Both empirical scatology and critical eschatology can be useful methods to uncover, trace and map the causal relationships between extraction/abstraction and the rise of kakistocracy. As I have tried to demonstrate, whereas empirical scatology can deal with the concrete entropic practices of extraction as rooted in the estate, critical eschatology can enable an uncovering of the self-valorizing mythological mantra of kakistocratic abstractions, for example as practiced under the labels of Zionism or perhaps better: Jewish Supremacism and/or Christian Nationalism. It seems that whenever Religion and Nation intermingle, bad things start happening.
It would make sense to counter kakistocracy with a stringent detoxification programme, which requires an anamneses rooted in Dialectical-Historical-Materialism. The reason why Religion and Nation are an extremely productive couple in the spewing of kakistocratic mind-sets is because together, they can so easily bypass history and politics. Hence, a detoxifying anamnesis might want to start at the surface, the discourses of legitimation and justification, like those of Carl Schmitt regarding the inevitability of the inaugural violence of the political as both the separation between friend and foe and the performative act of inaugurating territorial sovereignty as the base of the rule of law. It is not for nothing that Schmitt’s type of endeavour has been classified as political theology. It is like God is right behind him, whispering in his ear, that there is no other way to create order but through the arbitrary violence of declaring a people as “His” and that as long as the follow him, he will do their bidding.
Of course, I am ranting and exaggerating, but it should be made clear that historically the birth of Nationhood coincided with the death of God, but at the same time most Nations are constructs in which God is resuscitated as an ally and a close friend. To wield that kind of infinite power, power that originates and resides outside of history, is to be able to justify the most gruesome acts, not because the perpetrator enjoys committing them, but because it is his moral duty. Hence, religion can make good people do bad things.
We need to stay at the surface and take a closer look at justifications and legitimations as performative practices of abstraction. The ultimate justification of the genocide in Gaza is that Jewish people are entitled to have a sovereign state at all costs. That is, every act of violence in the name of the sovereignty of this Jewish state is justified. Therefore, every criticism of Israel will be met with the question whether the critic acknowledges the right of (the state of) Israel to exist. Everything else is derivative of the answer to this question. If the answer is no, then the discussion is over as the critic is “obviously” anti-Semitic. If the answer is yes, then we are automatically entering the numbers game of how many Palestinian babies must be killed before every single Israeli feels safe. Ultimately, once one accepts that every Palestinian is likely to resent the state of Israel for past and present war crimes committed in its name, then the answer will be that the genocide is a moral obligation to the sovereignty of the State of Israel.
The issue of Palestine is the kakistocratic litmus test. If one is able to justify a single war crime in the name of the right of a state to exist, one has already been perverted by the virus of kakistocracy; that is, one is becoming a cowardly piece of excrement. Only a complete and unequivocal opposition to all war crimes, regardless of why they had been committed, can prevent the perversion of the kakistocratic mind set. It takes a lot of courage to do so, as in the case of Palestine, opposing genocide is easily relabelled as anti-Semitic. It usually starts with a denial that a genocide is going on at all, and from there a slide into diatribes about how evil Hamas are and by extension all Palestinians, because “they” have voted for Hamas (19 years ago) and finally states that calling the killing of Palestinains is trivializing genocide. It is clear, this is kakistocarcy at its filthiest.
Let me make this very clear. If there is no genocide in Gaza, why is there no concerted effort to disprove it with forensic evidence, witness testimonies, independent inquiries? Why are journalist, medics, paramedics, aid workers and poets deliberately being assassinated by the Israeli Occupation Force? Why are protesters in the “West” prosecuted and persecuted for calling it a genocide? Why are art exhibitions and cultural events being cancelled because the artists, authors and intellectuals have criticized the state of Israel? If you live in truth, you do not to fear critique, but if you live in kakistocracy ….
Of course, there is a genocide in Gaza, otherwise the resolution by the ICJ on the 24th of January 2024 would have been taken seriously. What was then still only a reasonable suspicion, that a genocide may be taken place and that every state, including Israel, has the moral duty to prevent it, has been verified by the subsequent actions of Israel and its allies. The very fact that the kakistocrat-in-chief, Donald Trump, has launched a plan to ethnically cleanse Gaza of all Palestinians to build a massive sea-side resort for the rich and powerful (he wisely kept his mouth shut about the enormous gas reserves off the coast of Gaza), proves that there is already a genocide going on, with his full support.
Disaffected Sociology 
Leave a comment