Rubina Polovina,

I'm not quite sure what you mean by right side of history as the phrase was originally conceived to underwrite new concepts or new forms of totalitarianism, especially representing Russia and China.

Rubina,

Well clearly my question was meant to reflect the present whereby a state on the security council is conducting a frightening war against its neighbour and refusing to stop while of course refusing to leave its seat on the security council. The war is genocidal in that the offending nation is attempting to eradicate the identity, that is culture, of the other. As the responsible nation has a veto against any action taken against it, although action is being taken against it without employing the UN, and indeed its position is untenable as it has bombed a city into ruin killing 80,000 men, women and children. Engaged in torture of the citizens of the nation it has attacked, and further transported 20,000 of that nation's children into its own territory.

Your piece concerns itself with, by comparison, the luxuries of self identity, which although it may satisfy the future hopes of liberal western countries where identity is crucial, cannot impact on many societies where the leaders and the elite in general is more concerned with stealing and brutality. Several hundred years of cultural development separate these societies from each other. One embraces the masculine constructs of violence, whereby doing violence places an individual at the top of the tree and that individual is revered and embellished, and in the other feminine virtues are seen as necessary for both genders and violent male identity is rejected.

Thought so! That is what nihilism is based on.