The following piece was written at a time when I was not inclined
towards political activism, but concerned only with managing my own life as
appropriately as I could, in accordance to my personal value system of
optimal sexual experience, and after that, a gentle death. The attitude
was that when repressive morals encroached on one location, I would
just go somewhere else. I assume that many people have a corresponding
value system and attitude. For each of us, the point at which there occurs
the transformation of quantity (another anti-sexual element introduced
in the social environment) into a new quality (political activism
instead of just retreating again) is set differently. I arrived at it only
some time after having written the following piece, so it does not
reflect my newer political agenda. However, even at times I had no political
agenda, I stuck to principles of dialectical materialism to analyze my
environment.
***
I am very much against the widespread messing of the US in world
political and social affairs. It doesn't benefit the American people. It
costs a lot of taxpayers' money, and creates financial returns only for a
few wealthy American individuals who then get even richer.
What’s left
http://www3.sympatico.ca/sr.gowans/feckless.html
These wealthy individuals are hidden behind the typical American
business facade, the corporation. But corporations, so-called juristic
persons, are not alive, and therefore do not have interests. They are just an
instrument so that those who own them can evade liabilities, and can
remain largely anonymous, enjoying their growing wealth in a stress-free
environment.
For the ordinary American, there is no benefit from the US' messing in
other countries political and social affairs. Plain international trade
is OK. Of course, the messing starts when traders want to maximize
their profits by changing political and social conditions in other
countries (for example: imposing free trade). Such changes in political and
social conditions of other countries may indeed be reflected on corporate
earning sheets as higher dividends for their owners.
But that's not the full story. There are related costs which will not
show on corporate balance sheets, as corporations won't cover them, and
instead roll them over to the American government and tax-paying
public.
Anti-Americanism is the natural consequence of bullying the people of
other countries. And some of those constantly bullied will become
terrorist. And the expenses for American homeland security won't be paid by
those people, who, in hiding behind corporate facades, reap additional
profits from the messing in political and social affairs of other
countries (mostly in the Third World).
I am against US meddling on the level that is now common in many Third
World countries. It doesn't benefit the American public, and it is a
disturbance for me.
But I am flexible, and if conditions get bad in one country, I can
still go somewhere else. I am neither a terrorist, nor a supporter of
terrorism. I will never become a suicide bomber in order to effect changes
in a world in which I myself will no longer be around.
I only have a few more years, but if I will commit suicide, it will be
for my own comfort, not an esoteric purpose such as a religion, or a
nation, or so that my children will live in a better world.
Like everybody else who flies, or regularly has family members on board
of planes, I am against international civil aviation becoming a
battleground for the containment of the ambitions of US corporate owners.
I am also against attacks against so-called soft Western targets in
Third World countries, as I am one myself.
That said, I would like to proceed to apply some dialectical logics.
First it is important to differentiate between the image of the West in
general, and the image of the individual Westerner. The image of the
West in general depends largely on US political meddling. But the image
of the individual Westerner depends more on the question of how
frequently Westerners are encountered in a country. As an individual Westerner,
I have no problem distancing myself from ugly US politics. But if there
are too many other Westerners around, their presence and their possible
individual unpleasant behavior clearly reduces my sexual market value.
Terrorism is not a response on the presence of a large number of
individual Westerners in a country. Much rather, it is a response towards US
political interference with the aims of local political groupings.
However, the individual foreigner can well become a pawn in the political
conflict.
Odd as it may sound, and even though I am a potential target, I do
realize that beyond the short term, terrorists play into my hands. They do,
because an immediate result of their activities in any country is that
the number of Westerners, who come to that country, declines.
New Slump Predicted for Regional Tourism Industry After Bali Blast
http://english.people.com.cn/200210/15/eng20021015_105089.shtml
International tourism statistics
http://www.world-tourism.org/newsroom/Releases/2006/january/06_01_24.htm
I have lived in Third World countries for more than 20 years. In
countries like the Philippines and Cambodia, I have experienced Westerners
becoming gradually less exclusive and welcome the more of them arrived.
For my purposes, there is an ideal level of how many Westerners should
be present in a Third World city. Enough Westerners so that the sight
of me will not attract hordes of children following me wherever I go
because they so seldom see a Western man. But not enough Westerners to
ignite anti-Western sentiments.
Mass sex tourism as it existed, or exists, in Thailand, the
Philippines, and Cambodia, is totally against my interests. So is any other form
of mass tourism. Events that cup the number of Western tourists coming
to the country where I live, or events that depress Western tourism
overall, are in my interest, be it SARS, or plane crashes, or hotel
bombings.
However, I do want to, and have to, point out that my realizing that
terrorism and other adverse events play into my hands does not mean that
I would have a hand in such acts and events. I am, entirely, a silent
beneficiary.
