Could not the unreason of political reason be linked to myth?
If politics is about fear of violent destruction (death) then how does the state hold sway in society. I kept on thinking about that as I walked the long corridors of federal parliament late at night. It was eerie.
I was acutely aware of being a part of a political machine---its Hobbesian imagery I know. That was how I experienced it.
I asked myself: 'How does this conservative government of John Howard rule'? How is it able to stay in power in a liberal democracy.
It was not by the sword since it was a federal liberal democracy. Yet it ruled---retained power---by activating fear of violent death from terrorists whom, it warned, could strike anytime, anywhere. This way of ruling the citizenry was far more obvious with the imperial Bush presidency in the US. They have terror alerts being announced all the time.
The fear of violent death that was so activated has a sublimal undercurrent---the emotion of terror.
How then did it govern?
Through myth. Myth held things together. That is all that I could come up with. Yeah I know its Hobbes again.
The state was a some creaky machinery in the service of ensuring the physical protection of the governed. The fear created was both real (the Bali bombings) and mythic (terrorist cells are everywhere in the body politic).
What then was the myth? Terror? Or Absolute Terror
That was where I got stuck. I then went about doing the job I had been contracted to do.
Posted by Gary Sauer-Thompson at April 6, 2004 11:27 PM | TrackBackNew comment
Posted by: jwl on April 6, 2004 11:41 PM