[pf] Fw. You will not have read this kind of analysis before.

At 00:18 21/9/2001 +1200, Jeremy Hall <.-.-.@kiwilink.co.nz>, a previous NZ
contributor to PF, sent-on to GV-NZ: Subject: [GV]Sohail's analysis of
recent events :-

This guy addressed the NZ Heart Politics gathering in January 2000.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Sohail Inayatullah
http://www.metafuture.org, http://www.ru.org

First, the recent events should be seen in global human terms as a crime
against humanity. This is not only because those in the WTC from many
nationalities (around 700 Pakistanis are presumed to be dead) but as well
issues of solidarity and efficacy of response move us in that direction. It
is not only Americanism that is being attacked but certainly muslims (again
around 900 or so in the WTC and quite a few in the Pentagon) as well. In
this sense, the framework for dealing with this has to be from an
International Court, just as those responsible for Rwanda and Srebrenica.

Second, an equation that explains terror is: perceived injustice,
nationalism/religious-ism (including scientism and patriarchy), plus an
asymmetrical world order.

The perceived injustice part of the equation can be handled by the USA and
other OECD nations in positions of world power. This means really dealing
with Israel/Palestine as well as the endless sanctions against Iraq. Until
these grievances are met there can be no way forward. It means listening to
the Other and moving away from good/evil terms. This language only
reinforces that which it seeks to dispel.  It continues the language of the
Crusades, with both civilizations not seeing that they mirror each other.

The USA is a capitalist nation with military might buttressing it. Bin
Ladin and others are capitalists with military strength. Both are
globalized, both see the world in terms of us/them, both use ideas for
their position (extremists drawing on Islam; American intellectuals using
linear development theory). Both are strong male. The USA builds twin
towers, evoking male architecture (as argued by Philip Daffara). The
terrorists use the same phallic symbol - the airplane and the knife - to
bring it down. Boys with toys with terrifying results for us all.

The second part is a shared responsibility, within the Islamic world
especially, but essentially a dialogue of civilizations.  And here, the
crucial language is a dialogue within religions, between the hard and soft
side. In this case, the hard side is clearly defining the future, but that
not need be the case.   Fortunately, the hard side is becoming
de-legitimized  - Pat Robertson blaming the terror attacks on the USA
moving away from God because of feminism, etc.) and Muslims everywhere
hopefully beginning to see that more terror will not work (however, with
civil war in Pakistan looming, the prognosis for this alternative
perspective are not great). Still, the message must be: the injustices are
real but non-violent global civil disobedience (against companies, nations,
leaders)  is a far more potent method for long term transformation.

The third part really is what the social movements can and must continue,
challenging the asymmetrical nature of the world system, and pushing for a
new globalization (of ideas, cultures, labour and capital, while protecting
local systems that are not racist/sexist/predatory on the weak).

SCENARIOS

There are at least three scenarios for the near and long term future.

1. Fortress USA/OECD. Australia has already chosen that route, with
basically a prison lock down ahead, especially to newcomers (who desire to
enter the Fantasy island of the Virtual West). The costs for the elites
will be very high given globalized world capitalism, and with aging as one
the major long term issues for OECD. The Fortress scenario will lead to
general impoverishment and the loss of the immigration innovation factor.
In the short run, it will give the appearance of security, but in the
longer run, poverty will result, not to mention sham democracies with real
power with the right wing aligned with the military/police complex.

2. Cowboy War - vengeance forever. Bush has already evoked the Wild West,
and the Wanted - Dead or Alive. We have seen what that leads to all over
the world, and the consequences are too clear for most of us. Endless
escalation in war that will look like the USA has won - once the bad
Muslims are nuked off the face of the earth, but what if a few survive?
They will remember the latest round, and the response will be far more
terrifying. In any case, with the USA army, especially the marines -
rapidly becoming Muslim - conversion and growth rates - cowboy war will
start to eat at the inner center. And once state terror begins, there is no
end in sight. Bush as already stated the assassination clause does not
apply to Bin Ladin and others since the USA is acting in self-defense.
Cowboy war, again, will work in the short run. Crowds will chant USA, USA,
until the next hit. The CIA can get back to business.

In this future, there is no real change to the world system. Once the
terrorists are caught, no changes in international politics or
international capital occur, simply OECD states become stronger, while
individuals become more fearful, anxiety prone.  A depression of multiple
varieties is likely to occur (economic and psychological).

3. Gaia of civilizations/international justice/ remedying injustices
(especially in Israel/Palestine as well as the endless sanctions in Iraq,
and injustices by third world governments toward their own people) to begin
with, and new equity based multicultural globalization. This means
transforming the world system, focusing on a post-globalization vision of
the future, and moving to a world governance system (human and animal
rights; indexing of wealth of poor and rich on a global level; gender
partnership).. In terms of epistemology, this means moving from the
strategic discourse, which has defined us for hundreds of years, to the
emergent healing discourse (within, toward others, toward the planet, and
for future generations).  This means far more of a Mandela approach, what
Galtung is doing via the transcend ( http://www.transcend.org ) network
than the Bush short term approach.

This 3rd scenario is the global civil/spiritual society vision, and one
that stands in strong opposition to the declared USA position and the
extremist groups all over the world.

The first scenario is very much a return to the imagined past, the second
the likely future, and the third, for me, the aspirational .  This means
moving beyond capitalist West and the feudalized, ossified non-West (and
modernized versions of it) and toward an Integrated planetary civilization.
I can see this civilization desperately trying to emerge at rational and
post-rational levels, indeed, crystal clear at the mythic spiritual level,
and I can clearly see the huge stumbling blocks - perceived injustices, the
isms, and the asymmetrical world order, and national leaders unwilling to
give up their "god-given" right to define identity and allegiance.

Do we have the courage to create this emergent future. I am convinced it
will emerge, I hope it will emerge through ahimsa and not versions of
endless terror. We need to choose life.

 
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
sent on by David.
David MacClement [davd @ ihug.co.nz] (remove spaces)
http://davd.tripod.com/GrRR-010907_titles.html#top
http://www.geocities.com/davd.geo/index.html#top
***********************************************

==^================================================================
EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://igc.topica.com/u/?aVxifP.aVEN4x
Or send an email To: positive-futures-unsubscribe@igc.topica.com
This email was sent to: csf@moscow.com

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^================================================================