17 June 2006

Scare mongering

The psychology of politics should get more attention in the media than it does. It is with a grave sense of déjà vu that one notices the political psychology of the Republican interest groups when they argue in Congress. War mongering and scare mongering are close allies in the game of manipulation of public opinion. The South African Nationalist Government used the same tactics to win votes from 1948 until 1991 in elections. Hitler did likewise.

When democratic voices gathered strength against the minority rule in South Africa, the National Party of South Africa would always pull the terror card from their collective pocket. At the time, South Africa was engaged in border wars against Soviet supported insurgents from neighbouring states. Internal terrorism from resistance movements such as the ANC and PAC was on the increase. All these factors were utterly useful components in an overall policy of fear and rescue. The National Party had the guts and the will and ultimately the ability to allay the fears and come to the rescue of the beseeched country. On the other hand, the progressive voices could not be trusted with your safety. Trust the National Party, fighting a just cause, to ensure your safety against this ongoing, prevalent evil. And so it seems, does the Republican Party in the USA. Only, for South Africa the cause turned out not to be just at all.

The NY Times has reported recent partisan clashes in both Senate and Congress on the issue of security and the wars that the USA is fighting [1]. How convenient, if unfortunate, that this new war remains rather indefinite: A war on terror – no specific enemy, no specific goals, and no exit strategy. It is this singular, perpetual monster in the closet. Convenient indeed, if one has to keep the votes going the right way – that is, if one assumes Republican and all it represents to be the right way.

Such a strategy for lobbying support has marvellous advantages: Not much opposition to enormous spending on endless wars; a paranoid and neurotic support base that tremble at the very mention of the faceless evil that waits to descend upon local shores to maim and destroy the good people of the USA. And all that is standing between all these good, innocent people and the wicked, faceless evil snarling at the gates are of course the Republicans with their interest groups from corporate America.

In fact, the above scenario is sickening in its repeatability. It is also chilling in its destructive regularity. The South African Nationalist programs of war and self-righteous crusades wrecked the economy of South Africa such that ten years on the country is still recovering. The USA is heading the same direction with a national debt that hits all records, foreign lenders getting nervous and the budget deficit knowing no end. All the while, the international community is getting increasingly fed-up with jock-boy playing Superman.

It is time for a wake-up call. As the so-called threat on South Africa was mostly caused by the unjust policies of the South African nationalist government, so the current alleged threat on the US has a lot of ground in the unjust international policies of the US government. Unfortunately, a democracy is of the people and therefore the wows of this country are of the people – a serious change of heart might be needed before the politics with change. But then, why should the nation calling itself the greatest need change? It took an economic, policical and international crisis to convince the ruling South Africans to change heart. And so it goes and so its goes.

1 comment:

Anduril said...

One may counter that the US is in fact innocent of, for example, the callous attack in New York on 11 September 2001. One may argue that there is little comparison between South Africa during the policy of Apartheid and the USA of the past 30 years. However, the truth here lies in the essentials, not the details.

A democracy brings collective responsibility. A free market democracy does not allow anyone to hide behind any excuses for complacency when an elected government and a homegrown corporate establishment collaborate in unjust international practices.

Dubious involvement in Central America and the Middle East means the US public is both directly and indirectly to blame for the worsening reputation of the US. Just as white South Africans were collectively responsible for Apartheid, except for the few that stood in deliberate opposition, so the active and passive supporters of unjust US government policies must take collective responsibility.

Change only starts with acceptance of responsibility.