2. OBJECTIVE TERMS TO STUDY THIS GLOBAL CRISIS

"All is truth all is lie, it depends on the bearer's eyes"

The Bio-Historic Causes Of The War.

While the previous direct causes of war are obvious, there are when we consider a wider Historic perspective some basic 'bio-historic' reasons for this crisis, that become crystal clear when we consider the scientific, repetitive cycles of History and encroaches further this age of war:

- The paradox of History, that confronts regularly economic and religious societies, causing cyclical wars, since the age of the first semite wars... 5000 years ago, when the first Semite technological cultures destroyed the Genesian 'paradise' of the Fertile crescent. Those Cycles of war between technological and Neolithic societies are as old as history itself, and explain the clash of civilizations between Islam and the West, specifically the Jewish-Protestant civilization that controls the 3 main nations at war, Britain, US and Israel. In that sense the present Battle of the Semite wars is part of a long Historic conflict...

- The repetition previous cycles of history and economics. Those cycles repeat periodically their catastrophic crisis and regressions, giving birth to a possible science of History able as all sciences to determine the cyclical repetition of certain events in the future. The present regression to a new 'fascist age' has indeed many parallelisms with the 1930s, as we advanced in our Summer issue. In fact as early as 1994, in our book, the Vortex of History, we forecast this turn in history as a consequence of those repetitive cycles, confirmed now once more.

- Finally to clarify the causes of this war, we need to understand the Uni-causality of Historic Thought, that instead of dialog uses subjective victimism to enhance and justify war and conflict. This is indeed what has happened in this battle of the Semite wars, whose underlying causes - The Israeli-Palestine conflict, the process of globalization and degradation of the Third World - have been totally ignored.

Objectivity: the two elements of the paradox

In that sense we wont consider any subjective ideology of History at use today but a more scientific, objective approach to our analysis: the linguistic method of knowledge that considers any historic event from the different points of view of the event, to reach an objective truth on the cause and consequences of the event. This means this event is two-sided, with causes both in the west and the east, in our economical civilization and the religious civilization of Islam.

In History it is specially difficult to maintain this 3rd element of all scientific analysis, in as much as we are inside History. It is like if we were either a Gazelle or a Lion. The Lion has rights to feed and will defend them, but the gazelle would only consider the rights to survival. Within the event there might not be agreement. But outside the event we can define it as a fight for survival between a predator and a victim. It is clear that in the WTC attack, subsequent Afghan war, and "Global war against terrorism" depending on which side your victims are you will be biased and subjective about it. So today most people in the west, after the World trade massacre, do not want to understand Islam but merely erase it... As hardly any Israeli or Palestinian wants to understand the other side of history. Subjectivism is indeed the great problem of history and politics, the reason why we exist in a pre-Galilean age of social sciences...

In that sense our magazine differs from most of the mass-media treatment on the event, in as much as we consider both points of view, that of the Western civilization and the Islamic civilization, and we relate both the economical and the political crisis, to long-standing cycles of history, in which they are inscribed.

Bio-historic terms, for the present world crisis.

So to analyze the 2001 crisis, we will use objective historic terms, regardless of the emotional charge carried by those events. In that sense it is important to understand that a scientist of history is outside the Paradox history, and cannot take sides, as newspapers do, in any confrontation of History, even at the risk of its own security, given the one-biased police measures taken now in the west.

What this means is that we prefer objective terms such as war, instead of ideological, 'politically correct' words like 'terrorism', meaningless in bio-history, words that immediately eliminate any objective, logic analysis of one of the sides of the war - the 'terrorist side' (Fundamentalist Islam) - such as most mass-media will do during this war.

One of the key elements that maintain 'primitive theories about history' is the use of myths and dramatic terms, such as right Vs wrong, evil Vs good, to qualify historic events, from the subjective point of view, of the civilization to which the historian belongs. This avoids all dialog, and in as much as primitive theories of history are hold usually by the military, it improves their capacity of confrontation, creation of war, and extinction of the other human - the enemy.

Today our western civilization uses the word terrorism instead of guerrilla warfare (which is the proper term for most terrorist events), to explain the present 'battle of the Semite wars', between Palestine and Israel, now expanded to the mother cultures of Islam and America. It is easy. No dialog with the Third World, no real solutions to the origin of those wars, and the hidden causes defined above. "Terrorism" justifies all, the massacre of innocent Afghans, the limitation to our civil liberties, and probably in the decades aHead the end of democracies and the beginning of neo-fascism at grand scale.

For the Historian it is confusing though to use such terms to define the causes, consequences and forecast the future of Historic and economic ecosystems. What does not mean at all we are backing 'terrorism' but defining terrorism in bio-historic terms, as a type of guerrilla warfare, proper of asymmetric relationships of power, hence logic to warlords of third world countries such as Bin Laden, in an age of decreasing cost in lethal goods and increasing number of violent ideologies. Those are indeed the dual germs of history, that cause wars, the sickness of history: violent ideas and violent machines. Men are only instruments of those systems. In an obvious simile, if we were doctors, we would not talk of the death of a person, as Middle Age doctors did, in terms of evilness, or define 'terrorist bacteria'. Instead, in scientific medicine, we would use scientific terms, such as germs, sickness, etc. So even if we are obliged by mass-media to consider such terms, it is clear that 'terrorism', a dramatic world that appeals to emotions (terror) is far less objective than war.

The second element of those primitive theories of History, is to consider that historic events are individualistic events, caused by single persons, 'monsters of history' such as Bin Laden or Hitler. Again this eliminates all systemic economical and political responsibilities. This again is false, as it is false that any sickness of your body is caused by an 'individual cell'. Doctors study the 'physiological sickness' of nervous, blood and endocrine systems of energy and information, that cause the individual sickness of cells. It is precisely that case, applied to the social organisms of history, what explains the existence of criminal cells such as Mr. Hitler or Mr. Bin Laden, affected by the sicknesses of their civilization - Germany and today Islam - which causes their ideologies and existence. If Mr. Hitler had not existed, but the ideological and economical sicknesses of the 20s in Germany existed, another man would have occupied his place. When Mr. Bin Laden gets killed, the problems of Islam, Israel and America, the 3 civilizations implied in global 'terrorism' will not end unless their physiological sicknesses are cured.

In that sense we will use bio-historic terms to define the present World crisis, its causes and consequences, such as the concept of the 'physiological sickness of our civilizations' (caused by the germs of Weapons, the corruption of the nervous systems of civilizations, its laws and financial systems, etc.). Those bio-historic terms explain much better why those 3 civilizations, America, Judaism, and Islam, are now engaged in a low intensity, long-term war...

The paradox of History: Confrontation of Verbal and Technological societies, of traders and warrior cultures.

It is then necessary to treat the present episode of the semite wars within the cyclical, scientific context of the paradox of History, in which certain events caused by the confrontation between technological and religious societies, repeat ad infinitum. The WTC attack is an episode of that paradox of History, specifically of the Semite wars, between Israel and Palestine, and his allied mother-cultures, technological America and religious Islam.

The long-standing Paradox of History, shows two clear type of cyclical war confrontations that apply to the Palestine Vs Israel war, and the WTC attack:

- Confrontations between technological societies, or 'economic ecosystems', and agricultural societies, or 'religious ecosystems' such as the British Empire Vs the Spanish Empire, in the XVII century, Europe Vs the Third World in the XIX century, etc. Those confrontations have happened for millennia, and the present confrontation between the West Vs the oldest Neolithic cultures of History (that embraced Islam hundreds of years ago) is part of those cycles...

Of course subjective History, as perceived from the point of view of the Western civilization does not understand those confrontations. For Western people, dominated by the Myths of science, economics, and Go[l]d religions, Neolithic and religious civilizations are 'negative', enemy cultures, labeled at best as primitive. While Progress=technological evolution is the goal of history. Yet if you are an intelligent westerner, you will have at least some doubt about that single, lineal path for history. To most Third world countries, the west, and his technologies have brought social poverty, harshness and often death (slavery, war, military dictatorships far more efficient in their cruelty than past warrior kings). So many people on those countries rejected the West, and his civilization, fighting the West, till technological warfare defeated them.

- The second type of repetitive wars in bio-history are confrontations between specialized trader and warrior cultures, that use either money or weapons as their main tool of power. Those two type of 'animetal' civilizations based in the power of a different metal species (informative money or energetic weapons) tend to see each other as different, opposed by their tools of power. So they enter in cyclical wars such as the wars between Rome (war culture) and Greece (monetary culture), or Rome and Phoenicia+Israel (monetary culture), or the present wars of Arab countries (warrior cultures) Vs Israel and America (trader cultures).

If we put both type of confrontations together, it is crystal clear that Israel Vs Palestine, now America Vs Islam, respond to both bio-historical causes of war...

Thus the Semite wars are a 'natural war' of bio-history, sensed as logic and 'just' by both sides of the war paradox. Americans and Jewish feel the 'primitive' Neolithic Islam culture, ruled by 'barbarous warriors', the enemy of their civilization and have little sense of guilt when they bomb Baghdad or Kabul, massacre Palestinians, or let Iraqi children die under embargo. On the other hand, Muslims feel the 'machine-controlled' Jewish-American civilization, impious, idolatric, anti-human, cruel with their people, and ab=usive of Islam. So their radicals massacred the people at the WTC and many demonstrate against America and Israel, and pray in favor of those who from time to time strike the enemy. Of course both sides fight with different weapons those wars, given the overwhelming military superiority of technological cultures over Neolithic cultures: Neolithic cultures use guerrilla warfare, in his modern hide and seek version called 'terrorism'; technological cultures use regular armies in his modern hide and seek version called 'air strikes'. Both show little human values, in a profession, war, which is always anti-human.

The paradox of History exists. There are two ways of perceiving the future of mankind: a Neolithic, agricultural, religious way, in which technology and machines, and digital science are secondary to nature, human goods, and verbal religion. And the Western culture based in numbers and machines that destroys Neolithic civilizations. That systematic destruction is a contrasted cyclical event in History even if most Western Historians deny it, under our ideologies of Industrial Evolution=Progress, Science=Truth, and economics=Wealth that exclude the other point of view of Third world nations, based in Social evolution=Progress, Religion=truth, and Ethonomics=Wealth.

The wrong concept that one civilization is better than the other, is not only the concept of Fundamentalist Islam, but also the concept of Fundamentalist Economics, as biased, and wrong as Fundamentalist Islam might be about the true nature of machines and economic ecosystems.

In that sense our Fundamentalism breeds Islamic Fundamentalism and resistance, because it is based in dogmas as false as those of Islam.

The Myths of Economics, and the repression of all economical ideas that deny those myths, hide indeed the concept that History is cyclical, and technological nations do not help but often confront, extinguish and destroy other civilizations. It might be part of the paradox of History that both sides of the paradox, technological societies based in digital languages, and religious societies based in verbal languages, cannot understand the reasons why the other culture wants to keep his values and forms of life. So a Greek will say to a Persian: "You would not understand even the meaning of freedom", and a Muslim will say to a Westerner: "Without Islam - the social organism of all the believers - I am nothing". Ultimately as we shall see the confrontation between both kind of societies is a Universal confrontation between two ways of perceiving existence: the individualistic way of the western man, that needs economical wealth, that prefers the solitude of the consumer, and the help of machines to survive; and the social dissolution of the believer in the community, that needs other human beings to survive, and fulfills his existence emotionally, and so rejects Industrial progress as shallow idolatry. While the advantages of the Western way of life are evident, since machines and wealth are external, visual, the advantages the Eastern man obtain with his mysticism are internal, and like other internal phenomena (drugs, love) very difficult to value, or understand positively in the visual, technological West, which immediately equals lack of machines to backwardness and social organisms that control individuals (families, tribes, religions) as lack of human freedom. Freedom Vs Order, Movement Vs Position, Individual Evolution Vs Social evolution, the 'Homo Bacteria' Vs 'the Organic cell', to put it in bio-historic terms arehowever elements of the Universal duality that organizes all systems, including history.

The reasons of Fundamentalism in the 3rd World: Industrial Neo-colonialism and Globalization

A self-fulfilling life in Neolithic societies is possible. So, when the alternative is to belong to the pariah classes of the West - the 'energy class' of people without employment, without human rights, without wealth - people from old-established Neolithic civilizations such as Islam resist the change.

Many pages of this issue will be dedicated to understand what is a social religion such as Islam is today, or Christianism was in the Middle ages. Only if the West understands Islam without a sense of superiority caused by our own myths, that hide much better than in Islam the basic injustices of our system we will be able to deal with Islam on equal foot. Indeed, our system is as corrupted and violent as the present governments of Islam. Yet we have built some basic myths to cover this: Myths of democracies that hide the subservience of our political systems to lobbyism and a few wealthy men; Myths of science that hide the technological degradation of our culture by mental machines; economical myths that hide the fact that the most profitable industries, and the higher levels of wealth are reached in war, hence making wars a recurrent phenomena of democracies. Of course we enjoy higher levels of life, which are partially based in the poverty of billions of people, without rights to trade their goods (GATT agreements that favor the free trade of industrial goods of the west, including Weapons, and limit the trade of Third World goods), and without right to credit, which creates reality (financial systems that deviate systematically to Western stock markets the capitals of the Third world). This selfishness of the west, goes to the limit when considering the kind of governments we systematically back in those nations: governments that will export capitals to western stock-markets, that will sell us cheap the raw materials of their nations, that will buy us huge quantities of weapons (as much as 40% of the GNP in some Islamic nations), regardless of the consequences for 90% of their population. Of course as it happens with all 'sinners', complex ideas to self-justify the sin have been deployed to cover up this situation, and blame the poor, and the religious groups that protect them. This again could be compared to the situation of Latin-America, which for centuries was exploited by Spain, Portugal and the trading nations of the west. Only the priests, regardless of the little interest many natives had for Christianism, defended them, and so many people joined Christianism. Today only priests hold in many regions of South-America a moral standing. So happens to Islam, where only priests help the poor, regardless of the backwardness of many of their ideas.

Unfortunately to behave with minimal justice towards Islam and the Third World, would be 'expensive' for the West. It would imply changes in our 'Primitive ideologies of History' and a more objective perception of the past centuries, and the negative role of the west in those civilizations. It would imply a change in trade policies, specifically in GATT policies to favor the goods of Islam and the Third World (agricultural goods), and restrict trade in the biggest world business - weapons - to limit the consume of lethal machines by those countries. It would imply to back democratic elections that surely would favor religious parties against military dictators. So it is much cheaper to keep the myths of the West regarding the evilness of Fundamentalism, with all those 'subjective' speeches, specially now after the murderous WTC attack. While making further business with 'Splendid little wars' like the Afghan war, in which to test the last lethal weapons of the west, and jack up military demand with substantial new security contracts. Yet that revengeful, cynical strategy of the west towards Islam, clearly on the lines of XIX century colonialism (that also feared and despised those 'barbarous Indians and black people), should change now for a simple reason.

Our economical, scientific and political myths about the World order, and the injustice of our treatment towards the third world have not changed, despite the idiocy of those myths and the ethic brutality of our neo-colonial globalization, This fat alone says a lot about the 'intelligence' and 'morality' of our western civilization, that believes those childish, ideological myths about science Vs Religions, and Technology Vs Human goods; and prefers to kill children with embargo than throw dictators with armies (Iraq). We cannot expect a lot of our Western 'intelligence and ethics', not very different today from those of the British empire a century alone. However an external, technological factor has changed the game: now it is clear that if those myths do not change the violent clash of civilizations between 'Terrorists' and Western Armies will mean the death of millions of innocent people in both sides of the paradox. Why so many victims? Because there is a second reason of this crisis, that the West also systematically denies, the lethal Industrial evolution of weapons, that has reached today an economical threshold of price and availability that multiplies enormously the destructive power of a few, decided, criminals.

Technological evolution of guerrilla warfare becomes terrorism.

Mr. Bin's Ladens' 'terrorist' action is an episode of Guerrilla warfare, proper of Third World Neolithic countries such as Afghanistan, in which regular armies cannot oppose First World military systems. What has happened now, for economic reasons of technological evolution, is an enormous increase in the capacity of Third World guerrillas to harm First World societies, after 5 centuries of null military power among Third World countries, since the discovery of America. This of course is new... Indeed, the Spanish or British empires could not expect any attack back from the Indian or African or Hindi, or Chinese populations they 'terrorized' in the colonial wars of those centuries. Till the WTC attack, no First World country could fear beyond dramatic speeches any attack of third world countries against which the first world has been in recurrent wars for centuries.

This means for decades the First World has downplayed Third World guerrilla warfare, qualified as terrorism. Which in a way means, that the first world lacked any concern for the lethal consequences of their policies in third world countries - such as the maintenance of military dictatorships for a busting warfare business, so common during the XX century. On the contrary it has pursued Neo-colonial, economical and military policies against those countries - which are the underlying cause of 'terrorist' actions such as those of Bin Laden - whatever the official version of that 'evil' character might be. Now the scenario has changed. The West can expect those attacks not only from Third World guerrillas but also from the growing mass of poor people in First World nations..

As we will show in our next issue "Globalization", in as much as the process of Technological evolution displaces humans with machines, and with Robots, the 'division' of the world between First world people needed by the economic ecosystem, and a growing number of dispossessed, obsolete workers displaced by robots, will continue, and social differences will also make the poor of the West, as desperadoes as the poor of the Third world.

So it should be wise to change both our neocolonial policies in those countries to avoid the underling causes of Third World Terrorism, and the brutal Globalization process in favor of machine-workers that will throw our poor into similar life conditions.

This desired solution will not happen very likely, as 'dramatic, primitive systems of history' based in profit and violence, will try to solve the problem with more bombs, and new lethal technologies, creating a growing spiral of violence and social repression. Reflections that lead us to the second cause of the WTC attack, an economical, technological cause, the need for splendid little wars to improve the western economy.