Multipolarity versus Unipolarity

Image Credit: The New Humanitarian

My wish for a multipolar world

There is so much that African countries can learn from each other, so much that Global South countries can learn from each other, that the oppressed in global North can learn from each other. And here's something I have been flirting with in my thought: perhaps our unity matters so much beyond our geographical limitations? 

At the end of the day, I have no-where to go but to expect or wish a way of organizing towards action for the better. I am at least comforted by the intellectual activism out there - maybe the actual solution will come in future generations!! Intellectual activism in itself requires courage, against attacks both from the Global North and those whose mind has been dominated by them.

This is my desire for a multipolar world.

Why the unipolar world is not beneficial

One disagreement, maybe subconsciously, is if the West does not rule over us, in other words, without a unipolar world, where do we get our moral compass from? 

But the way the Western world or if you would like to call it the Global North dominates the world is through diverse, invasive institutions, and innovations in energy and technology, not to mention slavery and colonialism, in the past. This hegemony is supported by cultural hegemony and epistemological dominance.

 They also don't have the moral superiority. Their response depends on the benefits they get. Let's look at the logic: If the Western countries find strategic benefit, usually political-economic, against a certain country. It will interfere. But this strategic benefit usually doesn't translate to local benefit. It is never for democracy for democracy's sake. You can replace democracy for human  rights, etc...and you will get the same thing. On the other hand, it will never act against a country who acts as their puppet. 

We also live in a global order which punishes the global south for debt while subsidizing technology companies in the global north. It either ensures we export raw materials and import finished goods or takes over local sectors which ensure finished goods are exported. It ensures our credit assessment is so low that we are punished for borrowing while protecting the purchasing power of the dollar. All of this while closing its borders.

Think of Ethiopia. A puppet state willing to do everything and anything for Western countries, including the above. It is getting a go ahead for access, if not control, over the Red Sea. But, why? Because these institutions can do anything if the control is with Ethiopia. But, (or if you'd like, because of this) when it comes to internal human rights abuses, they will not be as fierce to Ethiopia as they'd been to Venezuela. Sure, they will make statements regarding human rights abuses, return of the displaced, (transitional) justice, and oh, don't forget DDR. But, they will not interfere, allow the ICHREE to continue, or God forbid, overthrow Abiy Ahmed. 

But, I won't expect much

But then, we look into our own communities (Global South) and we find human rights abuses, against rights, right because we are humans. The end is the same - those countries who are "closed" and "open" to outside influences end up violating human rights, at least economic rights. My wish is to see better from so-called "closed" countries because of the reasons I outlined so far as much as others who think "the West is the best" expect to see better from "open" countries.