Insidious Imperialism: America, the Global Hegemon (2005)
Insidious Imperialism: America, the Global Hegemon
In the 21st
century, many, many Americans are completely unaware that the United
States is an Imperial country that acts as an Empire. “The deepest
problems of modern life flow from the attempt of the individual to
maintain the independence and individuality of his existence against the
sovereign powers of society against the weight of the historical
heritage and the external culture and technique of life,” explains
George Simmel, author of The Metropolis and Mental Life. “The
psychological foundation, upon which the metropolitan individuality is
erected, is the intensification of emotional life due to the swift and
continuous shift of external and internal stimuli.” Simmel means, the
populace is too saturated within its own prism of self-reward. This
pretense is perpetuated by design. He further expounds, “Man is a
creature whose existence is dependent on indifference, i.e., his mind is
stimulated by the difference between present impressions and those
which have preceded.” American’s indifference, due to intensification,
has created two sets of mentalities within the populace; one either
exhibits a blasé demeanor, or one exhibits intellectualism. Simmel
simply states, “The essence of the blasé attitude is an indifference
toward the distinctions between things: the mental attitude of the
people of the metropolis to one another may be designated formally as
one of reserve,” i.e., one who is blasé is caught in the Matrix, in a
loop, saturated by indifference to the world around one; or if one is
intellectual, then one can see the incongruities by Bush and his
cronies, therefore, research and questioning can take precedence.
Though currently, throughout the world, other countries see us as a
global hegemon, which invades and occupies any country that we feel the
need to impose/interject our view of democracy. The great English
Empire of the past, is what our country was founded on, i.e., invading,
occupying, and conquering is what the colonial settlers did when the
came ashore and met the Native American Indians. The Natives befriended
the settlers, and taught them how to survive off the land. They also
taught the settlers about their government system, which is based on
democracy/bipartisanship. These settlers took aspects that they liked
and intertwined them into England’s Imperialistic tenets.
Surreptitiously, America was founded on Imperialism and sustained its
tenets under democracy; the Jewish people had been subjected to
extermination, as did the Africans, etc. But, the Natives were the
first North Americans to feel an Empire’s wrath, and thus, become
extirpated too, because of racism, elitism, and religion. Imperialism
and Christianity are ideals that are used to control a society via fear
and intimidation. Hence, an Empire using religion to push an agendum
that it wants, and as a consequence, that agendum is always beneficial
to the minority of rich and powerful pious families. “There is no doubt
in my mind there is a living God; and there is no doubt in my mind that
Lord, Christ, was sent by the Almighty. No doubt in my mind about that.
Today’s ceremony, I bet you, for millions of people, was
reaffirmation…and a way to make sure doubts don’t seep into your soul,”
said President Bush at the service for the deceased Pope John Paul II,
detailed in a Washington Post article: “Bush: Funeral a
‘Reaffirmation,” written on Saturday, April 9, 2005, by staff writer Jim
VandeHei. “A lot of Christians gain strength and confidence from seeing
His Holiness in the last stages of life,” as Bush expounded on his
impromptu harangue, “I think a walk in faith constantly confronts doubt,
as faith becomes more mature.” Because “you constantly confront, you
know, questions. My faith is strong; the Bible talks about; you got to
constantly stay in touch with the word of God in order to help you on
the walk.” His religious beliefs only underscore his idiocy as a
“leader” since he appoints himself as “doing God’s work.” One can only
assume that he was inferring that he was put here for the sole reason of
spreading the “truth” around the world, in countries that do not yearn
our religious and political tenets. Regardless, this is very precarious
for Americans and only reinforces all the tribulations in this
administration. Thereby, “Society as a whole is more and more spitting
up into two great hostile camps, into two great classes directly facing
each other, the Bourgeoisie and Proletariat,” reads The Manifesto of the Communist Party by
Karl Marx and Frederick Engels. Accordingly, underscoring the
assertion that it never truly benefits most Americans, the majority, but
rather, it benefits the already rich and powerful families, or, the
minority, so that they become more saturated and more narcissistic. “The
metropolis has always been the seat of money economy because the
many-sidedness and concentration of commercial activity have given the
medium of exchange an importance which it could not have acquired in the
commercial aspects of rural life,” insists Simmel, “In certain
apparently insignificant characteristics or traits of the most extreme
aspects of life are to be found a number of characteristics mental
tendencies; the modern mind has become more and more a calculating
one.” Furthermore, a term for these pious, upper elite and most
powerful families that Empires originate from are called the Illuminati.
The term Illuminati is the plural of the Latin, Illuminatus, which
means “one who is illuminated.” Thus, it means “a person who has
received the full extent of the commencement that is available through
Freemasonry.” Freemasonry, defined by Wikipedia’s free
encyclopedia, is “a worldwide fraternal organization; its members are
joined by shared ideals of both a moral and metaphysical nature, and, in
most of its branches, by a common belief in a Supreme Being.”
Moreover,
“Freemasonry is an esoteric art, in that certain aspects of its
internal work are not generally revealed to the public,” because
“freemasonry uses an initiatory system of degrees to explore ethical and
philosophical issues,” and “a peculiar system of morality veiled in
allegory and illustrated by symbols.” Microsoft Encarta defines
the Illuminati as “Greek illumination, name given to those who submitted
to Christian baptism. Those who were baptized were called illuminati or
illuminated ones by the Ante-Nicene clergy, on the assumption that
those who were instructed for baptism in the apostolic faith had an
enlightened understanding.” And today, the United States government, or
the current administration, is deceitfully intertwining Christian based
tenets into mainstream politics and eroding American’s civil
liberties. Religion is supposed to be separate from government; the
separation of church and state is the only way to instill a bipartisan
democratic government. Democracy is “free and equal representation of
people: the free and equal right of every person to participate in a
system of government, often practiced by electing representatives of the
people by the people,” defined by Encarta’s dictionary,
furthermore, a democratic nation is “a country with a government that
has been elected freely and equally by all its citizens.”
Unfortunately, this is not the case in America today. The results of
the last two elections in 2000, and 2004, were dubious in its execution,
especially the last one, which was even more in question, then the one
prior. As a result, the Bush Faction and his Cronies are pushing a
neo-conservative movement that promotes a doctrine titled, “Project for a
New America Century,” or its acronym: PNAC. Friedrich Nietzsche,
defines this ideology of Imperialists in The Genealogy of Morals,
first essay, “Good and Evil,” Good and Bad,” forebodingly. “These
bearers of the oppressive instincts that thirst for reprisal, the
descendants of every kind of European and non-European slavery, and
especially of the entire pre-Aryan populace—they represent the
regression of mankind!” This depicts and perpetuates Germany’s Nazi
dogma, “fear of the blond beast at the core of all noble races and in
being on one’s guard against it,” Nietzsche writes, i.e., contemporary
Imperial design, thereby, implies that preemption is at the forefront,
to keep other countries safe and thus, rule the world under one global
power under the guise of democracy. In addition, Nietzsche also
emphasizes his other creeds about good and evil/good and bad; “The
judgment of good did not originate with those to whom goodness was
shown; rather it was the good themselves that is to say, the noble,
powerful, high-stationed and high-minded, who felt and established
themselves and their actions as good that is, of the first rank, in
contradistinction to all the low, low-minded, common and plebeian,”
thus, buttressing how one group, a minority in essence, oppresses the
rest of the populace or the majority. Yet, somehow, these labels are
inverted, the rich are the minority and the poor are the majority.
Expressed poignantly by Marx and Engels’ theories on capitalism in The Manifesto of the Communist Party. They expound, “We
see, therefore, how the modern bourgeoisie is itself the product of
along course of development, of a series of revolutions in the modes of
production and of exchange,” and “Each step in the development of the
bourgeoisie was accompanied by a corresponding political advance of that
class.” Therefore, capitalism segregates the community into two classes
in society, the Bourgeoisie and the Proletarians or the rich and
powerful, and the poor and overworked. This system, in conjunction with
intrusive religious undertones, has eroded the entire political system;
and it’s continuing to condition the American populace, so that one
reign of power can control, oppress, and subjugate the very people it
was designed to protect. Moreover, the United States is taking their
ideals of nobility and superimposing them onto other societies in other
countries. Nietzsche also contests this self-imposed righteous nobility;
“The noble man, conceives the basic concept of good in advance and
spontaneously out of himself and only then creates for himself an idea
of bad,” additionally, “The two opposing values good and bad, good and
evil have been engaged in a fearful struggle on earth for thousands of
years; and there are still places where the struggle is as yet
undecided.” The United States as an entity is self-absorbed with their
own version of right and wrong, good and evil, or good and bad, as
Nietzsche profoundly asserted in The Genealogy of Morals, first
essay. Furthermore, the United States is mandating a social and verbal
lobotomy across the world, its own version of man-made Natural
Selection: mimicking Nature. “Let it be remembered how powerful the
influence of a single introduced tree or mammal has been shown to be,”
writes Charles Darwin in, On the Origin of the Species by Means of Natural Selection.
“Every slight modification, which in the course of ages, chanced to
arise, and which in any way favored the individuals of any of the
species, by better adapting them to their altered conditions, would tend
to be preserved; and natural selection would thus have free scope for
the work o improvement.” The United States is the “single tree” that
supplants itself into another country’s religious and political culture,
to permeate its own self-serving, egoistic dogma’s.
Insofar, what is being interposed is a neo-conservative movement, based on a doctrine titled, The Project for a New America Century, authored by the Secretary of Defense, Paul Wolfowitz, which can be accessed on-line @ http://newamericancentury.org/index.html, under the link, “Statement of Principles,” or http://newamericancentury.org/statementofprinciples.htm.
The doctrine reads, “American foreign and defense policy is adrift,”
and conservatives are “criticized” to resisting “isolationist impulses
from within their own ranks.” The conservatives “have not confidently
advanced a strategic vision of America's role in the world. They have
not set forth guiding principles for American foreign policy, and they
have not fought for a defense budget that would maintain American
security and advance American interests in the new century.” However,
“We aim to change this. We aim to make the case and rally support for
American global leadership. Does the United States have the resolve to
shape a new century favorable to American principles and interests?” It
asks, and then resumes, “We are living off the capital—both the military
investments and the foreign policy achievements—built up by past
administrations. Cuts in foreign affairs and defense spending, and
inconstant leadership are making it increasingly difficult to sustain
American influence around the world. And the promise of short-term
commercial benefits threatens to override strategic considerations. As a
consequence, we are jeopardizing the nation's ability to meet present
threats and to deal with potentially greater challenges that lie ahead.
A foreign policy that boldly and purposefully promotes American
principles abroad, and national leadership that accepts the United
States' global responsibilities. Of course, the United States must be
prudent in how it exercises its power. But, we cannot safely avoid the
responsibilities of global leadership or the costs that are associated
with its exercise. America has a vital role in maintaining peace and
security in Europe, Asia, and the Middle East. If we shirk our
responsibilities, we invite challenges to our fundamental interests.”
The narcissism of this doctrine is disturbingly ostensible, and
buttresses one of Nietzsche’s tenets; “One should be warned, moreover,
against taking these concepts pure and impure too ponderously or
broadly, not to say symbolically; all the concepts of ancient man were
rather at first incredibly uncouth, coarse, external, narrow,
straightforward, and altogether unsymbolical in meaning to a degree that
we can scarcely conceive,” from The Genealogy of Morals. Yet,
the Wolfowitz doctrine ignorantly continues, “The history of the 20th
century should have taught us that it is important to shape
circumstances before crises emerge, and to meet threats before they
become dire. The history of this century should have taught us to
embrace the cause of American leadership.” It also lists four tenets of
this “project;” one, “we need to increase defense spending
significantly if we are to carry out our global responsibilities today
and modernize our armed forces for the future,” two, “we need to
strengthen our ties to democratic allies and to challenge regimes
hostile to our interests and values,” three, “we need to promote the
cause of political and economic freedom abroad,” and four, “we need to
accept responsibility for America's unique role in preserving and
extending an international order friendly to our security, our
prosperity, and our principles.” Many signatures for this document are
revealing to say the least, Jeb Bush, Tallahassee’s Governor, and
brother of President George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, the Vice-president,
Donald Rumsfeld, the Secretary of Defense, Paul Wolfowitz, the Deputy
Secretary of Defence, Peter Rodman, Assistant Secretary of Defense, and
Vin Weber, the Vice Chairman of Empower America, former Minnesota Republican Congressman, and banker, has been a registered lobbyist for the Joseph E. Seagram & Sons, Mobil Corp, Microsoft, and the Edison Electric Institute, according
to the Center for Public Integrity. These people make up the faction
of cronies, that Bush has placed in key positions of government to
permeate this movement. In the book Imperial Design: Neoconservative and the New Pax Americana, by Gary Dorrien, he
attests that Bush and his “neo-cons” are fulfilling this movement,
“Having launched a total war on the world’s rogue states and terrorist
allies, the Bush administration produced a remarkable crop of doctrines
to support America’s total war. First came the doctrine of preemptive
attack against any enemy stat that possessed weapons of mass
destruction. Then came the doctrine of regime change against any such
state,” and “In England the Blair administration was staggered by public
outrage over the intelligence scandal and the Anglo/American failure to
find weapons of mass destruction. The United States is not merely
dominant; it assumes imperial responsibilities and reaps the benefits
that derive from them. It is the Imperial in the sense that it enforces
its own idea of world order in America’s interest; it presumes the
right to lay down the rules of trade, commerce, security, and political
legitimacy.” Furthermore, Dorrien asserts, “It assumes the burdens of
global maintenance, and it rewards or punishes countries on the basis of
their willingness to create open markets, support American military
policies, and establish democratic governments.” He too notices the rich
and powerful names; “Of the eighteen figures who signed the PNAC’s 1998
letter to Clinton calling for regime change in Iraq, eleven took
positions in the Bush administration; the signatories of that 1998
letter are today a Who’s Who of senior ranking officials in this
administration: Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, U.S. Trade
Representative Robert Zoellick, Deputy Secretary of State Richard
Armitage, Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz, Undersecretary of
State John Bolton, Undersecretary of State Paula Dobriansky, Assistant
Secretary of Defense Peter Rodman, and National Security Council senior
officials Elliot Abrams and Zalmay Khalilzad.” Also from his book,
pertaining to the United States’ pretext of democracy insidiously lurks,
the reality of America’s Imperialism. “A dominant great power acts
essentially alone, but, embarrassed at the idea and still worshipping at
the shrine of collective security [the United States] recruits a ship
here, a brigade there, and blessings all around to give its unilateral
actions a multilateral sheen,” says Charles Krauthammer, former speech
writer for President Walter Mondale, psychiatrist, a McGill University,
Oxford, and Harvard Yale Historian. He concludes, “Yet it does face a
serious threat to its dominance, indeed to its essential security; the
boldness of these policies—or, as much of the world contends, their
arrogance—is breathtaking.” This boldness, which the United States is
willing to adhere to, is eloquently illuminated in another part of Gary
Dorrien’s book Imperial Design; he mentions a Yale Historian named Paul Kennedy. In Kennedy’s book The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers,
he “argued America’s vitality was threatened by the same pattern of
imperial over commitments that dragged down Imperial Spain in the early
seventeenth century and the British Empire in the early twentieth
century; the military empire of the United States was created to protect
its increasingly far-flung economic interests and take economic and
strategic advantage of America’s powers.” Hence, the United States
invading and occupying many Middle Eastern countries. Nonetheless, an
Empire has to have a huge surplus of armed forces, “The United States
must retain sufficient forces able to rapidly deploy and win multiple
simultaneous large-scale wars and also to be able to respond to
unanticipated contingencies in regions where it does not maintain
forward-based forces; this resembles the two-war standard that has been
the basis of U.S. force planning over the past decade. Yet, this
standard needs to be updated to account for new realities and potential
new conflicts,” the PNAC doctrine contends. And subsequently,
conscription was recently and covertly brought to the House Floor, and
voted on, with most of the legislators voting it down. This vote was
reported in a Washington Post article, “GOP Brings Up Draft to
Knock It Down,” on October 6, 2004, by staff writers Charles Babington
and Don Oldenburg; nevertheless, President Bush can attain executive
powers by having many cronies he planted in key judicial positions, in
the Supreme Court enable him to subvert and distort many laws for this
Christian, Republican, partisan, neo-conservative agendum. Discerned
perfectly by James Bovard, the author of The Bush Betrayal; he
professes “It is naive to presume that Bush’s dictatorial power is no
threat to average Americans because he will only use it against bad
guys. A dictatorship rarely begins with public announcements of planned
future abuses. Instead, it is a gradual process, whittling away rights
and establishing one sweeping prerogative after another.” Bovard
includes some comments, verbatim, from a Bush interview conducted on December 16th,
2003, by ABC’s Diane Sawyer. Ms. Sawyer asked Bush whether he had gone
to war on false evidence. Bush replied by insisting that Saddam had
sought to acquire weapons. In her reply “Sawyer asked incredulously:
But stated as a hard fact, that there were weapons of mass destruction
as opposed to the possibility that he could move to acquire those
weapons still—” and Bush retorted: “So what’s the difference?” In
Bush’s continued spontaneous rant, he voiced a very insightful albeit
frightening remark. Bovard writes, “Bush confirmed his own morbid
narcissism in 2002” by spouting that “I’m the commander—see, I don’t
need to explain….That’s the interesting thing about being president….I
don’t feel like I owe anybody an explanation.” That statement by Bush
is so convoluted and perturbing that anyone could examine or
psychoanalyze the egomaniacal undertones of it. To illuminate the
indifferent, nefarious, and egoistic ways that Bush and his cronies
promote their lies, an “expert” on his deceit and deception exclaims,
“The size of the lie is a definite factor in causing it to be believed,
because the vast masses of a nation are, in the depths of their hearts,
more easily deceived than they are consciously and intentionally bad.”
Additionally, “The primitive simplicity of their minds renders them more
easy victims of a big lie than a small one, because they themselves
often tell little lies but would be ashamed to tell big ones; such a
form of lying would never enter their heads. They would never credit
others with the possibility of such great impudence as the complete
reversal of facts; even explanations would long leave them in doubt and
hesitation, and any trifling reason would dispose them to accept a thing
as true. Something therefore always remains and sticks from the most
imprudent of lies, a fact which all bodies and individuals concerned in
the art of lying in this world know only too well, and therefore they
stop at nothing to achieve this end,” wrote Adolph Hitler in the first
volume of Mein Kampf, originally published in 1925.
The civil liberties of Americans in 2005 and the future generations are in peril. In an article from the Washington Post,
“GOP Senators Back Pryor, Reject a democratic Deal” on Friday, May 13,
2005, by staff writers, Michael A. Fletcher and Charles Babington, the
“Republican-controlled Judiciary Committee approved another of President
Bush’s nominees to a federal appeals court, despite the threats from
Democrats to block the nomination with a filibuster on the Senate floor.
Democrats used the filibuster which requires 60 votes to be stopped in
the 100-member Senate—to block Pryor’s nomination during Bush’s second
term.” However, the Bush administration and the huge Republican
contingency want to repeal the filibuster used by Democrats, so that the
Christian based Republicans, can impose more of their dogma’s against
the civil liberties of the American people. “We stand here on the
precipice of a constitutional crisis,” stated Charles E. Schumer
(D-N.Y.). In a follow up article by the Washington Post article, “Democrats,
GOP End Talks on Filibusters,” on Tuesday, May 17, 2005, by staff
writers, Shailagh Murray and Dan Balz, the erosion of the filibuster
looms near. The Pew Research Center released a poll showing that “35
percent of Americans still did not have an opinion” about Bush and his
Republican bedfellows plans to expunge the only true “checks and
balances” in a bi-partisan government, the filibuster, because Americans
are doing “normal science.” Strikingly, but more interestingly, one
influential group largely that has removed itself from the clash is
corporate America; “We have been decidedly staying out of it and hoping
that leveler heads will prevail,” said a National Association of
Manufacturer’s spokesman. Corporate America is reluctant to “turn
against the Republicans,” because they are cautious of a “strife-torn
Senate killing pro-business items,” e.g., asbestos settlements.
President Bush is gerrymandered political parties for his Christian
based, neo-conservative, totalitarian agendum. Including, the
propensity to infringe upon the civil liberties of Americans,
vicariously via the fear of terrorism, and mendacity, to create an
oppressed country, as a consequence, fulfilling the goal of the PNAC set
of guidelines for an Empire. These anomalies were not perceived by the
populace and due to Americans not “thinking outside the box,” and
continuing to “do normal science,” society forfeits its rights
unwittingly and uncontested. Thomas Kuhn explains paradigms in The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, chapter III, “The Nature of Normal Science” and chapter X, “Revolutions as Changes of World View”:
how people possess a narrow-minded view of something, and how hard it
is to change that viewpoint. “A paradigm is an accepted model or
pattern, and that aspect of its meaning has enabled me,” Kuhn states,
“The success of a paradigm is at the start largely a promise of success
discoverable in selected and still incomplete examples.” Therefore, the
populace does “normal science,” and too frequently, “never think
outside the box.” Kuhn expounds on this, “A part of normal theoretical
work, through only a small part, consists simply in the use of existing
theory to predict factual information of intrinsic value.” So,
Americans continue doing “in the box thinking,” and never have an
epiphany, i.e., a scientific revolution. “Normal science ultimately
leads only to the recognition of anomalies and to crises. After a
scientific revolution many old measurements and manipulations become
irrelevant and are replaced by others instead. In addition, we shall
see that occasionally the old manipulation in its new role will yield
different concrete results,” writes Kuhn. Therefore, all the actions by
this administration are the anomalies that represent unheeded
forewarnings. And now the United States is in a full-scale invasion and
occupation in Iraq; a war that was initiated for feckless reasons, as
reported in a Washington Post article, “Data on Iraqi Arms Flawed, Panel Says,” by Washington Post
staff writers Walter Pincus & Peter Baker, on Friday, April 1,
2005. It was reported that a Presidential commission reports states
that the government’s collection of information leading to the 2003
invasion of Iraq cited its data “either worthless or misleading” and its
analysis “riddled with errors.” Thus, resulting in one of the “most
damaging intelligence failures in recent American history.” In the 692
page report, it has been determined that Bush and his administration
still have not fixed the problems, and the panel recommended 74
recommendations intended to “transform” the intelligence bureaucracy
that is “fragmented, loosely managed and poorly coordinated.” House
Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi said, “The president’s decision to go to
war in Iraq was also dead wrong; the investigation will not be complete
unless we may have used or misused intelligence to pursue its own
agenda.” This agendum is expressively depicted in “Hijacking Catastrophe: 9/11, Fear & the Selling of American Empire,”
a documentary directed by Jeremy Earp, and Sut Jhally. The documentary
accurately exposes a neoconservative, unilateral, totalitarian movement,
so that one race, one family or one empire can control the world via
fear, and military supremacy. In one decisive interview, Karen
Kwiatkowski, Air Force Lt. Col., asserts her troubling experiences,
while working in an office that was overseeing many documents stating
supposed reasons for a justified war in Iraq. “Some of these documents
imply possibilities that Saddam or Iraq might possess weapons of mass
destruction, either biological or nuclear,” asserts Kwiatkowski, and
that the “administration took bits and parts out of context” from the
“all of the reports generated,” and then “carefully manipulated them, to
justify an occupation or war.” However, those contentions are
“feckless.” She also illuminates a conspicuous coincidence; if one looks
at where all the major bases are in Iraq, then one will ascertain that
all the bases are coincidentally beside the major oil line, and
furthermore, that this main oil line is being heavily protected by
American soldiers.
“Man selects only for his own good; Nature only for that of the being which she tends,” writes Charles Darwin, from On the Origin of the Species by Means of Natural Selection,
in 1859; “Man can act only on external and visible characters; nature
cares nothing for appearances, except in so far as they may be useful to
any being. She can act on every internal organ, on every shade of
constitutional difference, on the whole machinery of life.” This
neo-conservative movement also displays man mimicking nature via natural
selection; “Every slight modification, which in the course of ages
chanced to arise, and which in any way favored the individuals of any of
the species, by better adapting them to their altered conditions; and
natural selection would thus have free scope for the work of
improvement.” Meaning, in a Marxist viewpoint, Capitalism segregated
the people into two divisions, where the minority, or the rich, own and
rule the lower class, or the majority. Thus, creating an imbalance in
society of oppression and Capitalism. “The need of a constantly
expanding market for its products chases the bourgeoisie over the whole
surface of the globe,” says Marx, in the Manifesto of the Communist Party,
“It must nestle everywhere, settle everywhere, establish connections
everywhere.” Expounding further, “All old-established national
industries, whose introduction becomes a life and death question for all
civilized nations, by industries that no longer work up indigenous raw
material, but raw material drawn from the remotest zones; industries
whose products are consumed, not only at home, but in every quarter of
the globe.” The abovementioned by Marx and Engles, forebode the evil
ways of Capitalism; the engrossing and excessive attributes that it
manifests. Also, “The bourgeoisie has torn away from the family its
sentimental veil, and has reduced the family relation to a mere money
relation; the bourgeoisie cannot exist without revolutionizing the
instruments of production, and thereby the relations of production, and
with them the whole relations of society; the bourgeoisie has through
its exploitation of the world-market given a cosmopolitan character to
production and consumption in every country.” And oil is the most
desired resource by this administration and Bush’s personal ambition of
starting an oil company. “George W. Bush returned to Midland, TX, in
the late 1970s to follow his father's footsteps in the oil business.
Beginning in 1978, he set up a series of limited partnerships - Arbusto
'78, Arbusto '79, to drill for oil,” writes Rick Wiles, from American
Freedom News.com. Arbusto means, “Bush” in Spanish. “Salem bin Laden,
Osama's older brother, was an investor in Arbusto Energy, as was James
Bath, a Houston aircraft broker. Bath served with President Bush in the
Texas Air National Guard. Bath has a mysterious connection to the
Central Intelligence Agency,” says Wiles, and “Doing business with the
enemy is nothing new to the Bush family. Much of the Bush family wealth
came from supplying needed raw materials and credit to Adolf Hitler's
Third Reich.” Moreover, Bush’s clandestine relationship makes a mockery
of his egoistic harangues. Wiles comments, “When President George W.
Bush froze assets connected to Osama bin Laden, he didn't tell the
American people that the terrorist mastermind's late brother was an
investor in the president's former oil business in Texas. He also hasn't
leveled with the American public about his financial connections to a
host of shady Saudi characters involved in drug cartels, gun smuggling,
and terrorist networks.” Additionally, Wiles adds, “President Bush
certainly is aware of that his former Saudi sugar daddy is still
financing Osama bin Laden's terrorist network. USA Today
newspaper reported in 1999, a year after bin Laden's attacks on US
embassies in Africa, Khaled bin Mahfouz and other wealthy Saudis were
funneling tens of millions of dollars each year into bin Laden's bank
accounts. Five top Saudi businessmen ordered the National Commercial Bank to transfer personal funds and $3 million pilfered from a Saudi pension fund to the Capitol Trust Bank in New York City. The money was deposited into the Islamic Relief and Bless Relief—Islamic
charities operating in the US and Great Britain as fronts for Osama bin
Laden.” He also remarks about a Halliburton derivative, “Abdullah Taha
Bakhsh, the Arab who cosigned the $25 million cash infusion into George
W. Bush's Harken Energy Corporation, appointed Talat Othman to manage
his 17.6 percent share in Harken Energy Corp. Othman, a native
Palestinian, is the president and CEO of Dearborn Financial Inc., an
investment firm in Arlington Heights, IL.” As noted in “House of
Bush/House of Saud” by Craig Unger, “Saudi Arabia owns 8% of the Gross
Domestic Product in America, because the Saudis have loaned and spent
$100’s of millions in the United States and invested/subsidized huge
conglomerates in America.
Contemporary Americans unfortunately display Kuhnian tenets of “normal science” and perpetual “paradigms,” even when anomalies expose themselves. Moreover, Simmelian aspects of “The Metropolis” and “Mental Life” easily are most of many American’s demeanor. One either personifies a blasé attitude or practices Intellectualism.
And obviously Darwinism applies to culture, the propagation and progeny
of the human race in the world. Additionally, via evolution,
paradigms, and capitalism, the human race as individual cultures,
created dogmas of good and evil, and therefore, Empires or Imperialism
could subjugate the very people it pretends to serve, via tyranny in the
semblance of good or nobility. When in truth it is a partisan,
religious, and heavily egoistic, serving one purpose, an Empire’s. For
example, presently, the fourth anniversary of the World Trade Center
tragedy is upon America, and there are no better answers to what
happened. The war is raging on, and thousands of American
soldiers—children—are killed. Companies such as Halliburton are being
awarded numerous no-bid contracts by this administration, as reported in
various newspapers, e.g., the Washington Post, and the NY Times, including, Gary Dorrien, author of Imperial Design: Neoconservative and the New Pax Americana.
He writes, “The Bush administration’s favor to Oil-services Company
Halliburton alone were enormous, beginning with a no-bid federal
contract for Iraqi reconstruction projects that was signed six months
before the invasion. By the time that American troops entered Baghdad,
Cheney’s former company held $425 million in work orders for troops
support projects in Kuwait, Turkey, Jordan, and Iraq; $28 million for
POW camps in Iraq; $40 million to fight oil-well fires in Iraq; and $70
million for Iraq reconstruction projects. And by the end of the year,
contracts for upcoming oil infrastructure repairs exceeded $6 billion,
and Wolfowitz publicly told France and Germany not to bother applying.”
Dick Cheney, the Vice-president, is still receiving deferred payments
for his help with Halliburton’s allotted contracts, a contention he
denies via the media. In addition to the daily report from the New York
Stock Exchange, that the price of oil is increasing, weakening the
economy, and despite this, Bush and his administration contend that
democracy is being implemented in Iraq, but the truth is the antithesis
of that claim. Newspapers such as The Washington Post and The New York Times
post almost daily columns that Iraq is in shambles, and the Iraqis want
the Americans to leave and end their occupation. Notwithstanding,
George W. Bush’s father, George H.W. Bush, still keeps his extended
family-to-family relationship with Osama Bin Laden’s family, by visiting
them in Saudi Arabia. Not to mention, President George W. Bush is the
best of friends with the Crown Prince Abdullah of Saudi Arabia, and
Prince Bandar Bin Sultan Abdul Aziz of Saudi Arabia. Surprisingly,
Prince Bandar Bin Sultan Abdul Aziz was the one on the phone with
President Bush and Condoleezza Rice, the National Security Advisor,
during the first 48 hours following the attack, and all of them
coordinated the exodus of the 141 Saudis, which included several dozen
family members of Bin Laden; just one of the abundant anomalies in the
book House of Bush / House of Saud by Craig Unger. Represented by
Thomas Kuhn’s assertions about “The Nature of Normal Science” and
“Revolutions as Changes of World View” from his book The Structure of
Scientific Revolutions. “A paradigm is an accepted model or pattern, and
in a standard application, the paradigm functions by permitting the
replication of examples any one of which could in principle serve to
replace it,” Kuhn writes. In Kuhnian terms, this paradigm has produced
an anomaly, hence, the questionable “exodus” of so many blood relatives
of Bin Laden, therefore, the American populace’s failure to notice and
draw attention to the disputed, is Americans performing “normal
science,” and not “thinking outside the box,” and “even more important,
during revolutions scientists see new and different things when looking
with familiar instruments in places they have looked before; therefore,
at times of revolution, when the normal-scientific tradition changes,
the scientists perception of his environment must be re-educated-in some
familiar situations he must learn to see a new gestalt,” writes Kuhn.
The failure of a scientific revolution is ostensible, “What occurs
during a scientific revolution is not fully reducible to a
reinterpretation of individual and stable data; given a paradigm,
interpretation of data is central to the enterprise that explores it;
but that interpretative enterprise, can only articulate a paradigm, not
correct it.” And that theory/supposition is vividly clear. A
scientific revolution needs to be come to the forefront of the American
people, politically. “Normal science ultimately leads only to the
recognition of anomalies and to crises; after a scientific revolution
many old measurements and manipulations become irrelevant and are
replaced by others instead. In addition, we shall see that occasionally
the old manipulation in its new role will yield different concrete
results.” When the paradigm shifts, the truth is unmolested and the
populace can determine its own perspective, as an individual, and as a
Nation. “If you would be a real seeker after truth, it is necessary that
at least once in your life you doubt, as far as possible, all things. It is only prudent never to place complete confidence in that by which we have even once been deceived,” said Rene Descartes.
Works Cited
Bovard, James. The author of The Bush Betrayal (2004).
Darwin, Charles. On the Origin of the Species by Means of Natural Selection (1859).
Dorrien, Gary. Imperial Design: Neoconservative and the New Pax Americana (2004).
Hitler, Adolph. Mein Kampf, Volume I. (1925).
Kennedy, Paul. The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers (1989).
Kuhn, Thomas. The
Structure of Scientific Revolutions, chapter III, “The Nature of Normal
Science” and chapter X, “Revolutions as Changes of World View” (1962).
Marx, Karl. The Manifesto of the Communist Party (1848).
Nietzsche, Friedrich. The Genealogy of Morals, Good and Evil,” Good and Bad (1887).
Simmel, George. The Metropolis and Mental Life (1950).
Unger, Craig. House of Bush/House of Saud (2004).
Bush interview conducted on December 16th, 2003, by ABC’s Diane Sawyer
Washington Post 9 April, 2005.
VandeHei, Jim. “Bush: Funeral a ‘Reaffirmation”
Washington Post 6 October, 2004.
Babington, Charles and Oldenburg, Don. “GOP Brings Up Draft to Knock It Down”
Washington Post 13 May, 2005.
Babington, Charles and Fletcher, A. Michael. “GOP Senators Back Pryor, Reject a democratic Deal”
Washington Post 17 May, 2005.
Murray, Shailagh and Balz, Dan. “Democrats, GOP End Talks on Filibusters”
Washington Post 1 April, 2005.
Pincus, Walter and Baker, Peter. “Data on Iraqi Arms Flawed, Panel Says”
Earp,
Jeremy and Jhally, Sut. (2004). Hijacking Catastrophe: 9/11, Fear &
the Selling of American Empire. Media Education Foundation
Microsoft Encarta. 1 May, 2005 < http://encarta.msn.com/>
The Project for a New America. 1 May, 2005 <http://newamericancentury.org/index.html> or http://newamericancentury.org/statementofprinciples.htm>
Wikipedia. 1 May, 2005 < http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page>
Comments
Post a Comment