I want to speak to you today about the grave situation we face, a crisis of the soul and of the nation that politicians fear to even mention as they bury us in talk about domestic programs.
When NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg traveled to Kiev, Ukraine, and declared to the world that “Ukraine’s rightful place is in NATO” and then he announced the next day that “all NATO allies have agreed that Ukraine will become a member of NATO” he was essentially stating that the institutional groundwork for a world war has been all laid down for us and that a dictatorial institution, shrouded in secrecy, called NATO, will seize control of the entire operation and enforce “full interoperability” within the militaries of the countries that have had the misfortune to become members of NATO.
“Full interoperability” means, for those unfamiliar with such technical military terms, that decisions within the military will be made in secret by a cabal of select military officers reporting directly to the billionaires.
Under the rule of Stoltenberg, an unelected general, the way forward to world war can no longer be impeded by mere citizens who arrogantly pretend they have ideas that they are entitled to express, that they have a right to hold opinions other than those fed to them by the New York Times or Fox News.
This push to destroy the chain of command in the militaries and in the governments of NATO members, the nations of Europe, Turkey, and the United States, has been extended to Asia as well. The bureaucrats and politicians of Japan, of the Republic of Korea, and of Australia and New Zealand have been told, in unambiguous terms, that they also must turn over the chain of command for their countries to NATO, using the newly invented AP4 (Asia-Pacific Partners) system, and that their nations will be lassoed into a drive for war with China–against the will, and the interests, of their citizens, against the interests of every child on earth.
This silent coup d’état has been advanced through the promotion of intelligence sharing, interoperability, and military exercises.
Each of these words has a special meaning that you are entitled to understand.
“Intelligence sharing” means that the information required for a nation to make decisions on critical security issues is being farmed out to multinational corporations like Google, Facebook, Amazon and others, and that the nation state no longer controls its military, no longer can decide its response in a crisis.
“Interoperability” means that only certain weapon systems can be used, those built by Lockheed Martin or General Dynamics, and that those weapons cannot be serviced, or modified, by third parties.
“Military exercises” (which are increasing in frequency) means that the militaries of each country in NATO (and allies in Asia) must work within an opaque and oppressive chain of command wherein officers practice being told how to wage war by forces that are invisible to them.
That means that neither the politicians, nor even the high-ranking generals, will have any say in this planned rush towards death.
And what has been the response of my colleagues who would run for president, or for congressman, to this push for world war? What words of protest have we heard from our elected officials in Washington DC as they are rushed around in limousines to and from all-too-important meetings?
Well, although there have been a few controversial comments about vaccine safety, about the destruction of the middle class, a morbid silence hangs over Washington DC like a shroud; the silence of the lambs.
I remember when the Senator Robert Byrd from West Virginia spoke out against the plans for a disastrous and unprovoked invasion of Iraq—which was nothing in comparison with a war between NATO and Russia, or between NATO and Russia and China.
Senator Byrd said then, and I say now,
“Today I weep for my country. I have watched the events of recent months with a heavy, heavy heart. No more is the image of America one of strong, yet benevolent peacekeeper. The image of America has changed. Around the globe, our friends mistrust us, our word is disputed, our intentions are questioned. Instead of reasoning with those with whom we disagree, we demand obedience or threaten recrimination.”
I ask you politicians running for office why you have not condemned this rush to world war?
You have no legitimacy, and no right, to bamboozle the American people with your trinkets and your dribble.
But it is not enough to denounce our leaders as cowards and clowns, as prostitutes and lackeys. We must first recognize the truth, and at this moment, facing a world war that may well kill us all, we cannot wait for truth.
The truth will set us free, or as James Baldwin wrote,
“Not everything that is faced can be changed. But nothing can be changed until it is faced.”
Or, as Frederick Douglass put it,
“Men may not get all they pay for in this world, but they must certainly pay for all they get.”
Let us stop accepting half-truths. Let us stop assuming that we must accept certain lies in order to be allowed to speak about some truths.
Let me, for a change, speak the truth to you, honored citizens.
The reason why no politician can stand up against the rush for war being promoted by multinational investment banks, private equity, and a host of parasitic entities is NOT simply that the politicians are corrupt and cowardly, selfish and narcissistic—although they are all of those things too. No, the truth is that the Department of Defense, the Department of Homeland Security, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and other parts of the federal government that have been largely privatized and rendered up as cat’s paws for the rich and powerful to use have issued classified directives that prohibit the discussion of critical issues like the drive for world war, the 9.11 incident, COVID19 and other operations—with serious consequences for anyone who violates those directives.
Such classified directives are accompanied by secret laws (whose existence is not secret). The Congress passes secret laws that prohibit certain actions by public figures.
Secret law is as binding as federal law—but disclosing its use is illegal and punishable by heavy fines.
The use of these unconstitutional secret directives and laws renders impossible the discussion of the most serious issues facing our country, even as our politicians boast of our democracy. All politicians recognize, and accept, this criminal and deadly deal with the devil, an arrangement resulting from years of corporate and bureaucratic power playing footsie.
It is not the first time in history that the control of government and of the military has been taken over by a hidden elite that are ready to kill millions in order to protect their wealth and power.
In the intolerable days of early summer, 1914, citizens across Europe watched in horror as the institutions of government embraced a suicidal march towards war without any space for discussion or for diplomacy. The leaders of France, Germany, England, Russia and Austro-Hungary appeared to be possessed by evil spirits forcing them to take steps that would leave millions of people dead, killing an entire generation of young men—young boys—for sport.
Later, however, it was revealed that these nations had signed numerous secret treaties between them that forced the hands of politicians and bureaucrats—and made it impossible for government to reflect the will of the people. The narrow interests of a handful of the rich, the Rothchilds, the Morgans, the Warburgs, and the Rockerfellers, were promoted at the expense of the rest of the world through such secret governance.
Such an unholy politics of secret governance is precisely what we face today. If any of us survive, no doubt those classified directives, and secret treaties between nations that are used to enforce the COVID19 operation, or to force the drive for war with Russia and China, will be released decades in the future.
What kind of a president do I want to be?
What kind of a president do I want to be? I want to be a president who serves the role of president, making decisions in accord with the law, and following the constitution in a manner that reflects the interests of the American people. I want to do so in a transparent and scientific manner, and I want to treat the people as rational thinking citizens, not consumers, who are entirely capable of understanding my speeches and of coming to their own conclusions without being manipulated by advertising and nefarious public relations campaigns.
I do not want to make money from secret bribes, or to give the veneer of legitimacy to criminal operations meant to destroy our world.
When the so-called progressive politician Bernie Sanders endorsed Joe Biden’s bankrupt campaign for president immediately, we knew that the system was broken beyond repair. Joe Biden at 80, and Donald Trump at 76 make the confused and aged leaders who oversaw the fall of the Soviet Union, Leonid Brezhnev at 75 and Yuri Andropov at 68, seem young by comparison.
I ask that you pull pack for a moment from the steam of lies and manipulative images, that the powerful are drowning us in, and that you think seriously about how we can take back control of our minds, of our families, of our economy, and of our government, and that you do so before the rich and powerful have dragged us into wars that we cannot escape from.
Their goal, without any doubt, is to create a crisis wherein we will have no choice but to enter the dark prison cell that they have lovingly prepared for us in advance.
《人生は速度ではなく方向だ：ハーバード大学 博士の韓国漂流記》（人生은 速度 아니라 方向 이다: 하버드 博士의 韓國漂流記）
（２１世紀部 ﾌﾞｯｸｽ、 ソウル、２０１６年）
《韓国人しかしらない違う大韓民国：ハーバード博士がみた韓国の可能性》（한국인만 모르는 다른 대한민국: 하버드대 박사가 본 한국의 가능성）
Selected Publications of the Asia Institute
（Asia Institute Press、ソウル、2013年）
《世界の碩学が勧告のみ例を話す》（세계의 석학들 한국의미래를 말하다）
The Visible Mundane: Vernacular Chinese and the Emergence of a Literary Discourse on Popular Narrative in Edo Japan （目に見える世俗：中国白話小説の伝播と江戸時代の「通俗」に対する討論の成立）
The Novels of Park Jiwon: Translations of Overlooked Worlds （朴趾源の小説：見過ごした世の中の翻訳）
The Asia Institute
THE ASIA INSTITUTE COVERS ASIA NOT ONLY IN ITS SEMINARS AND REPORTS, BUT ENGAGES AT A MUCH MORE DEEPER LEVEL BY CONSTANT DISCUSSION WITH STAKEHOLDERS AT ALL LEVELS ACROSS ASIA ABOUT THE CRITICAL ISSUES OF OUR TIME: THE ENVIRONMENT, THE IMPACT OF TECHNOLOGY ON SOCIETY, THE FUTURE THAT OUR YOUTH FACE AND THE CHANGING NATURE OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS. THE ASIA INSTITUTE IS INDEED A TRULY PAN-ASIAN THINK TANK.
THE ASIA INSTITUTE CONSIDERS MAINTAINING A BALANCED PERSPECTIVE ON CONTEMPORARY ISSUES AS ITS HIGHEST PRIORITY WHILE TAKING INTO ACCOUNT THE CONCERNS OF THE ENTIRE REGION AND THE INTERESTS OF ALL THE STAKEHOLDERS WHICH SPANS ACROSS GENDER, CULTURAL BACKGROUNDS AND SOCIO-ECONOMIC STATUS. THESE INCLUDE BUT ARE NOT LIMITED TO TECHNICAL EXPERTS, POLICY MAKERS, LOCAL AND REGIONAL COMMUNITIES AND EVEN HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS.
WE PROVIDE AN OBJECTIVE SPACE WHEREIN A SIGNIFICANT DISCUSSION ON CURRENT TRENDS IN TECHNOLOGY, INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS, THE ECONOMY AND THE ENVIRONMENT IS CARRIED OUT. THE ‘OBJECTIVE SPACE’ ACTS AS AN OPEN PLATFORM THAT ALLOWS ANY AND EVERY ONE TO PARTICIPATE.
THE ECONOMIC GROWTH AND INTEGRATION IN ASIA IS INCREASING AT A REMARKABLE PACE IN TERMS OF TRADE, TECHNOLOGY AND FINANCE. ASIA IS NO LONGER SIMPLY A HUB FOR MANUFACTURING, BUT ALSO A CULTURAL, INTELLECTUAL AND A STRATEGIC CENTER FOR THE WORLD. HOWEVER, DESPITE ASIA’S INCREASING ROLE IN ON THE GEOPOLITICAL STAGE, A SERIOUS GAP REMAINS BETWEEN THE STRIKING SPEED OF INTEGRATION IN TERMS OF LOGISTICS, ENERGY AND FINANCE AND THE MUCH RETARDED GROWTH OF INTELLECTUAL COMMUNITIES AND CULTURAL EXCHANGE THAT ADDRESS LONG-TERM COMMON PRIORITIES.
THE ASIA INSTITUTE IS DEDICATED TO INCREASING THE IN-DEPTH DISCUSSION BETWEEN THE CITIZENS OF ASIA ON THE IMPORTANT ISSUES OF OUR AGE SO THAT IT PARALLELS THE LEVEL OF PROMINENCE AND ATTENTION OF TRADE AND FINANCE. THERE IS A DESPERATE NEED FOR OBJECTIVE ANALYSIS AND RIGOROUS DEBATE THAT GOES BEYOND NATIONAL BORDERS AND INCLUDES ALL STAKEHOLDERS IN ASIA.
THE ASIA INSTITUTE FOCUSES ON THESE FOUR INTERRELATED ISSUES WHICH IMPACT THE ENTIRE WORLD. WE SEEK TO INTERPRET THEIR SIGNIFICANCE AND PLAN FOR A GLOBAL RESPONSE THROUGH A COLLABORATIVE DIALOG THAT INVOLVES A BROAD RANGE OF EXPERTS IN MANY COUNTRIES.
THE TRANSFORMATION OF OUR SOCIETY, AND OUR ECONOMY, BY THE UNPRECEDENTED RATE OF TECHNOLOGICAL CHANGE.
ALTHOUGH THE BRICK AND MORTAR BUILDINGS AROUND US ARE UNCHANGED AND THE BORDERS OF COUNTRIES REMAIN ESSENTIALLY THE SAME, OUR WORLD HAS BEEN AND UTTERLY TRANSFORMED BY TECHNOLOGY. COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY BRINGS TOGETHER LIKES WITH LIKES ACROSS THE GLOBE IN UNPREDICTABLE COMBINATIONS. THE VERY PROCESS OF DETERMINING TRUTH FROM FICTION IS MADE ULTIMATELY MORE PROBLEMATIC AS TECHNOLOGY CHANGES HOW WE KNOW AND WHAT WE KNOW, OR DO NOT KNOW.
SO ALSO 3D PRINTING MAKES IT POSSIBLE TO CREATE VIRTUALLY ANYTHING WITHOUT ANY NEED FOR MANUFACTURING. RESPONDING TO THE IMPACT OF TECHNOLOGICAL CHANGE ON SOCIETY WILL BE THE MAJOR CHALLENGE FOR OUR AGE, MADE MORE DIFFICULT BECAUSE THE MANY TRANSFORMATIONS ARE INVISIBLE FOR MOST PEOPLE.
THE IMPACT OF THE NEW SOCIOECONOMIC SYSTEMS ON OUR CLIMATE AT THE LOCAL, REGIONAL AND GLOBAL LEVELS.
CLIMATE CHANGE IS BY FAR THE GREATEST SECURITY THREAT THAT WE FACE TODAY. ALTHOUGH IT HAS BEEN IDENTIFIED AS A PROFOUND DANGER FOR OVER TWENTY YEARS, OUR ECONOMIC SYSTEM AND OUR SOCIAL AND CULTURAL INSTITUTIONS ARE INCAPABLE OF FORMULATING AND IMPLEMENTING A RESPONSE. WE MUST UNDERSTAND HOW OUR CURRENT GLOBAL ECONOMIC AND TECHNOLOGICAL REGIME CONTRIBUTES TO CLIMATE CHANGE AND FORMULATE CONCRETE STEPS FOR ADAPTATION TO, AND MITIGATION OF, CLIMATE CHANGE ON A GLOBAL SCALE.
THE TRANSFORMATION OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS BY TECHNOLOGICAL CHANGE, SPECIFICALLY CHANGES IN DIPLOMACY, SECURITY, EDUCATION, FINANCE AND TRADE.
ALTHOUGH WE USE THE SAME TERMS TO DESCRIBE INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS THAT WE EMPLOYED 100 YEARS AGO, THE NATURE OF DIPLOMACY, SECURITY AND TRADE HAVE BEEN ALTERED BEYOND RECOGNITION BY TECHNOLOGICAL CHANGE. IMAGES, TEXTS AND VIDEOS CAN BE TRANSPORTED AROUND THE WORLD INSTANTANEOUSLY, AFFECTING A TRUE “DEATH OF DISTANCE,” AND INCREASINGLY THEY CAN BE FABRICATED JUST AS EASILY.
PEOPLE AND GOODS ARE TRANSPORTED WITH GREAT EASE AS WELL OVER VAST DISTANCES, AND GLOBALIZATION HAS CREATED ENORMOUS DISPLACED POPULATIONS. SO ALSO GOODS CAN BE PROCESSED AND SHIPPED AROUND THE WORLD IN AN ENTIRELY AUTOMATED MANNER—PART OF THE FOURTH INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION. WE MUST ENTIRELY RETHINK THE CONCEPT OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS IN LIGHT OF THESE TRANSFORMATIVE CHANGES, MOVING BEYOND A VAGUE ANXIETY ABOUT GLOBALIZATION AND RATHER IDENTIFYING THE DISTINCT IMPACT OF TECHNOLOGIES ON INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS.
THE RISE OF ANTI-INTELLECTUALISM AND THE DECLINE OF THE APPLICATION OF RIGOROUS SCIENTIFIC APPROACHES TO ANALYSIS AND PROBLEM SOLVING, EVEN IN THE MIDST OF RAPID TECHNOLOGICAL EVOLUTION.
THE WORLD FACES A TERRIBLE WAVE OF ANTI-INTELLECTUALISM, FROM CLIMATE CHANGE DENIAL TO RACIST ESSENTIALISM, WHICH UNDERMINES OUR ABILITY TO RESPOND TO THE PRESSING ISSUES OF OUR AGE AND ENCOURAGES A SELF-INDULGENT ATTITUDE BORN OF IGNORANCE AND INDIFFERENCE. THIS DEVELOPMENT IS A PRODUCT OF THE DEBASEMENT OF EDUCATION INTO A COMMERCIAL PRODUCT AND THE RESULTING DECLINE IN THE INTELLECTUAL RIGOR IN THE MEDIA AND OTHER FORMS OF EXPRESSION. THIS NEW CULTURE IS INHERENTLY ANTI-SCIENCE, EVEN AS IT EMBRACES GLITZY TECHNOLOGIES.
WE MUST AVOID EMOTIONAL RESPONSES DRIVEN BY TECHNOLOGICAL BELLS AND WHISTLES, RATHER APPLYING A RATIONAL SCIENTIFIC APPROACH IN POLICY, IN TECHNOLOGY AND IN STRATEGY. WE MUST AVOID THE ANTI-SCIENCE, “BREAD AND CIRCUSES” APPROACH TO POLITICAL DISCOURSE THAT WE SEE SPREADING AROUND THE WORLD. ABOVE ALL, INTELLECTUALS MUST HAVE A STRONG SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY AND SHOULD BE TREATED AS ESSENTIAL FIGURES IN SOCIETY.
The problems we face today, from the environmental crisis to the increasing divide between the rich and poor, can only be solved by primarily initiating a profound contemplation within ourselves so as to cooperate for building more novel and sustainable solutions. Only when we have addressed the spiritual hunger and psychological insecurities that lead to unrestrained consumption, or ruthless conflict, can we begin find meaningful long-term answers. As Albert Einstein once remarked, “We can’t solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them.” Our research and our endeavors take into account the underlying contradictions within ourselves that have brought about the crisis of this day.
Our Fukushima Initiative, for example, has built a global platform that brings together different forms of expertise from around the world so as to find a solution to the dangerous challenges posed by the Fukushima nuclear disaster. In the process we have created new approaches to collaboration in policy, technology, analysis and implementation. This discussion has also touched on the philosophical and spiritual challenges for us and future generations posed by rapid and disruptive technological change.
Finally, the Asia Institute is engaged in a dialog with stakeholders from across Asia concerning the future of Asia itself. We always have been debating on how Asia can move beyond traditional geopolitical rivalries and envision an Asia as a peaceful totality in which current integration provides new horizons. We have written concrete proposals for a security architecture built around the response to climate change; for a “constitution of information” to respond to the current crisis we faced as a result of the rapid change in the technology for communication and massive scale surveillance and for new systems to promote international collaboration; and P2P (peer to peer) cooperation throughout Asia and around the world that would encourage free interaction of the stakeholders to jointly produce knowledge and other forms of goods/services primarily for its ‘use value’ instead of its ‘market value’ to temper the ever widening economic gap and promote empowerment at the grass roots level. We have been in debates and discussions on how to incorporate the perspectives of experts from the Middle East or Southeast Asia to the debate on the peaceful reunification of the Korean Peninsula. We have also discussed on how ecologists, artists and philosophers can contribute meaningfully in the debate about trade, finance and other forms of integration.