Notes on an American Hegemony
According to roman historians such as Plenty The Ender the Roman Empire never fought an offensive war, they only fought wars in defense of their national security.
The result of these wars were the expansion and prolifereation of Roman political and cultural hegemony. The United States has also never fought a war of territorial expansion and yet every war fought in the 20th century by the US has been fought on foreign soil. The result of these wars has been the expansion of American political, economic, and cultural hegemony. At the end of the 20th century we find a world transformed by this hegemony.
These wars were not started by the US. They were started by small groups of radicals. Be the revolutionaries, freedom fighters, or terrorists these people wished to provoke war with the goal of achieving a political end and to that end they have been phenomenally successful.
The First World War was started by a terrorist act. The assassination of Arch Duke Franz Ferdinand was supported by a small group of Serbian nationalists whose aim was the establishment of an independent Serbian supper state. At the end of the First World War this goal had been realized.
The State of Israel was established through the use of terrorist acts against the British. Vietnamese independence was begun thought the provocation of civil war through terrorist acts. Morocco, Liberia, and numerous other African states achieved independence by the provocation of war through terrorist acts. Even the American Revolution was begun through terrorist acts lead by a small group of people hoping to disrupt the political situation in the colonies.
The anatomy of a terrorist act begins with a political goal, and this goal is realized through conflict. In order to incite conflict and rally support for your cause one must create an enemy. This enemy must be so vile and heated that even the most ardent pacifists will be willing to lay down their lives to defeat this enemy. How does one create such an enemy? The answer is to find a hegemonic influence, associate that influence with the prevailing political institutions, and provoke it to violence.
The act of provoking a political institution to violence is surprisingly easy. One only needs to create a situation where the existing power begins to feel insecure about its control over political stability. This can be done by the assignation of a leader or an attack on a symbol of institutional authority. The political authority will then feel the need to assert its dominance often through violent reprisals.
A bomb in a public square near a government building will cause the public to become alarmed and force the government to initiate a military or police response. This is a critical factor because the response must be engineered in such a way as to oppress the general population perceived to be associated with the terrorist organization.
|
 |
The terrorist group must pretend to blend in with the general population they must cause the authorities to view the terrorists as indistinguishable from the common man. The irony is that the initial response will be imbued with the need to protect the common people from the terrorists.
However, the revolutionary must create a perception that it is the government who is oppressing the people. The initial goal of the terrorist is to provoke a violent retaliation against the very people they wish to liberate. The terrorist hopes that the authorities will retaliate against the general population so that people will feel as though they are being attacked and oppressed by the authorities.
|
Even a simple non violent response such as instituting a curfew can be interpreted as oppressive. The terrorist must blend in with the population and seek support from them. The more they are embedded in the general population the greater the likelihood that innocent people will be caught up in the violence aimed at suppressing terrorism.
In this context it is not difficult to see that America will increasingly be seen as the source of oppression as its political hegemony increases on a global scale. The 20th century has been marked by severe political and technological change. In the past America was seen as the liberator and catalyst of positive change as it has align itself with the forces of liberation.
But now America is the hegemonic power supporting existing political regimes it sees as sympathetic to its security concerns. As political and economic change continues to take root in developing countries it is the America who will be seen as the potential enemy of those forces looking to create change through violent conflict.
We can see an example of this in the most recent terrorist acts on 911. The ultimate goal of Osama Binladin is to effect political change is Saudi Arabia and other Islamic states. And yet how does an attack on two buildings in New York effect political change in Saudi Arabia?
In the same way the assignation of a foreign leader can provoke a world war and lead to Serbian independence so can an attack on America lead to a global conflict that will incite political change in regions all over the world.
According to revolutionary doctrine this global conflict will ultimately result in the Saudi régime being associated with a global hegemonic power bent on the oppression of Islamic people. The Islamic people feeling attached and oppressed by this foreign power will rise up against their governments who are seen as supports of this foreign power. Islamic fundamentalist will seek to recreate the circumstances in Iran where revolution and political change resulted from its government being associated with a corrupt and repressive foreign power.
What is it that a terrorist wishes to achieve? A perfectly sane well educated thoughtful person takes out a gun and kills a beloved leader knowing that he himself will die in the effort. What is it that can be accomplished through the death on an individual? Is history so subjective that one man’s life can alter the course of history?
No, the life of one man no matter how powerful will have little impact. But, the death of a man can change the course of history. If you are a Serbian nationalist living under the control of a benevolent well loved leader under stable relatively prosperous Austrian empire how do you incite revolution?
How do you incite the kind of fear and hated that can lead to war? There is only one way and it is relatively easy. By assonating the Arch Duke you can induce a reprisal that will lead to war. The live of the Arch Duke has relatively little meaning. He after all was a progressive leader committed to reform. Yet the act will have the affect of inducing a reprisal and it is this violence committed against your own people is the goal of the anarchist.
The goal of the terrorist is war. The terrorist wants to force a mass moment committed to war. The terrorist wants to see innocent women and children attached and murder in reprisal to the terrorist act. The state becomes a recruitment tool for the anarchist. Those who wish to incite war can do so.
|
