Nailed it. Mr Greenwald is not an analyst, or at the very least not a sophisticated one, but is an anarcho-libertarian moralist who marinates in the perpetual loathing of a single subject: The west. Why can’t the people who have blood on their hands be the people who literally have blood on their hands? In other words, what is functional significance of expressing such a statement? To me it’s quite clear. Like all dogmatic doctrines, Inverser imperialism is predicated on certain a priori assumptions; The subaltern- the victim of the oppression- are infantilised as ethereally victims; The west- the oppressors- even in the face of being unambiguously attacked are the primary agent of all moral turpitude that is visited upon itself. Now to me, this sounds like a politicised version of Stockholm syndrome, diluted of course to fit the peculiar dynamics of political discourse but retaining the same essence: extroverted self-loathing.
Posted on: Fri, 31 Oct 2014 11:27:17 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015