More than 110 million Terrestrials demonstrated for peace.

Let's break the monopolies! Let's privatize the oil sector!

by Adriano Autino


T. Jefferson wrote "All the men are created equal, and free".

From the the unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America (July 4, 1776): 

"[...] We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their creator with inherent and [certain] inalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, & the pursuit of happiness: that to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed; that whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it, & to institute new government, laying it's foundation on such principles, & organizing it's powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety & happiness. Prudence indeed will dictate that governments long established should not be changed for light & transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shown that mankind are more disposed to suffer while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses & usurpations begun at a distinguished period and pursuing invariably the same object, evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty to throw off such government, & to provide new guards for their future security.[...]" (see the whole text).

As anyone can see, Thomas Jefferson wrote that all men (nowadays we would add "and women", or better say "humans") are created equal, free, and endowed of certain basic rights. He didn't wrote: "the oil and weapons lobbysts are created equal, free, while the rest of the humans are created slave".

The february 15th 2003 over 110 million people (source: CNN) demonstrated against the war in Iraq. I listened to radio and tv the whole day, and I didn't hear that the rallies were characterized by particular anti-american feelings. Four million people in Rome, more than one million in London, some 2 million in Madrid, many hundred thousand people in New-York, notwithstanding the prohibition of the government.

Such an unprecedently big anti-war movement is something to think about. 

One year ago, at the time of the military interview in Afghanistan, we wrote (Liberty is a powerful weapon or a modern one? ): 

"Bush, after an absurd and terrible event like the 11 september one, could only have a great consent about his military position, also by many people who, traditionally (I'm one of these), criticize "military solutions" for social conflicts. Nobody cries for the end of Taleban regime, one of most retrograde and anti-historical dictatorships never seen in these last ten years. But now Bush is at a crossroads: trying to use the consent obtained for declaring war upon other "bad-states" in a political way, even if their bound with 11 september is less clear then Bin Laden's one, or administering carefully the same consent, going on for a more open-mind leadership, which respects innocents and allied's rights. As fair as I'm concerned, I think the second way is the best one. In the case of Afghanistan war, in public opinion, which take care about human rights, the desire to punish guilties of New York massacre and seeing afghanian women smiling had won. I think that if we were, in an imperialistic way, tempted (as does, e.g., the Israeli Sharon) to consider a terrorist every unlucky terrestrial who tryes, even by wrong means, to win his own rights, the same public opinion had very much to contest, consequently it wouldn't give the same consent."

What is happening these days is the exact confirmation of the above.

More than 100 million of people said they want to be free, and that - differently from the XX century - they don't want violence, as a mean to solve conflicts. Yes, residual piece of old ideologies and very ingenuous simplifications are still present, in this movement: many still give all the guilties to capitalism. But we are now in the position to see the industrial age with a more serene look, and, if we can surely give many guilties to capitalism, how could we still not seeing the guilties of the collectivist thought? 

We should finally start to consider that none of the social systems developed during the industrial age were good enough (to be fair) then, and surely they are not good enough nowadays, in the plein of the electronic age and of the globalized terrestrial economy!

The collectivist model has several very serious bugs: (i) notwithstanding the best intentions, it cannot prevent the bureaucracy from freezing the power in its hands and to kill the individuals initiative; (ii) it cuts the excellence, trying to help the poors; (iii) it claims to centralize all the decisions, stopping the economy; (iv) several times the degeneration of the bureaucracy lead to tyrannies and horrible dictatorships (nazists, stalinists, fascists, etc...) (v) The bureaucracy makes very much solidaristic propaganda, says to act in the name of the people's interest, while the politicians are corrupted.

The capitalist model has very serious bugs too: (i) it allows the raising of monopolist monsters like the oil cartel and Microsoft (ii) it mortifies the justice, allowing the very rich people to avoid paying for their crimes (iii) it allows the economical powers to promote wars and destructions, in order to keep their power and to burn industrial overproductions (iv) the politicians are corrupted, and often they only make their own interest, neglecting any fairness.

We shall also note that, notwithstanding all our claims to be the best champions of freedom and democracy, our systems still are not endowed of an easy (telematic) system to let people really and quickly express their will. To express their will, people are still obliged to go down in the street, as during the past century! And, sometimes, the "king" tries to prohibit this right as, 227 years ago, king George tried to prohibit the freedom of the colonies!

The very bad proofs given by the collectivist societies during the XX century bring us to turn toward a more libertarian thougth. But, beware, even here we have a problem: the big tasks we have to face require to join forces and efforts. Surelythe we should think again about the beginning of the burgeois revolution, because the struggle for the human rights, against the claimed "divine rights of the king", never really ended. And don't forget that such rights are still to be extended to all the Terrestrials. But we also need to move ahead: we shall think about ethics in a freedom and self-government environment, we shall think about the value, that each person put in a company or in an organization, or in any group working together. And we shall start to think about all negotiations in a quite new way, where ethics, fairness and beauty (of relationships) have a very much more relevant place. In a society where the links are no more structural, anyone is free to break the links and go elsewhere. If the human relationships will not improve, if we will not learn to recognize the value of the persons without they are constrained to fight for such acknowledge, we will end to have no more human relationships at all. It would be the end of any market, i.e. of any social organization. It is easy: even the oil monopolists will understand it.

More than ever, I believe in humans. All humans have a brain, and an evoluted intelligence. All humans (I mean all) are born free, and have right to turn into account their properties. 

Let the Iraki and the Kurdish people have their rights and their property! Let's hope that they will start a clever commercial politics, and start to compete not to collaborate with OPEC! At this point it should be evident to them that Mr. Hussein didn't make their interest, during all his tyrant government: they own half of the Earth's oil and their children keep dieing, lacking of the most common medicines. At minimum, they should elect another government.

And let's hope that Mr. Bush will understand that the oil tyrants don't deserve the sacrifice of the lifes of many good American and Iraki boys. 

Let's hope that people and companies around the world will understand that a competition in the oil sector will result in a reviving of the whole economy. 

Let's hope that some oil entrepreneur will re-start trying to be worth of such a title (entrepreneur), and finally accept to evolve toward new energy technologies.

Let's break the oil monopoly! 

Let's privatize the oil industry!

[003.AA.TDF.2003 - 16.02.2003]