Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

This New Year's day: Rahul Mahajan calls on Americans to fight to reclaim their minds

Expand Messages
  • Tarek Fatah
    Friend, Happy New Year! In wishing you this greeting, I sincerely hope this year, instead of bombs and bullets, happiness showers itself on the people of
    Message 1 of 1 , Jan 1 7:44 AM
      Friend,

      Happy New Year! In wishing you this greeting, I sincerely hope this year,
      instead of bombs and bullets, happiness showers itself on the people of
      Palestine, Kashmir, Chechnya, and above all Iraq.

      Rahul Mahajan, is a campus and community activist in Austin, Texas. 33-year
      old Mahajan, a Physics Ph.D., has worked on a wide variety of issues,
      including alternative media, South Asian issues, affirmative action, and
      Enron, but has concentrated on anti-war and anti-corporate-globalization
      work.

      In this article on New Year's day written for the on-line ZNet Magazine,
      Mahajan demolishes the US case against Iraq urging his countrymen to take
      control of their own minds, arguing that "No less than the collective fate
      of humanity hangs in the balance."

      Read and reflect.

      Tarek Fatah
      =====================
      Fighting for our Minds

      by Rahul Mahajan
      ZNet Magazine
      http://www.zmag.org/sustainers/content/2002-12/26mahajan.cfm

      As the Bush war machine attempts to plant the flag of imperium wherever its
      over-sized jackboot takes it, Americans must fight to reclaim that most
      precious ground, ceded to the forces of the right after long wars of
      attrition: our minds.

      No less than the collective fate of humanity hangs in the balance.

      The struggle is as easy or as hard as we make it. It’s hard because in a
      sense, we start already defeated; in the absence of an affirmative campaign
      to reclaim our minds, we think the master’s thoughts: he rules us as a
      colonial power. In the absence of a concerted, irreverently irredentist
      campaign to reclaim the territory that is rightfully ours, we are slaves in
      our own houses and our slavery removes the most fundamental check on the
      colonizer’s desire to find new worlds to conquer (with the attendant toll of
      human degradation, suffering, and death.)

      But its easy too because the moment we start the battle, the moment we
      acknowledge the simple fact that our minds have been colonized, the
      colonizer’s modes and methods, its purpose, its theology become ever so
      clear.

      Lets look at the case of Iraq and the stentorian bleats for war emanating
      from Washington. I think what we’ll find is an enemy (the colonizer from
      D.C.) made clumsy by years of success. The time is now to capitalize on
      this fact and to kick him out forever.

      For more than a year now, the Bush administration has been calling for war
      on Iraq, claiming that this forlorn and broken country poses an immediate
      and fundamental threat to the safety of the world’s citizens.

      Saddam, their argument goes, is flush with materiel and is busily enhancing
      his already formidable stockpile of Weapons of Mass Destruction; moreover,
      he is willing to use them. How this is true despite a brutal bombing war 11
      years ago coupled with the most onerous sanctions in the history of the
      modern world -- sanctions that have kept Iraq not only under the microscope
      but in the viselike grip of the West, poor, destitute--they don’t tell us.
      Another obvious question that they don’t even dare to answer is why a
      military attack would work this time if the might U.S. military machine
      couldn’t "do the job" last time.

      The colonizers’ argument is pathetic, clumsy, obfuscatory, and entirely
      dependent on our mental inaction. A couple examples of arguments that might
      seem compelling until we start fighting for our minds: 1. In a news
      conference, Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld claimed that Iraq could be 12-18
      months away from developing a nuclear weapon. He went further to mention
      that, apparently, Saddam has been trying to develop nukes for the last
      twenty years.

      Okay, Saddam Hussein with a nuclear weapon. Sound scary? It may be until we
      look a tiny bit deeper.

      What went unsaid? 1. Iraq has no delivery capability for nukes; 2. Iraq
      has NO incentive for using nukes even if it had them; 3. This stems
      DIRECTLY from what Rumsfeld himself said in the second part of his argument:
      if indeed Saddam Hussein has been trying to develop nukes for 20 years, then
      why on Earth would we will think this macabre task would reach fruition in
      year? If indeed he has been trying for 20 years, it would appear that Iraq
      is totally inept or has no access to fissionable material.

      In order to start asking these questions, one need not be an expert on
      nuclear weapons. In fact, all one really needs to be armed with is the
      knowledge that in producing an argument, the colonist is driven by his need
      to conquer new lands. The moment we realize this, we become skeptical of
      just about anything he claims since in a mad rush for power, people and
      institutions become utterly mendacious. Once we are skeptical, we are in
      luck because the colonizer has become sloppy: his arguments are easily
      dissected, easily seen to be repugnant, and are thus easily rejectable.

      Another argument the colonizer has recently been making requires us to
      believe that Iraq accepting the UN Weapons inspectors and pledging to give
      them unfettered access is a bad thing. Since the day Hussein pledged to
      comply, Washington and the fulsome private media have been talking of
      deception, game playing, obfuscation, and the general mendacity of the Arab
      leader.

      Sounds pretty bad doesn’t it? It does until one considers what the reaction
      would have been if Iraq decided not to comply. Most of us would be
      indignant wouldn’t we? And war would be imminent, wouldn’t it? Iraq had
      two choices in front of it: one, to comply and two, not to comply. If
      non-compliance proves intransigence and compliance proves both intransigence
      and utter mendacity, what is left for the poor nation to do? Sound confusing
      until one realizes that the colonizer wants war and has to have it. Once we
      understand this, everything they say about Iraq’s WMD and Hussein’s hiding
      weapons in palaces and in the "vast desert Kingdom that is Iraq" seems
      suspect.

      The arguments put forth by the colonizer are ever changing and specious.
      Once we start the battle of reclamation, we see them for what they are. And
      once we see them for what they are, we must resist the colonizer with all
      the forces we can muster.

      The importance of this battle is not academic. Its about two very
      important, very real things- freedom and humanism.

      The freedom to be able to think, to be logical and just in our thoughts. The
      freedom for us to live in a society that represents our morals, desires, and
      strong feelings of amity for fellow humans.

      The humanism that holds clearly that empires are evil.

      Dismantling empires has always started with the crucial and epic struggle
      for the one territory that is truly ours: our minds.

      Romi Mahajan, romimahajan2000@...
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.