Why are you against Bush?
The 64th Letter of an Autonomous Thinker

Amsterdam, September 22 2005

Dear reader, 

Of course I am against Bush but why should you direct all your political energy on only one of the elements of elitist power? Do you think that he is almighty? Do you think the next president will be better?
Past presidents
like Clinton , Bush sr, Reagan, Carter,  Ford, Nixon, Johnson, Kennedy, Eisenhower or Truman did not differ much from Bush. They pursued roughly the same policy.  

Past presidents were involved in many wars of which the Korean War, the Vietnam War and the First Gulf War are the most well-known. Poverty in the world was and is also caused by the American way of trading, cruel dictators were and are supported and anyone that wants to try something different is attacked. Illnesses are still rampant because of the high price of medicines.
Of course there are differences but in the end all American presidents represent in the first place the top-elite of the world. They have only one purpose, the promotion, defence and improvement of the interests of the own already privileged group.

All American presidents tried to extend the American influence by the most important method that is based on one-sided violence, the presence of American troops in nearly every country of the world. Third World armies are not allowed to invade other countries. England, France, Holland or Russia had troops in their former colonies but the USA is the first country ever that has troops everywhere.  

Maybe you still believe the American way of life is beneficial for all people on the world. But then you have to explain why misery does not seem to end, why illiteracy is hardly becoming smaller, why half of the world is still living on less than two dollars a day or why twenty percent of all African children are still dying before they reach the age of five mostly because of avoidable illnesses.   

I do not understand why people are so opposed to Bush and not to other leaders who are comparable. Bush sr invaded also Iraq, Kennedy invaded Vietnam, Clinton lowered the federal contribution to build dikes in New Orleans . The social system was already in disarray before Bush became president and poverty is growing in the richest country in the world.  

By being opposed to Bush alone the suggestion arises that other leaders (who belong to the same privileged group) will be better. That is rubbish. Problems will not be solved by removing Bush, his successors will hardly be better for the massworld.
Most commentators and also many masspeople still believe that a new man (women are rare in the top of the world) will be better because he did not yet openly support a policy that is in the first place profitable for the eliteworld. The behaviour of former American presidents proves that it is very difficult to determine differences between different presidents. All are in the first place active to improve their own world, the safe, happy and privileged eliteworld.  

Do not direct your wrath against Bush alone, Democrats are not better.  

I propose that masspeople withdraw from the political games that are played by leading people that never will try to make one world for all people. That can only change when masspeople develop their own creative, individual and autonomous way of acting.
Yours truly, Joost van Steenis


When you want to receive an e-mail message each time I publish a new article,
please become follower on my blog http://downwithelite.wordpress.com

65. We need a new political paradigm
To the index of All Letters