← Autodidact Archive · Original Dissent · TexasAnarch

Abu Ghraib: Legacy of Neocon Jewish Queerdom

Thread ID: 14578 | Posts: 1 | Started: 2004-07-27

Wayback Archive

TexasAnarch [OP]

2004-07-27 20:08 | User Profile

Abu Ghraib: legacy of Neocon Jewish Queerdom Analysis prepared from/for OD forom posts

[url]http://www.originaldissent.com/forums/showthread.php?t=14571[/url]

“(Armond) White should know that Abu Ghraib came directly out of the cotton plantation culture…”

    This is a half-Jew (Mark Ames, [email]editor@exile.ru[/email]) confirming PD’s acute observation, elsewhere on OD (Culture War “Homo Marriage”, #10):  ”Matter of fact get ready to hear the jews compare homosexual civil rights with black civil rights...a theme the jews have been playing all along….”  “Armond White”  is a black NYC blogger Ames is giving the bitch-slap to about who the enemy is.  Turns out to be us, of course.  It’s built into the “Left v. Right” grammar of politics:  (multicults against the south)

   “So long as they can convince the sheeple that this is about IDEAS like "right versus left" and not about PEOPLE, then they just won't be able to perceive the very simple tribal calculus underlying the entire debate.” (WY)

   To which I would add, weather permitting, “Left and Right” are not, or not just,  “ideas” – if only!   They are “signifiers”, specifically, splitters (I call them), whose use   controls debate by cathecting pre-processed value-opposites, to which the correspondent is called upon to align, on pain of moral sanction.  The “right” are the  “good guys”, even  – or especially – if they are PEOPLE FROM THE OLD JEWISH LEFT TRYING TO SOUND “right” by criticizing a “leftist black” -- for dumping on Moore as “leftist fascist”.  (yeek, scream)  (The black man whose Avatar name is “White”  really is off the wall, even for a Jayson Blair; blasting Moore as “leftist fascist”? – beyond risibility here. Serious Creutzfeld-Jacobsen’s spongyform encepholapathy.)

     I want to defend the hypothesis here that there is a depth psychological dimension to the tribal calculus. The unfolding, or playing out, of which dominates trans-millennial history.  Through “value splitter” Sign-use, they have brought the weakly grounded American psyche into alignment with their millennial delusion (Israel as YHWH’s return through  the sons of Menachem Begin).  Telling black people “look who your real enemy is – white southern Abu Ghraib slave trader types.”  And they are apt to listen, even while suspecting Shecky’s motives, thus poisoning race relations.  To cover their ass, as it turns out.  Literally.  .

This is a slur that cannot be allowed to stand.  Abu Ghraib – as signifier, at the fantasy level  – is the male homosexual component driving the entire Iraq war; it is a  mad, massive defense against a Father hell-bent on anal rape of “his people”.  That is the source of “terror” for them, psychologically,  as children; it is why the “war on terror” focused on his removal.  He is the Avenging Anti-God;  take-over of his worse prison, now its us doing it to them, is fantasy-justice.

It was consciously calculated that invasion of Iraq would bring a counterintelligence,  interrogation-intensive war. .  After all, lacking a real enemy except “somebody out to get you”, you can make it up as you go along, and it takes a lot of knutskis to even plan what info needs to be extracted, then a lot of torture to get it done.   So, apparently,  m*ssad helped by sharing the Israeli template for making such extractions, the results of which greeted the eyes and ears of all brave new world order folks when they saw the horror pictures, whether they wanted to or felt blessed by being informed, or not.  I for one, and for my country, felt soul-raped.  By them, as males, reducing “towelheads” to women-animals under a sadistic girl’s leash.  To make “enemies” cringe like “women”, e.g., the way Hedda Nussbaum and her 6year old adopted daughter cringed from Joel Steinberg’s fists. “Who knows better than the Israelis how to deal with Arabs,” one apologist for their participation in Abu Ghraib tortures remarked.  Indeed.

Here’s THE KEY IN THE LOCK -- all you have to do is turn it.

The Schreber case, by Freud’s analysis, established A LATENT HOMOSEXUAL CONTENT IN PARANOIA

The chief characteristic of the paranoid mind-set is perception of the world as full of threats and dangers, tending to become objectified under the figure of One Enemy, spreading “influences”, requiring constant defensive vigilance against attack.

Freud noted that the Persecutor, in Schreber’s case, first, then extending the observation to countless others, was “cathected with large quantities of libido” – “loved”, as he would say we say; and not just a little.  “Loved to death”, we say (“I just loved that boy to death.”).  What is persecuting the one suffering from such delusions is something for which they have deep being-love.  He interpreted the irrationality of exaggerated fears to arise from this libidinal component, turned back on its owner and arousing “inner defense”.  What is loved, at one (lower) level, must be defended against, at a second (higher, ‘return’) level MAKING THE LOVE ITSELF DANGEROUS IF YIELDED TO.  At an everyday, commonsense level,  this would manifest itself in instinctual trepidation – yes, fear; especially in women, who must allow penetration of themselves in order to do it  -- toward sexuality, itself, when  pre-pubescent, non-sexualized libido begins focusing on a contrasexual object-cathexis.  Love, in lowly physical or exhalted metal state, is a dangerous thing, and something inside instinctively protects against its frivolous ‘expenditure’.  (“Spending” was a well-known English metaphor for what liberals and onanists do; ‘saving’ made Puritans healthy, wealthy and wise.)

Add to his picture, for the son’s psycho-development in particular, the following:

1. The Father, encountered as all-powerful figure, after growing out from under mother’s wing; built like himself; loved by the mother not least because of his dominant physical power (archetypically: Schreber’s father was a noted Leipzig physician.) Little boys often develop girlie-type ways to attract Big Daddy’s attention, in play, blissfully unaware of it having any gender/sexual meaning, until later, and that is as it should be. A lot of hugging of the old guys neck, beard pulling, getting comforted, these should go on a lot, no fear. This is the individual basis of physical love of the father. It forms the core of latent homosexuality, developing full-blown when….

2. Neuro-genetic (neurosis generating) vicissitudes of instinctual development.
   Example: Subjection to harsh, abusive personal father, engendering pictures and fears of : anal rape or “castration” (Freud’s notion) enlivening boys imagination. And with vast, massive historical and current confirmation of that particular fantasy’s reality. The further back one goes in time, the more widespread such use and abuse of boys by their older male caretakers occurred as can be documented. (L. deMause). As the basis for all later relations to males, from sports to police authority, “its in there, ” as a latency. Just ask Abner Louima.

3. Name of The Father (family legacy, “to live up to”) carried by the Son. Since one’s surname is that by which one is officially “called”, by others, and to which one must “answer”, to receive government services, it is that to which the reality-cathexis must accept – for smooth response to that world – or reject, if the reality of that world makes demands to which there is instinctual revulsion. SUCH AS: bringing themselves to voluntarily, consciously, go under the abuser’s abuse: become Hedda Nussbaum’s taking whatever comes from Joel, offering him the child, as well. Yielding to this would be the ultimate terror. Anything but that. If, in spite of the way he was raised, the abused son goes forward with the identity Father’s name provides – a “Son” – it can only be through a compromise with conscience from ignorance. “He’ll be better.” Maybe. Why should he, if called upon to defend the heritage? (“Send the marines.”).

Two parallel developments of the arrested libido development help serve the function of smoothing over the conflicts latent between these two standpoints of accepting or rejecting, and permit him to make peace with himself and society – which, of course, is full of s.o.b.’s just like himself. These developments are repression, and sublimation. The development of libido toward the father, and through him the male world, is typically repressed, on the physical side, as an object cathexis, although Plato reports Greek god boys claimed to find the pug-nosed Socrates attractive. On the inner side, this would go with splitting off the perpetual out-flowing from that to which it would go out to, if unblocked, onto a path of discharge attaching it what is conveyed by The Name: the “Idea”. This shift is where the Father (parental progenitor) became/becomes the Son – even “Son of Himself” as in the doctrine of the Christian trinity. In smooth, normal development, when “God The Father” assumes a linguistic use for a son, the sign “God” will stand for that inner object toward which the previous love of the personal father is redirected. And this is the point at which a Son who never had the chance to develop any relation other than anal rape/terror relation to an actual father, or substitute, will be engulfed with threat dominated by just this fantasy. In the most stark, condensed terms, “God The Father” becomes someone who constantly pursues him, catching up in unguarded times, at night, inducing states of ravaged “voluptuosities”, not lacking in great cosmological (schizoid, alter-world) elaboration.

Freud’s analysis of the situation in a nutshell: When called upon to assume the responsibilities of carrying on his Father’s name (Schreber suffered his ‘nervous breakdown at the very time he reached the zenith of his career as a judge), the instinctual basis of his psychic organization reacted with massive refusal. A resulting backward-streaming of libido that would, ordinarily, get worked off by sublimating procedures, instead burgeons inwardly as narcissistic involvement in his own world, and aggressive paranoid defenses against his tormenter. An entire alter-world, created by his alter-male, ‘altar boy’ (in fantasy: the sacrificed, or crucified son), the entire project being restitution of the desired alternative world, allowing for the changes imposed by painful reality. Thus, instead of his loving an all powerful Creator, it is reversed: It “He” (the demon God) loves him (the created). Instead of being the helpless one snuggling up to the personal Almighty, the even Higher Almighty wants to continuously snuggle up to him. Instead of being impotent, Supreme potency is his destiny – a New breed of humans will come from his loins. Instead of being “on the bottom”, he will be “on the top”, if only in his dream-thoughts. This is accomplished entirely through creation of a new way of speaking he devises and weaves together into a great cosmic drama. He wrote a book in prison, “Memoirs of My Nervous Illness” in which this cosmology where he was Master is expounded with learned acumen. It was read by many and by no means dismissed as loony by all. Even Carl Jung, who knew that if Father Freud’s teaching was true, as a psychological fact, some new metaphysical speculations would certainly be appearing, so maybe judge Schreber was The One.

Two very brief evidences, now, that the same syndrome played out in Iraq, Schreber’s role being taken by Jews, as the little boy(s) in Big Daddy’s world they cannot live up to, so launch a project of making restitution for deficit male impotence, and become the virile, creating New Fathers, by showing they can lay the wood on Arabs.

One: the undeniably irrational paranoid delusions of persecution – Saddam Hussein had hidden “Weapons of Mass Destruction”; he mysteriously “poisoned his own people” (the Kurds, repetition of Poisonous Placenta’s action in ‘withholding’ oxygen during actual childbirth, so by changing “regimes” -- images in their own head, where he is a terror threat -- Bush can lead Americans to re-birth at the same time the “coalition of the willing” ( to re-valorizes his Father, and World War II Fatherhood strain interminably drawn out, as if it were forever (sacrifice of the finest generation’s finest, to match the Messianic grandiosity of Benyamin’s (son of Manachem) vision for the Middle east. The latent homosexuality is this paranoid project emerges, or deconstructs, in Abu Ghraib (Grab a-boo – a butt, an Arab boogeyman). Those pictures mean Big Daddy’s is around, and He wants them to see it and know it. Interrogation, my ass. ////the imagery of Saddam Hussein, himself, as handsome, manly, heroic, virile, strong, supported by loyal, disciplined, pride of Iraq’s males in histhe elite Republican National Guard (who disappeared wisely into the night in the spring of ’03, but will fight on, underground, forever, in fantasy, if not fact) …. This is saturated wilh homoerotic overtones. It is one reason I think the neocon cabal felt they could count on white, southern, religious males to go along. They, following Bush”, would project the same anal rape fantasies onto the Iraqi Strong Man (“Dictator”) as the Jewish boys, and defend against them on a paranoid basis by a pre-emptive strike. “We know what he and his Allah want to do to us.”

Two: the emergence of homosexual marriage as central domestic issue of the ’04 presidential election. . Elections are demi-rebirth rituals of their own, in which the “children” chose up “good-guy/bad-guy sides” then engage in “campaigns” to stick it up each other’s wazoo – everybody agreeing in advance, if its “democracy”, to let by-gones be by-gons afterward. Since the larger over-riding (sorry) issue is the Iraq war -- EVEN THOUGH THE DEMOCRATS ARE MAKING EVERY EFFORT TO PREVENT THAT FROM COMING ABOUT, WHEN POLLS SAY 9 OUT OF 10 DELEGATES OPPOSED IT – and it is about whether the homosexual (girlie men) neocon Jews get to screw Arab males in the ass whenever they feel like it, to demonstrate YHWH’s presence in the Middle East, this IS BOUND TO REAPPEAR IN THE CAMPAIGN – THE POLICIES UNDERLYING THE WAR ABROAD AND THE ISSUES AT HOME BEING FUNDAMENTALLY IDENTICAL. “Bring The War Home” is one of Kerry’s slogans; “Born to Run” is another. Now empowered by Clinton’s huge phallic Audience – bent a little to the side when extended, didn’t she say?), Re-pube neoconservatives know he won’t last past the fart stage of father love. “You’ll be glad to get back to Abu Ghraib.” They will win, if they do, because people really do want to get fcked in the **. They love their own “terror” so much they have delegated an entire generation of children, not to mention the next millennium, to ensure it gets done by the best, most experienced hands.