Olavo de Carvalho
O Globo, September 15, 2001

When a single phenomenon is described in two opposite ways, first by those at the center of the events and then by those who suffered its effects from a distance, the first version is most likely the reality while the second is fantasy. But there’s more to it than that. If we don’t know how fantasy was born from reality itself, we don’t understand the reality.

The clearest example is the New World Order. From Brazil’s perspective, a periphery nation, this concept is merely a new name for U.S. capitalism. From the U.S. perspective, at the center of the debate, it is a socialist project and essentially anti-American.

Obviously the Americans are seeing what is really there, and we, in turn, are delirious as always. Some scandalous facts, mostly hidden from Brazilian public opinion, can reveal this clearly:

1) In the past decade, the U.S. dismantled its nuclear defense system, reducing its stock of atomic weapons to a fifth of the size of the Russian and Chinese reserves, while ceding control of strategic areas like the Panama Canal to Beijin and allowing Chinese spies free reign on American soil.

2) At the same time, the U.S. openly violated its own Constitution by ceding increasingly larger shares of its national sovereignty to the UN, and admitting the interference of international organs into domestic affairs, such as education. As a result, text books adopted in public schools today are infused with anti-American propaganda and rigorously purged of all signs of patriotism and Christianity.

3) U.S. territory has been invaded and taken over by European NGOs backing Indians and ecologist causes. As early as the first half of the 1980s, 10% of the country’s total land area was out of control of citizens’ and the government’s hands, summing up to what was already at that time the largest transfer of real estate in human history.

4) The concessions that the ruling class has made to the New Left since the 1960s have transformed the academic, journalistic, and film establishment into a totally out-of-control anti-American propaganda machine. U.S. universities have become the largest source of Marxist indoctrination on the planet, surpassing the former Soviet university system.

5) The violent repression of any anti-Communism protest disabled the government from preventing Soviet spies and later Chinese spies from infiltrating the FBI, CIA, the National Security Agency, and military intelligence services. Ironically, while the opening of the Moscow Files has retroactively lent credence to Joe McCarthy and proved that the Communist presence in the federal government during the 1950s was even larger than he suspected, and while Soviet and Chinese operatives have admitted that Communist powers spent much more money on psychological warfare in the U.S. during the Vietnam War than on battlefield equipment, the much bigger penetration of the 1970s-90s took place under the auspices of “political correctness” which used the term “fascism” to label those who dared discuss it in the press.

Pretending a nation that disarms and weakens itself to such a point would at the same time be behind the height of global imperialism is absurd to the point of lunacy. The U.S. is not the owner of globalism. It is the first and largest victim of it. It’s true that some large U.S. fortunes influence the forces determining the new state of things. But to confuse the plans of a half dozen monopolistic dynasties with the national interest of the U.S. or with the spirit of liberal capitalism is more than dumb: it’s crazy. Monopolies and liberalism are opposing terms, and many of these monopolistic organizations have already proven their congenital anti-Americanism by financing the two totalitarian regimes that have worked hardest to destroy the U.S.: the Communist Soviet Union, and the Nazis.

Still, this foolishness is not born of nothing. These organizations are the same ones that, alongside the anxiously willing European Economic Community, have subsidized the majority of leftist movements on the globe and now awaken a global wave of anti-American sentiment, clearly present at the Durban Conference. They were the ones also who, under the pretext of anti-racism, installed pro-Communist governments in South Africa and Zimbabwe, which today are guilty of ethnic cleansing that the conference, in its ominous silence, has transformed from hideous crime into a right and merit.

A simple study of the sources of financing for Brazilian scholarships, fellowships, publications and research programs show that, without the help of these helpful monopolistic organizations, all leftist thought would practically disappear from the public eye.

The foolish fantasy, therefore, reveals its entire reason for being: if global monopolies strive in the U.S. to dilute national sovereignty in subservience to the “international community,” then logically they subsidize radical rhetoric in foreign countries that blame the U.S. for the evils of the oppressive New World Order. The oldest trick in the book of the criminal is to demonize the victims.

Leftist intellectuals, after all, always need some money and are drawn to the first carrot dangled in front of their noses. Nobody serves better for manipulations of this type of uneducated, verbose, vain, and foolish intellectual activist which Third World universities annually launch on the market in stunning numbers.

It’s no surprise that, without a clear intellectual vision of what occurs in the world, these persons are equally devoid of moral conscience and, in fighting for good, take the defense of any hideous crime that seems to aim the “bête noire” of their delirium: the Yankee imperialism.

There has been no shortage on this country’s television and in newspapers of those trying to diminish the horror of the September attacks, justifying them as “inevitable consequences” of George W. Bush’s foreign policy, as if complex terrorist operations could be improvised in the few months after the new president took office.

George W. Bush said after the horrors of the World Trade Center and the Pentagon that the U.S. was dedicated to “no longer distinguish between terrorists and those who harbor them.” How can one not also include among those protectors people who perform operations of misinformation and psychological warfare in the media, through ignorance or perfidy, whose support can determine the success of any armed aggression?