The following is an archived copy of a message sent to a Discussion List run by the Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq.
Views expressed in this archived message are those of the author, not of the Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq.
[Main archive index/search] [List information] [Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq Homepage]
Dear Eric and List, I apologize again for the Nero comparison. I said it in passing, and shouldn't have said it. Yes, it was unfair. It just struck me as odd that someone should be worrying about the alleged import of 'chewing gum machines' at this sad time. Still, mea culpa... But it was "current crisis" that prompted my response. Here I stick to what I said. And this wasn't meant personal, Eric. I wasn't trying to single you out for using that term. My examples made that clear, I hope. Nor was I trying to cast aspersions on your sincerity as an 'antisanctions campaigner'. But Iraq is, at this very moment, being bombed to smithereens. Iraqis are being killed, wounded, and made homeless. The reality of this is being denied through a stream of propaganda lies. And the hypocrisy displayed seems mind-boggling to me. So I was trying to draw attention to manipulation through language. It was an effort at awareness raising. Sorry if this was misconstrued. You said: >> in view of current crisis) > and have not used euphemisms Eric, if you don't see 'crisis' as a euphemism in this context, I respect your view. To me it is a euphemism. The word is 'war'. (I called it slaughter in my post.) In my mind, the word 'war' conjures up images of death and destruction - 'crisis' lacks these associations. War advocates must have had similar perceptions. They frequently spoke of a 'war on Saddam' - and denounced the proper term, 'war on Iraq'. Why? To soothe their conscience, perhaps? And no, _you_ did not use the term with this in mind. I believe that. As I said, "'Current crisis' or 'Iraq crisis' is the accepted euphemism - and a dangerously deceptive one". ('Iraq crisis' moreover very subtly shifts accountability.) But I believe that politicians use 'crisis' to cloud reality. The media faithfully perpetuates the term. And so it enters the public's consciousness. The same public, that is, who has come to accept 'collateral damage' and 'liberation'. 'Collateral damage', revived by the military during the 1991 Gulf War, was then perceived as obscene by many. Today it is common usage - I have seen it used in academic papers. That's what I meant by manipulation through language. (Language after all forms our ideas and perceptions.) And since the US dominates the news sources, these conscience-soothing euphemisms are translated into other languages by the foreign media - picked up by their readers. (Irak-Krise and Kollateralschaden in German.) Rightly or wrongly, I also believe that acceptance of such euphemisms desensitizes people to human suffering - and to injustice. Above all, euphemisms are meant to deceive people. And they are not confined to politics or the military. (William Lutz, an English professor in the US coined the term 'doublespeak', based on Orwell's doublethink. Lutz collects and publishes these gems.) You may recall the euphemism 'humanitarian intervention'. This was meant to suggest that the 'intervention', ie, the bombing, was carried out for noble reasons. And the ruse worked: most people to this day believe that the NATO bombing of Yugoslavia was justified. (Not only was the NATO bombing unjustified and illegal, it rested on a whole slew of lies. This is now well documented. And the reason was not 'humanitarian', but geopolitical: control of the Balkans... Kosovo, pipeline. But that's another story.) Yours peacefully and respectfully, Elga Sutter -------------Original Message------------- >From eric.herring@bristol.ac.uk Thu Apr 3 17:10:18 2003 Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2003 12:13:27 +0100 From: Eric Herring <eric.herring@bristol.ac.uk> To: H Sutter <citext@chebucto.ns.ca> Cc: casi-discuss@lists.casi.org.uk Subject: Re: [casi] While Baghdad is burning... The comparison is indeed unfair, as if this is all I have talked and written about for these past years. I have not ignored the big picture and have not used euphemisms. To see the truth of this, go to my website, or look at the exxamples below of my many articles. And the little picture like the one indicated below matters because of what it symbolises about the big picture, which is exactly why the Foreign Office (and indeed antisanctions campaigners look at such things. Eric On Thu, 3 Apr 2003 06:29:37 -0400 (AST) H Sutter <citext@chebucto.ns.ca> wrote: > > and the innocent victims of US/UK missiles are > lying in hospital wards, weeping and writhing in > agony, the question was asked: > > > Iraq imported chewing gum machines through OFF? > > Quoting Mr. Blair's official spokesman: > > 'the oil-for-food programme was abused by the Iraqi regime > > by, for example, using it to "import thousands of chewing > > gum machines"'. > > > > Has anyone heard anything about this before? I've emailed > > OIP about it and await a response (not holding my breath > > in view of current crisis) > > Nero came to mind, as I read this. Forgive me if the > comparison sounds unfair. It probably is. [Articles deleted to conserve space] ---------------------- Dr. Eric Herring Department of Politics University of Bristol 10 Priory Road Bristol BS8 1TU England, UK Office tel. +44-(0)117-928-8582 Mobile tel. +44-(0)7771-966608 Fax +44-(0)117-973-2133 eric.herring@bristol.ac.uk http://www.bris.ac.uk/Depts/Politics http://www.ericherring.com/ Network of Activist Scholars of Politics and International Relations (NASPIR) http://groups.yahoo.com/group/naspir/ _______________________________________________ Sent via the discussion list of the Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq. To unsubscribe, visit http://lists.casi.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/casi-discuss To contact the list manager, email casi-discuss-admin@lists.casi.org.uk All postings are archived on CASI's website: http://www.casi.org.uk