<https://tinyurl.com/2eyj8dg7> europa.eu
European Diplomatic Academy: Opening remarks by High Representative ..
Europe is a garden. We have built a garden .. The rest of the world ..
is not exactly a garden. Most of the rest of the world is a jungle,
and the jungle could invade the garden .. We are privileged people ..
...
This statement is a clear expression of entitlement, it implies that "Europe" is entitled to dominate and rule over inferior nations, whom
the speaker disparagingly calls "jungle".
Other acute thinkers also noticed the true colors, for example, the
UAE's MFA has issued a statement labeling the Borrell's rant "racist" <https://is.gd/oy6oSb>. It's not racist in the terms of race, but
the narrative of supremacy is surely akin to. And this racism-*like*
(or, some call it "cultural racism") is camouflageable.
In Chinese talks, the main criticism of the Western hegemony is
usually focused on America, while Europe is seen as a wingman addition
to America. In the terms of current politics and economics it's true,
but in a broader cultural-historical perspective, West Europe is the
core "nest of evil". I.e. the very root of this sense of entitlement.
In Western discourse, the sense of entitlement is well discussed, e.g. "simply put, people with a sense of entitlement think the rules don't
apply to them" <https://is.gd/OGUYao>. However, this well-
discussabillity does not impel them to changes in their behavior in practice. It's somewhat like the situation in America, where many are
making big anti-racist talks, while the gap between average 'whites'
and average 'blacks' is not decreasing, but even growing.
This "a garden" narrative sounds especially controversial against the
fact The Garden was recently the center of the most destructive wars.
Hitler is today a recognized character of evil, but Hitler was not an original thinker. The European "scientific racism" was developed in
the 19th century within the "Europe the Garden vs. the Jungle" vision,
and it then served as a basis for the Nazis. It wasn't a specifically
German phenomenon but rather a forthright version of the common
European agenda aimed to arrange a garden in the middle of the jungle. Euro-centric thinkers in Britain and Benelux would despise Hitler not because they dislike the very agenda but because those insufficiently enlightened, uncouth Germans managed to trivialize and spoil it.
The present American exceptionalism is based on the inherited European concepts with some modification, and, after the WW2, Europe has become
much less important in itself without America. Still the EU ideologues employ the pre-WW1/WW2 ideas of supremacy because it's a sweet cultism,
and it helps keep the sentiment of loyalty among the populaces within
the EU. Nowadays, Europe can imitate this image of supremacy only when
it's been attached to the US, so the addiction to the cultism prevents Europe from being able to pursue a policy independent of the US, even
when it becomes detrimental to the Europe's economic interest.
Then "democracy" is a thing linked with the supremacy and entitlement.
In most of the known implementations, throughout history, a democratic governance was usually supplemented with classes of disenfranchised.
Whether they were those ancient Greeks or the American slaveholders,
they managed well to combine democracy with a notion that some must be naturally excluded, what they think / want doesn't matter, or they are simply not quite humans. Keeping certain groups excluded is a well- established / deeply ingrained democratic tradition, sort of archetype.
It hints the way the above "the jungle" should be understood.
And the sense of entitlement operates so that any thing pro-Western is automatically branded by the Westerners as "democratic", regardless of
the true nature of the thing. It just can not be otherwise, given that
we the privileged are an embodiment of democracy while the rest of the
world is such a non-privileged jungle. It's naturally conflictogentic.
The 2014 coup in Kiev implemented through violent activism of neo-Nazi militias, was branded as pro-democracy revolution, and the legitimate grassroots protests and resistance against the usurpation of power was branded as sham (a Russia-organized sabotage). From the Russian view,
so much brazen insult to intelligence could hardly be tolerated. From
the Western view, everyone must accept their bogus interpretation just because they, the privileged ones, have a strong sense of entitlement.
One African analyst described in early February the Ukraine's 'paradox'
so that their pro-Western faction rejected "Western democracy" norms
and procedures (which repeatedly didn't give a desired outcome to them)
and resorted to "violence and non-constitutional means to attain power
or change government" <https://archive.is/ZqCV3>. With some inaccuracy
in details, it is generally a correct explanation. If democracy as such
was really a real value for the Ukraine's pro-Western faction then they would respect the democratic procedures, but instead they resorted to a violence. In fact, democracy as such was not their true aspiration, but their true lust was to join "the club of the privileged" as advertised
by the European ideologues. This "joining the club" was seen primarily
for political functionaries rather than for regular people (the way
regular Ukrainians are joining the club looks, quite typaly, like this <https://youtu.be/RQDqVBOaasg>), so there was no enough popular support
to implement it through democratic procedures. So the pushy pro-Western faction implemented a violent coup. But since it was pro-Western it had
been automatically branded as pro-democracy revolution.
Most of nations are aside from the Ukraine-related conflict context, and
the Atlanticist propaganda tries its best to depict it as if big evil
Russia offended small innocent Ukraine. However, things could not become
so hostile without the Atlanticist meddlement. After the anti-democratic coup in 2014, it turned to Atlanticist-guided puppet regime that began
to build its "identity" on the basis of Nazi-like hateful propaganda (targeted mainly against the Russians) and fictitious "history" (akin to
the Hitlerian Aryanism). In some respects, it's more like a civil war
rather than a war between countries. The post-coup regime has turned a
part of the populace under its control into a mercenary which now fights with the Western weapons and intelligence and under the guide of NATO command (and in favor of the Atlanticist interest). Those who'd support
the Kiev regime today, also would support the Western entitlement. One
other day this Western entitlement may be applied to you as well (don't forget, you're "jungle", in their view). But if the West will have to
step back then it may teach them to pay more respect to the rest of the world and less abuse their sense of entitlement.
On Wednesday, October 19, 2022 at 7:29:58 PM UTC, Oleg Smirnov wrote:some four billion people around the world have climbed out of poverty. The number of democratic governments has grown from no more than a dozen in 1939 to more than a hundred today. The power of the state has been curbed in favor of the individual in
<https://tinyurl.com/2eyj8dg7> europa.eu
European Diplomatic Academy: Opening remarks by High Representative ..
Europe is a garden. We have built a garden .. The rest of the world ..
is not exactly a garden. Most of the rest of the world is a jungle,
and the jungle could invade the garden .. We are privileged people ..
...
This statement is a clear expression of entitlement, it implies that "Europe" is entitled to dominate and rule over inferior nations, whom
the speaker disparagingly calls "jungle".
Other acute thinkers also noticed the true colors, for example, the
UAE's MFA has issued a statement labeling the Borrell's rant "racist" <https://is.gd/oy6oSb>. It's not racist in the terms of race, but
the narrative of supremacy is surely akin to. And this racism-*like*
(or, some call it "cultural racism") is camouflageable.
In Chinese talks, the main criticism of the Western hegemony is
usually focused on America, while Europe is seen as a wingman addition
to America. In the terms of current politics and economics it's true,
but in a broader cultural-historical perspective, West Europe is the
core "nest of evil". I.e. the very root of this sense of entitlement.
In Western discourse, the sense of entitlement is well discussed, e.g. "simply put, people with a sense of entitlement think the rules don't apply to them" <https://is.gd/OGUYao>. However, this well-
discussabillity does not impel them to changes in their behavior in practice. It's somewhat like the situation in America, where many are making big anti-racist talks, while the gap between average 'whites'
and average 'blacks' is not decreasing, but even growing.
This "a garden" narrative sounds especially controversial against the
fact The Garden was recently the center of the most destructive wars. Hitler is today a recognized character of evil, but Hitler was not an original thinker. The European "scientific racism" was developed in
the 19th century within the "Europe the Garden vs. the Jungle" vision,
and it then served as a basis for the Nazis. It wasn't a specifically German phenomenon but rather a forthright version of the common
European agenda aimed to arrange a garden in the middle of the jungle. Euro-centric thinkers in Britain and Benelux would despise Hitler not because they dislike the very agenda but because those insufficiently enlightened, uncouth Germans managed to trivialize and spoil it.
The present American exceptionalism is based on the inherited European concepts with some modification, and, after the WW2, Europe has become much less important in itself without America. Still the EU ideologues employ the pre-WW1/WW2 ideas of supremacy because it's a sweet cultism, and it helps keep the sentiment of loyalty among the populaces within
the EU. Nowadays, Europe can imitate this image of supremacy only when it's been attached to the US, so the addiction to the cultism prevents Europe from being able to pursue a policy independent of the US, even
when it becomes detrimental to the Europe's economic interest.
Then "democracy" is a thing linked with the supremacy and entitlement.
In most of the known implementations, throughout history, a democratic governance was usually supplemented with classes of disenfranchised. Whether they were those ancient Greeks or the American slaveholders,
they managed well to combine democracy with a notion that some must be naturally excluded, what they think / want doesn't matter, or they are simply not quite humans. Keeping certain groups excluded is a well- established / deeply ingrained democratic tradition, sort of archetype.
It hints the way the above "the jungle" should be understood.
And the sense of entitlement operates so that any thing pro-Western is automatically branded by the Westerners as "democratic", regardless of
the true nature of the thing. It just can not be otherwise, given that
we the privileged are an embodiment of democracy while the rest of the world is such a non-privileged jungle. It's naturally conflictogentic.
The 2014 coup in Kiev implemented through violent activism of neo-Nazi militias, was branded as pro-democracy revolution, and the legitimate grassroots protests and resistance against the usurpation of power was branded as sham (a Russia-organized sabotage). From the Russian view,
so much brazen insult to intelligence could hardly be tolerated. From
the Western view, everyone must accept their bogus interpretation just because they, the privileged ones, have a strong sense of entitlement.
One African analyst described in early February the Ukraine's 'paradox'
so that their pro-Western faction rejected "Western democracy" norms
and procedures (which repeatedly didn't give a desired outcome to them) and resorted to "violence and non-constitutional means to attain power
or change government" <https://archive.is/ZqCV3>. With some inaccuracy
in details, it is generally a correct explanation. If democracy as such was really a real value for the Ukraine's pro-Western faction then they would respect the democratic procedures, but instead they resorted to a violence. In fact, democracy as such was not their true aspiration, but their true lust was to join "the club of the privileged" as advertised
by the European ideologues. This "joining the club" was seen primarily
for political functionaries rather than for regular people (the way regular Ukrainians are joining the club looks, quite typaly, like this <https://youtu.be/RQDqVBOaasg>), so there was no enough popular support
to implement it through democratic procedures. So the pushy pro-Western faction implemented a violent coup. But since it was pro-Western it had been automatically branded as pro-democracy revolution.
Most of nations are aside from the Ukraine-related conflict context, and the Atlanticist propaganda tries its best to depict it as if big evil Russia offended small innocent Ukraine. However, things could not become so hostile without the Atlanticist meddlement. After the anti-democratic coup in 2014, it turned to Atlanticist-guided puppet regime that began1. American neo-conservative scholar Robert Kagan, the husband of the Victoria Nuland
to build its "identity" on the basis of Nazi-like hateful propaganda (targeted mainly against the Russians) and fictitious "history" (akin to the Hitlerian Aryanism). In some respects, it's more like a civil war rather than a war between countries. The post-coup regime has turned a part of the populace under its control into a mercenary which now fights with the Western weapons and intelligence and under the guide of NATO command (and in favor of the Atlanticist interest). Those who'd support the Kiev regime today, also would support the Western entitlement. One other day this Western entitlement may be applied to you as well (don't forget, you're "jungle", in their view). But if the West will have to
step back then it may teach them to pay more respect to the rest of the world and less abuse their sense of entitlement.
had also used the "garden vs jungle" analogy in his book "The Jungle Grows Back." But
with more nuance. Robert Kagan probably agrees with you that Europeans are taken their
success for granted. In addition, Kagan would emphasize the European garden is locally
or naturally grown but made by the USA.
"Since the end of the Second World War the world has also enjoyed a period of prosperity unlike any other, with more than seven decades of global GDP growth averaging almost 3.5 percent per year, despite the 2007–2008 financial crisis. Since 1945,
...overwhelm it.
But all this has been an anomaly in the history of human existence. The liberal world order is fragile and impermanent. Like a garden, it is ever under siege from the natural forces of history, the jungle whose vines and weeds constantly threaten to
Unfortunately, we tend to take our world for granted. We have lived so long inside the bubble of the liberal order that we can imagine no other kind of world. We think it is natural and normal, even inevitable. "
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 483 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 155:14:00 |
| Calls: | 9,592 |
| Calls today: | 6 |
| Files: | 13,676 |
| Messages: | 6,148,853 |
| Posted today: | 3 |