By Gary D. Barnett

“To see others suffer does one good, to make others suffer even more: this is a hard saying but an ancient, mighty, human, all-too-human principle [….] Without cruelty there is no festival.” 
~ Friedrich Nietzsche, On the Genealogy of Morals / Ecce Homo

August 23, 2019 "Information Clearing House" -  Why do powerful governments revel in their ability to cause human suffering in order to bring about a desired political change? The West, led by the United States, has become the initiator and prosecutor of purposeful pain and suffering, and is continuing to advance policies that breed anguish and hardship against the innocent in many countries. These innocent, many of them children, are left starving, left without medical care, and are forced to live in fear due to the horrible conditions placed on them by the western world.

Much of this agony is due to brutal economic sanctions being levied against those countries that do not bow down to the hegemony known as the U.S. The ruling elites are boastful in their support for these harsh policies, as what they claim to seek from these atrocious sanctions is regime change or major policy change by extreme force. But is that the entire story, or do they also find joy in the festival of causing harm to the people of countries they claim as enemies? Do they secretly gain pleasure from this planned cruelty? It seems evident that those implementing this suffering do take satisfaction in their ability to cause pain in order to gain power.

The idea of sanctions has become the norm. It is even anticipated and desired by not only the political class, but by many in the general population as well. Why is this so? Is it due to false beliefs? Is it because the propagandized masses fear that without these sanctions, other countries might rise up to be aggressors threatening our “national security?” Is it because by destroying others economically, Americans believe they will be more prosperous? Does the average person really believe that sanctions will prevent these countries from attaining weapons of mass destruction? Or do many in the general populace also take pleasure in witnessing human suffering at the hands of their rulers?

There are a few pretend dissenters in the mainstream media, and even some in the alternative media, who talk out of both sides of their mouths about this issue. While some claim to expose the brutality of these economic sanctions, they in many cases give cover to the narrative by using the excuse that these sanctions are not effective in bringing about regime change. If they were effective in causing regime change, would that then make this strategy moral or right? How can an aggressive act of war like that of forcing sanctions on an entire country or region, ever be warranted because it might affect regime change?