->  SNETNEWS  Mailing List



The Progressive Review
5/24/99 Sam Smith

There is a long tradition of those educated beyond their intelligence
believing that politics could be vastly improved if the annoying question of
consent of the governed were eliminated and matters left to people like
themselves. In this century, manifestations of this self-serving perversion
have included the early progressive movement with its government by experts,
the rise of government by foundation, and urban regionalization with its
transfer of power from elected officials to appointed technocrats. W.J.
Clinton and the other Third Wayers are out of the same mold, except that
instead of seeking to destroy a city's politics they apparently hope to
regionalize and de-democratize the whole globe. These are people, after all,
who believe firmly that they -- rather than any policy or program -- are the
solution to our problems.

This megalomania is rarely expressed directly but a recent article by Vaclav
Havel in that intellectual Leisure World for decaying liberals -- The New
York Review of Books -- comes close. Here are two excerpts of Havel's
defense of the war:

"In the next century I believe that most states will begin to change from
cultlike entities charged with emotion into far simpler and more civilized
entities, into less powerful and more rational administrative units that
will represent only one of the many complex and multileveled ways in which
our planetary society is organized."

"The practical responsibilities of the state -- its legal powers -- can only
devolve in two directions, downward or upward; downward, to the
nongovernmental organizations and structures of civil society; or upward, to
regional, transnational and global organizations."

Thus in a few paragraphs, Havel scraps democracy at every level of society
leaving us to be run, presumably, by business improvement districts and
NATO. It is a profoundly anti-democratic view, because at none of Havel's
levels is the consent of the governed considered. We are being asked, I
suppose, to scrap that "cultlike entity," the United States of America, for
that far more humane one run by General Wesley Clark.

Even the United Nations gets short-shrift in this new world order, which
should surprise no one observing the Clinton's regime's contempt for that
body. The UN -- unlike such independent, non-elected virtual empires such as
the World Bank, IMF and NATO -- at least is a controlled creature of
representative and non-representative governments. In Havel's vision --
clearly not his alone -- such control will be dispensed with.

In his new book, former UN Secretary General Boutros Boutros-Ghali describes
Madeleine Albright, that leader of the new world order. She seemed to have,
he writes, "little interest in the difficult diplomatic work of persuading
her foreign counterparts to go along with the positions of her government,
preferring to lecture or speak in declarative sentences, or simply to read
verbatim from her briefing books. She seemed to assume that her mere
assertion of a US policy should be sufficient to achieve the support of
other nations."

This is the not the way of a new humanitarianism but of old, pathological
imperialism. Hear now the extraordinary reaction to Boutros-Ghali's book by
Albright's flack James Rubin: "It was always unfortunate that Mr.
Boutros-Ghali did not have the skills to successfully manage the most
important relationship for any Secretary General, which is smooth
cooperation with the United States."

Such shameless and braggartly talk is the sort of thing that is leading the
Chinese, Russians and Indians to think in terms of countering empire. Thus
through the ignorant arrogance of the most small-minded, narcissistic, and
incompetent western leaders of our lifetime, we find ourselves once again in
grave danger of global catastrophe.

-> Send "subscribe   snetnews " to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
->  Posted by: "Bartch, Robert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>



Reply via email to