Terrence Edward Paupp, JD.
Terrence "Terry" Paupp
Aug 10, 1952 - Jan 5, 2016
The Oklahoman (January 07, 2016)
Paupp, Terrence "Terry," 63, died Jan. 5, 2016. Services pending (OK Cremation, Oklahoma City).
Dear GHA members,
Please, see the sad news below.
Bright memory of our Terry.
Dr. Leo Semashko
If it is true, it is indeed very sad.
He had one of the greatest minds.
Dr. Laj Utreja
Director, Institute of Global Harmony
Gandhi Vidya Mandir, Sardarshahr, Rajasthan, India
Please accept my condolence after late Dr. Terry Paupp.
No human being should experience, what late Dr. Terry Paupp experienced before passing away.
Let us work hard for benefit of all humankind.
For peace from Harmony of SPHERONS!
Prof. Dr. Timi Ecimovic
Terry was wise and a great person.
I had frequent contacts with him since attending 2004 Peace Culture Conference with Charles Mercieca at the Martin Luther King Auditorium in Atlanta.
In 2007 I brought his book "Exdus of Empire" to Beijing while attending the peace congress organized by our current IAEWP National Chancellor Professor ChaoCheng Yao. The problems is that nowadays most people in Beijing did not know English.
I had learned Terry’s weight problems and heart issues in additional to financial hardship, due to Toxic morgage resulting him losing his residence in San Diego. I have tried to help him, but not quite enough. He was legally disable due to depression, as having had to live though the negative energy in Washington DC.
Terry was a very good writer. He was educated and had lived in San Diego where I was educated, then he moved to Oregon which was too cold in the winter, so he moved back to San Pedro in the Los Angeles area where he had a lot of stress from the construction noises in the neighborhood. Later he moved to Oklahoma, as an invitation of a wealthy friend。Each time he traveled with his library of 8,000 books and his beloved loyal dog Sparky.
I last heard from him in 2013, he appeared to be more content living in Oklahoma.
Terry had also published “The Future of Global Relations: Crumbing Walls, Rising Regions". Terry’s latest book was “Redefining Human Rights in the Struggle for Peace and Development”, available from Amazon.
Terry's mentor is Professor Richard Falk at the Princeton University, now 86, who also grauduated from Wharton in 1952. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_A._Falk. I will try to contact him.
Lana Yang 楊幗蘭
Main Representative to the UN for IAEWP
Bad news !!!
Terrence Paupp left us in a silence despite the difficultiesthat he experienced ... His last email for me was"health before any things , take care of your health!" We discover his death" After 15 months !!!
My condolences to us , his family ...
Paupp ,Stay in eternal peace.
Let God bless his depart soul!
Pravat Kumar Dhal, PhD
Professor & Head
Dept. of Education, Magadh University, Bodhgaya
It was with enormous sadness that i heard that our dear GHA colleague/friend, Prof. Terrence Paupp has died. May his soul rest in eternal peace. Amen.
With thoughts of Peace and Courage for his family, friends and GHA,
Nosso fraterno abraçode
e amigos do Prof Terrence Paupp.
I never met Terry in person but have heard good things about him from you, Lana, and others. I felt a bond with him as a knowledgeable peace activist. My heartfelt condolences and my prayers for peace of his soul and for peace for his beloveds.
TERRY IS A GOOD MAN !
It's a very sad news to us because we lost one of our GHA members. May his soul rest in peace.
Maitreyee Bardhan Roy.
Maitreyee Bardhan Roy
Very Sad News!
It's a really very sad newsfor all GHA Membersas we lost very
active Peace Leader.
Myheartfeltcondolences to usand his family members.
May his SOUL rest in Peace & Harmony.
Οur memory keeps alive the true man Terry Paupp who served with dedication and selflessness the idea of Peace and Truth via life.
His imortal spirit will support our struggle for global peace from beyond.
Takis D ioannides
Yes dr, sahib it is very sad news. May Godgive patient to his family.
Dr. Noor .MLarik
Get Outlook for iOS
We pray for his immortal soul to move on to higher planes of liberation as an ascended Master ; "death" is never final although it leaves a bad scar in the engrams of ourpresent life memory. He has returned to the Source Energy andplanes of Everlasting Peace.His thoughts will be immortalised in the fabrics of the published works . May the Divine Grace and the Blessings of Source Energy be with him in his journey into the hereafter. Amen.
Steve, Natasha and the IAEWP Team Worldwide
Terrence Paupp was the GHA Ambassador for Peace and Disarmament from Harmony in USA;
Senior Research Fellow, Council on Hemispheric Affairs (COHA), Washington DC;
International Association of Educators for World Peace (IAEWP), Vice-President of North America;
Council Member of the International Advisory Council-The Toda Institute for Global Peace and Policy Research;
Expert in the fields of international law and human rights
Address: San Pedro, California, USA
Phone: (424) 224-7008; Cell: (858) 414-2005
Web: http://peacefromharmony.org/?cat=en_c&key=254His publications in the Global Peace Science book (2016) about American democracy and fashism:
since October 2014
The resignation from the post of the GHA-USA President since March 3, 2015 due to extraordinary personal circumstances shown in GHA message below:
American Peacemaker-Dissident. Compassion and Solidary Assistance. GHA Treatment.
Dear peacemakers in solidarity!
We are asking for help to our colleague peacemaker Dr. Terrence Paupp of the USA, San Pedro. Terrence is a prominent scientist, lawyer of international law, dissident who is well-known by the critical books and articles of American oligarchic regime and its militarism (http://peacefromharmony.org/?cat=en_c&key=254).
At 63, he was faced with a shocking fact of extremely dramatic situation in life: loneliness without family and relatives, physical problems (diseases), unemployment, homelessness danger of rent non-payment and a complete lack of means of subsistence. As he writes about himself: "I am the victim of a toxic mortgage from Wall Street."
Based on the feelings of peacefulness, compassion and solidarity, we invoke all peacemakers to send to Terrence financial assistance in $50-100, or any available to you, by the end of 2015 contacting him through his email: email@example.com. This is the most transparent, direct and reliable way to targeted assistance, free from any doubts and suspicions.
Any of our financial assistance to Terrence will be practical expression of our highest values of peace from harmony, solidarity, compassion and tolerance, about which we talk so much. Our indifference to Terrence’s dramatic situation will be flouting our highest values and will be the triumph of our individualism, greed and lack of spirituality.
I personally promise to send Terrence $ 100 in the fall (October-November) in 2015.
Apart from personal donations, other possible sources of our help Terrence are:
1. Any offer of teaching job for him.
2. Any International Peace Prize for the unique, the first in the world and in history, GHA book "Global Peace Science" (GPS, 2015-2016: www.peacefromharmony.org/?cat=en_c&key=585), coauthored by Terrence. We promise to send Terrence 10% of any such award. We hope that this science not be left without attention of peaceful global community.
3. The electoral victory of one of the new political parties in Russia or other peace-loving country, which recognizes GPS as their offensive peace political ideology, which initiates the law on assistance to all outstanding peacemakers, who have made a significant contribution to global peace. Terrence in 2007 still published a book on the US Empire fall as the main obstacle of global peace: "Exodus from Empire" (2007). The USA and other militaristic countries are not able to adopt a peace law and help to peacemakers. They only are able to fund the war and warlords. Therefore help Terrence, like other peacemakers, depends from the ratio of the forces of war and peace, which today, unfortunately, is not in favor of peace.
But GPS will change their ratio in favor of peace. It will happen soon, if we will be actively promote GPS, including assistance Terrence as its coauthor.
This letter was published on the GHA website, on the Terrence's page and will be published in GPS book.
With hope for your understanding and spiritual response, with respect,
Dr. Leo Semashko, President, Global Harmony Association, Russia,
Dr. Subhash Chandra, Secretary General, Global Harmony Association, India,
Dr. Surendra Pathak, President, GHA-India,
Dr. Charles Mercieca, President, Int. Association of Educators for World Peace, USA,
Dr. Ernesto Kahan, President, Association of Physicians for Peace, Israel,
Dr. Rev. Kurt Johnson, President, Interspiritual Association, USA,
Maria Cristina Azcona, President, Association of Bilingual Authors, Argentina,
Ayo Amale, President, GHA-Africa, Ghana,
Dr. Uraz Baimuratov, President, GHA-Kazakhstan,
Julia Budnikova, President, GHA-Russia,
Dr. Glen Martin, President, Association of the Earth Constitution, USA
And others the GHA members approving this message.
Since 2007, you have had in your possession my book on this very subject entitled:
1) EXODUS FROM EMPIRE: The Fall of America's Empire and the Rise of the Global Community (Pluto Press, 2007).I not only predicted a rising counter-hegemonic alliance among the nations and regions of the Global South (Third World) to the US Empire, but opposition from within the North Atlantic states to the warmongers, weapons dealers, and Wall Street.
I followed this book with my other books on the end of the US Empire AND on the need to make the human rights to peace and development the central elements of a world of peace and harmony.My other books since 2007 are:
2) THE FUTURE OF GLOBAL RELATIONS: Crumbling Walls, Rising Regions (Palgrave-Macmillan, 2009);
3) BEYOND GLOBAL CRISIS: Remedies and Road Maps by Daisaku Ikeda and his Contemporaries (Transaction Books, 2012);
4) REDEFINING HUMAN RIGHTS IN THE STRUGGLE FOR PEACE AND DEVELOPMENT (Cambridge University Press, 2014).
5) ROBERT F. KENNEDY IN THE STREAM OF HISTORY (Transaction Books, 2014).
(These books are on www. Amazon.com and as e-books at Leo Semashko – L.S.)
I think that if the membership of this organization knew the TRUTH about what I have stated here that a different result would be reached!!!!!
Terrence Edward Paupp: Has served as professor of philosophy and international law at Southwestern College, National University, San Diego City College. National Chancellor of the US for the International Association of Educators for World Peace (IAEWP, 2001-2005) and has been serving as a Senior Research Fellow at the Council on Hemispheric Affairs (COHA) Washington, D.C. since 2006.
September 7, 2014
THE ANTI-NUCLEAR INITIATIVE:--- IMPLICATIONS FOR THE FUTURE OF GLOBAL RELATIONS & NEW PROSPECTS FOR GLOBAL HARMONY
Terrence Edward Paupp
Within less than three months of his inauguration as President of the United States, Barack Obama opened the door to a global denuclearization initiative.His April 5, 2009 speech in Prague calls upon all nations to join together to move toward a world without nuclear weapons.In response the Global Harmony Association (GHA) has invited 163 peacemakers (64 from Russia and 99 from 35 other countries) to join in an historical undertaking dedicated to the eventual elimination of nuclear weapons.This action is in concert with the goals stated by the Federation of American Scientists (FAS) and the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) in their Report---“From Counterforce to Minimal Deterrence”.
What is increasingly clear is the fact that moving toward nuclear disarmament signifies an inevitable turn to global harmony.It is a point that I have articulated as well in my book, The Future of Global Relations: Crumbling Walls, Rising Regions.There are two central points in this argument.First, it has become impossible for the US to continue down the path of militarism in pursuit of global hegemony and empire.The US can no longer afford to keep over 700 military bases around the world in order to defend its version of a global empire.Hegemony is---by definition---based on three components: (1) a global consensus that supports its dominant role and rule; (2) sufficient economic strength to maintain a military force that can impose imperial dictates and strategies; (3) a sustainable military.All three ingredients for a vibrant hegemony are missing from the US today.Its economy is in tatters and shredded by the burden of militarism and fiscal mismanagement.It has lost the global consensus that it requires for its “soft power” to be effective.Its military and reliance on nuclear weapons is unsustainable and counter-productive.In short, the unilateral policies of the Bush era have exposed the “crumbling walls” of US hegemony and revealed the need to move nations and their policies toward more harmonious and cooperative paths of development and interaction.This leads to the second point.
Second, we live in a world of “rising regions”--- which means multi-centric global governance and the end of US unilateralism and reliance on nuclear weapons as the final arbiter of disputes.It also means that greater and higher degrees for cooperation between nations and regions around the world which are gaining in regional integrity and strength—such as ASEAN (Association of Southeast Asian Nations), have explicitly renounced the use of force and threat of force.In place of arsenals of weapons and threats to use them the principle of mutual cooperation and concerted efforts to resolve differences peacefully through negotiation and compromise hold out the promise for grater global harmony. This is important for those of us who want to close down the global military-industrial complex.So, the world inevitably moves to multi-polar global harmony as many different regional centers redefine the nature of globalization.In this regard, President Obama’s new nuclear initiative can only be sustained by a rejection of traditional attempts to maintain global hegemony and instead embrace the path of global harmony.
I have termed the embrace of the path toward global harmony the “Principle of Hegemonic State Accountability” (PHSA).This term is meant to signify the fact that nuclear superpowers such as the US and Russia must be held accountable to the dictates and demands of international law.Therefore, they must be held accountable when they seek geopolitical advantage through force or threat of force in order to advance their own domestic elite’s selfish interests.After all, the desire to maintain hegemony, promote primacy, and to secure the status-quo of dominated by the dominant reflects nothing more than an international order based on force, violence, and exploitation.It would be illogical to expect peace to emerge from such policies and perspectives.Therefore, the PHSA demands what the concept of global harmony requires---a renunciation of force and threats involving the weapons of force.The PHSA is clearly a call for greater accountability at every level of global relations with respect to addressing common needs throughout the global commonwealth.In the most practical of terms it also means when the US takes specific steps toward a world without nuclear weapons such a move will convince other countries to do the same.If Iran and North Korea no longer perceive a threat---such as the US invasion of Iraq in 2003---then the new American policy will have removed doubts about the sincerity of its intentions and, at the same time, start a global process of confidence building in the rule of law, the power of harmony, and the accountability of great powers to the same standard to which lesser powers have been subjected.
A world of “rising regions” offers the entire planet a future of global relations in which there are many different centers of power with many actors.This reality can work to strengthen efforts to reform the United Nations and to build a new global federation based on regional agreements and actors that are—of necessity---engaged in practicing cooperative strategies in the areas of trade and diplomacy, renouncing military force and solutions, and seeking greater South-South investments and cooperation to deal with global problems from climate change to genocide, from developing new forms of human security to ending poverty.Such efforts will themselves reduce the proclivity of people to engage in conflict and to seek instead a more harmonious approach to aligning their aspirations with the aspirations of others.Such a “cultural convergence” on a global basis is a recipe for building confidence between peoples regardless of culture, nation, or religious persuasion.As with the European Union, there is a greater hope now for advancing the social agenda and welfare of people because of the dynamics inherent in regional cooperation and multi-centric governance.This is also good news for the cause of nuclear disarmament.This is because the actions and priorities of coordinated regional centers and processes inevitably serve to conduct human practices and priorities toward new forms of global harmony or harmonious globalization.Such a view comprises the most hopeful vision for the future of global relations for it embodies the shared recognition of the importance of nuclear disarmament for a qualitative change in global affairs.It is a qualitative change that finds its ultimate realization on the basis of global harmony and hegemonic state accountability.
In conclusion, the GHA anti-nuclear project (Harmonious Peace Culture: Global Harmony as the Absolute Guarantor of World Security) represents an important and vital initiative for global civil society in the following three aspects:
- It represents an expression of wide public support for the advancement of the American anti-nuclear initiative as articulated by President Obama. It does so by virtue of raising public consciousness through the organization of a series of international Congresses. Hence, this GHA initiative deserves support from the American government and all international NGOs.
- By providing an understanding of the qualitative differences between the processes of armament, on the one hand, and disarmament on the other, we find that the process of disarmament demands adherence to the value of harmony as its ultimate guiding principle. That is because it has the capacity to unite all nations at a higher level of thinking and action. The value of harmony ---as the GHA guiding principle ----lifts us out of a destructive historical cycle by introducing the political dynamics of an Einsteinian thinking that places us in a position from which we can solve many long-standing global problems---including nuclear disarmament.
- The GHA anti-nuclear project also pledges to help bring about a revival of the World Peace Movement on the basis of global harmony. Such a Movement for World Peace from Global Harmonywill be a powerful factor in bringing about nuclear disarmament.
Finally, I wish to add the GHA project, the comment of 12th quote from President Obama’s speech, my following text:
Global harmony as the absolute guarantor of world security is concretized in international law by the "Principle of Hegemonic State Accountability" (PHSA) . Like the concept of global harmony, the PHSA requires the renunciation of force and threats involving weapons of force. The PHSA is a call for greater accountability at every level of global relations with respect to addressing common needs throughout the global commonwealth. The PHSA is a principle for the "Comprehensive Treaty of Global Harmony as the Absolute Guarantor for World Safety"---which should be accepted at the Global Summit on nuclear disarmament in 2010 at the USA Government initiative.
 Terrence E. Paupp, The Future of Global Relations: Crumbling Walls, Rising Regions (Palgrave-Macmillan, 2009); available at, www. Amazon.com
J.D., Prof., Terrence Edward Paupp is the Vice-President of North America for the International Association of Educators for World Peace (IAEWP) and a Senior Research Fellow at the Council on Hemispheric Affairs (COHA), Washington, D.C.
Thank you for your kind and thoughtful response. YES, I will be more than happy to write a public response to your project and connect it with the ideas in my book: The Future of Global Relations: Crumbling Walls, Rising Regions.
I am also very happy to see that your project will be sent to both Presidents Obama and Medvedev. It is important that your project and its themes be discussed at many international conferences. I think that we collaborated in a very productive manner to create an even more compelling case for nuclear disarmament in accordance with our respective works.
I am proud to be a part of this project with you and all concerned.
Thanks for your help and support.
May 16, 2009
Today I received the final version of your public response on the GHA antinuclear project, which you promised several days ago. Many thanks for your excellent work!
Your paper (2 pages + in attachment) represents solid scientific proofs for recognition of global harmony as a priority cultural value and a key scientific paradigm in a new civilization of the 21st century. Your paper is above any praises. It has very much great value and for the GHA project and for its authors from the most different countries of the world. I send your paper to the co-authors of our project, who, I am assured, will find in it many new ideas for understanding of global harmony and for its development.
We hope to discuss your new remarkable book, devoted to global harmony in the international relations and international law, in the near future.
Best harmony wishes,
May 21, 2009
Author of the book 2007: Exodus from Empire: The Fall of America’s Empire and the Rise of the Global Community
Pluto Press, London2007
Professor Paupp holds a B.A. degree in social science from San Diego State University, a Master of Theological Studies from the Lutheran School of Theology at Chicago and a Juris Doctorate from the University San Diego School of Law. During the 1980s, Professor Paupp has taught at a variety of colleges and universities in Southern California. In the 1990s he worked full-time in a San Diego law firm while continuing to write and publish on human and civil rights.
From August 2001 to present, he has been National Chancellor of the United States for the IAEWP. In this position, he has launched three national programs for the United States branch of the IAEWP: the Democracy Project, the Domestic Peace Corps and the Inclusionary Governance Project. He has appointed state chancellors and vice chancellors in over thirty-five states and developed alliances with other peace organizations and churches.
His publications include a treatise on international law and international relations titled, Achieving Inclusionary Governance: Advancing Peace and Development in First and Third World Nations. The book addresses the challenge of poverty and solutions to alleviating it, human rights in international law, the illegality of nuclear weapons, the theoretical and practical distinction between forms of exclusionary governance versus inclusionary governance, developing a more humane role for the state and future directions for international law that protect the vulnerable. His earlier works encompass human rights abuses throughout Central and South America, written for the Council on Hemispheric Affairs.
He has continued to work for radical changes in the field of human rights that give greater attention to socio-economic rights. In that regard, he has traveled to Taiwan, Geneva and South Africa to address peace conferences, civil society forums and U.N.-sponsored conferences in order to advance initiatives on socio-economic rights that offer alternatives to the approaches of the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund, and the World Trade Organization.
In the spirit of Frederick Douglass, W.E.B. Du Bois, Gandhi, Howard Thurman and Martin Luther King Jr., the life and work of Professor Paupp has consistently been dedicated to advocacy for the excluded and dispossessed around the world. His adherence to the principles of nonviolence and of reconciliation between peoples defines him as an articulate voice for human liberation and social transformation. His advocacy on behalf of labor rights and workers, nuclear disarmament, strategies of conflict resolution and prevention, as well as the protection of the environment distinguishes him as a prominent thinker and activist in the 21st Century.
Exodus from Empire:
Perspective of America’s Future
Charles Mercieca, Ph.D.
International Association of Educators for World Peace
Dedicated to United Nations Goals of Peace Education,
Environmental Protection, Human Rights & Disarmament
Professor Emeritus, Alabama A&M University
In the academic sphere of society the year 2007 must have a very good start. one of the greatest scholars of our time, Terrence E. Paupp, came with the publication of a timely and inspiring book, which should be a vade mecum, the book companion of every dedicated educator and concerned human being. It took quite a few years to bring this book to conclusion, which is objective and well-documented.
Fall of America’s Empire
The stated book demonstrates how the United States, in spite of its devastating military power and dominance in global politics is, slowly but surely, disintegrating and leading to a state of collapse. The book is entitled: Exodus from Empire: The Fall of America’s Empire and the Rise of the Global Community. In the introduction, the author shows how every empire in history always ended in disintegration and collapse. He also demonstrates how democracy in America is increasingly becoming extinct, a thing of the past.
This book, with over 400 pages, is developed into seven chapters each one of which is fully documented. Chapter one covers the enormous international resistance that developed over the years to this evolved and expanded American global empire. To maintain this global empire, the United States had to pay a high price: the waging of perpetual wars, one after another with no virtual ending. This trend has been going on for many years, which went as far as the recent American invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq.
There have been many wars in several countries across every continent, where the USA was responsible for the overthrow of democratically elected governments, as it was in the case of Chile to quote an instance. Chapter two shows how the United States has always been a nation of plutocracy, which is governed by the rich and for the exclusive benefits of the wealthy. National interests have always taken precedence over world order values. This explains why we have so much suffering of innocent people around the world.
Chapter three observes how the superpower law of the elite has served to promote lawlessness everywhere. When people are suppressed and deprived from their basic elements of life including human rights, they are bound to rebel sooner or later. Radical unilateralism and democratic despotism in America are properly brought into focus. The dangerous union of turbo-capitalism and inverted totalitarianism is properly outlined. The means the USA uses to control the world are free trade, science, technology and the widespread militarism.
Problem of Maintaining Justice
Chapter four focuses on a variety of topics of national and global concern including the problem of maintaining justice within the global community. The relationship between power and justice is well analyzed. The US arsenal of nuclear weapons coupled with increased US violations of human rights must make every nation reassess its relationship with this empire that has now engulfed the world. In spite of all this, there is still great hope in the great religions of the world that may provide us with a guideline on how to transcend sovereignty and embrace justice in the interest of all people without exception.
Chapter five exposes intelligently the hidden politics of the American empire. Overt and covert operations are fully documented. Besides, America’s dysfunctional policies in Vietnam and in Iraq reveal how dangerous the USA has become for the entire world. The author discusses also the assassination of President Kennedy and how the USA struggles to acquire all strategic resources it wants through the waging of never-ending wars. He also shows how national and global fascism are being used in the service of the American empire.
Chapter six deals with the human sacrosanct right to live in peace in a world that is free from wars. We also see clearly the relationship between globalization, poverty, and inequality. Besides, careful plans are presented on how the various regions of the world could form a mutually beneficial alliance to counteract the dominance of their respective economies by this American empire. Chapter seven is the conclusion. It reflects on the crimes committed by this involved empire, on the United Nations needed quest for the development of an alternative path for globalization, and of the rise of an eventual power, the people, who will finally be in a position to control their own destiny.
Those who may want a copy of this book, Exodus from Empire: The Fall of America’s Empire and the Rise of the Global Community, may get it through the following websites: www.bn.com(Barnes and Noble Booksellers) or www.amazon.comor may write to: Pluto Press, 345 Archway Road, London N65AA, United Kingdom, Phone: 011-44-438-2724.
In the course of writing this book I have been able to reach back 30 years for the benefit of educational experiences and the contributions of professional friends and acquaintances. In that regard, I am grateful to all of the professors and colleagues that I have served with in the cause of progressive politics and peace. As a student, I benefited greatly from the liberal arts education I received at San Diego State University. In the early 1970s, I was engaged in both study and the anti-war movement with respect to Vietnam. My course of studies at the Lutheran School of Theology at Chicago allowed me to write my thesis on liberation theology in Latin America, as well as obtain a Master of Theological Studies degree. While attending the University of San Diego School of Law, I found my understanding of human and civil rights expanding under the guidance of Professors Sheldon Krantz in the area of prisoners' rights, Willard Wirtz in the area of labor law, and Roy Brooks in the areas of civil rights and employment discrimination.
In my professional life, I taught at a variety of community colleges and then went on to work for three NGOs. The Council on Hemispheric Affairs (ÑÎÍA) is where I began as a research associate and now serve as a senior research associate. Its director, Larry Birns, has worked indefatigably across the decades in the task of monitoring human rights abuses and trends in Latin America. Headquartered in Washington, DC, the work of COHA serves as a constant reminder and resource to those who govern that US policies in Latin America, as well as those of the IMF and World Bank, have done more harm than good. I am grateful to Larry and to COHA for providing me with a forum during President Reagan's rampage of Central America in the early 1980s, as El Salvador was wracked by civil wars and CIA-trained death-squads while, at the same time, Nicaragua was subjected to US-sponsored terrorism at the hands of the CIA-supported Contras.
I also served for four years as the National Chancellor of the United States for the International Association of Educators for World Peace (IAEWP). I am grateful to its president, Dr. Charles Merceica, for the opportunity to build up the United States branch of an organization that is active in over 100 nations around the globe—dedicated to the tasks of advancing the cause of peace education, nuclear disarmament, protection of the environment, and the advancement of human rights.
During my term of office, I had the privilege of working in conjunction with the World Conference of Mayors for Peace on nuclear disarmament. I am grateful to the Mayor of Hiroshima, Mr. Tadatoshi Akiba, who serves as President of the World Conference of Mayors for Peace. I share their disappointment and contempt for the Bush-2 regime as it has actively worked to undermine the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). I share the same contempt for the Bush-2 regime's scuttling the 1972 ABM Treaty and the 1967 Outer Space Treaty in order to filter tens of billions of dollars into the coffers of its corporate supporters working on National Missile Defense (NMD) (Raytheon, TRW, Lockheed-Martin, and General Dynamics).
My work on the issue of nuclear disarmament has been enhanced by my professional association with Mr. John Burroughs, director of the Lawyers' Committee on Nuclear Policy. Under his guidance, I am working with the Association of World Citizens and the International Association of Educators for World Peace to distribute recently released copies of the Weapons of Mass Destruction Commission entitled, Weapons of Terror: Freeing the World of Nuclear, Biological and Chemical Arms.
I am grateful to Professor Bill Fitrakis who published my entire indictment of NMD in an edited collection on the subject—The Fitrakis Files: Star Wars, Weather Mods & Full Spectrum Dominance. I am also grateful to Mel Hurtig for generously quoting from my indictment in his book, Rushing to Armageddon. Finally, I am grateful to Marcus Raskin of the Institute for Policy Studies. Dr. Raskin published my essay entitled, "The Nuclear Crucible: The Moral and International Law Implications of Weapons of Mass Destruction" in his book, In Democracy's Shadow: The Secret World of National Security.
Last, but not least, I am grateful to the Association of World Citizens (AWC) and its president, Doug Mattern. The AWC is active in over 60 countries and involved with dozens of Nobel Prize Laureates in seeking nuclear disarmament and abolition. Working with the AWC has afforded me the opportunity to attend a week-long peace conference in Taiwan, the UN World Summit on Sustainable Development in South Africa, and a conference on global civil society in Geneva. Now, in my capacity as vice president for the AWC, I can return to writing and research on a more full-time basis. Due to this new role, I was able to complete my most current book, Exodus From Empire.
My professional life has been enriched by my association with Professor Richard Falk, Professor Bill Wickersham, and Professor Brian Foley. Their work and insights have contributed mightily to this book. I am especially grateful to Professor Falk for the many insights and suggestions that I received from him in the course of writing my first book—Achieving Inclusionary Governance—and the Foreword he wrote which graces its introduction.
I also want to take this opportunity to thank my publisher, Pluto Press, and its editor in chief—Mr. Roger van Zwanenberg. His appreciation of my book has allowed it to see the light of day. I also want to thank my friends who have done so much to enhance my life and encourage me over the course of this most recent effort. They are: Matthew Dawson, Curt Hatch, Jared Nelson, William Sims, and Rosemary Ferguson. For all of them, I want to express my deepest appreciation and gratitude.
Terrence E. Paupp July 20, 2006.
Preface to Exodus from Empire
Within the United States all too few realized that the nation had transitioned from being a functional democracy into an empire. However, throughout the Global South (Africa, Asia, Latin America, and the Middle East) America's transition into an imperial force was abundantly clear. The US Empire's influence was experienced in the forms of direct military intervention, financial dominance, through economic hegemony, or a combination of all three. The economic model of neoliberalism has bankrupted many economies in the Global South or left them mired in a status of permanent debt repayment to the IMF and World Bank. In order to overcome this cruel oppression and exploitation, many nations throughout the Global South have sought to leave this system behind them and embark upon a path of genuine national and regional development. This phenomenon is what is intended to be conveyed by the title of the book, Exodus From Empire.
The Title: The Biblical account of the exodus from Egypt remains a powerful image for the oppressed leaving the bondage of an imperial system. The idea of embarking upon an "exodus from empire" conveys a sense of directionality about history as it evolves. The status quo can be overcome and the imperial bondage can be broken. In order to convey this notion, the book outlines the means and methods through which the US Empire has exercised its power in placing itself on a course toward world domination. Under the Bush-2 regime, the US Empire has used the doctrine of preemptive war to illegally invade and occupy Iraq. Yet, this move has only served to expose its failure and powerlessness to project and impose its imperial vision abroad. In the alternative, there has emerged a rising global chorus of opposition that has come from European allies, disaffected Arab and Islamic states, alienated social movements throughout Latin America, the bankrupted states of Africa, as well as from Russia and China. Hence, the subtitle of the book employs the words "failure" and "rise" to present the reader with a sharp contrast between the failure of the US Empire and the force of a rising Global Community in opposition to the US imperial drive for global hegemony.
The Terminology. As the US Empire spirals into greater financial crisis through rising deficits, the costs of maintaining bases and imperial garrisons, investments in the military-industrial complex, its own citizens have become the victims of a growing fascist state. The Patriot Act has been used to shred constitutionally guaranteed civil liberties. The National Security Agency has been allowed to collect billions of pieces of data on American citizens in order to monitor dissent. President Bush has claimed that the executive branch is all-powerful under the theory of the "unitary executive" and that both congress and the courts cannot curtail or restrain its actions or the sweep of its mandates. As a result, the American system of checks and balances has collapsed under the weight of empire. Abroad, torture is routinely employed in clear violation of US law and the Geneva Convention. Military tribunals have suspended the reach of civilian courts and constitutional protections in the course of conducting a "war on terror." In combination, all of these actions are expressions of the crumbling of the US Empire (failure).
In opposition to the US Empire, the peoples of the Global South, as well as Europe, China, and Russia are moving toward more inclusive forms of governance and resistance that place "Global Community" on the ascendancy (rise). In the past, the term "Global Civil Society" has been used to depict the idea of a cross-national world citizenship. By definition, civil society is representative of all aspects of a society that are nongovernmental. In contrast, the term Global Community incorporates the resistance of social movements throughout civil society with a change of their governments into what I have called the "Inclusionary State" and "inclusive forms of governance." Hence, the term Global Community serves to identify the growing trend toward putting new governments in place that are more inclusive in their decision-making processes and policies, reject the neoliberal economic model, and are opposed to the US Empire's attempt at hegemonic domination.
History is in the midst of changing. The change is predicated on the notion that the citizens of the Global South are part of a Global Community who can be viewed as a cohesive community of oppressed and exploited peoples who are seeking an "exodus from empire." As I use the term, it allows me to write of the peoples and governments of Asia, Africa, Latin America, and the Middle East, as well as Russia and China, coming together in a national, regional, and international counter-hegemonic alliance against the US Empire. We already see this process evolving in the 2006 political and economic alliance struck between President Morales of Bolivia, President Chavez of Venezuela, and President Castro of Cuba. It is also evident in the 2001-mutual security pact between Russia and China. Further, it can be seen in China's Africa-strategy insofar as Beijing has enjoyed considerable success in Africa, building close ties with countries from Sudan to South Africa, becoming a vital aid donor, and developing military relationships with many of the continent's powers. In short, the rise of Global Community is taking place in response to the aspirations of peoples for genuine national and international development.
The Thesis'. If genuine national and international development is to be achieved, it can only be realized through a process of embarking upon an exodus from empire. International law's notion of the "equality of states" has been made into a mockery by the Bush-2 regime's assertion of absolute and unilateral power in international affairs. In the world of the Bush-2 regime, some states are "more equal than others." Such a view is characteristic of the imperial mind-set. It is a view that makes the world into a conflict-ridden war zone with no end in sight. For example, the Bush-2 regime has announced that the "war on terror" will go on for decades. This assertion is based on the fundamental feature of the power of global finance under US hegemony—its militarization. This reality is discovered in both the aggressive expansion of US military bases around the world, as well as by the growing presence of transnational corporations within the military-industrial complex.
On the economic side of the equation, the process of militarization is linked to globalization. In this world, the name of globalization is imperialism and imperialism is more openly enforced by war. Finance is at war against whoever tries to carry out or affirm autonomous development. The capitalist class can no longer retain its power except by war. Yet, the Global Community has increasingly rejected this historical trajectory as predetermined or inevitable.
Social movements have demanded more democratic constraints on their national governments. In turn, electoral outcomes around the globe have led to more progressive leaders and policies being placed into power that are at odds with the dictates of the US Empire. The regional alliances that have been developing in Latin America give concrete testimony to the fact that billions of people have decided not to allow the continuation of capitalism's economic and military dictatorship over their lives continue any longer. At the regional level, not merely economic alliances are being constructed, but clearly political ones as well—that have as their goal the end of dominance by the US Empire.
Not only have more democratically elected governments been installed, but accountability to the people now encompasses meeting the needs of the poor, protecting the rights of workers and labor, and expanding human rights claims by centralizing them in the national agenda. Similarly minded states are working with one another across the international spectrum. In short, an ever-expanding national-regional-international counter-hegemonic alliance to the US Empire is making possible an exodus from empire and the rise of Global Community.
Exodus from the Bondage of Empire
God of our fathers, known of old—
Lord of our far-flung battle line—
Beneath whose awful Hand we hold
Dominion over palm and pine—
Lord God of Hosts, be with us yet
Lest we forget—lest we forget!
The tumult and the shouting dies—
The Captains and the Kings depart-
Still stands Thine ancient Sacrifice
An humble and a contrite heart
Lord of Hosts, be with us yet,
Lest we forget—lest we forget!
Far-called, our navies melt away—
On dune and headland sinks the fire—
Lo, all our pomp of yesterday
Is one with Nineveh and Tyre!
Judge of the Nations, spare us yet,
Lest we forget—lest we forget!
For heathen heart that puts her trust
In reeking tube and iron shard—
All valiant dust that builds on dust,
And guarding calls not Thee to guard—
For frantic boast and foolish word,
Thy mercy on Thy People, Lord!
Kipling's hymn was written on the occasion of the Jubilee celebrations honoring the 60th anniversary of Queen Victoria's reign and the greatness of her empire
The path out from the bondage of empire must be rediscovered. If we fail to embark upon an exodus from empire we shall surely invite the fate against which Albert Camus warned of when he described those who supported the death penalty as both victims and executioners. The pursuit of empire becomes a version of the death penalty insofar as its pursuit often ends in both the death of imperial delusions and the death of thousands of victims caught in the vice grip of the imperial project. Empires have been notorious for their ruthless subjugation of peoples. After all, the imperial mentality is at odds with the recognition of human rights. Because the task of empire building is narrowly focused on the domination of people and their resources, the historical impact of empires on those peoples who are the objects of the quest for domination is one that is filled with tragedy.
The British experience in Kenya provides one such example. British settlers began displacing native Kenyans as early as 1900. The British appropriated the most fertile Kenyan land at the beginning of the twentieth century, precipitating an exodus of Kenyans to urban areas where poverty and discontent festered— especially among the Kikuyu people. In the economic depression that followed World War II, the ardent nationalism of the Kikuyu-based Mau Mau attracted new recruits at a pace that few could have imagined. A brutal war resulted between the insurrectionist Mau Mau and the colonial government. During that time, and in later historical accounts, there was a genuine dishonesty in failing to distinguish between terrorists and political insurgents. In the course of suppressing the Mau Mau revolt, Kenya's British rulers were responsible for thousands of unjustifiable killings, for gross abuses of both their own law and the laws of war, and for what are possibly the most brutal episodes of legal and physical oppression in twentieth century imperial history. The British, with the knowledge of both Winston Churchill and Harold Macmillan, committed untold atrocities against the Kenyan people, putting over 700,000 in prison camps and sending hundreds to the gallows without proper trial.
The truth is that the Kikuyu rebels killed only 32 white colonists and that the real aggressors in this "dirty war" were the high-ranking members of the British government. From 1952 to 1960, the British detained and brutalized hundreds of thousands of Kikuyu—the colony's largest ethnic group—who had demanded their independence. In the eyes of the British colonizers, the men and women who fought in the insurgency were not freedom fighters but rather savages of the lowest order. The British felt justified, in the name of civilization, in crushing all those who challenged colonial rule, even if it meant violating their basic human rights. Later, in an effort to cover up this stain on its past, the British government ordered all documentation relating to detention and torture during its last days in Kenya destroyed. The destruction of these records should come as no surprise given the nature and extent of the British occupation. The British detained nearly the entire Kenyan population—some one and a half million people—for more than eight years. Inside the detention camps and barbed-wire villages, the Kikuyu lived in a world of hunger, fear, and death. Their only hope for survival was a full denunciation of their anti-British beliefs.
In this regard, Britain's gulags in Kenya could be compared with the twenty-first century American occupation of Iraq and the nature of the US Global Empire's "war on terror." From its military base in Guantanamo, Cuba to "black sites" throughout Eastern Europe in old communist gulags, torture has been a tool of war for the United States. America's Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and military have employed torture as a tool in their "war on terror." With the approval 0f President George W. Bush, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, and Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, places of torture such as Abu Ghraib Prison have now entered into the historical lexicon of Bush's "war on terror." In reality, the US Global Empire's "war on terror" can be more appropriately understood as a war of terror. The policies of the US Global Empire, under the command of the leadership of the Bush-2 regime, are dramatically transforming both America, as a nation, and the nature of its Global Empire in both theory and practice. By removing all previous conventions and norms guiding State behavior, by its intentional abandonment of virtually all legal constraints on the use of power, by transforming the mission and purpose of American power in the world, under the leadership of the Bush-2 regime the United States has become the embodiment of what is implied by the term rogue nation? By shredding the prohibitions against torture as contained in the Geneva Convention, of which the United States is a signatory, the neoconservative leadership of the Bush-2 regime effectively declared their own war of attrition upon international law, human rights treaties and covenants, the UN Charter, and the mandates of the US Constitution itself.
THE FATE OF EMPIRES AND THE RISE OF COMMUNITY
All empires have two elements in common: first, their shared reliance upon oppression through militarism and, second, their shared capacity to inspire widespread resistance among those whom they seek to conquer, control, and exploit. To rediscover the path out from this bondage is to rediscover the truth that lies behind the first recorded exodus from empire—the departure of Hebrew slaves from servitude in Egypt's Empire. Its theme of liberation from oppression and imperial power has continued to be relevant through the centuries.
The exodus from Egypt was an historical event. It also remains paradigmatic for later generations. Infused within it are lessons that expose religious, political, economic, and social truths about the repressive nature of imperial power. In the twentieth century, Latin American liberation theologians often used the story of the exodus event as a powerful paradigmatic tool to preach and teach about a Judeo-Christian perspective on struggle in the world that would be shaped not only by the force of divine intervention but also by the free and conscious participation of human beings. In order to more accurately frame the sociological aspects of their political oppression, liberation theology employed a Marxist critique. When combined with a Marxist critique of their repressive and exclusionary societies, the liberation theologians of Latin America found that the exodus event gained a contemporary currency and vitality due to similar historical experiences in dealing w*th oppression.
This viewpoint constitutes a method of understanding history. As a method, it as allowed many theologians on different continents and in different periods of time to more effectively comprehend the nature of political oppression and the "joral duty to oppose it. For example, Howard Thurman (1900-1981) was one of the m°St respected and Prolific religious figures of the twentieth century. As an fncan-American, the deep spirituality of the African-American community resonated within his psyche. After meeting Gandhi, he returned to the United States with a deep appreciation of the lessons of nonviolence. He also understood that self-actualized people are socially and psychologically whole. They cannot be whole if the socioeconomic and political structure under which they live is oppressive. That message resonated in the psyche of Thurman's most famous student, Martin Luther King, Jr. In their critique of racial, political, and economic oppression, both Thurman and King sought to use the strategy of nonviolence as a means to induce people of conscience to realize that noncooperation with an evil system is a moral imperative.6
Based on this perspective, King was able to develop a view of civil disobedience that made a distinction between just and unjust laws—Any law that degrades the human personality is unjust. Segregation and the Jim Crow laws that upheld this system of racial apartheid were unjust because it is a system that not only degrades the victims, but the perpetrators as well. To be truly liberated within American society requires that there be an interpersonal venture of cooperation and responsibility. Thus, while integration and liberation are analytically distinct, in practical terms they are inseparable.7 With this perspective, both King and Thurman taught that it was necessary for America to embrace the ideal community—the beloved community.
Common themes in Thurman's and King's treatment of the actualization of community include: evil and sin as barriers to community, community as the norm and goal of the moral life, love as the means of actualization for community, and the nature and role of the moral agent in the creation of community.8 Given these requirements for the realization of both national and Global Community, it is not difficult to see why King opposed the Vietnam War. The US Global Empire's war against the people of Vietnam was destroying the hope of building a just society in America just as it was destroying the underlying requirements for realizing a just Global Community. The tools of empire—war and violence—are thoroughly incapable of building just communities or building the necessary bonds of love between people to create community. Therefore, King made it clear that while the bombs that America dropped were dropped in Vietnam, they exploded in the cities of America. America's wealth and treasure was being diverted from the needs of the poor, the cities, and the task of building a just community for people of all races within the United States itself. The cost of empire exacted a heavy price upon both combatants and noncombatants. The cost of empire exacted not only a financial expenditure, but also an expenditure of moral and political capital. In the mid- to late 1960s it was becoming clear to many that the ever-increasing death toll of innocent Vietnamese civilians was a war crime in violation of the Nuremberg Charter. From King's perspective, the entire moral order—at the national and global levels—was under attack by the US Global Empire.
In 1965, under President Lyndon Johnson, the United States initiated a war of aggression against the people of Vietnam in the name of democracy. In 2003, the Bush-2 regime would launch another war of aggression in the name of democracy—-this time against the people of Iraq. In so doing, the legal and moral dilemmas of empire are once again exposed. Some critics of the US Global Empire began to refer to its preoccupation with military force as the Superpower Syndrome. The as meant to address the fact that from the Vietnam War era through the invasion of Iraq, the leadership of the US Global Empire never questioned their supposed right to exercise indiscriminate power in the service of maintaining and extending their empire. Rather, the architects of empire within the Bush-2 regime embarked upon a course to actualize their vision for another American Century.
The neoconservatives had already drafted their version for this world. Their outline for this undertaking is laid out in a document entitled, Project for the Next American Century (PNAC). To ensure American hegemony over the world for the next 100 years, the authors concluded that it would have to be a century under the military domination of the US Global Empire. And, once again, the contagion of war, like a disease, has been framed in global terms—a global war on terrorism. In the case of the Vietnam War, the leaders of the US Global Empire claimed that they were engaged in a global struggle against the forces of godless Communism. In the case of the Iraq War, the leaders of the US Global Empire claim that they are engaged in a global struggle against both a godless version of Islam and Islamic terrorists. Instead of embracing the goal of working toward a postimperial America (my term), this neoconservative clique came to power in order to dominate the executive and legislative branches of the US government. Bush's inner-circle viewed the world from the perspective that the twenty-first century would involve an inevitable clash of civilizations.
Yet, rather than defining the post-9/11 world as an era for the clash of civilizations, I have argued throughout this book that the twenty-first century is an era for the convergence of civilizations (see: Chapter 4, Clash or Convergence!). By the use of the word convergence I do not mean to imply that the unique aspects of the world's cultures or religions will collapse into one homogenized brand. Rather, by the use of the word convergence I mean to communicate the idea that an inherent commonality, contained in the world's greatest faiths and identities, will finally emerge. Despite their distinctiveness, these faiths and identities still have the capacity to point toward a common ground for discourse, reflective of a growing global consciousness of humanity's shared fate and shared concerns. It is this realization that gives rise to the phenomenon of convergence—of community in the midst of diversity.
The good news is that nations, faiths, and cultures do not have to evaporate in order for a global discourse to arise that embodies a spirit of acceptance, inclusion, and a more complete recognition of the worth and needs of the other. Common needs and challenges already provide the objective circumstances for this convergence to take place. For example, the challenge of global warming and climate change, the AIDS pandemic, the continuing threat of nuclear war, the angers of terrorism (state-sponsored and group-sanctioned), higher degrees of inequality and poverty, all constitute a common environment for the convergence of peoples and nations to forge a sustainable Global Community.9 In fact, the rise Global Community is predicated upon such a convergence occurring. I would argue that this convergence has already been initiated as indigenous peoples have been responding the exclusionary nature of globalization and the clash of property versus human rights. Recognizing that the neoliberal order is unsustainable, indigenous peoples are in the process of working with other progressive social movements toward the transformation of the imperial global order.
Alternatives to empire, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and World Bank are yet to be fully determined. Still, it is becoming increasingly evident that genuine alternatives will have to encompass the task of forging regionalized economic and political structures such as the European Union. In fact, progressive and indigenous social movements have already been joined in common cause by 15 European heads of state that condemned the US invasion of Iraq as illegal and asserted the primacy of the United Nations (UN) in the international order.10 Throughout the 1990s and right up to the eve of the illegal invasion of Iraq by the United States in 2003, the UN has taken on the role of conflict prevention. Indeed, conflict prevention is a central goal of the UN system.11 It is also a central prerequisite for building a sustainable Global Community.
The continually evolving bonds of Global Community may also be seen in the advances of customary international law norms in symmetry with the teachings and insights of the world's great religions. The convergence of an emerging international consensus around inclusive and humane world order values points toward a global desire to constrain and restrain the use of force.12 The evolving bonds of Global Community may also be seen in new theoretical and practical approaches to development. Increasingly, human rights-based approaches to development are reinventing the entire concept of the role of human rights in the discourse on development. With a global recognition that the denial of human rights is invariably linked to impoverishment, vulnerability and conflict, UN agencies (UNDP, UNICEF), the Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency (SIDA), and international development agencies (Care, Oxfam), along with local grassroots non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and social movements, are transforming development practices. A new emphasis upon human rights is now linked to peace-building efforts in Northern Ireland. The practical solutions of rights-based approaches to legal and justice reform are responsible for advancing the reforms that benefit poor people. The human right to food and sustainable nutrition is contributing to strategies for combating infant malnutrition.13 In short, the power of nonviolence, the growth of progressive social movements, and the unsustainable nature of the US Global Empire are all factors that point toward the rise of Global Community.
The idea that there are currently evolving bonds of Global Community is no longer a theoretical abstraction. It is an historical phenomenon. We may begin to trace these evolving bonds by appreciating the central role played by NGOs in the emergence of development of a comprehensive world polity. In this respect, a new world polity perspective may be contrasted to other approaches for understanding globalization, including world-system theory and interstate competition theory. What a world polity perspective provides is an assessment of transnational organizing. No longer are politicians, State bureaucrats, bankers and lenders, and multinational corporations the only actors on the global stage. So, in this respect, the work of NGOs in transnational organizing can be understood as part of an historical process for the purpose of creating global rules and norms. These norms and rules will change over time, but the important fact that remains is that transnational organizing will continue to have identifiable effects on social organization at the national and local levels. Some of the component elements of transnational organizing include environmental groups, women's rights organization, the Esperanto Movement, and the International Red Cross. Other emerging components of transnational organizing are found in technical and economic bodies, including development organizations, population policy groups, and international professional science associations.14 Together, they form part of an incipient Global Community. The rising power of this Global Community may be at least in part attributable to the role that these NGOs play in helping to develop a world polity perspective.
THE COLLAPSE OF AMERICAN DEMOCRACY UNDER THE MANTLE OF EMPIRE
At the dawn of the twenty-first century, America's experiment with democracy and constitutional government has largely collapsed under the mantle of empire. With the inauguration of the Bush-2 regime, the quality and degree of American democracy is not merely obscured, but purposefully repressed. The Patriot Act, illegal presidential wiretapping without benefit of court-ordered warrants, large scale domestic spying by the FBI and CIA, and a right wing ideological drift throughout the government and nation as a whole, has left the citizens of America as citizens of a democracy in name alone.
Some commentators have diagnosed a national malady that they have termed attention deficit democracy.15 It has become an America where there is a rising level of ignorance among the electorate. Fear is produced by a constant mantra by members of the Bush-2 regime that America faces an imminent terrorist attack. Under Bush, America has become the breeding ground for a kind of messianic democracy that engages in deceit and the manipulation of foreign governments in the name of spreading democracy. It is rather ironic that after defeating totalitarian and fascist governments in the 1940s, the United States would begin to follow in the footsteps of those it had defeated and judged as war criminals at the Nuremberg and Tokyo Trials. Perhaps it is the price that must be paid when a democratic nation based on constitutional law and a system of checks and balances discards those benchmarks of democratic practice in order to become a National Security State and a Global Empire. It was a process that began as soon as World War II ended. Yet, it would not be until the Bush-2 regime that the United States would be fully transformed into a militarized Global Empire.
The end of World War II left the United States and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) as two superpower rivals struggling for hegemony. During the course of the Cold War, the nations of the global South were used as proxies and as battlegrounds for this rivalry to be played out.16 The Korean War, Vietnam War, •druggies for mastery over the resources of Africa, struggles for the markets of Latin America and Asia characterized the extent of this Cold War struggle. Terms such as low-intensity conflict were employed to describe wars throughout the hird World that were nonnuclear confrontations between the United States and USSR during the 50-year Cold War struggle. By the time the Cold War ended in l989, the United States was the only Superpower left standing. In a spirit of triumphalism a new age dawned for the United States—its Global Empire would enter a new phase.
Capitalism had defeated socialism by outspending it on weapons of war in an unending nuclear arms race. Now, with the USSR out of the way, market capitalism was touted as the means to lift Russia. Eastern Europe, and the rest of the global South out of a financial dark ages and into a neoliberal dawn of wealth, development, and peace.17 It was also a world in which the military bases and garrisons of the US Global Empire now spanned the globe, making it a global enforcer of American priorities. The newly empowered American Establishment sought to expand its global dominion beyond the constraints of a bipolar world and a policy of communist containment. The ideology of America first and an amorphous idea labeled globalization were embraced in order to sell a neoliberal economic model to the world. Empire and globalization would drive each other, influence each other, and feed off each other. The US Global Empire would use its financial clout to make the rules. The institutional task of making the "magic of the market" turn a profit for the corporations of the empire was augmented not only by the standard bearers in the Bretton Woods Institutions but also by the new rule makers for the global trading game in the World Trade Organization (WTO). If their rules were not followed, sanctions and penalties could be imposed, credit could be cut off, and in a worst case scenario the American military could be called into service in order to enforce the empire's commands. What this ultimately meant was that the Atlantic Alliance would no longer constrict the decision makers in Washington as they pursued their new version of America's foreign policy (see: Chapter 2, The Occupations of Empire).
The administration of President George W. Bush (hereinafter referred to as the Bush-2 regime) adopted a posture of conducting unilateral foreign policy abroad, while suppressing constitutional liberties at home. In the pursuit of the dream (delusion) of making the twenty-first century into another American century, the neoconservatives of the Bush-2 regime embarked upon dismantling international law in order to remove it as a restraining force upon their policies and conduct in the world. The 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty was discarded by presidential fiat in early 2002 when Bush's executive branch decided that funding National Missile Defense (NMD) meant more to America's security—and corporate profits—than maintaining a viable nuclear nonproliferation regime. In much the same way, the Bush-2 regime withdrew its support from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) in April 2004. Now, the administration and the Pentagon were free to talk about their new doctrine for planetary control by investing in new weapons systems for outer space, land, sea, and air—full spectrum dominance. This perspective has resulted in what some commentators have called the Superpower Myth—the idea that America could solve any foreign policy through military means.
As inheritors of Britain's empire during the 1940s, one would have thought that American policymakers and leaders would have learned the lessons from the British experience. These lessons have clearly been forgotten, even though they remain relevant. In the early stages of World War II, the vast crescent of British-ruled territories stretching from India to Singapore appeared as a massive Allied asset. It served to provide great quantities of raw materials and helped present a seemingly impregnable global defense against the Axis. Yet, with a few weeks in 1941-l942. a Japanese invasion destroyed all of this, sweeping through south and Southeast Asia to the Indian frontier, and provoking the revolutionary struggles that would mark the beginning of the end of British domination in the East. It would result in the death of British rule in south and Southeast Asia.
As the Bush-2 regime sought to extend its version of empire into the Middle East, it has had to confront the remnants of democratic dissent at home. Therefore, in order to stifle democratic dissent at home, the Bush-2 regime produced and, with a compliant Congress, imposed the so-called Patriot Act upon its own citizens in the aftermath of the events of 9/11. The Patriot Act was ostensibly put into place to combat the threat of domestic terrorism within the United States. However, its real effect amounted to nothing less than a direct assault upon Constitutional protections guaranteed to American citizens in the Bill of Rights. Further, the USA Patriot Act has had the effect of undermining the most basic principles of the Constitution with respect to the nation's war power by helping to invest the Executive branch with virtually absolute power. The shredding of America's system of checks and balances became one of the hallmarks of neoconservative governance in the Bush-2 regime. Further, by asserting the theory of the unitary executive (the theory that the Executive branch could declare and conduct a war on terrorism without regard to the system of checks and balances that mandates Congress and the Courts to be involved as coequal participants in such decisions), the Bush-2 regime actually advocates a centralized presidency. According to this view, power and accountability in government and in the Executive branch should be moved more toward the top, giving the president and his staff greater ability to make decisions themselves. Legal proponents of a strong unitary presidency usually do not outline a comprehensive policy defense of the legal position but rely more on doctrinal justifications and related policy arguments.
The theory of the unitary executive fit easily into the power plays of the Bush-2 regime. Using doctrinal justifications and policy arguments instead of being constrained by a functioning democratic system of checks and balances, the Bush-2 regime has sought to hide executive abuses and unconstitutional actions under the rubric of an unending global war on terror. This approach has had the simultaneous advantage of ending democratic accountability within the homeland of the empire and eviscerating the role of international law in the empire's foreign policy and practices. Hence, torture is employed by executive fiat abroad in the Middle East and Europe, while illegal spying on American citizens, the jailing of enemy combatants without charges for years, and wiretaps without warrants characterize the Bush-2 regime's misuse of power at home.
In January 2005, relying on the theory of the unitary executive, President Bush declared that he had the constitutional right to order his administration to engage in illegal domestic surveillance and wiretapping under the rubric of national security. In the years after the events of 9/11 the National Security Agency (NSA), under Bush's orders, spied, wiretapped, and engaged in domestic surveillance to a degree unknown even in the Nixon years. Both Bush and his Department of Justice not only admitted to carrying out these acts under color of law but also asserted that such a power was inherent in the Executive by virtue of the president's wartime authority as Commander-in-Chief.
In the foreign policy arena, the Bush-2 regime decided—even before 9/11—to invade the Middle East in order to secure its oil resources and to obtain a geopolitical advantage over potential rivals such as China and Russia (see: Chapter 5, The Hidden Politics of Empire). The Caspian Sea, the Persian Gulf, and oil rich states such as Iraq were areas seen as essential to making the twenty-first century into another American Century. This was the position of Zbigniew Brezinski, National Security Advisor to President Carter. In his 1997 book, The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy and Its Geostrategic Imperatives, Brezinski outlined a strategy that the Bush-2 regime and PNAC group endorsed as a blueprint for US foreign policy. A central premise in Brezinski's argument was to assert that while hegemony is as old as mankind, ''America's current global supremacy is distinctive in the rapidity of its emergence, in its global scope, and in the manner of its exercise."
When it comes to exerting US Empire's global supremacy, the general consensus among the elites of the US Global Empire seems to be that the American empire should do whatever it takes to "perpetuate America's own dominant position for at least a generation and preferably longer still."22 In so doing, the fabric of international law was shredded by the Bush-2 regime at the same time that the constraints of constitutional government were removed by the aristocratic claims of a president who saw himself in the role of the unitary executive—as the titular head of the American National Security State. In this role, President Bush essentially embarked upon a role that he believed left him above the law and virtually unaccountable to congress, the courts, or the American people (see: Chapter 3, When the Law of the Land Becomes Lawless). The mantra of national security provided the same rationale for any action taken by the executive branch. In the task of extending the empire into another American Century the administration's ready reference to national security was touted out to provide a convenient justification for any executive action.
Having been spoiled by the luxuries of their consumer culture, most Americans were content to let the US Global Empire protect their way of life. For far too many Americans, it mattered little that the "American way of life" was largely made possible by their empire's continued exploitation, oppression, subjugation, and sacrifice of other peoples. The realities of hunger, poverty, and disease throughout the global South were all too easily blamed on the people and governments of the global South—without any regard given to the realities of their unequal power relationship with the US Global Empire. Very few Americans gave much thought to offering their blind adherence to an imperial system that countenanced even deeper economic and political divisions between peoples and cultures. After all, Americans lived in the belly of the beast. Why should they question the policies of their empire? The last thing that most Americans wanted was the burden of choice, the responsibility of having to choose between maintaining the status-quo through their tax dollars to the empire or, in the alternative, questioning and challenging the policies and practices that the US Global Empire was undertaking in their name. At the dawn of the twenty-first century, structural hierarchies of exclusion and lomination remain in place within the US Global Empire and throughout all too many of the nations of the global South.23 The creation of such an international order was the result of the work of America's first generation of empire builders in the 1940s. The post-World War II period came to reflect the views of American elites and policymakers who were dogmatically committed to the idea that the resources of the global South ultimately belonged to the United States. After all, the United States was the defender of the Free World. The dominant status of the United States in world affairs was also seen by these elites as the necessary precondition to any kind of viable world order (see: Chapter 1, From Precedence We Come).
Yet, at the same time, the post-1945 world witnessed the Third World's revolution of rising expectations. Seeking freedom from colonialism would soon be understood as a natural consequence of the end of a world war that was fought to overcome totalitarianism, slavery by a foreign power, and imperial ambition. During the Cold War years, it would matter little to the peoples of the Third World whether the Soviets or the Americans wanted to impose their imperial ambitions on the nations of the global South. What mattered most to the peoples of the global South was the international recognition of their sovereignty, their desire for economic justice and development, an appreciation of their cultures and traditions, and their ability to peacefully coexist in a world that now lived under a nuclear sword of Damocles. So, in the 1950s and again in the 1960s and 1970s, nationalist movements throughout the Third World actively sought to be non-aligned with either superpower.
As far as the people and leadership of the global South were concerned, the East-West conflict mattered, but so did overcoming the global disparities found in the North-South divide. Therefore, the Non-Aligned Nations Movement (NAM) and advocates for a New International Economic Order (NIEO) focused upon the Third World's exodus from the bondage of all empires and imperial quests. As early as the 1950s, the people of the global South wanted to have their rights to self-determination acknowledged by the United States and USSR.
For the majority of citizens throughout the global South, the ideological system espoused by either of the Superpowers mattered very little. As it was expressed in various conferences among and between the leaders and representatives of Third World nations, the majority of nations and peoples throughout the global South were, without reservation, actively seeking to build a Global Community in which there would be a recognition of human rights attributed to entire groups of peoples rather than just to individuals. This catalog of rights included the rights to development, peace, a clean environment, and humanitarian assistance.26 They wanted to bring an end to the dangers associated with an uncontrolled nuclear arms race. They sought an open discourse between the United States and the USSR that would be capable of sustaining the transition to a more peaceful global order. This more peaceful order would have to be premised upon the overcoming °f gross inequalities, poverty, hunger, lack of educational opportunities, and the ever-present threat of war both within and between nations. In short, the primary goal for over two-thirds of humankind was to move the direction of international life away from a Cold War competition between two rival empires and toward the evolution of Global Community. Until that path became an objective possibility, the global consensus was that a path of nonalignment with either superpower was the most prudent choice for the peoples of the global South.
Unfortunately for the global South, the leadership of America's Global Empire in the 1950s and 1960s did not want nonalignment to become a part of the geopolitical equation. As Secretary of State John Foster Dulles saw it, the possibility of Third World states acting in unison would mean that the balance of power would drift toward the Soviets and leave the United States with diminished power. What was equally unfortunate was the US failure to give substance to the much-quoted but studiously ignored notion reflected in Article 28 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights according to which "everyone is entitled to a social and international order in which the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration can be fully realized." The result of this failure is summed up in Philip Alston's observation: 'The connotation of solidarity, of a duty to cooperate, and of the need for mechanisms to achieve an ongoing international redistribution of wealth linked to human rights obligations, have for too long been anathema to Western governments."
For decades, many nations throughout the global South have fought wars of liberation from empire. As with America at its own founding, nations throughout the global South vehemently opposed the goals of empire builders. During the nineteenth century, Great Britain, France, and Germany had embarked upon colonial interventions into the global South in an attempt to control both the resources and peoples of Africa, Asia, the Middle East, and Latin America. on every continent where the empire builders appeared, liberation struggles emerged to confront them. However, in the aftermath of World War II, with the birth of the UN and the global reach of its Charter, it was clear that colonialism—as it was practiced— could not survive as a governing strategy for the empire builders. The UN's global structure of conflict prevention, the enforcement of human rights norms, and international law's continuing adherence to the norm of sovereignty, all combined to eliminate justifications for either colonialism or imperialism. Hence, the post-1945 period was to become the age of decolonization and anti-imperialism. The nations of the global South were supposed to be recognized under the banner of international law as having sovereign equality with the Great Powers.
Yet, on the road to the New World Order, the US Global Empire took on the imperial mantle from the British in 1945. Throughout the 1950s and 1960s, the United States presented itself as the defender of the Free World. The only problem was that the Free World was not really free—in the sense of civil and political liberties. Rather, the Free World contained US-sponsored dictatorships, as with Marcos in the Philippines, Samoza in Nicaragua, and the Shah of Iran. It was a world in which the door was held open for corporations and business interests that continually sought unbridled access to the nations of the global South in order to secure control over their natural resources, labor forces, and markets. In 2001, the Bush-2 regime began to use its global war on terror as an extension and new revised version of the Free World idea, insofar as the concept of an unending global war could easily mask the empire's abuses at home and abroad. The unhindered imperial project could then proceed without reference to law, human rights, the doctrine of sovereignty, or democratic constraints.
In the decades after the American exodus from Vietnam (1974), US-dominated institutions such as the IMF, World Bank, and WTO would attempt to manage the world economy, without having to call upon the military forces of the US Global Empire to enforce the imperial consensus. This strategy worked until the last half of the 1990s when the so-called Washington Consensus—the neoliberal economic model of the Reagan era—collapsed at the end of the Clinton presidency. When the Bush-2 regime took office in 2001, the process of globalization was incapable of maintaining or securing American global hegemony without the use of military force. Resource wars were already underway for the control of oil and pipelines throughout the Middle East. Both China and Russia were seen by elites in Washington as rivals for the world's dwindling energy resources.
The failure of the neoliberal economic model was evident throughout East Asia in the aftermath of the economic meltdown of 1999. The East Asian tigers became the victims of a domino effect linked to the forces of uncontrolled globalization and faulty neoliberal economic prescriptions. Additionally, Africa remained an economic basket case, with very few exceptions. Latin America, which had never really recovered from its decade of debt, was now locked into a downward cycle of increasing levels of poverty along with worsening socioeconomic inequalities. Despite Latin America's embrace of democratic governments, it was still relatively no better off. Angered and alienated citizens would continue to vote out previous governments, while social movements continued to demand concessions from the State and an end to neoliberal economic prescriptions which had failed them miserably.
At the dawn of the twenty-first century, Latin America was a continent still enslaved by IMF conditionality agreements that strangled economic growth and development. It was a problem that was further exacerbated by an uncritical reliance on the economic mantra of markets, privatization, and deregulation. By surrendering to the laws of the market without maintaining the ability of the State to intervene on behalf of the victims of the market, many Latin American nations witnessed a worsening of the degree of inequalities and poverty (see: Chapter 6, Claiming A "Right of Peace": Moving Beyond the "Empire Syndrome").
No longer able to completely control the nations of the global South through its institutions of economic coercion (IMF, World Bank, US Transnational Corporations), the Bush-2 regime decided to rely predominantly upon its doctrines of resurgent militarism and preemption to reassert American hegemony. Armed with the doctrine of nationalism and resurgent militarism as its strategy of first choice, the Bush-2 regime embarked upon its version of how to capture the wenty-first century and make it into another American Century. The difference between the twentieth century period of American dominance and the projected twenty-first century period of American dominance was that the US Global Empire in the twenty-first century was willing to adopt a more fascist approach in attempting to maintain its hegemonic position (see: Chapter 2, The Occupations of Empire).
LIBERATING THE GLOBAL SOUTH FROM GLOBAL EMPIRE
For the advocates of human rights, for the sake of maintaining the integrity of the international law principle of the sovereign equality of nations, and for the goal of building a humane and inclusive global order, the only viable alternative to another American Century is the vision and promise of a rising Global Community. Throughout this book, I argue that the best strategy for realizing a rising Global Community would have to be one that was dedicated to abandoning neoliberal economic models, building strong South-South regional alliances, and incorporating the people power of social movements into a national/international counter-hegemonic alliance to the US Global Empire. Indeed, the power of a rising Global Community would be most dramatically and effectively manifested as the product of an emerging national/international counter-hegemonic alliance to the US Global Empire (see: Chapter 6, Claiming A "Right of Peace"—Moving Beyond the "Empire Syndrome'4).
In what could easily be the most succinct preamble for any document announcing the nature of this counter-hegemonic alliance, Boaventura de Sousa Santos observes:
Although neo-liberal globalization—the current version of global capitalism— is by far the dominant form of globalization, it is not the only one. Parallel to it and, to a great extent, as a reaction to it, another globalization is emerging. It consists of transnational networks and alliances among social movements, social struggles, and non-governmental organizations. From the four corners of the globe, all these initiatives have mobilized to fight against the social exclusion, destruction of the environment and biodiversity, unemployment, human rights violations, pandemics, and inter-ethnic hatreds, directly or indirectly caused by neo-liberal globalization.
In short, there are two globalizations at work in our age. The first type of globalization is supportive of the US Global Empire and the imperial project. The second type of globalization is a reaction against the US Global Empire and supportive of a variety of constituencies and issues that make possible the realization of Global Community. To comprehend the difference between these two alternative paths of globalization is to begin to understand the core thesis of this book.
The main theme of my book—finding an exodus from empire—follows the general outline of analysis (as set forth above) by Santos. That is because our research and our perspective converge on how to define, conceptualize, and analyze the nature of the worldwide system of the US Global Empire. Additionally, we concur that another globalization is emerging—one that is accountable to human rights and human needs within a rising Global Community. Being able to grasp the role converging social movements in opposition to neoliberal capitalism makes it possible for us to recognize the reality that neoliberal globalization has come into open conflict with the agenda of emerging transnational networks and alliances. Throughout the global South, the poor, the unemployed, the disenfran-hised and excluded are demanding that the sovereign equality of their nation within the Global Community be respected. It is no longer tolerable for the US Global Empire, the IMF and World Bank, or the WTO to dictate what their respective developmental paths will be in the absence of effective democratic representation.
This view embodies a recognition that is increasingly common among progressive thinkers around the globe. For example, Anne Orford has noted: "Economic alobalization has made the fictitious nature of state sovereignty apparent to all but the most myopic observer of international relations and international law."29 If state sovereignty is not an effective barrier to imperial intervention, then the entire world is simply left open to exploitation by the best-armed Superpower.
In Chapter 6, I detail how the financial axis of the empire, such as the IMF, World Bank, and WTO, operate in conjunction with the Washington/Wall-Street Alliance. I demonstrate how the purpose and conduct of these institutions is designed to facilitate the flow of wealth and resources out of the nations of the global South. As a consequence, the resulting collateral damage done by these institutions is to leave billions of people worse off than they were prior to the imposition of the neoliberal model and the destruction of their sovereignty.
The IMF and World Bank have had a significant impact on the policies of governments in those states seeking to make use of their resources in two ways. First, the IMF and World Bank influence government policy through the imposition of conditions on access to credits and loans.30 Second, the IMF and World Bank do not comply with the obligation to ensure that the model of development adopted by states is one in which all human rights and freedoms can be fully realized.31 Given this disempowerment of states, I outline a strategy for states, throughout the global South, to renew and remake their governments and societies in accordance with a model of governance that I have labeled the Inclusionary State (IS) (see: Chapter 6). The importance of the IS model is that the leadership of social movements, and all the major groups and classes within civil society, can finally be accorded a formal place at the table of decision making.
My advocacy of an inclusionary state may be seen as a key component of an exit strategy from the US Global Empire and its institutions of exploitation. That is because the effect of World Bank and IMF policies is to strip the state of most of its functions, except for maintaining law and order while, at the same time. facilitating private investment. When a state becomes stripped of its power to engage in protecting the rights of its citizens, as well as the course and direction of its own economy, it then becomes transformed into what I have called the "exclusionary state" (ES). It excludes the majority of classes and groups with- in the nation because the leadership of an ES state appears to address only the interests of international economic institutions and corporate investors. That is the bad news. The g°°d newsis that as the effects °f this kind °f limited representation of interestsbecomes clear to labor unions, the unemployed, the victims of human rights abuses, and social movements in opposition to the neoliberal model, a transnational counter-hegemonic allianceagainsttheUSGlobalEmpireis beginning to emerge. That is because the vulnerability, insecurity, and frustration of the people increases and with these symptoms of exploitation and a recognition of their ultimate cause. With rising levels of discontent comes a tide of global opposition in the form of violent protests, political destabilization. and the growth of populist nationalism. These are the societal consequences that emerge when ES in the global South appear to be accountable to only foreign investors, the IMF, and the World Bank.
Throughout this book, when I speak of an exodus from empire. I am also speaking of the need for the nations of the global South to embark upon an exodus from the influence, pressures, and coercion of both the IMF and the World Bank. Despite the fact that the 1997 World Development Report spoke of the need to bring the state closer to the people, the reality was that there was no significant shift in the World Bank's commitment to policies of privatization and state restructuring based on a narrow model of economic development that continued to exclude the needs of the poor and human rights concerns. The situation is one that remains much the same as it was in the late 1990s when John Gray noted: "At the global level, as at that of the nation-state, the free market does not promote stability or democracy. Global democratic capitalism is as unrealizable a condition as worldwide communism."
In this regard, some scholars have noted: "International institutions must make some changes in order to adapt to the human rights legal framework. But the institutions cannot change without a change in the international system itself, one of the main elements being the actual economic and financial system based on neo-liberal rules."35 So, despite the World Bank and IMF giving lip service to poverty reduction through new partnerships, we find: 'The new poverty reduction partnerships are based on consensus and the idea of mutual interest among state and donor actors. The partnership idea is not far from new, nor is it politically neutral. Indeed ... 'partnership' is commonly invoked when the more powerful party to an asymmetrical relationship feels threatened by impending hostilities and confrontation."36 The impending hostilities and the dangers of widespread violent confrontations, feared by the IMF and World Bank actually emerge from a combination of factors. The two most evident factors are: (1) progressive social movements making new political advances within and between nations and, (2) the growing force of a national/international counter-hegemonic alliance in opposition to the US Global Empire.
Even in the face of these impending hostilities the IMF continues to deny that human rights protection is an area of activity with which it should legitimately concern itself. The IMF has remained adamant in asserting that the protection of human rights is outside of its scope and is a responsibility that remains the concern of individual governments. Yet, the very fact that it imposes conditionally requirements upon governments accepting its loans makes the IMF into a force that dictates the degree to which human rights will be protected and advanced or ignored. Even when the IMF considers the impact of its own policies, it still treats human rights as a matter that is outside of the Fund's mandate. It should be no wonder that there are impending hostilities against the IMF. It has been increasingly seen as just one more institutional bastion of Western power that continues to emasculate the right of the global South to embark upon a path of humane and inclusive development. It has effectively ignored the UN's Millennium Development Goals and protests against its conduct from the human rights community.
Despite the IMF and World Bank, and the militarism of the US Global Empire, the fact remains that the path toward the realization of Global Community, as well as humane and inclusive development, is more accessible than ever before in recorded human history. In large measure it is because the norms of a human rights culture have become universal. It is also because the failures and limitations of Global Empire are more apparent. Military force cannot generate global compliance to the demands of a Global Empire any more than a dictatorship can inspire the loyalty of those who are subjugated by it. Neither can an economic dictatorship, under the global guidance of the IMF and World Bank, result in a reduction of poverty and inequality or open the door for an exodus from empire. These insights have inspired people around the world to recognize that Another World Is Possible.
In January 2001, in Porto Alegre, Brazil, 20,000 activists, students, and filmmakers assembled together in order to exchange ideas about confronting the US Global Empire. That was the birth of the now historic World Social Forum. At the center of most of the discussions held at that time was the fact that the IMF and World Bank bear the greatest responsibility for the plunder of entire communities. That is also the reason why, throughout this book, I have gone to great lengths to make a connection between the Washington/Wall-Street Alliance of the US Global Empire and its primary financial institutions—the IMF and World Bank. In opposing the empire, an incipient national and international counter-hegemonic alliance must find alternatives to these forces. With the articulation of alternatives a global discourse can be accelerated that should lead to projects of emancipation and liberation—an exodus from empire.
At Porto Alegre, a general agreement was reached on the need for an alternative system of global governance. Some participants invoked the term de-globalization to describe this alternative. Walden Bello clarified the meaning of the term by noting that: "We are not talking about withdrawing from the international economy. We are speaking about reorienting our economies away from the emphasis on production for export and towards production for the local market."38 At the top of his list, he suggested: "Drawing most of our financial resources for development from within rather than becoming dependent on foreign investment and foreign financial markets."39 Following that fundamental principle, he added that it would be necessary to carry out long-postponed measures of income redistribution and Land redistribution in order to create a vibrant internal market. Such a path would allow nations throughout the Global Community to de-emphasize growth and work instead toward maximizing equity in order to radically reduce environmental disequilibrium. Another benefit of taking this path would be strategic economic decisions would not be left to the market but make them subject to democratic choice. In furtherance of democratizing nations, the private sector and the state should be subjected to constant monitoring by civil society. Yet, for all this to take place and succeed, it will only be possible if it takes place within an alternative system of global governance. That alternative system is what I am calling Global Community.
In the four years since the first World Social Forum, the state of struggle against the US Global Empire has spanned the globe and encompassed the energies of millions of people. Social movements against neoliberal capitalist intrusion have sprung up throughout the Arab world, South Africa, East Africa, Australia, Central Asia, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, East and Southeast Asia, rural China, and throughout Latin America.40 Social movements are a central part of a worldwide struggle, helping to accelerate the global process of creating an alternative system. When viewed in combination, these struggles are all part of a dynamic convergence between nations, cultures, and ideas (see: Chapter 4). The World Social Forum served as an important platform for opening the door to the creation of a counter-hegemonic globalization. Other examples of convergence may be cited in the form of a global anti-war movement, the trade union movement, and the struggles of over three billion peasants for a decent life.
A global mobilization against neoliberal hegemony has taken many forms, but it has a common objective—the defeat of Global Empire and the establishment of a viable Global Community.41 The extent of this mobilization and the diversity of these struggles have just begun to be documented. Yet, it is undeniable that millions of people have become active in rejecting corporate globalization, the intrusions of Global Empire, and the IMF and World Bank. In all of these efforts, millions of people around the globe are developing alternatives to the current system. They are actively engaged in a process that will Jay the groundwork for an exodus from empire.
Terrence E. Paupp
Exodus From Empire: The Fall of America’s Empire and the Rise of the Global
Community (London: Pluto Press, 2007, 423.)
The Cold War world which began in 1945 and lasted until 1990 was basically a bipolar world, stabilized as well as threatened by the nuclear balance. The post-Cold War world in which the USA seemed to dominate the global scene both economically and strategically lasted from 1990 to 2008. Some saw this period as the belle époque of the American Empire. The empire collapsed in the sands of Iraq and the mountains of Afghanistan. The US-led ‘warm on terror’ failed to produce a sense of limits or guidelines. Terror could express itself through Al’Qaeda, the Taliban, Palestinian suicide-bombers, South American narco-terrorists or Chechen separatists. The war on terror was an open-ended struggle which failed to focus on the historical and political context in which violence is generated and terror becomes a tactic.
Paupp stresses opposition to the USA as a main reason for the fall of empire. “History is in the midst of changing. The change is predicated on the notion that the citizens of the Global South are part of a Global Community who can be viewed as a cohesive community of oppressed and exploited peoples who are seeking an ‘exodus from empire’. As I use the term, it allows me to write of the peoples and governments of Asia, Africa, Latin America, and the Middle East, as well as Russia and China, coming together in a national, regional, and international counter-hegemonic alliance against the US Empire.” As with past empires, there are limits to what military might can do. Today, while there are many US military overseas, they are not trained as colonial administrators, and even the formation of soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan goes poorly. Among Americans there were few empire builders. Unlike the French, the English or the Russians, few Americans wanted to leave home in order to administer foreign lands. There have always been ‘overseas Americans’ especially in the business world, and there have been Americans in education, health and religion. Yet they have not been called upon to establish public order and to oversee the daily work of ‘the natives’. In the spirit of the saying ‘What if we gave a war and no one came?’ we can say ‘What if we created an empire, and no administrators followed?’
Every nation has a story — a narrative it tells itself and others to explain its place in the flow of history and to give meaning to its actions. Pushing the frontier westward is a key part of the American narrative. The creation of an empire is not. There can be mythic covers for empire, and some see in ‘globalization’ a cover for US interests, a way of seeking markets for its global reach and for its economic productivity. Certainly, globalization does not go against US economic and political interests but globalization is a combination of trends and currents that the USA does not control and goes well beyond US interests.
Thus, the short American Empire will not be replaced by a different national empire, but rather by institutions, values and practices which will help to structure globalization. The United Nations provides the framework for this transition to world law, human rights, and inclusive forms of government. The United Nations is the symbol and the motor for “inclusive ideas, principles, traditions and practices that highlight the centrality of human cooperation, ethical reason, and sociability.” This international community is not yet embodied in a single, global, democratic, constitutional order, but the United Nations has the capacity to grow and to develop democratization to its universal dimensions based on the rule of law. The world society has a commonality of interests and values to which the USA has contributed, but the USA is not the exclusive guardian of the world society. It is likely that what we are seeing is not the ‘fall’ of the American Empire but its passing as a new world-wide social, economic, and political structure is being put into place.