Monday, November 08, 2004

International Terrorism: The World's Civil War

The trend in globilization is towards a world government. The most obvious signs being institutions like the UN, World Court, International Monetary Fund. Communications, economics are tying people around the globe closer and closer together.

So we are heading towards a United States of the World however there is no democracy in the current arrangement. Far too much power is held by guess who, the US. So there it is, people waking up and saying, heh, we want ours too. We in the US are being kept insulated from that reality. We are still believing that our enemies are "irrational" and therefore there is no legitimacy to their cause. Once we dehumanize, "hunting and killing", become the natural conclusion. This approach totally overlooks the sweeping global changes that are driving terrorists.

Humankind seems to abhor empires. Empires aren't sustainable, thats why they always rise and fall. Why is the US falling into the trap of expanding our influence so that we become the new empire, which is a set up for a fall.

We don't want to democratize the globe, we want to control. We think we have the most to lose by sharing power in a more equitable fashion. Never give up power. We may have the most to lose by not spreading wealth and power more equitably. Can we really keep the nuclear chicken from coming home to roost, indefinitely? Would it not be better to deal with the bigger issue, the huge imbalance of power, wealth and quality of life that exist in the world today? Is killing people and reducing their lives to piles of rubble the answer.

Likely, the tipping point that turns an inactive frustrated person, to an active participant, ie terrorist, is the death of a loved one. That's the folly of "hunting and killing terroists" each person killed have hundreds of relatives, including sons, daughters, fathers, mothers, sisters and brothers. There isn't any proof that the way to eliminate this type of warfare is to kill people. Killing people may in fact, make matters worse.

It certainly is dealing with the symptom, not the cause. It may only be making things worse.

I know Bush and Company, ultimately, say they want to create a peaceful democracy in Iraq. Likely this will take decades. One republican confided in me that the US needed to get "boots on the ground" in that part of the world because we were to detached and disengaged and didn't understand the people or their culture. The thinking goes that we are definitely safer now that we have our people over there, we are working with Iraqis to build schools and hospitals, building a nation. Wonder why the democrats weren't able to call Bush on that one issue. He said so clearly in the debate with Al Gore that he didn't believe in nation building and now his is nation building in Iraq. Thats a "flip-flop", but he was never called on it.

Meanwhile parents in places like Harlem, with its failing school system wonder why we have money to build schools in Iraq but can't fund No Child Left Behind, (interesting the use of the political word "left" in that odd phrase) Lots of interesting juxta position. No, Left, Behind, Children. Maybe I attribute too much to the "right wing" conspiracy.


At 9:39 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hi Albert, It's Terri. This site and format are great... your writing is thoughtful as well.

I was not sure how to get a password, however.... so I signed in anonymously. Keep up the good work.

Hope to see you soon.


Post a Comment

<< Home