-Caveat Lector-

The End of the Enlightenment

http://www.monbiot.com/dsp_article.cfm?article_id=476

A new, repressive form of government is emerging from the West's
military triumph
By George Monbiot. Published in the Guardian 18th December 2001

The pre-Enlightenment has just been beaten by the
post-Enlightenment. As the last fundamentalist fighters are hunted
through the mountains of eastern Afghanistan, the world's most
comprehensive attempt to defy modernity has been atomised. But this
is not, as almost everyone claims, a triumph for civilisation; for
the Taliban have been destroyed by a regime which is turning its
back on the values it claims to defend.

In West Virginia, a 15 year-old girl is currently fighting the
state's Supreme Court. Six weeks ago, Katie Sierra was suspended
from Sissonville High School school in Charleston. She had
committed two horrible crimes. The first was to apply to found an
anarchy club, the second was to come to classes in a T-shirt on
which she had written "Against Bush, Against Bin Laden" and "When I
saw the dead and dying Afghani children on TV, I felt a newly
recovered sense of national security. God Bless America". The
headmaster claimed that Katie's actions were disrupting other
pupils' education. "To my students," he explained, "the concept of
anarchy is something that is evil and bad." The county court upheld
her suspension, and at the end of November the state's Supreme
Court refused to hear the case she had lodged in defence of free
speech.

Katie is just one of many young dissenters now battling for the
most basic political freedoms. A few days before she was suspended
from school, A.J. Brown, a 19 year-old woman studying at Durham
Tech, North Carolina, answered the door to three security agents.
They had been informed, they told her, that she was in possession
of "anti-American material". Someone had seen a poster on her wall,
campaigning against George Bush's use of the death penalty. They
asked her whether she also possessed pro-Taliban propaganda. On
October 10th a 22-year-old called Neil Godfrey was banned from
boarding a plane travelling from Philadelphia to Phoenix because he
was carrying a novel by the anarchist writer Edward Abbey. At the
beginning of November, Nancy Oden, an anti-war activist on her way
to a conference was surrounded at Bangor airport in Maine by
soldiers with automatic weapons and forbidden to fly on the grounds
that she was a "security risk". These incidents and others like
them become significant in the light of two distinct developments.

The first is the formal suspension of certain civil liberties by
governments backing the war in Afghanistan. The new anti-terror
acts approved in the United Kingdom and the US have, like the
reinstatement of the CIA's licence to kill, been widely reported.
The measures introduced by some of the other allied governments are
less well-known. In the Czech Republic, for example, a new law
permits the prosecution of people expressing sympathy for the
attacks on New York, or even of those sympathising with the
sympathisers. Already the Czech journalist Tomas Pecina has been
arrested and charged for criticising the use of the law, on the
grounds that this makes him, too, a supporter of terrorism.

The second is the remarkably rapid development of surveillance
technology, of the kind which has been deployed to such devastating
effect in Afghanistan. Unmanned spyplanes which could follow the
Taliban's cars and detect the presence of human beings behind 100
feet of rock are both awesome and terrifying. Technologies like
this, combined with CCTV, face recognition software, email and
phone surveillance, microbugs, forensic science, the monitoring of
financial transactions and the pooling of government databases
ensure that governments now have the means, if they choose to
deploy them, of following almost every move we make, every word we
utter.

I made this point to a Labour MP a couple of days ago. He explained
to me that it was "just ridiculous" to suggest that better
technologies could lead to mass surveillance in Britain. Our
defence against abuses by government is guaranteed not only by
parliament, but also by the entire social framework in which
parliament operates. Civil society will ensure that there is no
danger of these technologies falling into the "wrong hands".

But what we are witnessing in the United States is a rapid reversal
of the civic response which might once have defended the rights and
liberties of its citizens. Katie Sierra's suspension was proposed
by her school and upheld by the courts. The agents preventing
activists from boarding planes were assisted by the airlines. The
student accused of poster crime may well have been shopped by one
of her neighbours. The state is scorching the constitution, and
much of civil society is reaching for the bellows.

This, I fear, may be just the beginning. The new surveillance
technology deployed in Afghanistan is merely one component of the
US doctrine of "full-spectrum dominance". The term covered, at
first, only military matters: the armed forces sought to achieve
complete mastery of land, sea, air, airwaves and space. But perhaps
because this has been achieved too easily, the term has already
begun to be used more widely, as commercial, fiscal and monetary
policy, the composition of foreign governments and the activities
of dissidents are redefined as matters of security. Another name
for "full-spectrum dominance" is absolute power.

There are, of course, profound differences between the US and the
UK. The United States sees itself as a wounded nation; many of its
people feel desperately vulnerable and insecure. But while our
cowardly MPs seek only to dissociate themselves from the victims of
Torquemada Blair's inquisitors, the Lord Chancellor's mediaevel
department is preparing to dispense with most jury trials, which
are arguably now the foremost institutional restraint to the
excesses of government.

The paradox of the Enlightenment is that the universalist project
is brokered by individualism. The universality of human rights, in
other words, can be defended only by the diversity of opinion. Most
of the liberties which permit us to demand the equitable treatment
of the human community -- privacy, the freedom of speech, belief
and movement -- imply a dissociation from coherent community.

While those who seek to deny our liberties claim to defend
individualism, in truth they gently engineer a conformity of belief
and action which is drifting towards a new fundamentalism. This is
an inevitable product of the fusion of state and corporate power.
Capital, as Adam Smith shows us, strives towards monopoly. The
states which defend it permit the planning permission, tax breaks,
externalisation and blanket advertising which ensure that most of
us shop in the same shops, eat in the same restaurants, wear the
same clothes. The World Trade Organisation, World Bank and IMF
apply the same economic and commercial prescription worldwide,
enabling the biggest corporations to trade under the same
conditions everywhere.

Some of those who, in defiance of this dispensation, write their
own logos on their T-shirts are now being persecuted by the state.
The pettiness of its attentions, combined with its ability to
scrutinise every detail of our lives, suggest that we could be
about to encounter a new form of political control, swollen with
success, unchecked by dissent. Nothing has threatened the survival
of "Western values" as much as the triumph of the West.



__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Send your FREE holiday greetings online!
http://greetings.yahoo.com

<A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/";>www.ctrl.org</A>
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic
screeds are unwelcomed. Substance�not soap-boxing�please!  These are
sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'�with its many half-truths, mis-
directions and outright frauds�is used politically by different groups with
major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought.
That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and
always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no
credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply.

Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html
 <A HREF="http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html";>Archives of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]</A>

http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
 <A HREF="http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/";>ctrl</A>
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Om

Reply via email to