Integrations – instrument of hegemony

Soviet Union fell apart in 1990., and in 2001. there was an Islamist attack against World Trade Center. Yet NATO survived during those ten years. So did the World Trade Organization.

Advocates of integrations come exclusively from countries which achieved their sovereignty and stability on the principles of individuality; first and foremost United States of America. But after the fall of USSR, NATO is increasingly focused on cultural and economic activities. Intellectuals, especially Western ones, are quick to denounce nationalism, even though it was nationalism which showed a path to freedom from the Communist dominance to countries of the Eastern Europe. Does this reveal a hidden goal of integrations, that is to enslave countries which achieved their freedom in 1990s? Quite likely.

In 1995., studies about expansion of NATO imposed following “military” requirements for membership: interoperability, acceptance of NATO doctrine and politics of standardization, and compliance with 1.200 agreements and publications. Due to requirements for standardization and interoperability, NATOs military integration is inseparable from trade integrations. And Conservatives in the USA always saw NATO as an institution which has to remain under complete control of Washington, without giving any power to its European partners.

All the Western integrations – NATO, EU, WTO – push the same requirements on new members: “cut the budget, reduce the government”. It is irrelevant wether these integrations are nominally of military (NATO), governmental (EU) or economic (WTO) character. United States have 4,3% of world populace, yet represent 37% of the world spending on military (in 1997., US had 5% of world populace and represented 36% of world military spending). United States spend more on military than next ten biggest spenders combined – most of them US allies. Between 1986. and 1994. world military expenditure dropped by 35,2%, but US expenditure dropped only by 21%. Pentagon is also horrifically non-transparent, losing billions without even knowing where they go. Meanwhile, 43% of Americans are insufficiently literate. EU is (still) enslaved to United States, and United Nations are completely impotent. In 1980s, USA sent 200 million USD worth of weapons to Somali dictatorial government, to spend 2 billion USD on stabilizing it later; still, Somalia debacle more often is used to point to ineffectiveness of United Nations. US share in weapons sales to Third World went from 48,5% in 1991. to 75% in 1993., and down to about one third in 2016.

Integrations may sound nice in theory, but in reality they are rather devilish. They change internal structure and international position of every country. Southeast European Cooperation Idea was forced by Washington and Bruxelles as a way of destroying sovereignity of all countries participating in it; Croatia joined in 2000. under antinational Communist government.

European Union itself has two purposes. First, it is a way for old European colonial empires to conquer other nation-states, primarily in Southern and Eastern Europe. Second, it is a way to intimidate countries outside Europe, primarily in Africa and Middle East. Military action in Iraq, Libya and Mali, as well as European integration and no-borders policy have a single goal: destruction of nation-states and imposing of regimes and policies acceptable to Western capitalists. France has moved back into Mali, and Germany back into German East Africa (now Tanzania).

The arrangements being made by the EU with India are to expand the Single European neo-liberal Market. India is to open her borders and privatise in exchange for free movement of labour as well as capital. Meanwhile, trade arrangements between US and EU are tailored to advantage of transnational corporations and banks, being designed to override powers of national governments and remove any controls of flow of capital. Transnational corporations and banks want to remove all restrictions on their objectives to have free movement of capital, services, goods and labour. European Round Table of Industrialists (ERT), a powerful lobby in Brussels, has promoted the EU at each stage. The ERT has pressed for and helped draft various EU treaties, the neo-liberal Single European Market and single currency.

Result of transnational policies, centralization and reduction of powers of national governments has been a crisis, both political and economic one, and reduction in the economic growth of Europe. The privatization of many important portions of public sector has been choreographed by EU policies, directives and regulations. National governments, already bought out by capitalists, have rubber stamped these destructive policies. European Union is anthithetic to nation-state and its accompanying institutions of democracy, national self-determination and freedom of speech and action. EUs common policies, directives and legislation are all designed to hand all aspects of the public sector to privateers, including crucial things such as regulation, defense, welfare and education. But its basic goal is to divert money from the public into pockets of select few capitalists and bankers, and to reverse the historic gains of the French Revolution. Modern right-wing, with its opposition to socialism, and left-wing, with its opposition to nationalism, are both puppets used to further the goals of capitalism while preventing any actual opposition by providing controlled opposition that is no danger to capitalists.

Advertisements


Categories: politics, Uncategorized

Tags: , , , , , , ,

8 replies

  1. I’m inclined to agree with this – neoliberalism is a terrible weapon that has been used to destroy the living standards of society.

    Basically what has happened is a looting of public goods from the very wealthy. There is no sense of interest for the common good. It is all about private profit and ultimately, the rich. Nationalism is rising because people realize that their politicians do not have their best interests at heart. Nobody in this world will look out for their nation’s interests but the people living in the nation. I think that the neoliberals try to portray economic nationalism as racism because they know that if they compete on facts, their lies would be exposed. The neoliberals want to create an environment where corporations and a few oligarchs loot society without any restriction.

    Given that the CDI, now the Strauss Reform Project under POGO has documented how much the US understates the amounts that the US spends on military, I would be interested to see if it is just 37%. Other nations also understate, but I suspect not as much as the US. I would not be surprised to discover if the real number is over 50% of the world’s military spending is American.

    • “Nationalism is rising because people realize that their politicians do not have their best interests at heart. Nobody in this world will look out for their nation’s interests but the people living in the nation.”

      Agreed. Without nationalism, democracy is impossible except at a very small (town) scale, because people will not feel loyalty to each other. That is why transnational integrations are a big hit now, politicians and capitalists are trying to weaken nationalism, and thus democracy as well.

      “I think that the neoliberals try to portray economic nationalism as racism because they know that if they compete on facts, their lies would be exposed. The neoliberals want to create an environment where corporations and a few oligarchs loot society without any restriction.”

      Precisely. Transnational institutions not only do not answer to nations, they do not answer to anyone, except their owners. And that is in the very core of the love of neoliberals for transnationalism, freeing corporations from restrictions that prevent free-for-all looting of societies. And, ironically, the left wing with its rampant transnationalism and globalism actually helps them in that.

      “Given that the CDI, now the Strauss Reform Project under POGO has documented how much the US understates the amounts that the US spends on military, I would be interested to see if it is just 37%.”

      I wanted to be conservative here, precisely because we don’t know how much other countries understate their spending. US easily halve their defense spending, but China at least (and maybe Russia) might be understating it even more.

      • Fair enough – we don’t know how much China and Russia spend. Assuming everyone understates by a comparable amount though, I suppose the percentages are accurate.

        It does seem like democracy is difficult to sustain with a multicultural population. Kenya is an example:
        http://digitalcommons.uconn.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1165&context=econ_wpapers

        On the other hand, here in Canada there does seem to have been some degree of success in integrating different groups of people from around the world. Perhaps it is a function of geography though and Canada’s relatively selective immigration process.

        • It is a function of several things, actually. First is that Canada still has population which is predominantly from European cultural sphere. Second is that it is a relatively prosperous nation, so it can tolerate greater population diversity as there is less cause for conflict (but as France shows, even this does not go forever). And third is, as you have mentioned, an immigration process.

  2. The last decades, the world is heading towards a new feudalism.These hyper-nation political structures, acting as empires, have been promoted as the solution to wars, global famine, corruption etc in this globalised world. However, looking the recent crisis, I would argue that this is not the case. This new medievalism, as proposed by Hedley Bull in The Anarchical Society (great book, a must-read), tends to overpass the sovereignty of nation states- one may see very clearly this structure in EU: Brussels act as the new Holy Emperor of the new Holy Roman Empire (EU), mediating between the barons (the states). In all cases, he cannot do as he pleases and is the stronger baron the actual force behind the empire.

    In all cases, this meta-nation structure is for surely reinforced from the new ”Long depression (2008-…). As in 1873, the Long Depressions reinforced a new colonial era, increasing the imperial status of the political structures, the same happens now, too; a new colonial era has spread out, with the state nations suffering under the economic burden of debt. The worse part is that the Long depression, when stopped in 1896, sprang a new series of wars: The Balkan wars and eventually the WWI. I am afraid that the outcome will now also be the same…

    • “The last decades, the world is heading towards a new feudalism.”

      Indeed it is. But it may be even worse than that. Feudal lords were under social contract of sorts, an obligation to protect their peasants so that they would have someone to rip off. But modern corporations, due to overpopulation, do not have that obligation. With 7 billion people and counting, humans are a renewable resource. Hence import of Muslims into Western nations, to force down labour costs and nullify all human and worker rights that Western people have managed to force. Islam, due to its denial of value of individual, hostility to critical thought and propensity for conflict, is a perfect ally in that project.

      “As in 1873, the Long Depressions reinforced a new colonial era, increasing the imperial status of the political structures, the same happens now, too; a new colonial era has spread out, with the state nations suffering under the economic burden of debt.”

      Agreed. And instead of acting through colonialist nation-states, modern colonial forces – capitalists, as always – act through transnational institutions. British Empire, French Empire etc. have been replaced by the European Union, IMF, World Bank… but the principle is the same: ripping off people for the profit of capitalists. However, people tend to focus on the ambalage way too much, so they invariably blame nationalism for colonialism, and fail to see that modern internationalism is nothing but 15th-19th century colonialism in the new attire.

      “The worse part is that the Long depression, when stopped in 1896, sprang a new series of wars: The Balkan wars and eventually the WWI. I am afraid that the outcome will now also be the same…”

      World War III is inevitable. The question is not “IF” but “WHEN”.

      • Another possibility is a French Revolution across multiple nations around the world. This may very well prove to be a lesser evil, although if it does lead to the rise of a person like Napoleon, perhaps your WWIII scenario is inevitable.

        The rich ignore history at their own peril – and ours too. They need to look at the cause of the rise of fascism and revolution.

        • The rich… don’t care. Hitler was actually financed by the Western capitalists (Ford etc.), both before and during World War II, and they were fully aware of his plans.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: