Quote:
What is it that differentiates us from our western allies who face a similar "terrorist threat" yet countries like Spain, France, Great Britain overwhelmingly oppose the use of torture.
Could it be attributed in part to the fact that the American public has been carpet bombed with "terrorist" rhetoric by the WH for the last seven years?
|
no doubt.
and many other places have pluralist political contexts, where the united states really does not.
when for example torture by the french paramilitary in algeria surfaced as a political and ethical issue in 1957, it did so via the french left--initially the communist party-later through a broader network (there are reasons for this, but they're distracting)---the results of teh torture itself were in the short run that the french crushed the fln--so it "worked"---but in the process their actions *created* mass algerian support for the fln *which it did not initially have* and turned it from a small military organization into the core of a mass movement AND they galvanized political opposition to the entire debacle domestically--AND the revelations hlped bring down the 4th republic and nearly triggered a civil war in france (i kid you not)---AND turned france into an international pariah--AND managed to generate a whole series of truly ugly associations between french presence in algeria/colonialism and fascism that makes the algerian war STILL something that is not talked about a whole lot in france. all this in a nutshell, you know? so the consequences of french use of systematic torture beginning in 1956 in algeria werea very mixed bag in which as it turned out the immediate advantage they gained in and around algiers in 1956 was overwhelmed by other consequences---most of which happened because france at the time was a deeply divided place on left-right lines--and so the issue was both a Problem in itself and was also a significant Political Problem--and in the longer run, it was the latter that turned out to do the most damage.
and the damage done by this played out over the next decade--i dont see how there could have been a mai 68 without the experience of algeria beforehand.
so think of it on utilitarian grounds--even if there are in most places conservative-types who think that protecting their shit justifies torture, they typically are not a dominant position ideologically--or more exactly, they are not in a position to control the entirety of political discourse--but they nearly were able to in the states after 2001.
i think the bush people have set something into motion that will bear ugly fruit fro a very long time.
there are a couple points to this little parable, whcih i am writing between bites of pasta.
a. such consent as there was for the bush-people's use of torture, extraordinary rendition, etc. was a direct function of the extent to which the press collapsed into a simple relay system for conservative ideological statements in the afterglow of 9/11/2001. we do not really live in a pluralist context still--though it is certainly more open than it was 6 years ago,
b. even if you support the idea of torture, when you look at what's happened in parallel situations in the past, the problems have so far outweighed the advantages produced that you really have to ask yourself if there's a point to such support--presumably it's based on some support for the continuation of the existing order and all that it entails--well, if that's the case, then i think torture is simply a bad bad idea on pragmatic grounds.
c. there is a mountain of data available about the effects of torture as an infotainment gathering procedure--it really aint new--most of the time, the one thing that you will surely find out is that the person being tortured wants the torture to stop happening. that is not a good basis for infotainment gathering. and that's just the simple, short-run kind of effect, in sound-byte form. there are many many others, all gifts that keep on giving. so again, if you can put aside moral problems with the actions themselves, the problems and consequences seem to outweigh any imaginable advantage
d. the entire conversation about serious, brutal occupation is in the context of this thread a red herring.