Western politicians have a compliant mainstream media through which to guide popular opinion regarding those they wish to portray as our enemies. But how safe are those assertions?
From
western politicians we hear how human rights and freedoms are the
primary inalienable virtues that they are dedicated to mandating
globally. This tends to indicate that those espousing these noble
concepts are idealists. How does this stand up when compared with hard
reality?
If
we take the USA as our primary example how convincing is it that the
politicians there are the idealists that they quite clearly claim to be ?
To
become a successful politician in the USA it is necessary to have a
great deal of money behind you. You will almost certainly require to be a
millionaire, or preferably a multi-millionaire. This requires most
candidates to have been successful business men or women. Then, after
succeeding in your quest you will require corporate sponsorship to
remain in position. Your sponsors will then expect to receive something
beneficial from you by return. If you then acquire a position in
government the most powerful influence upon you will then quite clearly
once again be your corporate sponsors. In addition, the lobbyists from
the most powerful corporate interests will seek to gain concessions to
their interests via government policy.
How
likely is it, considering the plethora of corporate influence within
the U.S. system that an idealist agenda will be formed at the core of
U.S. government policy?
Let us now examine the milieu within which the corporate world of the USA operates.
Is
it not fair to say that corporations in general seek always to expand
without limit and in this quest to in turn seek to minimise the number
of restrictions and regulations upon them and further, that bottom-line
profitability is their primary concern? The most powerful corporations
in the USA and elsewhere across the West are those within the so-called
defence industry, those that comprise the military industrial complexes
of those nations, those who thrive on war and the threat of war. How
high in their list of general priorities do you think idealism would
likely feature?
Just
to reiterate, these are almost to a man and women and virtually of
necessity, imbued with the ethical, moral and political precepts of the
business community from start to finish. Where then does the idealism
apparently espoused as the highest of priorities at the pinnacle of U.S.
governmental activity have its genesis... If at all?
Arguably
the U.S. corporate world is the most aggressive seen anywhere
worldwide. The urgency with which its executives wish to expand is clear
and the sometimes underhand, corrupt and downright criminal methods it
exhibits are well known. Isn't it far more likely, knowing just how
deeply embedded the business culture is in North American political
life, that the policies espoused at the forefront of its foreign policy
has at least something to do with the interests of doing business rather
than with some idealistic desire to better the lot of humanity in
general?
We
are currently in China where the general thrust of government policy
much more closely bears out the contention that something far closer to
idealism is in operation. The government here MUST deliver benefits to
the Chinese people to retain their trust and to remain securely in
power. Those benefits can clearly be seen across a range of aspects from
health care to education to transport and beyond.
In
regard to international affairs who is it that has clearly been in
expansionist mode, attacking and invading nations in recent decades? Has
it been China that has begun wars of choice or has it been the
collective West? Which region of the world has the greatest, continuing
incentive through its ideological or pecuniary stance to aggressively
interfere in nations far beyond their borders?
Is
the aggressive, profit-oriented and highly expansionist ideology of
western capitalism, deeply embedded in the body politic of the West
irrelevant when it comes to the policy of continual interference (for
others benefit we are told) of the USA and its allies across the world?
I
leave the question here for you to ponder. However, it is my contention
that it is not the mostly quiescent east that imbues the
characteristics of what has been called 'The Evil Empire', it is in fact in the west.
