![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
imomusI find the annual Pew Global Attitudes Project poll fascinating, not least because it's a way to overcome my own feelings of alienation from the way the world is going. The Pew reveals my attitudes to be closer to those of the many than those of the few. And that's a good feeling. What's more, the survey brings hope. It confirms Chomsky's proverb: "There are now two superpowers on the planet, the U.S. and world opinion".
Today I thought I'd go through the latest Pew Global Attitudes Report -- entitled "Global Unease With Major World Powers" and released yesterday -- to see how the way majorities of people in the world are feeling tallies with the way I'm feeling. Call it the "Hey, My Attitudes Are Global!" Project.
Global distrust of American leadership is reflected in increasing disapproval of the cornerstones of U.S. foreign policy.
This is a no-brainer. Bush and Cheney are so corrupt that even their own political system has noticed -- they were yesterday subpoenaed for documents relating to wire-tapping. They consistently act as if they're above the law. Their foreign policy has been such a huge disaster that yesterday's tributes to Blair cited his support of it as his biggest failure.
Not only is there worldwide support for a withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq, but there also is considerable opposition to U.S. and NATO operations in Afghanistan.
I'm absolutely on-message with "the world" on this one. The Surge has failed in Iraq. Even Karzai in Afghanistan is criticizing the US and NATO for their heavy-handedness (read: killing civilians and treating Afghan life as if it were "cheap").
Global support for the U.S.-led war on terrorism ebbs ever lower. And the United States is the nation blamed most often for hurting the world's environment, at a time of rising global concern about environmental issues.
Here you can slip a cigarette paper between me and Mr/Ms World's view. I'm only not ebbing because I never supported this "long war" in the first place. And I'm only not blaming the US for impending environmental catastrophe because I don't think we can look to the US to be any sort of responsible global policeman, and because China this month actually overtook the US as the world's biggest CO2 emitter (one more indication that the 21st century is going to be a Chinese century -- for good or ill -- not a "new American" one, as the US neocons had it).
China's expanding economic and military power is triggering considerable anxiety. Large majorities in many countries think that China's growing military might is a bad thing, and the publics of many advanced nations are increasingly concerned about the impact of China's economic power on their own countries.
I don't think China is going to do anything as imperialist as the Iraq and Afghanistan invasions in my lifetime. They've threatened to use nuclear weapons should the US intervene in any Taiwan-related war, though. Generally I think I trust the PRC administration rather more than I do the American administration at this point, on things like militarism and environment. It's a pretty grim choice, though. And sure, China's rise does imply a corresponding fall in Europe, where we're simply going to become more geriatric, less wealthy and less numerous. At best, this means we're going to be pioneering "the next thing" -- a transition to post-industrial, post-material values -- and leaving the "last thing" -- 19th century style industrialism -- to China. This is already very apparent in Berlin, a city of the very old, the very unemployed, and artists. In short, I'm much more complacent about China's effect on Europe than most Europeans surveyed. I think we have to go with the flow, find the silver lining. But whenever politicians talk about creativity being as important as productivity -- and there was a bit of this in Segolene Royale's debate with Sarkozy -- they lose. We won't let go of 19th century models of economic growth easily. Brown certainly isn't going to abandon that model in Britain. Nevertheless, that growth is not going to continue, and should not continue. What we need instead is controlled, well-managed, eco-friendly shrinkage.
Russia and its president also are unpopular in many countries of the world.
I must say that I was fairly appalled by the state of Russia when I visited a couple of years ago.The sense that you could trust no-one. The brash commercial atmosphere, the extremes of wealth and poverty, the run-down infrastructure, the casinos everywhere. I've refused all invitations to return to play concerts there, mainly because of a sense of widespread corruption. But actually I think I share the perception of many Russians that Putin's fight with the oligarchs is necessary. Yeltsin's hypercapitalism was actually giving Russians the worst of all possible worlds -- creating a tiny hyper-rich class while the majority saw their life chances (and life expectancy) decline to worse-than-communist levels. If I'm rather more pro-Putin than most surveyed, I'm also rather more pro-Chavez.
Huge majorities in most countries also say they have little or no confidence in Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to do the right thing regarding world affairs. There also is broad opposition to Iran's acquisition of nuclear weapons.
I actually agree with Zizek on this: Give Iranian nukes a chance. "In a mad world," says Zizek, "the logic of MAD still works... It is precisely because [harmony between the global spread of multi-party Western democracy and the economic and geopolitical interests of the United States] can in no way be taken for granted that countries like Iran should possess nuclear arms to constrain the global hegemony of the United States."
African publics are increasingly concerned about the growing gap between rich and poor. In addition, the belief that economic inequality represents a major global danger has become much more prevalent in South Korea and Russia.
Count me with the Africans, the Russians and the South Koreans on this one. Widening Gini rifts are the biggest headache of our time, and very radical interventionist measures are required to correct the "invisible hand" -- a hand that, left to do its invisible work, kills and oppresses millions.
Most people in the survey, conducted in 46 countries and the Palestinian territories, have a favorable view of the United Nations... For the most part, global opinion of the European Union parallels opinion of the U.N.
I'm with "most people" on this; I have favourable opinions of both the UN and the EU, which I wish would hurry up and become a liberal-progressive superstate and throw its liberal-progressive weight around on the world stage. I'm entirely in favour of the EU having a Foreign Minister, for instance -- something Tony Blair fought against and failed to stop at last week's EU Treaty talks. And it's Gordon's anti-Europeanism that makes me least bouncy about Brown. Likely adoption date by the UK of the Euro: never, at present.
The U.S. image remains abysmal in most Muslim countries in the Middle East and Asia, and continues to decline among the publics of many of America's oldest allies. Favorable views of the U.S. are in single digits in Turkey (9%) and have declined to 15% in Pakistan. Currently, just 30% of Germans have a positive view of the U.S. – down from 42% as recently as two years ago – and favorable ratings inch ever lower in Great Britain and Canada.
Back in 2001, you'd have found me living in New York and telling Index magazine "The American Dream is a thing you plug into when you get here, a common property for all of humanity." Well, I'm not saying that now. And even if I were, according to the Pew Global Attitudes Survey, all of humanity would most likely respond with a peal of hollow, bitter laughter.
Being on-message with world opinion feels good, even a reason for guarded optimism. But I have to give the last, cautionary note to Chomsky: "There's a tremendous gap between public opinion and public policy."
Today I thought I'd go through the latest Pew Global Attitudes Report -- entitled "Global Unease With Major World Powers" and released yesterday -- to see how the way majorities of people in the world are feeling tallies with the way I'm feeling. Call it the "Hey, My Attitudes Are Global!" Project.
Global distrust of American leadership is reflected in increasing disapproval of the cornerstones of U.S. foreign policy.
This is a no-brainer. Bush and Cheney are so corrupt that even their own political system has noticed -- they were yesterday subpoenaed for documents relating to wire-tapping. They consistently act as if they're above the law. Their foreign policy has been such a huge disaster that yesterday's tributes to Blair cited his support of it as his biggest failure.
Not only is there worldwide support for a withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq, but there also is considerable opposition to U.S. and NATO operations in Afghanistan.
I'm absolutely on-message with "the world" on this one. The Surge has failed in Iraq. Even Karzai in Afghanistan is criticizing the US and NATO for their heavy-handedness (read: killing civilians and treating Afghan life as if it were "cheap").
Global support for the U.S.-led war on terrorism ebbs ever lower. And the United States is the nation blamed most often for hurting the world's environment, at a time of rising global concern about environmental issues.
Here you can slip a cigarette paper between me and Mr/Ms World's view. I'm only not ebbing because I never supported this "long war" in the first place. And I'm only not blaming the US for impending environmental catastrophe because I don't think we can look to the US to be any sort of responsible global policeman, and because China this month actually overtook the US as the world's biggest CO2 emitter (one more indication that the 21st century is going to be a Chinese century -- for good or ill -- not a "new American" one, as the US neocons had it).
China's expanding economic and military power is triggering considerable anxiety. Large majorities in many countries think that China's growing military might is a bad thing, and the publics of many advanced nations are increasingly concerned about the impact of China's economic power on their own countries.
I don't think China is going to do anything as imperialist as the Iraq and Afghanistan invasions in my lifetime. They've threatened to use nuclear weapons should the US intervene in any Taiwan-related war, though. Generally I think I trust the PRC administration rather more than I do the American administration at this point, on things like militarism and environment. It's a pretty grim choice, though. And sure, China's rise does imply a corresponding fall in Europe, where we're simply going to become more geriatric, less wealthy and less numerous. At best, this means we're going to be pioneering "the next thing" -- a transition to post-industrial, post-material values -- and leaving the "last thing" -- 19th century style industrialism -- to China. This is already very apparent in Berlin, a city of the very old, the very unemployed, and artists. In short, I'm much more complacent about China's effect on Europe than most Europeans surveyed. I think we have to go with the flow, find the silver lining. But whenever politicians talk about creativity being as important as productivity -- and there was a bit of this in Segolene Royale's debate with Sarkozy -- they lose. We won't let go of 19th century models of economic growth easily. Brown certainly isn't going to abandon that model in Britain. Nevertheless, that growth is not going to continue, and should not continue. What we need instead is controlled, well-managed, eco-friendly shrinkage.
Russia and its president also are unpopular in many countries of the world.
I must say that I was fairly appalled by the state of Russia when I visited a couple of years ago.The sense that you could trust no-one. The brash commercial atmosphere, the extremes of wealth and poverty, the run-down infrastructure, the casinos everywhere. I've refused all invitations to return to play concerts there, mainly because of a sense of widespread corruption. But actually I think I share the perception of many Russians that Putin's fight with the oligarchs is necessary. Yeltsin's hypercapitalism was actually giving Russians the worst of all possible worlds -- creating a tiny hyper-rich class while the majority saw their life chances (and life expectancy) decline to worse-than-communist levels. If I'm rather more pro-Putin than most surveyed, I'm also rather more pro-Chavez.
Huge majorities in most countries also say they have little or no confidence in Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to do the right thing regarding world affairs. There also is broad opposition to Iran's acquisition of nuclear weapons.
I actually agree with Zizek on this: Give Iranian nukes a chance. "In a mad world," says Zizek, "the logic of MAD still works... It is precisely because [harmony between the global spread of multi-party Western democracy and the economic and geopolitical interests of the United States] can in no way be taken for granted that countries like Iran should possess nuclear arms to constrain the global hegemony of the United States."
African publics are increasingly concerned about the growing gap between rich and poor. In addition, the belief that economic inequality represents a major global danger has become much more prevalent in South Korea and Russia.
Count me with the Africans, the Russians and the South Koreans on this one. Widening Gini rifts are the biggest headache of our time, and very radical interventionist measures are required to correct the "invisible hand" -- a hand that, left to do its invisible work, kills and oppresses millions.
Most people in the survey, conducted in 46 countries and the Palestinian territories, have a favorable view of the United Nations... For the most part, global opinion of the European Union parallels opinion of the U.N.
I'm with "most people" on this; I have favourable opinions of both the UN and the EU, which I wish would hurry up and become a liberal-progressive superstate and throw its liberal-progressive weight around on the world stage. I'm entirely in favour of the EU having a Foreign Minister, for instance -- something Tony Blair fought against and failed to stop at last week's EU Treaty talks. And it's Gordon's anti-Europeanism that makes me least bouncy about Brown. Likely adoption date by the UK of the Euro: never, at present.
The U.S. image remains abysmal in most Muslim countries in the Middle East and Asia, and continues to decline among the publics of many of America's oldest allies. Favorable views of the U.S. are in single digits in Turkey (9%) and have declined to 15% in Pakistan. Currently, just 30% of Germans have a positive view of the U.S. – down from 42% as recently as two years ago – and favorable ratings inch ever lower in Great Britain and Canada.
Back in 2001, you'd have found me living in New York and telling Index magazine "The American Dream is a thing you plug into when you get here, a common property for all of humanity." Well, I'm not saying that now. And even if I were, according to the Pew Global Attitudes Survey, all of humanity would most likely respond with a peal of hollow, bitter laughter.
Being on-message with world opinion feels good, even a reason for guarded optimism. But I have to give the last, cautionary note to Chomsky: "There's a tremendous gap between public opinion and public policy."
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
You don't have to be mad to proliferate here
Date: 2007-06-28 08:41 am (UTC)I quite like Zizek's off-the-wall solutions sometimes - I think it was his Solomonlike suggestion to turn Jerusalem into a state of its own, like the Vatican, so nobody could argue over who actually owned it - but I'm not convinced that encouraging this prevalent, international neurosis is the best way to expiate it. The third way, of tackling profileration directly and without bias towards any particular bloc or hegemony, would be better in many ways than turning a blind eye to everyone.
(no subject)
Date: 2007-06-28 08:59 am (UTC)What makes you say that?
"which I wish would hurry up and become a liberal-progressive superstate..."
I'm in favor of a "United States of Europe" as long as Britain isn't a part of it. I'm not a fan of superpowers -- The larger the collective, the further the government grows from the people.
(no subject)
Date: 2007-06-28 09:04 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2007-06-28 09:13 am (UTC)Le Bon
Date: 2007-06-28 09:28 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2007-06-28 09:32 am (UTC)I don't see how enriching a tiny minority of Westerners at the expense of the majority of *the West's own population*, never mind Africans (and Asians and South Americans) by clinging dogmatically on to demonstrably false assertions about 'trickle down' or 'rising tides lifting all boats' is in any way better.
It boils down to "f*ck 3 billion people, I don't want to have to take the bus".
As for "progress" - progress towards the mouth of Hell is still progress of a sort.
(no subject)
Date: 2007-06-28 09:46 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2007-06-28 10:28 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2007-06-28 11:53 am (UTC)So, so much. Gold star.
(no subject)
Date: 2007-06-28 05:05 pm (UTC)Momus said he prefers economic shrinkage to economic growth, and he wants to close the economic gap between Africa and the rich world. I don't think Nick has thought through the logical consequences of doing both.
(no subject)
Date: 2007-06-29 04:09 pm (UTC)When it comes down to it, the US and EU are not growing like China is, whether you're talking of population or economy. That means that you have to look at what is really going on and adjust.
Closing the gap between the rich and poor means implementing fair legislation from the excesses of capitalism, a system that works in theory, but not very well in practice (for example, it doesn't represent quality very well, and externalities are huge issue everywhere). I know you right-wingers like to think that polarity is somehow a good thing in economics, but shitty in politics, but I have to assert that you're backward on that. When the uber-rich get richer at the expense of millions of others, that's not a good thing. And levelling the playing field for all of us is a good thing, benefits all of us, even the uber rich, and helps with quality of life for all.
I still can't fathom the notion of making $100M/yr and wanting more money. Can we just make that the maximum wage, tell you that 'you win' at that point, and do what Gates does with his money: Help others?
(no subject)
Date: 2007-06-29 07:24 pm (UTC)Nick makes clear that he's opposed to growth. He wants "eco-friendly shrinkage". I don't think most Africans want that.
I don't think that wanting growth is "right wing". Marx definitely believed in growth and progress. Socialists have historically believed that, with careful state planning, they could achieve faster growth than under Capitalism, and could distribute the returns from it more equitably.
At some point belief in Socialism, with its optimistic view of human potential, seems to have died. In its place we have an infantile "back to nature" Malthusian pessimism and a preference for shrinkage.
I'm not like that. I want to reach for the stars. Let's colonize Mars. Let's all live to be 200. Humans are amazing. There's almost nothing we can't do if we set our minds to it.
(no subject)
Date: 2007-06-29 10:46 pm (UTC)Except, apparently, work together, eliminate externalities, create world peace, and stop a race to the bottom and lowest common denominator economically.
The problem is, too many minds aren't set to anything. And those dwarf those of us who do want to make positive changes. While I'm outnumbered, I know, I'm still kicking!
(no subject)
Date: 2007-06-28 09:40 am (UTC)Indeed. Blairites have tried to defend his record by talking about economic growth, as if that excuses Iraq. German economic growth under the Nazis is never wheeled out as a defence of Hitler.
(no subject)
Date: 2007-06-28 10:14 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2007-06-28 10:19 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2007-06-28 02:22 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2007-06-28 10:27 am (UTC)Or, for the hard of thinking, replace "German" with "Soviet", replace "the Nazis" and "Hitler" with "Stalin". Analogy holds.
(no subject)
Date: 2007-06-28 03:48 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2007-06-28 05:12 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2007-06-28 09:58 am (UTC)I agree that the Chinese administration seems safer than the American one, but I wonder if that isn't just due to their current powerlessness?
Thats not to say that China isn't rising or isn't growing, but far more often than not it's just filling the orders of American and Japanese companies. Is china really as competitive, and really as much of a mover-and-shaker- as Japan was in the 80's?
I really don't think so. The real threat to other economies seems at least 20 years off.
Can anyone name a Chinese brand of anything?
(no subject)
Date: 2007-06-28 10:16 am (UTC)It's weird, no, I can't think of one! And yet many of the objects around me right now probably passed through China at some point in their manufacture. I suppose being surrounded by China-processed material objects whose brands aren't Chinese (or are, but aren't memorable) is all part of the weirdness of commucapitalism.
(no subject)
Date: 2007-06-28 12:48 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2007-06-29 10:48 pm (UTC)I speak Chinese... sorry.
(no subject)
Date: 2007-06-28 02:31 pm (UTC)Lenovo computers
Francesco
(no subject)
Date: 2007-06-28 12:04 pm (UTC)China will be a problem, in that it has a much older tradition of engineering than Europe (unless, I suppose, you count the Romans), while schools designed for pedagogy not education (http://www.johntaylorgatto.com) are collapsing, which isn't helping feed the pipeline at all.
Never mind. We'll run out of energy at the same time. (http://anthropik.com/2007/06/what-a-way-to-go/) Assuming ITER doesn't throw a spanner in the works. (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/07/06/nuclear_fusion/)
(no subject)
Date: 2007-06-28 01:35 pm (UTC)... well, unless you are chinese (or from Tibet), of course.
/bug
(no subject)
Date: 2007-06-29 01:57 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2007-06-29 04:12 pm (UTC)China's strength is not in their branding, but don't let that fool you into thinking they're powerless. Isn't it easier to let Whirlpool or GE brand for you than launching your own, badly-worded/translated marketing campaign?
(no subject)
Date: 2007-06-28 11:13 am (UTC)Assuming you'll last another three decades, I think you're being optimistic. China isn't a great military power like the U.S., which limits its opportunities for military adventurism, but once its phenomenal growth flows through to its military... I can think of plenty of scenarios where China as new superpower might flex its muscles. There's Taiwan of course. There's North Korea. Meltdown in North Korea can't be far off, and China may well want it to remain under its influence. There's China's western borders. I think there are all sorts of possibilities.
On another note, I thought you were going into minimal blogging mode until December? Finding it too hard to drag yourself away? Writing these long posts and sticking around to answer comments must suck up an awful lot of your time. It might do you some good to step away from the Internet for a while...
(no subject)
Date: 2007-06-28 02:12 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2007-06-28 11:56 am (UTC)California secession, now!
I'm sorry, Momus. I just can't say anything conducive to discussion.
(no subject)
Date: 2007-06-28 12:24 pm (UTC)personal dna
Date: 2007-06-28 01:31 pm (UTC)It's hard to predict outcomes from general feelings. I get the "feeling" that younger Europeans want to put the past behind them and live in a new unified superstate where the cultural and social capital belongs to everyone. Then again policy isn't harmonized, there are definitely poorer and richer countries, and sometimes you get that streak of xenophobia when borders are lifted. You can maintain the good as long as everyone's more-or-less doing well (universal healthcare, daycare, progressive taxation), but things start to fall apart when one stronger unit begins to dominate the discourse / set policy for everyone else.
-aj in montreal
Re: personal dna
Date: 2007-06-28 02:08 pm (UTC)"All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood."
(Which happens to be Article 1 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.)
(no subject)
Date: 2007-06-28 07:09 pm (UTC)And, as an artist, I think you must aggressively oppose the severe hegemony Putin has crafted over Russian society. Look no further than the state's total monopoly on the press, the murder of dissidents and writers, and the surge of extreme-right Russian nationalism and racism. Putin is becoming lionized as the fearless leader of Russia, an all-powerful champion of the pure nation--state tv runs animations of him as a pure white man fighting off vicious foreign wolves. He is, I think, the most dangerous man on the planet in many ways, because of his wealth, weaponry, and successful hegemony. Are you really "pro-Putin" in any way?
I find a comparison of Chavez to Putin irresponsible and unnecessary. Both are nationalists, yes, and both are doing damage to freedoms, but people are living better lives in Venezuela than ever before, and nobody is killed for dissidence, and people are not attacked en masse by the state for being gay or ethnic minorities or political protesters. Respectfully yours.
(no subject)
Date: 2007-06-28 07:36 pm (UTC)Byrlne
Date: 2007-06-28 07:50 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2007-06-28 07:54 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2007-06-29 02:16 pm (UTC)Many extreme leftists are just closet monarchists who essentially want their guy on the throne. Damned theory-blinkered, politically puritan roundheads--they don't even have the intellectual honesty to be proper cranks.
(no subject)
Date: 2007-06-29 08:09 am (UTC)Incidentally political
Date: 2007-06-30 06:27 pm (UTC)I quipped " I guess you really study the coupon section eh?" Off to the races.... Chatting... I will never make that mistake again.
She was nice enough, but she made the mistake of talking politics...I could see within the first few sentences that she was a droid...a W voting believer of all things post 9.11.
She stated that in the US political race she likes Guiliani. Wow. Did she live or go to NYC while he was presiding? Can she attest to what it was he actually did when she blathers " well he did clean up the City..."
My point is, I mentioned that the world will not put up with ( if such hyper-lunatic Bushwack policy were to be continued for more than 8 years )this hubris that we have exhibited.... I told her Bush was not to be trusted and you could see her discomfort in my saying that -- as if I told a child that Santa and the Easter Bunny did not REALLY exist.