Hegemony or survival
Finished reading the book (by Noam Chomsky) over a month ago and I think I should read it again. Usually, I don't read books again unless they happen to be accursed textbooks. But those days are waaaay behind me now. Thankfully? I dunno. In the event that I might be pursuing higher education, who knows? I might have to flip those books again. Yes, me going for a post-graduate course is as good as me walking into a pub and ordering a Coke. But stranger things have happened to me. So you never know.
Anyway, everyone knows that the US Presidential elections are heating up again. George W. Bush or John Kerry? Everyone has their own views on this situation. I guess, globally, Kerry would be a more popular choice. Well, popular sentiments rule that anything but Bush would be great.
I'm no political scientist or flag-bearing activist (Takes too much time away from my regular hedonistic acts, insert any of my vices). I'm pretty pessimistic about the Elections anyway. I don't think there might be much of a difference between Bush and Kerry. They'd definitely differ on their take on American internal policies. Their tax cuts, rebates, abortion policies, etc. Who cares. I'm not an American. Bush has planted the American flag in Iraqi soil. For what purposes? That's pretty fucken obvious. Even if Kerry wins this one in November, will he pull out all American influence in Iraq? Will he still continue with what the Texas cowboy, Bush did? Maybe, the only difference would be Kerry planting the corporations that have backed him throughout his campaign, taking away some of Bush's golf buddies' share of the Iraqi pie.
Hegemony G. Dawg, I can finally pronounce that) is the dominance of a state over others. Practically, the U.S.'s only foreign policy since the 2nd World War. You can bet your ass that even when Kerry takes over, he might be subtle about it like Clinton and not go on a whole war campaign like Bush. But there'd be still some 'democracy' being forced down people's throats in some 3rd World countries. And I thought there was the 1st Amendment, freedom of speech and choice. In the past decade, I believe people are seeing through the entire facade. They know it as well but who cares? They have the guns. They have the arsenal.
Chomsky offers his solution at the end of his book by saying that people have the power to remove such atrocities and make the changes. Bush or Kerry? It doesn't make a difference. It's the policies that need to change.
On a closer note, our very own Prime Minister, Goh Chok Tong (more affectionately known to me as 'Lao Goh') is stepping down on 12 Aug 2004, just a couple of days after our National Day Rally Speech. Stepping into his shoes would be our Deputy Prime Minister, Lee Hsien Loong, son of our Senior Minister-aka-modern-day-founder-aka-1st-emperor, Lee Kwan Yew. I dunno man. This is like all interesting and all. Would there be much changes in the administrative style? Probably harsher policies that would crack our pockets more. The new PM is still the Finance Minister, every smokers' bane.
Would it be all better for us now? Would there really be more freedom of speech...seriously? Do pigs fly?
Is tobacco tax still going to rise? Is everything the government do still about the economy? Are lesbians a turn-on for 99% of the adult male population?
The burning question would still be: When do I finally get to vote in my fucken constituency... if even at all?
Posts
