I’m ashamed at the shallowness and ignorance of human nature, displayed by many in US media. Take Chris Matthews on 11-23-04, for instance.
Cheap trick. Sounds controversial, while it absolutely isn’t. That’s exactly how you win hearts and minds of most people: by clearing their cities of “outside terrorists” like Zarqawi, or domestic despots, like Baath party types. There is a lot of hatred brewing inside any totalitarian country, the depth of which people in democratic countries can hardly fathom. From experience, I spent long time in old Soviet Union, and you could win my “heart and mind” any time you show me a head of a Communist party boss on a stick.
Another cheap trick. There is nothing controversial about killing some Arabs to please other Arabs. Arab world is rife with animosities, ancient and modern, and many of contending parties would be entirely happy to see their opponents dead. So it is quite possible to please some Arabs by killing other Arabs. And that doesn’t apply only to Arabs.
To expand, it is quite possible to please some Americans by killing other Americans. If any grief would suddenly come to the GOP, I think the first reaction of most Democrats would be moderately gleeful and hopeful. For example, if Martians took over US, get rid of all Republican leaders and proceeded to persecute entire Republican party, I don’t think Reeder would immediately join elucidator’s “Holy Motherland” brigades (just to pick two names at random). I think the general attitude of Bush detractors would be to wait and see, what happens next. There might be anomalies, for life is full of surprises, such as rjung starting “Bush the Martyr Avengers” fringe radical movement, but it would be rather the exception than the norm. Most people not purposefully targeted by invaders would try to take advantage of new opportunities, arising from fall of their old foes. And therein might lie real cause for the emergence of popular insurgency.
As much as I understand, people are always contentious, always fighting for something. There are animosities between states, between political parties within a state, between factions of the same party, between factions within factions, between personalities within groups within factions… without end. When a big adversary is removed, power vacuum forms and smaller struggles are blown out of old proportions very quickly. Democrats left without Republican opposition would most likely disintegrate into warring gay, union, green and other factions, each one originally looking for help from the mighty invading force. However, each will soon discover that invaders are not interested in their petty causes; all invaders want is to have “no trouble”, period. Few people would agree to that in their hearts. With every new frustration, the alien nature of invaders would become more and more apparent, people will be reminded of dear old things they have in common with their disagreeable countrymen and eventually the real national resistance might spring up. From jubilation to chaos to new national unity.
To understand this process better, I’d like to ask, what would it take for everyone to take arms and join the resistance against the beneficial invader that concentrates on destroying your erstwhile enemies and even tries to stay on your good side? Perhaps that way we can get past the meaningless media chatter and get some real understanding of the issue.