The text describes the U.N. as a controlling structure with omnipotent power over the world. This structure is created in an effort to prevent world crisis. It is not only a protective measure for individuals but also for governments of the world. The U.N. is unfortunately an organization which decides what is universally good. They are the law upon which every subscribing state's law is based, inherited by the monarchy and liberal models proposed by Hobbs and Locke. It is not a collaboration, but rather another type of power entirely, an Empire, as the authors suggest. They talk about "just wars" as wars approved by a community for the "greater good". They have a right to make "peace wars", though the term is ironic because the U.N. says it is good and because it is good, the local government has to agree with them. War, to them, isbanalised and absolutised . Because it appears to be everlasting, the Empire cannot be overruled or overthrown by those few who disagree with them, but they are scared of that possibility. By undermining their authority, the latter begins to deplete. To remain successful, the empire must convey to the public that their power is necessary. The empire is not disconnected from local government. It is directly affected by the changes occurring in global populations. Their declines are related. Conditioning humans to the desires of the empire forms bio power. A power structure which is innately built and harvested in populations. The distinction between local and global is a false impression of the power situation. Humans revolt once they become aware of an internal conflict between the implanted laws and their beliefs. This is different from Foucault's point of view. Our world runs on money. Those who hold the most, are able to sway policies. They are the elite. Through communication media, the political power, imagination and symbolic forms influence humans. News media and non-governmental organisations identify universal needs and defend human rights, leaving the actual task of addressing the problem to the Empire. Moral intervention by theseNGO's prepares the stage for the Empire to make military interventions. Denouncing and peace-talking, in a sense, comes before the actual act of war-making to bring on that peace. "Just war" as well as rights are supported by the "moral police" (theNGO's ), just as they are supported by the local police. The UN is located in a space without borders. It is in a flexible environment, everywhere and nowhere and the same time. It has been created to fashion an illusion of security in the lower working class.
Stalin says "one death is a tragedy, one million deaths is a statistic". One death is tragic, personalised, it has a name. On the other hand, a million deaths are faceless, easier to swallow for the masses who are tuned in to the crisis or war. Those deaths are just as tragic, but rendered less so by the fact that we can't possibly imagine all those lives slipping away. We cannot think in or conceive such large terms or numbers, it is too overwhelming. Stalin killed approximately 20 millions Russians. There he dismisses those deaths as unimportant in the face of his campaign of power. Such words also make sense when contextualised with the U.N.'s "just war" concept. Do they happen to care how many die? We think not. Their goal is to police the world on their terms, regardless of the number of deaths. Canadians penetrated Iraq in an effort to keep "peace". This duty has become a cleanup of American devastation. Although there has been recent revolt against this, it mostly passed subtly thanks to the approval from the Empire. If we are to take this new knowledge to the next level, we must find a way to govern our planet effectively. One approach to this is an independent third party. Someone unbiased and uninfluenced by this planet's money would be a good candidate. Our governments could report to the independent third party for it to make uninfluenced suggestions. We believe the ideal implementation of this anti-empire is an alien race charged with managing our planet. Visions of the world will always be affected by social class. This is important in Marxist theory. The bourgeois class is more educated while the proletariat find it difficult to climb this ladder. This is not only a social problem, it is faced by many who wish to pursue post-secondary education. Foucault analyses the whole of society. In the video shown in class, it is normal that the two philosophers project different opinions as they come for different sociopolitical backgrounds. In the movie Equilibrium, everyone has to take a pill to eliminate their emotions and supervise them, make them more controllable. The society dominates all on earth. We mention this movie because, in the text, they mention that "the formation of a new right is inscribed in the deployment of prevention, repression, and rhetorical force aimed at the reconstruction of social equilibrium: all this is proper o the activity of police.".
In fact, is it possible that comtemporary society should revert to living without Empires like the UN in an effort to develop more humanly?
1 comment:
i like......
Post a Comment