An article in the London Review of Books (23 Mar. 2006) on “The Israel Lobby” by John Mearsheimer of the University of Chicago and Steven Walt, dean of the Harvard’s John F. Kennedy School of Government has caused a great deal of contention from the pro-Israel crowd, and has been described as “anti-Semitic’. A follow-up essay by Michael Massing in The New York Review (June 8, 2006) points out some omissions but on the whole supports “The Israel Lobby”; closing with a statement: “Despite its many flaws, their essay has performed a very useful service in forcing into the open a subject that has for too long remained taboo”.

An essay in the Baltimore Sun (7 May 2006) by Norman Solomon, executive director of the Institute for Public Accuracy entitled “Opening the debate on Israel”. Mr. Solomon, a Jew, quotes the authors of “The Israel Lobby” as saying “that one of the consequences of the Israel Lobby activity is that United States has become de facto enabler of Israel expansion in the occupied territories, making it complicit in the crimes perpetrated against the Palestinians.”. Mr. Solomon suggests that the relationship between Washington and Israel must be debated without “Anti-Semitic” labeling.

The Israel Lobby is a loose coalition of individuals and organizations who actively steer US foreign policy in a pro-Israel direction. It is dominated by the American-Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC). The World Jewish Congress and the Conference of Presidents of Major Jewish Organizations also play major roles. The Lobby includes prominent Christian evangelicals like Pat Robertson, Jerry Falwell, Gary Bauer, and Tom DeLay, who believe that Israel’s rebirth is necessary for the fulfillment of biblical prophesy. Neo-conservatives such as Jeanne Kirkpatrick, Elliot Abrams, John Bolton, Douglas Feith, I. Lewis (Scooter) Libby, Richard Perle, Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz, and William Kristol, are also staunch supporters of Israel.

Among the media with very definite pro-Israel bias are the Wall Street Journal, Chicago Sun-Times, Washington Times, The New Republic, The Weekly Standard and The U.S,News and World Report. All have much wealth behind them. Groups within the Lobby have put pressure on particular academics and universities. The use of the term ‘anti-Semitism’ is one of their powerful weapons.

Israel’s immoral and continued encroachment on Palestinian land is the typical acquisitive behavior giving rise to “anti-Semitism” that Jews get so upset about. In fact the forced removal of Palestinians from their own property, which may have been in the family for generations can only be described as theft. One of God’s Ten Commandments directed to Moses states: ”You shall not steal” (Exodus 19:20). The Palestinians were a peaceful agrarian people. They have been transformed into a nation of beggars, refugees, exiles and second-class citizens of Israel who has partitioned off Palestine into ghettoes behind barriers and checkpoints. The people are now without adequate food and medicines. The Prime Mister of Israel, Ehud Olmert, indicates that he is going to unilaterally draw Israel’s border keeping Jerusalem and the Jordan Valley.

PALESTINE TO DATE

Arabs and Jews arose from the same primitive desert culture. Israelite tribes entered Palestine before the end of the late Bronze Age. There were in the area a number of Semitic groupings: the Hyksos, Amorites, Canaanites as well as Egyptians of the 12th dynasty. The Israelites’ monotheistic faith and stern code of ethics set them apart from their neighbors. The Mosaic tradition of the covenant between Yahweh and Israel also bound the tribes together. In mid-10th century BC Solomon finished the Temple at Jerusalem and fortified Megiddo.

The trials and tribulations of the Israelites are recorded in the Bible, Roman history and the archeological record.

In 1516 when Palestine came under rule of the Ottoman sultan the population was about 90 per cent Arab, some families having dwelled there for some thirteen hundred years. It remained under Turkish rule for about four centuries. During this period Palestine was opened to Western influences. Christian missionaries established many schools and European powers established consulates in Jerusalem and the port cities. In the 19th century the Ottomans encouraged the development of private property and agricultural production for the world market. There were increased foreign settlements including those by Jews.

In the late 19th century the Palestinian Arabs shared in a general Arab renaissance. Arab newspapers reveal a strong Arab nationalism and opposition to Zionist expansion. The population of Palestine in 1914 was about 690,000 (535,000 Muslims: 60,000 Christians, most of whom were Arabs; and 85,000 Jews). In World War I the Arabs supported the Allied powers against the Ottomans and afterwards sought statehood. However, in 1917 Britain, France and Russia internationalized Palestine and Arthur Balfour, the British secretary of state for foreign affairs, addressed a letter to Lord Rothschild expressing agreement for the establishment in Palestine of a national home for Jews. This is the “Balfour Declaration” which contained a sentence: “nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine.”

In 1920 the principal Allied Powers approved the Balfour Declaration whereby a part of Palestine was to be the national home for all Jews from throughout the world and Sir Herbert Samuel, a Zionist, was appointed high commissioner. He opened a land registry whereby unsophisticated and ignorant Palestinian farmers were short-changed. Twenty-three Arab villages and huge estates passed into Zionist hands. Later Winston Churchill, as Colonial Secretary, stated that His Majesty’s Government had no aim of creating a Jewish Palestine, just a Jewish Homeland. For twenty-six years Palestine was governed by Great Britain on a mandate from the League of Nations.

In February 1947 Great Britain dumped the problem on the United Nations who partitioned Palestine and in 1948 David Ben-Gurion proclaimed Israel to be an independent state.

There was no major Middle-East crisis before the onslaught of immigration sanctioned by Great Britain during its mandate. Since the 19th century both Zionists and Palestinian Arab nationalists have claimed the territory west of the Jordan River. However, it was the “Arab Revolt of 1936-39” that was the first sustained violent uprising by Palestinian Arabs in more than a century; and it has been worsening ever since.

The violence in Palestine plus US endeavors to force “democracy” throughout the Middle East, in order to safeguard our oil needs, has inflamed Islam and jeopardized not only US security but the security of much of the rest of the world.

Mearsheimer and Walt contend that the centerpiece of US Middle Eastern policy has been its support of Israel’s expanded illegal settlements on Palestinian territory which makes the US complicit in the crimes perpetrated against the Palestinians. For no good reason the United States has subsidized Israel from early on. Since 1973 Israel has received military and economic support of over $140 billion in US tax-payer’s funds. The Congress is for the most part composed of shallow persons not concerned about the philosophical aspects of their behavior as long as they get their money for reelection. They have also turned a blind eye to Israel’s acquisition of nuclear weapons. By adopting Israel as a favored nation we have antagonized the Muslim world and exacerbated our terrorist problem.

Actually Islam does not have a deep hatred for the US except for our continuing endeavors to westernize their customs. As for example in 1953 when the US supported the Shah of Iran’s forces and abetted the overthrow of Mosaddeq, the Premier. The Shah, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, who was brutally forcing western ways upon Iran was finally ousted in 1979 in a revolution led by Ruhollah Khomeini. America’s relations with Iran were at an all-time low and have not improved since. It was at this time that the American Embassy staff were held hostage. The US has had no diplomatic relations with Iran since then.

At present the Bush Administration, at the behest of Israel, considers Iran to be a threat to world peace, but more important, a threat to Israel and to our oil supply. This is because Iran appears to be interested in becoming a nuclear power like its neighbor Israel. Actually, Iran has waged no war of aggression for over a century unlike China and North Korea who are also are developing atomic weaponry. Iran’s president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has made noises about how Israel should be wiped off the face of the earth, which is more or less is the wish of most Muslim countries. He also has expressed concern at the US support of unrest by minority ethnic separatist groups who account for about half of the country’s 68 million population. Such covert activity has been acknowledged by the Pentagon as preparation for a possible preemptive strike on Iran’s nuclear facilities. The US again very openly seeks a regime change to one that is more in accord with our needs.

Backing Israel has complicated America’s relations with the Arab world as shown by the unmitigated hatred displayed by a large portion of occupied Iraq as well as Islam throughout the world. Israel is not of strategic value since their airbase facilities are not available to us, nor is it a loyal ally. According to the General Accounting Office Israel conducts the most aggressive espionage activities against the US of any ally.
Today Israel is the strongest military power in the Middle East.

With US backing Israel has become the dominant power in the region. Israeli settlements proliferated throughout the land, taking over the homes and farms that had been in Palestinian families for centuries. Whereas the Israelis were well armed with tanks and bulldozers, thanks to US taxpayers, the Palestinians only had stones and explosives for suicide attacks. The Israeli militia were provided with truncheons to break the arms of youths throwing stones.

Life magazine (September 29,1967) states that since the founding of Israel, two million Arabs have been displaced from Palestine to live in squalor in fifty-four refugee camps. It also states: “There can be no peace settlement between Israel and the Arab countries until the plight of the refugees has been solved.” Nearly 40 years later, the situation has only changed for the worse.

See also The Tragedy of Zionism by Bernard Avishai (1985), Arab and Jew by David K. Shipler (1986), and Baylis Thomas’ How Israel Was Won. A Concise History of the Arab-Israel Conflict (1999), A History of Modern Palestine; One Land, Two Peoplesby Ilan Pappe (2004).

Mearsheimer and Walt indicate that Palestinians resort to terrorism because they have no other way of fighting for their land. It should be remembered that in the twenties and thirties Zionists were also terrorists. (The Stern gang comes to mind.) Ehud Barak, former Israeli prime minister, once admitted, that had he been born a Palestinian, he ‘would have joined a terrorist organization’.

Critics of Israel are also accused of questioning Israel’s right to exist. This is a very good question indeed since the land was appropriated without Palestinian consent. However, most Zionists and Christian evangelicals actually believe that God promised the land to Abraham and his descendents some 3000 years ago (Gen. 12:7) to have forever. Those that do not really believe in such nonsense use it as an excuse for Israel’s expansionist behavior.

It continues to amaze me that so many people, not just Jews, believe that some three thousand years ago God promised the “holy land” to the Jews, his “chosen people”. To those who accept the Bible as the literal word of God, try reading “The Revelation” (John’s Vision of Christ) in the New Saint James Version of the Holy Bible. It is fantasy about dragons and beasts and rivers of blood and God with a sharp sword coming out of his mouth (Rev19:15). The “New Jerusalem” is described: her light like a precious stone and her construction of solid gold. It requires a lot of faith to believe such nonsense is the literal word of God and not just unintelligible metaphor, as is taught by Evangelicals like Jerry Falwell and his Liberty University. Even more amazing is its acceptance by over sixty percent of Americans including, not surprisingly, our obviously mentally impaired President.

Mearsheimer and Walt describe steps leading to our involvement in Iraq, which they suggest was at the behest of Israel, just as the Israel Lobby and Neoconservatives are currently advocating a surprise nuclear attack on Iran. This should never be an option, because as they point out neither Israel nor the US could be blackmailed by a neighbor of Israel having nuclear armament as the blackmailer could not carry out the threat without suffering overwhelming retaliation. The same holds true for other nations with nuclear weapons. Consider the fact that US has lived with a nuclear Soviet Union when we were bitter enemies since the mid-forties. Also Israel, China, India, Pakistan and North Korea have nuclear weaponry which we have learned to live with.

Mearsheimer and Walt assert: “Thanks to the Lobby, the United States has become the de facto enabler of Israeli expansion in the Occupied Territories, making it complicit in the crimes perpetrated against the Palestinians. This situation undercuts Washington’s efforts to promote democracy abroad and is hypocritical when it presses other states to respect human rights. US efforts to limit nuclear proliferation appear equally hypocritical given its willingness to accept Israel’s nuclear arsenal, which only encourages Iran and others to seek a similar capability”.

Ehud Olmert, the current Israeli prime minister, addressed a joint session of Congress on May 24th and spoke of a “dark and gathering storm casting its shadow over the world”, comparing Iran’s nuclear ambitions with slavery and the Soviet gulags. He described Iran as an existential threat. On numerous occasions he received standing ovations from our enthusiastic Congress.

The President talks with Jesus Christ and God, His Father. He eschews mainstream religion for fringe cults like that of Jerry Falwell or Pat Robertson. According to Ted Rall in The Progressive Populist (May 15-19,2006) Bush told the Palestinian prime minister in 2003 that “God told me to strike at al Qaeda and I struck them, then He told me to strike at Saddam, which I did, and now I am determined to solve the problem in the Middle East.” We should all pray that he doesn’t get a call from God to attack Iran!In two wars Bush has killed over 2500 American soldiers and untold thousands of Afghan and Iraqi civilians. Both nations are chaotic messes filled with sectarian hate and loathing for America. Amnesty International argues that Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld be tried as war criminals. I agree.

George w. Bush has created the largest deficit in history, ($7.5 trillion) and alienated most of the world’s nations. World terrorism has increased while Bush is simultaneously destroying our American Democracy in the name of “national security”!

America must wake up to the fact that President Bush is a ridiculous man who thinks God made him president to save us from our sinning and aborting ways, as well as to democratize and “set free” all the people in the world from the tyranny of their governments. Once an alcoholic, Episcopalian playboy he is now a moralistic born-again Christian of the Jerry Falwell or Pat Robertson variety. He is a creationist who advocates teaching school children “intelligent design”, a variant of creationism, alongside of evolution thus eroding the distinction between the two. In fact his administration seems to be thoroughly anti-science and threatens to undermine US leadership in science and technology.

Actually, it is no longer al Quaeda who poses the greatest threat to this country. It is George W. Bush and his administration!

Elizabeth Drew in The New York Review (June 22,2006) reveals how Bush has upset the balance of power among the three branches of government provided for in the Constitution. Laws made by Congress are supposed to be faithfully executed by the President. But by using a little known device called a “signing statement” Bush can unobserved, nullify any law or execute it as he sees fit. The signing statements are placed in the Federal Register which is rarely read.

This secret and contemptuous treatment of Congress came to light this year when he signed a bill containing the McCain amendment which places restrictions on the use of torture of prisoners. After signing the bill in the standard Rose Garden ritual, he later essentially cancelled it. As commander in chief he claims that he can do anything he wants, even to the barbaric torture of prisoners in arbitrary contravention of the civilized world’s code of behavior. It is no wonder that the world scorns our hypocritical concerns for civil rights. Use of this device explains why President Bush has no need for his veto power. We no longer have a government of checks and balances; we have a government of arbitrary rule by one man who converses with God, a King in deed, if not by name.

The seriousness of the situation becomes evident when it is realized that actually George W. Bush is a mere figurehead, a dummy like Charlie McCarthy. Cheney, Rumsfeld and a small cabal of Neoconservatives including Rove, Wolfowitz and Feith are the real power behind the throne. They are the dreamers of an American Empire and Iran is next on their list. (See Andrew Bacevich’s review of Cobra II: The Inside Story of the Invasion and Occupation of Iraq by Michael Gordon and Bernard Trainor in the London Review of Books. 8 June 2006)
Thanks to the very influential Israel Lobby (See separate commentary below) it appears that Iran is to be the target of our next liberating mission; it will be our prized trophy! Its central location and abundant untapped oil makes it invaluable for our global mission.

In a grim article in The New Yorker (April 17,2006) Seymour Hersh stated that a high-ranking diplomat told him that all systems are in place for a preemptive nuclear strike at Iran. The Bush Administration believes that only by controlling the hearts and minds of Iran can the real issue of who is going to control the Middle East and its oil be settled, of course necessitating more regime change. It would appear that the nuclear issue can be used in the same way that weapons of mass destruction (WMD) was used as an excuse to invade Iraq. Teams of American undercover combat troops are already in Iran collecting targeting data. Millitary planning is premised on the belief that a sustained bombing attack will cause the people to overthrow the government. and greet us as liberators as they were supposed to do in Iraq.

The International Atomic Energy Agency has confirmed that Iran is able to enrich uranium and perhaps to make a bomb within 5 – 10 years.
According to the Financial Times of May 1 2006, reports are emerging of US contingency planning to bomb Iran’s nuclear installations using nuclear bombs that can penetrate deep underground. The mullahs are delighted. Most Iranians support their country’s right to such technology. The paper indicates that Iran should reassure the world of its peaceful intentions and in turn US should guarantee that it would not attack.

A U.S. military strike would strengthen Iran’s determination to have nuclear capability; it would inflame the Middle East and the global Muslim population, crippling U.S. security, economic and strategic interests worldwide.

The Iranian President, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, has stated that Iran’s policy was working in the framework of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty and the International Atomic Energy Agency.

The disastrous consequences of Bush taking action against Iran include escalation of military action (with no troops available to escalate), oil pricing shocks, increased terrorism , worsening insurgency in Iraq, weakening of the Nonproliferation treaty, a stronger Ahmadinejad and increased international isolation. According to the National Academy of Sciences an atomic attack on Iran would incinerate more than a million civilians and create a cancer producing area larger than that of Chernoble.

On the other hand: according to political analysts an attack on Iran would head off the danger of a Democratic win in November and would offer Bush a way to head off impeachment when Congress becomes more Democratic in the 2006 elections.

In The New Republic (May 8, 2006) TRB asserts that the Hawks, who are for the U.S. making a preemptive strike on Iran, must show that if Iran gets a nuclear weapon it cannot be deterred from using it or transferring it to terrorists. “Where is the evidence that the mullahs seek martyrdom so fervently that they would risk the one thing that most regimes value above all else: survival?”

Actually, the Persians have not launched a war of aggression since the 16th century and there is no reason to believe Iran has aggressive intentions now. Only Israel will be upset at having her nuclear capabilities balanced. If Israel does not attack Iran there is no reason for Iran to attack Israel. In either case, both countries would be destroyed which they are well aware of. Most likely WWIII would ensue and planet Earth with its fauna and flora would be rendered unrecognizable
Iranians are not Arabs. They are Farsi-speaking Shiite Persians that have long been bitter enemies of Iraq. The population is relatively unified and nationalistic. Iran is about 4 times as large as Iraq and its territory just as rugged. It would be very stupid to start a ground war of aggression against Iran. The fact that they are developing nuclear capabilities is no indication that they are a threat to World peace. After all, Israel and Pakistan have atom bombs which they have not used. The Iranian people support their country’s right to both technology and deterrence. In view of Israel’s nuclear capability it is unreasonable that Iran cannot likewise have protection.

Matthew Rothschild in The Progressive (May 2006) states that Bush prefers military action to diplomacy. In March 2006 the Administration issued a new national security strategy which pinpoints Iran as being our most dangerous foe. Where is the evidence? The US at the behest of the Israel Lobby is making all the threatening noises. We have called upon Iran to renounce its nuclear program and open up its political system and afford freedom for its people. Unless Iran accedes to our wishes, the Administration claims it justification for a preemptive strike. What unmitigated gall!

Paul Craig Roberts in The American Conservative (May 8, 2006) states that the U.S. lacks sufficient conventional capability to prevail in any war it starts in Iran. He states further: “The Bush administration has committed America to a foreign policy that means years of wars and likely pre-emptive U.S. nuclear attacks against other countries.”

The Bush administration, with the support of both political parties, preaches democracy to the world while ignoring it at home. Roberts also points out that the primacy that the neoconservatives are seeking over the world will prevail over American people as well.

WESTERN CIVILISATION is undergoing deep changes. Having a soul and believing in God is no longer of central importance. What is important is personal responsibility. Optimism and belief in human goodness are essential to building a better world. Because superstition and mumbo-jumbo abound, we must not give up our trust in rationality and science. In order to meet the future it is essential to avert ecological suicide and learn to live with fewer finite resources. If we do not require truly responsible individualism from our leaders and ourselves civilization is doomed. The greatest threat to society is the decline in “liberalism” and the increased power of the neoconservative movement.

It is worrisome that so few people are interested in the less explicable aspects of their consciousness, their experienced outward world and their introspective selves. In Scientific American - Mind (April-May 2006) an article by Eric R. Kandel, a professor at Columbia University, entitled “The New Science of Mind” brings up-to-date the study of the molecular mechanisms that are responsible for our mental life, he points out that they are the same as those that regulate life’s other various processes. He also indicates that most of our mental life is unconscious and that eventually there will be a field of molecular sociology. The philosophical implications of such reductionism are profound. My book: Cascading Universe, was an endeavor to introduce a reductionist and rational society which I believe is necessary for our survival.* Such a thesis is further supported by the recently published report on Gerald ‘t Hooft of Utrecht University. (‘t Hooft was awarded the Nobel prize in physics in 1999 for laying the mathematical foundations for the standard model of particle physics.) (See article in New Scientist, 6 May 2006 by Zeeya Merali). His particles represent a deeper layer of reality than currently accepted quanta and behave predictably according to deterministic laws. Mathematicians John Conway and Simon Kochen, both of Princeton University, state that if ‘t Hooft’s theory is right there would be no way for us to have free-will.

*As I have indicated elsewhere our destiny was foreordained at creation. Humans have an illusion of decision making. (See reference to John Searle in Worthingtonism commentary). Truth is a matter of resonance. When an incoming stimulus resonates with one’s current neural network, the new input is “true”; if there is dissonance the input would be sensed as false. In both cases the “assessment” is the biological you.

Philip Shaw and colleagues at the National Institute of Mental Health have shown that in children of high intelligence the outer layer of the brain thickens more rapidly during childhood, peaking at age 11 – 12 and then thinning during adolescence. They report that “distinctive brain growth in superior-IQ children reflects prolonged development of neural circuits that contribute to reasoning, planning and other facets of analytical thinking.” (Science News, April 1 2006).
Past studies have shown that genes, and thus inheritance, influence brain structure and general intelligence. Unfortunately such thinking is “politically incorrect”. An article in The Wall Street Journal (June 16, 2006) describes the trouble caused by a lecture by Dr. Bruce Lahn, a professor of human genetics at the University of Chicago, Dr. Lahn reported finding signs of recent evolution in some people linking brain size and intelligence but not in sub-Saharan Africa. The resulting brouhaha has caused Dr. Lahn to give up the research.

Pilar Ossorio, professor of law and medical ethics at the University of Wisconsin criticized Dr. Lahn’s conclusions as supporting the controversial The Bell Curve by Richard J. Herrnstein and Charles Murray published in 1994. Ossorio’s endeavor to stop “racism” by ignoring the facts is stupid. All humans are different. Some are more different than others. It is time to stop trying to hide our mediocrity and call a spade a spade!

It is very evident that Americans are becoming increasingly anti-intellectual. Eighty percent of the U.S. population believes in Biblical mythology. Furthermore, we have a simpleton president who claims to have taken his orders from God (not Cheney, as some have suggested) to start a war of aggression on what he called an evil empire. Undoubtedly Saddam was an evil man but he was not our problem. By utter stupidity, the US, lead by a mentally incompetent and morally impaired Administration has caused untold misery throughout this country and Iraq. I just hope that God doesn’t order Bush to attack Iran, another Mideastern Country that would probably be happy to establish trading relations with us if we would refrain from interfering in their affairs.

However, according to a number of insiders in the Bush White House a preemptive strike at Iran’s nuclear facilities has a very good chance of happening. Seymour Hersh’s article in The New Yorker (April 17, 2006) is very discouraging. Bush considers Iran’s President, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, to be a potential Adolf Hitler. The President talks about diplomacy, but knowing how bold a liar Bush has proven to be, such talk is meaningless. As a Messianic leader, Bush feels he should tackle satanic empires. Iran is his current target. A nuclear war with an unimaginably dreadful outcome perhaps encompassing the whole world is in the offing.

The Wall Street Journal of April 21 points out the seriousness of the current situation and indicates that sanctions would be futile. They recommend that the Administration have a candid discussion with Congress and explain to the public what is at stake. Unfortunately that is not the President’s way; his way is to have a discussion with God (and perhaps Karl Rove). Bush himself is of course the “decider.”

Another factor to be considered is Israel. In the Islamic world, Israel and the U.S. are usually considered a single enemy. Although we consider ourselves fair-minded and with a keen sense of justice, we have whole-heartedly supported Israel’s immoral usurpation of Palestinian land and their shabby treatment of the Palestinian people who have been driven from their homes into refugee camps. By providing moral support and billions of dollars for arms and nuclear bomb facilities ( the same type of facilities that we are likely to go to war with Iran to prevent),. it is no wonder that Muslims see us as hypocrites and an enemy. See the “Israel Lobby” a part of this commentary which explains how President Bush and the Congress are completely held in thrall by wealthy Jewish lobbies.

It may seem odd that politics are brought forth in a commentary on neuroscience. But it isn’t really odd. Politics reflects a neurological activity (or corruption thereof) of human societies.

Neural activity manifests itself as our egos and creates the illusion that we view the world objectively and so can marvel at the wonders of nature and our mendacious President. With our expanding knowledge of the universe and its fundamental mathematical equations we are becoming better able to appreciate its intricate dynamic structure as a mass of seething energy particles. These molecules are responsible for the beauty of the setting sun, the oceans and rainbows and the complex group of integrated biochemicals that constitute our bodies. Actually our only visual contact with the world is via bits of energized photons impinging on retinas; these create in the brain images of a world unique to each individual. Similarly, taste, smell sound and sense of feeling are also due to patterns of electromagnetic activity in neural networks which give rise to our persona of the instant.

Watch an ant walking across the floor. Does it know where its going? Not hardly! But its leg motion is a result of biochemical activity just as yours is, both activities resulting from a cascade of subatomic particle reactions that began about fourteen billion years ago.

Probably you are cognizant of where you walk but only because of a more complex neural system which manifests itself as a stream of consciousness. Cognition is defined as perception or awareness. YOU ARE THAT AWARENESS!

There is no way of avoiding reductionism without assuming some unknown force as yet undetected. The concept of “emergence” is not the answer.

Two papers in Nature Reviews – Neuroscience (April 2006, vol.7 #4) lend support to my reductionist theme of personhood and behavior; which is essentially that “we are our thoughts”; a view that was taught to me in psychology 101 at the University of Virginia in 1933 and has been reiterated in all my writing ever since. No scientific training is necessary to realize its truth, just introspection.

Reductionism is a product of the human quest for understanding the universe by accumulated empirical data gathered by observations of nature which are available to all normal neural systems throughout the world; it differs from religion which is based upon faith. FAITH HAS BEEN DEFINED AS BELIEF IN THE OBVIOUSLY IMPOSSIBLE!

(My reductionist theory is developed in depth in the “Worthingtonism” commentary in this website and also in my book: Cascading Universe.)

In “Neuroscience and legal determination of criminal responsibility” by Nigel Eastman and Colin Campbell (pgs 311-31 the authors are concerned about the proper exercise of justice and treatment of civil liberties in light of recently identified areas of the brain corresponding to violent behavior that are observed by non-invasive functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI) studies. In no way should the mere presence of such foci be the basis for assigning responsibility for criminal acts by the courts or be a basis for preventive detention in the interest of public welfare.

However, since crime is becoming more evident with increasing population density some steps must be taken in order that most of us can live in a libertarian world without fear of interpersonal violence and knowing that our property is secure.

As the authors point out, law is ultimately pragmatic and pursues an abstract idea of justice. Although science interests itself in real, measurable phenomena, the courts are unlikely to accept evidence of association of violence with biological variables; nor should they. It is essential that there be unequivocal proof of a crime committed by a certain individual prior to justice being meted out. Retribution should be based upon protecting society from further crime and not upon revenge or punishment. We should not forget that we are but integrated bundles of particle activity that flows on and on. It behooves us to safe-guard our selves by humanely disposing of criminals as we do rabid animals. Storing either in cages is not the answer.

In “Meeting of minds: the medial frontal cortex and social cognition” (pgs 268-277), David M. Amodio and Chris D. Frith report on studies of the relationship between the brain and the social mind using non-invasive neuroimaging methods such as functional MRI. They indicate that neuroscientists have found neural structures that support various aspects of social cognition and endeavor to integrate neuroscience and social psychology.

It has been found that the area of the brain called the medial frontal cortex (MFC) is closely related to social cognition. In human studies, functional divisions have been determined for various tasks that activate frontal regions for which they hypothesize a systematic map. There is a region that seems to be concerned with determining future behavior. The most frontal region of the MFC enables us to think about thinking, reflect upon values linked to outcomes and actions. (There are 136 references cited for those readers interested in pursuing this subject).

WORTHINGTONISM promotes a rational, deterministic, atheist society in a particulate universe based upon current empirical neurological findings. It is a reductionist concept that posits we are essentially bundles of atoms, molecules and forces and that we are connected with ambient surroundings only electromagnetically at sensory nerve endings in skin, retina, mouth, nose, ears and soma. The concept of of an integrated living earth was introduced by James Lovelock. He called it Gaia, the ancient Greek name for the Earth Goddess. A “living” Earth is a very appropriate term, since Earth, just as man and his brain and also flora, fauna, rocks, water and atmosphere, consist only of active particles in constant motion. This activity was determined by the expenditure of energy that burst forth at the Big Bang. Thus, reactions of atoms and molecules in the brain and throughout the universe are constrained by the natural laws of thermodynamics.

Human behavior and thought are manifestations of biochemical activity in the brain. Neurons are essentially electrophysiological units, their voltage flow being caused by the traveling passage of sodium and potassium ions passing through the cell membrane. See Hodgkin and Huxley’s study of the neural dynamics of the squid (1952).

Human contact with another object therefore amounts to stimulation of neural dendrites, say in the fingers. These cause electric charges to pass up through neurons into the brain. Countless numbers of parallel stimuli form a pattern which the brain processes into the felt object. It might be noted here that our conscious world is one of neural patterns.

Consciousness, or thought, is a continuous manifestation in the brain which computes about 200 transactions per second using transynaptic agents such as serotonin; thus our perceptions are a steady stream of instantaneous events, which like a movie, appears to be a seamless scenario: our lives. According to Ray Kurzweil and Terry Grossman in Fantastic Voyage, (pg.14), the brain as a computer is about one million times slower than today’s electronic circuits. – More on this later. As Alison Gopnik, Professor of Psychology at the University of California at Berkeley, has stated in an essay in The Next Fifty Years, (2002) John Brockman, ed., “After all, the only information that reaches us directly from the world is a pattern of infinitesimal photons hitting our retinas and disturbances of air vibrating at our eardrums.”

The brain is a self-organizing integrated unit with about one hundred trillion interneural connections. One’s personality is an emergent property of its complex activity.

The above brief summary of neural activity gibes with current neuroscientific thought. The question of free-will usually trumps determinism. In Minds, Brains and Science, 1984, John Searle, Professor of Philosophy at the University of California, Berkley, deals with free will in Chapter 6: Since nature consists of particles and their relation to each other, and since everything can be accounted for in terms of these particles, there is simply no room for freedom of will. Indeterminism, at the level of particles in physics, gives no support at all for any doctrine of freedom of will; because the ostensible statistical indeterminacy at the level of particles does not show any indeterminacy at the level of objects that matter to us – human bodies, for example.

Searle further indicates that evolution has given us a form of experience of voluntary action where the sense of alternative possibilities is built into the very structure of conscious, voluntary, intentional human behavior. He believes that man will never be convinced that behavior is not by choice; that free-will is an illusion.

The reader may ask: If free-will is an illusion and our fate was determined 15 billion years ago why worry about the future, or anything else? Because our behavior includes worries about the future, our hopes, dreams, endeavors and failures, even a minor finger twitch is foreordained just like the activity of every particle of the universe. Its constituent energy – particles and forces – are governed by their innate –“natural”- laws. There has been no evidence of any intervention by a supernatural power or God, much less a loving God who cherishes humans as His children! Just note the natural calamities that are afflicting the world these days; or are they punishment by a vengeful God for our sinful behavior as Pat Robertson claims?

Thus, it is my fate to continue to write this essay as it was the reader’s to get this far. Incidentally, one hears philosophers and ethicists lament the sterility of atheistic determinism. Let them speak for themselves; I have been an atheist since before college and have found it very satisfying – far better than trying to reconcile the impossible with reality.
_______________________

Man’s reliance upon religious mythology to provide spiritual and moral guidance is obviously unsatisfactory. Throughout all of human history the more aggressive, stronger and slyer men have become tribal leaders and prophets who claimed intimacy with God and took unto themselves royal prerogatives such as levying taxes, determining moral standards and coercing the people to fight for them, flag and country. These powerful men actually did shape mankind’s history. They are now represented in the United States by such types as President Bush, his cabinet, congress, fundamentalist evangelicals, and the Mormon hierarchy; foolish men all!

The problem with sincere, naive believers in the God of all religions, is that they fail to realize that all cerebral animals are governed by four dominant drives: for food, sex, shelter and most important of all, “peer recognition”; this latter drive accounts for the alpha male syndrome, top dogs in the financial world, urban gang leaders, government war mongering “statesmen”, the Pope and other prominent men of God. The Church, rather than devoting its efforts to community welfare problems and worthwhile “good works”, wastes its time preaching mythology and endeavoring to brain-wash simpletons into belief and behavior according to the Gospels, Torah, Koran or some other “sacred” text. The benighted clergy believe that saving men’s imaginary souls is more important! In view of the fact that unfortunately, practically all humanity adheres to some form of religion, no matter how stupid, there is no point in belaboring it.

It should be noted that despite thousands of years of religious indoctrination and codes of ethics, civilized man for the most part still lies, cheats, steals and commits bloody mayhem when it is to his interest. There is absolutely no evidence of an increase in morality in all of recorded history. Most people just do not take their spiritual selves very seriously except by hating (scorning, at any rate) persons of a different belief.

What amazes me is the vast number of ostensibly intelligent, educated persons who still accept the Bible verbatim. It is as if they claimed black is white or 2+2 = 5. Like the ignoramuses who believe in creationism or intelligent design, they are afflicted with warped neural networks. Those endeavoring to promote such anti-science nonsense are undoubtedly in it for whatever financial rewards may be forthcoming as well as for publicity. Peer recognition, remember?

In fact humanity has few interests that are not self-serving. It must be realized that human life is dependent upon utilizing environmental resources, renewable or not. Environmentalists may lessen air and water pollution but controlling the climate is, I think, beyond man’s ability. In any event, the evolution of Earth will continue as scheduled!

According to futurists, the outlook is not all bleak: nanotechnology is becoming one of the most important developments of this century. Though a problem for some who reject any new ideas, it offers humanity its best bet for survival. Bioconservatives such as Leon Kass and Francis Fukuyama, members of the President’s Council on Bioethics as well many other confused people on both the right and left, fear any biotechnology that might improve the human condition and threatens their devoutly held ideas of proper human behavior and undermine community control. According to Ronald Bailey,(pg.1 Kass warns against “a utopian project to achieve ‘nothing less than a painless, suffering-free, and, immortal existence.’”!

Nanotechnology relates to the engineering of devices at the atomic and molecular level. It was made possible by the invention of the scanning tunneling microscope, for which Heinrich Rohrer and Gerd K. Binnig received the Nobel Prize in Physics in 1986. There is also an atomic force microscope that can be used to move nanoparticles around on surfaces and create patterns. A nanometer is one billionth of a meter; about the width of a few hydrogen atoms.

Scientists have found that in small clusters, atoms and molecules have different properties. Nanotechnology exploits these differences. When two or three atoms of carbon or iron, for example, are joined they form nanoparticles with electrons on the outer surface; thus they can form bonds to other molecules such as antibodies. For more on their use as diagnostic and therapeutic agents see Weissleder et al “Cell-specific targeting of nanoparticles by multivalent attachment of small molecules” Nature Biotechnology, 23, 1418, Nov. 2005.

“The Coming Era of Nanotechnology” , the subtitle of K. Eric Drexler’s Engines of Creation. (1990) is recommended for an overview for the coming revolutionary technology and its potential dangers. It has already been reported that targeting cancer cells with specific anti-tumor molecules by injected nanobots into the circulating blood stream has been successful. Nanobots, or nanoparticles, are small clusters of atoms small enough to penetrate the membrane protecting the brain from foreign bodies. Their active surface readily attracts therapeutic molecules. Such a procedure using superoxide dismutase might be practical for ridding the body of free-radicals that are thought to be responsible for aging. The book, Understanding Nanothechnology by the editors of Scientific American (2002) presents a review of the foreseeable limits of nanotechnology, which, though awesome, are somewhat more conservative than those of the futurists who predict a future of overwhelming technology based upon the continued operation of Moore’s law which has been evident for four or five decades.

Kurzweil and Grossman’s : Fantastic Voyage suggests that humans may eventually redesign and rebuild, their bodies and brains molecule by molecule, thus reversing aging. Nanotechnology has many other far-out uses. Solar energy will amply supply, at practically no cost, all the energy required by our advanced society. There will be no sickness and human embryos will be designed and incubated in vitro. Life will be truly idyllic.

“Moore’s law”, which provides the basis for the wild dreams of the future, was formulated by Gordon Moore in 1965. It states that computational capacities of integrated circuits on “chips” double every two or three years. The increased speed of computer circuitry is due to the reduced distance between components thus an electric current, which is the flow of electrons, has less distance to travel and so is therefore faster. This trend has remained valid for some forty years. According to deGaris (The Artilect War,) if the trend continues until 2020 it will be possible to store a single bit of information on a single molecule and quantum computing will be possible. (A “bit” is a binary digit, a 0 or a 1 that is used to represent numbers and symbols in computer calculations.) Thus during this century computers will have a capacity trillions of trillions of times above our current ones.

LIKE THE ACCELERATED PACE OF EVOLUTION, IT IS EVIDENT THAT TECHNOLOGY DOES GROW EXPONENTIALLY.

THE SINGULARITY

The futurist, Ray Kurzweil has recently proclaimed in a new book that a “singularity” is almost upon us. The Singularity Is Near (2005) with a subtitle “When Humans Transcend Biology”. (A singularity is defined as a unique happening. The Big Bang was a singularity.)

Kurzweil’s singularity is a future period during which the pace of technological change will be so rapid that human life will be irreversibly transformed. He bases his prediction on the law of accelerating returns. Information technologies will continue to expand exponentially (Expansion by repeatedly multiplying by a constant as opposed to linear expansion of adding a constant.) He indicates that there is a doubling of the paradigm shift every ten or so years. (A paradigm shift is a major change in accomplishing a task.) As an example he believes that we will not achieve 100 years of progress during this century; it will be more on the order of 20,000 years of technical advance.

Looking ahead several decades there will be a merger of the vast knowledge embedded in our brain along with vastly greater capacity, speed, and knowledge-sharing ability of our technology. He suggests that most of the intelligence of our civilization will ultimately be nonbiological but derived from biological design. We will remain human but with understanding far beyond what we consider human today. It will be a time when greater-human-knowledge drives progress.

Kurzweil states (pg.194) that in the decades ahead we will be able to interface our brain with a computer and that the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency is spending $24 million per year to investigate such interfacing.In addition, the Max Planck Institute for Human Cognitive and Brain Sciences in Munich are already interfacing nerves with electronic devices. “As the computational power to emulate the human brain approaches – we’re almost there with superconductors – the efforts to scan and sense the human brain and to build working models and simulations of it are accelerating.”(pg.196). Machines will process and switch signals at close to the speed of light (about 300 million meters per second), compared to about 100 meters per second for electrochemical signaling in biological brains.

Between 2030 and 2040 nonbiological intelligence will predominate. In our brains, nanobots will interact with biological neurons enabling full-immersion virtual reality incorporating all the senses.
Machines will have access via the internet to all the knowledge of our human-machine civilization.

Any serious assessment of the history of technology reveals that technological change is exponential. Using this evidence, Kurzweil leaves this planet and projects humanity’s brain-power to the distant regions of the universe! (pg. 364)

Another futurist who builds “artificial brains” is Hugo de Garis. His book, also about the consequences of Moore’s law is as fanciful about the future as Kurzweil’s. He indicates that with new neuroscientific knowledge and nanotech tools, along with quantum computing, it will be possible to build intelligent, conscious machines which he labels: “artilects” (artificial intellects). On page 193 de Garis says that although artilectual progress will be exponential it will take many decades to create true artificial intelligence. “Terrans”, bioconservative opponents of artilects, (as opposed to “cosmists” who are proartilect), feel that artilects are potentially too dangerous to be built. However, according to de Garis they will probably not get worried until they see real intelligence in their household appliances. De Garis expects the conflict to heat up in the 21st century and that our children will be involved. Artilects with their superior intelligence might easily exterminate the human species thus ending another interval in the history of the universe – the extinction of homo sapiens!

REFERENCES

Bailey, Ronald, Liberation Biology 2005, Prometheus Books, Amherst, New York.

Brockman, John, ed. The Next Fifty years, 2002, Random House, New York.

de Garis, Hugo, The Artilect War, 2005, ETC Publications, Palm Springs, California.

Drexler, K. Eric, Engines of Creation, 1990, Anchor Books, New York.

Kurzweil, Ray, The Age Of Spiritual Machines, 1999. Penguin Books, New York.

Kurzweil, Ray, The Singularity Is Near, 2005, Viking, New York.

Kurzweil, Ray, vs the Critics of Strong A.I., Are We Spiritual Machines? 2002, Discovery Institute, Seattle, Washington.

Scientific American, Editors: Understanding Nanotechnology (2002) Warner Books, New York.

Searle, John, Minds, Brains and Science, 1984, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Mass.

Addendum

A review article by Gabriel A. Silva entitled: “Neuroscience nanotechnology: progress, opportunities and challenges” in Nature Reviews/Neuroscience, 7, 65 –74, January 2006, is recommended for readers interested in more information on nanotechnology.

Charles C. Worthington, 18 January 20

PREFACE: Worthington’s World is libertarian. I believe that people should be free autonomous directors of their own lives, constrained only by laws of a duly elected libertarian government.
_______________

George W. Bush, formerly a heavy drinking carouser who once publicly called Al Hunt, Washington bureau chief for the Wall St. Journal, who was dining with his wife, television correspondent Judy Woodruff and their four-year-old son in a Dallas Mexican restaurant “a no good fucking son of a bitch” (Christopher Andersen’s George and Laura: Portrait of an American Marriage, (Pg. 142), 2002, Harper Collins, N.Y.), was called upon by God to be President.

The redeemed sinner now speaks the language of the evangelicals. Under God’s guidance he has created much misery for the country: not only by enmeshing us in a foolish and wholly unnecessary war of aggression and stirring up a hornet’s nest of terrorists, but also by some of his outrageous political ploys. His inflated self-confidence in his own hunches that he believes come from God, has resulted in unrestrained spending while lowering taxes for the wealthy. These policies will eventually come home to roost. Of course, since Bush believes the Bible to be literally true, perhaps he knows that Christ will return before then.

More recently, according to the Associated Press, he is asking God to guide him in repairing the damage done by Katrina. Since Katrina was part of God’s intelligent design, it seems unlikely that God will get involved. As catastrophes go, Katrina was trivial compared to the Bush administration. This disaster has led to thousands of deaths and destroyed lives, hardly a trivial event. It would appear that the “intelligent” designer must have had some bad days! In any event it is inexplicable why the American public would elect such a stupid man to be President.

The scariest situation which puts the whole world at risk of a nuclear melt-down, is that vice president Cheney’s office requested that the United States Strategic Command (STRATCOM) plan for a massive nuclear air assault on Iran in event of another 9/11-type terrorist attack on the U.S. Note the sentence: “As in the case of Iraq, the response is not conditional on Iran being actually involved in the act of terrorism directed against the United States.” (The above is from an article by Robert C. Koehler in Liberal Opinion Week, Sept. 14, 2005, taken from the Aug 1 issue of The American Conservative)

Our war on terrorism is actually a war on Islamic martyrs; Muslims willing to die for Allah as the early Christians were willing to die for their God. Palestinian suicide bombers sacrifice themselves for Islamic Palestine as did Saint Joan of Arc who believed that that she was divinely inspired to defend France against the English. Though victorious she was later burned at the stake for witchcraft.Fundamentalist religious fervor, whether Christian or Islamic, or whatever, is firmly embedded in humanity’s neural network (singular) and cannot be dealt with militarily as history has shown and we are finding out in Iraq.

The primary reason why Muslims feel set upon by the West and U.S. in particular is because of our staunch support of Israel’s aggressive take-over of Palestine which is geographically an integral part of the Islamic world. This hypothesis is borne out by the lack of terrorist attacks prior to 1947 at which time the United Nations indicated that Jews should have a homeland in Palestine.

In the world-wide neural network that encompasses all cerebral organisms, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is like a festering boil which will continue to spread to the West as the U.S. continues to whole-heartedly support Israel in spite of the dangers of foreign entanglements that were recognized by our Founding Fathers.

I have previously presented widely accepted scientific evidence* indicating that humans and all living organisms are molecular aggregates interacting with other components of the surrounding biosphere in which we are imbedded.

Individualism necessarily follows my belief that every living organism is a world unto itself. The life of all animals, (humans are certainly animals) constitutes a stream of biochemical reactions to ambient stimuli. From a rational point of view, as I explain in Cascading Universe?, it could not be otherwise. Thus all values are self-centered and each is responsible for their own behavior. One of society’s problems is making people realize that each is responsible for his/her actions and holding them to it.
Radical individualism could never take hold given our feeblemindedness as indicated by the widespread belief in God, not as an unknown force that set off the Big Bang, but a father-figure to whom one turns for help and forgiveness; not just here in the West but throughout the world. The intensity of belief in Allah by Muslims has resulted in much savage warfare.
God, if there is one, certainly is not the loving heavenly father proclaimed in Christian doctrine. This is evidenced by wars, plagues and the overall unhappy, poverty-stricken state of the world with its natural and man-made calamities, such as racial cleansing and tsumanies, that wipe out millions of innocent people. It might be noted here that according to my doctrine every feature and activity in the universe is due to the nature of the particles of energy of which it is composed. For further insight see Cascading Universe*.

ADDENDUM

In view of the catastrophic anti-American decision of the Supreme Court (23 June ’05) to allow a government to confiscate private property I would suggest that the Connecticut Minutemen, organized at the behest of the Continental Congress on 18 July 1775 to fight tyranny, be mobilized to defend the private property that the City of New London Plans to seize.

The recent overwhelming tsumani in southwest Asia and its horrendous aftermath have once again showed the insignificance of humanity as an integral part of the universe. Why has our Heavenly Father allowed such an evil catastrophe to happen? Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson and other charlatans on the televangelist circuit will probably attribute it to an act of a vengeful God to punish all those Asian Muslims and pagans who do not believe in Jesus, as an afterthought, the sinning vacationers in Phuket were also struck down.Actually this disaster appears to be a result of tectonic plate movement beneath the ocean floor, a process initiated during Earth’s formation following the Big Bang.

      Earth’s outer crust, the lithosphere, as distinguished
     from the hydrosphere and atmosphere, consists of several large
     plates that are slowly moving around, independently of each
     other. They are responsible for continental drift. When they
     collide, seismic and volcanic activity are likely to occur.

Some years ago James Lovelock declared that Earth is a self-contained living organism. (The Ages of Gaia by James Lovelock, 1988, W.W.Norton & Co. New York). Accordingly, the recent S. Asian catastrophe could appear as a natural growing pain in aging Earth. The Gaia theory has not been accepted; however, recent discoveries of elegant natural cycles such as the “plankton effect”, wherein tiny organisms in the oceans release vast quantities of organic material into the air which in turn affects the amount of sunlight bounced back into space and thus the surface temperature, lend support to the Gaia concept.

The reductionist thesis outlined in my book: Cascading Universe, The Integration of Science and Religion by Charles C. Worthington, 2004, Dorrance Publishing Co., Pittsburgh, PA 15222, also would attribute the tsumani, like the Holocaust, the war in Iraq, Israeli incursion into Palestine and other catastrophes to natural causes rather than a curse invoked by an avenging god.

In my materialist world, life originated during the early universe when it was a seething mass of energy particles and atoms. Stable aggregations of atoms formed replicating molecules (RNA and DNA). These gave rise to populations of biochemical aggregates of various forms and configurations. The more stable of these persisted and formed larger aggregates which now constitute the biota which covers Earth and of which humanity is only a small fraction.

The interesting thing about Homo sapiens is his neural development. Humans everywhere have the illusion that they are capable of independent thought, intentionality, and to a limited extent, of communicating with fellow beings and of altering the physical environment to suit themselves. The answer to the “Mind-Body Problem” according to John Searle is: “Mental phenomena are caused by neurophysiological processes in the brain and are themselves features of the brain.” (The Rediscovery of the Mind by John R. Searle, 1992, The MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass.). Granted, philosophically this is solipsistic, but acceptance of the elegant ever expanding edifice of scientific knowledge is mightily satisfying.

Thus far President Bush is responsible for over 1300 U.S. soldiers killed and in excess of 10,000 wounded. He absurdly claims that they are bravely dying for their country. What twaddle! They are fighting for Bush’s ego and the Neoconservative drive for empire.To really believe that poor, trade-embargoed Iraq with its tin-horn dictator would attack the United States is idiotic. To use 9/11 as an excuse for war with Iraq, which our silly President does, is immoral. He declared war on terrorism but has done nothing to stem its roots.

Yes, he has probably heightened our national security but the hate directed toward us by the Muslim world is unabated and it will remain so until we stop supporting Israeli expropriation of Palestinian territory.

IS SUPPORTING ISRAELI AGGRESSION REALLY WORTH THE LIVES OF OUR SERVICE MEN AND WOMEN?

The United States incursion into Iraq is a prime example of the Machiavellian neoconservative doctrine: a foreign policy directed toward world dominance based upon a unilateral preemptive use of force without regard for diplomacy and multilateral organizations. Actually our chance to establish a “Pax Americana” was in 1945 when we alone had nuclear capability. However, we are not a war-like nation and sought world peace in the United Nations which neoconservatives disdain. Perhaps we were naïve and hoped for too much. At least it gave the international community a forum to air problems and endeavor to keep peace. Its sanctions kept Saddam Hussein at bay for twelve years and certainly prevented him from being a threat.President Bush is intellectually mediocre. From the beginning of his presidency, according to ex-staff personnel, he was angling for an excuse to go to war with Iraq. He had early on surrounded himself with Machiavellian neoconservatives and after 9/11, with international acquiescence, went after terrorists in Afghanistan where the al-Qaeda terrorist network was supposed to be headquartered. But as Rumsfeld said, Afghanistan, had no good bombing targets. So the war on terrorism turned into a war on Iraq to the consternation of all our major allies except Great Britain. Although ostensibly we are fighting to establish an Iraqi democracy, we are actually fighting to get a U.S. foothold in Arabia to enthrall the nation and control their valuable oil resources. Our original target, terrorists, are still active as indicated by the heightened danger alert today (2 Aug.) for downtown N.Y. and Washington, D.C.

Neoconservatism is amoral. It is also an excellent example of man’s inborn hunger for recognition and power. As I indicate in Cascading Universe.* this is a genetic trait in all cerebral animals, a product of Darwinian evolution. The concept of right and wrong plays a very limited, illusory role in basic physiological drives. Michael Ledeen in Machiavelli on Modern Leadership states that the bloody-mindedness of world leaders and would-be leaders –“derives from ambition and human ambition is unlimited, both that of individuals and the institutions they create.” Ledeen, still following Machiavelli in The War Against the Terror Masters, extols leadership and stresses the importance of winning. He praises “Creative destruction — both within our own society and abroad.”

The Neo-con’s American Empire can never come to pass because U.S. citizens are not interested in sending their youth to die in a war of outright aggression when there is no apparent threat. In former times, forceful leaders, kings, emperors or dictators seeking glory were able to assemble armies to extend boundaries and enhance national pride. In those days people were more easily made to serve because they were under the thumb of a government that stressed “patriotism” above intellectual development and a citizen’s well-being and his striving for a better life. Today people are more educated and independent. In the U.S. government is supposed to serve the people, not the people serve the government. As I stress in Cascading Universe, each individual is a world unto himself; civilizations are merely interacting, commingling aggregates of the atoms that constitute man.

Society is a product of personal interactions of constantly changing neural networks of individual brains; thus human affairs are never static. The increase of population and the accompanying broader knowledge add to the complexities of interpersonal relationships and make possible a greater realization of oneself as an individual rather than just as a pawn of the state. At present, with a more catholic and educated population, the call to arms necessary for a militant, unilateral and forceful promotion of American democracy throughout the world with no imminent threat is doomed to fail. Even in Iraq where American prestige is at stake the war became very unpopular when it became apparent that our aggression was wholly unnecessary and started primarily to satisfy Bush’s desire to be a “war president” as well as his desire to initiate the first step in the Neoconservative drive for U.S. world hegemony. In fact, there is considerable popular support for curtailing the useless killing of our soldiers and calling it quits.

It is hard to imagine how our government, knowing what they did, could order military reservists, hardworking American volunteers to give up their families and livelihood to war against a small insignificant nation that presented no threat to us. It is evident that we were blindsided by conniving neo-conservatives embedded in the present administration, taking advantage of the horrendous 9/11 attack to further their own aims.

Leo Strauss, a German Jewish émigré and a professor at the University of Chicago until his death in 1973, provided the intellectual support for neoconservatism. He preached that religion is the opium of the people and that those in power (like President Bush et al) should invent noble lies and pious frauds when necessary to keep the people enthralled.

The neoconservative movement was initiated by Irving Kristol in the late 1960s. Kristol, a New York Jewish intellectual was originally a Trotskyite who later switched to the right.

Neoconservatives are empire builders who scorn social science as being anti-business and left-wing. Hard science is also shunted aside when it conflicts with big business, particularly with respect to water and air pollution, saving the forestland, and global warming. Bush staunchly supports far-right religious doctrine as his opposition to stem-cell research and abortion would suggest. Neoconservatives whole-heartedly support Israel, not only as a Jewish homeland but as an important ally in the Near East.

Essentially, neocons believe that the United States should use its dominant power to unilaterally promote its values throughout the world. They are deeply immersed in the current Bush administration as the following roster indicates:

Vice President Richard Cheney
The vice president’s Chief of Staff, Lewis “Scooter” Libby
Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld
Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz
Undersecretary of Defense Douglas J. Feith
Undersecretary of State John R. Bolton
National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice
National Security Council Senior Director Elliot Abrams
Key Advisor Richard Perle

Also: Richard Armitage, Paul Bremer, Donald Kagan, Zalmey Khalilzad, William Kristol, Michael Ledeen, Bernard Lewis, Martin Peretz, Peter Rodman, Leon Wieseltrier, David Wurmser, Dov Zakheim, and many others.

The Neo-conservative network includes The American Enterprise Institute, The Heritage Foundation, The Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs, Center for Security Policy, Hudson Institute and the Project for the New American Century.

They consider the Middle East to be a region of great importance to us because of its energy resources; and Israel, a vital interest. The Palestinians are considered to be of no account and can be justifiably enclosed in a little state under the control of Israel.

The Neo-conservatives envisage American power throughout the world, advocating the use of force as an end in itself.

—————–

Tyrannical Arabian theocracies will eventually succumb to more democratic societies as their citizens become more sophisticated and come to realize how down-trodden they are. New, less repressive social ideas will eventually take hold as they did in Europe several hundred years ago.

With regard to the present situation wherein Bush has bamboozled the public to support a war of aggression into Iraq, it should be obvious that we can not base foreign policy on lies and arbitrary decision making notwithstanding his Machiavellian cabinet. It behooves us to set an example as trading partners for everyone’s benefit rather than try to impose reform by destructive militancy à la Machiavelli.

SOURCES

Bush League Diplomacy, Craig R. Eisendrath and Melvin A. Goodman, 2004 Prometheus Books, Amherst, N.Y.

Machiavelli on Modern Leadership, Michael A. Ledeen, 1999 St Martin’s Press, New York, N.Y.

The War Against the Terror Masters, Michael A. Ledeen, 2002 St. Martin’s , Press, New York, N.Y.

America Alone, Stefan Halper and Jonathan Clarke, 2004 Cambridge Univ. Press, New York, N.Y.

Imperial Hubris, Anonymous, 2004 Brassey’s Inc. Dulles, Va.

Resurrecting Empire, Rashid Khaldi, 2004, Beacon Press, Boston, Mass.

Cascading Universe, Charles C. Worthington, 2004, Dorrance Publishing co. Pittsburgh, Penn.

Leo Strauss and the Grand Inquisitor, Shadia B. Drury, free inquiry, June/July 2004