February 6, 2002

9:41 PM

"AXIS OF EVIL" was supposed to send a message. "Those who condition themselves to think that an axis of evil surrounds them will only live a painful, gloomy and uncomfortable life. They will, in effect, loose many of their powers and abilities as a result of their exaggerated sensitivity and drown themselves in fatal ignorance of the blessings and good things of the world."
posted by sheauga (17 comments total)

(Hit link before reacting. Quote from third to last paragraph of the section on pessimism.)
posted by sheauga at 9:50 PM on February 6, 2002

Interesting theory, but if it were true, I don't see how the North Koreans were expected to get it.

And does that site's writings jibe with Sunni Islam too?

posted by aaron at 9:57 PM on February 6, 2002

Those who condition themselves to think that the axis of evil surrounds them will only live a painful, gloomy and uncomfortable life.

If someone pointed this out to GWB, would his response be something like, "Good thing I'm a Christian!"

Also, if the speech-writers were referencing this passage, I think they missed the point. It says (and presumeably the devout believe) that those who see evil everywhere are the ones who truely suffer. The sentiments of the Islamic street could very easily interpret the "axis of evil" to be another reason the US has no credibility, for surely if we see evil everywhere America must be a horribly gloomy place.

Lately at times it sort of has been.
posted by joemaller at 10:14 PM on February 6, 2002

For similar reasons, they are using a word which appears in many of the hadith: evildoer.

I have stated elsewhere that although a direct effect on the three nations listed is desired, the more important immediate effect is to warn other nations about getting too close to them. viz. a Riyadh-Damascus-Baghdad-Tehran consensus on Palestine was developing, and this was a pointed reminder to the former two capitals against consorting with the latter two.
posted by dhartung at 10:16 PM on February 6, 2002

" ... Those who condition themselves to think that an axis of evil surrounds them will only live a painful, gloomy and uncomfortable life...."

As opposed to, oh, for instance, 3,000 New Yorkers who are dead because none of us were conditioned to think that an axis of evil surrounded them. Or the several millions of Jews who died because no one was conditioned to think that an axis of evil surrounded them.

In all the chapters of the work noted in this FPP, I notice none are entitled "Realism". sheauga, Saddam Hussain wants to kill you ... do you understand that? He is building weapons, and will launch them given even the slightest opportunity. Biological weapons. Nuclear weapons. Chemical weapons that he has already used on his own population. Do you really get what evil is? I'm happy that at least our current president does.
posted by MidasMulligan at 10:29 PM on February 6, 2002

Surely you've caught on by now to the notion that the concepts of Good vs Evil are no longer appropriate or useful. Everything, and everyone, is a shade of grey.

Sure, those people (whomever) did bad things, but golly - they are justified in their anger. And even if we disagree with their reactions to that anger, we can't really argue with the anger itself. Its in that way that leaders who kill scores of their own people, and terrorists who kill civilians have migrated from Evil to somewhere in the darker shades of grey. Grey vs. Gray is the new Good vs. Evil
posted by schlyer at 10:40 PM on February 6, 2002

Hehe, you know, schlyer, some people actually believe that.
posted by dagny at 10:59 PM on February 6, 2002

I really don't want to drag this one out, but...

Midas, it's impossible to argue the Holocaust, but it's important to remember that the Nazis believed they were actually ridding the world of evil (re: jews). Had they succeeded, and/or won the war and been the authors of subsequent history, the extermination of Germany's Jews would now be seen as regrettable, but a good thing in the end.

This is not "moral relativism", it's just the way history works.

Shades of gray arguments are usually trivialized by misunderstanding of their motive. The intention is to achieve some kind of unconditional non-comparative good, not just a self-defined good arrived at by kicking the crap out of those who call you evil.
posted by joemaller at 12:25 AM on February 7, 2002

"...it's important to remember that the Nazis believed they were actually ridding the world of evil (re: jews). Had they succeeded, and/or won the war and been the authors of subsequent history, the extermination of Germany's Jews would now be seen as regrettable, but a good thing in the end."

The winners write history, but conquerors cannot completely control the minds of those they rule. There was internal resistance to Nazi Germany's mass murder of Jews and other "undesirables," even as the ovens roared.
posted by Carol Anne at 5:49 AM on February 7, 2002

"AXIS OF EVIL" was supposed to send a message.

And there was me thinking it was just another trite soundbite for the remote-controlled masses.
posted by walrus at 6:02 AM on February 7, 2002

apologies for the length
MidasMulligan: Saddam Hussain wants to kill you ... do you understand that? He is building weapons, and will launch them given even the slightest opportunity.

next time you meet saddam, can you ask him how he hopes to rebuild the country whilst the import of books and journals is banned by the UN sanctions. This effects the, usually pro-Western, Iraqi professionals (such as teachers, doctors, dentists etc.), and obviously the population at large.
i suppose he isn't too bothered about the moderates within his country, as there aren't many left after the years of bombing and sanctions.scroll down to 'iraq' heading
also, ask him why he felt the need to gas the kurds in northern iraq, when the traditional response to their cries for self-governance is to ignore them completely.
you can ask him if he got his ideas for controlling the population from the russians (chechnya) or the chinese (tibet) or the english (ireland).
that is assuming that you have direct access to him, which is what your previous post suggests. otherwise what you have to say is pure conjecture.
if that is the case, allow me to balance your conjecture with some more:

'In the West, the public are led to believe that everything that is happening – or at least everything that is allowed to reach their ears – is the fault of the Iraqi regime; or more specifically, of President Saddam Hussein, who since the Gulf War has become the man the world most loves to hate. He is portrayed as a ruthless monster, a dictator who murders his own people by the thousands, and stockpiles food and medicines rather than feed his starving people. There seems little truth in the latter allegation (see article) but it is clear is that the regime – and it is the regime, not just the President – brooks no dissent and punishes those who speak out with imprisonment or execution. This has been presented as a targeting of minorities. It is not. The Government in general allows its minorities – including the Kurds – more freedom to practise their religion and culture than any other Middle Eastern government, so long as they are not seen as a threat because of their national aspirations. Those who are seen as a threat are simply not tolerated. Amnesty International in its 1999 Annual Report finds the regime guilty of ‘torture and ill-treatment of prisoners and detainees’; hundreds of executions and thousands ‘disappeared’; a record that echoes that of many other dictatorial governments in other parts of the world.'
posted by asok at 6:03 AM on February 7, 2002

joemaller -- Funny, I missed the part about Zealots crashing two el-Al 747s into the World Trade Center. Funny, you'd think I would have noticed something of the sort.

Indeed if we're to delve into the "ominous parallels" of the current situation you'd have to consider the opposite viewpoint. Until Hitler came to power Germany was fairly friendly to its Jewish population. Certainly there were what we would now consider to be bias incidents, but the unemployed Viennese painter put the whole bigotry thing in high gear. Granted, it was more gradual than stepping out of your house to find out that 3000 people died while you were brushing your teeth, but we're dealing with what is essentially the very same phenomenon.

The Jews of Germany were people which appeared to be on the whole fairly successful in an ungentle economic climate. The Nazis and their followers wanted to create a new world order based on an arbitrary set of criteria, and gradually changed society to the point where they implicitly accepted the mass murder of civilians.

So what are we dealing with today? Mentally feeble but able-bodied nutcases, with the certainty of "having God on their side", who over the years have been taught by so-called "clerics" that the mass murder of civilians is acceptable, setting their targets on a group of people who are seen as being economically successful and leading a lifestyle which is uncommon in Islamic lands.

"Never again" my *ss. People who ignore history are doomed to repeat it; I would further venture to say that those who mistake a difference in details for a difference in fundamentals risk being doomed. Period.

TAE (Visit my web site!)

posted by clevershark at 7:28 AM on February 7, 2002

i don't agree with iran being lumped in w/ n.korea and iraq and i was wondering why they were. fwiw, here's the best explanation i could find.
posted by kliuless at 8:02 AM on February 7, 2002

"Also, if the speech-writers were referencing this passage, I think they missed the point. It says (and presumeably the devout believe) that those who see evil everywhere are the ones who truely suffer ..." This would include those who have built themselves an inner world full of jihad, evildoers, "the great Satan," etc.

As part of the generation which grew up with the killing fields of Cambodia as its reference point for evil, I was struck by the way these Islamic teachings expressed what Buddhists call seeking the "Buddha within others." I couldn't agree more with the importance of training young people to develop a personal world view which states that relationships of trust and confidence must be considered the foundation of human affairs. Is there any way that humanity can survive the creation of WMD, other than by establishing relationships of trust and confidence?
posted by sheauga at 10:08 AM on February 7, 2002

Saddam Hussain wants to kill you ... do you understand that? He is building weapons...Chemical weapons that he has already used on his own population.

Yes, he has. What does it say about the U.S. that it continued and even increased military support for Hussein after he had done this? Of course, this was back when Hussein was one of the "good guys".
posted by Ty Webb at 10:15 AM on February 7, 2002

That link on Saddam Hussein building weapons discusses weapons inspection and verification- an endeavor where relationships of confidence and trust are crucial. Yet another example where Islam's guru has a point- those who aren't willing to live in a world based on trust are likely to reap the consequences.
posted by sheauga at 10:18 AM on February 7, 2002

fwiw2:

David Frum's "Axis of Evil"

Dear all,

I realize this is very "Washington" of me to mention but my husband is responsible for the "Axis of Evil" segment of Tuesday's State of the Union address. It's not often a phrase one writes gains national notice—unless you're in advertising of course ("The Pause that refreshes")—so I'll hope you'll indulge my wifely pride in seeing this one repeated in headlines everywhere!!

D

King accuses Iran of threat to Israel

Iranians for Bush

i'm thinking the byline of the slate article, "Authorial vanity strikes the Bush White House."
posted by kliuless at 11:52 AM on February 7, 2002