Or: Are you reading the right newspapers ?

A couple of days ago I published a request for information on the NATO meeting which was due to be held in Naples in late september. ["news on NATO, anyone ?"]. But it is of grave concern when such requests are met with if not Orwellian, then certainly McCarthyite rantings about thinking,(and reading) the right thoughts.
As things stand at the moment, there is the possibility that this long pre-arranged meeting will be cancelled, certain sections of the Italian establishment having had second thoughts after Genoa. But nobody knows for sure, which is why I naievely asked for information, referring to a piece I read in The Times.
some of the replies I received rather disappointed me; The Times is clearly a work of The Fiend himself, I should beware of subliminalism, and seek enlightenment in The Guardian. Occasionally, we on the left have recourse to mainstream newspapers and they are not objects of taboo, not even the ones owned by Rupert Murdoch !!! and having read the complete works of Vance Packard, I am perfectly aware of the rather dated technique of subliminalism. Indeed, it was the very fact of having seen vague hints in The Times that prompted me to make my request.
Have we forgotten so much since 1999 ? That year, when NATO occupied three European nations, bombarded a fourth and destroyed an embassy of a neutral world power, it was THE GUARDIAN which proved itself to be Blair's best friend, the most vehement pro- war supporter. When Jouhn Pilger exposed the duplicity of the Rambouillet "peace" treaty, it was Ian Black of The Guardian who accused him falsely for a liar. Bad faith ? You decide...
NATO's political ambitions are, i suggest to you, potentially, our greatest peril. It is not a charity, whatever Ken Livingstone might tell you: I studied it and put my degree at some risk by dissenting from the prevailing "wisdom" of the late '90s. When the approaching recession hits, it is not so much a globalised economic regime that we should fear but a worldwide political-military regime. NATO has held two meetings already this year (Vilnius and Budapest) with a third approaching, all political raher than overtly military.
As it happens, The Times was absolutely correct about one thing... writing about the Naples gathering, it said:

"NATO meetings had attracted demonstrators in the past, but
not the anti-globalization protesters who tended to focus on economic summits".

This is true. I cant quite explain it. I dont think that the WTO protesters are bizarrely pro-NATO, but the reluctant way in which they are just beginning to notice it i find equally bizarre. Isnt it possible that NATO is trying to build a new, post-UN structure, primarily based on miltary might rather than liberal right, members only, openly heirarchical ? I think so, and we should devote more time to the distinct possibility that the political military can 'globalize' as the economic organizations have done already .

if anyone's in doubt about the military/political side of 'globalisation', look up the US government's mission for 'full spectrum dominance' on the internet - one telling document is i think called 'joint vision 2020'. 'full spectrum dominance' is about land, sea, air and space, also economy, culture and all. the documents unashamedly say that inequalities on earth will grow so the US has to defend its interests as well as expand them, primarily through the use of the military (rather than diplomacy, aid or whatever).

This is what we are in the end up against.

I guess people are wary of looking at and getting into this side of things cos it's not at all fluffy and there's no hope of the US military going 'duh' and realising that their models are wrong - not that the economists are likely to either but I think activists like to pretend things are not as bad as they really are so that we seem to have a better hope of changing them.

maybe.

They're FOUR of them, definitly:
WTO, WB, IMF and NATO.
If you forget the last one, you're missing something.
As a state need a repression organisation, international organizations of capitalism need a force.

(LINK: artwork on the Gang of Four)