h1

In defense of the indefensible

September 25, 2007

by Ap. Fotiadis

In response to a previous conversation I was preparing to write a detailed text explaining why the Food for Oil program was strait genocide of children. How people who knew that people suffered and died kept on with the program for years. When asked why, answering that is worth it. How the US vetoed cargoes of hepatitis vaccines for infants and other medical equipment, saying it contained chemical substance which could make horrific weapons. I would be the narrator this time, proving that the war on terror is another religion.

But then there was this title over a picture of rotten wooden boxes that forced a though about the poverty of history. Post-Soviet Horrors, rotten wooden boxes and deserted miserably build houses. What was left from the Soviet era is a repulsive world and the certainty that anything related to this was given birth by some horror.

There are people, many of them, who spent their lives thinking that they lead the masses to the future. They are still around but keep silent; from time to time still reading the sacraments of their fallen religion; trying to understand where things went wrong and they led millions of people to misery.

They are other imitating them now; they are leading people, day after day, to freedom.

History is like plaster. Poisoned plaster. The historian is to damn or offer salvation. The historian is a small god dominating the finger of blame, doing justice. This is horror, this is freedom. Like retarded who repeat simplistic binarisms. This horror, this freedom; In a simplistic repetitive way, like Goebbelian poetry.


I would narrate about another horror; to say things and do justice. Human history is full of them. Who is left to defend as from the narrators?

Advertisements

One comment

  1. I am not a student of history. So, to answer to this, I add some comments that Hobsbawm makes at the end of a 600 page book about the 20th century, “The Century of Extremes”. If the reader was waiting for major conclusions, he is surely to be disappointed. What Hobsbawm underlines is precisely that, the difficulty of making “big statements”, “big profecies”.
    Hobsbawm says actually that, after all this effort to understand what has been happening throughout the century, the only thing we know for sure is that we know little and that the authors of major decisions throughout the ages also knew little, even less, not having the benefit of the perspective.
    He does point out, however, that history is a “dossier of crimes and madness” and that, with the 20th century behind us, there are less reasons to be optimistic than some decades before.
    Hobsbawm also says (he writes this in the early 90s) that humanity has reached the moment of a historical crisis and that the world will be forced to change: “There are signs, both internal and external, that we have reached the moment of a historical crisis. The forces generated by the techological-scientific economy are not powerful enough to destroy the environment, that is, the material foundations of human life. The structures of our society, including some of the basic elements of capitalist economy, are about to be destroyed by what we have inherited from our human past. Our world risks both an explosion and an implosion. It must change.”



Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: