Arts, History, Human Rights, Philosophy, Society, United States

Quantum Leaps: Thomas Paine…

THOMAS PAINE 1737 – 1809

English born political philosopher, Paine not only invented the term ‘United States of America’, he inspired the revolutions both there and in France. He was forced to flee from England when he tried to do the same thing there. Awareness of his importance in the formulation of the American constitution and the American ‘way of life’ is pivotal to understanding the entity that is modern day America.

Having emigrated to the New World in the early 1770s, Paine became editor of the Pennsylvania Magazine and published one of the first essays calling for the abolition of slavery. With the beginning of the American Revolution, Paine made himself famous by publishing his book Common Sense. In it, he argues against the notion of a ruling class, insisting that government and society must be kept distinct. Independence for the American colonies, Paine argued, was both morally and practically justified. He continued to write and publish pamphlets throughout the War of Independence in support of the revolution.

Thomas Paine was a philosopher, political activist and revolutionary. As a political theorist he advocated that ‘the proceeds of land and property tax should be invested in a welfare system’.

Thomas Paine was a philosopher, political activist and revolutionary. As a political theorist he advocated that ‘the proceeds of land and property tax should be invested in a welfare system’.

After the success of the war for American independence, Paine went first to France and then to England. In response to Burke’s Reflections on the Revolution in France, Paine wrote and published The Rights of Man, his seminal treatise on democracy and republicanism. According to Paine, all men are born with equal rights. The necessity of social living however, can bring about situations where we impinge on the rights of others. Moreover, we may not always have the means to protect our rights from others who do not respect them. Consequently, it is necessary to develop the state and a constitution in which individual rights are encoded as civil rights, enforced by the state on behalf of the individual. The only morally acceptable constitution is that of the democratic republic in which citizens are granted the further right to vote in order to choose their own leaders. It is just this right, to choose one’s leaders, that the hereditary monarchies of France and England deny to their people and provides justification enough to abandon them as immoral constitutions.

Similar:

The British Government, in response, charged Paine with treason, causing him to flee back to France. With Paine gone, the government quashed the British revolution before it had a chance to gain momentum. In France, Paine was at first welcomed and given a seat in the National Convention. However he was later imprisoned and only just escaped execution.

Paine developed his ideas on civil rights and justice in his Agrarian Justice. He argues that a state is predicated on the basis that it makes its citizens better off than they otherwise would be without the constitution. But, he finds, many of the poorest people in the civilised societies of Europe are in a worse state than so-called ‘uncivilised’ Native American Indians. The inequity has much to do with land and property ownership, a privilege Paine suggests should be taxed since the generation of wealth that makes it possible requires the support of society. The proceeds of land and property tax should be invested in a welfare system, access to which is a right of every citizen.

In 1802 Paine returned to America, but it was not to be a happy homecoming. In the Age of Reason Paine had argued against both atheism and Christianity in favour of a deism which rejects any appeal to divine revelation. Rather, the belief in God is claimed to be intrinsically reasonable, a logical conclusion to the question of why anything exists at all. Paine rejects both organised religion and the Bible’s portrayal of a vindictive, vengeful God. Unfortunately for Paine, America was resolutely Christian and frowned upon his religious writings, despite his previous service to her. Though he remained in the United States for the rest of his life, he died in obscurity.

Paine’s work is characterised by a rare integrity that rails against political oppression, organised religion and poverty. Despite the massive influence of his early writings he remains a philosopher who, curiously, is now rarely mentioned.

Standard
China, Economic, Foreign Affairs, History, Politics, Russia, Society, United Nations, United States

The new and emerging Russia-China pact bodes ill for the United States…

GEOPOLITICAL STRATEGIC TRIANGLE

It was in 1972, at the height of the Cold War, when President Nixon made his impromptu (but famous) visit to China in an attempt to normalise relations with Beijing. His aim was for the United States to gain an advantage over its superpower rival, the Soviet Union. In recent days, Russia’s Vladimir Putin made his journey to China. The countries in this geopolitical strategic triangle may be the same, but their roles are far different from what they once were.

Transformation in Russia, the successor state of the former Soviet Union, has been huge. Moscow is a diminished power now and not the threat it once posed. The US, the only remaining superpower, is also in decline, at least in relative terms. But this trend in turn reflects the emergence of China, almost dormant 40 years ago, but now accepted as being a mighty global force on the world stage. China’s economy is soon expected to surpass that of the US, and many economists suggest that China’s currency poses a serious challenge to the US dollar, the world’s main currency reserve.

In the 1970s, the odd man out in the triangle was Moscow. Now, though, Presidents Putin and Xi Jinping are trying to forge an alliance that will cut the US down to size.

Symbols of intent are apparent in this new and emerging joint partnership. The launch of the current joint naval exercises, for example, was attended by both leaders. And, far more importantly, is the massive 30-year deal signed this week for the sale of Russian gas to China. This will start in 2018, but the deal also contains contractual terms which allows for substantial Chinese investment in Russia’s infrastructure. The agreement will provide a new outlet for the energy exports on which the Russian economy largely depends. More broadly, Moscow’s orientation is being seen as part of a ‘pivot to Asia’, with a focus on deepening ties with the East (rather than the West).

The driving force and logic behind this new alignment has been accentuated when we consider the sharply deteriorating relations between America and its emerging eastern superpower rivals. In the case of Moscow, the annexation of territory in Ukraine has raised tensions with the West to levels not seen since the Reagan era. Ongoing difficulties have generated a fear of a looming second Cold War, which are by no means fanciful. Mr Putin’s unconcealed ambition to restore a de facto Russian empire continues to fuel such suspicions.

China and the United States, economic and increasingly geopolitical rivals, could well be described as being at loggerheads. Notwithstanding Beijing’s perceived expansionism in South-east Asia, which has brought it into direct conflict with several close American allies in the region, this week’s announcements of unprecedented criminal indictments in the US against Chinese military officials for cyber spying has raised the political stakes even further. Not surprisingly, Beijing has referred to a major setback in relations with Washington, while simultaneously proclaiming that relations with Moscow have never been better.

In some respects, however, this Sino-Russian rapprochement may make little difference. Economically, Russia needs China far more than the other way round: not just as an export energy market, but also as a source of vital capital.

When Russia’s economy is slowing and tensions over Ukraine threaten future financing and investment by the West, having Beijing as a strategic partner could unsettle relations with the West much further. China is already increasingly supportive of Russia’s position on Ukraine and, with both countries being permanent members of the United Nations Security Council, with the right to exercise the power of veto, the prospects of resolving the crises in Syria and elsewhere seems remoter than ever. Between them, too, they could also make it even harder to secure a satisfactory nuclear deal with Iran. Whichever way we turn, the loser in this changing eternal triangle of geopolitics is the United States.

Standard
Europe, European Union, Foreign Affairs, Russia, Society, Ukraine, United States

Preventing dismemberment of Ukraine requires conciliatory compromise…

UKRAINE

In the aftermath of the Donetsk referendum on independence for the new ‘People’s Republic’, Roman Lyagin, the region’s self-styled electoral commissioner, has proclaimed a charade of an election result. The fact that the total of the yes, no and spoilt votes exceeded 100 per cent, Western observers – including the British Foreign Secretary William Hague – rightly concluded that this contest was ‘illegitimate’ and had ‘zero credibility’.

Despite the surreal nature of the plebiscite, the outcome is nothing other than deadly serious. The most populous regions of Ukraine, with 4.5 million people and the industrial powerhouse of the economy, now stands on the brink of merging with Russia. We should be under no illusion: the shadowy circle of kleptocratic pro-Kremlin leaders who organised this poll, with the resulting 89 per cent ‘yes’ vote, is leading the eastern regions of Donetsk and Luhansk along a road that seems certain to end in union with Russia.

Ukraine’s new post-revolutionary government has no answer to the challenge. In what was described as a military offensive by the Ukrainian army prior to Sunday’s vote in restoring control over Donetsk, that strategy can only be deemed a fiasco upon reflection. The city of Mariupol, with its half-a-million residents, has effectively been conceded to the pro-Russian movement.

A chink of light may, however, provide a way out of the crisis. One of the referendum’s absurdities was a vague and indiscreet question that asked voters to assent to ‘self-rule’, clearly something which should have been clarified as to meaning. If Kiev were now to open proper talks and dialogue with the pro-Russian movement and make a generous and specific offer of regional autonomy, that might allow both sides to step back from the brink. Those hardliners in Kiev will no-doubt have difficulty in negotiating with a motley collection of Russian allies, particularly as Moscow is once again ramping up the threats to turn off Ukraine’s gas supplies, but the alternative will only exasperate an already tense and bitterly volatile situation.

It seems certain now that, given the events in Ukraine over the past few months, unless a bold and conciliatory move is made by Kiev, the dismemberment of Ukraine looks inevitable.

Standard