Vukica Djilas says, "I do not intend to analyse in extenso either Baudrillard's
empty rhetorical attrition, or Karadzic's self-righteous immorality. I shall
just point out that both are the products of one
dimensional mental perspective - which, among other things, expresses itself in
the need to transform
people of one town into a conceptual notion (symbol?) which can thus be
manipulated according to manipulator's purposes. In one case this purpose is a
justification of methodology, while in the other the purpose was to justify
murder."
From what I can tell this reading of Baudrillard is completely wrong; I do not
know about Karadzic. How did you develop the reading you have, Vukica Djilas? I
don't see it.
Baudrillard is not claiming that war is unreal so much as he's claiming that our
mediated experience of the war makes it hyperreal for us and removes us from any
purposeful sense of human interaction. Indeed, in line with Blake and Nietzsche,
he shows how our pity objectifies our objects of pity and estranges us from
their reality:
"Pity would be no more,/If we did not make somebody Poor," says Blake ("The
Human Abstract").
JMC
