Kurdish QuestionDisillusioned Rudeboys: Jihadi Recruits And The Machine Of CapitalismThis talk was first given at:'Rojava Revolution: Kobane, Resistance and Radical Democracy 'On the Nov 2nd 2014 at Halkevi Community Centre in Dalston, London.
Imagine a small village with an enormous factory making many different products and generating huge amounts of money for the owners. If you walked around the factory all you would see are big shiny bits of metal grinding along efficiently and of course people of the village mindlessly doing their bit in the production line, they don't even know what they are making. Then imagine that among the products being made in the factory were instruments of torture which are to be used on anyone who tries to damage the factory.
Well, that village is the global economy, that machine is capitalism, those factory workers are us, and those instruments of torture are ISIS.
My aim in this talk is to explain how ISIS recruits are manufactured then used as a tool not just of the West but of our global economic system, and how a combination of abjection and perversion is manipulated to serve its ultimate ends. ISIS are hench men of something far more subtle, pervasive and enduring than fundamentalist Islam.
The threat of the Jihadi recruit sitting on the bus beside us is now not just the territory of Daily Mail headlines. The ISIS recruiting figures in the West alone are staggering and point to a profound disfunction in our so called liberal democracy. It cannot be that religious ideology just crept in and poisoned these men, something far more complex is happening.
It has its roots in the socialising of young men into a society where their basic instincts are frustrated and their conception of masculinity is forged in an environment of despair. How do we come to any useful psychosocial analysis of the ISIS mentality and not just disappear into academic obscurity while real people are chopping real heads off, raping and murdering thousands in the name of religious ideology?
It’s not enough to do a theological critique of Islamic fundamentalism. As we have seen, this polarised debate between the “rational, enlightened, scientific” mind as spearheaded by Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris and provocative pundits such as Bill Maher has done nothing to improve the situation. Instead it has further cemented the deadlocked orientalist paradigm of the Western “progressive liberal” mind-set versus “antiquated religious” Middle - Eastern culture, leaving us with a misunderstanding and misrepresentation of the genuine and complex causes of the problem.
Surely an understanding of the socio-political conditions and therefore a psychoanalytic grasp of the Jihadi mind-set, that is clearly not just a temporary anomalous aberration, is necessary if we are to come close to facing the issue.
Watching any of the countless ISIS recruitment videos available online, the first impression is of incredulity; this is a young disillusioned teenager who doesn’t really know what he’s saying. Then the realization comes; the murderous claims to ruthless and brutal domination of all who stand in their way are not just empty threats borne of teenage rebellion, but a manifesto of despair.
Listening to the familiar London “street” inflections of the British recruits gives a chilling uncanny feeling. We know these young men, they are from our streets. How did they come to this? It’s not a case of a remote “foreigner” whose culture and mentality we could never possibly grasp.
No, this is our culture. This is our problem.
What is the appeal of The Islamic State for these young men? How did they become so detached from any sense of identification with what we would call modern humanistic conceptions of personhood? How are they capable of de-humanizing women to such a degree that they can be sold as sex-slaves chained together in a cage like animals? Unfortunately there is a connection between the cultural environment even here in Britain and their extremist actions far too important to ignore.
When youth culture abounds with slogans and pop songs that deify money -baseball caps emblazoned with CASH IS KING, music celebrating and glorifying pure greed and excess, and of course sexual exploitation of women- is it a surprise that the more nuanced facets of young men’s personalities are not being developed? When young men are growing up without any sense of purpose outside of a strictly patriarchal, profit driven environment, what can they aspire to be other than rich, aggressively powerful and sexually potent? Young women too become complicit in the sexualisation and monetization of their worth when that’s all they are offered.
Of course the problem with the capitalist model is, apart from being fundamentally corrupting, it’s a impossible pot of gold at the end of the rainbow. Those ideals that that we are compelled to pursue personal happiness, wealth, and individual freedom are unattainable to the 99%. Only the 1% can actually reap the benefits of this mindless striving for neo liberal self-fulfilment, whilst watching the rest of us scrabble about in the dream of one day “making it”. Making what is the question?
It seems now even feminism has been co-opted to the capitalist project; if you are not a ruthless moneymaking, ball-breaking, sex-bomb a la Beyoncé, you’re not a feminist!
So what parallel is to be drawn here? If we are to boil it down to its most essential ideological grains, as philosopher Catherine Mackinnon says ;
“Sexuality is to feminism, what work is to Marxism, that which is most one’s own, yet most taken away.”
The colonization of women’s sexuality that brutally misogynist culture enacts is the ultimate and mortifying expression of the alienation of the fruits of the work from the worker that capitalism engenders.
In order to better understand the link between the misogyny and indeed misanthropy of both fundamentalist Islam and Western hedonistic individualist capitalism, it’s necessary to look at the reflexive relationship between the cultural ideology at work and the formation of the unconscious in the male psyche at both ends of the spectrum.
First let’s ask; what is the implicit status of women in the Western symbolic order?
In the midst of a femicide and mass rape by ISIS as we saw inflicted on the Kurdish Yezidi community of Iraq in September, the Western reaction to this found its expression in the supplications of a young, rich, famous and beautiful actress appearing in the UN to ask men politely to join in the fight for “equality”. Emma Watson’s impassioned speech for the HE4SHE campaign barely made reference to the atrocities against women that were going on outside of her cosseted world, rather the emphasis was on not scaring men off with the dirty “F” word. Feminism, that is.
She asked with perfectly poised indignation, why she should be paid less than her male counterparts for her next multi million pound movie deal. The reference to her distress at being sexualised by the media from a young age, was particularly significant, since sexualisation of young actresses is the life blood of her profession and her industry at large. We are forced to ask; who consented to this? Her parents? Her agent? Can she really regret all those half naked photos that catapulted her to fame ? Or is her image now more profitable if it ascribes to the buttoned up “thinking man’s totty” trope? Furthermore, perhaps most pitifully, much was made of the fact that men too suffer from the effects of gender inequality, hence for this reason, Miss Watson explains to us, it must be in their interest to care.
Obviously the bitter pill of feminism isn’t palatable unless administered in capitalist friendly doses that don’t upset the digestive tract of the machine. Emma Watson may give the illusion of waking women up to gender inequality, but all she really serves to do is reinforce the accepted norms of who can speak out about what, and how they are permitted to do so. I’m afraid she speaks not for equality but for the maintenance of hegemony. She is white, educated, rich and famous. She must at all costs protect the interests of those like her and the industries that thrive off the permutation of her image.
Of course It’s not Emma Watson’s “fault”, and you may ask why she is relevant, but the meta-narrative functioning here is crucial. We must examine the relation between the symbolic histories at work (the set of explicit, mythical narratives and ideologico- ethical prescriptions that constitute the traditions of a community) and what philosopher and psychoanalyst Slavoj Ẑiẑek would call its “obscene underside”;
“the un-acknowledgeable “spectral” fantasmatic secret history that actually sustains the explicit symbolic tradition but has to remain foreclosed if it is to be operative”.2
In other words; what are our cultural codes of accepted behaviour reliant upon in order for their transgressions to be measured? How does the socio-sexual world maintain its distinctions between the explicitly forbidden and the implicitly foreclosed? What are the presuppositions that we have made about female sexuality that give rise to both its excessive exploitation and its fervent denial?
Whilst on the surface of society, we attempt to maintain ideas of “family values” and the healthy normative institution of marital sex, porn culture is at an all -time high. Studies are being carried out on the neurological changes happening in young men’s brains who’ve had excessive exposure to pornographic material, and there is a clear and deeply sad crisis of teenage sexuality happening due to the pornification of the female image. The legacy of such easy access to instant gratification we are yet to see in the coming generations. But what we can see so far is the effect this proliferation of porn and vice culture has been having on the economy; and guess what, it’s a good one.
For the first time the Office of National Statistics are measuring the value to the UK economy of sex work and drug dealing – and have discovered prostitution and drugs trade make roughly the same contribution as farming – and only slightly less than book and newspaper publishers added together. They found in 2009, illegal drugs and prostitution boosted the economy by £9.7bn – equal to 0.7% of gross domestic product.
Clearly the cycle of sexual exploitation and the horrors of drug addiction are highly beneficial to the capitalist agenda even though the government would have you believe otherwise.
Unfortunately though, this deception is not something merely imposed on us from outside, there is a much more fundamental internal process going on.
So how do we sustain this contradiction? Surely the appearance of normative values are only possible through a shared agreement of self - deception? We agree to hide the true nature of our desires in order not only to maintain the social order but, in the act of their foreclosure, to give life to these desires themselves. What would sex be if it were not forbidden? This is almost a truism too obvious to mention but by examining the mechanics of such a fundamental feature of human life we can begin to understand how the engine of ideology is run, and what happens when the presuppositions of certain ideologies become so imbedded as to be invisible.
Every woman knows that even in today’s liberal society to lay claim to a sexual appetite let alone to admit to indulgence in recreational sex with multiple partners is still a transgressive act. Those that do freely profess such liberation do so in the knowledge that they are making a political statement for feminism, whether explicitly saying so or not.
Whereas, of course for men, the expected norm is sexual promiscuity and an unquenchable libido. We don’t have to burrow very deep into the female psyche to find that this reticence is built on a myth about the inherent chastity of female sexuality. However, the ideologically brain washed among us need only understand the dynamics of porn to see the truth behind the lie. Women in porn are un-tameable, voraciously sexual beings who are in a constant state of arousal and will find any opportunity to perform sex acts for man, woman, or beast.
Whilst I’m not suggesting this is literally the case, the truth of the matter resides not in the actual representations of the women on film but in their indelible place in the male psyche. The obsession with the overtly sexual woman, is not an invention of men, rather it is a manifestation of what the psychoanalyst Jacques Lacan would term the “Real”; the truth too awful and threatening to face in the symbolic order that therefore is converted into a foreclosed fantasy to enable male sexual and economic domination to continue.
Once we recognise the dynamics of sexuality as represented in the unconscious symbolic order we can begin to get a picture of the systems of thought that are “erected” on their foundation. Since it is around this fundamental power relation of the sexual drama that cultures are formed. So we have to ask; if fundamentalist Islam works so hard at supressing female sexuality and Western neo liberal culture works so hard to exploit it, are they not just two sides of the same coin?
I’m afraid to say my reaction to a women in a full burqa in the height of summer is the same as when I see a clearly uncomfortable woman hobbling around in stiletto- stripper shoes and a mini skirt in mid-winter; my first thought is- you are oppressed.
As we know fundamentalist Islam (like all monotheistic religions) is built on the subjugation of women, and the manipulation of their sexuality to maintain the patriarchal order. But if you asked the faithful why they adhere to this, they don’t need to explain it; women are designated this role simply because Allah wills it so. Likewise the Western woman sees her choice of provocative and restrictive clothing as the ultimate expression of her liberty, nothing to do with the satisfaction of a male fantasy or the commodification of her body.
Let us now draw on Lacan’s formulation of perversion to explain this in psychoanalytic terms:
"Strictly speaking, perversion is an inverted effect of the phantasy. It is the subject who determines himself as an object, in his encounter with the division of subjectivity…It is in so far as the subject makes himself the object of another will that the sado-masochistic drive not only closes up, but constitutes itself…the sadist himself occupies the place of the object, but without knowing it, to the benefit of the another, for whose jouissance he exercises his action as sadistic pervert."3
So as Slavoj Ẑiẑek points out, a pervert is not simply someone who likes to indulge in sickening or transgressive acts, rather he is someone for whom his will is given over to what would be called in Lacanian terms that of the “big Other”.
The extreme effects of such perversion we are witnessing now in Syria. The ISIS member gives over his will to that of the will of Allah, in a sense he is not responsible for his actions rather he merely follows the injunctions of his master. His acts of vile brutality become not free acts of malicious intent but the fulfilling of a duty to a will infinitely wiser and more powerful than his own. He has in effect, no choice and is thus exonerated.
Again where is the Western corollary to this behaviour? Surely in the murderous military actions and (inactions), first of president Bush in the “holy” war with Iraq, and now continued with the Obama administration which purports to act in the interests of the victims of the massacre in Iraq and now Syria, but in fact whose military interdictions have been purely in order to serve the “big Other” of capitalism. If this were not the case how could their inaction in the face of a genocide in the region been legitimised by the words of John Kerry as follows:
“Kobane does not define the strategy for the coalition in respect to Daesh (ISIS) Kobane is one community and it is a tragedy what is happening there. And we do not diminish that….. where we ought to be focusing first…is in Iraq.” 4
So what do we understand from this? What could be the higher purpose than to save thousands from massacre? It’s obviousness has become its justification; the corporate multinational agenda of finance capital is the most decisive factor in all acts of contemporary war. This is what removes the ethical obligation from the shoulders of John Kerry and the Obama administration. The unflinching obedience of this greater force has become ingrained in the national consciousness to such an extent that we in the Western “enlightened” world can watch the most horrific torment of a community of people and put it down to collateral damage in the pursuit of the higher goal; the will of the “big Other”; capitalism. This is perversion at work.
The mechanism that sustains this process is the same ideological technique at work in the Western neo- liberals as in the Fundamentalist Islamic State.
So ISIS is evil, this we know, but it is evil legitimised by the willingness to let it flourish providing it does not upset the hegemonic order of capitalism. Of course this makes the conflict of East and West, not a battle but a dialectic. Both sides are slaves to a greater power.
So the ISIS recruits in the videos, who are they? Are they really that remote from the West? Or do they just show us how fragile the human mind is when put under certain conditions. We live in a system that interpellates young men into an ideology that rewards its most ruthless, avaricious and bellicose qualities. Is it not a foregone conclusion that on the periphery of society, the most disenfranchised and disillusioned members will be swept up by the allure of something which promises to repay them most handsomely for such talents, whilst co-opting them to the greater capitalist project? That’s the genius of capitalism, it’s so called enemies do all it’s dirty work freely and willingly.
http://kurdishquestion.com/insight-rese ... alism.htmlAnthea: Glad I did not bother to go