Really, America, do you think you can bully the rest of the world with perpetual war and drone strikes; and then marginalize, criminalize, and terrorize your own subjects, without expecting any blowback...from anyone?
E.J. Montini, a progressive columnist for the Arizona Republic, said last night on the local news that "we can put aside our bickering, and all come together as a community and as a nation during these tragedies" (my paraphrase). EJ is great when he adds something controversial to the conversation besides the usual progressive routine, which he accomplishes quite often, even when I disagree with him. Here, though his sympathy is noteworthy, I would argue that "unity" is the last thing America needs. A "unified" America?
Thanks, but please fuck off. I've been feeling "unified," "bipartisan" and patriotic enough for the last twelve years to yack. A "unified" America will give us, as GOP House Rep Peter King argues for today here, a stronger surviellence nation-state. It will provide more security cameras, more militarized guns in the hands of a mighty militarized police force, and far more laws--you know, like the Patriot Act--than we need.
Moreover, it only took a couple of hours for CNN, Esquire Magazine and MSNBC to suggest that anyone and everyone critical of the U.S. government is probably to blame for Boston's Blowback. Meanwhile, the SPLC drools in anticipatory glee that any suspects might turn out to be "anti-government, radical extremists".
We might as well start rounding up the suspicious anti-government bloggers first, I say. Read something, Say something!
So, despite EJ's enthusiasm for national "unity" after Boston's Blowback experience...yeah, it's not going to happen.
Nor should it.
Tom Brokaw also cheered on the "national unity" chorus last night on NBC. And both of them expressed a mournful admission that random acts of terrorism will simply be the "new normal". It's "the price of freedom," said Brokaw.
Right. But I thought FISA, the NDAA, the Patriot Act, the CIA, the FBI, rampant surveillance cameras, the Nanny State, the War on Drugs and--in general--the American Empire were supposed to keep us all safe in the first place?
I'll say this, at least Brokaw has got one fucked-up idea of freedom. And that makes him slightly more interesting than your typical psych-ward patient suffering from an acute case of cognitive dissonance and denial. Let's call it, "obsessive greatest generational dementia disorder". Whatever.
Let me help you guys out. Here's something potential domestic and foreign terrorists have in common: they simply want to be left alone by the American Empire. Resentment, hatred and a willful desire for resistance and vengeance are perfectly rational responses to any powerless group dominated and oppressed by another tribe with near unlimited power.
That's the reason why Brokaw's pronouncement of "the new normal" is totally, outrageously flawed. He wants to claim there's a metaphysical quagmire of two spirits dueling one another in the neither world--freedom versus security--that will paradoxically haunt the thoughts of all Americans, forever, in perpetuity, until we just admit that freedom and anarchy suck. (Oh, wait, we've already gone there.)
Allow me to introduce a thought from the French that might help us out of this ghostly dilemma: Laissez-Nous Faire. "Let us be!" "Let us do!" Or, my favorite translation, "please, just leave us the fuck alone!"
So, here's some better advice to our dear leaders who don't want random acts of terrorism to become Brokaw's "new normal": Don't bomb other people around the world. Don't attempt to rule them. To dominate them. To tell them how to live their lives. Don't even do it to your own people. And maybe, just maybe, those evil disempowered groups (foreign or domestic) won't feel the need to resist...or strike back in anger against innocent civilians.
In a way, I agree with Brokaw and Montini--expect more terror in "tis land o' liberty" as imperialism swells at home and abroad, like the expanding cock of a serial rapist. But I don't think it has to be this way. And in spite of my genuine contempt for all the "unified America" balderdash tossed around by aging mainstream media men, my anarchist love goes out to the victims of Boston. As civilian noncombatants, they did not deserve to be murdered or maimed or wounded by anyone. It is a disgusting tragedy that more blood is spilt--body parts blown to smithereens--ironically, because "freedom isn't free."
Yes, you assholes, it is. The victims of Boston's Blowback did not need to experience the implosion of their internal organs for America's so-called "freedom".
And the son-of-a-bitch who did it should be tried for murder. Whether he works for the nation-state or not, whoever harms innocent human beings deserves to see justice. Politician or policeman, "foreign or domestic terrorist," no one has the right to harm innocent life.
I wonder, how many Americans feel the same thing for these eleven Afghanistan children, murdered by the American Empire and NATO, earlier this month?