David Gardner on the moral test for the west. Political Observer comments

Headline: The assault on Aleppo is a moral test for the west

Sub-headline: Will anyone stop Russia turning the city into another Grozny, asks David Gardner

A perfectly executed piece of propaganda, with the central character being Putin The Terrible. And judging from Mr. Gardner’s very impressive CV, his credibility to be a ‘Moral Judge’ about ‘Western Responsibility’ for the carnage in the ‘Middle East’ i.e. Syria, should be un-challegable?

The history of Western Imperialism that predates from well before Sykes-Picot, the Americans being the latest fellow travelers of that mendacious and self-serving exercise in Western Paternalism, leaves no doubt as to the motives of the R2P (Responsibility to Protect) zealots, and their political propinquity with the Neo-Conservatives, and their abject worship of Mars. To put it in Pascalian terms Mr. Gardner places his wager on this misbegotten alliance.

But the rhetorical frame must, of necessity, be framed in moral terms for the ‘Western Reader’: suffering from a debilitating fatigue, the root of which is that The War on Terror is now thirteen years old, and its adjunct the Drone War have fostered the  growth of ISIS, and the Caliphate, as credible answer to an utterly pernicious and destructive Western interventionism. What Mr. Gardner and his allies miss and or elide from their narrative is that ISIS and its precursors are anti-imperial in nature.

Samuel P. Huntington’s prescient rhetorical intervention of 1993, framed it as a ‘Clash of Civilizations’, he was subject to his own WASP paranoia of the Other, which dovetailed with his status as operative and defender of the American National Security State. Not seeing that Islam is an integral part of the Abrahamic Tradition: meaning that the ‘they’ that he points to is really a part of the ‘us’ and not in least ‘alien’.  Huntington’s ‘Clash’ was the Cold War projected onto the world i.e. everyone was not just a potential enemy.

Political Observer




About stephenkmacksd

Rootless cosmopolitan,down at heels intellectual;would be writer. 'Polemic is a discourse of conflict, whose effect depends on a delicate balance between the requirements of truth and the enticements of anger, the duty to argue and the zest to inflame. Its rhetoric allows, even enforces, a certain figurative licence. Like epitaphs in Johnson’s adage, it is not under oath.' https://www.lrb.co.uk/v15/n20/perry-anderson/diary
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.