Terrorism of the Past
Orson Scott Card writes:
A century ago, there were bombings and assassinations all over Europe and America. Followers of a radical, utopian ideology (and the wackos who used that ideology as an excuse for murder) murdered a Tsar of Russia, a President of the United States, a President of France, a Premier of Spain, an Empress of Austria, a King of Italy, and various lesser officials.They also, occasionally, attacked random innocent civilians. The man who killed one person and injured twenty others with a bomb he placed in the Café Terminus in Paris said he chose that site because there came "all those who are satisfied with the established order, all the accomplices and employees of Property and the State, ... all that mass of good little bourgeois who make 300 to 500 francs a month, who are more reactionary than their masters, who hate the poor and range themselves on the side of the strong." (Quoted in Barbara W. Tuchman, The Proud Tower, p. 93.)
For more on who these fanatics were, and more, just click here and read the whole thing.
This stuff matters. Especially his last line: "But we're Americans. We neither study history nor learn from it."
Hey! Nothing wrong with run-of-the-mill anarchists.
These extremists hijacked a peaceful idealogy and gave it a bad name. Just like the idiots in the WTO demo's.
OK, now I re-read the essay. Outstanding. He's probably correct, too.
Dean,
Thank you for pointing me to this piece. This guy is an excellent writer - and correct in SO many ways.
I haven't read his essay about terrorism, yet. I'll probably like it, he's a good writer. :)
It's cool that someone else actually read The Proud Tower...
I read the Proud Tower, Casey. My own grandfather was born in 1867, so he was a child of that era.
I do not think we shall succeed in ending al-Qaeda terrorism by ordinary means, but I do not believe the United States government or our underlying culture now has the temperament cold-blooded and objective enough to take the measures necessary to stamp out this threat.
I am reminded about an incident I heard about some years ago in connection with the civil war in Lebanon. One of the moslem religious-affiliated groups had kidnapped some Soviet KGB resident functionary in Beirut. In response, the KGB or some of their agents kidnapped the first-born son of the group's leading imam (religious leader), with the warning that parts of his body would be shipped back to his father every day if the Soviet agent were not released unharmed. He was.
A true story? I don't know. But someone thought it impressive enough to spread around. One thing about the good old Soviet Union. Nobody got away with fucking them over the way these Arabs are getting away with doing this stuff to us and ours.
I am getting damned pissed reading about our men stopped at a roadblock in Mosul, then having their thrats cut and their heads smashed in by concrete blocks in the hands of an Arab mob.
Why have we not fire-bombed that neighborhood, killing some thousands of the civilians? I think the Arabs respect nothing but strength and brutality. It ought to be applied to them. Directly.
Why has our secret government not arranged to kidnap all the brothers, sons, and nephews of Osama bin Laden and begun anonymously Fedexing parts of their bodies to the same Arab radio/tv complex in Qatar or wherever it is that all the al Qaeda tapes are played?
(Would I have used these tactics against the leaders of the Nazis or Japs in World War II? You bet your ass I would have. Because I believe in total war. No restraint, no limit, no pity, no remorse, once our country has been attacked.)
Arnold Harris
Mount Horeb WI
Leaving aside the final conclusions of Card's essay (which are acceptable enough for Huntington fans), he's simplified the history substantially with regard to the 19th century Anarchists.
Some quotes:
(1) "they believed that all the evils of human life were caused by the interference of governments"
This is different from classical liberals, how? When living under the Czar or King George or merchantalism it was easy to call government evil, because it was.
(2) "Never mind that it is impossible for people to live together without government."
And how did people live before there were laws? I don't think it's a Chicken-&-Egg question to ask "which came first, government or community?" Do YOU need a government to keep you from killing your neighbor? I doubt it.
(3) "Look what happened when Communism fell in Russia..."
This is relevant to the Anarchists how? They didn't cause the fall of the USSR and the 19th Century movement certainly wasn't on the scene in the 1980s - they were wiped out by Stalin.
(4) "their very ideology, they refused to organize. Organization was the evil they fought against. So unlike the Communists, who organized for revolution, or the socialists, who organized to try to win political power within the existing system, the Anarchists simply did not organize at all."
This is factually and historically inaccurate. Ideologically Anarchists are opposed to the State but NOT to organization. The State is a political organization with a monopoly on the coercive use of force. They are PRO-organization, but ANTI-State. Anyone who cannot concieve of a form of organization besides government has been brainwashed by a totalitarian ideology. Spanish Anarchists ("Republicans") overthrew the King of Spain and maintained order until crushed by fascists on the battle field. In fact, there was a world Anarchist congress. Ask the question "Who was killed at Haymarket Square?" and then figure out why there were so many Anarchists in the same place at once.
[Note: Anarchism is making a come-back. Anarchists are predominant in modern protest movements because their ideals of decentralization, diversity, cooperation encourage participation and Big Tent coalitions. See Seattle WTO Protests, Quebec FTAA protests, etc.]
(5) "When they were arrested, they couldn't inform on any other Anarchist terrorists because they didn't know any."
This isn't true, either. When looking back at the history there are several cases where groups of Anarchists were caught and tried as conspirators. Several were executed.
Yes, there are lessons to be learned about the international crack-down on Anarchists. But with history like Mr. Card's, you'll never learn them.
Leaving aside the final conclusions of Card's essay (which are acceptable enough for Huntington fans), he's simplified the history substantially with regard to the 19th century Anarchists.
Some quotes:
(1) "they believed that all the evils of human life were caused by the interference of governments"
This is different from classical liberals, how? When living under the Czar or King George or merchantalism it was easy to call government evil, because it was.
(2) "Never mind that it is impossible for people to live together without government."
And how did people live before there were laws? I don't think it's a Chicken-&-Egg question to ask "which came first, government or community?" Do YOU need a government to keep you from killing your neighbor? I doubt it.
(3) "Look what happened when Communism fell in Russia..."
This is relevant to the Anarchists how? They didn't cause the fall of the USSR and the 19th Century movement certainly wasn't on the scene in the 1980s - they were wiped out by Stalin.
(4) "their very ideology, they refused to organize. Organization was the evil they fought against. So unlike the Communists, who organized for revolution, or the socialists, who organized to try to win political power within the existing system, the Anarchists simply did not organize at all."
This is factually and historically inaccurate. Ideologically Anarchists are opposed to the State but NOT to organization. The State is a political organization with a monopoly on the coercive use of force. They are PRO-organization, but ANTI-State. Anyone who cannot concieve of a form of organization besides government has been brainwashed by a totalitarian ideology. Spanish Anarchists ("Republicans") overthrew the King of Spain and maintained order until crushed by fascists on the battle field. In fact, there was a world Anarchist congress. Ask the question "Who was killed at Haymarket Square?" and then figure out why there were so many Anarchists in the same place at once.
[Note: Anarchism is making a come-back. Anarchists are predominant in modern protest movements because their ideals of decentralization, diversity, cooperation encourage participation and Big Tent coalitions. See Seattle WTO Protests, Quebec FTAA protests, etc.]
(5) "When they were arrested, they couldn't inform on any other Anarchist terrorists because they didn't know any."
This isn't true, either. When looking back at the history there are several cases where groups of Anarchists were caught and tried as conspirators. Several were executed.
Yes, there are lessons to be learned about the international crack-down on Anarchists. But with history like Mr. Card's, you'll never learn them.