Tweet
America: On the wrong side of the world revolution
Yuram Abdullah Weiler
http://www.tehrantimes.com/yuram-writings/96117-america-on-the-wrong-side-of-the-world-revolution
On Line: 05 March 2012 18:11
In Print: Tuesday 06 March 2012
`I am convinced that if we are to get on the right side of the world
revolution, we as a nation must undergo a radical revolution of
values. We must rapidly begin the shift from a `thing-oriented'
society to a `person-oriented' society. When machines and computers,
profit motives and property rights are considered more important than
people, the giant triplets of racism, materialism, and militarism are
incapable of being conquered.' -- Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, April
4, 1967.
Almost half a century has passed since Dr. King uttered those dire but
eloquent words of warning when the United States of America was
engaged in a barbaric aggression against the Vietnamese people. Since
then, corporate greed, technology and consumerism have come to reign
supreme in the U.S., and the inherent evils of racism, materialism and
militarism as we were forewarned by Dr. King appear now to be
invincible.
In its rhetoric, the United States zealously touts itself as the
world's foremost champion of democracy and human rights, but let us
briefly examine this self-proclaimed guardian of western civilization.
While there are many factors to judge the degree of democracy in
government, among the most important are freedom of the press,
independence of the judiciary, limits on executive power, vibrancy of
political opposition and transparency of elections.
Unfortunately for today's Americans, their press is anything but free
since the vast majority of communications media in the U.S. is owned
by six corporations: General Electric, Walt Disney, News Corp.,
TimeWarner, Viacom and CBS. Down from 50 corporations in 1983, a
dozen in 1992 to six today, these megamedia monoliths own perhaps 90%
of all mass media in America: newspapers, magazines, TV and radio,
internet and cellular. Since the corporate media moguls have
interests intertwined with the military-industrial complex, news
reporting is severely slanted and any views contrary to the welfare of
the war establishment are sanitized, marginalized or censored.
While America may have an independent judiciary, which some consider
to have been a model for the rest of the world, access is restricted
to those who can afford it, and incidences of racial and ethnic
discrimination occur with alarming frequency. A 2011 report by the
World Justice Program asserts, `The [U.S.] civil justice system is
independent and free of undue influence, but it remains inaccessible
to disadvantaged groups. Legal assistance is expensive or unavailable,
and the gap between rich and poor individuals in terms of both actual
use of and satisfaction with the civil courts system remains
significant. In addition, there is a general perception that ethnic
minorities and foreigners receive unequal treatment from the police
and the courts.'
Despite relatively high marks, the independence of the American
judiciary must be questioned over election campaign funding practices
for judges, since large donations by wealthy benefactors obviously
have the potential to influence decisions made by the elected jurists.
In the U.S., bribery and corruption appear to take the more subtle
form of campaign contributions.
Not so subtle is the blatant racism within the U.S. judicial system,
which imprisons a disproportionate number of blacks and ethnic
minorities as documented in a report by Human Rights Watch. Black
non-Hispanic males are incarcerated at a rate over six times that of
white non-Hispanic males and almost three times that of Hispanic
males. Also disturbing is the trend toward privatization of
incarceration leading to what some refer to as the prison-industrial
complex. Prisons are a growth industry in the U.S., which also leads
the world in incarceration with 25% of the world's prisoners.
Additionally, there are concerns over concentration of executive power
and circumvention of the judiciary as is exemplified in the recently
passed National Defense Authorization Act of 2012. It makes little
sense to laud the virtues of an independent judiciary, when the U.S.
president can bypass it at will to incarcerate or assassinate anyone,
including American citizens, anywhere in the world who may be on `The
List'.
While seeds of dissent are sprouting in America in the form of the
occupy movements, the lack of vibrant political opposition remains
truly striking. One blogger even asks, `Why aren't Americans, like
the Armenians, or the Greeks, or the French, protesting/rioting in
various hard hit areas of the United States and demanding real
change?' Unlike other western democracies, there is no true opposition
party in the U.S., as acclaimed linguist and political critic Noam
Chomsky points out, `In the U.S. there is basically one party -- The
Business Party. It has two factions, called Democrats and Republicans,
which are somewhat different but carry out variations of the same
policies.'
Gene Sharp of the Albert Einstein Institution observes, `People in
many countries have experienced decades or even centuries of
oppression, whether of domestic or foreign origin. Frequently,
unquestioning submission to authority figures and rulers has been long
inculcated.' The scholar concludes, `The result is predictable: the
population becomes weak, lacks self-confidence, and is incapable of
resistance.' This certainly appears to be true for older Americans
who grew up in the 1950s and 60s in a fearful world seemingly on the
brink of nuclear war, with duck-and-cover drills in school and
Conelrad Civil Defense radio broadcasts at home. Perhaps the youth
will cause an American awakening to blossom this spring.
Concerning elections in the U.S., it is the Electoral College, which
consists of 538 electors chosen from among the party elites, that
actually elects the president and not the citizens. At least four
times, the candidate with a minority of the popular vote has been
elected in the Electoral College, essentially reducing the popular
vote to a charade; the most recent example was the Bush coup in 2000.
Incredibly, electors from 24 states holding 257 electoral votes -- and
only 270 are required to win -- are not legally bound to vote for the
candidate winning the popular vote in their respective states. In
other states, electors are `bound' by a pledge or by law with
punishments ranging from cancellation of vote and replacement to a
$1000 fine. Any other country implementing a similar voting system
would be accused by the U.S. of election fraud.
No longer a democracy where `elected' leaders represent the interests
of their constituents, America has become what some scholars term a
`democratic dictatorship', which means that despite the pretense of
elections, the president wields such concentrated power as to be
indistinguishable from a dictator. Scholar Michel Chossudovsky
summarizes U.S. politics stating, `While the facade of democracy
prevails, supported by media propaganda, the American republic is
fractured. The tendency is towards the establishment of a totalitarian
State, a military government dressed in civilian clothes.'
Vietnam was on the right side of the world revolution as Dr. King
noted, `The Vietnamese people proclaimed their own independence in
1945 after a combined French and Japanese occupation, and before the
Communist revolution in China.' Sadly, he also pointed out, `Even
though they quoted the American Declaration of Independence in their
own document of freedom, we refused to recognize them. Instead, we
decided to support France in its reconquest of her former colony.'
The U.S. dropped 88,500 tons of bombs and 19 million gallons of Agent
Orange defoliants on Vietnam in an effort to impose a dictatorial
regime in place of the legitimate government, whose leader Ho Chi Minh
originally had admired the U.S. And to compound the offense, the U.S.
dropped over 260 million cluster bombs on Laos, of which 75 million
did not detonate, killing over 200,000 people to date. Are these the
acts of a civilized western democracy or of a bellicose, imperialistic
fascist power?
No, America is and has been on the wrong side of the world revolution,
but Iran and Islam are on the right side. Iran, accused by the West of
being a `threat', has not acted aggressively against other countries
since Nader Shah invaded India in 1738. Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali
Khamenei states, `The Islamic Republic of Iran has presented a model
to the world of Islam: a model for religious democracy, a model for
independence and national glory.' It is precisely this Islamic model
of religious democracy of which the U.S. and the West is most
apprehensive.
India, where one of the world's largest strikes by 100 million workers
recently occurred, is on the right side of the world revolution.
Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi, the Indian political leader who played a
pivotal role in freeing India from Britain's iron-fisted colonial grip
through non-violent resistance, recognized the peaceful power of Islam
while in prison. He writes, `I became more than ever convinced that
it was not the sword that won a place for Islam in those days in the
scheme of life. It was the rigid simplicity, the utter
self-effacement of the Prophet (S), the scrupulous regard for pledges,
his intense devotion to his friends and followers, his intrepidity,
his fearlessness, his absolute trust in God and his own mission.'
Bahrain, Egypt, Lebanon, Libya, Palestine, Syria, Tunisia, Yemen and
most of the Middle East are on the right side of the world revolution.
While much of the world favors Islamic concepts of democratic
government, America remains obstinately on the wrong side of the world
revolution, imposing its supremacy, as it has since the worldwide
Islamic awakening began in Iran 33 years ago. Ayatollah Ali Khamenei
writes, `Our enemies are alarmed and do not want our nation -- which
is located in a strategic part of the world -- to achieve these
accomplishments. They do not want the Iranian nation to be known as
the standard-bearer of Islam.'
The Holy Quran has a message for the United States and all the
hegemonic powers that seek to impose their supremacy over other
nations. It would benefit them to study it diligently.
`As for that abode of the Hereafter, We assign it to those who do not
want to impose their supremacy over others in the land, nor spread
corruption.' (Surat al-Qasas 28:83)
Yuram Abdullah Weiler
http://www.tehrantimes.com/yuram-writings/96117-america-on-the-wrong-side-of-the-world-revolution
On Line: 05 March 2012 18:11
In Print: Tuesday 06 March 2012
`I am convinced that if we are to get on the right side of the world
revolution, we as a nation must undergo a radical revolution of
values. We must rapidly begin the shift from a `thing-oriented'
society to a `person-oriented' society. When machines and computers,
profit motives and property rights are considered more important than
people, the giant triplets of racism, materialism, and militarism are
incapable of being conquered.' -- Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, April
4, 1967.
Almost half a century has passed since Dr. King uttered those dire but
eloquent words of warning when the United States of America was
engaged in a barbaric aggression against the Vietnamese people. Since
then, corporate greed, technology and consumerism have come to reign
supreme in the U.S., and the inherent evils of racism, materialism and
militarism as we were forewarned by Dr. King appear now to be
invincible.
In its rhetoric, the United States zealously touts itself as the
world's foremost champion of democracy and human rights, but let us
briefly examine this self-proclaimed guardian of western civilization.
While there are many factors to judge the degree of democracy in
government, among the most important are freedom of the press,
independence of the judiciary, limits on executive power, vibrancy of
political opposition and transparency of elections.
Unfortunately for today's Americans, their press is anything but free
since the vast majority of communications media in the U.S. is owned
by six corporations: General Electric, Walt Disney, News Corp.,
TimeWarner, Viacom and CBS. Down from 50 corporations in 1983, a
dozen in 1992 to six today, these megamedia monoliths own perhaps 90%
of all mass media in America: newspapers, magazines, TV and radio,
internet and cellular. Since the corporate media moguls have
interests intertwined with the military-industrial complex, news
reporting is severely slanted and any views contrary to the welfare of
the war establishment are sanitized, marginalized or censored.
While America may have an independent judiciary, which some consider
to have been a model for the rest of the world, access is restricted
to those who can afford it, and incidences of racial and ethnic
discrimination occur with alarming frequency. A 2011 report by the
World Justice Program asserts, `The [U.S.] civil justice system is
independent and free of undue influence, but it remains inaccessible
to disadvantaged groups. Legal assistance is expensive or unavailable,
and the gap between rich and poor individuals in terms of both actual
use of and satisfaction with the civil courts system remains
significant. In addition, there is a general perception that ethnic
minorities and foreigners receive unequal treatment from the police
and the courts.'
Despite relatively high marks, the independence of the American
judiciary must be questioned over election campaign funding practices
for judges, since large donations by wealthy benefactors obviously
have the potential to influence decisions made by the elected jurists.
In the U.S., bribery and corruption appear to take the more subtle
form of campaign contributions.
Not so subtle is the blatant racism within the U.S. judicial system,
which imprisons a disproportionate number of blacks and ethnic
minorities as documented in a report by Human Rights Watch. Black
non-Hispanic males are incarcerated at a rate over six times that of
white non-Hispanic males and almost three times that of Hispanic
males. Also disturbing is the trend toward privatization of
incarceration leading to what some refer to as the prison-industrial
complex. Prisons are a growth industry in the U.S., which also leads
the world in incarceration with 25% of the world's prisoners.
Additionally, there are concerns over concentration of executive power
and circumvention of the judiciary as is exemplified in the recently
passed National Defense Authorization Act of 2012. It makes little
sense to laud the virtues of an independent judiciary, when the U.S.
president can bypass it at will to incarcerate or assassinate anyone,
including American citizens, anywhere in the world who may be on `The
List'.
While seeds of dissent are sprouting in America in the form of the
occupy movements, the lack of vibrant political opposition remains
truly striking. One blogger even asks, `Why aren't Americans, like
the Armenians, or the Greeks, or the French, protesting/rioting in
various hard hit areas of the United States and demanding real
change?' Unlike other western democracies, there is no true opposition
party in the U.S., as acclaimed linguist and political critic Noam
Chomsky points out, `In the U.S. there is basically one party -- The
Business Party. It has two factions, called Democrats and Republicans,
which are somewhat different but carry out variations of the same
policies.'
Gene Sharp of the Albert Einstein Institution observes, `People in
many countries have experienced decades or even centuries of
oppression, whether of domestic or foreign origin. Frequently,
unquestioning submission to authority figures and rulers has been long
inculcated.' The scholar concludes, `The result is predictable: the
population becomes weak, lacks self-confidence, and is incapable of
resistance.' This certainly appears to be true for older Americans
who grew up in the 1950s and 60s in a fearful world seemingly on the
brink of nuclear war, with duck-and-cover drills in school and
Conelrad Civil Defense radio broadcasts at home. Perhaps the youth
will cause an American awakening to blossom this spring.
Concerning elections in the U.S., it is the Electoral College, which
consists of 538 electors chosen from among the party elites, that
actually elects the president and not the citizens. At least four
times, the candidate with a minority of the popular vote has been
elected in the Electoral College, essentially reducing the popular
vote to a charade; the most recent example was the Bush coup in 2000.
Incredibly, electors from 24 states holding 257 electoral votes -- and
only 270 are required to win -- are not legally bound to vote for the
candidate winning the popular vote in their respective states. In
other states, electors are `bound' by a pledge or by law with
punishments ranging from cancellation of vote and replacement to a
$1000 fine. Any other country implementing a similar voting system
would be accused by the U.S. of election fraud.
No longer a democracy where `elected' leaders represent the interests
of their constituents, America has become what some scholars term a
`democratic dictatorship', which means that despite the pretense of
elections, the president wields such concentrated power as to be
indistinguishable from a dictator. Scholar Michel Chossudovsky
summarizes U.S. politics stating, `While the facade of democracy
prevails, supported by media propaganda, the American republic is
fractured. The tendency is towards the establishment of a totalitarian
State, a military government dressed in civilian clothes.'
Vietnam was on the right side of the world revolution as Dr. King
noted, `The Vietnamese people proclaimed their own independence in
1945 after a combined French and Japanese occupation, and before the
Communist revolution in China.' Sadly, he also pointed out, `Even
though they quoted the American Declaration of Independence in their
own document of freedom, we refused to recognize them. Instead, we
decided to support France in its reconquest of her former colony.'
The U.S. dropped 88,500 tons of bombs and 19 million gallons of Agent
Orange defoliants on Vietnam in an effort to impose a dictatorial
regime in place of the legitimate government, whose leader Ho Chi Minh
originally had admired the U.S. And to compound the offense, the U.S.
dropped over 260 million cluster bombs on Laos, of which 75 million
did not detonate, killing over 200,000 people to date. Are these the
acts of a civilized western democracy or of a bellicose, imperialistic
fascist power?
No, America is and has been on the wrong side of the world revolution,
but Iran and Islam are on the right side. Iran, accused by the West of
being a `threat', has not acted aggressively against other countries
since Nader Shah invaded India in 1738. Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali
Khamenei states, `The Islamic Republic of Iran has presented a model
to the world of Islam: a model for religious democracy, a model for
independence and national glory.' It is precisely this Islamic model
of religious democracy of which the U.S. and the West is most
apprehensive.
India, where one of the world's largest strikes by 100 million workers
recently occurred, is on the right side of the world revolution.
Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi, the Indian political leader who played a
pivotal role in freeing India from Britain's iron-fisted colonial grip
through non-violent resistance, recognized the peaceful power of Islam
while in prison. He writes, `I became more than ever convinced that
it was not the sword that won a place for Islam in those days in the
scheme of life. It was the rigid simplicity, the utter
self-effacement of the Prophet (S), the scrupulous regard for pledges,
his intense devotion to his friends and followers, his intrepidity,
his fearlessness, his absolute trust in God and his own mission.'
Bahrain, Egypt, Lebanon, Libya, Palestine, Syria, Tunisia, Yemen and
most of the Middle East are on the right side of the world revolution.
While much of the world favors Islamic concepts of democratic
government, America remains obstinately on the wrong side of the world
revolution, imposing its supremacy, as it has since the worldwide
Islamic awakening began in Iran 33 years ago. Ayatollah Ali Khamenei
writes, `Our enemies are alarmed and do not want our nation -- which
is located in a strategic part of the world -- to achieve these
accomplishments. They do not want the Iranian nation to be known as
the standard-bearer of Islam.'
The Holy Quran has a message for the United States and all the
hegemonic powers that seek to impose their supremacy over other
nations. It would benefit them to study it diligently.
`As for that abode of the Hereafter, We assign it to those who do not
want to impose their supremacy over others in the land, nor spread
corruption.' (Surat al-Qasas 28:83)