bandwagon

The world overall has progressed in material wealth, - but not necessarily paralleled by happiness. (Unhappiness exists amongst the deprived of course, but also increasingly amongst the wealthier).

The moral standing of the world is in my view diminishing. Since WWII there was an ascent of morals with the pursuit of peace, the recognition of universal human rights with a reach for basic absolute moral standards, through the UN. Although the UN is a flawed, political body in the way it conducts business, it is its recognition of absolute morals that has been a great achievement.

The drive behind the imposition of these values has come from Western culture. Other cultures have lagged or stayed behind, some by a long way.

The ascent towards reaching absolute moral standard peaked (still well short) around the millennium and has fallen since. There are two reasons for this.

1. Muslim Fundamentalism. Whilst the muslim world in general may have been beginning to converge with western morals, the fundamentalists have sought to prevent this; Sharia doctrine does not recognise the priority of individual human rights. However, it is the radical movement that have precipitated a divergence. Amongst the radicals it is particularly the emergence of the toxic doctrine of Al Zawahiri, who wanted to eradicate Western values by any means both inside and outside the muslim world, adopted by OBL in the mid 90s, that is now leading to a viscious downward cycle: Unfortunately, his doctrine is becoming increasingly adopted amongst muslim all over the world, as a predicted consequence of the military action by the West in the past few years. Human rights and indiscriminate compassion mean nothing to adherents of Al Zawahiri’s doctrine.

2. Neocon foreign policy. It is recognised of course that self-defence, i.e. the targeting of a direct and imminent threat, is either included in, or ring-fenced from an absolute moral code. Neocon foreign policy, as written up in “The Defence of America”, adopted by the Bush administration in 2000 (unmandated), implements pre-eminent assault on other nations, not just as part of national security, but as strategy to further America’s global hedgemony and economic security. The plan explicitly required a “new Pearl Harbour” type event to enable it to be implemented, which was provided by 9/11. Implicit in this doctrine is a conflict with universal human right to life. Clearly the subsequent military action in Iraq and Lebanon has not changed the aims of Al Zawahiri, -how could it, this was already maxed out. But it has lead to the popularisation of the doctrine, most chillingly amongst 2nd generation immigrants. My perception is that it in turn has lead to an ascendance of dehumanistic views amongst westerners.

-certainly if these boards are anything to go by, as illustrated by these unopposed comments:

And these well–wishes for holding a view:

-A case of the pot calling the Islamo-kettle a fascist-black