PANDEMIC DIARY
DO NOT SUFFER FOOLS
July 7, 2021
Two nights ago on “All In with Chris Hayes”, he previewed a soon-to-be released documentary produced by New York Times journalists about the January 6 insurrection. The film is composited by extracting videos from the phones of those accused or charged with various degrees of acts of violence during the breach and penetration of the Capitol Building. The filmmakers were able recreate exactly what was happening from all sides of the building at the exact same times isolating time stamped phone video sequences of events. This has produced a frightening, logical procedural of just what occurred, how it took place and by whom. It is a formidable piece of investigative journalism.
In the film, the producers were able to ask questions of the insurrectionists. “Why are you here”? “What do you hope to accomplish?” The stated goals and desired outcomes varied and reflected some of the conspiracy theories floating around, and likely generated by the very groups participating in the assault. More consistent was the fact that each person felt that once achieved they would be able to install some political framework that would restore integrity to our ‘corrupt’ system. They appeared completely naive or totally blind as to what it takes to run a government. Furthermore, and this is the point I wish to make, they each believe that they are vital to the cause. Indispensable. I find this absolutely incredible. And stupid.
I have watched and wondered about this phenomenon whereby these right-wing extremists truly believe that their contribution matters in some grander scheme, and that they will be a lasting participants and contributors to what’s next for some enduring length of time. Not one of these zealots has ever, to my knowledge, expressed remotely any doubt or concern as to what follows the deposing of our Democracy or hesitation about whether they would be of any lasting consequence to a movement. So I did some research, basically to determine whether and to what degree faithful adherents are expendable in the fluid circumstances of an overthrow of a government by an authoritarian, cult leader.
I used Hitler and the Nazi party as the example. But, before I go on, I want to introduce you to a term you will likely be as unfamiliar with as I was, and a fact that I did not know about that shifted the whole of my thinking about this subject. Firstly, the term is Democide: a label created by R.J. Rummel in 1986 and author of the book, “Death By Government”. Rummel realized that however an abomination genocide is, that it is, by international law, only one kind of act against humanity that has become singularly prevalent to the exclusion of other state and non-state sponsored acts. Whereas genocide is “the killing of people by a government because of their ‘indelible group membership’ (race, ethnicity, religion, language)”; democide is the murder of any person or people by a government, including genocide, politicide, and mass murder.
The distinction becomes important in light of other acts that do not fit comfortably in the dominant definition. Would the massacre of helpless villagers in the Sudan by government forces fighting a rebellion fall into this category; the Indonesian army’s purge of communists; the assassination of political opponents by the Nationalist government of Formosa; the “land reform” execution of landlords in the Soviet Union; or, the rapid death of inmates in Vietnam re-education camps? What about non-killing which has been called genocide such as in the absorption of one culture by another? Would Israel’s displacement of large populations of Arabs within its territories be a form of systematic genocide? If not, Rummel proposes a solution by re-categorizing those acts which do not possess legal international standing even though the actions taken are horrible and heinous. Democide is this classification. All genocide, politicide and mass murder would fall within the definition of democide.
Now, for the fact. On July 7, 1986, The Wall Street Journal published an article by R.J. Rummel entitled, “War Isn’t This Century’s Biggest Killer”. A methodical survey of democide, Rummel was provided a grant by the United States Institute of Peace to perform a more in-depth study. The culmination was the publishing of his book, “Death By Government”. In his article for WSJ, he later revealed that his original pilot article underestimated the number of deaths that fall outside the standard definition of genocide and mass murder by 42 percent.
“Our century (21st cent.) is noted for its absolute and bloody wars. WW I saw nine-million people killed in battle, an incredible record that was far surpassed within a few decades by the 15 million deaths of World War II….In total, this century’s battles killed in all international and domestic wars, revolutions, and violent conflicts is so far about 35,654,000.”
But wait, what is missed are the staggering numbers of killings by governments that inspire hardly a murmur, while a war killing ‘mere’ thousands of people can cause a world outcry and global reaction. An example of this misdirected focus is The Falkland Island ‘War’, a minor skirmish between Great Britain and Argentina occurring while Burundi’s were killing or acquiescing in killing about 100,000 Hutu in 1972; and, the slaughtering of likely 600,000 “communists” in 1965 by Indonesian military, or Pakistan’s well planned massacre, eventually killing from one to three million Bengalis in 1971.
As a Vietnam protestor, I also offer a double standard that I find relatable, even as I deplore the Vietnam War. The International Community was outraged at the attempt to militarily prevent the North Vietnamese from from taking over South Vietnam and, if as claimed, eventually Laos and Cambodia. An inexcusable effort. The “Stop the killing” outcry, the pressure from foreign and domestic forces impelled an American withdrawal. The total death toll on all sides was 1,216,000 people.
Subsequently, and with the United States refusing to provide aid or military assistance to the South Vietnamese government, the North, as predicted, swallowed up South Vietnam while Cambodia was taken over by the Khmer Rouge. In their attempt to restore a primitive communist agricultural society they slaughtered from one to three million people. Rummel points out that if we take the middle figure of two million killed, then in four years the government of this small nation of seven million alone killed 64 percent more people than died in the ten-year Vietnam War. But this was hardly a blip on the screen.
These examples repeat themselves throughout time. The first takeaway is relevant to today’s right-wing extremists. “ABSOLUTISM IS NOT ONLY MANY TIMES DEADLIER THAN WAR, BUT IS THE MAJOR FACTOR CAUSING WAR AND OTHER FORMS OF VIOLENT CONFLICT. IT IS THE MAJOR CAUSE OF MILITARISM. INDEED, ABSOLUTISM, NOT WAR, IS MANKIND’S DEADLIEST SCOURGE OF ALL.”
The second takeaway has to do with who are the subjects of these killings. When we think of the Nazi killings we automatically refer to ‘genocide’ and the killing of 6,000,000 Jews. But, the Nazis killed for other reasons (and non-reasons) other than religion or race. The Nazis killed anyone who hindered or opposed them, actually or potentially. [Please note that this is relevant to my point of how current day insurgents believe they will be part of a loyal opposition] Hitler assassinated hundreds of top Nazi SA’s or storm troopers. Over 5,000 citizens were executed after an assassination attempt on Hitler’s ife. “Indeed, it is why critics, pacifists, conscientious objectors, campus rebels, dissidents, and others of different political persuasions were executed or disappeared, or were sent to concentration camps. The Nazis killed some 288,000 Germans, not counting Jews, homosexuals, and those forcibly ‘euthanized’. It is estimated that the Nazis murdered at least 762,000 Germans. Along with the extermination of Jews, the military and non-military death toll increased the likelihood of dying to better than 1 out of 11 German citizens - low odds for survival.”
Most killings are not war related but are akin to administrative devices. They are tools used to terrorize society and opposition, to conduct mass reprisals, to maintain control, prevent sabotage, and safeguard their soldiers. What that can look like is if one man is accused of underground activities a whole village can be rounded up and executed, the village burned, and women and children sent to concentration camps. The long-term strategies of authoritarians rarely take into consideration the tactical necessity of killing. Murder and annihilation are a means to an end. In this sense, Hitler was, admittedly, different and saw an easily defined group of people as easy targets whose elimination he could get a population to rally around. But the necessity of ancillary killing along with the power to execute without restraint happening within a paranoid environment ended killing an estimated 31 million people in total.
NO ONE IS SAFE OR SECURE IN A TOTALITARIAN SOCIETY. THERE ARE NO ALLIES IN TOTALITARIAN RULE. YOU ARE EITHER COMPLICIT OR DEAD.
They are fools who believe they are expressing loyal opposition. They are fools if they believe the person standing next to them does not think him or herself more right than you. They are fools who hold to the notion that what follows is anything but chaos, more violence and endless rebellion. And, those who think that what they impose and inflict on others cannot happen to them, they are really foolish.