This is the extremely brief summary of the present
website, which admittedly is not neutral at all concerning such a controversial
subject. At least for now — i.e., unless the opposite can be proven — the
website is completely favorable to the creation of a global governance,
something feasible if a prudent, deft and democratic method of construction is
used in order to do so. Moreover, it is with tireless insistence that we defend
the matter, as criticism is everywhere.
The website has chosen a more journalistic than
erudite (or academic) communication style, for example dividing a long
article, which grammatically should have consisted of one very long and dense
paragraph, into two or three ones. However, such “slicing” shall
never affect the substance of
whatever is being exposed. Its primordial purpose is to convince the largest
possible number of readers — of all ages and social status —, including people
who are usually distant from the more sophisticated legal and political
analysis of the subject but who are still interested in planetary problems
which can affect everyone.
Talking to people from a varied number of
professions, from time to time we are impressed by the level of seriousness of
their concerns. People who are not teaching in universities just because the
need to find a job so soon in life prevented them from going themselves to
college. There are many people who are supposedly unlearned but have much more
common sense than people with a bachelor´s degree. I`ve heard someone
say, “That person got more instructions than his brain could withstand”.
Nevertheless, the website shall welcome with open
arms any eventual observations and theoretical articles from people who are
experts or well versed on the subject even if they are totally opposed to any
kind of universal governance. There shall always be a number of readers who are
more demanding, learned and intellectually honest and who are sincerely
convinced that a “world” (or “global” or “universal”) government can inevitably
be dangerous: — “Who can save us from a global dictatorship if every country is
in the dictator´s hands?”
This people consider it is preferable to have an unorganized
and tense but free world — even if with occasional slaughtering (slaughtering)
— than an organized and clockwork planet which becomes a mixture of Army
headquarters and hospice for old people. Others might say that the idea is good
but this is not the “right moment” yet. The truth is we are more than late.
Smoke clouds darken the skies in the Middle East while rain clouds are either
lacking or drowning entire cities, a consequence of our global inertia when it
comes to defending the environment. How can we “make pressure” in this matter when
each country can feel free to sign or skip the agreements?
I admit that professors of International Public
Law and Political Sciences are already well versed in the subject of “World
Government”. However, even they can feel tempted or curious to look at articles
written in a more journalistic style, articles that are more concerned with
giving the reader the utmost clarity and understanding of the subject.
The importance of this subject exceeds any other
when it comes to the need for security and a harmonious development of human
activities. Security has little value when it is temporary and unreliable, as
it currently is. A “crazy” decision a country makes can “pull the rug” under
thousands of workers in other countries whether they are close or distant,
leading to unemployment and other kinds of problems. “Totally distant”
countries no longer exist. Moreover, something like that could apply even to
highly qualified professionals.
The sense of uncertainty (financial, in the
aforementioned example) causes distress on autonomous professionals, especially
those who are of age and were unable to find “a place under the sun” or else to
“suck on the government´s tits”, anything that might allow them to enjoy a
dignified retirement without a drastic change in their way of living. The need
to “get rich before getting old” — in Brazil, for instance — since the governamental
pension plans are usually much worse than what´s “advertised” in terms of value
(or number of minimum wages) —, has always been a great concern for workers in
the private sector. And here we´re talking about the “intellectual elite
without a monetary safeguard”, people who can still feel happy. They at least
will have what to eat and won´t have to resort to begging on the streets.
The same cannot be said regarding millions of
citizens. Looking today (August 2014) at pictures of refugees in Africa and the
Middle East running away barefoot from irrational conflicts — leaving behind
their homes, their belongings and their dead (s)
—, there is only one possible conclusion: there´s an intolerable excess of
things that are insanely wrong in this planet. A planet that aims to colonize
Mars but at the same time is unable to stop murder, rape and mutilation of
millions of people who kill one another motivated for any number of reasons,
including religion.
Has the reader, by any chance, ever tried to
understand why the Shia and Sunni hate each other? I´m not going to explain it
here, but should you ever try it, you will certainly not believe it. The most
incredible thing involving the three largest religions in the world – Judaism,
Christianity and Islam – is that all three of them are monotheistic, believers
of a single god who is considered an abstract being.
All of them
preach for patience, peace and love for the neighbors, but their believers have
been so skillfully molded since childhood — a time when their still virgin
neurons were able to keep forever whatever they learned — that some of them
believe they have a moral obligation to convince, for better or worse, those
who believe differently than them. And when convincing is not possible, killing
the unfaithful is the achievement demanded by their god: — “And how could you
go against a command from heaven?”
In an ambitious website such as this one, which is
interested in achieving world peace connected to a larger progress — all the human
energy directed to constructive ends —, it would be irrational and coward to
avoid dealing with conflicts derived from religious beliefs, even if it is such
an explosive topic. Ignoring this theme would be like leaving intact a time
bomb whose “tick tack” is clearly heard. That — the disarming of the spirit -
is the only reason why the religious matter – or at least the relation between
religion and conflicts of a large scale - will be dealt with in the website.
The comforting, compassionate and philosophical
side of a religion is one person´s intimate subject. But when this religion
occasionally transforms itself into a means of oppression, or worse, the rest
of humankind has the right to intervene – if only to eliminate the acid and
poisonous part within the whole, which at least in theory is beautiful in its
spirituality.
Everything that “elevates” man above the brutal
animalistic characteristics is laudable — after all, every animal is selfish,
except the dog regarding its owner —, as long as it doesn´t get to the point of
ignoring that man is part of nature and is still an animal, albeit an animal
improved by the aspiration for higher things, even if he can´t define with
precision what those things are. And it is exactly for not knowing it that he
searches for faith.
It is true that the human being is brilliant in
many aspects, but he´s also stupid and defenseless when pointed towards the
abyss — or earthly hell —, by some chiefs of state who, even though “completely
nuts”, are still considered untouchable by the rest of the world, including the
UN. Such unscrupulous leaders feel protected by the unbending veil of the
absolute sovereignty of the country they rule — or else, to be more precise, plunder
much more than govern.
In the theoretical plan, they invoke the
sacrosanct sovereignty — something which is useful when used in the right
proportion —, but in the concrete plan, they delight themselves with the
feeling of power and the look of fear seen in the faces of their subjects, who
have no else to turn to. And who could they turn to? A judge? No, because
judges are also intimidated. After all, it is not uncommon for a judge to be
nominated to a court by a ruler who then expects or even demands that he will
return the favor when it is necessary.
In such a situation, sovereignty becomes ludicrous
because, after all, the obligation of every government is to bring happiness to
the population – and not exclusively to the “boss” and his “gang”. Besides,
with the growing globalization it is no longer enough the well-being of one´s
own citizens; it is also necessary to think, at least in some extent, of the
well-being of the other citizens of the world. That´s because those who help
may one day also need help. In any case, the world must be aware to prevent the
wealth of a nation increasing at the expense of the suffering and
impoverishment of the rest. Is that out of mere kindness? Of course not; it is
due to wisdom and a greater vision.
— “Why this concern with the other? — Someone
might ask. — “Isn´t it workload enough to care for your own citizens?” No, it isn´t, because human beings have a
prodigious memory when it comes to injuries and losses which are suffered and
not atoned for. Only an equivalent and massacring retaliation “soothes one´s
soul”.
The thing is: retaliation in excess — or even
without excess —, generates a new cycle of retaliation, as no one can judge its
own cause. Hence the imperious need for a solution to be taken from the hands
of the “interested parties” (when they can´t reach one in reasonable time) and
fall within the jurisdiction of a “superior authority” – regardless of such
jurisdiction being judicial or not, what matters is that it is legally
predicted —, which will presumably give the cause the fairest solution, or at
least the most humane one possible.
This is what happens internally in the whole
civilized world, with a result which is a thousand times superior to the right
of using blunt force in the solution of conflicts. Thousands of judicial
sentences are proclaimed every month in the entire planet and seldom the losing
party resorts to killing its opponent or the judge responsible for the
decision. Nevertheless, in a global scale — which is even more severe — a
method as simple, practical and tested such as this, i.e., attributing to a
third party the power to solve an issue, is not used.
Even among the UN members, any country which feels
harmed by another one can only sue the latter with its assent. Knowing it is in
the wrong, the harming country simply does not agree and that is it, period.
Nothing happens. If it does, it is only through the uncontrolled use of force,
with a lot of blood and destruction, especially of the weaker party.
No weak and isolated country declares formal war
against a stronger country, as it knows it is going to lose, no matter how
severe the offense it suffered was. Such impossibility of finding a “judge” to
whom present a complaint is an invitation to terrorism, the last resort of
those who don´t have a voice. This big blank in international law justifies in
itself the interest in the discussion of the world government – or whatever
different denomination it might have (after all it is not rare for “something”
to be hated merely for the name it became known for).
A special example of how absurd such a matter is
is the more-than-half-a-century old issue involving Israel and the
Palestinians. The latter can´t complain in court against Israel at the
International Court of Justice because the Palestine is not considered a
“State”. The Palestinians are merely a “people”. In order for them to be
accepted and seen as a “country”, they would need to have set borders. Such
borders, of course, would have to be settled with the agreement of Israel,
which prefers the more comfortable position of keeping the subject in an
eternal discussion — so that it can´t be bothered by any dispute within the
international court.
The aforementioned topic shall be a theme of this
website not because it involves Jewish and non-Jewish people, but for its great
relevance, as it is probably the issue with the greatest potential of leading
to a world conflict once it starts involving other countries in a bellicose
way. Even North Korea, with its nuclear bombs and its grotesque leader,
presents a lesser risk to world peace, since it at least has an acknowledged
border with South Korea – or at least there has never been anything different
reported by the media.
A good chunk of our planet doesn´t have a
civilized method for solving the inevitable problems of coexistence. The most
common method is to attack and retaliate. However, as Gandhi used to say, “The
eye-for-an-eye tactic shall leave us all blind”. Hatred has never been a good
advisor. What took decades or centuries to be built can be destroyed within
years, months, days or even hours. Everybody has heard of the “Hundred Years´
War”, which lasted from 1337 to 1417 —
i.e., actually lasting 116 years but rounded down — and involved France and
England. Or maybe the “Thirty Years´ War”, which started in 1618 and involved
many European nations.
Those wars at least had an excuse: there were no
international courts at that time, such as the International Court of Justice
and the International Criminal Court, both located in The Hague. After the
creation of both tribunals, there is no longer an honorable excuse for the
inertia of the world regarding the prohibition of the use of blunt force or
financial cunning in international conflicts. I mention the latter because a
country can suffocate another without firing a single gunshot, simply through
commercial and financial isolation.
Had there been an effective World Government
in the 1930s, Hitler probably wouldn´t have been able to arm Germany in such a
gigantic scale, something which would coherently “demand” wars of conquest in
order to justify (or not be seen as stupidity) such a waste of money in
weaponry. After all, what to do with so many airplanes, tanks, submarines,
machine guns etc.? Use them, of course!
On the other hand, had there been a World
Government right after the hostilities of the First World War ended, the Treaty
of Versailles probably wouldn´t have been written in the same manner. Hitler
wouldn´t have been “born” out of a “natural need”, a poisonous mushroom which
grew out of the resentment of a Germany which felt defeated and was treated
with extreme rigor by the “Triple Entente”
(England, France and the Russian Empire).
Through the Treaty of Versailles, eight
parts of the German territory became part of the neighboring countries. Every
German colony became English or French colonies. However, the worst punishment
imposed to the defeated Germany was the obligation to pay heavy war
reparations, and those were almost impossible to be paid by a country which had
already become poorer due to the long war effort. The Treaty was followed by huge inflation in
Germany, along with poverty and riots, and all of this ended up “demanding” for
a bold leader who could restore self-esteem to a humiliated nation.
Expanding what has already been said, had
there been a World Government in the beginning of the 20th century there
wouldn´t have been any of the Great World Wars nor Hitler (at least not as we
know him). He might have been a successful architect, maybe a writer, perhaps
even a politician acting in lesser dramas.
His emotional “fuel” was enriched by his millions of admirers who wanted
to hear exactly what he was shouting at his rallies, something which was helped
by a then unknown technique: state propaganda in a huge scale.
Without the strictness of the Treaty of
Versailles we wouldn´t have had two decades later the Holocaust. We also
wouldn´t have had the creation of the State of Israel, the Palestinian
resistance, Osama Bin Laden, the destruction of the Twin Towers, the invasions
of Afghanistan and Iraq, the nuclear tension with Iran… nor any other tense –
and maybe still unknown by now – consequence that might await us unless the
world hurries up and creates a superior authority which doesn´t limit itself to
“admonish” countries which get along.
Such hope is foolish, naïve. When the
“admonishments” are not complied with, it is necessary to act. If the mentally
sane part of humankind doesn´t act, the lunatics of all kinds will “take
matters into their own hands”, mostly stimulated by the weapons industry, which
will rub their hands with joy, hoping for a new and better “golden age”.
Advertising, and especially political propaganda, is cleverer by the minute and
knows exactly how to make the people think and fear, in this or that way.
The
weapons industry can´t remain exclusively in private hands. A peaceful
environment can make them bankrupt. No self-respecting CEO in this area would
allow such “tragedy”. A World Government with peaceful purposes would have to
treat such people cautiously and carefully, redirecting them to other areas of
production, after all an everlasting World Government would have to be
democratic, with elections from time to time, and local propaganda shall not
cease to exist in a national level. Ameaçada de falência, a indústria
armamentista reagiria, com inteligente propaganda, tentando desmoralizar a
ideia de um governo mundial.
A minimum of legal force, deriving from a
universal legislation, must be employed when moods get too heated up and
discussions are paralyzed and adversaries kill each other. In every judicial
sentence in the civilized world, once the examinations and reexaminations are
over and the sentence becomes definitive, there comes the moment of execution
and the use of legal force is legitimized. The same thing shall have to be
applied in the area of international justice, which needs to be strengthened so
that it doesn´t get demoralized. In the special case of the Middle East — the
most complex one nowadays— and considering its urgency, the solution shall have
to derive more from fairness and common sense than through the handling of
international treaties, some of which are delegitimized by the use of force
when they get signed. The Treaty of Versailles, for example, was clearly a
“treaty”, but the difference in level of power among the parties involved was
huge.
It is important to remember that it is not
enough nowadays to avoid wars between nations. It isn´t enough to have an
International Court of Justice with an extended jurisdiction. It is necessary
to investigate and treat the reason or reasons that lead to conflict and
consequently to war. This is the final result of a situation of extreme
discomfort or impoverishment of a nation. A suffering which cannot be solved
through a mere “civilized conversation” between nations. Simply preventing an
armed conflict is not enough when the friction that led to it has not been
dealt with. Thus the interest of this website to discuss the various – and all
– problems which, when not dealt with, lead to war (whether within the law or
“outlaw”) and terrorism.
The present essay is already too long to be
read on a website. However, a few
hundred pages would be needed in order to express everything we wanted.
Nevertheless, what would be left to say on a daily basis if everything was said
in the introduction of the website?
To wrap things up and bring relief to the dear
reader, I reproduce here an anecdote originated in Europe at Gorbatchev´s time
and which reflects really well the need for the rational operation of the
planet. Two planets with very close trajectories used to talk briefly every
time their paths crossed, even without knowing each other´s names. And that
kept happening until the moment a cosmic accident separated the planets.
Thousands of years passed and by chance the two
planets once again crossed paths. One of them, looking very healthy, was rather
honest with the other: — “Hello! It is a pleasure to see you again! However, I
cannot help but notice your skin looks terrible. What´s the matter? Is it
erysipelas, leprosy, syphilis, mycosis, skin cancer or what?” — To which the
other planet replies, “Tell me about it! I´ve had appointments with the best
cosmic dermatologists and none of them could help me.... I don´t know which
ointment to use anymore”. — The healthy planet takes a closer look and says, —
“Hold on, I know what you have... I´ve already had this damned plague! You
don´t need to seek treatment because it will go away on its own. It is caused
by naughty germs who eat one another. In half a century you will be cured and
clean. Well, I feel like we´re getting away from each other, it´s a new route,
you know… See you in half a century and you then tell me if I was right. So
long!” — “Wait! I never knew your name!” shouted the sick planet when seeing
the other one pull apart. To which the other one shouted: — “My name is Earth!
I´m Planet Earth!”
Before our old malady, “unlimited and
irresponsible sovereignty”, destroys us — or else extends ancient suffering —,
we shall examine one by one on this website the components of this world
medication – which has nothing to do with Satanism, Illuminati, Bilderberg
Club, global dictatorship, world domain by the United States, compulsory
unification of religions or any other deformity which taint such an important
theme.
It´s not that such “mysterious schemes” don´t
exist. They do exist, of course, but their role in the building of a better
world will have zero value, or merely a little more than that. For now, such
“secret conspiracies” are nothing more than child´s play.
To say that what we propose is utopic is too
superficial. Hundreds of advancements in technology, science of the matter and
social science have, at some point, been considered utopic. Is the reader
pleased with the general aspect of the world? If not, do you know how to change
that?
This is where we stop, grateful for the
(exhausted) attention of every lady and gentleman, intelligent and curious. The elite
of the countries.
São
Paulo, August 19, 2014.
Francisco
Cesar Pinheiro Rodrigues
