Non-Proliferation For DominanceThe debates on whether the innocent victims of American bombers in Iraq will be sanctioned by UN, or the sanction of US military functionaries will be enough, is an excellent example of the hypocritical nature of bourgeois legality. Any law is in the interests of those in power and against those in need. The ruling classes dictate their own law to the world they exploit and plunder. On the global scale, this leads to dividing all the countries to those having right and those that must obey orders. All the body of the international law is nothing but disguise for that simple rule. How can one country prescribe the forms of government to another? Why should it be concerned about the name of the other country's president or the work of its mass media? And, of course, in a world of global equality, each country is to decide itself, which scientific and technological research to support, and which weapon choose for its army. Well, even if Iraq or Northern Korea had nuclear weapons, nobody has right to forbid them possessing it. One could admit that, for such countries, this might be the only way to prevent aggression from the outside. If Cuba had ever installed nuclear missiles aimed at the USA, this might be due to the exposure to the US militarism that it felt. Why do the USA, NATO, or United Nations, decide who will be given the privilege of national security, and who will be always in risk of invasion? Why not think about the USA? They have all kinds of the weapons of mass destruction, which is especially dangerous for global stability, since that nation is brought up on the cult of brutal force, violence and murder, and aggression is in the blood of its citizens. They can even sacrifice a few thousand lives to obtaining a pretext for world-wide war for absolute dominance, and ruining the twin towers of New York might well be a monstrous provocation by the CIA (no other evidence has been provided so far). Of course, there are millions of Americans who do not want war. But they will vote for it, if pressed from above. They cannot imagine any other nation to have right to be as independent and as powerful. Any pretence like that is immediately interpreted as a threat to US national security and global interests. However, the very idea of global interests is aggression and striving for world dominance. Think about yourselves, and let the others care about themselves. Until recently, Americans could easily approve such a disastrous policy, since there was no real threat to the USA from any other global force. Today, in the era of globalization, no country is safe enough, despite all its economic and military power. Devastation of Grenada, Lebanon, Libya, Serbia, Afghanistan, and any more countries, will return by powerful blows to the core infrastructure of US economy, by mass terror using all kinds of means, including biological and chemical weapons and cyberterrorism. A country that wants to be the master of world, that wants to subdue all the other countries to its economical and political interests, should be prepared to meeting as global retort, and perishing in ruins, like any empire. Do not spit on the world, or the world will spit on you and you'll get drowned. However, it is not the world divided into numerous nations struggling with each other for a bit of monopoly and ephemeral supremacy. It is the world of people that do not want to be exploited and do not want to exploit others. Objectively, formation of super-powers establishing their world dominance leads to consolidation of all the exploited nations, and the boundaries between the countries and cultures get erased due to the efforts of both the global capitalism, striving for world-wide dictatorship, and the global anti-imperialistic movement uniting before the powerful enemy. Some day, the economic system of capitalism will become utterly incompatible with global economy, and the super-powers, devouring the whole world will blow up from inside.
[Notes & attitudes]
[Online texts]
|