Geopolitical Breach of Commitment in the Light of Divorce, Pederasty and Pedophilia

TRANSCEND MEMBERS, 9 Feb 2026

Anthony Judge | Laetus in Praesens - TRANSCEND Media Service

Collective Implications of Practices Dating from Ancient Greece and Rome

Introduction

2 Feb 2026 – There is currently considerable concern with potential breaches of collective long-term international commitment through treaties and “special relationships” — exemplified by US foreign policy with regard to collective security through NATO and the United Nations (New World Order of Walk-away Wheeling and Dealing, 2018; Alleged Breach of UN Treaty Obligations by US, 2010; Davide Castelvecchi, The US is quitting 66 global agencies: what does it mean for science? Nature, 20 January 2026). There is a case for comparing the acceptability of such breaches by comparison with the mindset regarding marital commitments “until death do us part” — in the light of the incidence of divorce, notably in the USA. How is long-term “commitment’ to be compared in both cases? What real meaning is associated with any such “promise” — upheld as “sacred” to varying degrees?

Such breaches also merit exploration in the light of widespread concern with current scandals of elite pedophilia — exemplified by the role of Jeffrey Epstein and the challenges to Western elites of the release of the Epstein files — however questionably and heavily redacted are those released. The comparison is arguably justified by the sense in which such scandals highlight the extent to which they have been enabled by a form of breach of confidence by elites in relation to victims held to be innocent — if only by virtue of their age and inexperience. A curious feature of pedophilia as currently practiced, and righteously condemned, is how it is to be distinguished by practitioners (rather than commentators) from the pederasty respectably practiced by elites in Ancient Greece and Rome — societal models which continue to be cited with admiration as an inspiration for Western secular civilization. Little is said of how practitioners frame their activity (the “self-narrative”) in contrast with how commentators frame it (the “exploitation diagnosis”)

Similarly unmentionable, except through anecdote, is the extent of some form of sexual intercourse in institutionalized environments, whether schools, universities or military establishments — however it may be tolerated as a part of hazing rituals (Aashish Srivastava, Brutal rituals of hazing won’t go away — and unis are increasingly likely to be held responsible, The Conversation, 9 November 2020). There is a degree of irony to the association of such rituals with so-called Greek letter societies with which elites-to-be are members (Hazing in fraternities and sororities, Wikipedia). Although well-documented, the extent to which hazing includes forms of sodomy is carefully avoided — whether amongst future elites or otherwise (Mary Elizabeth Williams, Rape culture punishes boys too, Salon, 24 June 2013). Irrespective of the subsequent implications, there is little insight into “who has buggered whom” during the formative process of elites.

The parallels with institutional behaviour merit exploration of the extent to which the mindset associated with pedophilia — in the guise of claims to pederasty — have long been evident in the engagement of former colonial powers (and the international institutions they have created) with emerging countries. The pattern could be seen as even more evident in the engagement of sophisticated multinational corporations. More provocatively, are there institutional “Epsteins” facilitating the engagement of sophisticated institutions with emerging countries for the purposes of their exploitation? Is the COP process one such example? Is the World Economic Forum another (Complicity of World Economic Forum in “impalement of the planet”? 2023). Does the relation of the new Board of Peace to the Palestinians of Gaza merit examination in that light?

Especially curious is the extent to which the language of courtship may be used in the marketing and public relations initiatives by which engagement with “targets” is framed (Sanford V. Berg, Corporate Courtship and Successful Joint Ventures, California Management Review, 22, 1980, 2; Marketplace Approaches to Courtship, Love, and Sex, Encyclopedia of Human Relationships). And yet the courtship arts offer a valuable way of reframing the dynamic in that both parties bring skills to the encounter. The “victim” exercises a degree of agency within constrained conditions (or may assume that to be the case) — thereby offering a potential challenge to any righteous oversimplification. This suggests the need to move beyond the unilateral exploitation frame toward a co-produced courtship illusion.

Potentially more problematic is the degree to which incest has long been a feature of Western societies — even in the USA (Rachel Hope Cleves, From Pederasty to Pedophilia: sex between children or youth and adults in U.S. history, History Compass, 16, 1, 2018). This could suggest the recognition of how emerging nations engendered by colonial powers may be subsequently engaged by their progenitors — having drawn the borders, created the institutions, and then “partnered” with their creation — a pattern closer to incest than to courtship.

That there is a degree of mindset equivalence between the individual and the collective case is suggested by the perception of some critics that many emerging countries have been “raped” by international institutions — or are vulnerable to such abuse by powerful nations. The possibility was notably highlighted by the appointment of Dominique Straus Kahn as managing director of the International Monetary Fund (Pre-Judging an Institution’s Implicit Strategy by the Director’s Private Behaviour, 2011). The appointment presumably followed due diligence of a quality which has more recently resulted in the appointment of Peter Mandelson as Ambassador of the UK to the USA.

TO CONTINUE READING Go to Original – laetusinpraesens.org

Share this article: email mastodon facebook 🔗 copy link

DISCLAIMER: The statements, views and opinions expressed in pieces republished here are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of TMS. In accordance with title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. TMS has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is TMS endorsed or sponsored by the originator. “GO TO ORIGINAL” links are provided as a convenience to our readers and allow for verification of authenticity. However, as originating pages are often updated by their originating host sites, the versions posted may not match the versions our readers view when clicking the “GO TO ORIGINAL” links. This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

There are no comments so far.