No Free Worlds

The line between ethical values is a blur by the so called leaders of the "free world" we have seen actions recently from world leaders which would suggest how being morally ambiguous is the only real playing card to pursue self perceived ideals of peace and globalisation under whichever interpretation they choose under their own terms. The free world doesn't necessarily equate to having a collective choice on how we interpret and shape the rules of freedom outside the sphere of an already heiriarchal and outdated diplomatic system which seems to benefit only those at the top of the economic ladder aka the original designers so to speak of the free world, ironically the original colonisers and destroyers of freedom.

We also see recently just how polarising and controversial this is when we look at the covert development of weapons and expansion of military bases across the world for strategic power. The average citizen in said countries who'd be none the wiser because governments do not discuss with the public the purpose behind military expansion in a way which is digestible and understandable to your everyday person, therefore incoherence is the tactic to remain ambiguous with the general public over military actions, and only when we see the true visible evidence do we realise the impact which awakens our consciousness to the way in which the world still works.

Operation provocation would be an apt title to describe the balance of control in the world, many global citizens are just trying to go by their everyday lives without the thought of an oppressor lurking over their shoulders who could potentially colonise them again at any given opportunity and overthrow their entire way of life. Leaders will say we need military presence to avoid aggressors stepping in and doing whatever they want, but what is the purpose of global military positioning in a peacetime world? Trust goes both ways, and sadly it is proven time over that these leaders cannot be transparent and ethical in the responsibilities given to them, which leads to distrust in nations resulting in conflict and war, really nothing has changed since the medievil ages.

The "free world" is not exactly leading by example right now and is willingly manipulating the rules of Humanitarian Law and effectively obstructing the justice system by doing so, which in itself is against the law. How can anyone expect smaller lesser developed countries to comply under these same terms when the playing field is designed in a way which is unfair for law abiding adopters and appears to put them at a massive disadvantage by doing so. The glaring inconsistencies within institutions such as the UN has always been a point of contention for me, even more so how highly influential countries and their leaders appear to be abhorrent in keeping shadow power intact across the world to continue the rule of control. There is also the question of ethical standards within institutions and just how impartial they can really be without cohersion by those willing to provide the most funding to keep the lights on, however this is exactly the case for what should be the worlds fairest humanitarian organisation.

The pattern repeats itself throughout history and always the losers are the ones who stand nothing to gain aka the very people these institutions are supposed to serve and protect. What is the ultimate end goal? Bloodshed can never result in peace, and even if it was achieved under the barrel of the gun, the bitterness of retribution and justice will always hold deeply in the veins of those who have lost the most, you can cage a tiger but they will always remember the face of their captors.

The imperialist countries of old who still play soft power games across the globe are constantly reminded to this day by those affected just how much their old ways are no longer welcome in modern society yet they still believe their territorial presence is justified and wanted by the rest of the world. Many of these imperial colonisers have still not made an official apology or taken full responsibility for the atrocities of the past, and why, because any act of admission would initiate unprecedented legal action which under modern terms they would lose to devastating effect and at a huge reparative scale which would do long term damage to their economies, this is if they were following the same laws they have designed in a fair, consistent way.

I watched a documentary recently on the technological advancements in China and it was interesting in how some of their most progressive projects are based entirely around the needs for the daily lives of Humans. The country has jumped leaps and bounds into the future and are working on everything from advanced irrigation for farming and greenhouses to Industrial level replanting of trees to improve air quality and slow the desertification process of the outer dunes. China also appears to be leading in huge scale solar farming and eco projects. Electric vehicles are prominent on the streets and are affordable and accessible to everyone, robotics are also designed to aid humans with their physical daily needs, all of which are already integrated into normal daily life. This sounds all like something from a sci fi film, but it is modern day life in the so called developing world, yet the developed world appears stuck in the mindset of imperial conquest and the industrial revolution era by obsessing over continuous growth, power and wealth, except this time the average citizen has vast amounts of knowledge at their disposal and now it is impossible to ignore the ethical consequences.

But ignore is what they are continuing to do by repeating the same mistakes and learning absolutely nothing, so maybe it is time to pass the leader of the "free world" card to those with the positive ideas of human progression rather than forcing us into a battle of the strongest survive. The Window of opportunity to focus on the interests of everything in our world is now and there is no time like the present to work together for human progression over human dominance, but the old guard needs to stop gatekeeping the past to enable us to move forward.