peace between civilizations
Maybe neoliberalism works in a peaceful multipolar world but not in a monopolar world dominated by american presidents and their foes. Maybe neoliberalism can develop its true strength in a multipolar environment, where there isn't the risk of seeing global monopolies install themselves, posing a serious systemic risk to the sustainable survival of humans with their corruption in the dominating empire's geopolitical interest.
.
The complex underlying observation to this statement goes as follows : the attempt to create global unity or harmony, means trying to establish a global believe structure, a global religion, something I think we will never be ready to, lest able to achieve sustainably so it is worthy the wish for in the first place. There will be occasional and exceptional moments of global unity confirming the rule such as Olympic Games.
But otherwise I think we have to live with the fact that we're at best able to achieve satisfaction in our own realm ; we can expect to be correct in what we feel in the geographical or cultural community of nations we belong to or think belong to; where we have lived and made our place : not more, the rest is luck and bad luck, your karma or destiny as individual and community, or why not as empire amongst empires.
To feel global as one humanity is accepting that your thoughts are never perfect and that things will never work out as you wish because if you're honest, you can feel only half the truth, never do you know everything, at maximum anything ( geopolitically ) crucial for a moment, but then you don't know what it means for yourself. It's an error trying to have a globe-spanning view or strategy without submitting yourself to universal rule of cold social life and saying goodbye to the warm justice or wishful thinking as you can allow yourself protected by a loyal community. Because unlike a human in his or her dreams, a community / empire living on hard stone and fragile earth can't just slip away in a lethal confrontation as an individual might be able to, without creating costly points of no return.
Feeling global as one humanity entails to see humans as equal, as living elements in an interdependent nature in a cold universe. Life, that might be lived only once and where love and meaning are a complicated result of chemical and biological reactions of which you can control at best your own. A complexity, which you can surely modelize or try to, but in the act of simplifying you will always lose the full grasp of the full truth respectively always have to allow for inexplicable exceptions - which want to be explained as well, at some point, by somebody, or it was all for nothing.
.
Through love and passion, trial and error, humans will build or have built a global multipolar neoliberalism nevertheless, where the most effective organisations - the global governmental organisations such as the UN or WTO, but as well NGOs and especially multinational commercial enterprises - deliver a global universal service at minimum price - and high risk submitting themselves to global rule where lies can't be pardonned with culture but only with cash.
Sad as it sounds indeed, to not be able to feel global with love and religious sense of unity as one humanity, but only be allowed to feel for your own realm and religious tribes; for your empire as you could think - on this one common planet, sure, but next to the other cultures, religions and multinational enterprises as well -, is of course a reduction of the feeling of security respectively an increase of anxiety as you're submitted to the randomness of the interactions with other empires. Individuals, communities, governments, who might not care for whether you're a loving and passionate individual; for whom you're just one from "the others".
.
Out of the humble corner of our common experience comes the wisdom to not try to feel global as one humanity - even if we have come one again through migration, commercial and touristic globalization. A wisdom that isn't given, it being a difficult task to let there be space for the shadows in a dark corner; to let there doubt - de facto risk - which is some times at some moments a legitimate freedom refused : the freedom to fill the void with meaning ; to create a unity where there isn't, but wouldn't it be great. A ( mental ) freedom we learned to cherish under American dominance : wasn't it so handily given into our fantasy by Hollywood film-makers ! A freedom that is generally supported not by religions themselves, but clerics and shrinks not yet old enough or too old before their time, to not be afraid of doubt and trust God or science void of vanity, false pride or lazyness.
A refusal, to not be allowed to feel global as one humanity following one common goal - even if we do -which doesn't mean though - exactly why - that you can't count on universal values such as any religion teaches them and which, ironically - my thinking based on humanism is - are anyway the foundation for a peaceful multipolar neoliberalism to work on this one planet with this fragile environment and as intelligent humans.
In the end, you can or could wonder, with what inspiring tragedies and dramas, solutions and remedies, happy-endings and forms of harmony, the Hollywood, Bollywood or Nollywood film-makers would have come up with, would the United States and the American realm or empire not be ruled by the strong President of the United States, but rather by the seven equal members of a hypothetically even stronger Federal Council of the mighty United States of America, to put directorial logic at one extreme of today's common conscious, void of wanting to be extreme, just radical for change, to keep it one planet, one life and not one king and his wife.
...
...
...
o5-february-2o21 to 14-april-2o22
