ECONOMIC
Mankind's proclivity toward, and consequent steps that are leading to the achievement of, globalization and unification have been a factor in history for many years. In early times, these attempts were obviously not conscious efforts to attain such specific results; but the net effects nevertheless bore resemblance to what would later emerge as society's more conscious steps toward unification. These earlier efforts frequently took place throughout our world in ways that were primarily economic in orientation and effect.
As has been proposed earlier, the colonial endeavors exercised by numerous countries during the sixteenth to eighteenth centuries, crossing oceans and borders as they did, though motivated by desires for wealth and conquest, actually at the same time constitute an early form of international joinder and consolidation.
Contemporaneously in Europe during this period, the Commercial Revolution spawned a capitalist economy in many countries, wherein focus shifted from town-oriented to nation-oriented concerns and activities. As a subsequent step, these commercial nations themselves became mutually involved and associated economically, as people within the seperate countries did more and more business with each other. As Montesquieu observed in his Spirit of the Laws, when nations thus became "reciprocally dependent...their union is founded on their mutual necessities." Thus, on account of these necessities, people of numerous nations developed more and closer ties and relationships, business and otherwise, as time marched forward.
During this era, and specifically during the eighteenth century, the age which we refer to as the Enlightenment arose in Europe. Here a group of thinkers who came to be called "political economists" looked to the state as a regulatory and enforcing factor in assistance of the economic climate. But they were by no means "nationalists." Rather, they have been labeled "universalists," who looked to the state to rise above local regulation, promote law and order, maintain the sanctity of contracts, and preserve a free and open market. In a phrase, they "believed in the unity of mankind under a natural law of right and reason." (Palmer and Colton, A History of the Modern World)
A quintessential illustration of this is found in the description given by said historians Palmer and Colton of the year 1870, which they portrays as a time of unprecedented economic world unity. They speak of a "true world market," wherein "goods, services, money, capital, [and] people moved back and forth almost without regard to national boundaries." Moreover, during this time, we are told, the purchase and sale of goods took place at a set of "uniform world prices." ( Palmer and Colton, op. cit.,)
Then, further evidences of unity began to appear. In the early part of the twentieth century, business mergers became the order of the day. Many companies in the same field formed combinations for the purpose of avoiding wasteful and harmful competition. Workers who were employees of these companies also began to organize and to bargain as a group with their employers. Similar activities were exhibited on the part of their agricultural counterparts as well; as the turn of the century witnessed the formation of cooperatives among farmers, providing advantages of sharing certain expenses and eliminating the need for midedlemen.
With economic activity becoming an economic phenomenon and endeavor, the problems connected with such economic pursuits also began to exhibit themselves on a global scale as well. Thus, by reason of one such concern, an international conference was held in Paris in September of 1910 to deal with the growing challenge of worldwide unemployment. This represented an early example of an international forum being convened for the purpose of addressing something perceived to be an international economic problem.
In October, 1927, the New York Stock Exchange expanded its functions to become a world stock exchange. Corporate stocks traded on Wall Street bore worldwide implication and effect, constituting but another extension of man's business enterprise onto an international stage.
Although Europe was long divided into numerous poolitical subdivisions, nation-states, factional areas within nations, and factional areas that straddled national boundary lines, that which would be called "European civilization" was, and is still, somewhat considered to constitute a unity. Thus, Europeans appear to view themselves as having more in common with, than contrast to, other Europeans. In particular, there has from an early day been a consciousness of an economic unity within Europe and among its inhabitants. This feeling has grown apparently stronger over rece
nt decades, culminating in the beginnings of a European Economic Community (whose development will be traced later).
Thursday, June 21, 2012
Thursday, May 24, 2012
Wednesday, April 18, 2012
A DECLARATION OF MY PURPOSE AND INTENT
I wish to one day witness a transformation of the current complex web of competition, hostiloity, and need that constitutes our world today, into a united people, freely functioning under an objectively sensible, logical and beneficent worldwide guiding body, who shall implement such resources as are at man's disposal to most reasonably and beneficially deal with such needs, difficulties, conditions and occurrences as should exist or arise.
I am not speaking on behalf of any religious sect or belief.
It would be descriptively appropriate to label that which I seek as a "new world order"--but any of today's resultant stereotypes do in no way apply.
Needless to say, I am not the "antichrist," nor a minion of any suchg fantasy. Nor am I acting on behalf of a super-rich or super-powerful individual or group seeking to control mankind or the world.
I am not a socialist or a communist.
I seek only benefit to, and the advancement of, civilization, mankind, life, and the world.
I am not speaking on behalf of any religious sect or belief.
It would be descriptively appropriate to label that which I seek as a "new world order"--but any of today's resultant stereotypes do in no way apply.
Needless to say, I am not the "antichrist," nor a minion of any suchg fantasy. Nor am I acting on behalf of a super-rich or super-powerful individual or group seeking to control mankind or the world.
I am not a socialist or a communist.
I seek only benefit to, and the advancement of, civilization, mankind, life, and the world.
Friday, March 30, 2012
HISTORY'S PROGRESS THUS FAR (cont.)
In further support of what I have been writing of late, it appears that unification is in consonance with the precepts of evolution as propounded by Charles Darwin. The Incomparable Darwin and his successorshave proposed that all living creatures evolve, and thus change, in order to survive and flourish. If this be correct (and I believe that, today, there is little rational basis for doubting the accuracy of this theory--i.e., either as a conviction that this is the method God utilized to create His universe; or by which the universe has otherwise come into being), then the human body ("morphological evolution") and human behavior ("cultural evolution") are likewise ever-changing and developing, for the dsake of possession by uws of better chances for survival and success as organisms. It would thus appear to follow that the uniformity and unification which has been occurring in our behavior and our organizations over these countless millenniaare themselves actual expressions of these very evolutionary trends, having as their underlying purpose the promotion of our greater likelihood of survival, and our greater success as living beings.
In short, if mankind's history comprises a progression from tiny isolated groups of prehistoric humans to ever larger groupings--until we see, in the current day, a world composed of nation-states, and combinations of nation-states mnbound togetherin various ways--then it seems illogical and unlikely that the progression will end there. It seems, in fact, a further and inevitable next step in this direction for the entirety of humankind to join together into the formation of a united world, guided by a single sensible and beneficent universal government. For if benefits were had by the joinder of a number of tiny isolated prehistoric communities into larger groups, and finally into nations and empires--then it appears to be a like obvious and indisputable fact that further benefit can, should, and will be derived from this continued and final combination of all of the earth's people into a single unified entity.
Of course, if this be thus self-evident, one would be impelled to say, "It's going to happen anyway--sowhy bother advocating for change? Let time take its course; and let things occur naturally." However, it is my fear that the now somewhat likewise unavoidable "Second Big Bang" might occur before this eventual final unification has had a chance to take place. And so, I strongly urge we take matters into our own hands--in a peaceful and law-abiding way--"getting the ball rolling," and "getting the job done," before it is too late.
* * * * *
In short, if mankind's history comprises a progression from tiny isolated groups of prehistoric humans to ever larger groupings--until we see, in the current day, a world composed of nation-states, and combinations of nation-states mnbound togetherin various ways--then it seems illogical and unlikely that the progression will end there. It seems, in fact, a further and inevitable next step in this direction for the entirety of humankind to join together into the formation of a united world, guided by a single sensible and beneficent universal government. For if benefits were had by the joinder of a number of tiny isolated prehistoric communities into larger groups, and finally into nations and empires--then it appears to be a like obvious and indisputable fact that further benefit can, should, and will be derived from this continued and final combination of all of the earth's people into a single unified entity.
Of course, if this be thus self-evident, one would be impelled to say, "It's going to happen anyway--sowhy bother advocating for change? Let time take its course; and let things occur naturally." However, it is my fear that the now somewhat likewise unavoidable "Second Big Bang" might occur before this eventual final unification has had a chance to take place. And so, I strongly urge we take matters into our own hands--in a peaceful and law-abiding way--"getting the ball rolling," and "getting the job done," before it is too late.
* * * * *
Thursday, March 29, 2012
HISTORY'S PROGRESS THUS FAR (cont.)
"The most perfect form of patriotism is to be so fully conscious of the rights of humanity that one will want to see them respected for all the peoples of the earth." (Jancourt, "Palestrina") These words, uttered in eighteenth century France, appear to be an early reflection of the concept that people the world over are equal and entitled to the same human rights, regardless of their geographic location, or position in their society. Reason seems to indicate that this concept, in turn, would be best safeguarded in a unified world, wherein a single government directs, and protects the rights of all, the world over.
Thomas Paine has proclaimed that "a government of our own [i.e., self-government] is our natural right." In my opinion, government on behalf of the world (i.e., on behalf of all of mankind) is more in the nature of self-government than can be government by (and at times on behalf of the often petty interests and politics within) individual nations. For the interests of the world constitute the interests of all of the world's peoples--which is more representative of the interests of all of us than the possible political agenda of an individual nation's government (or, worse, the current, or entrenched, leaders thereof).
Thus, on down through our years, an ever-ongoing drive toward unity continues to silently proceed. Evidemce of its obviously unavoidable progress to date exists in numerous dimensions of our society. Our ideas, and the institutions that they have spawned, seem strangely more similar of late. The racial, linguistic, and cultural divisions of prior days are now much more readily overcome, thanks to advances in communication, more widespread education, and mass production of similar objects for worldwide distribution. All over the world, we find people dressing more and more alike. Many of us live in cities with similar streetscapes, which include lampposts, traffic signals, and bus stops; while in the stores the goods sold are basically similar, if not the same. Even our interior climates have become rather unified lately, as heating systems, air conditioning, and electricty in general, serve to moderate temperatures on every continent.
With a few intentional exceptions, people the world over now share a common civilization. This is at least partly due to the vast quantity of recent advances and improvements in our suystems of communication. By reason of greatly improved and accessible telephone networks, the proliferation of the cell-phone and successive devices, as well as the rise and circulation of the Internet, we are in instant contact with one another. This causes events and trends to rapidly reach and affect all of us, and has an effect of bonding us together as members of a single human family. Worldwide communication, trade, and social activity have transformed people's interactions into what has been termed "the rudiments of a world society." Transnational transactions and trade, world-encircling transfers of technology and aesthetics, worldwide tourism, and international conferences and correspondence among nenbers of various professional organizations around the world, all strengthen the proposition that we now do truly experience, and function within, a singular worldwide milieu.
Additional evidence that we are daily moving ever closer to a global community lies as well in numerous and varied official happenings in the recent past, including:
a) nations of the world having entered agreements concerning the emission of greenhouse gases;
b) in the economic arena, the establishment of international bodies, such as the World Trade Organization, the World Bank, and the International Monetary Fund;
c) the establishment of an International Criminal Court;
d) at the UN Millenium Summit, recognition expressed by many of the world's leaders that relieving the plight of the world's poorest nations constitutes a global responsibility;
e) an International Labor Organization, having been supported by the World Trade Organization as a means of organizing global standards for the world's working force;
f) various activities and events having worldwide orientation and significance taking place more frequently of late, and enjoying greater publicity (for example, Earth Day, begun in 1970, having become an annual happening in New York City, symbolizing ecological responsibility on a worldwide basis).
* * * * *
Thomas Paine has proclaimed that "a government of our own [i.e., self-government] is our natural right." In my opinion, government on behalf of the world (i.e., on behalf of all of mankind) is more in the nature of self-government than can be government by (and at times on behalf of the often petty interests and politics within) individual nations. For the interests of the world constitute the interests of all of the world's peoples--which is more representative of the interests of all of us than the possible political agenda of an individual nation's government (or, worse, the current, or entrenched, leaders thereof).
Thus, on down through our years, an ever-ongoing drive toward unity continues to silently proceed. Evidemce of its obviously unavoidable progress to date exists in numerous dimensions of our society. Our ideas, and the institutions that they have spawned, seem strangely more similar of late. The racial, linguistic, and cultural divisions of prior days are now much more readily overcome, thanks to advances in communication, more widespread education, and mass production of similar objects for worldwide distribution. All over the world, we find people dressing more and more alike. Many of us live in cities with similar streetscapes, which include lampposts, traffic signals, and bus stops; while in the stores the goods sold are basically similar, if not the same. Even our interior climates have become rather unified lately, as heating systems, air conditioning, and electricty in general, serve to moderate temperatures on every continent.
With a few intentional exceptions, people the world over now share a common civilization. This is at least partly due to the vast quantity of recent advances and improvements in our suystems of communication. By reason of greatly improved and accessible telephone networks, the proliferation of the cell-phone and successive devices, as well as the rise and circulation of the Internet, we are in instant contact with one another. This causes events and trends to rapidly reach and affect all of us, and has an effect of bonding us together as members of a single human family. Worldwide communication, trade, and social activity have transformed people's interactions into what has been termed "the rudiments of a world society." Transnational transactions and trade, world-encircling transfers of technology and aesthetics, worldwide tourism, and international conferences and correspondence among nenbers of various professional organizations around the world, all strengthen the proposition that we now do truly experience, and function within, a singular worldwide milieu.
Additional evidence that we are daily moving ever closer to a global community lies as well in numerous and varied official happenings in the recent past, including:
a) nations of the world having entered agreements concerning the emission of greenhouse gases;
b) in the economic arena, the establishment of international bodies, such as the World Trade Organization, the World Bank, and the International Monetary Fund;
c) the establishment of an International Criminal Court;
d) at the UN Millenium Summit, recognition expressed by many of the world's leaders that relieving the plight of the world's poorest nations constitutes a global responsibility;
e) an International Labor Organization, having been supported by the World Trade Organization as a means of organizing global standards for the world's working force;
f) various activities and events having worldwide orientation and significance taking place more frequently of late, and enjoying greater publicity (for example, Earth Day, begun in 1970, having become an annual happening in New York City, symbolizing ecological responsibility on a worldwide basis).
* * * * *
Wednesday, March 28, 2012
HISTORY'S PROGRESS THUS FAR (cont.)
Citing a term with which we are all by now quite familiar, our new era has been entitled the age of "globalization." Thomas Friedman, a very knowledgeable New York Times journalist, and author of The Lexus and the Olive Tree, as well as several other insightful works, characterizes globalization as a dominant international system which now shapes everyone's domestic politics, commerce, environment, and international relations. It has arisen in post-Cold War society as its dominant international system, making the world an increasingly interwoven place. Further, according to Mr. Friedman, globalization and the Internet have cast commerce, education, and communication onto a global stage. At the same time, it has converted the world's marketplaceinto one in which investors are able to "move money around with the click of a mouse"; and marketers are capable of directing their sales efforts toward "global elites," "global middle classes," and "global teens."
Globalization in fact consists of, and is driven by, the colossal worldwide diffusion of markets and democracy. According to economist Joseph Stiglitz, this has produced huge benefits to all of us. These benefits include greater and wider opportunity for trade, and increased access to markets and technology. Moreover, in the words of Mr. Stiglitz, this has brought us "better health and an active global civil society doing battle in the pursuit of more democracy and greater social justice." (Joseph E. Stiglitz, Globalization and its Discontents).
Our financial and currency markets are more interwoven than ever before. With our advanced technology, a single financial market now operates around the world and around the clock; and it is sensitive to changes anywhere.
All of this gives credence to another statement uttered by Mikhail Gorbachev, during a speech before the United Nations in 1988, wherein he stated that the world economy is becoming "a single organism."
* * * * *
In fact, since World War II, there has truly been a steady and constant movement toward global economic interdependence. As time has moved forward, more and more businesses have buile factories and sold their products in more and more places. By the time the 1980s rolled around, corporations from every advanced industrial country, and some from a number of developing nations, had expanded their production and marketing activities across national borders. Vast growth in foreign direct investment, and in the activities of these multinational corporations, has linked many nations more closely, and has continued to promote our global economy.
During the 1980s, foreign investors owned U.S. corporations valued at almost a trillion dollars. And by 1989, American businesses were amassing over half a trillion dollars in earnings from their overseas activities. Furtrher, these years bore witness to a greater and greater number of intercorporate alliances, in the production as well as the service sectors. It was estimated, for example, that more than twenty thousand such unions occurred between 1996 and 1998 alone. Many, or perhaps most, of these alliances, mergers, and takeovers, have taken place, and continue to so take place, across national boundaries.
It has therefore been generally agreed among the economic community that globalism is occurring on a grand scale, and has already triumphed over regionalism. New financial and technological forces seem to be propelling the world's economies into higher and higher levels of integration. Moreover, since the end of World War II, the prevailing scene is one in which numerous nations have been "catching up" with America's former status as economic behemoth. Mutual interdependence in the global economy seems to be universally recognized and acknowledged; and it is today obvious and thus agreed by most in the business community that the planet's economic interdependence is what has enabled global commerce to flourish so vastly of late.
As technology has advanced to greater and greater heights, it has overcome distance, and has contributed significantly to this movement toward economic globalization. A planet once dominated by military superpowers has evolved to become a "global village" led by a number of economic poowers. Moreover, these economic powers represent internationally-oriented entities, rather than individual nation-states.
In support of this characterization of our planet as a "global village," statistical facts disclosing that, between 1985 and 1990, foreign direct investment (in businesses in other nations) grew at an average rate of thirty percent per year--a rate of increase that was four times the rate of increase in world trade; and further that the annual flow of the world's foreign investment doubled to almost $350 Billion between 1992 and the late nineties. These expansions have, moreover, continued and increased during the early years of our twenty-first century.
Such numerous and varied statements direct us to an irrefutable conclusion that the marketplace today is the entire planet earth; and this global integration of technology, finance, trade, and information exerts primary influence upon most aspects of our lives. We are witnessing a process in the formation of a world economy that is analogous to earlier processes via which national economies were formed. What is required under such current circumstances, in the opinion of the economist Joseph Stiglitz, is a governing body that shall be accountable to all the world's people, to oversee the globalization process in a way that would be comparable to the manner in which the various national governments guided these processes on their respective national levels in years gone by. Thus, in such an atmosphere of so highly integrated a global economy, many are beginning to look upon the nation-state as "anachronistic and in retreat."
What we are in fact faced with today is a world of nation-states attempting to govern and regulate a world of international commerce. The necessity here for a form of worldwide regulation appears to be a natural, and eventually inescapable, consequence. As though in recognition thereof, government policies at the close of the twentieth and start of the twenty-first centuries have in fact indicated movement toward weaker state control and greater international influence. But more is indeed required.
* * * * *
There are, I am sure, still many diehards who favor preservation of the world as an agglomeration of individual sovereign nations, and an isolationist policy for their own respective states. But isolationism--the antithesis of unity--is, in the opinion of many, no longer practicable. It stands in stark conttrast to today's prevailing beliefs and tendencies toward the promotion of freedom and brotherhood for all. America has undergone periods when isolation was its preferred national posture. The Monroe Doctrine was an early official declaration of such a policy. In later years, our refusal to join the League of Nations represented expression of a similar attitude. But America has been far from isolationist where welcome to certain individuals requiring a new domicile is concerned. Notwihstanding sporadic expressions of opposition to newcomers, the U.S. has been a nation composed of immigrantrs since its inception. And these immigrants' loyalty has been at times described as something more than loyalty to a country--rather, loyalty to "the uplifting, dignifying effects of liberty and equality, the exhilarating lure of opportunity, the enjoyment, or even the expectation, of a greater prosperity." (Liah Greenfeld, Nationalism).
This immigratipon began, of course, long prior to the advent of globalization. And there have been numerous similar movements, of people seeking equality and democracy, in numerous other parts of the world as well. Such ideals, wherein people from different groups or classes stand in equal rank with each other, and where all share an equal voice regarding government, actually constitute a form of unity. It therefore ought perhaps be acknowledged that quests for equality and decocracy within individual nations may be considered to be precursors of the eventual unity of all on a global level.
* * * * *
(Please leave a comment--or send an E-Mail to oneworld@tampabay.rr.com)
Globalization in fact consists of, and is driven by, the colossal worldwide diffusion of markets and democracy. According to economist Joseph Stiglitz, this has produced huge benefits to all of us. These benefits include greater and wider opportunity for trade, and increased access to markets and technology. Moreover, in the words of Mr. Stiglitz, this has brought us "better health and an active global civil society doing battle in the pursuit of more democracy and greater social justice." (Joseph E. Stiglitz, Globalization and its Discontents).
Our financial and currency markets are more interwoven than ever before. With our advanced technology, a single financial market now operates around the world and around the clock; and it is sensitive to changes anywhere.
All of this gives credence to another statement uttered by Mikhail Gorbachev, during a speech before the United Nations in 1988, wherein he stated that the world economy is becoming "a single organism."
* * * * *
In fact, since World War II, there has truly been a steady and constant movement toward global economic interdependence. As time has moved forward, more and more businesses have buile factories and sold their products in more and more places. By the time the 1980s rolled around, corporations from every advanced industrial country, and some from a number of developing nations, had expanded their production and marketing activities across national borders. Vast growth in foreign direct investment, and in the activities of these multinational corporations, has linked many nations more closely, and has continued to promote our global economy.
During the 1980s, foreign investors owned U.S. corporations valued at almost a trillion dollars. And by 1989, American businesses were amassing over half a trillion dollars in earnings from their overseas activities. Furtrher, these years bore witness to a greater and greater number of intercorporate alliances, in the production as well as the service sectors. It was estimated, for example, that more than twenty thousand such unions occurred between 1996 and 1998 alone. Many, or perhaps most, of these alliances, mergers, and takeovers, have taken place, and continue to so take place, across national boundaries.
It has therefore been generally agreed among the economic community that globalism is occurring on a grand scale, and has already triumphed over regionalism. New financial and technological forces seem to be propelling the world's economies into higher and higher levels of integration. Moreover, since the end of World War II, the prevailing scene is one in which numerous nations have been "catching up" with America's former status as economic behemoth. Mutual interdependence in the global economy seems to be universally recognized and acknowledged; and it is today obvious and thus agreed by most in the business community that the planet's economic interdependence is what has enabled global commerce to flourish so vastly of late.
As technology has advanced to greater and greater heights, it has overcome distance, and has contributed significantly to this movement toward economic globalization. A planet once dominated by military superpowers has evolved to become a "global village" led by a number of economic poowers. Moreover, these economic powers represent internationally-oriented entities, rather than individual nation-states.
In support of this characterization of our planet as a "global village," statistical facts disclosing that, between 1985 and 1990, foreign direct investment (in businesses in other nations) grew at an average rate of thirty percent per year--a rate of increase that was four times the rate of increase in world trade; and further that the annual flow of the world's foreign investment doubled to almost $350 Billion between 1992 and the late nineties. These expansions have, moreover, continued and increased during the early years of our twenty-first century.
Such numerous and varied statements direct us to an irrefutable conclusion that the marketplace today is the entire planet earth; and this global integration of technology, finance, trade, and information exerts primary influence upon most aspects of our lives. We are witnessing a process in the formation of a world economy that is analogous to earlier processes via which national economies were formed. What is required under such current circumstances, in the opinion of the economist Joseph Stiglitz, is a governing body that shall be accountable to all the world's people, to oversee the globalization process in a way that would be comparable to the manner in which the various national governments guided these processes on their respective national levels in years gone by. Thus, in such an atmosphere of so highly integrated a global economy, many are beginning to look upon the nation-state as "anachronistic and in retreat."
What we are in fact faced with today is a world of nation-states attempting to govern and regulate a world of international commerce. The necessity here for a form of worldwide regulation appears to be a natural, and eventually inescapable, consequence. As though in recognition thereof, government policies at the close of the twentieth and start of the twenty-first centuries have in fact indicated movement toward weaker state control and greater international influence. But more is indeed required.
* * * * *
There are, I am sure, still many diehards who favor preservation of the world as an agglomeration of individual sovereign nations, and an isolationist policy for their own respective states. But isolationism--the antithesis of unity--is, in the opinion of many, no longer practicable. It stands in stark conttrast to today's prevailing beliefs and tendencies toward the promotion of freedom and brotherhood for all. America has undergone periods when isolation was its preferred national posture. The Monroe Doctrine was an early official declaration of such a policy. In later years, our refusal to join the League of Nations represented expression of a similar attitude. But America has been far from isolationist where welcome to certain individuals requiring a new domicile is concerned. Notwihstanding sporadic expressions of opposition to newcomers, the U.S. has been a nation composed of immigrantrs since its inception. And these immigrants' loyalty has been at times described as something more than loyalty to a country--rather, loyalty to "the uplifting, dignifying effects of liberty and equality, the exhilarating lure of opportunity, the enjoyment, or even the expectation, of a greater prosperity." (Liah Greenfeld, Nationalism).
This immigratipon began, of course, long prior to the advent of globalization. And there have been numerous similar movements, of people seeking equality and democracy, in numerous other parts of the world as well. Such ideals, wherein people from different groups or classes stand in equal rank with each other, and where all share an equal voice regarding government, actually constitute a form of unity. It therefore ought perhaps be acknowledged that quests for equality and decocracy within individual nations may be considered to be precursors of the eventual unity of all on a global level.
* * * * *
(Please leave a comment--or send an E-Mail to oneworld@tampabay.rr.com)
Monday, March 26, 2012
HISTORY'S PROGRESS THUS FAR (cont.)
Notwithstanding obvious weaknesses and deficiencies in the United Nations and other international organizations, it nevertheless seems self-evident that mankind's paths have in fact converged more and more in recent years. Convergence, in fact, to quote historian J. M. Roberts, appears of late to be the dominant theme of world history, and people are behaving more and more in accordance therewith, as "more common experiences and assumptions are now shared more widely than ever before." (History of the World).
Another pattern which this convergence has assumed consists of a phenomenon that the years following World War II are said to have provided conditions for, and thereby promoted. It is most widely referred to as "regionalism." Defined as "clusters of supranational, though subuniversal, interests and sentiments...." (Alfred DeGrazia, Political Organization), his might in fact constitute a next-to-last step in the process of which I speak.
From another vantage point, we must view the post-World War II world as one in which we witness a vast growth of the contemporary welfare state. In an increasing number of places, we behold higher and higher priority being assigned to social objectives, such as the right to a suitable job, government compensation in the event of unemployment or disability, social security in old age, free or subsidized health care, and the redistribution of wealth and income through progressive taxation. Moreover, in recent years, these benefits have become available to many, if not most, people within a place--instead of being confined, as in less recent times, to only the poor and disadvantaged residing thereat.
In 1947, answering a Soviet charge that America's program to distribute aid (the Marshall plan) was divisive, President Truman urged world cooperation, and an end to the barriers that do in fact divide our world.
1948 saw a movement toward unity in the sphere of religion. A World Council of Churches was founded, an exponent of the ecumenical novement. As an organized effort to unite the many branches of Protestantism, and eventually all of Christianity, ecumenicism represented but another example of the process of consolidation that is taking place in society. In the 1960s, the Roman Catholic Church also began to encourage ecumenical concepts as well as dialogue with the non-Christian world.
In the same year (1948) as well, a former United States fighter pilot named Gary Davis interrupted a session of the United Nations taking place in Paris to announce that he was a "citizen of the world," and to call for the formation of a world government. He was expelled from the hall; but his exclamations, as well as expressions thereafter of a like nature on the part of others of a similar mind, seem hopefully to be a portent of mankind's future.
In the 1950s, Western Europe began to shed a good deal of the nationalism that had been such an overriding influence before. The Marshall Plan and NATO were factors that initiated the beginnings of integration within the Continent. This apparently signaled an end to an era of warfare among its component states, and the substitution of cooperation and negotiation, which has promoted and encouraged political unity for the region--unity which has culminated in the formation of the European Union.
In the late 50s and early 60s, man began to become more extensively interested and involved in ventures into space. At first as a sort of race to accomplish "firsts," between the United States and Russia, it produced, among other things, a lot of wasteful duplication and very little cooperation between the two programs. However, as time went on, this error was somewhat corrected (as evidenced by the first joint US-Soviet space mission in 1975); and space exploration has since become more of an international activity.
During these same years, another technological phenomenon began to unfold, as the world of computers slowly became established as a method, later the most efficient method, and finally the more or less only method, of dealing with our data, as well as the conduct of our business and personal affairs. Today, one of the primary components of our computer-driven world is the Internet, also known as the "World Wide Web." The Internet has been credited with spawning a worldwide "information revolution," and transforming our globe into a "global village," in which people across the planet are exposed to the same information, share the same problems and concerns, and are able to maintain instant contact and communication with one another.
The Internaet has been called "the pinnacle of the democratization of information," in that it is totally decentralized, owned by no one (and therefore by all), and capable of potenbtially reaching into every home in the world. It has compelled people everywhere to change "from thinking locally first and then globally, to thinking globally first and then locally." The three resultant fundamental changes that have come about via the computer--in how we communicate, how we invest, and how we learn about the world and each other-- have been said to have enabled the world "to come together as a single, integrated, open plain." (Thomas Friedman, The Lexus and the Olive Tree).
One observer of all this, the noted historian Palmer Colton, speaks of recent years as being a time of "a kind of unigform modern civilization which overlies and penetrates traditional cultures...an interlocking unity, in that conditions on one side of the globe have repercussions on the othetr. (Palmer and Colton, A History of the Modern World)
Historian J. M. Roberts describes this as "a creeping unity" that has overtaken mankind--causing clashes among cultures to decrease significantly. And when conflicts do occur (as in the Middle East today), they may actually be more appropriately characterized as being, or having originated in, conflicts between contestants who share somewhat common backgrounds. (J. M. Roberts, op. cit.)
In 1989, the Berlin Wall came tumbling down; and the era of the Cold War ended with it. The U.S. and Russia, former rivals, began working somewhat toward common aims in Europe and Asia. Russian leader Mikhail Gorbachev, conscious of the advent of this new age, identified modern-day progress in science and technology as progress requiring "a different road to the future." Referring to the current existence of an interdependent globe besieged by nuclear, ecological, and economic dangers, he declared that our highest concern must be "universal human interests," and the "universal human idea."
Patrenthetically, to quote one G. Frering, chairman of a giant Brazilian company, "The Berlin Wall fell here (i.e., in Brazil) too. It wasn't just a local event in Europe. It was a global event." Or, in words recited at about the same time by one Raul Vivo, rector of a school for advanced studies in Cuba: "Cuba is no longer an island....There are no islands anymore. There is only one world." [emphasis supplied]. Such declarations from so many quarters make it obvious and clear that these concepts have by now come to be noted and acknowledged by a great many people in a great many places.
* * * * *
(Please leave a comment, or send an E-Mail to oneworld@tampabay.rr.com)
Another pattern which this convergence has assumed consists of a phenomenon that the years following World War II are said to have provided conditions for, and thereby promoted. It is most widely referred to as "regionalism." Defined as "clusters of supranational, though subuniversal, interests and sentiments...." (Alfred DeGrazia, Political Organization), his might in fact constitute a next-to-last step in the process of which I speak.
From another vantage point, we must view the post-World War II world as one in which we witness a vast growth of the contemporary welfare state. In an increasing number of places, we behold higher and higher priority being assigned to social objectives, such as the right to a suitable job, government compensation in the event of unemployment or disability, social security in old age, free or subsidized health care, and the redistribution of wealth and income through progressive taxation. Moreover, in recent years, these benefits have become available to many, if not most, people within a place--instead of being confined, as in less recent times, to only the poor and disadvantaged residing thereat.
In 1947, answering a Soviet charge that America's program to distribute aid (the Marshall plan) was divisive, President Truman urged world cooperation, and an end to the barriers that do in fact divide our world.
1948 saw a movement toward unity in the sphere of religion. A World Council of Churches was founded, an exponent of the ecumenical novement. As an organized effort to unite the many branches of Protestantism, and eventually all of Christianity, ecumenicism represented but another example of the process of consolidation that is taking place in society. In the 1960s, the Roman Catholic Church also began to encourage ecumenical concepts as well as dialogue with the non-Christian world.
In the same year (1948) as well, a former United States fighter pilot named Gary Davis interrupted a session of the United Nations taking place in Paris to announce that he was a "citizen of the world," and to call for the formation of a world government. He was expelled from the hall; but his exclamations, as well as expressions thereafter of a like nature on the part of others of a similar mind, seem hopefully to be a portent of mankind's future.
In the 1950s, Western Europe began to shed a good deal of the nationalism that had been such an overriding influence before. The Marshall Plan and NATO were factors that initiated the beginnings of integration within the Continent. This apparently signaled an end to an era of warfare among its component states, and the substitution of cooperation and negotiation, which has promoted and encouraged political unity for the region--unity which has culminated in the formation of the European Union.
In the late 50s and early 60s, man began to become more extensively interested and involved in ventures into space. At first as a sort of race to accomplish "firsts," between the United States and Russia, it produced, among other things, a lot of wasteful duplication and very little cooperation between the two programs. However, as time went on, this error was somewhat corrected (as evidenced by the first joint US-Soviet space mission in 1975); and space exploration has since become more of an international activity.
During these same years, another technological phenomenon began to unfold, as the world of computers slowly became established as a method, later the most efficient method, and finally the more or less only method, of dealing with our data, as well as the conduct of our business and personal affairs. Today, one of the primary components of our computer-driven world is the Internet, also known as the "World Wide Web." The Internet has been credited with spawning a worldwide "information revolution," and transforming our globe into a "global village," in which people across the planet are exposed to the same information, share the same problems and concerns, and are able to maintain instant contact and communication with one another.
The Internaet has been called "the pinnacle of the democratization of information," in that it is totally decentralized, owned by no one (and therefore by all), and capable of potenbtially reaching into every home in the world. It has compelled people everywhere to change "from thinking locally first and then globally, to thinking globally first and then locally." The three resultant fundamental changes that have come about via the computer--in how we communicate, how we invest, and how we learn about the world and each other-- have been said to have enabled the world "to come together as a single, integrated, open plain." (Thomas Friedman, The Lexus and the Olive Tree).
One observer of all this, the noted historian Palmer Colton, speaks of recent years as being a time of "a kind of unigform modern civilization which overlies and penetrates traditional cultures...an interlocking unity, in that conditions on one side of the globe have repercussions on the othetr. (Palmer and Colton, A History of the Modern World)
Historian J. M. Roberts describes this as "a creeping unity" that has overtaken mankind--causing clashes among cultures to decrease significantly. And when conflicts do occur (as in the Middle East today), they may actually be more appropriately characterized as being, or having originated in, conflicts between contestants who share somewhat common backgrounds. (J. M. Roberts, op. cit.)
In 1989, the Berlin Wall came tumbling down; and the era of the Cold War ended with it. The U.S. and Russia, former rivals, began working somewhat toward common aims in Europe and Asia. Russian leader Mikhail Gorbachev, conscious of the advent of this new age, identified modern-day progress in science and technology as progress requiring "a different road to the future." Referring to the current existence of an interdependent globe besieged by nuclear, ecological, and economic dangers, he declared that our highest concern must be "universal human interests," and the "universal human idea."
Patrenthetically, to quote one G. Frering, chairman of a giant Brazilian company, "The Berlin Wall fell here (i.e., in Brazil) too. It wasn't just a local event in Europe. It was a global event." Or, in words recited at about the same time by one Raul Vivo, rector of a school for advanced studies in Cuba: "Cuba is no longer an island....There are no islands anymore. There is only one world." [emphasis supplied]. Such declarations from so many quarters make it obvious and clear that these concepts have by now come to be noted and acknowledged by a great many people in a great many places.
* * * * *
(Please leave a comment, or send an E-Mail to oneworld@tampabay.rr.com)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)