human being on Fri, 26 Dec 2003 09:10:32 +0100 (CET) |
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
<nettime> on new states of affairs |
could be a very unpopular viewpoint. sending anyway... not sure where others are at with current events, though wanted to share a limited hypothesis that in the buildup to the Iraq War was done with so much dealmaking of forgoing diplomatic stop-gaps (terrorists from freedom- fighters), and spending (bribes, others have called them) that when issues in Iraq seemed to be going off the cliff and James Baker of Florida election fame, amongst other connections, may have indicated a certain inevitability of foreign policy by oil gamblers, betting against the house: see: Gambler's Ruin for more information on the end-game: http://mathworld.wolfram.com/GamblersRuin.html In any case, saw this essay on neoCONism from cursor.org think it was, which provides one backtrack worth reading, of which others could be added: Twilight of the Neocons? http://billmon.org/archives/000924.html There are several approaches or questions and also conclusions that could be drawn from current events, though it would seem of the obvious is that there has been shift in international cooperation, however so, that has China, Russia, and the United States among many others (Libya, Palestine, Egypt, Iran, Pakistan) suddenly sounding in chorus about what is said to be global terrorism of nuclear, biological, chemical, radiological and other dangers to the state of worlds. That is, however one perceives the scale of events, if it is through a political party or well beyond this. of nettimers there are probably hundreds who know a lot about the intricacies of all of these dynamics so it is not intended to do anything more than introduce an idea which is to follow, a general hypothesis on .US state of affairs in relation to the world. it could be very wrong or inaccurate, and speculation is cut very short. - if the rise of the current political manifestation had its core origins some 30-40 years ago with Bush I, the Nixon Whitehouse, maybe even in relation to issues such as JFK's and other national tragedies, deep throat, etc. - it would seem that from article #1 above (twilight of neocons) that the 'root cause' may have been an approach to the cold war that is still being fought within the NeoCON establishment, in that to hear Cheney come out of his hole is to hear psycho-babble which I hope a Navy doctor will be checking out rather soon, as it is out of touch with the reality of everyday lived experience, to say at the time 'we are winning the war on terrorism' etc. what if, say, that buried deep within government, enough so to plan its takeover, a disconnect from checks and balances came about, which in turn increased danger to world stability, delusional in the way that the VP would send x-mas cards with a quote from Ben Franklin about 'EMPIRE', that keyword readily passed online as assumed to be inherent in American's and America's pre-war ideological truth-system, omnipotence, prior to the overreaching and subsequent consequences. and what if this is not being addressed, accurately, the failure of the ideology (the VP just spoke in a total denial that this is not an accurate worldview)? it may mean that these 'cold warriors' may threaten world peace and safety and may only be able to make war, though never having themselves been warfighters, nor peacemakers. and with nuclear weapons. remember, Kissinger said once that the Soviet Union could not be defeated, it would have to be ultimately be dealt with, and today we have the NeoCons and a vast foreign policy failure of the establishment mindset. the .US lost the war of ideas against the Soviet Union, it is proposed, yet, finally, it may have ended in a draw through the destruction of the power (of money, deals) to bring .US hegemonic power back into relation in terms of the world- to balance, and also answer for itself on others terms, and shared terms, too. in effect, the .US has been humbled by the world. yet there are many questions as to how/why it is so, or if it is even acknowledged that everything has now changed- and the sooner it is realized that relations have changed orders, scales, the sooner the values and democratic institutions can be questioned, to shore up what has been left after the implosion of cold war bureaucracy. it would also seem that, while G.W. Bush is both the target and shield for policies, that questions of leadership are illegitimate, given policies of which they have so far been based. That is, to fight Bush II is to miss Cheney, Bush I, others who have deep structure to the issues of today whose policies may have necessitated actions by any president. This is not to say Bush II is a good president or an informed leader, but he is certainly not making the policies, he is just so good at beating his opponents in his strong will and quick decisive actions that it makes it hard to beat him at his own game. Well, the world is now doing that, instead. And, well, Wolfowitz may be leaving and some may think this is an act of regularity. It may instead provide some indication of the defeat of .US cold war policy, which ultimately will make the world safer as 'all of the sudden' countries all over are back on an international diplomatic track, including the .US (possibly directed by Bush, outside of Cheneypoliticals) at the same time domestic issues such as monetary policy, immigration, oil and environment issues are either in the realm of questioning or actual change, if not on the federal level, then on the strong state model of rising up against horrible federal domestic policies to take a different approach. Bush, if considering the context, may also be able to reason outside the NeoCON agenda, if, that is, he is able to get outside their control. Stupid to believe this, people may say. Yet, it is also this aspect which people trust and also believe in Bush, that his intentions are good, that he is strong in decision making, no matter if the whole world ends up hating him and the .US- there may have been reasons that after a change in diplomacy in Iraq, that Baker is en route to making huge concessions, also, that the Chinese leadership is in the United States, that Russia has a strong statement of leadership while telling it like it is in relation to the international abuse of power and need of international laws) -- gambler's ruin may have officially ended the cold war, instead of one winner, the world won, if it is to stop the war machine, transforming it into forces for an attempt at peace, in some way. Else, on the track traveled, it would be nuclear war- driven by .US ideologues. that Cheney and others are so self-assured while delusional is not good for anyone. how power is more important than constitutional democracy or the rule of law. things await dealing with in the .US now. there is little doubt that these players were played, or unleashed, yet at a point of the resolution, it ended in a draw... Colin Powell and Dr. Rice seem clueless, that they too like G.W. Bush may be screens or fronts for an older agenda. Consider if, in a state of (state) emergency, that things could be happening out of necessity to get to the next step (florida elections, say), to keep the game being played out... the cold war, the way Op-Editorials lambaste world- wide while the .US currently sinks deeper and deeper, increasing and compounding the ill-will, it is of great interest as to who is helped by this, if anyone, this hubris, sense of power that is illusion, moreso delusional. If indeed the .US has a chance at changing itself, which scenarios currently indicate that there is a remote chance of peaceful transition from horror and the horrible, to peace and the peaceful, international and local- all of which needs to be defined, refined, transformed in a more realistic, possibly even idealistic, way of relation between states (of individuals and peoples, places, events)- that it will need the help of everyone in that there is only one-side of the coin, the other is the self in the mirror. If there is an actual 'transition' between what has been the .US deep strategy which is now a total failure in being able to deal with what is now faced, it is wondered how this is going to be translated into something on the water's surface, such as Bush versus Dean in 2004/5. That is, what if the ideal is so unreal, that to now approach the issues, regardless of what is rotten to the core and will be dealt with in the ways, by those who are best equipped to bring justice in such a situation, -- what is to happen post civilian world war- to unite the forces, if the unwise leader suddenly 'gets it?'. That is, there is a chance to make a transition, else to descend further into a chaos that no one would desire, in opposition, as it is war. The only combination of forces that seems it may be able to bring together these relations is, at least symbolically, the model of Texas' state government, where there was a mixture of democratic lieutenant governor and then a republican governor. If today were the date of the elections, it is believed a Bush/Dean ticket is the only way out of current scenarios. Which would be transitional and lead to the full review of the .US constitution, to issues of free speech where right wing zealots can call citizens terrorists and say they should be shot which is tantamount to seditious behavior even organized, and citizens should have a basic protection from this and its prosecution. it is less than democratic, annihilating freedom. There are a lot of questions, what happened with 9/11? what is with the energy task force? Why is watergate occupying the whitehouse? It may need to be repainted, Mark Twain style, in black paint for the time of national recovery. recovery of the government, of a governance by citizens, for citizens, locally, and globally. all the critiques are due, against the .US, yet also when change is attempted, please help by supporting the regeneration of a better .US as that is the only way change will be able to occur. If things are anywhere near this basic approximation of events, it would indicate that there is an internal review of ultimate serious consequences for the decisions made, in the best interests of the survival of the country. It is a question of how things will proceed from here, if these forces will try to take down the .US government and system once again, or if they will, so to speak, find their places in history as the .US changes onto a new course. That would leave many questions and also many situations and responsibilities for a new order that otherwise is totally unprepared for in terms of though, psychology, relating. maybe it is delusional to attempt to make sense out of it, yet it is also the hope of finding relation in a new scale, and it is where the .UN and state (country) governments and policies are deadly important. That differentiation between freedom fighters and terrorism, which was tossed out in the big gamble, needs to be reconsidered diplomatically, ethically dealing with the full field of concerns of what is public, what is private. If there is to be a future of the .US, it is to be a partnership in the world, not as its oppressor or misguided leader. it is to be reflective, with friends in every nation, yet also with a long interaction that has been negative. If Empire, then Cheney, Bush I, Nixon, assassins, now terrorists that may also be freedom fighters: 'everyone's a terrorist' ready to destroy the state. What is the state? the individual state, nation- state, global-state of affairs. The scale of the question of the state, if to be of peace, and to route around the .UN in relation, would seem to indicate that the resurgence in diplomacy would demonstrate the .UN is in the fight now. and is also holding things in check, balance. yet, inside the .US, it is up to the citizens to now take back their/our government, from the failed cold warriors who finally, did lose to the .USSR which no longer exists. thank goodness for that this epic game of chess ended in a draw, as now success is dependent on everyone's success, not just on the exploitation of one by the other. This is a question, if this is approximately so. it may not be, yet things are so far from this type of analysis that it is hard to communicate even the most basic relation about such a context, that goes beyond discrete events, into larger, longer, pathways. maybe everyone knows of these connections and just does not write as it is, well, maybe not a smart thing to be doing. Yet it is the time, place, and space to right the ship of state, and to do so, an attempt at what is going on, is attempted to be put into writing. Also, if this is in any way accurate, given news, it may indicate that the .US is also in a position that enables its introspection afforded by other democratic and-or international governments. Actions are being taken on a world scale, it is to seem, to change course, more acutely and more accurately. This is not either-or, nor is it both-and, it is in suspension, depending on the actions one takes to make the new future. That is why education may be one model for keeping things in the realm of reason while a large scale transformation is underway. That is, if the educators are to change with the times. The professions. The approaches. This is not to say global hegemony as a goal, rather to say, how might relations be achieved if world relations were now at a draw, and change is the question, and what is to be done now, next? Of course, the disclaimer being this is a guess. And a hope, for if cold war politics have finally found resolution for 'all sides', then, impossibly, the best option may be the result. That is, there is no reason for others to use abuse of the .US power to legitimate their own actions, in realms of nuclear war and weapons, as a rogue state outside of international law. Things leveled out? And if the Bush II cabinet remains, it shouldn't. Yet to put Bush II as the cognizant head of state during such a long story is to possibly miss the other things, which surely the government isn't-- at least, if its allegiance is to the .US citizenry. What happens next, day by day, will probably say a lot more one way or the other, of which forces will be in control of the future in the .US. citizens who turn away from this responsibility only want a dictatorship of the status quo, which is where things are at today. as more people do what is necessary to regain control of the public realm, in terms of its necessary dimension to the idea of a state, then maybe democracy is alive... brian (peace on earth) brian thomas carroll: research-design-development architecture, education, electromagnetism http://www.electronetwork.org/bc/ # distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission # <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets # more info: majordomo@bbs.thing.net and "info nettime-l" in the msg body # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@bbs.thing.net