It was six folk of the western world
to hand wringing and self-congratulation much inclined,
who went to see the famine
though all of them were blind,
so that each by self-flagellation
might satisfy his ego.
The first approached the famine, and, whilst supplying arms,
and dropping BOMBS and proclaiming a “spectacular military success” began to bawl:
“We’re going to get that taken care of; a lot of people are starving!”
and it was taken care of by privateers, drones and hundreds of deaths
when even animals do not kill at the waterside
The second cried: “Israel has a right to self-defence”
and proclaiming weapon sales should not be banned
before wringing her hands and acknowledging that blocking aid and causing famine
was abhorrent and outrageous
The third surveyed the famine,
While boosting defence spending to 5% GDP to please “daddy”
and of emaciated and starving children
issued a strongly worded statement
deploring the humanitarian crisis
The fourth reached out his eager hand,
and expressed “deep concern” whilst banning Palestine Action
and added “We will not stand by while the Netanyahu Government pursues these egregious actions“
before doing absolutely nothing
The fifth, who chanced to threaten sanctions
but no change to his full support
was met with charges of an “untenable crusade against the Jewish state”
and meekly said no more
The sixth no sooner had begun the famine to discuss,
than claimed that all were to blame and not Israel alone
and lamely lectured that they expected better
for those “whose suffering we see”
And so these folk of the western world, disputed loud and long,
each in their own opinion, exceeding stiff and strong,
Though each was not moved to act at all, and all were in the wrong!
For they do not act
but simply talk
with words that are not worthy of weasels
Like an Orwellian nightmare, their identification with a single nation
whom they arm and fund
placing that nation on a pedestal, beyond good and evil
recognizing no other loyalty,
seeking to silence any
who break with that orthodoxy
when to like a post on social media
leads to summary dismissal
irrespective of the truth
So, oft in theologic wars, the disputants, I ween,
tread on in utter ignorance, of what they even mean,
and prate about the problem, not one of them can see
that they and each of them are also colonisers
guilty of genocide
enablers of the present perpetrators
as they acknowledge on their behalf
And like groomed children, they bow before “daddy”
The leader of “the world’s number one state sponsor of terror “
and, yet again, stand and watch an engineered catastrophe
they helped create
and could stop if they so desired
I acknowledge John Godfrey Saxe’s “The Blind Men and the Elephant” which is modified above, George Orwell’s “Notes on Nationalism” and the courage of those who speak truth to power.
Google AI Summary of Orwell’s “Notes on Nationalism”1 (and if Orwell could see it and articulate it 80 years ago, why are we so wilfully blind)
George Orwell’s “Notes on Nationalism” analyses the concept of nationalism as an intense, often irrational, devotion to a group or cause, extending beyond mere patriotism to encompass ideologies, religions, and even abstract ideas. It highlights how this devotion can lead to a willingness to excuse or even condone actions by one’s own group that would be condemned in others, demonstrating a lack of critical self-reflection. Orwell identifies different forms of nationalism, including positive, negative, and transferred nationalism, and examines how it can manifest in various political and social contexts.
Key points from Orwell’s analysis:
- Nationalism as a form of loyalty:
Orwell defines nationalism as identifying oneself with a single group, placing it above good and evil, and prioritizing its interests above all else.
- Beyond the nation-state:
While often associated with nations, nationalism can extend to other groups, such as political parties, religions, or even abstract ideas.
- Lack of self-criticism:
Nationalism can lead to a blindness to the failings of one’s own group or cause, making it difficult to engage in objective analysis or criticism.
- “Our side” bias:
Nationalism fosters a tendency to excuse or justify actions taken by one’s own group, even if those actions are morally questionable or inconsistent with previous positions.
- Different forms of nationalism:
Orwell distinguishes between positive nationalism (promoting one’s own group) and negative nationalism (hostility towards other groups).
- Transferred nationalism:
Nationalism can be transferred to ideologies or groups that are not explicitly nationalistic, leading to a similar kind of devotion and justification.
- Examples:
Orwell uses examples like Communism, Zionism, and even pacifism to illustrate how these ideologies can exhibit nationalistic tendencies.
In essence, Orwell’s “Notes on Nationalism” is a warning against the dangers of uncritical loyalty and the potential for even well-intentioned groups to be swayed by nationalistic fervour, leading to harmful consequences
“If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, looks like a duck, and you think it’s a pig, it’s a pig”
Gloria Steinem
Footnotes
- Published in Polemic October 1945 ↩︎
