World Governance In Selected Writings By Bertrand Russell: Utopia Or Ideology.

2021

Articles Scientifiques Et Publications

ASJP

Autre

Université Mouloud Mammeri - Tizi Ouzou

Benmechiche, Hacene

Résumé: This article studies the idea of “World Government” as envisioned in a series of essays published by Bertrand Russell in the period of the Cold War. It draws upon the theoretical categories introduced by Karl Mannheim in Ideology and Utopia (1936) to account for the nature of the reconstruction schemes the author advances to spare human society a possible apocalyptic nuclear confrontation. The study has shown that Russell’s outlook is utopian insofar as it has shown advanced positions regarding self-determination, the dissemination of progress and global cooperation toward the reconstruction of a peaceful and prosperous world. However, given the technological abyss separating the industrialized “West” from “the Rest” in the 1950s, an open “World State” would be another form of imperialism in disguise. The risk involved is that this “global utopia” whose rulers monopolize military, legislative as well as economic power, would turn into an ideological instrument of control in the hands of the technologically powerful few.

Mots-clès:

: world state- Governance- reconstruction- progress- Utopian – ideological- open society- Imperialism –Liberalism- world order.

Introduction

The two World Wars were major traumatic experiences to the human race. Fuelled by ideologies of nationalism and racial superiority

they had caused unprecedented human and material losses and stirred new fears for the future of the human race. The emergence on the world stage of two ideologically opposed blocs: the liberal west and the communist bloc

both of which had developed nuclear arms and contending for global hegemony

made the prospects even gloomier. This ‘titanic struggle’

as Bertrand Russell notes

could at any time evolve into a nuclear conflict between the two superpowers and bring human civilization to an end (“Man’s Peril”:1956).

Given that impending disaster

the consolidation of peace became an urgent challenge. It was in that period

that Russell

a British aristocrat and pacifist produced a series of essays calling for a “New World Order” that would insure

peace

stability

collective human progress and prosperity. To this end

Russell projected the reconstruction of the divided human society into a “World State” that would transcend racial

ideological

and national barriers. This new state

thus reconstructed

would be controlled by a “World Government” that would promote the interests of the whole by granting lasting peace

spreading progress and freedom to the backward parts of the globe

and sharing the resources of the planet through the abolition of national frontiers. Russell believes that free access to resources and markets to the industrialized countries would render useless the traditional competition for expansion

conquest or control . Considering his views on religion and science

peace and governance

self-determination and national sovereignty

Russell’s ideas have been the object of various critical appraisals.

Review of the literature

In his introduction to The Basic Writings of Bertrand Russell

professor Egner hailed Russell as the most widely read and debated thinker

and one who had had the most ‘profound influence on the course of modern philosophy’(1961

p: iii). From a conservative stance

Russell was labeled as a libertine and advocator of the over man theory. David J. Peterson(2000) charges him of having ‘lent his authoritative voice to the eradication of [. . . ] the moral order’ assimilating him to a disciple of Nietzsche who had pronounced the death of the Christian God. Peterson seems to have been shocked by Russell’s conviction

that Christian religion and its moral values are incompatible with a scientific civilization.

Paul Meier

another critic

reads the discourse of “internationalism” which underpins Russell’s militancy for world governance as a conspiracy of Anglo-American intellectual elites. Meyers suspects that under cover of the quest for peace and the prevention of a nuclear conflict

advocates of globalism like Russell and H. G. Wells were actually serving the hegemony of the rising liberal West. As an example of this ‘conspiracy’

Meyers cites the philosopher’s strong support of the “Barruch Lilienthal Plan” of 1946. The plan which was put to Stalin for approval included three basic ideas: the institution of a World Government to replace the U.N.

an International Agency for Nuclear Energy

and the suppression of the right of Veto. The plan

Meier notes

was meant to grant Americans exclusive monopoly of nuclear power and control by the liberal West of the U.N Executive Council. Russell went further since he suggested threatening the Russians with an atomic strike to have them sign the plan. His reputation as a pacifist suffered severe damage but he continued to militate for a global state convinced as he was that it was a lesser evil than a world in which rival nations with a nuclear potential may lead to the apocalypse.

Oddly enough

Russell’s advanced views on governance

education

eugenics

workers’ control

and the nature of the utopian ideas that inform his political writings have not received enough attention. By utopian

I mean the instruments of governance that would turn human society into “the ideal place” under the rule of the wisest and ablest as envisioned in the texts of the utopian tradition. It is all the more perplexing that critical studies of the utopian genre have not included his schemes for a World State for analysis. Neither have his ideas on decolonization and the construction of an open society as popularized by Karl Popper (1947) been the object of critical analysis by scholars belonging to the Third World despite his commitment to self-determination

education

and progress in favor of the peoples of the traditionally colonized lands in Asia and Africa.

Issue and Hypothesis

Although Russell did not write a utopia in the conventional sense

a formal utopia

the present study is premised on the assumption that his writings

as a social and political thinker

are informed by utopian aspirations which deserve closer examination. This article

accordingly

explores the following hypothesis: in a world made strongly organic by technical progress and tighter economic relations

Russell believed that the traditional forms of military or colonial domination had been rendered unpopular

obsolete

and dangerous. His plea for decolonization

the development of the “backward areas” of the globe

birth control among “the prolific races”

and the monopoly by a World Government of military power and all natural resources

reads

in fact

as a plea for the protection of the human kind under the leadership of a liberal industrialized West. Like E. Bellamy (1888) and H. G .Wells (1906)

he felt that the contradictions of the capitalist system could be solved through a World Government that would globalize liberal values and practices to the rest of the world under the supervision of intellectuals and scientists committed to the happiness and welfare of their fellow men

a vision close to Plato’s Republic and Thomas More’s Utopia (1516) . By so doing

competition for resources or markets between firms

trusts

and nations would be prevented

and with it the impending disaster awaiting the human kind in case of a major conflict. Thus

the utopia which was traditionally confined to an ideal nowhere would assume a global scope.

To read the nature of Russell’s schemes for the future organization of the human society

I have used the definitions of” ideology” and “utopia” put forward by Karl Mannheim (1936). Recent studies in the nature of the U.S/ U.K. “special relationship” (John Dumbrell

2006) are also summoned to back up my claim that the quest for a global order may serve as a form of discourse that partakes of an aspiration to project the constructed idealized Anglo-Saxon self onto the rest of the world.

Peace

Stability

and New World Order

Russell’s concern about the impact of technical progress on society was expressed as early as 1924. In an essay entitled “Icarus or the Future of Science” (1924)

he voiced his fears that given the economic and political conditions prevailing then

‘science will be used to promote the power of the dominant groups rather than make men happy’. He feared that like Icarus

governments were using scientific and technical progress unwisely and so may very well lead human society to ruin or back to barbarity. The reason is that scientific and technical advances have not polished Man’s instinct of rivalry and his lust for power. This has greatly reduced the positive impact of technical progress. For industrialism to achieve the summum bonum

‘the human instincts of rivalry and power lust need to be artificially curbed’ (ibid).

To achieve a balance of technical progress and human happiness

Russell writes

certain scientific disciplines need to be developed further. He believes that the laws of heredity discovered by Mendel and which have promisingly been applied to agriculture could be used

to improve human society. Eugenics

along with anthropology

psychology

and sociology

could contribute to the engineering of a better society through the “engineering” of the desired social subject. These ideas have been the object of a satirical treatment by Aldous Huxley in Brave New World (1932). He was convinced that the Industrial Revolution which began in England should ‘conquer’ the world (emphasis mine).He was adamant that economic integration will result in political centralization. ‘Industrialism’

he writes

still has great parts of the earth‘s surface to conquer. Russia and India are very imperfectly industrialized

China hardly at all. In South America there is room for immense development. One of the effects of industrialism is to make the world one economic unit: its ultimate consequences will be very largely due to this fact. But before the world can be effectively organized as a unit

it will probably be necessary to develop industrially all the regions capable of development that are at present backward (Russell

1924).

Unfortunately

however

industrialism had rather been achieved at the expense of the country peasants and the laboring urban classes at home

and through the expropriation and exploitation of “subject populations” abroad in the name of progress

racial superiority

or freedom of trade. The First World War

which had just ended

was eloquent enough on the extent of the damage which technical progress could produce

when it was combined with imperialism and fuelled by feelings of nationalism or racial superiority.

From Nationalism to Globalism

Russell considers that technical progress

which has led to the evolution of human organization from clans and tribes to nation states

have also brought about a struggle between nations for the acquisition of raw materials and markets

which would insure or preserve their domination. Thus

the labor saved by machinery and the surplus of commodities produced is squandered in financing war rather than improving the general standard of life. Military power becomes the inevitable instrument in the quest technological

industrial

and national prestige as he observes that

[I]t is science above all that has determined the importance of raw materials in international competition. Coal and iron

and oil especially

are the bases of power

and thence of wealth. The nation that possesses them and has the industrial skill required to utilize them in war

can acquire markets by armed force and levy tribute upon the less fortunate nations. War is often resorted to to possess these sources of power. (ibid)

Science has been used by nations to increase their military power which in turn is used to control raw materials and markets without which power is quickly lost to a potential rival. Hence

science has created the conditions for a globalized economy in favor of the most advanced nations and made the use of power nearly ‘a necessity’ to keep economic supremacy. However

with the development and use of nuclear weapons during World War II

the possible proliferation and use of these weapons in the future

the risk of a nuclear apocalypse was imminent and with it the impervious need to ward it off.

Russell argues that just as the nation as a modern form of political organization had been made possible by technical progress in the 19th century

further technological development has enhanced international economic integration thus imposing political globalization as a more appropriate form of organization which fits a de facto economically globalized world. As technical progress has increased governments’ control over education and the media of press

it has become easier to influence the taste and opinions of large numbers of people and thus insure economic dependence and ideological allegiance to the powers that control the market and politics. In an over organized world

Russell writes

a man‘s thoughts and acts are

to a large extent

determined by the groups to which he belongs. Control by a World Government of education and mass media alongside the control it exerts over resources and trade would in the long run produce social subjects with the desired outlook.

The U.S.A as a Paradigm for World Governance

The solution to a potentially destructive international conflict lies in the institution of a planetary organization

a World Government that would prevent wars. He believed that owing to the speed of technical progress

the world would soon evolve toward

[. . . ] one producing and consuming unit. If when that time comes

two rival groups contend for mastery

the victor may be able to introduce that single worldwide organization that is needed to prevent the mutual extermination of civilized nations. [ . . . ] There would be at first economic and political tyranny

[ . . . ] and a drastic suppression of liberty but [in the end]

the vanquished will give up hope and accept the subordinate place assigned to them by the victors in the great world trust (Russell

1924).

Interestingly

Russell‘s evocation of “world trust” reminds us of the dream of Julian West

Bellamy‘s hero in Looking Backward 2000-1888

in which U.S industrial system naturally evolved from a number of private trusts competing for control of the market into a national trust

before it spread to the rest of the world. Later

H. G. Wells in his Modern Utopia (1906) envisioned a planetary system under the rule of elites of legislators and executives he called the “Samurai”.

In an essay written in 1952

Russell agrees with Marx and mainly John Dewey that the function of philosophers is no longer ‘to interpret the world but to change it’ (“science and Values”

pp 635-646). He argues that in a globally organized system of production scientists and philosophers should help to produce not only appropriate structures but also an outlook that would sustain them. He believes that in a world that is organized as a single unit of production and consumption

a World Government

even if it were to rely on nothing but armed force

would reduce the events that threaten civilization. This government may be cruel and despotic at first but it is necessary if the human scientific civilization is to be preserved.

One notices that Russell condones the use of power by the mightiest nation to govern the world in the name of economic efficiency

peace and human civilization. He is convinced that hope for salvation lies in the benevolent domination of the world by one group which would spare competing nations mutual destruction. Notwithstanding the reserves he expresses as to the possible imperial temptations of such a system

Russell names the United States as a model of economic and political system that would progressively permeate the world

and evolve into an orderly economic and political global utopia.

Despite his aristocratic descent

Russell considers that the U.S. society is the best suited model for the construction of a global system of governance. As a new nation

it is the outcome of exceptional historical development. Symbolically

it is the Promised Land

the New World

the asylum for mankind

the Beacon on the Hill

the land of opportunity

of liberty

equality and happiness

but above all

the land where the first form of federal government was successfully instituted. The U.S. economic

cultural

and political success story seems to entitle it to serve as a paradigm of economic success

political organization

and human happiness for the rest of the world.

In an essay entitled “The Taming of Power” (1938)

Russell argues that the quest for power has guided men’s actions throughout history

but so has the quest among philosophers and social thinkers for ways of taming this power. Among the various systems that have been considered and tried out

Russell seems to favor democracy in spite of the risk involved that the system may be subverted into tyranny by poplar demagogues. To prevent such perversion

democracy has to be ‘sustained by economic conditions

propaganda conditions

and psychological and educational conditions’ (Russell

1961

pp: 663-664). It is democracy

he observes that has checked the power of monarchs and reduced the power of industrialists by making trade unionism possible. Within small states

direct representation is possible

but in the case of large states where different groups coexist

a federal system combined with devolution may insure the representation of the interests of the different groups without threatening the whole system with anarchy or disintegration. Russell remarks that this system of government that had been perfected in the U.S.A. could serve in the constitution of a World Government in which the authority of the national or local governments will be subordinate to the authority of the “World State” in such strategic matters as peace

education policies

access to raw materials

and War ( Ibid: 665-666).

Writing in a period rife with ideological struggle

Russell was convinced that next to technical progress

the outbreak of a major conflict which seemed imminent had made the constitution of a World Government inevitable for various reasons. First and foremost

a world government would prevent a major war resulting from conflicting national interests. Next to this

it would help to disseminate the boons brought about by technical progress. Further

it will found a human society in which the best will be allowed to emerge. Last but not least

it will grant unrestricted access to resources and markets in a world from which frontiers and private ownership are banned. Again

he takes the U.S.A. as an example and argues that a federal system will grow into a more centralized system with time although ‘the sentiments and interests of the constituent units are stronger than the sentiments connected with the federation’ ( Ibid

p: 666). He gives as an example of evolution towards more centralization the growing influence of the U.S. Federal Government and its institutions over that of the individual states since the constitution was drafted. The U.S. War of Secession is a case in point of the growing control of the central authority over its peripheral constituents. It follows that a federal World Government

once instituted

would follow the same course

even in case of rebellion and conflict with one of its national governments. Save for matters connected with peace

education

and the property of raw materials

certain tasks like taxation

health

security are to be devolved to national governments. Russell is well aware that there might be cultural or psychological resistance at first. However

if democracy and the comforts that technical progress and justice provided are spread to the different parts of the world

fear

envy

and the risk of war will diminish.

Along with this Federal World Government

economic democracy

a free press

and education for freedom will limit abuses of power. By economic democracy

Russell conceives a system in which the world state

acting on behalf of citizens

owns and controls certain strategic sectors such as land

raw materials

and energy to prevent concentration of economic powers in private hands. This will help to correct the errors of communism in which an oligarchy of party members who exercise bureaucratic control on the economy accumulate both political and economic power

which

combined with the control of mass media

may give the ruling party absolute power. Another measure against abuse of power depends on the existence of a free press that would denounce corruption

monopoly

of power

or injustice to check the temptations of oligarchs or plutocrats. Education should work toward the suppression of strong emotions of fear

hate or love

all of which lead to radical ideology because of the blind submission they may inspire to a creed or a leader. Education should foster rational evaluation rather than dogmatic belief. It should

as far as possible

avoid strong emotions which lead to collective hysteria that prepares for war and annihilation. In short

Russell

advocates a liberal education

[. . . ]which regards the welfare of the state as residing ultimately in the welfare of the individual [ by contrast to education in] a totalitarian state which regards the state as the end and individuals merely as indispensable ingredients whose welfare must be subordinated to a mystical totality which is a cloak for the interests of the rulers. (ibid

p: 680).

Peace

salvation

progress

and happiness for humanity seem to lie in the institution of a New World Order that would work towards the abolition of national frontiers

feelings and allegiances. However

this society as the one advocated by Popper(1946) should remain open to criticism and improvement.

Globalization or Americanization?

To prevent the nuclear peril

Russell advocates ‘empiricist liberalism which is not incompatible with democratic socialism [. . . ] in a politically divided but technically unified planet [. . .]’( 1947:p.467). The need to develop this outlook and to institute a World Government stems from the fact that nations’ economic systems have developed from activities based on the quest for private profit

‘economic interdependence

instead of producing friendliness tends to be a cause of hostility’ (Russell

1961: 699-704). Russell goes on to explain that military power plays an important part in economic competition for it grants access to raw materials

energy

and markets. Politics is subservient to economy. The quest for economic domination has been the main cause in the development of human association from the state of tribes

to that of nations

and to alliances of nations to ensure victory. However

in a world where the contending powers have developed mass destruction nuclear weapons

the greatest victory lies in the enforcement of peace and the prevention of war. Peace becomes a strategic necessity if human civilization

nay if human life is to continue. As long as there are many sovereign states with diverging interests

Russell observes

war cannot be prevented. The only hope lay in the creation of a unique sovereign power that would represent the interests of the whole humanity ( ibid).

Attributes of the World Government.

To preserve peace and insure the welfare and happiness of the human kind

the World Government should have complete monopoly of power. By power

Russell means not only military power but equally the natural sources of energy such as coal

oil

uranium

or any other form of energy that scientific progress may come to develop. Monopoly of all major weapons by the army of the World Government

combined with a total loyalty of this army to the World Government would empower this supreme authority to prevent conflicts by arbitrating and settling disputes between local states. A legislative body dependent on the new hegemon will pass laws binding all the local states

and the World Government will have an irresistible power to enforce them. Recourse to war between local states will be deterred as any use of force by these latter shall bring deserved punishment (Ibid).

This World Government

Russell explains

‘may owe its origin to consent or to conquest’. It may be the national government of a state which has achieved world conquest. Russell believes that the U.S.A.

owing to its economic dynamism and military power

its federal constitution and democratic culture

its leading role against Nazism

and then Communism

possesses the required assets to be the seed that would

with time

grow into the global authority so eagerly sought for. To prevent resistance

affluence and a certain level of comfort should spread to the “backward states” which concomitantly will supply the energy

raw materials

and markets necessary to the world industry to thrive and prosper. ‘It will be impossible’

Russell writes

to feel that the world is in a satisfactory state

until there is a certain degree of equality and a certain acquiescence everywhere to the power of the world government. And this will not be possible until the poorer nations of the world have become educated

modernized in their technique

and more or less stationary in population (p. 702).

The emancipation and development of the formerly colonized areas

then their integration in a globalized economy will reduce envy and feeling of injustice

and add to the common wealth and welfare of the human kind.

Ethics in the Globalized World

Along with the centralization of power in the hands of a World Government made inevitable by stronger organic links between communities and the impervious necessity to preserve peace

freedom and personal initiative should be encouraged if progress is to take place

Russell writes in “Individual and Social Ethics”(1961:357). Freedom of initiative through devolution should be granted to national states

local governments

groups and individuals if despotism and injustice are to be prevented. Men may even inspire or lead revolutions against the new world order in case it proves iniquitous on condition that the leaders of such revolutions are imbued with a deep respect for law. Russell cites 1688 and 1774 as examples of successful revolutions because they did not lead to anarchy although they reinforced democracy and freedom. These revolutions

which are the core of the Anglo-American liberal tradition

managed to strike a balance between order and individual initiative. Scientific enquiry and technical progress have diminished man’s dependence on nature and expanded his empire over it. However

thirst for power inherent in men‘s nature has remained as strong as ever thus turning knowledge and progress into instruments of subjection and alienation. To prevent injustice

ethics should encourage men‘s creative impulses that do not lead to the subjection and suffering of their fellow men.

Colonialism is another ethically unacceptable form of institutionalized subjection and injury which is incompatible with a globalized human society. In an essay entitled “The Next Half Century” (1951)

Russell suggests to work progressively toward the self-determination and independence of the colonized territories in Africa and Asia. The period following the defeat of Nazism

Militarism

and Fascism was particularly propitious for a discourse of liberation

self-determination and international cooperation toward stability and peace. Russell had two strategic objectives in mind. The first and most urgent was to contain Soviet ideological and military influence by establishing a balance of power in favor of the liberal West. The next step consisted in the reconstruction of the world in a form that would spare humanity further injustice and destruction. To that effect

Russell suggested replacing the traditional colonial relations based on military domination

economic and political annexation

by a new world order in which the newly independent states would keep privileged relations with the metropolis. The West

once peace was secured

should ‘find ways of raising Asia and Africa to the economic level of Western Europe if not America‘(Russell

1961:705). For example

the French and the English should work toward the modernization of their former colonies which with time would be integrated in the globalized economy. This could be done through investment to modernize infrastructure

agriculture

and industry in the backward areas of the world. Meanwhile

population should be educated and encouraged to practice birth control to enjoy the boons of pprogress.

The new system will present a double advantage. Besides helping to overcome native suspicion in European imperialism

it will replace costly unpopular military occupation and economic exploitation by close

voluntary cooperation within a globalized liberal system and prevent anarchy or communism from taking root in the newly decolonized areas. Thus

independence

together with improved education

birth control

and tight relations with a stable technologically advanced west will result in economic prosperity in Asia and Africa. This prosperity

in turn

will benefit the Western nations by granting them access to energy and raw materials

prosperous markets

and a better educated and highly skilled workforce (ibid).

To preserve peace and institute global governance respectful of human rights

Russell

calls for scientists to join their voices to prevent a nuclear conflict ‘lest what Western civilization has achieved may be forgotten in bitterness and poverty’ (New York Times

Sept. 3rd

1950). This can be done by translating the ideals embodied in philosophy and social theory into practical actions. In other words

Russell is a pragmatist who believes with Karl Marx and John Dewey that the value of ideas is measured by their capacity to transform society. ‘Contemplation’

he writes

‘if it is to be wholesome and valuable

must be married to practice

it must inspire action and ennoble aims of practical statesmanship. While it remains secluded in cloisters

it is only a means of escape’ (ibid).

As a scientist and a pragmatist

Russell believes that technical progress has given man power and control over nature and his fellow men and has enabled him to change the world for the better. He believes

together with empiricists and pragmatists

that truths are those theoretical tools that enable men to achieve suitable ends. They will remain valid as long as they constitute suitable means to desired ends. In their contest with the metaphysical and religious interpretation of the world scientific truths have come out victorious

Russell observes in The Impact of Science on Society (1971). Traditional religious dogmas find no support in science as science has proven that nature is governed by immutable laws. By scientific and technical knowledge

man is now master of his fate as he has acquired mastery over natural phenomena. Considerations of good and evil are no longer the monopoly of religion but of science which has supplanted it in the interpretation and control of the world. Science not religion is the source of ethics in a modern technologically oriented world. Reflecting about the leading role of intellectuals and scientists in modern societies

Russell notes:

In the world of value

we are greater than nature. In the world of value

nature in itself is neutral

neither good nor bad

deserving of neither admiration nor censure. It is we who create value and our desires which confer value. In this realm

we are kings and we debase our kingship if we bow down to nature. It is for us to determine the good life

not for nature

not even for nature personified in God. ( “ What I Believe”

1957: 371).

It is

therefore

the responsibility of scientists and pragmatic rulers

not that of the clergy

to define the good society and work toward its construction.

The “good society”

for Russell

is necessarily one guided by knowledge and inspired by love. Although both knowledge and love are necessary

love is in a sense more fundamental. People seek knowledge in order to find out how to benefit those whom they love. ‘Love makes us benevolent’

Russell notes

in “Individual and Social Ethics”

‘and knowledge increases the impact of our benevolence (1961:358). Ethics is improved by knowledge. Science is subservient to ethics. However

one may object

since the value of actions is decided by those who hold power

ethics are usually set by the mighty to serve and preserve their collectively organized interests. Those in power often cooperate to instill into the minds of the social subjects all forms of value judgment that sustain the order. The good life depends on the good society

and the good society depends in the last resort on the will and interests of those who wield power. Russell who was culturally immersed in the English liberal tradition could not fail to praise liberal values and present the U.S.A as a paradigm for the good society.

Making the bed to the Rising Hegemon

Recent developments on the world scene

especially since the end of the Cold War in favor of the liberal west seem to confirm the rising of the U.S.A. as a leading world power. David Grondin(2006) observes

the U.S.A.

which alternates hegemony with imperial practices

is gradually remapping the world in accordance to its national narrative

self-perception and strategic interests. Commenting on the modern reterritorialization of the world

Grondin notes that the national state is the ‘primary locus of political

economic and cultural organization [in which] the state reinvests its nation with new meaning’ (2006: 3). However

when we take into account the U.S. growing global influence

facts seem to run counter to the official story. Grondin observes further that

When considering global power

the resulting map is necessarily an approximation

an interpretation

a codification of reality. The globe in its entire cartographic representation is of interest to the U.S. because it has global power

responsibilities and interests (Ibid).

As a modern nation and hegemon

the U.S.A. is a product of its founding text

the U.S. constitution

which it has authored

and which in turn determines its outlook and guides its actions. This founding narrative

constantly revisited to fit new challenges

turns into a dominant discourse which gives leadership status to the U.S. nation

statesmen

and citizens

fashions their representations

and orients their praxis at home and worldwide.

In recent times

especially after the 9/ 11 terrorist attacks on the U.S. symbols of power and the subsequent American intervention in Afghanistan and invasion of Iraq

the scenario envisioned by Bertrand Russell is beginning to materialize. Some provisions made by the neo- conservative think tanks and executives under the G.W. Bush‘s administration seem to confirm the global unilateral role of the U.S.A. The Global War on Terror and the National Security Strategy (2002) which take the whole globe as their field of action

heedless of international legality

public opinion

and the resentment and fear that these actions can engender

betray the imperial pretentions of the U.S.A.

From Exceptionalism to Liberal Millenarianism

Because of its exceptional history

the U.S.A. has always incarnated

in the minds of its people and leaders

novelty and leadership. It has alternatively been viewed as “an empire of liberty”

an “empire by destiny” then “an empire by invitation” to defeat Nazism and then contain Soviet communism (Grondin

2006). The end of the Cold War in favor of the liberal West and the demise of the Soviet Union seem to have consecrated the victory of capitalism and the liberal version of millenarian ideology over the dream of the “dictatorship of the proletariat” which was assimilated by liberal thinkers to totalitarianism. Today

liberalism has become a matter of common sense. As such

it has turned into an ideology that sustains U.S. interests. ‘The presumption that liberal values [as stated in the U.S. Constitution] are self-evidently true’ (emphasis is the authors’)

Patrick Thaddeus Jackson and Daniel Nixon observe

underscores the possibility that other societies could be more like America in practice given the proper incentive or tutelage. Hence

the familiar spectacle of American presidents making appearances in foreign countries and pressing those countries to enact such liberal institutions as free market economy

the separation of [religion]and state

and increased freedom of the press. While non-Americans resent such actions

in the United States

they are seen as the simple reaffirmation of things that Americans know to be true(emphasis is the authors‘). America imagines the rest of the world as somehow

at base

just like America if not for the distortion produced by ideology

corrupt regimes

and the historical effects of culture.‘ (“Representation is Futile? “American Collectivism and the Borg”

in Hegemony or Empire p.11).

Hence

imposing liberal values as commonsensical is a form of ideology that constrains the actions of the social subjects .Acting outside common sense is a form of folly that must be corrected lest it disrupt the prevailing order. It must therefore be treated accordingly. This explains why countries that ignore the expectations of a liberal world hegemon are diplomatically interpelated or forcefully constrained.

Conclusion

Bertrand Russell was writing in an age of distrust

fear

and real danger into which he attempted to infuse some measured hope. The hopes placed in science and technical progress was thwarted by the ends that were achieved: exploitation and subjection at home and abroad

totalitarian ideologies

and international competition

which had resulted in two World Wars.

By Mannheim’s standards

Russell’s project for a “World State” under the authority of a “World Government” are utopian in nature insofar as they tend to transform an unpleasant reality

an ideologically divided world threatened by destruction

into an ideal united world where cooperation

harmony

and peace prevail. His militancy for the decolonization and development of the then colonized areas in Africa and Asia deserves our attention and respect

and partakes of the same utopian aspirations to secure a better future to the human race.

On the other hand

the choice of the U.S. form of federal government as a model to imitate in the construction of the World State

and the fact that he condones recourse to coercion to this end may be interpreted as an ideological siding with the liberal West and U.S. global influence. In a world made strongly organic by technical progress and consolidated by a political union

from which frontiers would have been erased

offers the advantage of granting the technologically advanced liberal nations free access to markets

energy

and a selected qualified labor force as is the case today. Resistance

opposition or sedition from one the peripheral constituents could bring about legitimate and legal action from the world power.

In Spite of his opposition to U.S. imperialist practices in Vietnam

as he had set up a War Crimes Tribunal which condemned the U.S. Government for war crimes there

Russell seems to have unwillingly made himself the accomplice of neoliberals’ hegemony.

Globalization is a form of discourse that sustains a return to the monopolistic trends of modern monopoly capitalism. In a post Cold War atmosphere in which economic

cultural and ideological diversity are demonized by the liberal victors

pressure is often exerted

and “wars on terror” are waged to discipline the “rogue elements”

spread the values of freedom

democracy

human rights

and consumerism everywhere

and convince the recalcitrant states to integrate them the global Leviathan.

References

- A Special Relationship: Anglo-American Relations from the Cold War to Iraq.

Edited by John Dumbrell

New York: Pallgrave Mac Millan

2006.

- Fominaya

Cristina

Flesher. Social Movements and Globalization: How protests

Occupations and Uprisings are Changing the World. Hampshire: Palgrave MacMillan

2014.

- Hegemony or Empire? The redefinition of U.S. Power under George W. Bush. Edited by Charles Philip David and David Grondin

England and USA: 2006.

- Keane J.

and P. Meiers. Global Civil Society. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

2008.

- Mannheim

Karl. Ideology and Utopia: An Introduction to the Sociology of Knowledge. San Diego

New York

and London: Harcourt Brace and Company

1936.

- Peterson David

J. “Bertrand Russell: Prophet of a New World Order.” New Oxford Review: 35-40

June 2000.Available at:http://www.catholicculture.org

accessed in October 2015.

- Popper

Karl. The Open Society and its Enemies

the Spell of Plato. London: Routledge and Sons Ltd.

1947.

- Robertson

Roland. Globalization

Social Theory

and Global Culture. London: Sage

1992.

- Russell

Bertrand. The Practice and Theory of Bolshevism. London: Allen and Unwin

1920.

- ……………… .. “Icarus or the Future of Science”. London: Allen and Unwin

1924.

- ………………... “Science and Values”(1959)

in: The Basic Writings of Bertrand Russerll.:1903-.Edited by R.Egner and Laeter E. Dennon

New York: 1961

(pp

90-107).

- ………………… “Individual and Social Ethics”(…….)

in: The Basic Writings of Bertrand Russerll.:1903-1959.Edited by R.Egner and Lester E. Dennon

New York: 1961

(pp

357- 366).

- ………………… “What I Believe”(………)

in: The Basic Writings of Bertrand Russerll.:1903-1959. Edited by R.Egner and Lester E. Dennon

New York: 1961

(pp

367-390).

- …………………. “The Taming of Power”(……)

in: The Basic Writings of Bertrand Russerll.:1903-1959.Edited by R.Egner and Lester E. Dennon

New York: 1961

(pp

663-681).

- ……………………….“If we are to Survive this Dark Time”. New York Times: Sept.3

1950

in: The Basic Writings of Bertrand Russerll.:1903-1959 Edited by R.Egner and Lester E. Dennon

New York: 1961

(pp

682-687).

- ……………… “What would Help Mankind Most?” (1951). in: The Basic Writings of Bertrand Russerll.:1903-1959.Edited by R.Egner and Lester E. Dennon

New York: 1961.

- …………………“World Government”

(1951). In: The Basic Writings of Bertrand Russerll.:1903-1959.Edited by R.Egner and Lester E. Dennon

New York: 1961.

- ………………… “The Next Half Century”(1951)

In: The Basic Writings of Bertrand Russerll.:1903-1959.Edited by R.Egner and Lester E. Dennon

New York: 1961.

- ………………… “Science and Human Life”(………)

In: The Basic Writings of Bertrand Russerll.:1903-1959.Edited by R.Egner and Lester E. Dennon

New York: 1961.

- …………………. “Life without Fear”

(1951). In: The Basic Writings of Bertrand Russerll.:1903-1959.Edited by R.Egner and Lester E. Dennon

New York: 1961.

- ………………… “Science and Human Life”

In: The Basic Writings of Bertrand Russerll.:1903-1959.Edited by R.Egner and Lester E. Dennon

New York: 1961

(pp

716- 725).

- ……………. . The Impact of Science on Society. London: Unwin Paperbacks

1976.

- Wallerstein

I. “Globalization or the Age of Transition” International Sociology: 15

(249-265).

- Wells

H. George. A Modern Utopia. London: Chapman and Hall

1906.

-Zunino Marcos. “Subversive Justice: The Russell Vietnam War Crimes Tribunal and Transitional Justice”. In International Journal of Transitional Justice

Vol.10

Issue 2

July2016

pp. 211-229. Available at http://doi.org /10.1093/ijtj/ijw00.

Publié dans la revue: الخطاب

Nos services universitaires et académiques

Thèses-Algérie vous propose ses divers services d’édition: mise en page, révision, correction, traduction, analyse du plagiat, ainsi que la réalisation des supports graphiques et de présentation (Slideshows).

Obtenez dès à présent et en toute facilité votre devis gratuit et une estimation de la durée de réalisation et bénéficiez d'une qualité de travail irréprochable et d'un temps de livraison imbattable!