Security, Freedom and
Democracy: Justification
for the State Terrorism I
Julio Moreira
Brasil
Presented
before the Public Forum of the IAPL 3rd Congress
Davao City, Philippines; 14 October
2006
By way of introduction to this theme,
I would like to situate it in the actual anti-terror policy
originated by imperialistic States, principally after the facts on
September 11th, 2001, and followed by the States that
support that policy, like Brazil, which practices State terrorism.
Bush itself said that “If you are not
beside us, you are beside terrorism”, showing his perverse kind of
State terrorism. It is like what Atty. Hakan Karakus said in his
article “The imperialism of the United States justifies intervention
using humanitarian reasons and preventive wars” (Dissent, n.3,
2003):
“To protect its hegemony U.S.A. had
become inevitably more aggressive and had started to base all its
strategical politics in military attacks. This demanded an increase
of its targets and the search of a better and more legitimate cause
to serve as an excuse for the interventions. Concepts such as `war
against the terrorism`, `fight against terrorist activities` had
been born as resulted of these developments.”
So, let’s see what are SECURITY,
FREEDOM and DEMOCRACY in imperialist purposes. They are words that
are misrepresented to justify its occupation war, militarily as well
as ideologically.
This occurs in a context of growth of
all the world’s basic contradictions today: the ones among the
imperialistic States themselves; the ones between the imperialistic
States, on one side, and colonial and semi colonial countries’
people by the other side; and the ones between the bourgeoisie and
the proletariat. So, the current war against peoples of the world
represents the growth of these contradictions, specially the second
one.
In ideological terms, this war has an
apparatus that is the base for the anti-terror policies like
recipes, to be applied in the different countries. Thus, the terms
Security, Freedom and Democracy are used exactly in this context.
About SECURITY, how it is used by
State terrorism, means repression. It means conservation of a
current status of power, the bourgeois and large landowner’s power.
It means the security of a much-restricted social group against the
people’s interests, and to conserve the power of this group.
To legitimize the Security speech,
imperialism is served by his military forces and by the
communication monopolies that create and impose for the people a
weather of fear and threats, like saying that “if you don’t be quiet
and silent, it will be better for you”. But this is not true.
About FREEDOM, it means, in the
societies held by capitalism: only formal freedom, without the means
to turn it effective, so people are not allowed to make it real; the
freedom of a people’s person to choose how it will be exploited; the
freedom to buy capitalist customs` illusions.
About DEMOCRACY, like freedom, it
cannot be defined without considering the context it is being
applied. And also, it cannot be defined without considering the
relation with its opposite, the dictatorship, as an opposites`
unity, where one cannot exists without the other. So, if there are
classes in struggle, the democracy for one side cannot exists as the
same time and the same way of the other side, there is not plenty of
democracy for both oppressors and oppressed, but the democracy for
classes that have the political and economic power in their hands
means dictatorship above the classes that are oppressed by the first
ones.
So, all th
