But if the grass ever did look greener, which political party do you think you’d be more comfortable with? Well, if I ever ran for office, I’d do better as a Democrat than as a Republican–and that’s not because I’d be more liberal, because I’m conservative. But the working guy would elect me. He likes me. When I walk down the street, those cabbies start yelling out their windows.
It was too good a quotation not to share on this blog.
There are others nuggets as regards the Trump show, the promotion of extraordinary egotism (on this blog, the same may be interpreted and developed as a malign or reparative narcissism), admiration for the Chinese government’s show of strength at Tienanmen Square, and obsession with nuclear war:
I’ve always thought about the issue of nuclear war; it’s a very important element in my thought process. It’s the ultimate, the ultimate catastrophe, the biggest problem this world has, and nobody’s focusing on the nuts and bolts of it. It’s a little like sickness. People don’t believe they’re going to get sick until they do. Nobody wants to talk about it. I believe the greatest of all stupidities is people’s believing it will never happen, because everybody knows how destructive it will be, so nobody uses weapons. What bullshit.
“As I have repeatedly said, it is not our fault that Russian – American relations are in that poor condition.”
If you’re a BackChannels regular or an enthusiast in political psychology, you know that the “malignant narcissist” — autocrat, bully, or dictator — is never wrong.
“The struggle of man against power is the struggle of memory against forgetting”
Lest any forget, there’s plenty of reading at hand (these days: Amazon One-Click shopping may be the next best thing) for guarding against forgetting.
Posted by The Guardian, November 9, 2016.
BackChannels has framed contemporary conflict in terms of time, i.e., whether confronting Assad or, for a domestic example, the Ku Klux Klan, the modern person is actually rejecting the reappearance of the past in his own path.
For the most part, whether involving the aggressive Muslim Brotherhood aspect in contemporary Islam, the barbarism on display in Syria — and do “thank” Assad, Putin, and Khamenei for choosing that evil path — or the Russian invasion of Crimea, one is actually aiming the finger back at the world of Medieval Political Absolute Power, i.e., AKA the divine right of rule, rule by a presumptuously superior nature, rule by thuggery, and, most certainly, unquestionable authority, or authority beyond criticism and beyond law.
Putin : Medieval Political Absolutism
vs
Trump: Modern Democratic and Checked Distribution of Political Power
Choose.
Posted by VICE News, March 3, 2014.
While “western” political success and related productivity and affluence provide for western humanism and other aspects of idealism, “eastern” barbarism and suffering have left behind a world in which fear and insecurity appear to threaten those who should be in the most confident and secure of internal psychological states. Leadership in tribal cultures and states tend toward a winner-take-all — and loser-lose-all — position in their politics, and it may be that we mistake for a better politics and ennoble with the term “realpolitik”.
Our world pays a high price in general suffering — suffering associated horrors beyond imagining — for the emotional care and feeding of its “malignant narcissists” — its most damaged bad boys, the same that make themselves known as political and war criminals.
So:
Bashar al-Assad: war criminal?
Vladimir Putin: war criminal?
Ali Khamenei: political criminal?
As a class, dictators “exceed limits” — just as Muhammad warned 🙂 — and in doing so free themselves from other normative restraints while at the same time condemning themselves to remaining in political power at any cost (always to others).
In effect, the worlds of despots become worlds of political absolutes, and if for no other reason than the near impossibility of the retreat of their authors.
If over the past five years you had been a Syrian noncombatant, would you wish to see Bashar al-Assad a) remain in power, b) exiled, or c) hung in public?
If you had been swept off the streets of Tehran and dumped in Evin Prison (say for wearing that hijab a little to far to the back — or for being Baha’i or gay or western in outlook) , or if you had had family murdered by the Iranian regime, would you care to see Ali Khamenei’s term in power a) modified, b) truncated, c) “terminated with extreme prejudice”?
Has Putin a graceful retreat today — Syria was al-Assad’s war and armies, flyers especially, make mistakes; and Ukrainian autonomy was Khrushchev’s mistake, which was made with the confidence that Kiev would remain forever bent to Moscow?
Putin may have that.
And Trump may be wise to see that Putin, the Russian State, and the Russian People (of Russia proper) have that “out” — but to horse trade Ukraine, the European Union, the United Nations, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization?
“Nyet” to all that!
(Liberal politics have come to mire judgment, unfortunately. Biography.com maintains a page titled “Political Criminals” but begs credulity by placing side-by-side J. Edgar Hoover and Richard Nixon, both of whom may have exceeded some boundaries in power, with Adolph Hitler, Joseph Stalin, Benito Mussolini, Fidel Castro, and Idi Amin all of whom plainly represent the most reckless of minds and murderous of despots).
Historian John Bew suggests that much of what stands for modern realpolitik today deviates from the original meaning of the term. Realpolitik emerged in mid-19th century Europe from the collision of the enlightenment with state formation and power politics. The concept, Bew argues, was an early attempt at answering the conundrum of how to achieve liberal enlightened goals in a world that does not follow liberal enlightened rules.
If, as the poet says, America is not the world, then the world is surely owed an apology for the lack of attention paid to what ought to have been, and are, a series of alarming developments throughout Europe and the Middle East. Perhaps appropriately, all have involved or implicated a revanchist authoritarian power for which the incoming commander in chief has repeatedly professed his admiration and which, after having done all it could to facilitate an upset American electoral outcome—“maybe we helped a bit with WikiLeaks,” as pro-Kremlin political analyst Sergei Markov put it Wednesday morning—offers its hearty congratulations on his victory. Meanwhile, Russia’s alleged “wet work” and maneuvering outside the United States in the last two weeks has been even more impressive.
Echoing Saudi Prince Alwaleed bin Talal scandalous post-September 11, 2001, remarks, global jihad by groups like Al Qaeda also elicited Western guilt from School of Advanced International Studies (SAIS) Dean Vali Nasr. After 9/11, “Islamophobia, in a way, was a policy deliberately pushed from the very top of the U.S. administration” as indicated by President George W. Bush’s use of “Islamo-fascism,” Nasr stated. “Islamophobia was a way of passing the blame back to the Muslims, put Islam itself on trial for its responsibility in promoting terrorism rather than put U.S. foreign policy on trial for creating some of the problems.”
It may be easier to tolerate one candidate’s indiscretions and poor judgment than to allay the fear of what appears to some as a bombastic egotistical hothead surrounded by questions involving taxes, vendor lawsuits, attitudes toward minorities and women, and, of course, judgment as regards the hiring of the world’s foremost consultant to the world’s dictators.
Again:
Brown – New Nationalists — Donald J. Trump’s Elephant Red–Green — Old Comrades and Neo-Islamists — Hillary Clinton’s Ass
That’s the way it is.
We’re all munching popcorn (or mixing the Kool-Aid) together on this one.
I would expect Americans to vote their judgment of character and their ideals, and neither candidate has appeal in character. That may be a function of this election’s relentless negative campaigning.
Think about it a moment.
The campaigners are the kind of people who would go microscopically digging in the past to scrape up a few moments of locker room braggadocio with which to scuttle a presidential contender’s campaign.
Vote Donald J. Trump!
But then . . . what does one do with Trump’s bankruptcies, “tax freedom” (one might call it), and the near routine stiffing of vendors who have delivered their work and then have had to sue to hold Trump’s side to its contract obligations?!
Vote Hillary Clinton!
Then li’l ol’ me goes dredging up — I’m a humble blogger, lowest of the low in journalism, a bum, so I’m allowed to go dredging (or is it “Drudging”?) — something out of Bill’s past, and there’s the Moscow connection.
Vote Donald J. Trump!
But Trump had the temerity or naivete to hire Paul Manafort, consultant to the world’s bloodiest dictators and political mafia, including Viktor Yanukovych whom Ukrainians ousted from power, so disgusted were they with the corruption associated with the regime. Yanukovych went crying to Moscow; Moscow sent in the “Little Green Men” and annexed Crimea against old agreements to leave Ukraine independent . . . .
Vote Hillary Clinton!
Feeling screwed either way?
Many of my fellow Americans may feel the same way.
On the 2016 American Elections, BackChannels has striven to either stay out of it or stay balanced, and it has possibly succeeded at both.
Come the day, many voters may feel they’re not voting for Clinton or Trump but rather voting against one or the other, i.e., blocking a perceived threat to America’s “domestic tranquility” — perhaps the entire election should be perceived as and rendered unconstitutional! — and its independent foreign affairs policies and practices.
U.S. intelligence officials described the covert influence campaign here as “ambitious” and said it is also designed to counter U.S. leadership and influence in international affairs.
With even a little looking into “Russian influence operations”, one finds gems.
Here’s one from France:
The French Coordination Council of Compatriots is a subsidiary of the International Council of Russian Compatriots established in October 2003, the Putin equivalent of the Ausland Organization (AO) created by the Nazi Party in 1931 in order to mobilize the German diasporas to serve the Reich. This network now relies on the “Russian world” (Russkiy mir), an organization founded in 2007, which signed a collaboration agreement with the Orthodox Church in November 2009.[2] The first Forum of Russian Compatriots was held in France in September 2011 at the Russian Embassy. At the 3rd Forum organized in October 2013, French citizens of Russian origin were explicitly invited by the attending representatives of the Russian authorities to become vectors of the Kremlin’s policy in France.[3] In France the role of the Moscow Patriarchate in the seduction of the conservative right should not be underestimated. Since 2000 the Moscow Patriarchate has been taking over Russian Orthodox parishes formerly in the jurisdiction of the Patriarchate of Constantinople, reportedly with the occasional help of the Russian special services.
From UK Scotland comes an account of “framing”, a technique that takes a given reality but sets out to cast the same in a disparaging manner:
It was a moment in which the people of Scotland were vulnerable, says independence campaigner Douglas Daniel, who was present at the vote count and wrote about it for the political website Wings Over Scotland.
At the time, he says, he knew nothing about the ROIIP team.
“It wasn’t until the articles speaking about ‘Russia’ and saying the process was flawed [appeared] that I became aware of their existence,” says Daniel.
Sure enough, by the end of the day after the vote, the ROIIP delegation’s damning verdict was all over the British and Russian press.
The vote in Scotland “[did] not conform to generally accepted international principles of referendums,” said Borisov, the delegation’s head.
In the above cited quotation and article, the “ROIIP” was Russia’s “election monitoring” organization that ended up predictably devising and promoting criticism certain to cause dissension in the Scottish electorate.
Again (if you’re a BackChannels regular, you seen this point made many times), the purpose of the spin appears to be that of sowing discord and conflict in Moscow’s target states.
The point was writ large with the January 2016 announcement of a Congressionally-backed mission to review of clandestine Russian funding of European parties over the last decade:
A dossier of “Russian influence activity” seen by The Sunday Telegraph identified Russian influence operations running in France, the Netherlands, Hungary as well as Austria and the Czech Republic, which has been identified by Russian agents as an entry-point into the Schengen free movement zone.
The US intelligence review will examine whether Russian security services are funding parties and charities with the intent of “undermining political cohesion”, fostering agitation against the Nato missile defence programme and undermining attempts to find alternatives to Russian energy.
As I remember it, the first signs of danger started appearing close to ten years ago, when, after the breakup of the Soviet Union, many people in Russia and in former Soviet republics started expressing their discontent about the poor economic situation, social inequality, and political chaos. The post-Soviet emphasis on developing democracy gradually started to fade, replaced with other concerns, above all a critical attitude toward the United States and the West in general, which was considered to be responsible for the decline of Russia. The message of the Russian powers had changed, and everything from television and large-scale events to daily interactions and personal attitudes reflected this. The Soviet Union and its World War II victory became more hallowed; red flags, red stars, and portraits of Lenin and Stalin reappeared. So too did the glorification of the Russian Empire. Drivers in Ida-Viru County, for example, decorated their cars with the orange-and-black Ribbon of St. George, a symbol of military valor in czarist Russia. In an attempt to show pride in their Russian heritage by supporting both czarist and Soviet imperialism, these patriots seemed to forget that the Bolsheviks oppressed recipients of the Order of St. George and executed many of them.
Works by energy consultant Agnia Grigas always prove enlightening as regards Russian influence and policy in its foreign relations.
Ten days ago, yet another far-right party supporting Russia gained a foothold in an EU country, this time Slovakia. People’s Party, Our Slovakia won 8% of the vote in national elections, joining a burgeoning club including Hungary’s Jobbik, Greece’s Golden Dawn and Marine Le Pen’s National Front in France.
The far-right parties, which often stem from neo-Nazi groups and sport crypto-fascist insignia, are the most visible layer of the pro-Russia camp in Europe. With Europe engulfed in a migrant crisis sparked by the war in Syria, their anti-immigrant and anti-EU rhetoric is in hot demand across the continent, particularly in the east. Party leaders are frequent guests in Moscow, and many of them are closely linked to Russia’s own reactionary networks. Together, they are nudging the political mainstream toward radical nationalism, which these days often comes hand in hand with pro-Russian sentiment.
The question was why mental illness seemed to be taking the murderous mad jihad direction — and answer had to do with the susceptibility of some to messages similar in medieval thought to that represented in this now well-known video featuring imam Farrokh Sekaleshfar and the ability to integrate that with their own problems.
Posted to YouTube by United West on April 6, 2016 in relation to the Orlando “mass casualty” attack by Omar Mateen, who was also known to the FBI.
As “lone wolves” keep turning out to be “known wolves”, it would seem sensible to review three dimensions of law: incitement and sedition — to both dampen the ardor with which some ideas are presented and to get them into discussion before a critical public; and detention of perhaps greater period to provide law enforcement with the time needed to caution or channel a “person of interest” and to investigate what is going on within a person who by way of speech and activity has thrown out a number of caution flags.
Focusing on aberrant medieval thought and extremism without attachment to affiliation allows moderate souls to formulate and choose moderate paths without the burden of defending against an aggressive and unnecessary demonization.
I would not want to make an enemy of someone who really isn’t my enemy _unless made out to be that way_.
Each seduced “Allahu Akbar terrorist” has the effect, of course, of tarring Muslims as a class and driving resident nationalist sentiment toward an extremism of its own.
McVeigh — a very different story — got a mention, but one might and perhaps should focus on the way he handled his grievances associated with the FBI ambush on the Koresh facility at Waco and the other long-argued-about shooting at Ruby Ridge.
Re. McVeigh — I might suggest that dictators and terrorists share this characteristics in their political psychological makeup or expression: “Paranoid Delusional Narcissistic Reflection of Motivation” (https://conflict-backchannels.com/coins-and-other-terms/anthropolitical-psychology/paranoid-delusional-narcissistic-reflection-of-motivation/) — where each takes upon himself a messianic mission to restore something damaged (I would call that “projected externalization of damage” — i.e., in McVeigh’s head, it’s not Timothy who has been damaged but the American Constitution — and he’s the hero who’s going to make the statement that addresses that by summarily engaging in mass murder.
Tsarnaev Brothers — same thing. In fact, we could probably go down a pretty good roster (let’s not leave out Brevik) and find out the key is less what we imagined as a class or division issue and much more a personal issue shared by very different individuals.
If I type as an apologist, it may be to keep the spotlight on the extremism and shared psychology but not necessarily to give each culture or subculture coughing up terrorists a free pass as strident ideas (‘this is what the book says . . . killing them now would be a mercy’) incite and apparently obligate that “narcissistic paranoid delusional” class of messianic murderers.
BackChannels 