Friends, Here's my first attempt at an Introduction to the book. The question here is not whether it's "correct", but rather: Is it appropriate? Does it answer the questions a reader might have before digging into the book itself? If someone were to peruse the Introduction in a bookstore, would it encourage them to buy the book? best regards, rkm -------------------------------------------------------- draft version 3.17 INTRODUCTION I grew up in the lily-white suburbs of Los Angeles the 1950s. We had good schools, virtually no crime, and you could comfortably leave your house unlocked and the keys in your car in the driveway. I always walked to school, even in first grade, as did all the other children, and we never had any fear, or even notion, of being abducted. After school we might tarry for hours, either on the school grounds or riding our bikes around the neighborhood, and our parents never worried about us as long as we got home in time for supper. Such a different world it was then! My favorite hero was Superman, and I believed in his credo: "Truth, Justice, and the American Way." We all knew that America was the best country in the world and that our benevolent leaders were doing their best to spread democracy and to help other countries to advance and become just like us. I believed that America was a beacon of freedom to the world and that, like Superman, Uncle Sam came to the rescue of oppressed peoples everywhere, never asking anything in return. I went to church (generic Protestant) every week and to the church youth group Sunday evenings. It never occurred to me to doubt what they told us in church, or that I lived in the world's greatest democracy. I believed in the efficacy of progress: the world was getting better all the time. I assumed that nuclear power would supply all the energy we would ever need, and never suspected that disposing of nuclear wastes could be much of a problem. In other words, I grew up as a standard, rather conservative, red-blooded American boy. The only sign that I might eventually have problems with the system I lived under was the fact that I was always getting in trouble with my teachers at school. I was bored to death sitting in a classroom all day and was frequently "disruptive." Today they would say I had Attention Deficit Syndrome and undoubtedly they would have put me on a prescription of Ritalin. At the time I was ashamed of my behavior; today I'm proud that I didn't submit to the dreary regimentation of the classroom. My spirit survived! Woe to those poor innocent children that are now forced to endure drugs so that the oppressive regimentation can continue. I suppose the first time I began to wake up to the realities of the world was when I happened to pick up a copy of William Lederer's, A Nation of Sheep. Before that I hadn't suspected that the media or the government was capable of lying to us. But like many others, I didn't really begin to question the general benevolence of "the system" until the mid-sixties came along, with the Vietnam War and the Civil Rights movement. I joined the peace marches, cursed at the Southern "rednecks" on TV, and hated Lyndon Johnson with a passion. But I still believed in the system. The problem, I thought, was that we had drifted from our traditional American values. We had forgotten what the Founding Fathers had stood for. Corrupt politicians, a compliant media, and over-powerful corporations were ruining our wonderful American system. I thought the radicals of the sixties were crazies: they wanted to throw out the baby with the bath water. It was in the seventies that I began thinking seriously about how the system could be reformed. My friends got annoyed with me for always bringing up political topics. I began to read what passes for left-wing magazines in America, and donated regularly to dozens of activist and environmentalist groups. I started developing ideas about media reform, election reform, restraints on corporations, the creation of third parties, and all the standard reform approaches. I even made a few awkward attempts to write articles. In the eighties I began to try to educate myself at a deeper level. I started listening to books on tape during the daily commute, mainly histories and biographies: Alexander the Great, Benjamin Franklin, Alexander Hamilton, the American Revolution, the Roman Empire and Hannibal, the American Civil War, Elizabeth I, the Russian Revolution, J. Pierpont Morgan, American Indians, John D. Rockefeller, the Krupp dynasty, the Franco-Prussian War, NapoleonŠeverything I could check out by mail from the wonderful collection of the L.A. library. Believe me, I learned a lot more that way than if I had majored in history in my university days. I'm not usually good at doing two things at once (being male), but driving and listening turned out to be a great combination. I began to love traffic jams and red lights: "Please don't turn green yet; I want to finish this chapter!" The turning point in my life came with the first Gulf War. I could see that the invasions of Grenada and Panama had been warm-up exercises, preparing the American mind to get over the "Vietnam syndrome." I was appalled at the way Washington manipulated the UN, and disgusted at the way we saw only "surgical strikes" on TV while most of the actual bombing was being carried out by B-52s: carpet bombing from 50,000 feet. I knew that Saddam had been set up when he was given the go-ahead by the State Department to invade Kuwait, and was then betrayed by those whom he thought were his American allies. I hadn't forgotten that he had been "our man" in the Arab world all through the decade-long war with Iran, and we had supplied him with technology, chemical weapons, and intelligence information. Why would he suspect that things had changed with Kuwait? (Don't get me wrong: I don't like Saddam, but I like even less betrayals by my government.) The straw that broke the camel's back was the announcement by Bush I at the end of Desert Storm that a "new world order" was now in effect. It was clear to me that Bush was talking about a new era of American unilateralism, an imperialist agenda running under the cover of benevolent interventionism. I couldn't stand it anymore. I began thinking seriously about quitting my job and becoming a writer. I didn't know of anyone else who was adequately understanding the big picture. In 1994 I finally got up my courage and left my high-paying software job in Silicon Valley. I moved to a small town in Ireland and began devoting full time to writing and developing my ideas. The Internet was just beginning to go mainstream and that proved to be an ideal forum for my pursuits. I created an email list, gathered some subscribers, and began publishing essays online. I also joined other email lists, and entered into debates and dialogs with all sorts of experts in political science, history, economics, and many other fields. It was like being in a world-wide university that was always open for business. I was learning more and faster than at any other time in my life. I began receiving invitations from editors to write articles for magazines and journals, and ended up publishing dozens of articles in a variety of publications, ranging from leftist journals to militia newsletters to youth 'zines. In 1998 I was invited to speak to an NGO group at the UN building in Geneva, on the topic of globalization. I had made the transition from Silicon Valley nerd to being a writer and thinker who was beginning to find an appreciative audience. This book is the culmination of my ten year investigation into how the system works and what can we do about it. I consider this to be a collaborative work, as my ideas have evolved through dialog with people all over the world, from all walks of life, and from many fields of expertise. * Terminology I've tried to use everyday language and avoid academic jargon. There are a few terms, however, that may be unfamiliar to some readers. To many Americans, 'neoliberalism' may be one such term. Neoliberalism has nothing to do with the American term 'liberalism', which Europeans would associate with 'social democrats', but refers rather to the absurd economic doctrine behind globalization, as introduced by Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher. Neoliberalism is the doctrine proclaiming that "market forces" are always benevolent, and is really the same thing that in the 1800s was called 'laissez-faire economics'. The term 'neocon', short for neoconservative, refers to the Rumsfeld-Cheney clique that currently dominates the White House. Neocon turns out to be essentially a synonym for 'fascist'. -- ============================================================ If you find this material useful, you might want to check out our website (http://cyberjournal.org) or try out our low-traffic, moderated email list by sending a message to: •••@••.••• You are encouraged to forward any material from the lists or the website, provided it is for non-commercial use and you include the source and this disclaimer. Richard Moore (rkm) Wexford, Ireland "Escaping The Matrix - Global Transformation: WHY WE NEED IT, AND HOW WE CAN ACHIEVE IT ", somewhat current draft: http://www.ratical.org/co-globalize/rkmGlblTrans.html _____________________________ "...the Patriot Act followed 9-11 as smoothly as the suspension of the Weimar constitution followed the Reichstag fire." - Srdja Trifkovic There is not a problem with the system. The system is the problem. Faith in ourselves - not gods, ideologies, leaders, or programs. _____________________________ cj list archives: http://cyberjournal.org/cj/show_archives/?lists=cj newslog list archives: http://cyberjournal.org/cj/show_archives/?lists=newslog _____________________________ Informative links: http://www.indymedia.org/ http://www.globalresearch.ca/ http://www.MiddleEast.org http://www.rachel.org http://www.truthout.org http://www.williambowles.info/monthly_index/ http://www.zmag.org http://www.co-intelligence.org ============================================================
