Sadly, we cannot afford to
pretend that the ongoing vitality of human cultural heterogeneity will be
universally welcomed. There has always been a segment of human society that
aspires to subjugate diversity and to impose its own cultural, moral and
ethical values upon others. In the nineteenth century we saw the British
Empire spread through Asia and Africa cheered on, not as commonly believed,
by merchants and soldiers but rather by clergymen and journalists who alike
exhorted their national leadership to "bring the wretched heathen to
the light" and "take up the white man’s burden" – in
other words to bring the benefits of the supposedly superior Anglo-Saxon
religion and culture to the inferior black and brown skinned people of the
world.
Please do not believe for one passing moment that, with the coming of
the twenty-first century, this imperialistic instinct has gone to its
grave. To the contrary, the form may change and its expression may alter
but the fundamental urge to subjugate one culture to the will of another
remains. The new cultural imperialist does not bash a bible; he pushes an
ecological manual in your face and demands your adherence. He does not avow
adherence to a church of the spiritually enlightened; he professes
membership in a Non-Governmental Organization (NGO) of the morally
superior. He comes not to save your souls; his flock will be your birds,
your elephants, your reptiles and your fish. He alone knows how to care for
and tend to them. He shares several salient features with his nineteenth
century counterpart. He is utterly and totally convinced both of his own
moral probity and of the right that his natural superiority imbues in him
to tell you exactly what you are going to do and how you are going to do
it. In the past, when you defied a ranting British preacher, he ran to his
national government demanding military protection. The new imperialist
similarly runs to his national government when he is defied. If you will
not adhere to the environmental strictures that he has mapped out for you
– without, of course, consulting you – then he will demand that his
national government, along with any available international bodies, impose
on you a broad range of economic sanctions in return for your impetuosity.
Our new imperialist also comes armed with two new weapons that would
arouse the intense envy of his clerical predecessor, namely, ready access
to an instant global communications and support network that will amplify
his message around the globe and equally ready access to enormous bank
accounts that can finance both his activities and the international
promulgation of his message.
I should point out, in passing, that no-one, not one lone individual has
ever cast a single vote to condone these supposedly pro-environmental
international activities. The NGO’s tell us that they are the guardians
of wildlife, but we always need to bear in mind that they are
self-appointed guardians. Their only mandate is the one that they have
chosen to arrogate to themselves. Ironically, the NGO’s will demand that
multilateral meetings of elected officials throw open their doors to their
participation in order to "democratize" them – a somewhat
hilarious claim when stemming from non-elected bodies. They will tell us
that they "speak for the world", but how can we recognize their
claims when they have never subjected their mandate to popular scrutiny?
Now why should a symposium on sustainable fisheries trade concern itself
with my complaints and historical analogies on the workings of today’s
international environmental NGO’s? My answer to you is simple and
forthright – these NGO’s operate in a predictable, repetitive manner
and every indication is, ladies and gentlemen, that you are the next target
on their target list.
Back
