.

.

.

.

. .

 .

 .

The Power of Nightmares: The Rise of the Politics of Fear, 3-part BBC 4 presentation by Adam Curtis. [From the Amazon.com blurb:] 

"This film explores the origins in the 1940s and 50s of Islamic Fundamentalism in the Middle East and Neoconservatism in America, the parallels between these movements, and their effect on the world today. From the introduction to Part 1: 
'Both [the Islamists and Neoconservatives] were idealists who were born out of the failure of the liberal dream to build a better world. And both had a very similar explanation for what caused that failure. These two groups have changed the world, but not in the way that either intended. Together, they created today’s nightmare vision of a secret, organized evil that threatens the world. A fantasy that politicians then found restored their power and authority in a disillusioned age. And those with the darkest fears became the most powerful.' The Power of Nightmares: Baby It's Cold Outside"

More than the clash of fundamentalisms or religious True Believers (both Islamic and Christian), Curtis's powerful documentary explores the outcomes of a scary-world perspective on social systems as DQ and ER impact each other. By delving into the (Leo) Straussian requisite of a grand unifying mythology to pull a people together, along with the use of demon-making and common enemy approaches, the work helps clarify why many of the Cold War players and their mindsets are still prominent in global politics, the worst of Reaganism reborn with regime Bush II. He points out how both the Americans and the Islamicists claimed credit for collapsing the U.S.S.R., whereas it was the Soviet system's own internal dysfunction which made it impossible for Gorbachev or anyone else to salvage it - time simply ran out on a model history had passed. 

While readily admitting the serious threat of terrorism as a tactical choice of angry and frustrated groups, Curtis discounts the idea that a tightly structured Al Qaeda, a central tenet of the 'war on terrorism,' existed when the 'war' was declared. (A note from the documentarian appears in front of the latest release of this 2004 production acknowledging the London transport bombings and proposing that while the event was terrible, it does nothing to diminish his case.) The well-connected, closely coordinated global organization was, he argues, a sham which has been legitimized by the very rhetoric exploiting it for political advantage. In this light, attacks on a global network of finance and planning only serve to realize it, and simultaneously do little to dilute a meme but may, in fact, enhance and distribute it. 

Curtis proposes that the meme of Al Qaeda is an American creation, largely a myth built for pursuit of criminal charges in the 1990's and subsequently adopted by U.S. neocons in need of a sharply-defined enemy on which to focus. Osama bin Laden and other violent Islamic revivalists have latched onto it since 9/11 and exploited the name to look far more powerful than they are. The film portrays the elusive bin Laden as more of an ideologue backer and financier than movement mastermind, part of a lengthy history going back to the Muslim Brotherhood in the 1920's and focusing with his virtual mentor, the Egyptian Islamicist and writer Sayyid Qutb, who was active in the mid-20^th century in condemning "pagan ignorance" and Western secularism. The meme is embodied in the dream of a Salafi State, especially the Jihadi one.

The 'leadership', according to Curtis, is more ideological and symbolic for propaganda and rallying than command-and-control. However, Al Qaeda has become a widely-recognized flag of convenience for people angry at what they consider decadent Western ideologies, those determined to impose Islamist rule in their own states, and/or those frustrated by what they see as corrupt regimes beyond hope of peaceful reform. For them, it is a rallying point and label for a loosely-woven confederacy. For their opponents, it is the consolidating embodiment of 'the enemy they' which polar thinkers require to justify their singular good versus evil arguments. Thus, Al Qaeda in now a readily available brand for terrorists to adopt and for anti-terrorists to rally against. 

The film explores how DQ-centered absolutists (using SD terms) come first to view those who believe other than their way as evil and threatening to their truth. They then extend that perception of evilness onto their own people who do not toe the line well enough because they are obviously contaminated by evil influences since they are not part of the movement. That stretch makes 'innocent' civilians acceptable targets because their disengagement makes them complicit with the ways of evil, thus not innocent at all. Finally, the demonization extends to colleagues within the movement itself who deviate even slightly from 'the truth' as the ideologue alone can see it. It is the early phases of this authoritarian aggressiveness which stand as great threats to the world. 

Even before 9/11, manipulators anxious to exploit popular emotions 'took arms against this sea of troubles and, by opposing,' have actually expanded rather than ended them. Certainly the Clinton administration had a big hand in feeding the growth of this memetic monster, though it has come to maturity under Bush. The fault, according to Curtis, lies with failed liberal policies which catalyzed extremists on the right as well as the left in a regressive search. He cuts through the excuses and the fog of 'war' to show how these diversions from the complex nature of today's politics offer a false simplicity, one far easier to market as a justification for state controls and intrusions on civil liberties. Thus, central governments consolidate control in the name of 'democracy' by using omnipresent terrorists and the threat of perpetual war as justification. At the same time, the threat of loosely connected groups and even individuals doing horrific things to get attention and move policy does exist. Unfortunately, there is little to suggest a change of course, or to indicate more complex thinking in the corridors of nightmare-driven power.

[The anti-Western sentiment is explained clearly in the small and powerful book, Occidentalism: The West in the Eyes of Its Enemies by Ian Buruma and Avishai Margalit, Penguin, 2004]