Bertrand Russell in his essay “The Future of Mankind” favors a unified world government either formed by agreement or through “the monopoly of forces”. According to Russell, a unified world government is essential in certain ways, such as world peace, lawmaking, controlling the use of atomic powers, and stopping the war.
Firstly, according to
Russell, a unified world government is needed for world peace and restraining
wars. Russell in his essay presents the notion that through power and monopoly
of forces, a world government can force “murderous states” like
the Soviet Union and can bring universal peace.
This article is copy protected!
|
Secondly, Russell
argues that a world government formed by the alliance of “The United
States” and “British Commonwealth” can make certain
sanctions that are required for peace. According to Russell, liberty is “not
absolute good” as everyone feels a restrain to confine murderers and
murderous states. With the help of force and sanctions world, peace can be
brought.
Lastly, he presents the
notion that a unified government can ben the use of nuclear weapons and bombs
which according to him will eventually help in the formation of world peace.
However, Bertrand
Russell’s view of the world government formed by the alliance of America is too
biased and utopian. Considering the role of America in the current scenario,
his views of a unified world government formed through the alliance of America
and allies seem superficial and hypocritical because of certain reasons.
Firstly, in his essay,
he favors America over Russia beaches if the reason that the world government
formed will be of America and the alliances which will preserve other cultures
like the British culture, German culture, French culture, Italian culture, and
American culture. But considering the current political scenario, this ‘cosmopolitan
nature of America’ is just a show-off as pointed out by Mohsin Hamid in his
novel ‘The Reluctant Fundamentalist'. Hamid in his novel criticizes the
American nation who “use to conduct themselves in the world as though they were
it’s the ruling class”. The cosmopolitan nature which Russell highlights in his
essay is just a cover that can be justified by Muslim deportation in 2001 after
the attack on Twin Tower in America.
Secondly, he favors the
victory of America over Russia because according to him Americans value
freedom:
“Freedom of thought,
freedom of inquiry, freedom of discussion and humane feelings”.
America values freedom
more than the communists and totalitarian states like the Soviet Union. He
presents the notion that in America one has the freedom of speech I.e. one can
write a book “debunking Lincoln” but in Russia, one cannot
write a book “debunking Lenin” as his book neither would be published nor will
he live (he will be liquefied). Similarly, one is given freedom of thought i.e.
a geneticist in America can disagree with Mendel if he provides evidence but
the same cannot be done in Russia and one has to agree with Lysenko. In the
same way, an American economist may hold any view depending on the statistics
but a Russian economist must never contradict the views of the higher-ups.
These notions adopted and presented by Russell in his essay are biased and
superficial. As argued by many writers and poets, that the so-called liberty in
America is just a cover-up. W.H. Auden in his poem September 1, 1939, argues
and brings to light the ignorant and oblivious nature of Americans who claim to
be the forbearers of world peace ignores the “unmentionable odor of
death” in Europe. Similarly, the “Islamophobia” was also initiated by
the Americans after the attack on the Twin Tower on September 11, 2001.
In short, Bertrand
Russell favors a unified world government, as according to him, a unified world
government through the monopoly of forces will be able to make laws and
sanctions that will pave way for world peace. However, his vision of a unified
world government under America and its allies is biased and superficial
considering the current political scenario’s where the Americans are not the
forbearers of justice and peace as justified by their prejudices against
different ethnicities (Islamophobia against the Muslims and China and Russia in
terms of communism) Continue Reading
This article is written by, Syeda Areeba Fatima, a permanent contributor to the SOL Community.
