[Peace-discuss] Tulsi Gabbard’s Blob apostasy: “premature” opposition to U.S. support for Al Qaeda

[Robert Naiman]

Tulsi Gabbard’s Blob apostasy: “premature” opposition to U.S. support for
Al Qaeda


https://www.facebook.com/robert.naiman/posts/10158745493197656



Many recall that in George Orwell’s dystopian novel _*1984_* one of Big
Brother’s slogans was:



“We have always been at war with Eurasia.”



But they forget the context of Big Brother’s slogan, so they lose much of
its significance in Orwell’s critique of endless war. In Orwell’s dystopia,
Big Brother keeps switching sides in the war between Eurasia and Oceania.
Every time Big Brother switches sides, Big Brother insists that he was
always on the side he is now on, even though yesterday Big Brother was on
the other side. Willingness to accept Big Brother’s insistence that he was
always on the side he is now on, instead of acknowledging that Big Brother
was on the other side yesterday, is presented as a crucial test of loyalty
to Big Brother. Whoever refuses to “acknowledge” as “true” the manufactured
reality that Big Brother was always on the same side as Big Brother is now
has committed a _*thoughtcrime_ *and can be singled out for punishment and
“re-education.”



To clarify Orwell’s intent, we can italicize his sentence, as Leo Rosten
used italics in _*The Joys of Yiddish_*:



“We have *_always_* been at war with _*Eurasia_*.”



The point isn’t just that we’ve always been at war. That’s also true. The
point is to forget that yesterday we were on the other side of the endless
war. The point of forgetting that we were on the other side of the endless
war yesterday is that the moment the Empire switches sides in the endless
war is a moment of ideological vulnerability for the Empire with the
domestic population that’s bearing the domestic burden of the endless war.
When the Empire switches sides in the endless war, the “justifications” for
continuing participation in the endless war need to change. If we’re not
living in a police state, that dramatic shift might raise questions in the
domestic population carrying the domestic burden of the endless war.
Answering those questions might be awkward if there’s free inquiry, because
the new “justifications” might be the opposite of the old “justifications.”
The best way to pre-empt the questions is to pretend that the shift in
alliances didn’t just occur and punish anyone who doesn’t comply with the
officially sanctioned make-believe.



During the post-World War II “witch hunt” against the American Left of the
McCarthy period, a curious phrase arose: “premature anti-fascists.” These
were Americans who had opposed the fascist takeover of Spain in 1936-1937.
Having opposed the fascist takeover of Spain in 1936-1937 was taken as
evidence of prior support for the American Communist Party, which had
opposed the fascist takeover of Spain in 1936-1937. But, the accused
argued, didn’t we just fight a war against European fascism? Weren’t we all
on the same side? Yes, the accusers acknowledged, it’s true, we did just
fight a war against European fascism. But that was from _*1941-1945*_. In _
*1936*_ you hadn’t been issued an opinion against European fascism by the
U.S. government yet. That’s what’s so _*suspicious*_ about your _*premature*_
opposition to European fascism: you hadn’t been issued an opinion against
European fascism by the U.S. government yet. Therefore, your _premature_
opposition to European fascism must have come from some other, nefarious
place, since it was not issued by the people who own and operate
America.



What Tulsi Gabbard stands accused of amounts to _*prematurely*_ opposing
U.S. support for Al Qaeda in Syria when U.S. support for Al Qaeda in Syria
was being advocated by the Blob and the neocons; indeed, when it was U.S.
policy during the Obama Administration.



Look at the Establishment Democrat wing of the Blob’s bill of indictment
against Trump for withdrawing the unconstitutional U.S. military presence
in northern Syria. Trump’s military withdrawal has, they claim, enabled the
Turkish military invasion of northern Syria, together with the
Turkish-backed “Free Syrian Army,” _*whom the Blob now denounces as
jihadists_*.



But during the Obama Administration, _*the Blob supported the Free Syrian
Army_*, and _*demanded that Obama support the Free Syrian Army*_. Obama did
support the Free Syrian Army, but he was nervous about it, and Obama
refused to support the Free Syrian Army as much as the Blob demanded. Why
was Obama stingy with U.S. support for the Free Syrian Army? _*Because he
saw the Free Syrian Army as jihadists, and didn’t want them to take over
Syria as a result of the U.S. toppling the Syrian government, as jihadists
had taken over Libya as a result of the U.S. toppling the Libyan government*_.
Eventually Obama curtailed U.S. support for the Free Syrian Army, and
backed the Syrian Kurds instead, seeing them as more trustworthy. When
Obama curtailed U.S. support for the Free Syrian Army, _*the Blob denounced
Obama for “betrayal,”* *just as the Blob is denouncing Trump for “betrayal”
now_*.



What was the goal of the Blob in Syria? It was to install a pro-Saudi
regime in Damascus, to bleed the Syrian government and its supporters until
they agreed to the installation of a pro-Saudi regime in Damascus. Failing
that, their secondary goal was to bleed the Syrian government and its
supporters as much as possible, to punish them for defying the Blob’s _
*diktat*_ to accept a pro-Saudi regime in Damascus. The first goal of
installing a pro-Saudi regime in Damascus was almost surely doomed from the
start. But the Blob certainly achieved its secondary goal of killing a lot
of people to punish non-compliance with Blob _*diktat*_. Since the Blob is
never punished for failure, since it’s not the children of the Blob who
bleed, the Blob will surely continue to advocate more regime change wars in
the future. This is why the Blob wants to isolate and marginalize Tulsi
Gabbard and people with similar views from having any say: because regime
change wars are the _*raison d’etre_ *of the Blob, the reason that the Blob
exists. The Blob exists to capture the U.S. government, make the Blob’s
enemies into the U.S. government’s enemies, and then use U.S. military
power to overthrow the governments of the Blob’s enemies. That’s what they
did in Iraq, that’s what they did in Libya, that’s what they tried to do in
Syria, that’s what they tried to do in Yemen, that’s what they wanted to do
in Iran.



This is who the Blob is. The Blob is neither Democratic nor Republican. The
Blob is neither pro-Obama nor anti-Obama, neither pro-Trump nor anti-Trump.
The Blob is pro-Blob. The Blob is pro-Empire. The Blob is for endless war.
The Blob sees the world as a game of Risk, of Diplomacy, of chess. The
object is to control more territory, control more oil fields, establish and
hold more foreign military bases, overthrow more governments and replace
them with compliant regimes. The Blob will ally with or oppose whoever they
think helps them achieve these objectives at any particular time, and
switch alliances as soon as they see it as being in their interests to do
so. The God of the Blob is not Woodrow Wilson or Ronald Reagan, but
Clausewitz. As in chess, the ultimate object of the game is not to protect
one’s own pieces, but to checkmate the enemy King. If one sacrifices pieces
to checkmate the enemy King, that is considered strategic. Since it’s not
the children of the Blob who bleed, the people who are killed are only
chess pieces.



What’s most important about this for America going forward is this: “_
*premature*_” opposition to the agenda of the Blob is _*exactly the
opposition to the agenda of the Blob we need*_. There’s nothing we can do
now to undo the destruction caused by the Blob’s wars in Iraq, Afghanistan,
Libya, Syria, and Yemen. The most important thing is to _*end these crimes
now*_, and _*stop these crimes from being repeated in the future*_. To stop
these crimes from being repeated in the future, we need to defang the
political power of the Blob. We need to purge the U.S. government of the
Blob and its loyalists. We need to ensure that future U.S. governments
employ zero neocons and zero Blob loyalists.



This is why everyone who wants to end endless war must defend Tulsi Gabbard
from the smears of Hillary Clinton, queen of the warmongers, even if they
are supporting another candidate, _*especially*_ if they are supporting
another candidate. If we want to end endless wars, it cannot be the case
that opponents of endless war are pushed out of the discussion by
McCarthyite smear tactics.



End these regime change wars.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.chambana.net/pipermail/peace-discuss/attachments/20191020/98788aa6/attachment.htm>