The official blog of the Libertarian Party
September 19, 2007
Iraqi clockwork oranges
The Washington Post had a story out today that talked about the military's attempt to "reeducate" Iraqi detainees with some as young as 11 years old.
Stone said such efforts, aimed mainly at Iraqis who have been held for more than a year, are intended to "bend them back to our will" and are part of waging war in what he called "the battlefield of the mind." Most of the younger detainees are held in a facility that the military calls the "House of Wisdom."
Some of this new education is religious. The military has brought in Muslim scholars who teach "moderate" Islam, and pick a part the arguments of al Qaeda.
The religious courses are led by Muslim clerics who "teach out of a moderate doctrine," Stone said, according to the transcript of a conference call he held from Baghdad with a group of defense bloggers. Such schooling "tears apart" the arguments of al-Qaeda, such as "Let's kill innocents," and helps to "bring some of the edge off" the detainees, he said.
Some of the programs aren't as controversial, such as vocational training and basic education courses. However, the idea that the military is engaging in "psychological warfare" at the individual level is scary nonetheless. The whole concept of reeducation seems right out of the pages of A Clockwork Orange. I can just see an Iraqi teen strapped down into a chair, with his eyes peeled open with pictures of the aftermaths of suicide bombings and 9/11 blasted on a screen in front of him for hours.
Secondly, the whole "House of Wisdom" carries the same ominous feeling that there is something inherently wrong with the problem. Whether or not it is a play on Islam's "House of War" and "House of Peace" still doesn't change the fact that it seems it could have been based off of 1984's Ministry of Love, where "thought-criminals" were taken to be mentally broken to the point where the finally are brainwashed enough to accept the Party's ideals. Preaching "moderate" Islam is nowhere near as ignominious as brainwashing people with socialism and authoritarianism, but the ethics are still nearly as debatable.
Proponents of this program will of course say that the battle of the mind is nearly as important as the actual military battles on the ground in Iraq. Truth be told, there is a lot of merit to this argument. In fact, the battle of the mind is exponentially greater than any military engagement, and is one of the things that must be undertaken before the seeds of democracy will ever take root. Bush forgot this crucial point before deciding to mess with the Middle East in the first place. However, essentially "brainwashing" captive detainees seems so morally wrong, that what "good" could come from it is overshadowed entirely.
The same situation (to a lesser degree) was the case in A Clockwork Orange. For those that haven't read Anthony Burgess' book or seen the Kubrik film adaptation, the main character, Alex, is arrested by the police for murder and eventually placed in an experimental behavior modification program to extinguish his delinquent behavior. The program is a success, and Alex is "cured" of his bad behavior for the time being, but the obvious ethical questions of the procedure and general morality of the program is dubious.
Does the government have a moral imperative to influence a captive's mental state, against his will, if it serves the interests of the State?
It would be one thing to let "Western" values assimilate into Islamic culture through trade and other non-violent, voluntary relations. But this is far different from what the American military seems to be doing, even if the outcome is for "the greater good."
Posted by Andrew Davis at September 19, 2007 12:45 PM
Reader Comments:
I wonder if having Muslim clerics on the federal payroll also violates the separation of religion and state. It's a bit worrisome to think that some bureaucrat in the Pentagon is deciding which imams fit its definition of "moderate," and should therefore be allowed to teach at, essentially, a taxpayer-funded religious school.
..test..apparently the stiflers, filterers, editors, etceterats, are out and about this morning!.. >;o)
I have found Republicans a particularly stooooopid and/or hypocritical breed of Republicrat..And many of these monstrous gd fools fancy themselves as 'Christian?!'
As if it were Jesus the Mercenary, the Commando, The Fearsome, Sure Killer..instead of Jesus the Forgiver, The Wise Compassionate Peacemaker..
I would say these miserable stinking fools have confused Jesus the Christian with Moses the Jew..
..were it not that Moses taught 'one eye for one eye'..and these monstrous scumbags appear unsatiated after what, 50 'muslim' eyes for one 'christian'/"American" eye?
..You do the math, Republicrats..those of you capable.. >:0(
Amazing, I happen to be listening to an audio book of 1984. As soon as I saw "House of Wisdom" I thought of the Ministry of Love, Ministry of Plenty, etc.
The authoritarian/totalitarian nature of this Bush regime is scaring the hell out of me.
Thanks Walt. I have visited nolanchart a few times and find it to be entirely worthwhile. At one time I fancied myself a columnist, but with the ebb and flow of interest, I could not contribute regularly.
I have practiced my writing skills privatly and you can read some examples here (if you have time to kill).
http://hyper2.com/essays
Oh, boy, we're running re-education camps now. Anyways, I want to point out that you missed an opportunity to title your post, "An Iraqwork Orange".
This is an interesting and disturbing issue.
First, however, does anyone know what/how the U.S. assisted the Germans, Japanese and Italians following WWII with respect to teaching basic capitalism and republicanism and comparing the same with authoritarianism, communism, fascism and militarism? Is our government following the same model used then or is this a whole new ballgame?
Second, how is the Libertarian Party responding to this report? What is the Libertarian message here?
Thanks a bunch,
Clayton Gordon
Great historical question worthy of some investigation. I don't have a clue though.
I would like to relate a story to everyone involving me and my son.
Last night I was talking with my 9-year-old son. He has learned about government in school and understands the separation of powers. He knows Congress is legislative, the President is executive, and the courts are judicial. We were watching the local debate between mayoral candidates. At one point he said that he would like to be mayor someday. I told him that I hope when he grows up, whether he becomes Republican, Democrat, Libertarian, Communist, or anything else, that he would fight for personal freedom and privacy. I explained how President Bush has created several laws that trample those ideas. He questioned me how this was possible since the president is not supposed to make laws. I gave him examples how you only have to be SUSPECTED of being SYMPATHETIC to certain issues to have all your freedoms revoked. My son finally said, "at least next year we get to pick a new president." I agreed, but taught him about the national emergency powers Bush granted himself and told my son all Bush would have to do is invent an emergency and cancel the elections. At this point my son jumped up about to cry and wanted a place to hide saying "you're scaring me Dad!" The best I could do to reassure him was to say that there were millions of people that felt the same way I did. We would not let him get away with it. If Bush tried that, the people would make their own army and overthrow the government. My son felt better about that.
If it gets to that point I hope you're all with me. My son depends on you.
http://hyper2.com/pics/baseball/2007Cardinals/Ian/Ian-pitching002.jpg
(now you know why I am "Coach Jim")
I find this chilling.
On the surface, moderate Muslim clerics sent in to correct the thinking of radical Islam seems sane, even compassionate. It would be, had the subjects chosen it.
This reminds me of a particular scene in A Clockwork Orange (since it has been brought up), where a "rehabilitated" Alex is being paraded in front of bureaucrats to demonstrate his inability to commit violent or sexual acts in the very face of temptation (he becomes nauseaous, weak and suicidal). The prison chaplain breaks in and denounces the charade. "You have robbed him of all moral choice! He can only be good because you have forced him to do so, with this disgusting display".
The head of the program sneers at this, saying "Father, we are not interested in the 'whys', 'whats', and 'wherefores'. The point is that it works." The bureaucrats applaud and the reverend is dismissed.
As a Libertarian and a Catholic Christian, I am appalled at this reprogramming effort - that is what it is. It smacks of totalitarianism - the very concept we claim to be against as Americans. And it robs a person of the most precious gift we have as human beings - free will.
Pax,
TC
Tomcat, I totally agree with you. Free will seems to be the REAL enemy of the Bush administration.
Whoever we Libertarians nominate as our presidential candidate I hope they emphasize these doctrines in their platform
Privacy
Freedom
Liberty
Free Will
Individual Choice
Lowering the tax burden
1-5 are closely related, but not exactly the same thing.
TC WROTE: "As a Libertarian and a Catholic Christian, I am appalled at this reprogramming effort -"
LOL!..It seems our whole lives in Republicrat society are inundated with mostly mindless Republicrat 'reprogramming'/inculcation..nothing new here!..and why would foreigners be exempt from something even worse!?
..crissakes folks, they have us, practically, killing each other for federal reserve token$ when not one in a thousand even honestly understands what a federal reserve token is! ooga booga!.. .;0)
The ethics of this practice are "still nearly as debatable...as brainwashing people with socialism and authoritarianism"? Either they're debatable or they're not.
Apparently they are, or you wouldn't have written an article about such practices. The problem with said article is that is drips with concern for the "individual rights" of Iraqi citizens - especially Iraqi citizens who attacks Americans. These Iraqis, let alone any Iraqis, have no rights as individuals if their (even passive) existence facilitates aggression against America. The subtle egalitarianism running throughout your article is a dangerous concession to the moral inferiority of the rest of the world.
Now, with that said, I agree with you, this type of pscyhological indoctrination is an iffy waste of time - just like the entire war, and our entire government's involvement in the Middle-East is an iffy waste of time. You cannot force people to love liberty and democracy any more than you can force them to love fossil fuels and Coca-Cola. Instead of forcing people to love us, we should be "forcing" them to experience the consequences of their backwards cultures by ignoring them.
You should have just said that.
"You cannot force people to love liberty and democracy any more than you can force them to love fossil fuels and Coca-Cola."
One wonders why it appears so hard for some Republicrats to understand that most 'foreigners' are/would be repelled by George stinking Bush's, Rush stinking Limbaugh's, etc. god-damned Republicrat fools galore, notions of 'liberty' and 'democracy'..crissakes, even most Americans can just barely tolerate these monstrous Republicrat fools!..
Has the LP ever officially condemned Sharia Law?
Clark spewed: "crissakes, even most Americans can just barely tolerate these monstrous Republicrat fools!.."
Ooga booga, Clark, ooga booga.
"we should be "forcing" them to experience the consequences of their backwards cultures by ignoring them." ....
Well said Grant. Short and to the point.
I guess we haven't repudiated Sharia Law yet. Hopefully we'll get around to it before a dirty bomb goes off in an Americna City. How about Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi picking last week to censure our Turkish Allies for the 1901 Massacre of Armenians by the Ottoman Empire? What great timing? How isn't that treason?
| 
I wonder if having Muslim clerics on the federal payroll also violates the separation of religion and state. It's a bit worrisome to think that some bureaucrat in the Pentagon is deciding which imams fit its definition of "moderate," and should therefore be allowed to teach at, essentially, a taxpayer-funded religious school.
Posted by: Mark at September 19, 2007 07:15 PM