Advertisement

L'Ordre

L'Ordre

A state of war

La vertu est un état de guerre, et que, pour y vivre, on a toujours quelque combat à rendre contre soi.

Virtue is a state of war, and to live in it means one always has some battle to wage against oneself.

Jean-Jacques Rousseau


A new contribution in my series of anti-statist essays was published at Dissident Voice on Monday 4th August. Titled “What is the Nation?”, the article was (unintentionally) well-timed in that it came out at the time of a major World War One Centenary event. It was written essentially as an exploration of the ambiguous nature of the claim to being part of a nation, and the ways in which this concept has really become redundant in Western countries in the Twenty-First Century. Astonishingly, many people not only still subscribe to the view that they are part of a nation-state, but that its offerings of young lives on the alter pointless wars somehow secured their “freedom”.

Advertisement

World War One was pointless. In total, over 37 million people died in it. Western politicians and media actually try to invoke memory of that war in the face of today’s aggressive NATO posturing towards Russia over the Ukraine crisis. Inadvertently, this does nothing more than confirm that the existing NATO posturing is like World War One in threatening to waste people’s lives for what they don’t care about (the politicians care least of all, since they’d be off to hide in the bunker and do not intend to sacrifice any of their comforts in such a war).

Advertisement

One irritating argument commonly expounded by nationalists, warmongers and patriots is the view that the deaths of soldiers or others for a cause, usually for a nation, somehow validates the cause for which they have fought. An appeal to the honor of the dead is, to date, the only argument in existence for the concept of revering a nation and its symbols or military objectives. Many political speeches and quotes with a nationalist ring typically invoke the memory of the dead to justify the nationalist cause or the existence and preservation of the integrity of nations in any form. These speeches are fallacious, as they appeal only to martyrdom in order to assert their claims. Martyrdom to a cause does not say anything about whether the cause is just.

Advertisement

As sad and as hard as it might be to accept, the fact that many died for a cause does not mean they died for a just cause. We know this, because many people have died for many wrong causes throughout history. We do not know how many Roman legionaries gave their lives for the Senate and People of Rome, but we know that they all died for nothing, because the empire for which they fought ceased to exist. Its citizens grew so tired of its corruption that they even flung the gates open and embraced their own deaths.

Exactly like those Roman legionaries, the 4,487 American soldiers who gave their lives in the Iraq War died for nothing. This does not reflect badly on the personal honor and integrity of each of those soldiers, but it does confirm that the state for which they fought is little more than a liar and a murderer of innocent sons. The evil regime that existed under the George W. Bush administration wasted those lives for nothing, knowing full well that the cause for which these men died was empty and hollow. To this date, none of the weapons of mass destruction allegedly possessed by former Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein to threaten the security of the United States have been discovered. After the smoke cleared, it should have become abundantly obvious that the only mortal threat to the “American people” is their own aggressive regime, so eager to waste their lives while sacrificing none of its own comforts.

Advertisement

As we see continued nationalistic ramblings about who gave their lives for what, in the face of modern strategic tensions with Russia, and foolish justifications of sacrifice (albeit economic, given that it is unlikely to go beyond this), we must remember that states always want to sacrifice everyone on the altar of their own greed and incompetence. The people of Europe themselves have nothing to gain from a conflict with Russia, whether economic or military. The only agency behind this conflict comes from the brutal and selfish governments of individual NATO countries, which live by some kind of maxim that the people must be prepared to sacrifice but the regime mustn’t.


By Harry J. Bentham

HJB Signature and stamp

Advertisement
Comments Post the First Comment »
post a comment

Comments are closed.



Previous Posts

"Russian propaganda" and "paid trolls"? More like the truth and the blogosphere
J'adore la liberté; j'abhorre la gêne, la peine, l'assujettissement. I love liberty, and I loathe constraint, dependence, and all their kindred annoyances. Jean-Jacques Rousseau Suddenly, everyone is scared of the scale of ...

posted 11:00:35pm Apr. 18, 2015 | read full post »

L'Ordre de la Montagne, a blogging society's ascension
Nous sommes tous montagnards, vive la montagne! We are all Montagnards, vive La Montagne! Slogan used in an address to the Jacobin Club, 1793 I have been privileged to help publicize a growing club of bloggers known as the Mont Order ...

posted 11:00:26pm Apr. 17, 2015 | read full post »

Easier to accuse a poor isolated regime of censorship than a world-controlling regime?
Il n'y a pas d'amis : il y a des moments d'amitié. There are no friends: there are moments of friendship. Jules Renard Making it in the mainstream media has and continues to be one my goals. However, controversy is fun, and a useful ...

posted 11:00:11pm Apr. 11, 2015 | read full post »

Snowden had to act because the government was too slow
Le vrai Citoyen préfère l'avantage général à son avantage. The true Citizen prefers everyone's benefit over his own benefit Jean-Jacques Rousseau Oliver Stone may direct a thriller called Snowden, telling the heroic story of ...

posted 11:00:06pm Apr. 10, 2015 | read full post »

The US and NATO are like withering vampires hovering over Europe
Renoncer à sa liberté, c'est renoncer à sa qualité d'homme. To renounce liberty is to renounce being a man. Jean-Jacques Rousseau A very shrewd analysis at Counterpunch titled "NATO Lies and Provocations" responded to a Der ...

posted 11:00:05pm Apr. 04, 2015 | read full post »

Advertisement


Report as Inappropriate

You are reporting this content because it violates the Terms of Service.

All reported content is logged for investigation.