The Totalization of War Continues

As our Police State continues stampeding us toward an eternal war footing in which Everywhere is the Battlefield and Everyone is a Combatant, it only stands to reason that we should get little consolation trinkets as gold stars for being good citizens of the totalizing War State. So lawmakers are looking to hand out Purple Hearts to civilians who suffer from domestic terrorism. Next step: expand the definition of “terror” to cover more and more of what we used to just call “crime”. The step after that: use the lawless tactics we’ve deployed abroad against citizens.

Oh. Wait. Obama’s already granted himself the power to murder and indefinitely jail any citizen he decrees to be an enemy of the state. So we’re safe. Enjoy your trinket. You are a Good Soldier for fighting for our Dear Leader.

"From Jonathan Liedl's piece:Hittinger defines malignant technology as “the systematic application of tools to culture, ..."

Is Technology Morally Neutral?
"Hmmm... I'm having a difficult time deciding the right way to reply because I think ..."

Is Technology Morally Neutral?
"Lewandowski, another sociopath Catholic who flaunts his faith - like Paul Ryan, Steve Bannon, Kellyanne ..."

Our Post-Satire Age
"Comment keeps getting deleted. Will try one last time...See Russell Hittinger's essay "Christopher Dawson on ..."

Is Technology Morally Neutral?

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!

What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • S. Murphy

    In the first link, they’re talking about awarding the PH to soldiers wounded in the Ft Hood shooting – maybe giving that putz too much credit for being a real terrorist – but if you accept him as that, then arguably, those Soldiers were wounded by enemy gunfire. It may sound silly from the outside, but people agonize over award criteria all the time – especially the Purple Heart.
    The other link – I dunno, the allegedly narcissistic comment could have merely been an attempt on Obama’s part to personalize the sense of gratitude he’s claiming to feel as a citizen, for the guys on the front lines. It doesn’t mean he’s not over-optimistic about the government and what it can do for us, and too cavalier about what it can do to us; but this comment doesn’t strike me as much of an example.

  • Hezekiah Garrett

    Oh frickin’ great! Now we’re the Japanese.

    Based on our own narrative, should we go to war with Iran, aren’t they pretty much justified in launching nuclear weapons at us, due to our jingoistic militarization in declaring all Americans combatants, coupled with the overwhelming loss of Iranian life that would be lost even trying to invade our home continent?

    • Hezekiah Garrett

      Belay all that. Mark, your linked story says nothing about awarding the I Forgot To Duck to civilians.

  • Dan C

    This has been going on for a while. The Church was a direct subject of that war in Latin America in the 1970s and 1980’s. It was under Jimmy Carter that the El Salvadoran military stepped up its offenses on the Church and the poor with the aid, direction, and comfort of the American military and the American diplomatic apparatus. It was under Carter that Romero was assassinated, that four American nuns were assassinated and raped in El Salvador (an act supported and excused by the Reagan administration-it doesn’t matter the party in power).

  • John

    So Dan, there were no communist agents in El Salvador, no arms smuggling from Nicaragua coming in, no Cold War proxy hostilities going on until 1989? Just perfectly harmless social justice outreach up in the hills of El Salvador with no ulterior motives, no political aims, no threat to the common good?

    Not saying that atrocities by the Salvadoran government is OK – but it’s not like it was a one-sided conflict. There were armed rebels in the hills doing what armed rebels do.
    Oh and I highly doubt the Reagan Administration was informed that a hit squad was going to kill nuns after raping them and that Ronnie personally signed off on it.

    The Church was attacked only insofar as some Catholics were mixed up with Communists, not attacked “qua” Catholics as in Mexico (else, why weren’t there any slaying in the Capital or other major towns? Oh that’s right, because the Church in the towns weren’t hotbeds of marxist rebellion.

    • Dan C

      “The Church was attacked only insofar as some Catholics were mixed up with Communists…”

      In a way that warranted death squads? Is union organizing enough to determine “Communism?”

      The US participated in corruption and oppression in El Salvador eagerly and passionately. That war targeted military targets as well as civilian targets of parties in legitimate opposition to the ruling parties. In the midst of that, the local Church, siding with the poor, was declared as a legitimate target. A bishop was murdered. Priests were muredered. US missionaries were raped and murdered. The US provided military and intelligence direction and assistance in that region for that decade. The US continues to harbor El Salvador’s murderers in Florida.

      Conservatives who claim the US government’s religious oppression is coming soon for actions proper to that of the Church should make note that it has happened in recent memory in this hemisphere. And current “co-belligerents” (what a great word) were extremely supportive of the endeavor, with the Church’s body count treated with less compassion and in fact blame, unlike today’s Middle Eastern Christians, who are understood as merely collateral damage.

      Total war has been the rule since before I was born. The Church is a legitimate target of all political parties, sometimes an distinct target.

    • Ted Seeber

      The marxist rebellion would never had been necessary without the atheist libertarians.

      • Martial Artist

        What atheist libertarians would that be, Mr. Seeber? My recollection is that most of Latin America is not libertarian, having a truly free market economy. It is, rather, what is more correctly called a conquistador economy. One wherein soldiers of the Spanish (or Portuguese, or French) monarch were offered the following deal in exchange for their services: Go ye into the new world and by force of arms conquer and pacify the salvajes locales for (choose one as appropriate {Spain, Portugal, France}] and I, your sovereign will reward you with land beyond your wildest dreams, populated by the slaves you have captured, who will work the land at your beck and call so that you will no longer be a menial soldier, but rather a wealthy landlord.

        If you can get anything resembling a libertarian beyond a member of the bipedal species H. sapiens, I want to know what intoxicating substances you have been ingesting, because they must be extremely potent. Do you have so much as a hint of a clue of what fundamental natural law principles actually guide most practicing libertarians?

        Pax et bonum,
        Keith Töpfer