RE LEADERSHIP

The essential ingredients necessary to assist mankind and our world out of their present conditions of weakness, defect, and danger--in a word, to beget world improvement and reform--are already in our possession.  But, in order to accomplish these things, we must ignore our variations, and begin to "pull together," under the guidance of our most competent and capable professionals in all the necessary and appropriate fields of social science and operation of government.  Perhaps then a directing and guiding group of persons, who would together constitute what I call a "World Guiding Body," would be enabled to produce peace and improvement for all of mankind.

On the other hand, as I have emphasized in the past, care and precautions must be at all times exercised to make certain that no form of intellectual "dictatorship," preoccupation with personal enrichmnent or aggrandizement, or reversion to "political" activity, among such leaders would arise.  Methods must be determined and developed to insure that such officials will continually conceive of themselves, and thus behave, as but eminently skilled practitioners within divisions of a discipline perhaps best considered and referred to in its entirety as "social science."

"Social science" is a key term and kind of "common denominator" in this regard.  Thus, a great many more "social scientists" will be needed.  This would include people trained in fields such as Political Science, Public Law, Government, Management, and various sorts of Administration.  They ought be professionals in possession of the most effective skills in the areas of conflict reduction and resolution, initiative focus, resource utilization and development, as well as social benefits, programs, and controls.  Such social scientists in contrast to politicians or military personnel, would be best able to consult and advise, as well as to engage in the research, planning, and development required in regard to their respective specialties, concerning the affairs of the world of tomorrow.

Moreover, experts in the numerous physical sciences, as well as the medical, legal, and techjnical professions, that I ha ve referred to various times herein, would likewise be required, to conceptualize, plan, and direct the numerous instrumentalities that would need to be put into place and/or dealt with durins this anticipated effectuation of a brave new and improved era.

Some amusing examples which demonstrate that many of us are already of this sentiment frequently appear in our press.  For one, not many years ago, a Japanese government official was quoted as commenting that Japan's budget was "not a political matter,"  and that politicians should therefore refrain from interfering with the government. 

And probably more laughable is the account of a situation wherein a certain American columnist, addressing a group of corporate CEOs, asked for a show of hands concerning who had recently voted for a certain U.S. President--resulting in almost every hand reaching upward.  He then asked, "How many here would let him be CEO of your company?"--whereupon not a single hand went up.  Need more be said in this regard?

                                                              * * * * *

RE LEADERSHIP

Government by the Skilled

Down through history, there have been a few examples of recognition of the fact that effective government will result from the efforts of small skilled combinations of statesmen or advisors, who are cognizant of public needs and interests.

Several centuries before the birth of Christ, China began to delegate its ruling powers to "scholar-officials," who were chosen pjursuant to state-administered competitive examinations.  These tests were continuing, so as to constitute an ever-ongoing search for new and superior talent.  Thus, the Empire was guided by appointed officials, as opposed to hereditary nobles:  a "professional civil service" of "scholar-gentry officials," if you will, whose mandates were said to comprise greater quantities of moral virtue and wisdom, than coercive and punitive laws. 

Moving to ancient Greece, during pre-Christian years, we note that Plato's Republic likewise recommended direction of the populace by individuals of high moral and intellectual status, who should be chosen by merit.

 France can also be counted among the proponents of, and hosts to, a measure of this sort of professional direction.  Beginning in the sixteenth century, the Valois royalty resorted to employment of professional officialdom as a means of avoiding interference by powerful aristocrats.  Later, during the eighteenth century, Jean-Jacques Rousseau counseled his readers that "it is the best and most natural arrangement that the wisest should govern the many."  Other Frenchmen, who favored the choosing of skilled persons to man the helm of government included Henri Saint-Simon, who, during the nineteenth century, encouraged a new leadership order from among the intellectual class; and twentieth century scholar-philosopher Pierre Bourdieu, who stressed the need for politicians to behave more like scholars than politicians.

  Corresponding with this, the political institutions of France's Second Empire (1852-1870) included a Council of State, comprised of experts who composed legislation and issued advice on technical matters.  And proceeding to the twentieth century, we find French public leadership recruited from among top-ranking graduates from the country's top-ranking schools, further educated at institutions such as the Ecole Polytechnique or Ecole d'Administration, and awardede positions within one or another of the Grands Corps or Council of Ministers.

Other places within our world have occasionally resorted to the utilization of intelligence and expertise in the operation of government.  For example, when the crown expelled the clergy from administrative posts in sixteenth century England, their places were ably filled by "university-trained laymen" of "remarkable abilities and education." (Liah Greenfeld, Nationalism)  This was in harmony with the contemporaneous writings of scholar Thomas Elyot, who proclaimed, at such an early date, that the basis of hierarchy ought be intelligence rather than nobility. (Sir Thomas Elyot, Governour)  Four centuries later, during the 1930s, in a noteworthy effort, Britain's Labor government attempted to rise above parties and politics in general, by seeking and pursuing policy recommendations issued by commissions composed of experts in the particular fields involved.

In the United States, intellectual capability and/or business acumen have at times been looked to as factors in government.  Thomas Jefferson for one, in his writings, supported an "insurrection of science, talents and courage against rank and birth."  During the Progressive era of the early twentieth century, cities cuch as Cleveland, Detroit, and Toledo elected businessmen as mayors, presuming that they could run these cities with the same efficiency as they operated their businesses (a currrent example is Michael Bloomberg, now Mayor of New York City).  When Franklin D. Roosevelt took office in 1933, he began to rescue his country, looking to the advice and guidance of a group of leading academics, who became known as his "think tank" or "brain trust."  And a later President, John F. Kennedy, likewise arrived at many of his decisions via the assistance of "some of the best brains in the country"--the best and the brightest from institutions around the [nation]...." (J.A.S. Grenville, A History of the World in the Twentieth Century; Downey, Green, eds., The Twentieth Century). 

The common denominator, in these numerous, varied, and somewhat scattered examples is the employment of what could be referred to as specially competent persons in the functions of government.

I do not wish to appear blind to the fact that most of the higher posts within the governments of the msjority of our more advanced countries are today filled by persons who are university, and frequently law school, educated.  But such training is mostly for the purpose of creating good lawyers or skillful businessmen.  Rarely is it an education specifically directed toward competence in the functions and operations of government.  Moreover, special interests, the political "game," and the distractions involved in the pursuit of re-election, seem to additionally occupy a major proportion of the time, talents, and attention of such leaders.

And when the terms of our current officials are over, they simply go out and operate lucrative law practices and/or businesses--which is what they had been trained to do in the first place.  Some will continue to function politically as well--"behind the scenes"--as lobbyists, and/or assisting other office seekers to win nominations, appointments, and elections.

And so our world thus continues to spin--maintaining its uncomfortable and dangerous status quo.  Our problems, conflicts, and tragedies continue to occur,in an almost predictable sequence.  And most of us continue on as well, in like fashion, seemingly oblivious to the fact that relief, improvement and change are in fact possible.

What we really require is abandonment of our factional ways; and of our continued entrustment of our world, our safety, our children, and our futures, to leadership by factionally oriented and factionally chosen "popular" individuals--or worse, tyrants whose status is based upon force or fear; or leaders who claim to be leaders because they are the descendants of leaders.  What we really require is leadership by skilled professionals--experts and specialists in the procedures involved in the operation of government and society--having no agenda stemming from poloitical advantage or personal self-interest.

                                                   * * * * *

RE LEADERSHIP

Government by Heredity

Political scientists distinguish three forms of "legitimacy" that determine the basis of sovereignty:  charismatic, rational, and traditional.

Where sovereignty springs from "charismatic legitimacy," the ruler usually proclaims himself to be, and is often consequently considered to be in possession of, uniquely superior powers, and/or embarked upon some divinely appointed mission.  "Rational legitimacy" constitutes a grounds for the yielding of obedience and respect by the governed to a set of defined rules and laws that are laid down by the leader or his deputies; for the most part logical and clearly set out; and followed by the governed out of fear and/or respect for him or her, or for the concept of obedience to legal mandates in general.

Where "traditional legitimacy" is the rationale supporting someone's power, his claims, acts, and rulings are accepted and followed simply because this is the way it has always been; and thus, for the sake of uniformity and security, should always be.  This last sort of legitimacy is the common form upon which kings, emperors, and other such monarchs, were given, or founded, their claims to power down through history.

In years gone by, monarchs became tyrants, taxing at will, regarding their nation's resources as their personal property, living luxuriously while subjects starved, and occasionally--resorting to "charismatic legitimacy"--declaring themselves to be deities--or descended therefrom.  For example, in seventeenth century France, the Divine Right concept and Cardinal Richelieu combined to insist that kings be regarded and respected as "most glorious instruments of divine providence," recipients of authority directly from God, and accountable to God alone.  Laboring under such misapprehensions, it is no wonder that the French Kings of that period behaved as they did.

England's royalty believed and behaved little differently.  They considered the nation to comprise the monarch's estate; and the rest of the populace to be but tenants or occupants thereof.

Russian royalty exhibited a like attitude prior to the revolution.  Czars, supported by the Russian Church, felt no compunction in considering and treating the country and its people as but an extension of their persons.

More recently, a former army sergeant rose to seize power in the Central African Republic, one of that continent's most poverty-stricken countries.  He bestowed the title of "emperor upon himself, at a 1977 coronation ceremony that cost his "subjects" over twenty million dollars.

When, in 1971, England's Queen Elizabeth II asked Parliament to increase her annual grant to $1.4 Million (in U.S. Dollar equivalent), Richard Crossman, a former Labor Minister and current editor of the New Statesman, commented that one of the world's richest women ought think twice about burdening [poor ordinary] taxpayers further.

It is simply not logical to entrust the regulation and guidance of a people or place to a particular person or group who simply claimed or snatched power at one time or another in the past.  And there is even less logic in the supposition that the descendants of a person or persons who were relied upon for personal and material protection, by a relatively small group of people many years ago, are today the most effective individuals to direct and guide the sizeable segment of society that comprises a "nation."  Ancient demonstrations of strength, bravery, domination, or ability to assemble and direct hordes of combatants, though perhaps admirable at the time, ought not be the basis for trust and powers that can affect the lives and fates of millions in today's society.

A remnant of the age of widespread monarchy consists of the two-chamber legislative system that exists in a number of countries, including Canada, England, and the United States.  The upper house represents, in a symbolic fashion, what was formerly known as the "aristocracy."  As such, it is still meant to be a check against the possible hasty acts of the lower chamber (or "common people").  In some countries, including Canada, members of the upper chamber are appointed--rather than elected; and in England, membership in the House of Lords is still principally hereditary.  In various other countries, possession of a certain amount of wealth, membership in a profession, or a title of nobility, are prerequisite to service in the upper section of the legislature.  This rationale betrays pure and simple resistance to change, and hopeful preservation of an obsolete status quo. 

Application of common sense ought produce a realization that neither a quantity of wealth, a professional degree, nor a noble title, will cause the possessor to be the most efficient or effective in the guidance and direction of society.  On the other hand, come to think of it, neither does the fact that a member of the lower house--or of any other branch of government--was "elected by a landslide."  Only the most capable and competent in the actual pursuits involved in any field--including those concerning the administration and operation of our world--should be in positions of leadership and guidance within governments anywhere.

                                                           * * * * *



Government by Politicians

"Democracy" sounds like a good thing.  It conjures up ideas of a mass of people voicing and effectuating their desires, approvals, and disapprovals.  But in actuality, this is not what happens.  Instead, the decisions and determinations, policies, and actions that determine our lives, expend our money, and take our sons, are made by officeholders who are beholden to their party superiors, and to the dream of re-election.

It is simple common knowledge that the policy-making branches within the governments of our democracies are usually controlled, to a great extent, by the political party which happens to be in the ascendency at the moment.  These parties, like most organizational entities, are directed by a hierarchy of leadership.  Here, the leadership looks to party and personal aspirations, as well as to future electoral victories, in its decision making and policy-crafting processes.   In addition, it would be naive to suppose that seniority, nepotism, and party affiliation  never enter into the determinations and choices that are arrived at.

As has been stated earlier--and demonstrated numerous times through the ages--popularity is not necessarily accompanied by administrative or managerial skill.  Further, government decisions have been said to often be devised as a palliative until the next election; as well as frequently directed more toward the maintenance of approval by certain key people, interests, or groups, than toward actual objective benefit to the totality of the decision-makers' constituencies.

It has been suggested that certain elective offices (such as the U.S. House of Representatives) have a longer tenure--in order to avoid the present circumstance wherein officeholders are absorbed in campaigning for the next election shortly after their terms have begun.

Such preoccupation with such campaigning has even at times "spilled over" into the thinking of "unrelated" parties--such as, in October, 1956, when England, France, and Israel formulated an attack upon Egypt over the Suez Canal crisis, believing U.S. President Eisenhower would be too busy with his bid for re-election in November to interfere with the plan.

Campaigns for political office (along with football, or soccer, or rugby, depending upon where you are) has itself become a form of mass diversion.  Television appearances, declarations, and debates by and among candidates have become commonplace and more or less necessary in this era.  They are, of course, timed and staged, by media professionals, so as to command maximum impact upon the usual countless viewers.

In a debate, we check and evaluate the candidates' appearance, dress, stage presence, speaking ability and debating skills.  All but the last are completely irrelevant--and the last bears but little relation--regarding competence and efficiency in the operation of the mechanisms that affect the lives and fates of all of us.

Perhaps our late President Reagan summed this up when he said, during his presidential campaign:  "the things I've done so far are far away from this [the presidency of the U.S.]....[But] a substantial part of the political thing is acting and role-playing, and I know how to do that."  (Downey, Green, et. ors., eds., The Twentieth Century)

It's poxssible, in fact, that all of this media exposure has become a factor contributing to the circumstance that, in the United States at least, the presidency seems to have increasingly taken on traits of "personal rule" or "presidential monarchy."  Personal initiatives, possibly fueled by semi-conscious, though understandable, aspirations to "go down in history" as a "great" President, have resulted in decisions and actions that have had effect upon millions worldwide--sometimes unfavorably, sometimes tragically.  Meanwhile, the masses who elected him accept such determinations, and their results, with nothing more than apathy and fatalism.

                                                           * * * * *

RE LEADERSHIP

It is a common fact of life that there presently exist great disparities between the demands of most positions of political leadership and the character and abilities of the leaders who occupy them.  In most Western and other, more "advanced" nation-states, key political positions are generally held by individuals who belong to the right "group" or clique," or "party."  These are all similar terms expressing the accurate, though actually inappropriate, parameter that thus exists today in most, if not all, parts of our world.

In 1915, in a work entitled Political Parties, political scientist Roberto Michels identified the tendency, within groups organized in democratic ways for democratic aims, to develop into groups run by a few men, mostly for their own goals.  Michels was correcting commenting about the history of mankind since the beginnings of the democratic process.  Moreover, it appears that the facts expressed in his assessment have not changed much between the publication of his book and the present day.

"Ceremonial and rhetorical skills, soldierliness, and organizing ability" have been identified as common traits "among political officeholders and office seekers within societies everywhere."  (Alfred DeGrazia, Political Behavior)  And although military aptitude may assist aspiring office-holders to succeed, the abilities of military men to make "the most important decisions" has been assessed as "questionable."  (ibid.) 

                                                                  * * * * *



Government by Force

Probably the worst form of government that can exist is government by compulsion.  And yet, ironically, it continues to arise and flourish in too many places to this very day.  In 1976, historian J.M. Roberts declared that during the last thirty seven years, the world had come to be burdened by more dictators and more authoritarian political regimes than had existed in the 1939 Fascist era.  (J.M. Roberts, History of the World)  This indicates an unfavorable as well as dangerous potential for all of us; and a particularly painful situation for the millions who must actually live under such rule.

Government by force, also known as dictatorship, has led to much suffering and many deaths in many places.  In Russia, under the yoke of Josef Stalin, some twenty million human beings died between 1927 and 1953, as a result of executions, famines, and the regime's infamous labor camps; while another twenty million were arrested or uprooted during the same period.

During the 1930s, ruthless dictators, such as Hitler, Mussolini, and Franco, were able to use their peoples' nationalism, combined with economic troubles caused by the first Great War and the Great Depression, to seize power and lead the entire world into World War Two,

When that War ended, the 1950s witnessed a number of new or newly restored nations grow out of the ashes and peace talks.  Many of these fledgling countries were internally weak; which caused a number of one-party authoritarian, and/or military, governments to spring up and take control, in efforts to establish strong central authority in such places.

Later, during the mid-sixties, China's Mao imposed a "Cultural Revolution" upon his people, which resulted in three million being arrested and sent to labor camps--at thich some 700,000 perished.  To quote Chairman Mao:  "Political power grows out the barrel of a gun...our principle is that the Party commands the gun...."

This sad state of affairs persisted in many places afterwarde as well.  Such places include Central and South America, where business interests, old wealth, and the Church have been known to favor governments founded upon coups and resultant military dictatorships as a more stable alternative over reform-seeking civilian politicians.  During the nineteen sixties and seventies, we saw travesties arise, such as the administration of Francois Duvalier in Haiti, with his own private army of tantons macoutes; Generals Torrigos and Noriega in Panama (the latter of whom allegedly divided his time between drug dealing and running a nation); Idi Amin, who massacred entire ethnic groups in Uganda; and Colonel Alberto Natusch, who in 1979 proclaimed himself President following that nation's two hundredth coup d'etat in Bolivia.

We should probably pity the poor peasants of Vietnam, who were divided into two groups by authoritarian leaders on both sides, conscripted into rival armies, and compelled (with much outside help) to slaughter one another over a period of years.

And we should probably shudder to realize that the abuses of authoritarian rule continue.  A moving example is Somalia--where independence brought about dictatorship, corruption, and much murder and mayhem; accompanied by the most foolish expenditures of what little resources the nation possessed upon milirtary armaments; and a "government" that, until recently, controlled but a few square blocks within the capital.

                                                                   * * * * *

SOME COMME NTS CONCERNING GOVERNMENT

What is my suggested method for initially obtaining the engagement and services of those who should participate in the making of the decisions, and performance of the activities, that affect the lives and fortunes of all of us?  As we know, most of the more "advanced"  nation-states within today's world contain systems for choosing who shall govern that are actually, or supposed to be, more or less "democratic."  That is to say, the leadership within the particular place is elected or otherwise approved by a majority, or some predetermined percentage, of the populace thereof.  In others, it is via approval by a majority or prescribed percentage of a body composed of members who were themselves elected by a majority or required percentage of said populace.  Thus, what would probably need to occur at first, as regards leadership by a governing body as envisioned herein, would be something like:
a.  the formation, in various places, of World Unity political parties (as referred to in other postings), by the first people to recognize and appreciate the need for and value of a single world government--and leadership by the most qualified instead of the most popular;
b.  the growth and development of such parties, as more and more people hopefully come to recognize the merit of such a concept of government;
c.  the nomination and, it is hoped, election, in various parts of the world, of World Unity Party candidates, who would be committed to the promotion and eventual effectuation of the principles similar to those set forth herein, via lawful means, and the expressed will of the people of their respective locales, and subsequently of the world.

It is hopefully anticipated that eventually World Unity Party candidates will have come to be popularly elected in numerous places --thus signaling, more and more, man's readiness for a single world government by the most qualified.  When that time should arrive, it is expected that, via consultation among such officeholders, and the expressed will and consent of their constituencies, methods for the determination and engagement of the most competent and qualified for the various functions involved in the operation and guidance of our world, for the benefit of mankind, shall be accomplished.

I do not claim that this is the absolute or only answer.  Perhaps no one has an answer at this point.  But whatever course should one day come to be determined, suggested, or attempted should be a process or method which would reflect the approval of many or most of the world's people.  Sadly, it is once more conjectured that this approval might come to pass only after some sufficiently horrid tragedy will have taken place by reason of, or at the hands of, political leaders, and/or their factions or nations.  Or, more optimistically, perhaps the simple passage of time, with its attendant discomforts, panics, and disasters, might serve to render sufficient common sense upon a sufficient number of people to realize, and thus accept, the fact that our world is too comples, too advanced, and too vulnerable, to be operated by individuals who acquired their right to do so via nothing more than popularity, money, connection, kinship, or fierceness.

I would, in any event, leave it to persons more knowledgeable and experienced in such matters than I to devise and perfect the final methods and procedures for choosing and retaining the right persons and systems that would thereby beneficially guide our world.

                                                                  * * * * *

In 1949, a novel by George Orwell, entitled 1984, was published.  I was in high school, in 1951, when I became aware of it; and I considered it to be quite futuristic in tone.  And yet, today, some of its details have actually somewhat come to exist. 

The ideas presented herein would possibly provoke in some readers recollections of Orwell"s work.  However, in defense of the greater practicality of my proposals, I must point out the following:
a.  Oceania, Eastasia, and Eurasia, the three political entities that comprised the world in the book, were constantly at war with one another.  I believe that division into three similar nations would be a greater cause of conflict than our current state of affairs wherein the world is composed of a large number of nation-states possessing various degrees of size and strength.  I say this because I believe that excessive similarity appears to prompt excessive competitiveness and resultant hostility in the human psyche.  The purpose of my proposed changes are, on the other hand, to put a complete end to competition and hostility among nations altogether, by erasing all division and replacing it with a single all-embracing unity.
b.  The government of Oceania, being the place of residence of the main characters, is described as a totalitarian regime which sought to totally manipulate its citizens.  The government respectfully proposed by me is intended to function only for the purpose of providing maximum benefit and freedom for all of mankind.  This would include, among other things, freedom from want, freedom from neglect, freedom from warfare, freedom from harm, and freedom to act in accordance with one's lawful ambitions and desires.
c.  It is not anticipated that the occupants of a unified world should or would become sort of identical ciphers,or nonentities.  As set forth in an earlier posting, I do not discourage the practice of any and all religions, and/or the preservation of any and all (former) national, geographic, social, or other kinds of cultures.

Thus, I see no probability for tomorrow's society to in any way resemble that which one beholds in Mr. Orwell's famous novel.  Instead, to borrow a term from another great author, I seek and hope for a "brave new world" of peace, contentment, and happiness for all.

                                                                  * * * * *


 

SOME COMMENTS CONCERNING GOVERNMENT

Mobilization Systems

(continuing from yesterday)
The fourth of these aforesaid types of, or descriptive terms applied to, government is known as the "mobiliation system."  It denotes a system of government which seeks to utilize the services of experts and professionals in the planning, operation, and guidance of the functions of government.  This is therefore the apparently correct technical label for that which is described, endorsed, and called for, herein.  For, as has been stated numerous times heretofore by me, it is an objective of my writing herein to recommend leadership by individuals who possess the greatest quantity of competence and expertise for the performance of their respective roles in government.  This is a political philosophjy that is far from new; and, in my opinion, very reasonable as well.

Both Plato and Aristotle devoted much attention to the concept of resorting to the most capable, competent, and highly trained (in a word, the "best") to fill the roles of guardians, or "rulers," of the state.  However, there are some differences between the urgings of these great philosophers for immediate resort to the most highly qualified, and that which is herein endorsed.

On the one hand, I do not encourage, nor anticipate, rapid change.  I recite a conviction in earlier postings to the effect that the end result described by me will likely inevitably take place over time.  On the other hand, I have asserted that we should endeavor to hasten its occurrence, lest an eventual similarly likely self-destructive tragedy take place, causing such progress as will at that time have been accomplished to be in vain.  But it is nevertheless recognized and understood that a reasonable amount of time, disclosure, planning, and other activity will be essential.  In short, I do not propose a revolution.  I wish to merely request consideration of my suggestions; and, hopefully one day relatively soon, the effectuation of something along the lines thereof, by persons having the wisdom, opportunity, and bravery to do so.

                                                          * * * * *

SOME COMMENTS CONCERNING GOVERNMENT

Man has been governed--i.e., ruled over--by one or another form of ruling entity since earliest times.  Technically, the group of prehistoric humans, huddled together in a cave, were "governed" by one or more of the most dominant males among them--who determined, perhaps, who would eat first or most, or who would be his "mate" on this or that occasion.

The common denominator in the earliest days was simply physical strength or force.  The less physically capable were compelled to submit to the wishes, or "agenda," of the more powerful.  Subsequently, other factors and influences came to temper this, as man became more civilized.

In his Comparative Legal Systems, Charles F. Andrain describes four fundamental systems of government:  Folk, Bureaucratic-Authoritarian, Reconciliation, and Mobilization.



The Folk System

As societal groups became larger, and their members more intelligent, other forms of dominance and compulsion, besides strictly brute force, emerged.  The nuclear family and extended family composed the basic elements of the assemblage, or village.  The systems that came to organize and govern these early groups are today referred to as "folk systems."  They were the dominant form of social organization prior to 3000 BC.

Higher degrees of role specialization evolved.  More specialized indstitutions began to emerge within these folk systems, dealing with intra-family and inter-family disputes, as well as problems arising from interactions with neighboring villages.  Religion and religious figures also came to be an influence over people's affairs and behaviors.



The Bureaucratic-Authoritarian Systems

Next, since rather early times, there came to exist, and subsequently further developed, groups or classes of ruling elites within the various societies, as well as within the nation-states that later resulted from them.  The status of ruling elites arose solely from brute strength in the earliest days; but later began to evolve from economic and religious foundations as well.

The powers of our ruling elites have since come to be preserved and institutionalized via the development of our bureaucratic society, and by the political processes that came into being in the various nation-states that have subsequently come into existence.  The systems governing much of society since approximately 2,000 years before Christ have thus been named "bureaucratic-authoritarian," because of their tendency to be regulated by the powerful, who created and utilized administrative bodies named "bureaucracies."  These bureaucratic bodies have been defined of late as consisting of organized groups of officials performing specialized functions according to more or less fixed rules.  They are known to commonly resort to something disdainfully referred to as "red tape"--consisting of excessive formality and ritualism of questionable necessity or utility.  This is often suspected of being but a means of obtaining blind compliance, and/or assurance of the practitioners' own continued existence.



Reconciliation Systems

The aforedescribed systems of government that had progressed thus far later came to be tempered somewhat further, by people and organizations having ideals and demands most simply described as favoring the governed.  Governments in a number of places responded to this need to somewhat thus further modify; and the resultant political systems, as thus adjusted, have been referred to as "reconciliation systems."

Consequences of such "public-induced" features have borne labels such as "freedom," "equality," "civil liberties," and "civil rights."  These concepts are of course good, and to be preferred over dictatorship.  However, good and desirable as these fruits of our progress may have become, they are nevertheless quite far from all-encompassing or otherwise completely effective.

For example, concepts like "competitive elctions" and "direct popular representation" have come to be accepted as the  epitome of government for the public good.  But it should be kept in mind that, in most instances, "elections" comprise a choice between two or three possibilities proferred by the current political establishment--in a sense, two or three of the most popular and/or acceptable candidates, in the judgment of their respective party leaders and/or party insiders--who attained their  positions via the cultivation and maintenance of the selfsame brand of popularity and maneuvering some years earlier. 

Moreover, "representation" constitutes but proposals for, and oppositions to, various issues affecting the lives and fortunes of many or all of us, in accordance with, among other things:
a.  the need to please, and to comply with the "platform" composed by the aforesaid party leadership, party strategists, and/or party insiders;
b.  the necessity of responding to the efforts of various lobbyists, and the interests and possible campagn contributions they may actually represent;
and
c.  the desire to be re-nominated and hopefully re-elected when the particular representative's term is over.

Agreed, many of the actions of our representative governments do originate from widespread public entreaties or vociferously expressed opinions.  But even so, the public decisions which will best shape and affect our lives should as well not necessarily emanate from the loudest among public outcries, or the most numerous expressions of public preference by those who are motivated and happen to be able to so register them.  And our leadership in general, which thus proceeds to determine our well-being and our fates, should not be a consequence of power, nor of competition, nor of popularity, nor of a particular instance of public agitation or outcry.

The aforesaid should not be interpreted to signal a conclusion that I am recommending a worldwide dictatorship, obsessed with objectivity, and mechanically compelled by logic.  In the past, I have described an ideal regarding the identification and formulation of policies and activities on the part of our governing entity which would be based upon "self-evident," "best," choices (with respect to efficiency and advantage, justice and beneficence).  I thereby call for the development of a system that would naturally and logically integrate true public needs--and thus naturally consequent public desires--with objectively identified and determined public requirements--which would result in naturally consequent government policies and actions.

WORLD UNITY AS A GOAL

THE WORLD OF TOMORROW (cont.)

In a borderless world, governed by universal principles, standards, and requirements, minimums and maximums would need to be set at high, but uniform, levels throughout the world.  For example, requirements for licensing or certification, in various professions, businesses, and trades, would need to reflect the same standards as regards education, experience, and performance everywhere.  In fact, traditional minimums and maximums concerning just about everything would need to be adjusted, so as to become basically uniform and sufficiently elevated across the globe.  A physician practicing in New York, and one doing the same in Kenya, would need to eventually conform to the same high standards; soo too the electrician in Alaska, and his counterpart in Brazil.

A worldwide weather tracking and forecasting system, available to everyone, should be instituted.  As stated earlier, steps should be taken for the worldwide establishment of equally effective protective measures, devices, and response personnel, regarding emergencies and catastropohes related to weather; and resources should be at the ready regarding relief and relocation for the victims of extreme weather-related phenomena, whenever and wherever such might occur.

Charities would of course be allowed to continue to operate.  All should be subject to a new, universally determined, method of validation and standard-setting; and those which qualify permitted to continue operating as locally or universally as they should choose.

All sports activities and events would likewise continue to be carried on as they are presently.  New and expanded communication and contact among people from various places would likely spur interest in sports carried on in one place among residents of more and more additional places.  Thus, expansions among sports participants and audiences would probably asutomatically take place.  This might result in subsequent expansion of "leagues" and other such divisional organizations; as well as in a possible eventuality wherein "World Series" in various sports will mean truly that.

Of course the present worldwide organization of Olympic games would continue.  The athletes, instead of representing particular nations, would come to instead do the same for their particular individual regions.  But the spirit of competition and striving for excellence would likely remain the same--for that is the nature of athletics to the present day; and there is no reason to foreseea change in human nature.

There are numerous other aspects of life on earth.  Some of these would remain the same, while others would become transformed in the natural course of events, as society within a unified world moved forward.  Speculation can be voiced concerning many of these--but they would nonetheless take place in their own fashion notwithstanding such predictions.  In any event, it is rather certain that these alterations, whatever their sequence, form, or content, will comprise an overall benefit to mankind and society.

                                                                         * * * * *

WORLD UNITY AS A GOAL

THE WORLD OF TOMORROW (cont.)

A world without borders would naturally result in a number of aspects of human life and society becoming uniform.  It is anticipated that some, if not most, of these changes might entail a degree of difficulty in learning and adaptation; and consequently prpoduce a measure of initial resitance on the part of some, and possibly many, who read this.  But it is further anticipated that, in the long run, the world could be a safer, happier, and more abundant place as a result. 

As a single universal guiding entity took its place at the helm of the world, politics and political activity would lose their fire--and become devoid of their abuses as well--as roles of leadership become more administrative and technical, and less fraught with distractions concerning power and copmpetitiveness.  Institutions of learning would likely spring up that specialized in,, and/or existing ones may redirect a portion of their cirricula toward education of students for service in, the various aspects of the operation of our world.  Subjects such as Political Science, Government, Law, Management, and various forms of Administration ought, and likely would, become widespread subjects of study and specialization in our institutions of higher learning.  This could be linked with a system of internships in such fields as well.  Such a scenario would likely produce and constitute the future knowledgeable experts in world guidance that I speak of herein.

I have spoken in the past about the need for and advantages of a common universal language.  If and when this should come to pass, a universal system of numbers, weights, measures, and sizes would also become necessary.

Akin to this, a universal economy and currency were recommended by me earlier.  This would result in a uniform system of accounting, banking, and credit worldwide.  It is likely that a single banking institution serving the entire world would eventually emerge from this--probably comprising a combination formed by the world's major banks, and/or the World Bank, and/or the International Monetary Fund.

There would probably also emerge a worldwide stock, bond, and commodities market.  It would perhaps be located in a single place, and accessed via computer; it might have locations in a number of major cities; or, most likely, the market will be solely operated vie the Internet.  In any event. it seems probable that the twenty-four-hour, seven-day-per-week, business day will have become necessary and customary.  (Of course, people could continue to perform their services for approximately forty or less hours per week, if they so chose.)

A worldwide system and entity for insurance, regarding every sort of risk or eventuality, would also likely appear (again probably consisting of a combination of the world's major insurers).

A worldwide legal system, regarding standards, procedures, etc., would become necessary.  Such a universal system ought be logical, just, realistic, and humane.  It should concern itself with the fields of criminal and civil law, including those regarding admiralty, bankruptcy, patents, copyright, and trademark.  Furthermore, a worldwide legal system should be formulated re decedents' estates, administration and probate thereof, and rules concerning inheritance.

The laws of ownership and conveyance of property, both real and personal, should become uniform everywhere.  So too should laws regarding all aspects of business and commerce--especially because such will have become part of a universal economy.

For the same reason, business organizations, and other such entities--including corporations, partnerships, limited liability companies, joint ventures, and the like--would also exist and operate more logically and effectively if they were formed and functioned as worldwide entities, pursuant to universal laws and regulations, instead of under the law and rules of a single nation or state.

So as to avoid any possibility of "ex post facto," pending civil lawsuits and claims would probably have to be permitted to proceed to completion--regardless of how long mnight be required--under the legal systems pursuant to which they were commenced.

WORLD UNITY AS A GOAL

THE WORLD OF TOMORROW (cont.)

Security and Crime Control

A worldwide police force would be established to preserve the peace and apprehend lawbreakers wherever crime should take place.  Police personnel would also continue to perform presently traditional duties re the rendering of assistance to persons in various forms of distress.

Uniform worldwide crimimnal codes would need to be formulated.  Pursuant to these, particular acts or omissions would be permitted or forbidden everywhere, instead of depending upon what side of a border line one happens to be.  Further, the penalties for transgressions would likewise be similar regardless of the place of commission or arrest.

Actions and instrumentalities that are objectively injurious, harmful, or hurtful, to oneself or to others, whether that harm be immediate or eventual, should be illegal, forbidden, and prevented everyplace.  Everything else should be left to the personal choice of each competent adult person.  Children and incompetent adults must, of course, always be subject to the determinations and guidance of appropriate persons or institutions having care and/or custody of such child or person.

With this as a basic credo, groups of worldwide legal experts should assemble for the purpose of determining the legality and treatment of a great many subjects.  Concerning most of these, universal worldwide perception and approval should be determined, conformed to, and adopted.  Worldwide systems should be formulated, and worldwide prohibitions enacted, concerning various aspects of human behavior and endeavor.

In my opinion, religion per se, should never be a factor behind the composition of any such criminal or other legal codes.  However, it is understood and herein pointed out that most religions basically espouse the same principles:  goodness and kindness to one's fellows; and refraining from acts that are hurtful or harmful to oneself or others.  Thus, so long as somewhat "unique" religious beliefs or practices are not sought to be incorporated into a criminal code, the fact that the new criminal code might seem to paralell aspects of various religions ought not co nstitute a basis for objection.

Parenthetically, this worldwide code should particularly focus upon gun and other weapon controls.

A worldwide and universally administered system of prisons and other rehabilitation facilities would be established by worldwide experts.  Cruel, unusual, and inappropriate punishments or executions should be abolished everywhere.  Emphasis and methods ought be particularly directed toward rehabilitation, as opposed to punishment.  On the other hand, it is acknowledged that containment of a criminal so that he or she cannot repeat the wrongdoing would in some instances continue to be the more important objective.

In a unified world, escape to the jurisdiction of another country (before or after arrest) would no longer be possible; nor could the complications associated with extradition any longer exist.



Social Services

Besides monetary benefits, retraining, and placement services for the unemployed, and assistance to the poverty-stricken who are unable to help themselves, should also be provided.

Worldwide systems should be instituted to provide adequate pension benefits to those who should elect to, or need to, retire from gainful employment after a certain (predetermined) age.  Funding for this could be obtained from those entities who had employed them, from the employees themselves, and from the public sector as appropriate.

As I have stated earlier, reduction of the birth rate is a key element to improving the lot of mankind overall.  A worldwide census should be undertaken periodically, to determine, among other things, whether this is in fact happening.  If it is not, further lawful means should be considered and undertaken in order to further facilitate an end to our presently unchecked population explosion.

A worldwide code should also be enacted having a purpose of putting an end to cruelty to, as well as wasteful consumption and/or purposeful extinguish of, our animals and wildlife.



Transportation

Transportation and traffic would be viewed, arranged, and controlled from a worldwide perspective.  A worldwide system of safe and modern roads, seaports, and airports should be the eventual goal, so as to make the entire globe--which would now constitute a single political entity--accessible to everyone.  Airlines, water transport companies, and railroads would no longer be operated under a variety of national or other local standards and regulations; and they would have theoretical free access to the entire world.  Experts would establish universal safety guidelines and standards to which participants in all forms of transport and travel would be subject.

Terrorism, which today seems to automatically come to mind when one speaks of transportation, would continue to need to be guarded against.  However, it is hoped that the absence of national states will serve to defuse some of the wrath that has led to such wrongful acts in recent years.  On the other hand, should it continue, it would be more efficiently dealt with on an international basis, as a crime against all of humanity, rather than its current perception and treatment as a protest against the acts or policies of a particular nation or group of nations.

                                                              * * * * *

WORLD UNITY AS A GOAL

THE WORLD OF TOMORROW

A world without borders would require a number of modifications to a number of commonplace aspects of society.  Many of these would be improvements.  All would require input from, and decisions by, experts in the respecdtive disciplines involved in each such aspect.  I offer some thoughts, and respectfully submit some suggestions, concerning a few of these.  However, since I am a layman concerning most of the actual subjects involved; and in that I am not certain as to when, how, and in what sequence, these changes might take place; they are merely intended to constitute random generalizations and predictions.





Taxation

A worldwide system of taxation would need to be formulated.  In my opinion, this should be comprised of a uniform schedule of rates, applied to the universal economy, and voiced in the universal currency, that I spoke of in earlier posts (august 23rd to 30th).  It should, hopefully, be a more simple and direct system; absent of the hodge-podge that the American system, for one, has come to typify in recent years. 



Communications and the Media

A single worldwide postal system would come to be established.  Rates would be based upon distance, and expressed in the aforesaid universal currency.  No longer would quality and/or speed of service vary from country to country; instead, a uniform level of quality and performance could and should prevail worldwide.

In a number of places, postal service has come to be privatized.  It seems that a worldwide application of this concept, subject to governmental guidance and supervision, might be adopted.  Private "overnight" delivery services would continue to operate, on a worldwide basis, with fees based upon distance and/or difficulty of delivery, rather than upon countries of origin or destination.  Furthermore, the complications and expenses of customs and other cross-border formalities would no longer exist.

Radio and television stations could be permitted to operateand broadcast worldwide (or as locally as each one should wish).  Initially, their transmissions would be in original native languages.  However, later, they might include simultaneous broadcast in the new universal language as well.  These stations would no longer be voices of, controlled by, or compelled to broadcast material submitted or approved by, national governments--for there would no longer be any such national governments.  And, of course, the aforementioned world governing body should never be permitted to in any way involve itself in, or influence, the content of any broadcasts (except when clearly temporarily necessary for public safety or welfare--such as in the event of an emergency or catastrophe).



Ecology

As has been stressed in recent postings, serious worldwide steps would finally be undertaken to "clean up" our environment, and to prevent the ecological disasters that are presently on the way, due to the current reliance upon "sovereignty" on the part of certain nations as bases for refusal to do what is so clearly necessary.  Furthermore, there would no longer be any "poor nations" needing to sacrifice ecological and conservationist concepts for the sake of needed business activity and/or revenue.



Resources

The world's resources would now be perceived and dealt with on a global basis.  They would be available to all, subject to worldwide regulation; and, of course, private ownership, as appropriate.  Nations could no longer hoard them, withhold them, or make them available to recipients within different nations at varying favorable and unfavorable prices or terms.  This has become particularly prevalent in today's world regarding petroleum and other such energy-critical resources.  In a world without borders, there would no longer be a need for countries having petroleum-producing capability to band together for their common welfare, seeking to defend themselves against perceived enemy nations, by withholding, or charging higher prices for, their petroleum products. 

Agriculture, as well other aspects of food production, would continue to be a private pursuit (as it is presently in most parts of the world).  However, the needs of the world could be considered in a global context, and any shortcomings in production and/or distribution made up for via government, or government-sponsored, support or activity.  No more would there be famine in one country, while an overabundance in another causes the government of that latter nation to pay farmers to destroy some of their crop in order to support prices there.

In short, with a global orientation, hunger of any sort, or in any place, can and will be made to have become a thing of the past worldwide.

Rivers, lakes, and other navigable waterways would no longer be under the control of one or two nations--but, rather, accessible to all, and utilized sensibly for the benefit of all. 

Where irrigation were necessary--or its opposite, flood control--they too could be approached and available on a worldwide basis, with no national borders to restrict programs of establishment and implementation. 

Hunting and fishing, as a business endeavor as well as recreational pastime, could be licensed and permitted on a worldwide basis.  This would always be subject to global ecological and conservationist guidelines; which would need to be determined, established, and modified as necessary, by experts in these fields.

There would no longer be political border lines beyond which one could not range, nor waters which were claimed to be the exclusive domain of a particular nation, and therefore closed to all except natives of that country (or companies to whom licenses had been sold by the national governments thereof).



Housing and Development

Housing standards should likewise be considered and established on a worldwide basis.  Worldwide codes, having variation predicated upon climate and other considerations related to physical and global location, would be established by engineers, architects, and safety experts, regarding housing, buildings, construction, utilities, sanitation, and other such subjects; and enforced worldwide as necessary.

Obviously, development of ideal living and working environments will take time.  But the commencement of such efforts on a worldwide basis will begin to effectuate an eventual end to abuses and deficiencies regarding such matters--which were born of, and are today sustained by, local leaderships and local inadequacies.

The administration of cities could also be undertaken according to universal principles, directed toward the elimination of unhealthy and unsafe conditions anywhere and everywhere.  This would include the resettlement of people now trapped in the worst places, to newer, more advantageous, locations.

Adequate and proper housing for persons with special needs--including the aged, infirm, physically disabled, and mentally challenged--could also be developed and provided for all who require it.  Poverty and homelessness should be made to be a thing of the past.  Steps should be taken as soon as possible to relieve and eliminate both to such extent as should be humanly possible.  Once more, the absence of vast expenditures upon arms and armies would hopefully constitute an opportunity for significant steps to be taken toward such goals.



Education

Worldwide education seems to reuire particular attention.  Appropriate determination and planning for meeting the world's needs should be undertaken, so as to eventually provide for a sufficient quantity of people possessing adequate skills, in all requisite vocational fields, wherever they should be needed.

Programs to provide sufficient and proper education to all the world's children should be a must.  So too should there be worldwide advanced educational opportunities.  This could be coupled with mandatory post-graduate service in the graduates' respective callings.  In short, the object should be to eventually leave no corner of the world in darkness or privation due to ignorance or lack of resources or personnel.

As accessory to education, there should also be established a worldwide system of libraries, and/or other such sources of knowledge and information, comparable to that which presently exists in the more developed regions.  Present and future electronic advances should make this a feasible ambition.  As a universal language began to be accepted and used, such facilities could also include sections containing books and other sources of information in that format as well.



Employment and Labor Conditions

A worldwide system of employment opportunities should be available to all qualified persons from anywhere on earth.  This would be a true blessing--for it would constitute the maximum utilization of the world's educational facilities, manpower, talent, and capability, for the benefit of the entire world. 

There should be a worldwide standardized code of labor and employment regulations, so that employers and employees throughout the world could expect the same requirements, conditions, wages, and benefits.  Although I foresee and advocate a system of free enterprise, wages would come to be more or less uniform for particular jobs, at particular levels of skill and experience--whrereby by reason of the universal economy and currency as is herein advocated, wages would come to be more or less uniformly set in said universal currency.  This would serve to dispose of the reasons for, and thereby put an end to, today's "outsourcing," as well as the widespread occurrence of "illegal" immigration, by people seeking employment opportunities and higher wages in places beyond their national borders.  Pursuant to such a state of affairs as are herein foreseen, it seems that variations in wages or pay scale would depend only upon level of capability, experience, location of place of service, number of hours to be worked, and/or risks involved in the particular type or place of service applicable to that job.

Labor unions would and should continue to exist.  In fact, unions of particular sorts might join forces worldwide, forming single giant "mega-unions" for their trade.  In that wages as well as labor conditions would have thus become much the same across the globe, unions' parameters and demands would probably likewise become similar worldwide.



Medical Standards and Facilities

Worldwide conferences attended by appropriate physicians and other health care professionals should lead to universal medical and health standards, and a universal health code.  A worldwide system of adequate hospitals and other medical facilities should be another goal, and an eventual accomplishmehnt.  Medical, hospital, and other forms of necessary physical care should in time be made to be available to all human beings wherever they may be.  No longer should people in one place have a life expectancy beyond eighty years--while somewhere else, a person is  considered fortunate if he survives past forty.

Input by worldwide medical and health experts could result in the establishment of universal programs for immunization and disease control, as well as a worldwide organ donor and transplant system.

Minimum food and nutritional standards for all human beings should also be a must.  It seems that unimpeded universal efforts can and should conquer all instances of famine, starvation, and illnesses related to inadequate nutrition, wherever they should occur.

WORLD UNITY AS A GOAL

I have been writing this with an obvious anticipated goal:  to implant a seed in the minds of intelligent and well-meaning people everywhere, that will hopefully form roots and grow, and one day flower forth as a world that reflects the oneness of mankind.  It would be a world wherein there will no longer exist any national borders separating people into needless and dangerous groupings.  It would be a world wherein people will no longer suffer imprisonment--consciously, if not physically--within distinct patches of territory called "nations," and distinct assemblages which I refer to herein as "factions."

I firmly believe, and attempt to demonstrate, that the most fundamental needs and desires of all human beings are similar, when not identical.  These needs and desires wear different costumes in different places; but, when dissected and analyzed down to their most primary fundamentals, I think we must all agree that they always contain, and consist of expressions of, the same basic elements--which include:
a.  physical, mental, and emotional comfort, safety and well-being--for ourselves; our relatives, friends, acquaintances, neighbors, and associates; the members of the groups to which we feel a sense of belonging; the human race; and the world in general;
b.  freedom from harm, from fear, and from deprivation of any of our primary needs, rights, and desires;
c.  an opportunity for our individual selves, and those for whom we care, to live meaningful, fulfilling, and happy lives--in peace, in freedom, and in accordance with our own individual consciences, convictions, and aspirations.

                                                     * * * * *

This new world, as herein envisioned, will nevertheless require a governing entity.  However, as I've stated in the past, I do not believe that people should be strictly "governed," or ruled over; rather, the world needs to be directed or guided by logical and objective standards, principles, and procedures--with the assistance of the most logical, objective, intelligent and capable persons and processes, who and which will assist in fostering and maintaining conditions that would produce fulfillment of these aforesaid needs and desires of mankind.

It is really but a simple, and oftentimes obvious, process to determine what conditions are necessary to produce comfort, safety, well-being, and opportunity for all of us.  The trouble--once more--is that man happens to be split up and separated into factions, each with its own self-interest and agenda.  This serves to prevent the implimentation and application of a single set of universal principles and operations directed toward the accomplishment of the maximum benefit achievable for each of us, and all of us.

As I have stated previously, the individuals who would determine these principles, and implement their application, ought not be chosen by reason of their "popularity," or personal charisma--or worse, having come into power by reason of their familial or social relationships or connections--or even worse yet, by snatching power via force, fear, or violence.  We have seen in the past--almost without exception--the mistakes, misdeeds, and outright evils that have been so frequently perpetrated at the behest of some of our "leaders" as they have been so chosen--or permitted by us to assume control over us--from the beginning of history, until the present time.

Instead, the individuals who comprise our government need to be persons who can logically and objectively assess the needs and requirements of the world and its people; identify resources available, or needing to be produced or acquired, in order to fulfill these needs and requirements; and formulate systems, as well as parameters, for the actual fulfillment of such needs and requirements, to such extent as this should be possible and practical.

                                                                   * * * * *

In retrospect, it becomes obvious that many of the endeavors undertaken to date by various of our present politically oriented governing persons and entities--mostly on an individual, piecemeal, and self-interested basis by each of them--would have been accomplished more economically, effectively, and appropriately, were they perceived, organized, and executed from a worldwide standpoint, by experts in the respective fields involved, and/or pursuant to systems and parameters determined by such experts.

It seems, in fact, to be a logical certainty that, at every moment, there exists a self-evident "best" means (i.e., most efficient and advantageous, while at the same time tempered by justice and beneficence) for dealing with every situation and condition that should exist or arise, regarding our world and our society.  This would require a certain seeming relinquishment of "control," and perhaps a consequent apparent "leap of faith," on the part of many people.  Most of us usually need to feel that we are "in control" regarding the directions and destinations of our respective lives, and those of our loved ones.  We believe that, by entrusting these prerogatives to elected officials, and to the minions consequently appointed by them (often their friends or colleagues), we have thus retained such control.  But in fact, by surrendering the administration of our lives to such usually inexpert "popular" leaders, we have actually given up more control over our existences and well-beings than we dare to realize.

It is herein suggested that we put our faith and our fates into the hands of people having the greatest quantity of knowledge, experience, capability, talent, and success, in the respective subjects involved.  These would have to be professional experts in their particular fields--having no personal or political agendas.  Methods and systems would admittedly need to be devised to determine, absent any and all subjective elements, the means of identifying these "experts," as well as means to ensure continuous loyal and honest performance by them of their functions.  Safeguards would need to be devised and put into place in order to insure the current and continued absence of personal, financial, or other improper or inappropriate motivations on the part of any or all of them, as well as the impossibility of private benefit or profit to any of them (or to any other person or entity of their choosing).  A very sufficient arrangement of financial and/or other compensation during said persons' periods of so performing would also need to be effectuated, in order to ensure honest and faithful compliance with the duties of their posts.

Of course, these "experts" must be individuals in possession of only the highest degree of qualification and competence in and for their respective roles in office.  Regression to "political" processes, or bureaucratic dallying, must be dilligently avoided and prevented in the course of determining who shall be requested to so serve the world and mankind.  Moreover, additional safeguards, including a system of checks and balances, will need to be in place, to make certain that there shall be no opportunity for degeneration into a form of world tyranny.

Personal rights and freedoms must always be regarded as sacred and critical objectives, when government policies and actions are being formulated and effectuated,  Although the application of logic to objective conditions and/or criteria may indifferently dictate particular policies, restrictions, or courses of action, the basic rights and freedoms of humankind must always be also factored into the equation.  Thus, pure, "blind," decisions, or excessive bureaucratic mandates, heedless of the personal circumstances and welfare of all or some of mankind, should never be the sole basis for the directions in which our governing body would proceed.

In addition, there must be an ultimate extraordinary opportunity for the people of the world to "change their minds," and reject what will have been established and accomplished.  Such an opportunity to "opt out" should require an expression of desire for such change on the part of a predetermined substantial percentage of all of us.  When and if this should occur, then, pursuant to procedures arrived at and agreed upon during the early period of "world government," one or more alternatives might be proposed, considered, and chosen.

Could such a massive alteration to the way the world is presently organized and operated take place in a single sweep?  I don't think so--but it can eventually be accomplished--if sufficient numbers are permitted to become aware of these suggestions; and if sufficient time and talent are expended upon the development of that which is so sorely and obviously needed by us all.

The human race is ready for such changes.  Union and consolidation began a relatively short time after the "Big Bang;" and it has been going on and on ever since.  An account of some evidences of this from our past is respectfully offered in my postings of March 13th through March 30th.  And this process continues to proceed forward, slowly and silently taking place all around us every day.  As it occurs, we nevertheless continue to protest and insist that such things as I foresee and recommend can and will never happen.  And, ironically, at the same time, we are ourselves simultaneously participating in the fulfillment thereof, during the daily routines of our very lives.  And, as we continue to move closer and closer together, the need for efficient and effective guidance and leadership, on a global level, by the most capable among us, and directed toward the well-being of all of us--instead of that of the governor, and/or of the faction that he governs--becomes more clearly apparent and more vitally important.

But, real and inevitable as this process and these changes may be, likewise real and inevitable is the danger that the human race may not survive long enough for this eventuality to become accomplished in its slow and gradual, natural fashion.  Or perhaps it will--but under circumstances wherein only a few survivors will be left to (probably gratefully) join into such a unified and sensibly governed body, within a world that had undergone one or more grave, self-inflicted, disasters.

                                                         * * * * *

 

THE NEED FOR A LOGICALLY PLANNED WORLD

SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY

As we all know, various forms of scientific knowledge, and the forces and instrumentalities created thereby, can be used constructively or destructively.  It is also obvious to all of us that rivalry and conflict, such as regularly occurs among nation-states, hampers the development of scientific advances, and/or causes them to be developed for hostile and destructive purposes.  Furthermore, where scientific and technological activities are carried on competitively, and therefore often under pressure, undetected incompetence, as well as error caused by excessive haste, can lead to unpredictable rresults that could be disastrous.  Additionally, two states carrying on the same programs in competition with one another must constitute a measure of wasteful duplication in manpower, material, and resources.

Like everything else spoken about by me here, the scientific community also--and perhaps
especially--needs to be united in a global fashion, so as to be enabled to direct its efforts and pursuits toward the benefit of mankind, rather than toward competitive activities on behalf of respective nation-states, for potential use against one another.  Such activities ought be approached and conducted calmly and sensibly, on behalf of, and for the benefit of, all of humanity--rather than in the interest of one nation, in order to give it an advantage over other nations, with whom it may be in conflict--or worse, at war.  Scientific research and endeavor, and their resultant achievements, thus carried on and arrived at in an atmosphere of calm effort to discover answers and improvements--and not in an effort to "beat the other guy"--can and will produce more and greater achievements, and consequent reward to humanity.

It is thus self-evident that, if carried on for common beneficial purposes, and not in efforts to threaten and destroy a potential or actual enemy, our scientific community can provide us with a future that will be an era of sufficiency and comfort--rather than a grotesque nightmare of danger and destruction.

                                                                 * * * * *

                                              

THE NEED FOR A LOGICALLY PLANNED WORLD

EMERGENCIES AND DISASTERS

Instead of the various individual nations continuing to squabble among themselves about things like proving their respective claims to national superiority, and/or their right to impose their domination upon people of other nations, reason and common sense dictate that everyone would be far better off if we all joined together to address and deal with the real problems and needs that confront all of mankind.  Many of the former military forces, who would be no longer required to menace and do battle with one another, could then be constructively employed to face and defeat many of these genuine enemies that threaten all of us.

Conferences should be organized, and attended by the world's leading experts in the particular fields involved, to consider and assess the needs, dangers, emergencies, and disasters that routinely affect our world; and to determine the nature, quantity, and disposition of such resources as we presently possess and/or need to develop in order to effectively deal with these problems.

Hurricanes, cyclones, tornadoes, tsunamis, and earthquakes regularly occur in various parts of the world, often causing many deaths and widespread destruction.  A devastating earthquake occurred in Italy in 1908, causing the loss of a hundred thousand lives.  Cyclones and floods in Bangladesh and Pakistan in 1970 killed half a million people.  On December 7, 1988, an earthquake struck Armenia, leaving fifty five thousand dead.  And, during that same year, a hurricane having winds of as much as 218 miles per hour struck Jamaica, leaving half a million people homeless.  Bangladesh was again devastated by a cyclone and tidal wave in 1991, bringing death to 120,000 more.  And a 1990 earthquake in Iran annihilated at least forty thousand human beings.

Numerous similar tragedies have occurred over the years, before the events referred to above, in between, and thereafter, in virtually every corner of our world, often at a cost of tens of thousands, and sometimes hundreds of thousands, of lives lost.  Most recently, the North American continent as well as the Carribbean have felt Mother Nature's fury during the 2004 and 2005 hurricane seasons.  This was followed by a horrendous earthquake in Pakistan on October 8, 2005.  On December 26, 2004, a deadly tsunami struck a number of places in South and Southeast Asia, claiming approximately 200,000 lives.  And it is certain that these tragic episodes will continue into the future ad infinitum
                   
A global approach to such disasters is necessary.  People must be permitted, and even encouraged, to leave places that are shown by past history to be particularly and repeatedly prone to such tragedies.  The absence of national boundaries will serve to permit and facilitate such movement.  But further, and more importantly, personnel and resources must always be at the ready to deal with such happenings. 

When disasters such as the aforementioned occur, rapid and massive amounts of assistance, to such extent as should be required, must be available to be called into action immediately.  This means that such personnel and resources as might at any time be thus required should be at all times in place somewhere, and ready for utilization where needed.  In that such things might happen anywhere in the world, such placement must be in multiple locations, in numbers and types that are governed only by the likelihood of particular emergencies in particular locations or regions.  Further required are the elements of such post-occurrence assistance and resources as should be necessary to render sufficient aid to the victims of the episode in question, and for security, repairs, and restoration at its situs.

As stated above, conferences need to be held concerning such subjects, attended by experts in the various fields connected with such activities, to determine the nature, extent, and placement of such personnel and resources; and plans formulated as well for their effective application in the event of such various possibilities.  These plans should include prompt and substantial rescue efforts, medical assistance, such transportation as should be required, advice and counseling for the victims, necessary monetary and material assistance, adequate interim housing, help with insurance and other such problems, and prompt steps to restore the damaged places to such extent as restoration should be reasonable and appropriate.

If on a single given day--such as took place on June 6, 1944--we can launch tens of thousands of troops, with requisite ordnance and equipment, to do battle with tens of thousands of troops from the other side, we should be able to promptly dispatch the personnel and supplies necessary to promptly deal with any emergency or disaster which might anywhere occur.

                                                         * * * * *

THE NEED FOR A LOGICALLY PLANNED WORLD

ECOLOGY (cont.)

Undsafe Water

Unsafe drinking water is a subject related to unclean air.  More than a billion humans on this earth are still forced to regularly consume unsafe drinking water; while the wastes of over two billion people are disposed of in an untrteated state, back into the water and other natural resource systems of human beings.

Many urban centers in the developing world lack adequate facilities for disposal of toxic industrial wastes--pouring them as well into the ground, streams, and coastal shores--where they pollute domestic water supplies, and proceed to sicken and kill neighboring populations.

Like air pollution, these activities also need to be dealt with around the world via the development, by experts, of systems and procedures for the abatement and correction of such conditions on a global basis.  Then, these recommendations should be acted upon, necessary resources and changes put into place, and strict enforcement become the worldwide order of the day

                                                                * * * * *



Abuse of Our Natural Resources

Another factor contributing to our present shameful ecological situation is brought about by plain and simple ignorance and thoughtlessness on the part of many who should know better.  This includes the squandering and abuse of our lands, and the products thereof, on a wholesale basis.

Land resources are blatantly mistreated in many places, with little or no regard for the conseqences.  For example, within certain national territorial boundaries, according to a recent survey by Time Magazine, "slash and burn" is carried on to such a reckless extent that the world loses as much as fifty two acres of forest every minute.  Add to this the toll wreaked upon much of the remainder of our woodlands by overharvesting, and we behold a sorry prospect indeed.

The building industry--which is said to account for a substantial percentage of the materials entering our global economy each year--needs to be controlled and regulated, so as to reflect a degree of concern for society's environment and ecosystems.  Moreover, the use of secondary materials needs to be encouraged in many industries--and perhaps mandated in some--so as to provide leftovers, and consequent hope, for future generations.

Only a single universal governing and guiding entity--above and beyond the constraints imposed by competition between the industrial standing among various nations--can succeed in effectuating such arrangements.

                                                                  * * * * *



Abuse of Our Seas

Another problem which has resulted from unwise, uncaring, and reckless ecological management is today's sorry state of our oceans and other bodies of water.  Pollution and overfishing have caused extinction to at least twenty percent of our freshwater species; as well as dramatic decreases in catches, during recent years, within thirteen of the world's fifteen major marine fishing regions.

Each coastal nation claims exclusive rights to an area adjacent to its shores, extending outward to an arbitrarily declared distance.  Then, pursuant to the same theory of national sovereignty as repeated by me before, that section of the world's seas is frequently overexploited and despoiled by the fishermen of that nation.  Add to this the harm rendered by oil spills, pollution which originates on land and runs into the water, and other ecological violations, and our waters are presently in an understandably sorry state. 

In this instance as well, a single worldwide guiding body needs to formulate and impose appropriate rules and controls for each of the aforesaid concerns, which will arrest, and hopefully reverse, the harm that has been visited upon our rivers, lakes, and seas to the present day.

                                                              * * * * *

THE NEED FOR A LOGICALLY PLANNED WORLD

ECOLOGY

Another subject deserving serious concern on everyone's part is the sorry condition of the physical world from a natural, or ecological, standpoint.  Symptoms of the sick state that we have inflicted upon our atmosphere and our natural environment in general include shrinking forests, thinning soils, falling aquifers, collapsing fisheries, expanding deserts, and--probably most ominous of all--rising global temperatures.

Environmental risks and the results of unwise and damaging activities do not stop at the border of the nation that is permitting them to happen.  They cause peril to neighboring regions as well--and often to the world as a whole.

                                                                          * * * * *



Global Warming

Among the dangers that threaten our world, global warming seems to stand out as deserving of the most current and pronounced concern.  Numerous knowledgeable people warn us that there does exist a real danger of future calamity, unless steps are undertaken now to cease, or at least substantially reduce, the activities that are wreaking havoc upon the fragile ozone layer surrounding our earth.

The damage done and dangers created by global warming in particular respect no national boundaries.  Thus, the measures necessary to hopefully remedy this looming disaster must similarly be taken by all, on a united and universal basis. 

Presently, many individual nations resort to a claimed right of "sovereignty" as authority to employ only such lukewarm measures, regarding the burning of fossil fuels and other actions that contribute to the atmospheric "mess" that surrounds our globe, as that (wealthy) nation cares to--because it is beholden to noone; or that (poor or recently industrializing) nation dares to--for fear of losing crucial commercial capability and activity.

National sovereignty is an inappropriate and improper justification for offending nations to set their own more or less ineffective standards and timetables for their grudging adoption of corrective steps.  A worldwide approach, with worldwide enforceable regulation, would be the only way to produce meaningful reductions of these activities that are presently contributing to our eventual doom.

                                                                 * * * * *



Air Pollution

As ever-increasing concentrations of carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide accumulate in the air we breathe, more and more of our people suffer and die from pollution-related lung disease.  It is estimated that, in China alone, perhaps a million deaths occur each year as a result of the polluted atmosphere that hangs over many parts of that country.  And in the United States, the number of deaths resulting annuallyfrom this cause has been estimated at sixty thousand.

Among the causes of this worldwide menace to life and health is the burning of fossil fuels in industrial centers, as well as the rampant clearing of vegetation to make room for new endeavors, such as agriculture, grazing, and housing, in areas that should probably be left in a natural state.

Widespread encouragement and developoment of alternative forms of energy, such as solar, wind, and water power, on a worldwide basis, would likely save many lives, and produce a healthier atmosphere for all.  Of course, this is not likely to happen as our present condition of division into nation-states continues to prompt wealthy nations to rely upon notions of sovereignty to justify their lack of cooperation in these directions; and developing nations to claim a need to do the same in order to move forward into the ranks of the wealthy nations (whereupon "sovereignty" can be utilized to support continued offensive activity).  Only worldwide government can formulate and impose enforceable worldwide restrictions and programs, developed by experts, aimed at preventing further damage; and, hopefully, commencing restoration of our environment to a more healthful state.

                                                               * * * * *