Pour mes lecteurs francophones : mon ami Ron m’a suggéré de publier certains de mes posts en anglais afin d’élargir mon audience… Et comme Ron a pris la peine de traduire ce post, je ne pouvais qu’aller de l’avant pour l’en remercier !
====
It’s been some time since I made a rule for myself; not to immediately react to current events, even if they stir my emotion. Therefore, after everything that happened in Paris last week, I let a week slide by before wanting to write about this tragedy.
And then a friend emailed me, and I thought it might be interesting to share our thoughts with you (his email is in italics and all of the rest is mine).
After noting the events of last week, I noted some similarities between what has happened after the tragedy of 9/11 and the attacks on November 21 in Paris. In both instances, laws were passed quickly,“ for security”, without involving the majority of the citizens. These laws have revolved around using the military, even if it is not certain about the effects of these actions (for instance, the current bombardments have had only a limited effect on ISSIS).
Indeed, the similarities are startling. One thing seems clear, however, governments rule by emotion. Shocking emotional events occur, some more intense than others, some more tragic than others. But the public’s opinion remains hypnotized by the event that has happened, until suddenly, it seems, the crowd will accept almost anything.
Governing by emotional response, is certainly not new (take the US response after Pearl Harbor). When a serious event occurs, then people want something done, now! Therefore, it is necessary to go and do something, even if nothing is certain (refer to the article by Cringely).
For instance, after 9/11, the number of people joining the armed services markedly increased. And some have noted that the discussions of M. Holland are similar to the discussions of George Bush after 9/11. And I am totally surprised by the number of people commenting in LeMonde (popular French newspaper) writing that the security measures (laws) have gone too far.
This talk has even expanded to the U.S. There have been requests to limit the use of encrypting electronic messaging (actually over and over again) or the crazy talk of Trump, campaigning about stopping the immigration of all Muslims into the United States. And then the bombing of ISIS, this has been really emphasized. The costs are huge, while the true effect is much more limited. But this action gives the impression that one is doing something.
It is important to note that our comments do not mean, in any way, justification or support of these crazy acts. But simply, we are disappointed to see that after these tragic events occur, they are used to manipulate people. Of course it is necessary to react and defend oneself, but it is very important how one reacts and not to react too quickly. But to go and bomb everything, without a clear, realistic and solid strategy, without understanding the real situation, without knowing how to stop and get out of the conflict is simply strategic guessing (actually this goes by the name of ,”the aims/targets of war, discussed by Clauswitz). This strategy could finish badly. But really, this could just be too much to ask of the Holland government.