What Moby Dick Can Teach Us About the War on Terror
By projecting metaphysical meaning onto Canada’s struggle with ISIS, Stephen Harper is joining a tradition begun by Captain Ahab and long dominant in U.S. politics.
Vietnam is surely haunting the U.S. in Iraq, as Tony Burman wrote here last week. But something scary and vague is always haunting the U.S.: not just the sellout at Munich, the Berlin Wall, or the battle of Little Big Horn. Maybe it's hauntedness itself. I happened to rewatch Apocalypse Now last week, Coppola's Vietnam epic based on Conrad's Heart of Darkness, about colonialism in Africa. "The horror, the horror," breathes Brando hauntingly at the end. U.S. policy always manages to metaphysicalize itself out of specifics and into abstractions.
The cultural source of this pattern is Captain Ahab's pursuit of the white whale in Moby Dick, written in 1851. It's the whiteness that's hypnotic. "Were it not for the whiteness, you would not have that intensified terror," says the narrator. Interesting word to use, at a time when terror hadn't yet become an ism, though it had been a reign (of).
Whiteness lets you project anything you choose onto it, it's like green screen today (Moby Dick as the green whale?). Ahab says, "Sometimes I think there's naught beyond. But 'tis enough ... I will wreak that hate on him." The U.S. always projected this way; it's a metaphysical country.
During the Cold War, writes Greg Grandin, "politics was often presented as metaphysics." Nazis and Soviets "were understood as motiveless, driven by a hatred of freedom." So when W. said "because they hate our freedoms," to explain 9/11, it wasn't as butt ignorant as he sounded. He was in the tradition. Same for Reagan calling the Soviet Union the evil empire in the 1980s. They have a genius for ignoring specifics or causes, and jumping to moral absolutes.
So last week at Ramadi, the U.S. called Iraqis cowards for fleeing before ISIS, who are sheer evil. As if it all happened out of time: no 35 years of war and invasion, sanctions, displacement, death, in which U.S. policy was central. Just sheer cowardice on one side; pure evil on the other. No background required.
In a way, ISIS is the perfect cosmic dance partner for this U.S. mindset. Soviet communism was always a slightly bad fit: too much economic specificity and social class analysis. In the Mideast today all other applicants for infernal enemy have been dispatched: nationalism (Nasser) of the 1950s, socialism of the early Baath Party, national liberationism of Arafat's PLO. Even the modest ambitions of the two-state solution.
What survives as antagonist is the deep, unuprootable force of simplistic religion, especially ISIS. Compared to ISIS, Hamas and Hezbollah are subtle, pragmatic entities. ISIS shares with U.S. policy the sheer good versus evil, us against them, non-exploration of reality. Shall we dance?
This helps explain, by the way, ISIS' "phenomenal success at recruiting young people from around the world" (Al Jazeera). Youth, due to its limited experience, tends to gravitate to absolutes. If it rejects, with cause, the absolutes of U.S. policy, it moves easily to a separate but equal absolutism.
And what of Canada? I'm inclined to see as a national cultural strength our rejection of metaphysical mythmaking. Or maybe it's just ineptitude. Perhaps it results from seeing the many idiocies and disasters the U.S. falls into. But with Stephen Harper's war on terror, the white whale has come to Canada. He says we "are targeted by these terrorists for no other reason than that we are Canadians. They want to harm us because they hate our society and the values it represents." W. could have said that. Or Reagan. Or Ahab. The risks of ISIS in Canada seem small, but less so if you metaphysicalize them wildly.
It's what Harper will run on in the coming election, and it's a prescription for future elections if it works, since pure evil can't ever be vanquished. This may be our first metaphysical election but, given our system, he'll need far less than a majority of votes to extend his transcendental policy abstractions.
Ahab's first mate is Starbuck, for whom the coffee chain is named. He takes an anti-metaphysical stance: "Vengeance on a dumb brute! That simply smote thee from blindest instinct! Madness!" Starbuck hits a Canadian note, as Harper hits an American one. Of course these things aren't strictly geographical.
Urgent. It's never been this bad.
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission from the outset was simple. To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It’s never been this bad out there. And it’s never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed and doing some of its best and most important work, the threats we face are intensifying. Right now, with just two days to go in our Spring Campaign, we're falling short of our make-or-break goal. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Can you make a gift right now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? There is no backup plan or rainy day fund. There is only you. —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Vietnam is surely haunting the U.S. in Iraq, as Tony Burman wrote here last week. But something scary and vague is always haunting the U.S.: not just the sellout at Munich, the Berlin Wall, or the battle of Little Big Horn. Maybe it's hauntedness itself. I happened to rewatch Apocalypse Now last week, Coppola's Vietnam epic based on Conrad's Heart of Darkness, about colonialism in Africa. "The horror, the horror," breathes Brando hauntingly at the end. U.S. policy always manages to metaphysicalize itself out of specifics and into abstractions.
The cultural source of this pattern is Captain Ahab's pursuit of the white whale in Moby Dick, written in 1851. It's the whiteness that's hypnotic. "Were it not for the whiteness, you would not have that intensified terror," says the narrator. Interesting word to use, at a time when terror hadn't yet become an ism, though it had been a reign (of).
Whiteness lets you project anything you choose onto it, it's like green screen today (Moby Dick as the green whale?). Ahab says, "Sometimes I think there's naught beyond. But 'tis enough ... I will wreak that hate on him." The U.S. always projected this way; it's a metaphysical country.
During the Cold War, writes Greg Grandin, "politics was often presented as metaphysics." Nazis and Soviets "were understood as motiveless, driven by a hatred of freedom." So when W. said "because they hate our freedoms," to explain 9/11, it wasn't as butt ignorant as he sounded. He was in the tradition. Same for Reagan calling the Soviet Union the evil empire in the 1980s. They have a genius for ignoring specifics or causes, and jumping to moral absolutes.
So last week at Ramadi, the U.S. called Iraqis cowards for fleeing before ISIS, who are sheer evil. As if it all happened out of time: no 35 years of war and invasion, sanctions, displacement, death, in which U.S. policy was central. Just sheer cowardice on one side; pure evil on the other. No background required.
In a way, ISIS is the perfect cosmic dance partner for this U.S. mindset. Soviet communism was always a slightly bad fit: too much economic specificity and social class analysis. In the Mideast today all other applicants for infernal enemy have been dispatched: nationalism (Nasser) of the 1950s, socialism of the early Baath Party, national liberationism of Arafat's PLO. Even the modest ambitions of the two-state solution.
What survives as antagonist is the deep, unuprootable force of simplistic religion, especially ISIS. Compared to ISIS, Hamas and Hezbollah are subtle, pragmatic entities. ISIS shares with U.S. policy the sheer good versus evil, us against them, non-exploration of reality. Shall we dance?
This helps explain, by the way, ISIS' "phenomenal success at recruiting young people from around the world" (Al Jazeera). Youth, due to its limited experience, tends to gravitate to absolutes. If it rejects, with cause, the absolutes of U.S. policy, it moves easily to a separate but equal absolutism.
And what of Canada? I'm inclined to see as a national cultural strength our rejection of metaphysical mythmaking. Or maybe it's just ineptitude. Perhaps it results from seeing the many idiocies and disasters the U.S. falls into. But with Stephen Harper's war on terror, the white whale has come to Canada. He says we "are targeted by these terrorists for no other reason than that we are Canadians. They want to harm us because they hate our society and the values it represents." W. could have said that. Or Reagan. Or Ahab. The risks of ISIS in Canada seem small, but less so if you metaphysicalize them wildly.
It's what Harper will run on in the coming election, and it's a prescription for future elections if it works, since pure evil can't ever be vanquished. This may be our first metaphysical election but, given our system, he'll need far less than a majority of votes to extend his transcendental policy abstractions.
Ahab's first mate is Starbuck, for whom the coffee chain is named. He takes an anti-metaphysical stance: "Vengeance on a dumb brute! That simply smote thee from blindest instinct! Madness!" Starbuck hits a Canadian note, as Harper hits an American one. Of course these things aren't strictly geographical.
Vietnam is surely haunting the U.S. in Iraq, as Tony Burman wrote here last week. But something scary and vague is always haunting the U.S.: not just the sellout at Munich, the Berlin Wall, or the battle of Little Big Horn. Maybe it's hauntedness itself. I happened to rewatch Apocalypse Now last week, Coppola's Vietnam epic based on Conrad's Heart of Darkness, about colonialism in Africa. "The horror, the horror," breathes Brando hauntingly at the end. U.S. policy always manages to metaphysicalize itself out of specifics and into abstractions.
The cultural source of this pattern is Captain Ahab's pursuit of the white whale in Moby Dick, written in 1851. It's the whiteness that's hypnotic. "Were it not for the whiteness, you would not have that intensified terror," says the narrator. Interesting word to use, at a time when terror hadn't yet become an ism, though it had been a reign (of).
Whiteness lets you project anything you choose onto it, it's like green screen today (Moby Dick as the green whale?). Ahab says, "Sometimes I think there's naught beyond. But 'tis enough ... I will wreak that hate on him." The U.S. always projected this way; it's a metaphysical country.
During the Cold War, writes Greg Grandin, "politics was often presented as metaphysics." Nazis and Soviets "were understood as motiveless, driven by a hatred of freedom." So when W. said "because they hate our freedoms," to explain 9/11, it wasn't as butt ignorant as he sounded. He was in the tradition. Same for Reagan calling the Soviet Union the evil empire in the 1980s. They have a genius for ignoring specifics or causes, and jumping to moral absolutes.
So last week at Ramadi, the U.S. called Iraqis cowards for fleeing before ISIS, who are sheer evil. As if it all happened out of time: no 35 years of war and invasion, sanctions, displacement, death, in which U.S. policy was central. Just sheer cowardice on one side; pure evil on the other. No background required.
In a way, ISIS is the perfect cosmic dance partner for this U.S. mindset. Soviet communism was always a slightly bad fit: too much economic specificity and social class analysis. In the Mideast today all other applicants for infernal enemy have been dispatched: nationalism (Nasser) of the 1950s, socialism of the early Baath Party, national liberationism of Arafat's PLO. Even the modest ambitions of the two-state solution.
What survives as antagonist is the deep, unuprootable force of simplistic religion, especially ISIS. Compared to ISIS, Hamas and Hezbollah are subtle, pragmatic entities. ISIS shares with U.S. policy the sheer good versus evil, us against them, non-exploration of reality. Shall we dance?
This helps explain, by the way, ISIS' "phenomenal success at recruiting young people from around the world" (Al Jazeera). Youth, due to its limited experience, tends to gravitate to absolutes. If it rejects, with cause, the absolutes of U.S. policy, it moves easily to a separate but equal absolutism.
And what of Canada? I'm inclined to see as a national cultural strength our rejection of metaphysical mythmaking. Or maybe it's just ineptitude. Perhaps it results from seeing the many idiocies and disasters the U.S. falls into. But with Stephen Harper's war on terror, the white whale has come to Canada. He says we "are targeted by these terrorists for no other reason than that we are Canadians. They want to harm us because they hate our society and the values it represents." W. could have said that. Or Reagan. Or Ahab. The risks of ISIS in Canada seem small, but less so if you metaphysicalize them wildly.
It's what Harper will run on in the coming election, and it's a prescription for future elections if it works, since pure evil can't ever be vanquished. This may be our first metaphysical election but, given our system, he'll need far less than a majority of votes to extend his transcendental policy abstractions.
Ahab's first mate is Starbuck, for whom the coffee chain is named. He takes an anti-metaphysical stance: "Vengeance on a dumb brute! That simply smote thee from blindest instinct! Madness!" Starbuck hits a Canadian note, as Harper hits an American one. Of course these things aren't strictly geographical.