Western Defence

The Responsibility to Defend the Developed World

History has spawned some surprising conflicts. Unlikely alliances and turns of events can swiftly turn a stable world into a chaotic warzone; the Al-Qaeda attack on September 11th has appeared to light the fuse on a number of USA-led invasions, in a millenium that had previously held promise to be potentially war-free, as far as developed countries were concerned.

Wars between countries do not just effect the governments, soldiers and civilians directly involved. World economies and world stability are effected. The arms industry is strengthened by every conflict, and the success of the arms industry facilitates more conflict, for good or bad. When a region erupts into war, the economic ramifications can reach far and wide. Disruption to oil supplies can cause serious chaos in developed countries. As a result, we police the Middle-East trying to enforce stability and prevent wars. It seems we are least successful and most disruptive when we are the ones starting the wars.

Pacifism vs. Reality

The world is not an idealistic place. Violence is a reality that will not go away just because Western Europe and Developed Countries have gone through an enlightenment. Dictators and expansionist regimes will not stop merely because we have nice pacifists or peaceful-sounding inter-government agreements. The political theorist Machiavelli taught that although we can rule by law or by force, whilst the first is an ideal we still need recourse to the second, because the world is not an ideal place₂. Likewise, Albert Einstein (who participated in political debate, aside from being the leading physicist) warns that whilst pacifism can be popular, and even be taught in schools in countries where there is no risk of invasion, it shouldn't be done for emotional reasons, disregarding the practical need for military forces₃. When chaos erupts, we need our Armed Forces, and increasingly, we need them in a European and International sense. The European Union and the United Nations both need to consciously attach more improtance to their combined forces.

Mankind's Heritage Must be Protected

If our technology, computers, communications and science were to be threatened, perhaps destroyed under religious intolerance or war, the loss would be immense. It has happened before, the ages of faith, saw most of Europe fall to Christian theocracies that set back science and Humanity by several hundred years. The future is not immune to such cataclysms, and we must always have armed forces that are capable not only of defending one particular region of the Earth, but which also has a remit to defend the assets and people of any country against the ravages of the violent or barbarian, in whatever guise he is mustered.

Proclamation of the Western World

• Western culture is worth fighting for, and I am willing to give my Military and Intelligence communities the benefit of the doubt when it comes to securing our own national security and interests.

• Western culture is better than many other cultures.

Many sociologists and politicians use the term 'Western' to refer to post-industrial technologically developed countries, including countries such as Japan, not just Europe and the USA. This is the sense in which I too use the term.

Western Culture

I would fight for a generic Europe, a generic Scandinavia, Germany, France or Switzerland, and as such I fully promote the idea of European Soldiers, working for an integrated European Armed Forces, although I do not think such a force should replace national home defence forces. With the exception of USA commercialism, the "culture" I am defending (in words) is the best. It is the best of a rotten bunch, for sure, and we have a tonne of crap to go with our science, intelligence and progressive values, but the trash that I accidentally defend is not worse than many oppressive regimes and cultures around the world, and to that extent I've had enough of philosophizing about how to live, and am going out to specifically put my self in the line of fire for what I think is right.

Some cultures are better than others. Western culture is a thousand times more tolerant of minorities such as gays, religious groups, and we strive to be gender-neutral (i.e., equal women's rights), more than any Arabic, Asian or African culture (with exceptions). European culture is more balanced than the USA's extremely commercialized culture. Science and progression are powering ahead unhindered by the ignorant opposition of the stupid populations - whereas under many other religion-influenced governments and theocracies, such things are hindered. Compare how advanced our "green" and "welfare" groups are compared to Eastern and developing countries, the USA, and South America. No other region compares in its attempts to live responsibly. Our nearly green, pro-science, mostly pro-individualistic, pseudo-democratic European culture is to be the next superpower to take the human race forwards.

I'm not specifically vying "for democracy", because even where democracy is perfect, if the culture has produced a population of morons, democracy shoots itself in the foot. In our culture the stupid are enslaved by TV (which is good). Without an intelligent population, governments may as well be ran by monkeys... and although this is mostly the case, our culture breeds intelligence and forward-looking attitudes more than any others at the moment and for the forseeable future. This is a defence of Western advancement, moral and technological, whether it happens to be democratic or not.