As individuals we go through life facing all sorts of
threats ranging from the benign to the severe. A danger can come from a
neighbor that is never friendly, a coworker that is jealous, a partner that is
developing strange ideas about the partnership and so on. As a society, we also
face threats that may come from gangs of hooligans roaming the vicinity, a
government that is corrupt or incompetent, an unsavory neighboring state that
keeps violating the country's territorial integrity and so on.
A level-headed individual will keep things in perspective in
that he or she will assess the danger posed by the neighbor, the coworker or
the partner – and work out a contingency plan for each of them should things
start to get out of hand. As to the society, it will take measures that will
contain the threat posed by the gangs. Even if the government is corrupt or
incompetent, it will consult with allies and the proper international
organizations from whom it will solicit moral support, and where needed, the
assistance that will help repel any aggressive move attempted by the unsavory
neighbor.
Most of the time, the situation stays simple enough that a
confusion is unlikely to develop, thus all things remain under control. But
there are times when confusion may develop, thus escalate the situation to a
serious level. It can happen because of an honest error committed by one side
or the other, a miscalculation made by either side; or it can happen because of
a serious defect in the character of someone. Looking closely, that defect will
prove to be paranoia, schizophrenia or a combination of the two.
Unfortunately, such developments happen too often in the
fast moving life of the big city, and they result in heartbreaking outcomes. It
happens less often on the international stage but when it does, the
consequences can be devastating and long lasting. For this reason, it is
desirable that we, as a society, develop the skills that will help us detect
those among us who may be disposed to imbue the environment in such a way as to
make the people they come into contact with behave as if gripped by the defect.
These people may or may not themselves go off the rails; but they will have the
ability to inject insidious signals into the culture, thus infest it.
You can see how that works when you study two articles
published recently. The first was written by John R. Bolton under the title:
“Pretending the Islamic fury does not exist” and the subtitle: “Denial will
only worsen the day of reckoning” It was published on May 27, 2014 in the
Washington Times. The second is actually an editorial written by the editors of
the Wall Street Journal under the title: “Iran 's
Nuclear Masters” and the subtitle: “Tehran
has kept its core team of weaponization researchers intact.” It was published
on May 28, 2014 in the Journal.
What Bolton does in his article is akin to someone saying
there exist a neighbor here that is not friendly, a jealous coworker over there
who may be dangerous, and a partner that may be developing strange ideas
sitting in the corner office of the floor. And Bolton
ends with this: “These catastrophes are related, sometimes involving close
cooperation among [them]. Our unwillingness to grasp the connections and
discuss them rationally will not make them disappear, and certainly will not
make them easier to defend against. Seeing the world clearly is not evidence of
animus. Instead, refusing to acknowledge the obvious is a form of blindness
that can be fatal.”
As he himself acknowledges, these are obvious incidences,
each of which is bad but not so bad as to be apocalyptic. And, in fact, they
may all have materialized because the human tendency to copycat is a powerful
instinct. But for Bolton to clutch on this straw and conclude that what he sees
in others is a form of blindness that can be fatal because there may be a
connection (which no one denies) between the various incidences – is proof of a
schizo-paranoia that is plaguing Bolton and his likes … a disease that is the
real danger to the world.
It is the defect whose influence is so insidious; it can
stealthily permeate the entire culture, and demand that someone “fess up” to
something that never happened. When no fessing is done, those infected by the
disease ask America
to “shock and awe them” to kingdom come as it was done to the Iraqis. Bolton,
among others, has tried to repeat that performance with Iran but have not as yet been
successful. And so, you see their surrogates, such as the editors of the Wall
Street Journal, jump into the fray and add their two-cent worth of advocacy.
Because progress is being made in the talks between Iran and the
P5+1, you see the editors who have been infected by the disease, whine about
Teheran keeping the team of researchers intact. What did they expect Teheran to
do with these people? Grind them and make meatballs out of them?
Starting with the disclosure made by an Iranian opposition
group (MEK), the editors of the Wall Street Journal discuss history in a manner
that suits their current aim, which they blurt out in the style of speculation
at the end of the editorial: “If past is precedent and the MEK's disclosures
are to be believed [Iran] will continue as it has to this day. The snake may
shed its skin but not its temper, runs an old Persian proverb.”