Now, is order or justice more important in our international system?
Global Governance 232 is like such a hard-core politics unit; even the lecturer-cum-our-tutor looks like (as in of course intellectually, but also physically) as if he's one of those people which ABC Lateline interviews every night; with some highly-sounding title like "Strategic Analyst for International Order and Justice, School of Australian-Asian Diplomatic Engagement, Australian National University, Canberra".
"Welcome to tonight's programme, Professor XXX.... What do you think are the prospects for securing democracy in Myanmmar if Bob Carr replaces Kim Beazley, and pips John Howard to be Australian PM?"
I made those questions and titles up. But I think it's good warming up for my research essay later in the semester; where I'd have to think of a question by myself, and then write an answer to it (3000 words I think)..... Looks pretty difficult to me.
Today's tutorial was about "The UN and apartheid's demise in South Africa". Why is apartheid different from other "normal" human rights violations? Why did the Western powers take so long (25 years at least) before contemplating implementing sanctions on SA? Because they valued order over justice in the bipolar world of the Cold War? Can economic and strategic interests really explain US / UK shift in foreign policy towards apartheid, as their interests were still there (if not stronger) by the mid-1980s? Perhaps there was a shift in global norms that promulgated racial equality? Where did this pressure come from? From other states? UN General Assembly? Internal domestic politics?
I think it's a really interesting unit man; though the readings are quite tough and ardous.... I do actually give up in disgust sometimes trying to unpack the meanings within the readings, especially the text for this unit: "The Declining World Order: America's Imperial Geopolitics" by Richard Falk - whom when I'm irritated with him, I'd refer him to as "Richard F*ck".
Perhaps I'll spend my whole life in search for this elusive thing called Global Governance - is order and stability kept through inter-state relations (the "Westphalian" international system), or perhaps through global institutions like the UN? Transnational actors? Not easy questions; god knows if there's an answer to that also.... heh.
I'm pretty ok; just in case you thought I've went a bit cuckoo over Global Governance. Global Governance isn't everything; Fascism is. lol. Since I've got a test next Wednesday that's worth 15% of the unit (btw, the lecturer euphemistically calls it an "in-class assessment exercise", cos he says the Arts Faculty doesn't want to freak us out by using the word "test"...)
Tell you a story which the lecturer for Fascism said today. You see, Fascism tried to bring all classes together (proletariat, capitalist, middle class etc.) in the name of the nation, and this stands in opposition to Marxism, which argues that class conflict is necessary, leading to the triumph of the proletariat.
So, in trying to bring these elements of the population together, you kind of need some reconciliation. He was quoting a propaganda rally in which Joseph Goebbels attended in 1932. The crowd consisted of workers and land-owning peasants, artisans etc.
Someone asked Goebbels, "What about bread prices?"
He couldn't say "higher" cos' that would agitate the workers (who were already reeling from the effects of the Great Depression). Neither could he say "lower" as the peasants wanted more profits from selling their bread.
Goebbels replied, "We will not have "lower" bread prices...... (and the workers groaned).... but neither we'll have "higher" bread prices.... (and the peasants gruntled)."
"Instead, we'll have "GERMAN" bread prices."
To which, the crowd gave the Heil Hitler salute and roared with approval.
The lesson in this story is that the Nazi regime did not really fundamentally alter the nature of the capitalist society (despite their claims of fascism being a "Third Way" between Marxism and liberal capitalism). They then got around the problem of being anti-capitalist and pro-captalist at the same time, by utilising the idea of "reconciliation through rhetoric."
Fascism is after all, not a political doctrine, but as we're told, it's an attitude of the mind. Not words, but action and movement. Not gesellschaft, but volksgemeinschaft.
I really hope no one bothered to read what I've written so far. Out of here. To cook. lol.