World News

It’s not nationalists v. internationalists; it is international fascism v. international democracy.

Posted by:

Date: Sunday, 28 January 2024

It’s not nationalists v. internationalists; it is international fascism v. international democracy.

Eric Zuesse (blogs at

International democracy is the world’s main need in order to avoid a WW III. Here is why:

International democracy would be like the U.N. except with enforcement ability.

This means that it would retain almost all of the features of the U.N.’s Charter, such as the General Assembly, which is on a one-nation-one-vote basis, and the Security Council, which is aimed instead at preventing any of the major powers from expanding its empire near or up to the border of any other, because doing that would enable or at least greatly facilitate one superpower to invade that other one and so to initiate a Third World War, which the U.N. as originally conceived by FDR had been intended to PREVENT. 

Another required change from the existing Charter is that it must clearly indicate that the United Nations concerns ONLY international laws and NOT intranational laws. This ALSO means that neither the laws nor the enforcement capabilities (but the current U.N. has none of the latter, no enforcement, and this must be rectified) pertain to any ‘international human rights’, because ALL human rights can effectively be legislated and enforced ONLY on a NATIONAL — not at all upon an international — legal basis. Even intranational genocides cannot be effectively dealt with by any international laws, but ONLY international ones can be. (For example: Hitler’s was international and therefore would have been coverable under international laws. Also, what Israel is now doing to Gazans would be, because Gaza is legally under the jurisdiction of Palestine, not of Israel, and so this too is an international genocide — which the Truman-designed U.N. is powerless to prevent.) This means that genocides and ethnic cleansings that are purely intranational can be effectively dealt with ONLY by diplomatic intranational means within and between individual countries, NOT by any international body. 

On January 25th of 2024, Amnesty International headlined “Emmanuel Macron’s participation as guest of honour at India’s Republic Day celebrations sends out a worrying political signal”, and argued that France shouldn’t be cozying-up to Narendra Modi’s bigoted Government. However, while that would be true as a matter pertaining to Indian national laws and their enforcement, it is NOT true as a matter of international laws and their enforcement. America’s NBC News published then a photo with the caption “French President Emmanuel Macron waves from a vehicle alongside Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi during a roadshow in Jaipur, part of the French leader's two-day visit with an eye on sealing lucrative deals with the world's fifth-largest economy”. NBC News and Amnesty International are agencies of the U.S. empire, which wants there to be something they call “R2P” or Responsibility to Protect, which would ‘authorize’ them to issue international sanctions against or even to invade foreign countries, in order to install ‘democracy’ and “international human rights’ (which don’t actually exist) there. Their R2P is a hoax that is supported by the U.S. empire in order to ‘justify’ its many (and mostly illegal under international law) international sanctions, coups, and invasions so as to expand even further its empire. Right now it virtually surrounds both Russia and China, the other two superpowers (exactly what FDR would have clearly outlawed in the U.N.’s Charter) — and France’s Government wants to be a fourth superpower except that it is even more blatantly hypocritical than America’s Government is, and so it both endorses and itself violates America’s R2P.

International laws cannot constructively be based upon either America’s blatant might-makes-right fascist imperialism, or France’s ‘softer’, even more hypocritical, type of fascist imperialism.

FDR’s reason for conceiving the U.N. was to outlaw internationally ANY empire, but he tragically died on 12 April 1945 two weeks before the San Francisco Conference in which the Charter for the U.N. was written between 25 April and 26 June 1945.

There need to be international laws, and there needs to be a world government to draft and create them, and to enforce and impose them against violators of them; so, the problem today isn’t that the U.N. exists, but instead that it isn’t the international democracy of nations that its anti-imperialist inventor, FDR, had intended it to be. That needs to be corrected. The current U.N. Charter’s Amendment provisions (Articles 108 and 109) would enable that to be done if the U.S., UK, and French Governments wouldn’t block it at the Security Council. They are the malefactors that want to increase their empires more than they want there to become a U.N. that transforms into being an authentic international democracy of nations that can prevent there being any WW III. Above all, the U.S. Government will be making this decision. If it refuses to do so, then the responsibility to punish it for refusing to do so falls upon each and every other nation.


Investigative historian Eric Zuesse’s latest book, AMERICA’S EMPIRE OF EVIL: Hitler’s Posthumous Victory, and Why the Social Sciences Need to Change, is about how America took over the world after World War II in order to enslave it to U.S.-and-allied billionaires. Their cartels extract the world’s wealth by control of not only their ‘news’ media but the social ‘sciences’ — duping the public.

EmbassyMedia - ራብዓይ ግንባር!

Dehai Events