) governments in the entire world operate today. This is the philosophical basis (ethical if you want) that is presented to us every time we are told that such-and-such measure is being taken "for our protection". They are protecting us from imagined worst case scenarios and nothing else. It is for this very reason that politicians cannot provide any shred of evidence pre, during or post threat investigation processes. It is for this very reason that the amount of people threatening a country (any country) that were brought to "Justice" anywhere in the world is, well, ZERO.

There hasn't been a single person anywhere in the world that was submitted to a public trial where evidence was provided demonstrating (or hinting) the existence of actual and ongoing nation-level threats. Or developed plans. Or even conspiracies. Not one. How is this possible? Simple: they don't exist. They are a figment of politicians' imagination operating under the Precautionary Principle where absence of evidence is evidence of something even more dangerous and sinister.

Let's be clear. We are not talking about revolutionary movements in countries. Those are OK with politicians as long as they don't threaten their "vital interestes", whichever they may be. These movements are typically contained in a geographic area and as such they are of little to no use in terms of politics of fear. We are talking about large terrorist organizations capable of bringing a country to its knees for the sole purpose of destroying what they see as a "threat". This type of organizations are the supposed sources justifying the politics of fear.

Consequently, what politicians have delivered are small groups of people or even solitary people planning isolated attacks here and there. Nothing remotely capable of producing nation-level chaos and disasters. Even the intentions and plans of these people are usually blown out of all proportions and most end up collapsing during trials, if they actually make it that far.

What politicians have delivered are summary executions, black ops, targeted assassinations, torture organizations and paranoid "Intelligence Communities" with "Special Operations" military muscles attached to them. In summary, death squads.

Do you honestly believe that with the massive intelligence resources available to the most powerful countries on earth, it is still not possible to identify and bring to justice not ONE nation-level terrorist threat?

Do you honestly believe that they would not expose such threats to be used by politicians as smoking guns should these people exist? Of course not. The reality is that such people simply do not exist. It is much more convenient and expedient to sweep all so-called "terrorist" activity under the blanket of "national security" and bomb (sorry, UAV target) the hell out of them. No proof required.

The truth is that it is not the case where you do not understand the situation because you don't have the information to understand it. The situation itself is illogic, a figment of their imagination and no amount of data will make any difference in your understanding. You are the sane person, not they, and as a sane person you should remember that trying to argue logically with a lunatic is not conducent to enlightenment; neither yours nor theirs.

CAN IT HAPPEN?

Well, yes. It can happen. Yes, it is possible that somewhere, somehow a determined group of people with the money, the connections and the will to bring down a state using terrorist methods may actually exist. How do we know? Because it has happened in the past. We need go no further than Vietnam and the Viet-Cong.

If these groups could get their hands on something massively lethal such as weaponized biological weapons or weapons-grade Uranium, they would most definitively use them. This much is true. However, there is something else that it is true, this being a trick assertion.

The real question is this: what is the probability that such a group exists? The answer is: not much. Just because something is possible it does not mean it is probable.

It is for this very reason that in the past intelligence agencies collected evidence, not hints. It is simply not economic to try to defend a nation against all possible (not probable) threats. Yet, this is the current policy. It is nothing short of lunacy. Idiocy. Yet it is idiocy with a clear purpose: to keep politicians (and the power elite) exactly where they are today: in power.

THE CONSEQUENCES

The consequences of the politics of fear are clear. They give politicians blank checks to do whatever they wish to do. It is the ethics of total war where everything and everybody must be sacrificed for the final victory. Yet in this case, there is no victory to be had, only defeat. The more we fight the more we lose to politicians and the more control they have over us the more secure their jobs are.

The consequences of the politics of fear imply that we are trapped in our homes and cities and we have no escape. The only thing that stands before us and total oblivion are politicians, however unpalatable their acts may be.

THERE IS ANOTHER WAY

But there is another way. This is the way of courage. We can and should call their bluff. We could demand proof that we actually need them… proof that they cannot provide. If it comes to it, some governments may get so desperate that they may manufacture evidence and events but at a global scale, this won't happen.

Yet, people won't act courageously. This is not the way of the political evolution. Evolution is the process of adapting not confronting. It is the process of surviving, not aggressing. This is OK. It is as it should be. Evolution renders politicians powerless not defeated.

CONCLUSION

The consequences of the politics of fear are nothing but the natural extension of the Precautionary Principle. Knowing this fact brings clarity to the way in which politicians operate. It brings sense to understanding their actions but it also brings the knowledge that we must defend ourselves. Anyway we can. Don't expect your fellow citizens to help you. You are alone but at least you are ahead in the game. You have evolved while they are still the primitive ones. At least that's our opinion. Yours may differ… at your own risk.

Note: please see the Glossary if you are unfamiliar with certain words.

Attachments:
Download this file (Power of Nightmares.pdf)Power of Nightmares.pdf[ ]307 kB
Comments | Add yours
  • No comments found
English French German Italian Portuguese Russian Spanish
FacebookMySpaceTwitterDiggDeliciousStumbleuponGoogle BookmarksRedditNewsvineTechnoratiLinkedinMixxRSS FeedPinterest
Pin It