John Armitage on Thu, 20 Sep 2001 11:24:25 +0200 (CEST) |
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
<nettime> FUTURES AHEAD |
FUTURES AHEAD After the Terror Sohail Inayatullah [1] 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 come from many nationalities [2] but as well issues of solidarity and efficacy of response move us in that direction.. In this sense, the framework for dealing with this has to be from an International Court (and a reformed strengthened United Nations), just as those responsible for Rwanda and Srebrenica (as Tony Judge and others have argued, www.uia.org). 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. Indeed, we need to move to a new level of identity. As Phil Graham writes: "We are the Other. We have become alienated from our common humanity, and the attribute, hope, image, that might save us is the "globalisation" of humanity." [3] 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 Ivana Milojevic and Philip Daffara [4]). The terrorists use the same phallic symbol the airplane 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. Certainly the Taliban arguing that Muslims have a duty to fight with them in case of an attack on Afghanistan does not help matters. The Taliban has spent the last decade fighting against Muslims, why would anyway desire to support such a state? While 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 and is morally wrong (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). The social movements can through their practice and image of the future, show, and create a global civil society, challenging the twin towers of capital and military. 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. Increasing airport security is a must but without root issues being resolved, terror will find other vehicles of expression. After all, fortresses are remembered, in history, for being overrun, not for successful defense against "others." 2. Cowboy War - vengeance forever. Bush has already evoked the Wild West, and the Wanted Dead or Alive image, indeed, even calling for a "crusade" against the terroists. Asks, Laurence Brown of the University of Queensland, "where have we heard that language before." [5] 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, with new sorts of weapons. In any case, with the USA army, especially the marines rapidly becoming Muslim (through conversion and demographic growth rates) [5], cowboy war will start to eat at the inner center. And once state terror begins, (or shall we say continues) 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, and continue to make enemies everywhere. 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). Healing means seeing the earth as an evolving body. What is the best way to heal then, through enhancing the immune system, listening to the body, or through massive injection of drugs? Ultimately, this means far more of a Mandela approach, what Johan Galtung is doing via the transcend (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 fragmented 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. NOTES [1] Professor, Tamkang University, Taiwan; Sunshine Coast University, Maroochydore; Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane. Co-editor, Journal of Futures Studies, Associate Editor, New Renaissance (www.ru.org). s.inayatullah@qut.edu.au, www.metafuture.org. [2] Around 500-700 Pakistanis are presumed to be missing, as based on data from SBS Television Australia and Pakistan's The News. It is not only Americans that are being attacked by certainly Muslims (possibly around 900 or so in the WTC and some in the Pentagon, perhaps, not to mention attacks of terror toward Muslims in the last 15 years from all sources) as well. [3] Personal comments. September 18, 2001. [4] Personal comments. September 16, 2001. [5] See his forthcoming piece on "The futures of terrorism," Journal of Futures Studies (November, 2001). [6] Ayeda Husain Naqvi writes in "The Rise of the Muslim Marine" (NewsLine, July 1996, 75-77) that while hate crimes against Muslims rise all over the world, surprising the US military is one of the safest places to be a muslim. Indeed, Qasem Ali Uda forecasts that in 20 years, 25% of all US marines will be Muslims and in a 100 years, most will be Muslim. Given the incredible influence that that former military personnel have on US policies (ie a look at Who's Who in America shows that military background and law school education are the two common denominators on the resumes of America's most influential people.) # distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission # <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets # more info: majordomo@bbs.thing.net and "info nettime-l" in the msg body # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@bbs.thing.net