The west in a panic

We are on the verge of a nervous breakdown? Apparently, yes: the new president of the European Council Donald Tusk evokes the "great war with Russia", implicitly urging Europe to prepare to lead hands, David Cameron goes behind Hollande takes poses in front of the Roman dictator Rubicon , the Nobel Prize for Peace Obama goes to alternating current: a threat apocalypses day and the next day he retires. And the newspapers you read things that were unthinkable a few weeks ago. Ezio Mauro reads the contemporary crises of Ukraine and Iraq as a joint attack by the West and its values ​​of freedom, rule of law, their style of life, indeed, (let's face!) In civilization. Fifty years: the Free World against the USSR. Handsome hint ontologically imperialist character of Russia "has preceded, accompanied and survived communism" reads like the "long telegram" by George Kennan. No doubt about Gulf wars and the cost to iraqueni 400,000 dead, insane or management occupation of Iraq on the bestiality made ​​by American intelligence, the political effects of what Israel does to the Palestinians: all unpleasant misunderstandings. And no doubt either that the Russians may have their reasons. Putin is a dictator? Yes, but why in Kiev are students of John Locke and Tocqueville? Or at Wall street is the club Voltaire? The massacre in Odessa? Why there was a massacre in Odessa? "When? In 1942?

The apotheosis comes with Giuliano Ferrara, who invokes the "religious war" with Islam, "The only answer is in an incomparably greater violence." Sic! That just sounds like an invitation to use nuclear weapons (of course: tactics, small, not heavy stuff). Then it swept away all distinctions between jhiadismo, fundamentalism and Islam as such: a whole bunch. What's going on? And 'the effect of sunspots? In addition to that there is around the ebola virus dementia? None of this: for the first time is manifesting a panic attack of Western leaders, faced unexpected evolution of globalization , which was conceived as the triumphal march of the values ​​of the West in the World and is turning into a nightmare. "Why shoot at those people who should thank us, as we bring freedom, prosperity, democracy, culture? It 'clear: it is the fault of Putin, of Osama, the despots who are afraid of our freedom and incite their people to stay in power. "The West (ie the United States with the usual retinue of lackeys European, Australian and Japanese) loves consolation of his political defeat, telling the tale of the tyrants of the conspiracy against him. He feels besieged by a growing China (and weapon) too quickly, to a Russia that is the bear imperialist ever, that Islam is the usual army of bloodthirsty lousy, the South Americans who are ungrateful, incompetent and not want to pay their debts and also by those sly Indians that you never know which way they're.

The world hates the West and does not give you any suspicion? The fact is that the West has triggered its decline with relocation, not to pay three cents more than his workers, with the total financial deregulation, who removed the capital to the tax authorities by producing the chasm of public debt, with the return of appalling social inequalities internal, which affect the efficiency of the system itself, with a crazy selection of the ruling classes, less able to handle the huge power entrusted to him, with the corruption that destroys the legitimacy of the system. Now collects the results of this disastrous seeding, he realizes that his hegemony wobbles more and more, and instead of starting a serious examination of their own mistakes, puts in the holster. This does not mean that others do not have their wrongs, that Isis is good to decapitate his prisoners and Putin to try to resolve the crisis in Ukraine slaps or the Chinese to forcibly hold down the yuan renminbi; but the responsibilities are certainly prominent in the USA and their henchmen, who stubbornly refuse to consider the possibility of a different world order. I'm not so utopian to think of a world order idyllic and without hegemonies, nor naive enough to think of a power that is stripped from him. But the historical moment we are going through would require more wisdom: the hegemony of the coast, has costs. L '"West" if they can still afford it?

The world situation is such that the sovereign debt debts of the western states (Use in the head, then Japan, Italy, England, France, and even the most virtuous Germany) exceeded the threshold of 90% of GDP and, therefore, are no longer returnable , the more so in growth rates that, when it goes luxury, plodding between 2 and 3% and in several cases have a minus sign in front. So, let's face it a good time, our states are almost all technically bankrupt, because the moment will not be able to pay the interest is not far, it is true, how true it is, that the interest on the debt and now are equal in different cases exceed the increase in GDP. In such a situation, it would not be appropriate to discuss a worldwide restructuring of debt, offsetting a portion with the mutual credits and another with the exchange between moratorium and shares of world power? Can the West, under present conditions, to claim the monopoly of the top positions in the IMF, the WB, the WTO? A world order, both monetary and political, based on the hegemony of a group of 7-8 major powers (USA, Japan, China, Brazil, India, Russia, South Africa and, if it can exist, EU), would certainly be more balanced and, through an efficient system of regulation of international conflicts, would allow a balanced reduction of military spending. It would be the decline of Western hegemony, but not for the transition to another unipolar hegemony, but to a balanced and shared hegemony. All this is not deemed worthy of consideration by our ruling classes who, rather than give up their shaky monopoly of power, they think to go to arms. It is not the "world of tyrants" to be afraid of freedom in the West. And 'the West afraid of its own decay, which reads in the mirror of the crisis.