Orks and imperialism. Yes. Again.

I despise the word "Orc". Write it with a K, be appropriate. I don't care if it's right. It's more orkish.

So, yeah, discussion's been had a bajillion times over. Are Orcs (because that's how He writes it) a metaphor for nazism? Is Mordor the disgusting progenitor of the military-industrial complex that massacres Palestinians? Is the "fair, blonde" race just inherently good?

No. Fuck off.

 

"I cordially dislike allegory in all its manifestations, and always have done so since I grew old and wary enough to detect its presence. I much prefer history, true or feigned, with its varied applicability to the thought and experience of readers. I think that many confuse "applicability" with "allegory"; but the one resides in the freedom of the reader, and the other in the purposed domination of the author."

This is from the Harper-Collins edition's intro. No clue about year or whatever and I'm not home to check and I don't care enough to do it. He wrote it. Something else he also wrote is:

"The real war does no resemble the legendary war in its process or its conclusion. If it had inspired or directed the development of the legend, then certainly the Ring would have been seized and used against Sauron; he would not have been annihilated but enslaved, and Barad-dur would not have been destroyed but occupied. Saruman, failing to get possession of the Ring, would in the confusion and treacheries of the time have found in Mordor the missing links in his own researches into Ring-lore, and before long he would have made a Great Ring of his own with which to challenge the self-styled Ruler of Middle Earth. In that conflict both sides would have held hobbits in hatred and contempt; they would not long have survived even as slaves".

How the actual fuck are we still onto this shitty discussion that diminishes one of the very best artworks of our species? Politically uneducated turds that read about swords and dragawnz, that's how.

Colonialism cannot exist extra-capitalistically. In a simpler manner, capitalism defines the basis and function of colonialism and imperialism. Do not for a fucking moment confuse wars of expansion and conquest for whatever concepts and practices the capital dictates. Do not for a fucking moment forget the role that capital plays in the massacre of peoples and cultures.

A lot of people, equate empire building with imperialism. Imperialism is not just simple conquering of land and peoples. Imperialism has a concise, definite purpose and that is to expand the territories of a nation-state. The metropolis (eg. London, Paris), directs, fights, and seizes, all in service to the power expansion and projection potential of the state. No such thing as states in Tolkien, especially ones functioning under Malthusian and lebensraum premises. Discussion about the difference of nation-states with fantasy kingdoms and empires, in another post.

Add to that, that a lot of people use "imperialism" and "colonialism" interchangeably? See where I'm getting at. No, you don't. 

So, colonialism's distinctive difference from imperialism, is that while the metropolis controls and directs imperialism, it only enables colonialism and profits from it. Colonialism is uncontrollable, it's a network of powers and players that exist in an "overwhelming, oppressive periphery" as I like to say (srsl, it's mine, I said it in a PoMo Literature lecture once, I kept it). It is not a policy, it isn't a conception. It's a set of practices. 

Colonialism is not a single, overarching entity, even though its purposes and objectives are quite similar across all its implementations. Its methods are not as homogenous as imperialism's are. This is why postmodern defeatist asshats cower before a potential definition of it.* Colonialism is colonialisms. The true gift of Edward Said upon humanity was this exact courage and audacity he showed in making sweeping generalisations about it. Right or wrong, he stuck his head out and drove the stick deeper.

To that end, we have certainly not reached a "post-colonial" moment in time, as much as the liberal proponents of the term want to claim. We are not even post-imperialist - go see what's going down in Iraq, Palestine, Venezuela, and Sudan. In a small scale, it kinda makes sense that politically uneducated and inactive morons will claim that Orks are an imperialist people? For them, maybe the notion of the nation-state and capitalism are so "TINA", so all-encompassing and atemporal that everything must exist within their conceptual confines. Thank fucking God that Tolkien was a tad more intuitive than they are.

I love Orks. Of all kinds, but mostly the 40k ones and the Shadowmoon Clan. Garrosh did nothing wrong, and all that.

But to equate Orks and Mordor with what nazism, the putrid limb of capitalism, or Lockheed Martin do, is to do them a favour. It is to accept that oh well, imperialism and colonialism always existed, people were always massacring other people, it's just a fresher way to do it.

Colonialism did not always exist. Pre-capitalist empires were not imperialistic or colonisers; they were expansive conquerors, massively bureaucratic, and stagnant.

People were always killing each other and fighting wars. They did not actively strive to become more efficient in the murder of thousands so as to profit a little harder, little faster. Do not confuse the context, uses, and networks built around the composite longbow and its emergence with Dachau or white phosphorus over Gaza.

Orks are Orks (or Orcs). Even against them, the unity of peoples and the undermining of technology (ie. the Ring, lmao, we'll about technology in Tolkien another time), beat that shit. It's only on the proper Earth that we got people unable to make rent while blaming immigrants and abortions instead of the actual culprits; nah, they're willing to shoot people over their overlords' honour.

Gorbag - I think it was Gorbag - even fucking Gorbag dreams of a future free to pillage and maraud. The ultimate slave to evil, dreams. Capitalism is so permeating and corrupting that dreaming has ceased. And you wanna exonerate that by equating it to Sauron's regime.

No. Fuck off. Organise. Unionise. Agitate. Fight the fuck back. I'd rather have Sauron than the EU. At least he's got the decency of being proudly hateful and unmaskedly evil.

*: Fuck whomever ever shied away from naming names and pointing fingers just to save his fucking academic position of licking ass cracks and barely making a living for it. You're everything wrong with the educational process and you drag academia's name though shit, you vile, servile curs. May they find you cold and rigid. May education educate again.

PS1: I wanna talk about neocolonialism and its potential in fantasy literature and storytelling at some point. Given the nature of neocolonialism as a non-physical colonisation practice, ie. colonisation though economic browbeating and keeping a territory fiscally and financially hostage (see the French Treasury situation against Benin, Mali, Guinea-Bissau, Niger, and 10 other African countries), this is non-sensical to do here; it adds nothing to the debate. But keep in mind that we're DEFINITELY not "post-colonial".

PS2: I want to also touch on the subject of metaphysical and soteriological contexts and their relationship with "manifest destiny" policies. In Tolkien, WoW (Garrosh did nothing wrong), 40k, or whatever, there are quite a few tangible arguments for acting according to a divine mandate. In real life, not so much. I ain't shitting on anyone's religion - fuck if I know what I myself believe on that matter - I'm just saying that as far as we know, we got no proof that our decisions will either be rewarded or condemned. There is only belief. Which is fine. But there is no knowledge.