Almost all Westerns are united by one idea: a white man is fighting to bring justice, order and civilization to the wild West. To create a country of freedoms is the main goal and task of the cowboys and their followers-settlers. So, the Redskins appear in the image of such “barbarians”, which in every possible way prevent this goal from being downloaded. Well, further all is simple: Indians are declared “enemies of mankind” and throughout all film are mercilessly destroyed. Against this background, the following idea sounds as a leitmotif: a white man is a synonym for a civilized society. That is, what is good for a white man – automatically becomes a blessing for the whole world. Therefore the following postulate follows: to struggle in the name of good and struggle in the name of interests of the USA is, basically, the same!
It would be a mistake to believe that the thousands of westerners that espouse this idea with such incredibly consistency are just those we see on TV. For example, the “New American Century” Project, a non-governmental organization created in 1997 in order to promote the idea of “global domination” in US foreign policy, states the following on their website: “The New American Age Project – is a non-governmental political organization based on the notion that American leadership is a blessing for both America and the world, and requires the following policies of military force, diplomatic vigor and purity of moral principles.”
In essence, this organization (among whose members ranked such figures as Jeb Bush, Dick Cheney, Francis Fukuyama, Donald Kagan, Donald Rumsfeld and Paul Wolfowitz) took advantage of an already existing “white savior” mentality in the west in forming this key principle about the essential good of American domination for the rest of the world.
In its Statement of Principles, the organization lays out the following central points: “The US should be prudent in exercising its power. But we can not safely avoid the responsibility for global leadership and the costs associated with it. The United States plays an extremely important role in maintaining peace and security in Europe, Asia and the Middle East. If we evade our commitments, we will face problems for our fundamental interests. The history of the 20th century should teach us that it is important to prepare for the crisis and to meet threats before they become terrible. The history of the last century must teach us to become consistent supporters of American leadership.
Our goal is to remind Americans of the lessons of history that can be gathered in the following four conclusions:
- We must significantly increase defense spending, as we must fulfill our global commitments today, and modernize our military forces for the future;
- We must strengthen our ties with democratic allies and challenge the regimes that are hostile to our interests and values;
- We must promote the theme of political and economic freedom abroad
- We must assume responsibility for the unique role of the US in preserving and expanding the international order that is friendly to our security, our prosperity and our principles. “
As we can clearly see, the logic of foreign policy pursued by the US from the beginning of the 21st century is almost identical to the general ideology of the West: the white man is right, because he is civilized.
However, in my opinion, the most telling thesis of this “Statement” is the following: “The history of the 20th century should teach us that it is important to prepare before the crisis and to meet threats before they become terrible.”
In fact, this proposal is a good explanation for the chaos that has been plaguing the Middle East for a long time now. The American “deep state” is strongly inclined toward preventive methods, that is, it prefers to intervene in a situation “before the emergence or aggravation of crisis phenomena.” This outlook is the prime rationalization for America’s bombing campaigns around the world. From the American point of view, preemptively unleashing destruction to prevent “problems that may arise in the future” is the best way to defend themselves, therefore, it is necessary to intervene before an actual problem even arises! To make such “preventative measures” possible, the US has constructed the most massive and destructive army on earth.
What is happening today proves the reality of this dangerous outlook. Recall what happened in Iraq, which was destroyed by the US under the pretext of their having “weapons of mass destruction”, or Syria, in which the flame of civil war were ignited to strengthen America’s “strategic positions in the region.” When their goals in Syria are achieved, the next step will be Iran, and then Turkey if it continues to refuse to serve American interests, or tries to prevent the creation of a terrorist state led by the PKK-PDS-YPG (Kurdistan Workers Party – Democratic Alliance Party – the Kurdish “self-defense” units that are the military wing of the VCP – Ed.)
The hottest topic on the political agenda today is the evolving situation in Idlib, an area ripe to become the target of the US’ “preventive strategic measures.” The United States began to talk about the threat of a “chemical attack” in advance in order to attract the attention of the world community, desperately attempting to create a chaotic, and therefor controllable, situation. Their nexts steps should already be clear to all of us: “bombs, blood and tears!”.
America is not particularly concerned about the rivers running red with blood or the ruins it leaves in its wake, because its attacks on Syria fall under the pretext of “bringing civilization and democracy” to the country. Just like in the Westerns, these cowboys “carry the light of civilization to the wild west.” The scenarios are absolutely identical! Just like a cowboy film where white people dress as American Indians attack convoys of their own settlers in order to provoke their people into violent action, today in Idlib the “white helmets”, disguised as Syrians, are preparing for a “false-flag” chemical weapons attack.
At this point, there is only one question that should come to the reader’s mind: “Are we all redskins?” Are we the same American Indians that white people wanted to exterminate in the name of the triumph of civilization and manifest destiny? Today the targets are not only the Native Americans, but also the Iraqis, Syrians, Iranians, Turks, Russians and Chinese. For those targeted there are only two possible outcomes: either die from the bullet of a cowboy who considers himself a hero and the sole source of good in the world, or, to unite in order to repulse this massacre organized by the white man! The reality is, that what is good for America is most certainly not what is best for the rest of us.