According to NPR, “negotiators at a global climate conference in Baku, Azerbaijan, struck a last-minute deal for wealthy countries to help their poorer neighbors deal with global warming, saving the annual meeting as it verged on collapse.” I am a strong supporter of wealthy countries helping poorer countries improve their economies, but I believe that this is the absolute wrong way to do it. Large amounts of money transferred with little to no control over how it will be spent. This wastes resources, fails to help economies, and discourages everybody with the wherewithal from trying to help their poorer neighbors. Our own AID program suffered the same fate earlier. Following WWII, the American people were willing to help poor countries, but we soon became disillusioned by our failures and turned against the fundamental concept of foreign aid. “None of our business.” “Too many problems here at home.” “Foreigners need to help themselves.” Etc, etc, etc…. The thinking behind the Mega movement is the logical result.
I contend that economic underdevelopment leads directly to war. The details are always unique, but underlying them is the constant of economic inequality. In the past, war was an acceptable solution. One side eventually dominated the other and a new world order emerged. That restructured the world economy and a fragile peace emerged that lasted for some period of time before being challenged by a new combination of political and economic factors upset the existing order. We are in that cycle right now with China challenging our domination of the world economy. Assuming that we continue along the historic path, we will eventually see war between ourselves and one or another other nuclear power. I can not see the precise trigger for that conflict, but I do see its inevitability unless we figure out how to help all humans live a decent life. Just giving poor people money clearly does not work internationally, just as it does not work here at home. It is merely a miserly attempt to salve a guilty conscience, and feel a bit better about ourselves.
I believe that there are a multitude of ways in which a catastrophic nuclear exchange could come about, but I see Beijing as being the most likely antagonist to provoke such because of the economic issue. Teheran and Moscow are indeed also threats, but they are primarily motivated by different immediate rationale. Were I influential enough, I would partner with China to help other countries develop economically, instead of trying to compete with them for control of the world economy. My objective would be to improve the lives of all humans inside and outside of our non-existent borders. I am not deluded as to Beijing’s intentions and would insist that they approach the problem in the same spirit as are we. I would offer all out war as being their only other alternative.
I do not expect any national politician to have the gumption necessary to advocate this approach to the problem. They will explain that it is naive and unworkable and does not have the support of the American people. That unfortunately ensures that we will continue to focus on the minutia that we can get our feeble heads around and continue to live on the cusp of nuclear obliteration. I suggest that we actually think that nuclear war is so horrible that it is not a real threat and the most important choice that we have to make, is to either make America Great Again or invite the rest of the world to come live with us here in America. We do not need to worry about the internecine slaughter that is going on in underdeveloped countries all over the globe. We can deal with it by pontificating about the rules of war rather than getting our hands dirty improving the lives of seven, going on eight, billion people on a spinning rock of finite dimension and limited resources.
We are stupid.
No comments:
Post a Comment