Friday, December 09, 2005

Globalization: Western Culture, Democracy and Interests Paradox

We might think that globalization and trade activities between countries are a key factor for making a meaningful progress in the overall health and wealth. Is it right? Rest assure that this debate can not be covered in this short column, there are too many complex factors involved, among them traditions, cultures, religions, economies, geographical structure, politics, ego, interests and much more. However, I wanted to point out one factor that build up a paradox that the whole world will have to deal with, and from my point of view, it better be soon.
Don't Be Naive !!! The western culture, although being built of democracy, is also built of rules. Our education is based on the common understanding that says that people should act based on a global and mutual social interests, and by applying to the rules we will live peaceful and can expect for having the tools and capabilities to gain more progress in our life, either it is financial, spiritual, educational, or other. It is also common to think that this is the right way to live in order to increase the overall satisfaction and efficiency, just by being collaborative and conforms to the common rules. The democracy gives us the right to choose between alternatives and the ability to show our individualism, as long it is being based on the common rules. This is nice, as long as we are all sharing the same faith, common understanding, and similar education. What happens when we don't? Well, I want to tell you that in the global world this just don't work and that we are all naive (yes, me too. Well - not any more). The western countries are currently facing a critical challenge, their own rules putting them in dangerous and it is time to understand that yesterday's rules does not apply to the future, and domestic rules are different than exterior ones. Also, there must be alternative rules, or better say alternative ways for dealing with situations that your rules does not thought about.
You might ask yourself what am I talking about. I'm talking about terror, terrorism, terrorists and the way the world is dealing with them. I'm talking about the long processes that we have to comply with when we are dealing with evil enemies, those that are not sharing the common understanding with us and are using our own rules cynically to work for them. We give them the tools to publicly judge us under soft eyes of bleeding hearted public, whilst our enemies are not judged at all. Our democracy enforce us to allow open communication even in critical situations. The reporters that can not enter into the other lines and show their actual evil, are busying in showing our own acts with much more criticism that we deserve, leaving no place for doing the "right thing" since everything is under everybody's eyes. - This is naive I must tell you. Some saw says, "When you are at Rome, act as a Roman" - are we?

The "flattening of the world" makes us more vulnerable for being the victims of evil forces since there are much more alternatives for small groups to organize plan and move from one place to another, using basic low-cost tools. Decisions can be made in a distance, and it is relatively more difficult to track such organizations today due to the mass means of message deliveries that exist - this is one of the major cynical ways of using our own tools to attack us, the Internet which was built in the USA is now used against it, and against the modern world.

The United Nations organization supposed to be the competent authority for solving problems such that. So does (maybe) the international justice court in Hague. The problem from my point of view is that both organizations are either using double standards, or not familiar with the situation they are facing with. When each of these organization condemns Israel for its some kind of reaction, and cannot do the same for a suicide bomber, I see it as a brute double standard (without getting into the question whether Israel is right or wrong). If this is the case, how can we expect the suicide bombers to stop doing so? Isn't it supposed to be a trivial act to condemn such kind of "solution"? - When the evil is condemned, it is basically done through a long process. Take the Iraqi crisis for example. Is the long "play" of Saddam Hussein with the UN observers sound reasonable? It took them years to understand that collaboration will not be made. Another sample, the Palestinian authority. Israel through Osslo's agreement started to "pay" by providing its share of the agreement. The Palestinians from the other hand are keeping to educate their children for war, and building a new generation of fighters and suicide bombers, instead of sticking to their side of the agreement - which will bring them new opportunities, prosperity and much more joy and potential.

Call for action: My call for action is to form a new agenda in the political life. A one that is much more responsible and less hesitant. One that will put the interests of well being at the top, and will not use double standards. One that can be controlled and criticized, but not by the overall public in a way that gives ways to the civil enemies to use it cynically. A special body should be built in order to perform such control, but also to enforce proper education that will maintain the overall integrity. Our rules should be apply to anyone that participate in our culture and act under the same rules. All the others, should be treated by a different set of rules, in some cases even with their own rules.


Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home