‘Vote for insanity, you know it makes sense’ – Lord Sutch
Between the rock and the hard place
Mohammed Adamu
‘Whoever emerges President of the United States of America, will continue to ride roughshod over both the written and the unwritten rules of international law’
The expression ‘between Scylla and Charybdis’ came from the personification of two phenomenal hazards of navigation, both occurring off Italy’s narrow straits of Messina: one hazard named ‘Scylla’ was a ‘rock’ dangerously positioned against the ease of marine movement; the other named ‘Charybdis’ was a freak of perilous ‘whirlpool’ on the opposite side of Scylla and equally as threatening to sea-going vessels. Thus the expression ‘caught between Scylla and Charybdis’ is to face a ‘choice’ between two equally-threatening perils; -or as we say today, to be between the ‘devil’ and the ‘deep blue sea’.
And this is exactly what a ‘Trump-Hilary’ contest for the American presidency offers the American electorates –a tough ‘choice’ between a hazardous ‘Scylla’ capable of smashing the ‘Mayflower’ and a tempestuous ‘Charybdis’ rearing to sink it even into deeper waters. There is more to ‘fear’ than ‘cheer’ in the dangerous ‘choice’ between a Trump or a Hilary; or should we say between a barefaced-lying, rabidly bigoted xenophobic out to bite the world, and a stealthily hawkish, two-faced, she-devil waiting to mount chivalry charge on the world.
For the Americans, there is not the luxury even of settling even for that proverbial ‘lesser evil’ -because in reality each of the two ‘evils’ is equally as fiendish. In fact there is no better example of the universal un-redeeming power of ‘democracy’ than the ‘no-choice’ Trump-Hilary contest which has now poignantly exposed the ‘venomous beauty’ of the democratic process -which manifests ironically not in the practical solution it provides to the problems of society, but in the mere fact that it offers society the ‘freedom’ to decide who governs its affairs.
But of what value is the democratic ‘right’ to choose who governs the affairs of man when that ‘choice’ is strictly between the ‘rock’ and the typical ‘hard place’? It amounts to a Hobson’s choice if the electorate must choose between two equally ‘bad’ candidates. ‘Hobson’s choice’ originated from Thomas Hobson, a 15th century English horse lender who insisted his clients must take the horse nearest the stable door or none at all. Thus the metaphor Hobson’s choice came to be known as virtually no option at all. And which virtually is what the Americans face today: settling for a bitchy candidate high on the hormones of war, or an insane grandstanding son-of-a-bitch waiting to lay his hands on America’s nukes!
The Americans are not having to choose between a ‘republican’ and a ‘democrat’, because between Trump and Hilary what we have competing for votes are not the personifications of ‘republican’ or ‘democratic’ ideals. Nor are Americans having to choose between ‘good’ and ‘bad’ candidate, because no matter how America and the world are divided over Trump and Hilary, at least they are unanimous on one thing, namely that both of them are debouched –morally and otherwise. Besides having called each other ‘devil’, both of them can also be said to agree on their fiendish reputation. And between the he-said-she-said, the one thing left un-said is that Trump and Hilary cannot wait to get their hands on America’s instruments of offense to harm the world.
The world has known Hilary through and through. Because she had been both senator and Secretary of State before now. And her roles in those positions were less than savoury –to say the least. She had supported the illegal war in Iraq which had given birth to ISIS; and she had a hand in both the destruction of Libya and now Syria. The world knows Trump too. Not because there is a democratic credential to his less than savoury, capitalistic past, but because Trump himself has said it, he will hurt the world no less than Hilary has, or could.
And so the Trump-Hilary conundrum is not a case of the ‘devil’ we know –Hilary- being better than the ‘angel’ we do not –Trump; rather it is a case of the ‘she-devil’ we know who already has the blood of innocents on her hand, and the ‘he-devil’ we are getting to know –Trump, who is itching to have the blood of innocents on his hands! The ship of the American state is between the ‘devil’ and the ‘deep blue’ sea. Something has to give. Soon!
Simply voting ‘freely and fairly’ is merely a non-tangible dividend of democracy. It only confirms the ‘democratic credentials’ of a nation. It does not prove the ‘justness’ or the ‘providence’ inherent in the system. The voice of the majority they say is not necessarily a proof of justice.
Nor does voting ‘freely and fairly’ alone necessarily take a nation out of harm’s way. In fact sometimes it is voting ‘freely’ and ‘fairly’ that puts a nation right in the way of harm! Often people have either voted ‘freely’ and ‘fairly’ to elect the ‘wrong’ candidates or the ‘democratic process’ itself offers them no alternative to choosing between fiercely competing evils.
Postscript
Head or tail, it matters not!
But let’s face it, whether Trump or Hilary wins the next presidential election, one thing is certain: that America will continue to be ruled not by elected politicians, as the impression is falsely given, but by covert non-democratic security institutions who –behind Washington’s closed doors- will continue to determine how America makes her living: by might not by right; and by the promotion of a defective merchandize, democracy as a decoy to entrench an unjust economic system.
Whether Trump or Hilary wins the next presidential election, democracy especially in the rest of the back countries of the world, will continue to be not really about ‘good governance’, but about continued devotion to ‘democracy’ and the ‘democratic process’. It will not matter whether poor nations feed or starve as long as they remain democratic.
Notwithstanding who wins between Trump and Hilary, the ‘right’ of ‘might’ in international politics will continue to take precedence over both ‘legal’ and ‘moral’ imperatives. America, in all her dealings with the rest of the world, will continue to keep no ‘permanent friends’ or ‘permanent enemies’; but she will be more determined even to assert the ‘permanence’ only of her ‘interests’. Whoever emerges President of the United States of America, will continue to ride roughshod over both the written and the unwritten rules of international law.
The veritable feature of America’s foreign policy will continue to be ‘global war’. America will continue to use her military might to perpetrate and to perpetuate injustice around the world. Injustice around the world will continue to breed terrorism; and terrorism by making the world insecure will continue to legitimize the need to curtail the freedom and liberty of the people –in their movements, in their transaction, in their contacts and in their communications; until the ultimate ‘Security State’ is created, leading to the ‘jackbooted, Policed State’ of George Orwell’s fictional book ‘1984’, in which we all will be walking ‘electronic chips’ watched wherever we are by ‘Big Brother’.
Notwithstanding who wins the American Presidency between Trump and Hilary, the agenda for a ‘Pax-America’ will not suffer delay!
Leave a Reply