Elite vs Poor: The Future World

Mukhtar Kareem

Quetta: No philosophy on the earth can mitigate the burden of appropriating the insatiable greed of the elites that control the destiny of our world. Their egos, be it political, economic or military,  are threatening the tranquillity and peace of our world. If allowed unabated, their egoistic transgressions and misdirection will inevitably result in the destruction of nature and the obliteration of human race.

The world where we circumspectly live and the atmosphere in which we breathe are at a risk from the overflowing greed,  meticulously disguised in the cloak of “national interest” so that it appears less destructive, less extirpating and, hence, more tolerable. However, our misplaced confidence combined with insatiable greed will ultimately have every potential of transforming this relatively salubrious world into an unwholesome one.

The important question about the future existence of the world is unashamedly digressed by competing for national interests. However, we are often left with asking: What is actually meant by the ‘national interest’? To what extent it should be pursued and for whom it should be pursued for?. For example, Is the ‘ national interest’  concerned with the well-being and welfare of general populace within and outside the defined borders? If yes,   then how is the invasion of one nation by another is justified? If the definition of ‘ national interest’ excludes the general populace then are we saying that it is merely about the interest of a minority at the helm of political and economic hierarchy? The answering of these and related questions are important if we are to prevent our world from sliding into an abyss.

Thus far we have learned to our utter dismay that ‘ national interest’ discourse has never been about the general populace.  It has only been about the interest of elites. The invasion of Kuwait by Iraq in 1990, for example,  defies any justification that this could in any way have benefited the people of Iraq. It was about one man’s ego trip to portray himself as being invincible. Russian people, after their country entrenched itself in Ukraine, seem to increasingly dissent against Putin’s actions.  This is progressively growing in the absence of any signs that an end is in sight. The only thing that is not showing any weakness is the resolve of Putin and his team.

Similarly, people of the United States of America, who are cognizant of world politics, disapprove much of what their government does on the international; scene. For example,  It was only after 9/11 that the public support for the military action in Afghanistan escalated. In the same vain, Chinese people, although in the absence of opinion data,  can be assumed to detest the tension with Taiwan, Japan and South Korea. Global public opinion, if taken cumulatively, is never in cahoots with what happens in the world from east to west.

It can responsibly be said that the so-called ‘national interest’ that every nation keenly pursues is actually the interest of those in power and at the helm. Public consent is taken for granted and used to justify policy decisions and ensuing actions, for example, the invasion of Iraq was a typical example of this. Tony Blair, the Prime Minister of Britain, misinformed the Parliament and the public to get his decision to invade.  Even in functioning democracies which are guided by the principle of  ‘ government for the people by the people, public consent for governmental actions through its tenure is not total. The outcome of an election can’t be taken to mean the unreserved public approval of all the actions that a government may take during its political life. Invasions and conquests are justified as being in the national interest but in reality these only benefit big conglomerates, political elites and the military junta of the world.

If those who manage the affairs of our world are allowed unabated to pursue their mighty egos and insatiable greed, a continuation of a  healthy and peaceful environment would only remain a dream. Military, economic, political and social confrontation will become an indelible fate of the world. In order to gain supremacy, global decision-makers will pursue the designs to bolster their positions of superiority, allowing them to maintain and enhance their hubris. The world shared by all of us will be at the intellectual mercy of a few decision-makers, living in bullet and bomb-proof houses, whose means are so vast and whose connectivity is so large to allow them to settle things as they see fit. The future of the world of ordinary people will hold a gloomy and bleak prospect. Our interests will be made subservient to the ‘national interest’ that in reality is the interest of political and commercial elites and the military junta.