Vote NO to Total War : Melbourne Indymedia

Global oil production is starting to peak with midpoint by 2008 and terminal decline becoming self-evident by 2010. Anglo democracies are on the march worldwide running full tilt towards the imminent energy descent and securing the Persian Gulf oil fields by military force.

Once oil depletion hits over the next 5 years, the terminal global economic decline that accompanies it will literally translate into oil for food for billions of us around the world. Our current government has completely aligned itself with the US administration and military to see us through this life and death struggle. They aim to survive by force of arms rather than international cooperation and the current oil wars have lit the fuse that could ignite World War 3: A global nuclear war.

The impending Australian federal election stands to provide Howard with an implicit mandate for this coming war to end all wars. The danger facing the Australian nation is extreme. The efforts we take to meet it may be just as extreme if we go down the path of global war. The time will come when the leaders will demand we remove our gloves and use our fists. Once energy depletion sets in we will no longer make only partial use of the war potential at home and throughout the Coalition of the Willing. We will be driven to use our full resources, as quickly and thoroughly as it is organizationally and practically possible for the leaders to bring this about. All concern for humanity and the rule of international law will become wholly out of place. The total war effort required to prevail over our energy competitors will become a matter of the entire Australian people. No one will be allowed any excuse for ignoring its demands.

The ideology driving this mad rush to total war resides at the highest levels of the current US Federal Government. As Richard Pearle bluntly states:

"This is total war. We are fighting a variety of enemies. There are lots of them out there.... If we just let our vision of the world go forth, and we embrace it entirely, and we don't try to piece together clever diplomacy but just wage a total war, our children will sing great songs about us years from now".

The future of the Earth hangs on our military success or failure in the Middle East. Those of us who prefer peace over total war need a government of the day willing to pursue international cooperation to prepare for peak oil and an irreversible global economic decline that will force a massive, radical and sustained change in our way of life as we transition to alternative energy sources and the economic/political order they support.

I humbly suggest that we should all vote NO to global total war.

...in yr mouth Dr Stupid. It's Richard PERLE and he did not say that quote. I think it was Michael Leeden or another one of those fascist neo con artists. That is just one mistake picked up on the most cursory and quick scan so you wont mind if I don't take yr advice today?

Not voting is not doing something - it's not doing something stupid.

Thanks for the proof read pr, typo noted. However, focusing on one cut and paste mispelling and using ad hominem does nothing to showcase your interpretive skills apart from the usual troll bait and switch.

Why are you so afraid of war? Apparently our leaders agree that it is human nature to survive by murder and that the historic democratic experiment has failed. It's <a href=" http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article6010.htm">failing already in Iraq if you haven't noticed.

The 'total war' quote is widely attributed to Perle across the internet and if you would like to peruse Pilger's original article I linked to:

One of George W Bush's "thinkers" is Richard Perle. I interviewed Perle when he was advising Reagan; and when he spoke about "total war", I mistakenly dismissed him as mad. He recently used the term again in describing America's "war on terror". "No stages," he said. "This is total war. We are fighting a variety of enemies. There are lots of them out there. All this talk about first we are going to do Afghanistan, then we will do Iraq... this is entirely the wrong way to go about it. If we just let our vision of the world go forth, and we embrace it entirely and we don't try to piece together clever diplomacy, but just wage a total war... our children will sing great songs about us years from now."

As for "Not voting is not doing something - it's not doing something stupid".

Not voting in the coming federal referendum on Howard's war is a perfectly reasonable way to use your voting rights. However, an abstention is already a form of voting and one that Howard is counting on amongst disaffected left wing nihilists like yourself. In the circumstances you might as well just join the Young Liberals and vote Liberal/National Party.

I'm not saying that Labor would be much different, there's not a lot of choice involved in a constitutionally gerrymandered two party deomcracy as you'll get the social and anti-social factions of the one business party that basically makes for a one party plutocracy.

But this forthcoming election is nonetheless important for a special historical reason. We are currently involved in a global oil war that may last 30 years if we don't self-immolate as soon as the nukes start flying, and the overwhelming burden will fall heaviest on us working poor. With peak oil the future looks rather grim and if you think the dole is hard try googling 'West Africa' for an insight into what's in store for us developed westerners once the global economy starts shrinking and/or collapses.

The US has responded to this crisis by simply stating it will dominate the world by military force and has demonstrated this new founding principle for world order through the conquest of Iraq. If you understand peak oil then you can see where we're going: WW3 and global capitalist feudalism more extreme than you can probably imagine.

The only way out of this global catastrophe is international cooperation and the immediate diversion of the gigantic funds currently being spent on the military and war into research for alternative fuels while we still have the wealth to do so.

Howard stands to win an implicit mandate for involving us in an oil war that promises armageddon. Voting for Greens with Labor second will help vote Howard out while Latham is committed to a very public withdrawal from Iraq that will further undermine the US presence there and help to increase pressure on Bush 2 in the US November election.

Lefties who choose not to vote will simply help Howard and the fascist neo con artists win and we'll sink further into the quagmire of a global oil war that has already slaughtered thousands of innocents and threatens to drag us all into an apocalypse of gigantic proportions as the oil dries up over the next 5-10 years.

What do you think about your abstention rights from this perspective pr?

Voting is at least one stupid thing pr doesnt advocate. Voting just helps to legitimise the system. You voted for Overseer Tweedledee so he now has a mandate to enforce slavery (albeit in a nicer way than Tweedledum). You cant fight them through their own games; thats why they have elections. Everytime you sign your name on one of their forms you give them a little peice of your soul (so to speak). So dont be a pawn in their game, liberate yourself from the beurocracy, cut all ties with the enemy and never go back.

"... dont be a pawn in their game, liberate yourself from the beurocracy, cut all ties with the enemy and never go back..."

Yeah right. Don't collect ya dole cheque - it's part of the beurocracy. And nice spelling, dullard.

Imbecile.

Fucking imbecile.

Idiot. If you need everything spelled out for you Im obviously not the one to do it. But Ill try again anyway: I dont collect a dole cheque anymore for the reason I stated in my post.

'Vote 1 Troll' does not vote and does not collect the dole, I guess he doesn't have a wage either so he doesn't have to dodge paying tax or if he has divested himself of all bureaucratic identity he is a feral ghost in the black market machine. But he does use the internet (on a stolen or ancient computer and a hacked ISP?) which nonetheless runs on electricity that he presumably does not pay for. Nor does he eat any form of processed food supplied by the mechanised agricultural industry fed by our oil economy and its petrochemical fertilisers and pesticides, or at least he eats only 'organic' produce but not from the large supermarket chains that are the main distribution channel for our industrial farms.

He certainly does not drive a car as paying for fuel not only contributes to global warming caused by globalisation and its consumption of fossil fuels but is also heavily taxed. I hope he doesn't smoke cigarettes as these are also heavily taxed and merely uphold the multi-billion dollar global tobacco industry. He refuses to purchase any form of plastics, in fact any commercial goods requiring transport, as these also uphold the global oil economy by consuming huge amounts of oil as raw material and for fuel. He also trusts only homeopathic remedies rather than the drugs synthesised from petrochemical sources.

I imagine he drinks only rain water as well since our privatised water corporations are also tied up in the bureaucracy of the fossil fuel economy and uses electricity to pump our mains water provided by commercial coal and gas energy. Relying on solar heating/electricity and permaculture to survive, and having rid himself of all dependency on the modern conveniences paid for by the exponential growth of globalisation since WW2 and founded on the constant growth in the production and consumption of oil he is well placed to survive the coming energy descent.

He will also make an excellent conscientious objector once the balloon goes up and the federal government is forced to institute a draft to feed the total war machine.

Thank you for that rant. Im probably the only person here who isnt on the dole or a public servant or living off the state in some way. So because you couldnt bait me for being a "dole bludger" you just make up two pages of shit which has absolutely NOTHING to do with me or my politics.

Did I say anything about private corporations in my comment? Did I say anything about the environment? Did I say I am some kind of ferral? NO. I said that if you oppose the state you should not support it or be dependent on it (if you can avoid it anyway). I did not say that you should withdraw from society or that that would be uselfull in any way. I practise what I preach. Thats all.

I also said that voting (especially compulsory voting) helps the government look like it is legitimate and has a "mandate" for its actions. I dont want a state so Im not going to vote for one. Simple as that.

Just small adds at the bottom of the comment or pop ups on the front page.

accepting election adds. At least they'd get money for pop-ups.

I too have come to realise the way to end the madness here on earth.

I'm sure ya'all won't mind if I copyright my brilliant new ideas?

First off, if you don't vote it will all go away. Once again we will be able return to our anarchist humpy communities and get back in touch with the earthmother by growing mung beans, alfalfa and wheat grass.

If by some fluke my non-vote doesn't change the course of human history I will don a BLACK leather jacket.

If by some fluke my BLACK leather jacket doesn't change the course of human history I will sew a patch on it.

If by some fluke my patch doesn't change the course of human history I will paint on a McDonalds window. I'll make sure the cops are watching so I get the opportunity to bring the pathetic bourgeois legal system to its knees with my razor sharp mind.

This plan is flawless.

The foolproof failsafe mechanism is to break a few windows and hold your breath until you turn blue.

Try tellin' me that ain't gonna change the fate of humanity!

Well, that about solves all our problems.

You can use my ideas, but please, give due credit to me with a gracious attribution and by making a small donation to my bank account thank-you-very-much.

(workshop dates to be announced soon)

Im glad you have a plan.

Between your leather lacket, Pr's doctors certificate and Dr Strangeloves tick on the little square box the state should crumble in no time.

"Between your leather lacket, Pr's doctors certificate and Dr Strangeloves tick on the little square box the state should crumble in no time"

The state is already crumbling, we are already embarked on war, it needs no help from us in this regard apart from our continued consumption of fossil fuels until terminal oil decline sets in within the next 5-10 years. By that time we'll be reduced to poverty along with the middle classes and serving as human raw material for a total war machine. Such is business.

This is all starting as we speak, the US is massing an armada for the Persian Gulf to confront Iran which has just announced that it has joined the nuclear weapons club and smart money is deserting stocks for gold. Bush 2 needs something big, an 'October surprise', to avert electoral defeat in November and continue his global oil war through to the end of 2008.

One possible action you might take to avert WW3 is to help the yanks dump Bush 2 by voting against Howard. Your democratic free choice not to vote will only make it easier for the Australian hawks within the government to win another mandate for this insane war we're involved in.

This decision is yours and it is the most basic political decision you could make, it's between war and peace.

What's the diff b/w Howard & Latham re US power?
Do you really think Howard has a mandate for war?
Since when were the ALP pacifist?

"This decision is yours and it is the most basic political decision you could make, it's between war and peace."
VOTE 1 ALP!

Hi nobody,

"What's the diff b/w Howard & Latham re US power?"

Probably not much, they both support the US-British alliance formed during WW2 and the fight against the Germans, Italians and Japanese just 60 years ago and cemented over the Cold War against the Chinese and the Russians.

But Latham is committed to a withdrawal from the war in Iraq that Bush 2 himself warns will be "disastrous" for the Coalition of the Willing. It would probably do a favour for Kerry in his electoral battle with Bush.

"Do you really think Howard has a mandate for war?"

If he wins the coming federal election he will effectively have a mandate for the 'war on terror' oil war that we are already heavily involved in. If you haven't noticed we are already a nation at war initiated against the overwhelming wishes of the population.

The whole world has been on a war footing ever since the Bush Doctrine was declared and we helped initiate the supreme crime of aggression that was the attack on Iraq. The founding principle of the UN outlawing state aggression has been superseded by a new world order based on the unilateral right of the US to attack any country it deems to be a threat to its national security. In this new world order you are either with them or against them, no neutrality will be recognised as we enter into the coming energy crisis.

"Since when were the ALP pacifist?"

Never have been as far as I know, and the WW2 PM John Curtin was a Labor man who broke with Churchill to align with the US and sent raw troops into Papua New Guinea against the Japanese Imperial Army.

Breaking with Bush doesn't break the US alliance, at least not if Kerry wins. The gigantic problem of peak oil will remain along with the 'war on terror' and whatever other god awful mess Bush leaves as his legacy to our future. But a change of leadership in both nations should hopefully slow the pace of war as the Neocons would be swept from office. And all we really have is hope.

Democrats, conservative Republicans and sections of the CIA and others in intelligence and the US military are actively working against the Neocons, Rumsfeld and Cheney while an impeachment of Bush might be forthcoming from the Grand Jury on the outing of Valerie Plame. If Bush attempts to suspend the elections in November it may all come down to who the military leadership supports. A totalitarian dictatorship simply must have the support of the armed forces when it comes to the suspension of a nation's constitution. They ultimately guarantee the order.

Beyond November who knows what will happen?

Pr a leftist and a nihilist!
Moi!
I resemble that remark.
I happen to be a post left anarchist spank you very much.
Now I don't know why the trolls persist in spamming us here at this INDEPENDENT and FREETHINKERS website with their blinkered poverty stricken view of politics but I will try and humor this lunatic.

Vote by all means by NOT VOTING, as participation rates drop well below 50% then NEITHER dopey, craven, conspiracist, authoritarian pack of liars, thieves and fucking degenerate criminals can claim a mandate.
We can then safely wall off the Canberra Sunni triangle.

And just a style note Dr Strangewank...

People might take yr deadly earnest garbage more seriously were you perhaps to take some courage in yr hairy sweaty palms and sign yr article? It kind of adds a little something elusive called credibilty, maybe you've heard of that in yr travels up yr arse?

Just a thought. Now your such a fuckin' know it all...why did the chickentroll cross the road?

PS - you seem to have me wrong on war too but thats one thing yr good at isn't it. Jumping to stupid conclusions - you probably work for the government with those diagnostic skills of yrs.

"Now I don't know why the trolls persist in spamming us here at this INDEPENDENT and FREETHINKERS website with their blinkered poverty stricken view of politics but I will try and humor this lunatic. "

Dont you mean that you dont know why people who disagree with you continue to post at this site?

The article seemed reasonable and certainly genuine to me. It is a discussion that has been going on for a long time. I think the effort and seriousness Dr Strangelove has gone to to express their views shows they are genuine more than just posting a name with the article would have.

Pr's future anarchist utopia:

"Vote by all means by NOT VOTING, as participation rates drop well below 50% then NEITHER dopey, craven, conspiracist, authoritarian pack of liars, thieves and fucking degenerate criminals can claim a mandate".

A 'mandate' is won by gaining a majority of whoever votes. What you propose is giving up the only minimal power you have left in a failing democratic state and handing it completely over to the vested interests that increasingly have a stranglehold on power. Rather than bringing the democratic order down the US system relies on this self-disenfranchisement of voters, Bush 2 has already profited from it by getting elected with less than 50% of a popular vote decided on by the US Supreme Court and he is leading the world towards an apocalypse.

Another case in point is the democratic election of Adolf Hitler and his Nazi party which never won a majority rule. He was a democrat who gained power in coalition with other far right wing parties and legally instituted a democratic, constitutional, absolute dictatorship by decree. Elected democratically he legally dissolved democracy and became a popular dictator. His rule led to the holocaust of WW2.

Howard doesn't care if you don't vote, in fact it suits his agenda perfectly the more people, especially socialists, turn off and don't listen to what is going on in this world. As the terminal energy crisis hits we will be driven into poverty and the plutocratic rule will entrench itself by way of global war, famine and pestilence. This is the Neocon world view, total war requires totalitarian rule as the age of cheap energy collapses. Only the 'chosen few' will be allowed to lead this new order.

Power doesn't need your vote, it only needs you to bury your head in the sand, click your Red Ruby slippers and dream that everything will go away. The bureaucratic system is not going to fade away even as the global economy enters a terminal decline over the next 10 years. Democracy may collapse but totalitarian power will intensify as it is already intensifying at the moment. The time span to arrest this intensification is rather narrow in world historical terms as peak oil and gas production is predicted for 2008 with terminal decline self-evident by 2010.

I understand why you feel the coming election is pointless, it's a poisoned chalice whether you vote or abstain. But voting against Howard just this once may help bring about the demise of the Neocons who intend the destruction of whatever minimal democratic freedoms you still enjoy and whose response to peak oil is to launch a global war that will probably ignite a nuclear WW3 and doom us to poverty at the same time as the stock markets crash and the price of housing, electricity, food and water goes through the roof.

Either we spend what national wealth we have left on a transition to an alternative energy economy as soon as possible or we waste it on a war that might consume us all.

Which poison do you prefer?

Total War has been going on for the last century. Global capitalism must expand and grow to survive. So the first world countries fight with each other over territory and the war and rebuilding fuels the ecconomy. People in the first world live off the destruction and resources in the third. People in the first world have been predicting impending doom continuously while the third world lives that reality. I dont think that there is going to be any major collapse in the next 10 years. I think that it will be a slow and painfull degeneration just like with all previous empires.

Why do you think that the end is coming in the next 10 years? And why do you think the state is crumbling? And if it is why do you want to prop it up by voting for a lesser evil?

Vote 1 Troll says:

"Total War has been going on for the last century".

The term 'total war' refers to actual warfare. Total warfare, as espoused by Neocon ideology fed by Straussian philosophy and real-politik, means the total subjugation of one's people in the service of the total military domination of all other powers. It requires the total mobilisation of all national resources, both human and material, in a war with no moral or legal bounds, or what the Nazi's called Vernichtungskrieg, their 'war of extermination' in the east. A total war is unrestrained warfare made possible by a total war economy in which every citizen is pressed into service on the home front or in battle without exception.

The last total war was WW2 and it slaughtered upwards of 50 million people or more in the European/Russian theater alone. It ended with the atomic bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

Your use of the term is merely metaphorical otherwise you would already be drafted into war service or hiding from the military and civilian police as a draft dodger.

"Why do you think that the end is coming in the next 10 years? And why do you think the state is crumbling?"

http://melbourne.indymedia.org/news/2004/06/72000.php

"And if it is why do you want to prop it up by voting for a lesser evil?"

I don't care about the state, it will do what it does. I care about my family and close friends having to deal with an extreme, terminal energy crisis within the next 10 years while the leaders have thrown caution and common sense to the winds and are dragging us into a nuclear apocalypse in a naked grab for the world's remaining oil reserves.

Neocon ideology is leading the charge and must be defeated if we are to have any chance of actually dealing with the end of cheap energy. War means only the wealthiest and strongest survive, the heaviest burden is always borne by the common peoples, and most especially the poor. Nuclear total war threatens nothing short of the extinction of the human species.

I also don't care if you can't believe what I'm saying. It's not a matter of belief anymore, just follow the links I've provided and search out your own version of the truth on the internet and in our heavily propagandised press and television news.

Oh, and good luck to you mate.

Signing out,

Dr Strangelove

My family and close friend dont just live in the west. Look at Africa, Asia and Latin America then tell me Im talking metaphores. Then tell me that ticking a box will solve that. But I will follow your links, looks interesting.

I like when anonymous cowards come here telling us we should play in some rigged game for their amusement. I get to mock their cowardice and gross stupidity and in this case their cynicism and borderline nihilism as well that is obvious. Now if voting actually changed anything it would be illegal but on top of that the so called alternatives in the USSA promise to ESCALATE the war in SW Asia whilst the local Alternative Liberal Party whose Premiers have deconstructed every human and civil right going promise us... what?

A department of Homeland Security.

Dr Strangelove has a strange love of poison but I would rather take warfarin than vote to perpetuate this insanity. No matter who you vote for a politician gets in.

You mean you would rather have hope and suffer along with the rest of the world than vote to prop up the state here at the expense of the rest of the world and the future?

HA HA fool.

Keep the war on other peoples territory, lock the barbarians out, arm the fortress and seal off the bubble dome by voting ALP!

The sooner the empire falls the more will be left for those who rebuild.

Hello Strangelove. I'd refer to you as a doctor, but alas, your prescriptions lead me to seriously question your qualifications...

"Latham is committed to a withdrawal from the war in Iraq..."

...by Christmas. Yeah, I've heard that one. I wonder if the whole country will've been paved and had parking strips put on it by then, whaddaya reckon? According to the DoD website [http://www.defence.gov.au/opcatalyst/], there's about 850 or so Australian troops taking part in 'Operation
Catalyst', which is described as being "Australia's contribution to the rehabilitation of Iraq".

Who said the DoD didn't have a sense of humour?

Anyway, I'm not sure exactly how many of these troops will actually be withdrawn in the event that Latham's 'commitment' does actually constitute a
'core' promise. Are you? Obviously, the Australian military's involvement is much more important politically than it is militarily. Thus, I *am* aware of the
fact that George II has made some noises about the withdrawal being "disastrous" for the Coalition of the Killing. Translated into English, I believe this means that George's advisers have informed him that awareness on the part of US voters of less-than-total support for (re-)establishing US hegemony in the region
may harm The Village Idiot's chances of being re-elected. In reality, I doubt too many Americans will care much one way or the other what the Australian Government decides, and an ALP victory, should it occur -- and should it be a 'favour' to Kerry -- will be a very, very small one.

So um, yeah, I *have* actually noticed that we're a nation at war; and that, like every other war that we -- young, free and girt by sea -- have fought, it's taking place in some other country, at the behest of an imperial power, and irrespective of the wishes of the Australian people. So what else is new? Microchip technology?

However, the idea that Howard, if re-elected, will thereby have been given some kind of a 'mandate' for the terrorist war to secure US-based TNCs' control of oil in the Middle East... 'scuse me, I meant 'war on terror'...
is just plain daft. If you haven't noticed we are a nation-state, and state policy -- whether initiated against the overwhelming wishes, or in keeping with the deepest aspirations, of the population -- proceeds according to its own values, dynamics and systems of priority. The purpose of elections is to allow the domestic population, toiling with hearts and hands beneath the radiant Southern Cross, to periodically ratify others' decisions. Hence the popular aphorism: 'A change in government is the joy of fools'.

Or to put in another way...

"In representative democracy people abdicate their power to elected officials. The candidates’ stated policies are limited to a few vague generalities, and once they are elected there is little control over their actual decisions on hundreds of issues — apart from the feeble threat of changing one’s vote, a few years later, to some equally uncontrollable rival politician. Representatives are dependent on the wealthy for bribes and campaign contributions; they are subordinate to the owners of the mass media, who decide which issues get the publicity; and they are almost as ignorant and powerless as the general public regarding many important matters that are determined by unelected bureaucrats and independent secret agencies. Overt dictators may sometimes be overthrown, but the real rulers in “democratic” regimes, the tiny minority who own or control virtually everything, are never voted in and never voted out. Most people don’t even know who they are."

For more, see Knabb http://www.bopsecrets.org/PS/joyrev1.htm.

The whole world has been doomed to be on a war footing ever since the formation of states roughly 5,500 years ago in Egypt. The founding principle of the UN outlawing state aggression has been routinely violated by the US and will continue to be violated by the US until such time as the domestic US population compels its government to behave in accordance with
international law. An unlikely prospect, but possible. The 'new world order' is hardly 'new', and barely an 'order', while the penalties for disobedience have always been most severe for those at the bottom of the pyramid. The only 'neutrality' recognised both now, in the past, and presumably the future, is passive acceptance.

"Since when were the ALP pacifist?" Sorry, that was a rhetorical question, prompted by your remark that the decision to vote (or not), and who for, is a vote "between war and peace". In other words, a vote for the Coalition = a vote for war, while a vote for the ALP = a vote for peace. Again, a pretty daft formulation, imo.