To reason is treason

These words are not mine. They come out of a sentence of Dr. James Hamilton, a former Stanford Medical School psychiatrist who was actively involved with many secretly funded researches into the human mind in the middle part of the last century. Here is the longer version. “Once at war, to reason is treason.” Most intelligence set ups believe in this dictum implicitly. In fact most people under threat of war or physical attack would tend to do so. Every one wages an unseen battle within themselves most of the time. This has mostly to do with a conflict between the taught version of reality and the personally experienced one. This is the case with nations too. A nation is nothing but a few individuals in power, whether it is called a democracy or a totalitarian system. The myth of democracy has iniquitously led people into traps. They are supplied with a false sense of power and prominence which they know within their heart to be far removed from the truth. Look at the word “treason”. The traitor is one who acts against the country or a set of beliefs or a cause. But who determines the status of a traitor? Both Galileo and Bruno were considered traitors against the Church. Bruno was burned at the stake and Galileo, being sensual recanted. Did the common church goer or believer take part in the decision? There are still Bruno’s and Galileo’s amongst us. One would rather burn to death than tell a falsehood. The other, buckling under pressure would probably become an instrument in the hands of those in control. Treason is tool by which many things get done. It is an effective argument to convince the less aware about anti national/social/groupist potentials of the expendable section of the population. Once this argument is mooted our patriot would stop thinking, because to reason is treason. If this behavior has the sanction of authority it becomes more than a dictum, it becomes law. This is the basic philosophy of the security freak in governments.

What is more threatening, the actual physical combat or the fear of an impending conflict? Every one worth their beans would truthfully admit that it is the later. Fear is a dangerous phenomenon, whether experienced by one person or by the group-let us say a nation. It makes people/nations do all sort of things. The thoughts of treason stems from subconscious feelings of insecurity, I have always thought that it is a residue of our past. A left over of our struggles to survive in a strange and unstable world filled with all sorts of dangers. But fear interestingly always is future-stricken, that is, it is not about what is there in the present that people worry about but what would happen in the next moment/day/week/year! Though in practical life future does figure somewhat in controlling our actions in a constructive manner, the sense of impending doom cripples us psycho somatically. It dwindle our external and internal resources. Look at the manner in which the
erst while USSR was affected in the cold war. Fear made them careless, economically incompetent and led to their final fall. I may have reservations about the efficacy of the socialistic structure of government, but that does not prevent me from saying that the demise of the USSR was the saddest political event in modern history. It took out the element of balance from global politics. It left the world to American hegemony.

But the altered political scenario seems to have affected the US very little. Their penchant for pursuing global power politics has gone into a higher gear if anything. To a careful observer it is evident that the remaining superpower is also struggling to cope with the effects of massive expenditure during the cold war. Other less militarily minded economic powers have left them dry in most of the other areas of technology and economical stability. No wonder the current government in the US is trying to turn its people’s attention to other subjects like terrorism, drug mafia and the middle east etc.. This is a tricky situation. When a nation as powerful as the US starts to fear the future it can be deadly. There is a massive influx of products and services into the country. US industries are finding it hard to compete with them. There is large scale unemployment and under employment in the US according to the media. The only area of expertise in which they are still supreme is military research. All the money put in to the research should bring in some returns, should it not?

How would you do it? Use your expertise. Bring in revenue from your conquests. Go for places which have an abundant supply of natural resources, bring them under your control. But there is a hitch. These coveted places have governments, some have even elected governments. You can’t declare war on them just like that. You need a pretext. Here is where years of military intelligence experience and counter intelligence experience and mechanism of propaganda developed over those years come into play. Label them as sponsors of terrorism and producers of biological weapons. The US has a responsibility towards the world. We have a duty to clean the world up of all its rubbish. Well on the side lines if we benefit from it a little none can complain, for policing is an expensive business. But what if the rest of the world reasons otherwise, well to reason is treason, remember. To reason against the world police is high treason.

Let us hope that the above scenario is not pursued to its full by the US. They might stick to the invisible methods of warfare for most part. They have satellites and surveillance equipment to do that. As these are in place there is only the cost of maintenance. This has an added advantage. It does not expose the personnel to hazardous situations. May be the leaders of other nations can be mind controlled to do their bidding, that is, if they do not have more advanced techniques of mind control by now! If that is the case I would not like to predict the out come. It could be pretty scary.