Bio-ideology
Presently, a world without the Military is not possible. But, it’s still one world with one dream – a world without the Military.
The fictional philosophy of Bio-ideology is a war policy. After the world has seen two world wars and a “cold war”, the policy is a culmination of a century of conflicts and couldn’t be escaped.
Bio-ideology has been in development since after the Cold War and is meant to be a humane way of preventing a possible global war and it’s in conjunction with the Geneva Convention.
Why the name Bio-ideology? Because, the policy reflects the laws of nature where the basic building blocks are always in balance even if there exists tension and this creates a semi-peaceful reality instead of destruction.
After the Cold War, there was no apparent aggressor to stop and no clear defendant. Bio-ideology recognises that even if the nuclear bomb is a mighty weapon, it will never be accepted by the general public. Still, it doesn’t sanction nuclear disarmament because the creators use nuclear bombs as a deterrent. In terms of “good” and “bad”, the ethical conclusion is that the continued storage of nuclear bombs lands in the grey area, because the actual use is impossible for a long time into the future. So-called “weapons of mass destruction” are dirty weapons and the use of them are seen as a crime.
“White Marble Disposal” was the code name for the neutron bomb, which is a small nuclear weapon.
It will never be made, because some things are sacred.
Bio-ideology is not about a war to end all wars. But, it had to come into existence in the 21th century, since the military mostly turned into a tool for humanitarian relief and almost became a “one world military”. An example is the International Security Assistance Force,
which was deployed after the launch of the term “war on terror”. This rethoric is not in violation of Bio-ideology to begin with, but it has failed due to the aggression in the use of further unrealistic security measures against “terrorists” and the consequence is that ISAF failed it’s mission in Afghanistan.
- The idea of surveillance states is dubious
- There’s far too much information to track
- The possibility for surveillance by any institution is limited, due to the great number of inhabitants
- It’s not too difficult to hide information and communication if one absolutely wants to
- Old and new technology can assist in keeping things private.
Bio-ideology is not about a new arms race, nor about total military disarmament. The illusion of world peace after the Cold War was rather a stand-still, while individual nation states saw their sovereignty dwindle when global security was the focus in the name of international co-operation. The “one world military” was not part of Bio-ideology, but the conglomerate of world political organisations thought they could change the policy by making the Military an integral part of the development of the so-called “international community”.
In this article, we claim that Bio-ideology was unavoidable. It was created both by intention and as a natural by-product of the complex situation that evolved in the late 20th century. It was the best solution to prevent new conflicts, now when there was confusion about what the Military is about. Bio-ideology turned the armed forces into an invisible security asset; something secondary, but not useless.
Into the third decade of this century, Bio-ideology is still applicable. Leftovers of it are still in effect, but the original idea has been diluted. Whether it can be helpful to end any current conflicts, can’t be estimated as long as it’s not ratified as an official agreement and now exists only as a remnant from the Cold War.
© 2021 MNLC