January 10, 2007

Gandhi Says:

Sometimes you just have to wonder whether the stupid, evil, greedy, arrogant, heartless bastards in the White House haven't over-exposed themselves.

All this corporatized globalization was working so very well for them and their Carlyle Group buddies. Why did they have to get greedy and go after Iraq's oil?

Now they have exposed not only their own criminal wrong-doings, but also the whole convoluted web of deceit surrounding Big Oil, Big Media, Big Pharma, et al. Even the IMF and the World Bank have been exposed as Big Business' economic hit men.

As the myth shatters, an opportunity presents itself. Like Terry Jones says, all the money wasted in Iraq could have been put to much better use. But are we, the people, prepared to put our own greed aside and work towards a better, fairer system for everyone?

One world. One love. It's time for a little idealism. Let the people's voices be heard!


Anonymous said...

They did that a long long time ago. It’s just that the American people are too stupid to understand that has been done to them and are now powerless to do anything even if they wanted to. The rest of the world is too afraid and too many people are on the take and too many have too much to hide to do anything against this rogue nation gone bezerk.

Hold on for dear life. I have a nasty feeling that as bad as things are, things have not even turned ugly yet.

gandhi said...

That's pretty grim, but I have the same feeling sometimes (particularly when I listen to the absurdly bubbly, optimistic talk on the TV financial news segments).

There is definitely a popular awakening going on, and the Internet/blogs are definitely at the forefront of it, so maybe it's easy for us to mis-judge the pace of change. Even so, it still seems too slow to convince me that we humans on planet Earth can make the necessary changes within my lifetime, and beyond that I fear it may be too late in any case.

Perhaps we are heading towards the ultimate test of human nature: some sort of global police state packed with informers and torture chambers, where even thinking the truth can get you killed. Or perhaps we are about to witness a few trigger events that will help us change course...?

Latif said...

During a session of the House of Commons last week which debated Tony Blair's request for Parliament to give its go-ahead for the invasion of Iraq, a statement by one of the MPs caused the hall to go into dead silence for a few seconds, and no one dared object.

"It's really strange that you want to rid Iraq of weapons of mass destruction, other colleagues present in the House and myself recollect signing a few years ago an agreement to sell such weapons to Iraq, which you now say are weapons of mass destruction and pose a threat to world peace and British interests. Is there some kind of explanation for this?" the MP asked.

The House of Commons discussions remind me of the time in history when Britain ruled the waves and colonized half the world. France, Spain and Portugal as well as Italy, Belgium and Holland all had the inclination toward colonization though the last three were less successful.

Therefore, the urge toward colonization is inherently European and rooted in the economy. War was the only acceptable way to realize economic interests — witness the two world wars both of which were fought for no other reason but economic interest.

After the end of World War II and in the face of the horrors that the people of the world suffered from, peace became the only slogan. With the end of the military-colonization ideology the search was on for an alternative. Thus emerged what we call neocolonialism or economic colonialism. It is the imposition of foreign policy, economy and culture on a nation without the need for military presence all the while acknowledging its independence and sovereignty.

However, the fierce economic competition between the big colonizers and their attempts to create special markets led to the failure of this new policy and to limited regional wars.

In the shadow of this, the United States' military and economic capabilities grew to an unprecedented level and it too began to need outlets and markets to serve its economy leading it to confront economic powers within world economic groupings.

The American idea of colonization primarily based on force came with the immigrant Europeans and was exemplified in the elimination of the original inhabitants of the New Continent — the so-called "Red Indians" — when unprecedented massacres were committed.

Thus the American-British invasion of Iraq is merely a return to the old-style military colonization after the failure of neocolonization.

The U.S. also aims to lay the foundations of a new world order in which it openly declares its complete control over the world and intolerance for any competitor. It will thus confront world economic groupings such as Asian, European and Chinese communities.

To confirm this theory we should note that the nations that reject war are France, Germany, Russia and China are doing it not in defense of Saddam Hussein. Everyone is in agreement of the necessity of getting rid of this regime. The dispute is over the method.

Getting rid of Saddam diplomatically retains the balance between the opposing nations and between the U.S. and its follower the U.K. while the diplomatic solution reduces American hegemony, especially over European policy.

Meanwhile, getting rid of the Saddam regime through military victory for the U.S. confirms Washington's sole control of the world and its heightened power to face off attacks by competing international economic groupings.

This analysis may be a response to the question we've seen repeated since the start of the Iraqi crisis: What is going on in the world?

The United States and Britain want, with the start of the 21st century, to set the clock back to the era of military colonialism through the American military machine's technological superiority and through British political cunningness, which is capable of turning the truth upside down without regard for international laws and customs.

Colonization happens only through war, and war is driven by economic interests; and in the face of economic interests, all morals and principles collapse, international laws fail and international legitimacy takes a back seat.


Blog Archive