Comments on: Why the US is in Iraq http://deepblade.net/journal/2005/12/why-us-is-in-iraq.html Cutting through the effects of the US empire Wed, 03 Dec 2008 23:03:07 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.3 By: Isaac http://deepblade.net/journal/2005/12/why-us-is-in-iraq.html#comment-488 Isaac Mon, 05 Dec 2005 09:12:14 +0000 http://deepblade.net/journal/2005/12/why-us-is-in-iraq.html#comment-488 A (very) brief explanation of the history of the hydra reference is now up over at sotd: http://sotd2.blogspot.com/2005/12/why-us-is-in-iraq.html Like I said in the first sentence or two over there, this elite vocabulary, what Marcus and I are calling the demonology of capitalism (I'm not sold on the term yet because it predates the historical origin of capital, but you have to admit it sounds *really* cool) is a fusion of mythological beasts and historical dissidents. Thus the hydra is conflated with serpents, bandits, pirates and witches as icons of class struggle are blurred together with religious heretics and otherworldly evils in an elite imagination that constructs itself over centures of human history. The bandit (referenced above), for example, has been studied in E.P. Thompson's Whigs and Hunters. The pirate is the center of Marcus Rediker's latest work, Villains of All Nations. While in these two cases it is promising that popular imagination clings to pirates and brigands as heroes (RIAA be damned), it's curious that after two millenia have passed schoolchildren and their parents still readily embrace Hercules as a hero and mindlessly digest rhetoric such as Bush's. On a personal level I'm very interested in the way ruling classes and lower classes accept or reject certain icons, and I'm particularly interested in this phenomenon in comparative historical perspective. To what extent were these legacies invoked in the revolutionary Atlantic? To what extent were these constructions accepted within their own time? Did pre-Roman Etruscan mythology serve the same purpose as it did in the empire, or today? What about in African, Egyptian, and other mythologies? Understanding the heroes and antiheroes of class struggle I think will go a long way to helping us understand revolutionary social change. A (very) brief explanation of the history of the hydra reference is now up over at sotd:

http://sotd2.blogspot.com/2005/12/why-us-is-in-iraq.html

Like I said in the first sentence or two over there, this elite vocabulary, what Marcus and I are calling the demonology of capitalism (I’m not sold on the term yet because it predates the historical origin of capital, but you have to admit it sounds *really* cool) is a fusion of mythological beasts and historical dissidents. Thus the hydra is conflated with serpents, bandits, pirates and witches as icons of class struggle are blurred together with religious heretics and otherworldly evils in an elite imagination that constructs itself over centures of human history.

The bandit (referenced above), for example, has been studied in E.P. Thompson’s Whigs and Hunters. The pirate is the center of Marcus Rediker’s latest work, Villains of All Nations. While in these two cases it is promising that popular imagination clings to pirates and brigands as heroes (RIAA be damned), it’s curious that after two millenia have passed schoolchildren and their parents still readily embrace Hercules as a hero and mindlessly digest rhetoric such as Bush’s.

On a personal level I’m very interested in the way ruling classes and lower classes accept or reject certain icons, and I’m particularly interested in this phenomenon in comparative historical perspective. To what extent were these legacies invoked in the revolutionary Atlantic? To what extent were these constructions accepted within their own time? Did pre-Roman Etruscan mythology serve the same purpose as it did in the empire, or today? What about in African, Egyptian, and other mythologies? Understanding the heroes and antiheroes of class struggle I think will go a long way to helping us understand revolutionary social change.

]]> By: Eric http://deepblade.net/journal/2005/12/why-us-is-in-iraq.html#comment-487 Eric Mon, 05 Dec 2005 03:56:07 +0000 http://deepblade.net/journal/2005/12/why-us-is-in-iraq.html#comment-487 And Isaac, glad you're picking up on this language of the ``multi-headed enemy''. I found this quite striking in the president's presentation. Also please see these Deep Blade posts: <a href="http://deepblade.net/journal/2005/10/another-push-of-panic-button.html">Another Push of the Panic Button</a> <a href="http://deepblade.net/journal/2005/02/us-murdered-fallujah.html"> The US murdered Fallujah</a> Note Nazi language, ``bandits'' <a href="http://deepblade.net/journal/2004/10/paul-nitze-dead-at-97.html">Paul Nitze Dead at 97</a> . And Isaac, glad you’re picking up on this language of the “multi-headed enemy”. I found this quite striking in the president’s presentation. Also please see these Deep Blade posts:

Another Push of the Panic Button

The US murdered Fallujah
Note Nazi language, “bandits”

Paul Nitze Dead at 97
.

]]> By: Eric http://deepblade.net/journal/2005/12/why-us-is-in-iraq.html#comment-486 Eric Mon, 05 Dec 2005 03:44:48 +0000 http://deepblade.net/journal/2005/12/why-us-is-in-iraq.html#comment-486 Isaac, Wallsy, thanks for the contributions. Yes, the UK Crude Designs report is notable for offering projections about the <i>effect</i> on Iraq's economic future under all sorts of scenarios. Iraq is such a huge oil province that there is no reason for the country to lay down and give away concessions -- clearly it would have the wherewithall and resources to finance its own oil development. The British for 40 years of the 20th and now the US/UK in the 21st century have worked mightily to deny Iraq this privilege -- now by committing the most serious crimes the leaders of countries can commit: Aggression and Crimes Against Peace. Herein is a possible economic explanation for the turn in Iraq policy that occured during the summer of 1990 -- Saddam Hussein was willing to do some nasty work for the West and mount some serious debt, especially against Iran, but he refused to play the game of the economic ``hit men''. This term comes from the very fascinating book by James Perkins. There's a lot more to say here I'll have to save for later. Isaac, Wallsy, thanks for the contributions. Yes, the UK Crude Designs report is notable for offering projections about the effect on Iraq’s economic future under all sorts of scenarios. Iraq is such a huge oil province that there is no reason for the country to lay down and give away concessions — clearly it would have the wherewithall and resources to finance its own oil development. The British for 40 years of the 20th and now the US/UK in the 21st century have worked mightily to deny Iraq this privilege — now by committing the most serious crimes the leaders of countries can commit: Aggression and Crimes Against Peace.

Herein is a possible economic explanation for the turn in Iraq policy that occured during the summer of 1990 — Saddam Hussein was willing to do some nasty work for the West and mount some serious debt, especially against Iran, but he refused to play the game of the economic “hit men”. This term comes from the very fascinating book by James Perkins.

There’s a lot more to say here I’ll have to save for later.

]]> By: Wallsy http://deepblade.net/journal/2005/12/why-us-is-in-iraq.html#comment-485 Wallsy Sun, 04 Dec 2005 13:53:32 +0000 http://deepblade.net/journal/2005/12/why-us-is-in-iraq.html#comment-485 As usual, in a mad rush, I didn't read through my garbled post. Please forgive me... As usual, in a mad rush, I didn’t read through my garbled post. Please forgive me…

]]> By: Wallsy http://deepblade.net/journal/2005/12/why-us-is-in-iraq.html#comment-484 Wallsy Sun, 04 Dec 2005 13:51:00 +0000 http://deepblade.net/journal/2005/12/why-us-is-in-iraq.html#comment-484 I I remember correctly, the UK report includes an analysis of the implications of federalism in the context of obtaining oil wealth. If for example Iraq is divided into separate, confederate states this will impact on its ability to negotiate and manage the nation's oil revenue due to the fact that, as the report states, " they lack both the institutional experience and the consolidated weight of handling the entire countryÂ’s resources. The likely result would be more negative terms than could be achieved at a national level." I feel that this is key to how private corporations under teh auspices of the US government have managed to gain leverage within a quasi "legal" framework, since this kind of arrangement would be illegal at a national level (if I understand the report correctly). In additon, federalism weakens the hand of Iraqi bargaining power since each region is, in effect, looking after number one. This may line corrupt Federalsit leaders for the time being, but in the long run, when they realise what impact of 40 year unnegotiable oil contracts will have on the entire country's future they might think again. Then of course there is aspect of the excluded groups in Iraq who will have no say in the redistributon of the oil "wealth" (the crumbs). This, as we have seen already, will probably lead to toalt dissolution, ths keeping the federal regions busy thinking about that while the oil companies prosepect freely upon all the Iraq's as yet unused oil fields. The report adds too that the fact that there are so many new fields to be prospected, and the fact that oil companies will have that contractual right to do so, will leave Iraq worse off in that a great deal of its revenue will go to oil companies. It is really frightening to discern this missing link in the debate on Iraq. All of a sudden it all makes sense why Washington and some IGC croies were pusing for federalism. On the one hand it weakens national, and thereby sovreign, unity (leaglly and otherwise), thus facilitating a plethora or privatisation moves that will impoverish the country, while on the other hand, fedralism divides the country into warring ethnic factions which in turn maintains a necessary level chaos in order to further Washington's sense of "order". It is just so sad that some handpicked governmental Iraqis would even consider going along with all this. However, that might only be part of the truth since we now know that there is dissent (or awareness) within the Assembly regarding the state of affairs in that country. Let's pray for a positive outcome. I I remember correctly, the UK report includes an analysis of the implications of federalism in the context of obtaining oil wealth. If for example Iraq is divided into separate, confederate states this will impact on its ability to negotiate and manage the nation’s oil revenue due to the fact that, as the report states, ” they lack both the institutional experience and the consolidated weight of handling the entire countryÂ’s resources. The likely result would be more negative terms than could be achieved at a national level.” I feel that this is key to how private corporations under teh auspices of the US government have managed to gain leverage within a quasi “legal” framework, since this kind of arrangement would be illegal at a national level (if I understand the report correctly). In additon, federalism weakens the hand of Iraqi bargaining power since each region is, in effect, looking after number one. This may line corrupt Federalsit leaders for the time being, but in the long run, when they realise what impact of 40 year unnegotiable oil contracts will have on the entire country’s future they might think again. Then of course there is aspect of the excluded groups in Iraq who will have no say in the redistributon of the oil “wealth” (the crumbs). This, as we have seen already, will probably lead to toalt dissolution, ths keeping the federal regions busy thinking about that while the oil companies prosepect freely upon all the Iraq’s as yet unused oil fields. The report adds too that the fact that there are so many new fields to be prospected, and the fact that oil companies will have that contractual right to do so, will leave Iraq worse off in that a great deal of its revenue will go to oil companies.

It is really frightening to discern this missing link in the debate on Iraq. All of a sudden it all makes sense why Washington and some IGC croies were pusing for federalism. On the one hand it weakens national, and thereby sovreign, unity (leaglly and otherwise), thus facilitating a plethora or privatisation moves that will impoverish the country, while on the other hand, fedralism divides the country into warring ethnic factions which in turn maintains a necessary level chaos in order to further Washington’s sense of “order”. It is just so sad that some handpicked governmental Iraqis would even consider going along with all this. However, that might only be part of the truth since we now know that there is dissent (or awareness) within the Assembly regarding the state of affairs in that country. Let’s pray for a positive outcome.

]]> By: Isaac http://deepblade.net/journal/2005/12/why-us-is-in-iraq.html#comment-483 Isaac Sun, 04 Dec 2005 11:07:55 +0000 http://deepblade.net/journal/2005/12/why-us-is-in-iraq.html#comment-483 last but not least: bush's reference to the "multi-headed enemy" warrants some serious extended attention. i'll try to write something of substance on this tomorrow over at sotd and i'll drop a post back here when i do. the historical use of this type of language is on the short list of dissertation topics for me right now. anyway, more to come... last but not least:

bush’s reference to the “multi-headed enemy” warrants some serious extended attention. i’ll try to write something of substance on this tomorrow over at sotd and i’ll drop a post back here when i do. the historical use of this type of language is on the short list of dissertation topics for me right now. anyway, more to come…

]]> By: Isaac http://deepblade.net/journal/2005/12/why-us-is-in-iraq.html#comment-482 Isaac Sun, 04 Dec 2005 10:58:03 +0000 http://deepblade.net/journal/2005/12/why-us-is-in-iraq.html#comment-482 apparently db doesn't let me use html in my comments-- my very first complaint about the site! here is the remainder of the above post with clumsy urls cluttering the text: i saw this story earlier and planned to post it as the story of the day over on my own site. about a half hour ago i started combing google for a good pic to use as the graphic for the article. eight pages deep and a photo stands out with ahmed chalabi's head circled and i swear i've seen it before. lo and behold it is none other than the deep blade journal: http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://deepblade.net/journal/chalabi.jpg&imgrefurl=http://deepblade.net/archive/posts/2005_04_01_archive.html&h=345&w=460&sz=53&tbnid=1qpxX2L7X1wJ:&tbnh=93&tbnw=125&hl=en&start=149&prev=/images%3Fq%3Diraq%2Boil%26start%3D140%26svnum%3D10%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26safe%3Doff%26sa%3DN i interpret this to mean one of two things: 1) i have actually wasted so much of my life online that i have truly reached the end of the internet. doug allen would say he's seen it coming for years. http://www.shibumi.org/eoti.htm 2) deep blade journal is in fact so important that it provides not only the most forward-worthy analysis of the weekend but its archives figure prominently in the search results for the best possible photos to accompany said analysis. that, or the internet is simply a much smaller place than i had once believed. one way or another, i thought this coincidence was funny. as it turns out, i settled on a photo that turned up some hundred or so items deep in the search results, but i think it was a nice fit: http://sotd2.blogspot.com/2005/12/why-us-is-in-iraq.html one people, one struggle, isaac apparently db doesn’t let me use html in my comments– my very first complaint about the site! here is the remainder of the above post with clumsy urls cluttering the text:

i saw this story earlier and planned to post it as the story of the day over on my own site. about a half hour ago i started combing google for a good pic to use as the graphic for the article. eight pages deep and a photo stands out with ahmed chalabi’s head circled and i swear i’ve seen it before. lo and behold it is none other than the deep blade journal:

http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://deepblade.net/journal/chalabi.jpg&imgrefurl=http://deepblade.net/archive/posts/2005_04_01_archive.html&h=345&w=460&sz=53&tbnid=1qpxX2L7X1wJ:&tbnh=93&tbnw=125&hl=en&start=149&prev=/images%3Fq%3Diraq%2Boil%26start%3D140%26svnum%3D10%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26safe%3Doff%26sa%3DN

i interpret this to mean one of two things:

1) i have actually wasted so much of my life online that i have truly reached the end of the internet. doug allen would say he’s seen it coming for years.

http://www.shibumi.org/eoti.htm

2) deep blade journal is in fact so important that it provides not only the most forward-worthy analysis of the weekend but its archives figure prominently in the search results for the best possible photos to accompany said analysis.

that, or the internet is simply a much smaller place than i had once believed. one way or another, i thought this coincidence was funny. as it turns out, i settled on a photo that turned up some hundred or so items deep in the search results, but i think it was a nice fit:

http://sotd2.blogspot.com/2005/12/why-us-is-in-iraq.html

one people,
one struggle,
isaac

]]> By: Isaac http://deepblade.net/journal/2005/12/why-us-is-in-iraq.html#comment-481 Isaac Sun, 04 Dec 2005 10:54:01 +0000 http://deepblade.net/journal/2005/12/why-us-is-in-iraq.html#comment-481 i saw this story earlier and planned to post it as the story of the day over on my own site. about a half hour ago i started combing google for a good pic to use as the graphic for the article. eight pages deep and a photo stands out with ahmed chalabi's head circled and i swear i've seen it before. lo and behold it is none other than the deep blade journal: i saw this story earlier and planned to post it as the story of the day over on my own site. about a half hour ago i started combing google for a good pic to use as the graphic for the article. eight pages deep and a photo stands out with ahmed chalabi’s head circled and i swear i’ve seen it before. lo and behold it is none other than the deep blade journal:

]]>