As of human rights and human dignity principles, every individual , or every group of individuals, have an unalienable right to be independent against any imposition on them against their wills. And thus, they have every right to fight against such imposition for their right of independence. Ironically the USA is a very example of this.
So what is the problem? The problem is the concept of the State itself. This destructive concept that the entire humanity has been indoctrinated from birth. This enslaving belief has been wired deep into human consciousness which is hard to be unplugged, except the anarchists. Remember Lao Tzu is the first known anarchist in the world with his work Tao Te Ching.
I am going to deal with certain cases to prove my point, my conviction.
The population of the thirteen colonies of the British empire in north America was mostly English. They were treated unfairly and unjustly by their “mother land”. And they decided to part and live their own way. You all know all the rest of this history. However, once they become a State, they started to behave exactly their former master:Britain. Look at the way they have treated the Native people, their quasi-colonies such as Puerto Rico, and the threat they warn to those who have the very same will that gave birth to the State of USA. The will to be independent, and “worst,” to have their own “statehood!”
So have the State of Spain, the State of Iraq, the State of Iran, the State of Italy, the State of Ukraine etc… They all once broke free from the previous oppressive States, and then repeat the oppression and suppression of the very same will of their own posterity and of other groups! There is no exception! The circle of power just repeats itself with brutal, unjust authority, violent coercive power of the State. After all, the State is just an euphemism for tiny group of psychopaths at the top of power structure. The State is truly an euphemism for an absolute religion of power that no other religion can match. The State has absolute power over people in life and in death. Unlike the normal fucking God, the State can wield its power of punishment on people instantly right in this life.
The case of the Kurdistans is a little bit complex and complicated, and more interesting as it entails quite a few issues concerning some “progressive” people.
You’ve probably heard that the Jews has been meddling up in this region for its own interest. It’ a no-brainer at all since we all know what the Jews have been up to. But in this case the Jews are not the main problem! The main problem is lying on those States that have been “governing” these Kurdish peoples, namely Turkey, Syria, Iraq and Iran. This “division” of the Kurds is an old but effective trick that the white Europeans planned. Why do these Kurds want their independence? How have these four States treated these Kurds ever since they themselves were “granted” their own statehood by their former master States?
As a matter of principle, the Kurds have every right like every one else to form their own “state” live their own lives at they see fit. The four master States should blame themselves for the way they have treated the Kurds, regardless of whether the Jews have their hands on this or not. It is not a major issue. With or without the Jews or the Yanks, the Kurds have every right to be independent. Period!
Those who claim to be anti- Anglo-Zionism and anti-imperialism have no right to accuse the Kurds of anything in this matter, and have no right to demand the Kurds remaining to live as second class citizens in those “master states” just for the sake of anti-imperialism. You want to fight against the empire? Rid yourselves of your own State first, otherwise you are the very imperialist yourselves!
The same principle must be applied to the people who have joined in the so-called color revolutions. No one has any right to accuse them of anything since they are the one who actually live under those regimes. They have every right and very legitimate reason to demand their freedoms, their dignity to be respected, and proceed revolution as they wish regardless of whether imperialist interference. They did not have, and do not have to put up with such regimes for the sake of anti-imperialism. If you don’t want foreign interference, treat your own people well and with respected.
Crimea, Kosovo, Catalonia, Corsica and Kurdistan
Just three years after a citizens’ referendum returned Crimea to Russia, from which it had been separated for sixty years, the people of Catalonia, Spain’s largest province, will vote to leave that country.
And just as the international community has decreed that the Crimean referendum was a fake, Spain’s Prime Minister felt compelled to declare that the vote could’t possibly take place, that it would be illegal, that independence, in his words, could only be ‘a pipe dream’ for the country’s richest province.
Clearly, national governments don’t like losing land and people, however when it suits the international community, some communities are permitted to become independent. In 1999, after NATO destroyed Yugoslavia, whose constituent republics were inhabited mainly by diverse groups of Slavs, after a prolonged crisis that culminated in a referendum, the Albanian majority in Kosovo, which had been part of Serbia, was granted statehood.
Almost twenty years have passed since then, and the world is coming to a different frame of mind. Russia and China have become an item, leading other major non-western countries to form the BRICS, drawing Brazil, India and South Africa into an alliance that spans the globe, while local independence movements signal a move toward decentralization.
The European Union, about which much criticism is heard, pioneered the idea that problems should be solved at the lowest possible level, to which it gave the name of subsidiarity. This has encouraged unemployed college graduates across Europe to reinvent themselves in abandoned rural villages, creating cyber versions of sixties communes.
As citizens around the world invest themselves in politics close to home, they are increasingly aware that the big picture requires a different kind of leadership from the one that purports to represent the idea of democracy. Taking its cue from ancient Greek city-states, the Western world evolved into parliamentary systems that partly diluted the power of kings to make war on each other: those of ‘the people’ who had the means and could take time away from earning a living, ultimately got to sit in august chambers and argue over whose constituencies should be favored in any given issue, leaving the ‘silent’ majority to hope their ideas might prevail in a future ballot.
In recent years, electronic communication has enabled minority populations within nation-states to bring decision-making closer to home — but when even that failed to bring a fairer distribution of obligations and benefits, some decided they would be better served if they had power at their own ‘national’ level. Although not many leaders have recognized the inevitability of such an arrangement, the size of the two countries which together are challenging American hegemony, China and Russia, has made it inevitable that power vis a vis the outside world has accrued to ‘the top’, under what the US calls ‘authoritarian’ regimes.
What this means is that in an atomic age, matters of human survival are wisely left in the hands of unquestioned authority, rather than on the endless jockeying for power among interest groups in so-called representative democracies, whose major achievement has been to prevent wise kings from being followed by tyrants. The power of ‘authoritarian’ rulers is also renewed periodically by their citizens, while preserving the governing process from being watered down by ‘compromises that favor the demands of backers.
Turning now to Crimea, Kosovo and Catalonia, the Crimean referendum, long on its Russian population’s minds, became a matter of life or death when a Western managed coup brought anti-Russian Nazis to power in Ukraine, while the Kosovo referendum enabled Albanians, a non-Slav people whose language is unrelated to any other, to no longer be ruled by Slavs.
The Catalan case is different from that of both Albanians and Crimeans. The area known as Catalonia was long contested between France and Spain, and Catalonians, like most Europeans, have an acute sense of history, which contributes to their determination to achieve independence. Their language, Catalan is related to French, Spanish, Portuguese and Occitan, which was formerly spoken in southwestern France, Northwestern Italy and northern Spain, thus they see themselves as equal to these cousins who have long had states of their own. (Similarly the Corsicans sought independence from France after World War II, gradually obtaining greater autonomy. Like the Catalans, they have their own language, and an acute sense of history, aided by the fact that Napoleon was Corse.
If the Catalonian referendum returns a high percentage for succession, the chances of Scotland holding a second referendum will increase. The first one, held in 2014, elicited promises of greater autonomy from the then British Prime Minister, which were soon forgotten. With Great Britain exiting the European Union, Scotland is likely to again seek independence in order to remain in Europe.
As for the Kurds, a people spread over a contiguous area divided among four national states, Turkey, Syria, Iraq and Iran, they have gone about earning statehood by providing some of the best fighters in the war against terrorism — including female battalions, unhappily becoming part of the standoff between the US and Russia in the Middle East. They rule a significant area in Northern Iraq and have had a referendum of their own which, however, is not seen as the first step toward a state that would include the three other Kurdish areas, as both the host states as well as Russia and the US have reservations about the idea.
Finally, in recent times, several Americans states have birthed successionist movements, the farthest advanced being that of California, with the campaign called Calexit, and the most recent being that of Texas. At some point, the American press will discover that the founder of Calexit, Louis Marinelli, has been living in Russia for the past several years. Oblivious to the complementary roles played by ‘authoritarian’ governments cooperating at the international level, and decentralization, also known as local democracy, it will see this as proof that President Putin is trying to dismember the United States.
Deena Stryker is an international expret, author and journalist that has been at the forefront of international politics for over thirty years, exlusively for the online journal “New Eastern Outlook”.