Everyone
is in denial. (Except perhaps the Pope?) The website “Organizing
for Action” https://www.barackobama.com/climate-change-deniers/#/ lists
conservative policy makers who believe climate change isn’t real. But most liberals and conservatives alike
remain in deep denial about a far greater threat to our security, prosperity,
freedoms and our children’s future. They
continue to believe that independent nations using independent agencies and policies
are capable of resolving entirely irreversible global interdependent problems
with unenforceable treaties and agreements.
From
migrants flooding out of Syria or Africa into Europe, or from Central America
into the southern border of the US, some believe fences can hold back the rising
tide caused by increasing economic, environmental, political, or ethnic
instability. Others believe we just need
to find places for them all to go until things settle down. That’s not going to happen anytime soon and
most nations are already economically and ethnically stressed. How easy we forget that it was an
environmental pressure (3 year drought) that sparked a mass migration into
Syrian cities where the existing regime was unable to cope with their needs or
their frustration. It may not be
overreach to suggest we are witnessing a global migratory domino effect.
From
WMD proliferation in the Middle-East to poverty or pollutants proliferating as
a result of unregulated global capitalism policy makers are increasingly
referring to ‘comprehensive’ policies or ‘whole of government’ approaches to
addressing the increasing chaos governments are facing. Unfortunately, they are unwilling to look to
the ‘whole of world’ approach that is needed to comprehensively prevent or
respond to the continued (and some would say – worsening) chaos.
The
other major persistent hot topic besides climate change has been the Iran
nuclear deal. One side is in denial
about the incapacity of the US government (with or without Presidential
approval) to dictate to Iran what Iranian leaders can and cannot do regarding
their goal of becoming a nuclear power -- without starting another war. A war Americans can neither afford or win
without committing mass murder ourselves.
The other side is in total denial about Iran’s capacity to secretly
develop or buy a nuclear weapon. Most
people have easily forgotten how easily Iranians captured without physical
damage our most sophisticated surveillance drone. Both US political sides are in denial believing
their path will bring increased security in a world flooded with increasing
access to unimaginably powerful biological, cyber or even conventional
weapons. Is a nuclear bomb really
necessary to bring chaos to US shores? An
oil tanker fully loaded with a mix of fuel oil and fertilizer-and wired like
Timothy McVeigh’s Oklahoma City truck bomb could cause a nuclear sized
devastation without any radioactivity.
Now imagine one or more detonating simultaneously in two or more major US
ports. Or a simple drone with infectious biological agents.
Nearly
everyone is in denial about the unavoidable global consequences of this
accelerating evolution of weaponry produced by the exponential growth of
technology. Every technology can increasingly
be used for unprecedented good (vaccines to prevent Cancer or AIDS) or
biological weapons that could target specific ethnic/genetic profiles or mass
murder millions with Ebola like symptoms.
Bio, cyber, nano, chem, and robotic technologies are increasingly
affordable and ubiquitous ensuring universal possession of WMD by anyone with a
moderate bank account, average IQ and a real or imagined grievance.
Conservative
GOP candidates are in denial believing US national security will be best assured
by returning to a pre-9-11 mentality of “peace through strength”. Some have stated all we need to do to defeat ISIS is “Crush
them”. How will massive military power
stop a biological attack? A scud in a
tub EMP event? A cyber attack on our
financial, energy or transportation infrastructure? The collapse of the US dollar from our
excessive military spending while skimping on the renewal of our infrastructure
which is key to our economic growth?
Liberals
are in equal denial believing we can achieve real security by waging peace
through disarming fearful nations using diplomacy, sanctions (which can be more
lethal than war and even start wars) or relying on unenforceable treaties. ‘Love is the answer’ isn’t going to work with
ISIS. We can only trust them to keep
doing what they are doing – trying to draw us into another war. A move the 9-11 attackers were hoping for in
their drive to break us economically and divide us politically. We didn’t need help with either goal but the
attacks on 9-11 lit a match.
I’m
a bleeding heart liberal. The most
exciting advocacy movement I’m aware of (the Pachamama Alliance) is effectively
inspiring people around the world “to
bring forth a thriving, just and sustainable world.” But, here in the US they are directing
inspired souls to activate their citizenship to join a constitutional amendment
campaign to remove money out of our electoral system. Good idea.
But they seem to be in denial about the power of getting more caring
people involved in voting and empowering them in educating their elected
official once they are in office. For
every dollar donated to a politicians campaign corporations spend forty or more
dollars lobbying them in office. Other
Pachamama graduates are encouraged to lobby for a carbon tax. Again, good idea! But even if passed it would have negligible impact
on reducing CO2 emissions if other non-democratic nations like China can easily
undo whatever good the US legislation achieves. This small but inspired
movement understands the need for systemic change but falls short of walking it’s
informed and inspired talk by avoiding any real change to the dysfunctional
nation state system.
Both
US political parties are looking seriously for a personality they prefer for
their 2016 savior. Neither seems to
realize that even if their favorite wins, and their party captures both the
House and the Senate, and then goes on to pass every law they have ever dreamed
of, our government will still be powerless to stop the global lawlessness
increasing as a result of every other sovereign nation (or corrupt leader)
looking out first, for its own economic interest. In this ‘international system’ there is no
global means of holding the nation or its leaders responsible for wars,
genocides, pandemics or catastrophic environmental conditions they may
initiate.
There
is one other organization with promise.
The Citizens for Global Solutions.
Formerly the World Federalist Association, this new name intended to
avoid any real talk about real global solutions and press on with business as
usual, favoring or opposing unaffordable international treaties and agreements
and paper strong demands for human rights.
Even CGS’s renegade anemic vestige, the World Federalist Institute,
can’t decide if it wants to face the global reality, independent nations and
policies cannot deal effectively with interdependent problems relying solely on
unenforceable means. World federation
advocates within CGS are seen as naïve thinking there is any possibility of
creating a world police force for taking on ISIS or world leaders who mass
murder using chemical weapons. Looking
at the conditions in Syria or their domino effect reaching around the world it
would seem naïve to think we will get a different result by doing the same
thing. Again, deep denial.
If
‘we the people’ of the US, the world and key organizations can be awakened we
will be face to face with three basic options of responding to this cascading
global chaos that is increasingly threatening our security, freedoms, prosperity
and posterity.
First,
we can keep on doing the same thing thinking it will turn our different. In which case this would be called ‘insane’
have moved way past denial.
Second,
we can chose to follow the fundamental teachings of the Bible, the Torah, the
Quran and other wise spiritual texts urging us to love one another, take care
of one another, forgive our enemies, and take care of God’s creation. And then
pray like hell everyone else does (and believes) the same.
Or, we can follow
the wisdom of our nation’s Founding Fathers and the wisest of our ‘greatest
generation’ that created the UN after the horrors of the last World War. In which case we would transform our current
UN confederation into a democratic world federation. No need to panic on how such a federation
would be created or structured. A mass
of details and rational, reasonable plans can be found in one relatively recent
publication, Transforming the United Nations System: Designs for a
Workable World: By Joe
Schwartzberg. And if this book doesn’t
float your boat, there are many others by equally brilliant authors.
What
they are calling for, is a world government where the ‘rule of law’ effectively
replaces the law of force. A global rule
of law that effectively puts the protection of human rights above the rights of
states to wage war, genocide or other mass murder ventures. It would be like our 50 state federal system
with a constitution that limits the powers of government. And it’s constitutional backbone would be a
global bill of rights, like those inalienable human rights that First Lady
Eleanor Roosevelt helped scrip into the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (unanimously
passed in 1948) that essentially
acknowledges our global interdependence.
Effectively enforced globally, these rights would prevent most of the
threats we face today and enable us to respond far more effectively to the
horrors we cannot now prevent.
I’m
in denial believing any of this will make any significant difference in the
hearts and minds of those who wield money and power in this increasingly
troubled and lawless world. This should
be surprising given that such a revised global political environment would
benefit business, people in power and all the world’s souls.
I’ve
almost given up believing that my liberal compatriots who are feverishly
working for a world we all know is possible will step back from their singular
priority of ending hunger, improving literacy, waging peace, fighting racism,
or campaigning for their favorite candidate and take a truly comprehensive
approach to ensuring life, liberty and justice for all. It’s most disheartening to witness even the
most intelligent people with deeply committed souls can be so persistently hard
headed.
When the Pope comes to town people should listen closely to his message. He seems to be one of the few who is not in
denial about the world ahead us all. He
calls for each of us to follow the basic teaching of our faiths or worldly
beliefs. He urges us to protect and
restore God’s creation. He calls for a
world government that would put real power into the protection of human rights.
I
chose to remain in denial believing that he could actually make that
difference. This planet and our
experimental species has never been blessed with so much wealth, science and
technology, power and genius ideas for three things.
1. Meeting and
joyously surpassing the most basic needs of all humanity,
2. Democratically
create and approve a global justice system, and
3. Restoring
our planets ecosystems which are also our own life support system.
If
not now, when? If not us, who? If not the global rule of law, what?
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home