The retrogression of yesterday reflects today’s inefficiencies, while today’s uprightness shows how progressive tomorrow can be. The judgment of days before now gives a sense of direction for today’s monumental social and political calculations.
This piece is to reflect on numerous issues around the world of today, which yesterday were unable to address, Here we take a look at world progressive governance and retrogression as a result of diplomatic inefficiencies, which bring about world security challenge and leadership failure that makes people vulnerable to the entire game of world politics.
Yesterday has not been forgotten; the Cold War experience serves as a lesson for us, the young people of today, to learn from. Today has not repented from the mistake and influence of the past negligence and failures, making the future difficult to predict and vindicate from world political aggression because of the events that unfold every day.
As a young man of thirties and a progressive democrat, I’ve not seen peaceful resolutions to the world most distorted aggression that has besieged our world of inequalities into a conclusive metamorphosis; this is because of grievances harbored by individual, race, ethnic, tribe, nations and governments, a change of government always result to a change of tactics, policies, and crisis.
The threat from Eastern Europe to the northern part of Asia, restiveness in the Middle East to North Africa, leadership failure, and negligence in Africa that have bedeviled that region for so long now have serious social, economic, and political effects on Africa today. I have not seen a change that the world deserves to ensure peace and security without threat to lives and property, no matter the location, race, or religion. We always cry for change, fight for change even with our blood and resources, but change is absolutely deceitful because human minds are very dangerous and can never reflect the so-called change principles; Arab Springs are good examples. Change never works the way we expect. Now reasons…
Related Articles :
- What are the Most Popular Sports and CRICKET activities in the World?
- Freedom without being simply free in the USA
- Can Finance Without a doubt End up a Strategic Associate to the Commercial enterprise?
- Education and the complete man or woman
- The Intricacies of China Unseating Germany As the World’s Biggest Exporter
War from beyond reflects on the latter part of human exigencies, making the weak more vulnerable and desperate to contend. At the same time, the strength tends to be more powerful and domineering. Now, what is the problem of the world? This missive is to reiterate on the speech delivered by former U.K. Prime Minister Late Mrs. Margaret Thatcher, at the John Findley Foundation Lecture on 9th March 1996 at Westminster College, Fulton, MO. This re-awakening speech caught my attention while I was reading speeches made by top political and government officials.
The speech titled “New Threat for Old” emphasized the phenomenon of the world’s political and security challenges and the role played by the Western World to ensure peace and security. The audacity and prowess of this gallant political leader were second to none; that’s why her role culminated in the nerves of the Western power play in the World’s political stability.
What is the problem of the world? Is it our social differences? Our political make-ups? Our religion and beliefs? Or our color and race?. Is it a result of stubborn leaders who make themselves monarchs over the people, ruling by coercion and humiliation, or the domineering power of the West that wants to enforce democracy on the rest of the world? There must be reasons for the world’s problems, but the way out might not be far-fetched.
The powerful, encrypted speech of Madam Thatcher focused on tackling international aggression. She emphasized Winston Churchill’s speech at the name Fulton, where the former U.K. Prime Minister exclusively spoke about the world’s stability, not long after World War II. The speech was delivered due to the consequences of those wars and the world’s most formidable adversaries.
Towards the end of that great conflict, the wartime allies had forged new international institutions for post-war co-operation. There was, in those days, great optimism, not least in the United States, about a world without conflict presided over benevolently by bodies like the United Nations, the IMF, the World Bank, and the GATT. But the high hopes reposed in them were increasingly disappointed as Stalin lowered the Iron Curtain over Eastern Europe, made no secret of his global ambitions, and became an antagonist rather than an ally.
Churchill’s speech here was the first serious warning of what was afoot, and it helped to wake up the entire West. The Churchill speech bore rich fruit in the new institutions forged to strengthen the West against Stalin’s assault. The Marshall Plan laid the foundations for Europe’s post-war economic recovery. The Truman Doctrine made it plain that America would resist the communist subversion of democracy.
The North Atlantic Treaty Organization mobilized America’s allies for mutual defense against the Soviet Steamroller. Stalin had overplayed his hand by attempting to destroy international co-operation; he succeeded in stimulating it along more realistic lines and not just through Western “Cold War” institutions like NATO.
As the West recovered and united, growing in prosperity and confidence, so also breathed new life into some of the first set of post-war institutions like the GATT and the IMF. Without the Russians obstructing them, these bodies helped to usher in what the Marxist historian, R.H. Hobsbawm, as ruefully christened the Golden Age of Capitalism.
Today, we are at what could be similar to previous struggles, the long twilight struggle of the Cold War about 4 decades ago, with a complete victory for the West and the people of the communist empire. It ended amidst high hopes of “A New World Order.” But those hopes have been grievously disappointed by previous events taken place across the world. Bosnia, Somalia, Sudan, Mali, and the rise of Islamic militancy all point to instability and conflict rather than co-operation and harmony.
Thatcher explained more about the causes and influence of those wars on world political stability. She frankly said that the difference between “the West and the rest is primitive political ideologies, which have been extinct in Western Europe and America for two generations,” this simply means the political mentality and perception of the West is different from the rest of the world which is a major player in world social and political instability.
