There’s much talk about China’s growing economic imperialism, its human-rights violations and about multinational corporations’ exploitation of humans and nature large-scale. But what about the West?
In the Age of Colonialism the West invaded countries abroad to bring “good things” by religion, to “civilize” the world while exploiting the hell out of other countries, their natural resources and people.
Clearly the same underlying patterns are still at work, because the West still feels superior over the rest of the world.
Colonialism is based on the collective conviction to be superior over others. In Christianity it looks to be deriving from culturally ingrained inferiority complex (“original sin”) to be overcompensated to by a superiority complex?
Western leaders have a history of shaping the world according to their ideals to save the world, to break with age-old traditions on-site and urge all to follow Western traditions instead.
Today, the West still feels superior over the “rest of the world” (a common phrase therefore) pushing the world to comply, this time not by religion but by democratization, fake media, banking and alternative manipulated science, appearing as “new religions.”
We strongly advocate human rights. However, undeniably many consider human rights as a secularized substrate of Christianity different from, for example, Sharia Law.
But many argue: Almost all countries committed themselves to respect the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948), beyond culture.
Sure, but in many countries human rights are respected in name only, rejected as a “Western product” dangerous to traditions on-site.
Although applying to everyone universally, many perceive human rights as a “Western invention” based on the Age of Enlightenment, which Western thinkers – in response to the horrors of World War II – propagated first. And that’s its weakness.
Resistance against human rights in the world originates from their being perceived as a new form of colonialism of Western powers spreading democracy worldwide while using human rights as a fig leaf for reckless exploitation of the world, similar to the Chinese model, which operates without democracy and human rights.
As well, even in Western countries human rights aren’t well established (integration struggles, non-ethical behavior of multinational corporations).
Remember the many domestic workers tortured by Asian bosses mostly educated at high-ranked Western universities, as are the world’s many Western-educated brutal dictators. Western education falls short when imposed.
Apparently human rights as a relatively new concept are outweighed by deeply rooted age-old cultures, where human rights aren’t culturally internalized.
Who pays the price for Western interventions? Is the history of Western “nation-building” and interventionism – coinciding with Western economic/strategic interests.
Does “spreading democracy and human rights abroad” even achieve the desired results? “Change takes time,” say advocates of installing Western values worldwide. True, it only takes generations.
The West spearheads a global cultural standardization process via the World Wide Web as new colonialism. A standardized world mainly benefits capitalist global trade.
Urging the world to model itself on the West to accept Western standards and creating Western copies worldwide, propagated by Hollywood and the media. India’s widespread obsession with skin-whitening or Asia’s frenzy forbeauty surgeries to look Western speaks volumes.
This two-faced global Westernization process appears self-contradictory.
While Western cultural imperialists – no longer spreading Christianity, as the Bible is widely considered “outdated” in the West – urge the world to adopt Western lifestyles, democracy, human rights etc.
Western multinational corporations exploit people and nature recklessly worldwide and deliver arms to cruel regimes violating human rights.
Revolutions have lasting change only by “the power within” – coming from inside out, if the majority population wants change. That’s the revolutionary factor!
Without that, foreign powers bringing change are perceived as imperialists looking to secure their own interests, ignoring the on-site majority populations’ reluctance against interventionism.
The revolution’s driving force is “the power within,” the majority population on-site ready for change. Only then is the time, the groundwork laid by the people themselves embracing change, which therefore lasts.
Asia Times / ABC Flash Point News 2020.