Kampagne für die Reform der Vereinten Nationen
Movement for UN Reform (UNFOR)
SI VIS PACEM PARA PACEM!
If you want peace, prepare for peace!
Unsere Themen und Projekte:
Menschenrechtsklage/Human Rights Complaint
Is Germany actually blocking the development of the UNITED NATIONS to become an effective System of Collective Security?
►►(Click here (German)!)◄◄
by Klaus Schlichtmann
Deutsch lernen in Tokio?
Täglich sterben über einhunderttausend Menschen an Hunger.
·Wie werde ich friedensaktiv ?·
Reasons For A World District And A World District Agency
by Armin von Samson-Himmelstjerna (1920-2008)
1.0 NEW IDEAS NEEDED Deutsch
1.1 On July 5, 1961, General Douglas MacArthur stated forcibly what others had said or written before:
"Abolition of war ... is no longer an ethical equation to be pondered solely by learned philosophers and ecclesiastics, but a hard core for the decision of the masses whose survival is the issue.
Many will tell you with mockery and ridicule that the abolition of war can only be a dream. But we must go on or we will go under.
We must have new thoughts, new ideas, new concepts. We must break out of the straitjacket of the past. We must have sufficient imagination and courage to translate the universal wish for peace into actuality."
1.2 If peace among nations is indeed a precondition for the survival of the human race, why are people not more concerned by the absence of wor1d government?
Do we not care? Do we not know? Do we not realize that, as citizens within each state accept the rule of law, so sovereign nation-states must accept the rule of world law, of world government? Why are we not engaged to get us there?
1.3 Or is it because we do not know what to do?
To help people find out what can be done and to lead to an understanding of world government, a completely new approach is needed.
2.0 CIVIL ORDER: INTERNATIONAL INSECURITY.
2.1 Within a nation, peace and security—civil order—come from government. But our present global insecurity, our need to fear nuclear war, also comes from government.
2.2 We know we need lasting peace. We know we should have abolished war. But by whom do we expect this new direction to be initiated? Can we realistically expect this from governments?
After Hiroshima, lasting peace and international security became ostensibly the primary goal, and local or internal peace and security a secondary goal.
Governments of sovereign nation-states in general achieved the second goal. So despite their efforts within their own borders, all people still face total insecurity.
2.3 Because of the international system of the nationstates and their common practice of national defense, lasting peace will remain a fake. For the sake of human survival people must forthwith look above the level of national governments.
3.0 NATIONAL MILITARY DEFENSE : NECESSITY AND OBSTACLE.
3.1. The only provision nation-states can provide for the security of the people internationally is military defense. Despite its crippling costs, this has failed to provide real security because ultimately it displays a preparedness and acceptance to fight and win a war, even a nuclear war, i.e. peace through deterrence—peace by waging terror. Yet the nation-state has no alternative. Its government has no way to, as MacArthur said, "break out of the straitjacket of the past." Part of the national constitution is the straitjacket. Government officials are bound to take an oath to first protect the nations constitution.
3.2 Though its people want to escape the straitjacket and though global civilization is at risk from nuclear war, a nation-state government must strive to fill the deterrence gap. But it is really a global civilization gap that yawns and no nation-state government can initiate ways of filling that gap.
3.3 People need to learn that governments cannot be held responsible for not filling that gap. It can only be done by people. People need to be aware, that its only they, not governments, who can establish a secure global civilization not wracked by the threat of nuclear war. It is the peoples' task, as it was with the American Declaration of Independence, "to form such new government" on a new level and at a new place "that can secure our inalienable rights" to peace, security and the freedom from war.
4.0 HOW TO CHANGE SYSTEMS
4.1. Therefore the crucial question is not when and how governments will arrange lasting peace and abolish war, but when and how people can organize a systematic transformation from the present global political structure to a new one.
People must be attracted to some project that can, when implemented, "break the straitjacket of the past", as it will facilitate the changeover from the old to an adequate new political system
4.2. The establishment of a World District is meant to provide such a mechanism for changing over without disturbing either the present balance of power or the rights of sovereign nation-states.
4.3. There is no purpose to be served in criticising governments for not doing what they cannot be expected to perform. They cannot find peace. They cannot be expected to abandon national military defense into a "vacuum of global order". It is not their fault that we have no world government available.
It is—even more important—not their business to initiate its creation.
4.4 Instead, the people themselves must move. It is up to them to "have new thoughts, new ideas, new concepts". It is the people who must find a formula for world government.
5.0 "DOCKING" INTO WORLD GOVERNMENT
5.1 How can it be done? It can be done by launching a common project to prepare an infra-structure for world government. At the World District there could be assembled the new hardware arid the new software for world government. If the World District is a going concern, then nation-state governments would only have to turn the key to lock into a World Federal Government once they had the political will to do so.
5.2 Nation-states could engage in a type of "docking maneuver". It need not disturb their establishment nor diminish their powers.
With the will of their people, governments may decide to "come alongside" the World District. When a majority of nation-states have so decided, there would be a prospect for world government.
Once a number of governments had "docked" to the World District, they may indeed switch into its systems and gradually delegate their functions and powers to what would be a World Federal Government rising from the World District.
But for this to happen, the World District would have to be in a standby position, ready for service.
6.0 WORLD DISTRICT AGENCY‘S FUNCTION - A MAGNET FOR BUSINESS
6.1. The targets of the World District Agency will be to:
— establish a World District which will provide an infra-structure for a world government; and
— raise the attention of the world's people to the fact that the "abolition of war" is becoming now a realistic option.
6.2 World Government must itself be transformed from a vague idea and take on a real shape as a visible, concrete and tangible project.
The project with its call for physical action in building a new city, will by its nature attract and inspire young and old of all nations. It will be a lure for business. Architects, construction firms, all kinds of contractors, shipping companies, airlines, and a multitude of service suppliers will see in the project a major opportunity for their operations.
6.3 The project needs to produce enough magnitude to become a real catalyst for political transformation, for change. The World District Development Project will be a showcase, a display centre for the new system and how it were to function. In it will be seen the opportunities that will arise when the ultimate aim of the World District Agency gets under way—World Federal Government.
6.4. Meanwhile, World District Agency will apply itself to:
— leasing a suitable area in which to locate the World District
— setting up the administrative infrastructure within a new town which may eventually become a World Capital.
— building a seaport and an airport,
— installing communications systems
— training a world law enforcement corps,
— founding a World University
— building the complete "peace-keeping-machinery"—ready made so that world government could start by its inauguration at a certain date.
7.0 RAISING PUBLIC CONSCIOUSNESS.
7.1 Once the World District Development Project starts its work—indeed once the Agency begins its feasibility studies—there is certain to be global media interest. There will be no shortage of news for the media and the story of world government will begin to enter the homes of the people.
Contractors, construction sites, successes, failures, political support, political opposition, Tangiers itself, conventions to draft a world constitution - and plans for the infra-structure will all be grist for the mill of the media.
7.2 Peace movements around the world could find common cause enabling them to focus and concentrate their efforts.
Relationships between governments and their local peace movements will take on a new dimension. Both sides can discover that there is no one to blame for the crisis of survival in which we have been trapped.
7.3 No governments, no politicians, no "enemy nations", no capitalists, no communists, no religious beliefs have been the obstacle. All have been victims of an out-dated system into which we have all been born and had no alternative but to accept.
8.1 The change what may have seemed to be inevitable has become an essential for survival. It will be for the people everywhere to urge their nation-state governments to move alongside the World District and try the "docking maneuver".
8.2 It may be possible if the World District is functioning for people to transfer from the existing system of nation-states to a system of world federal government thereby "translating the universal wish for peace and security into actuality".
8.3 The World District Agency's aim is to give people a chance - a chance to make a decision themselves. It will be an obvious decision for it will be "the decision of the masses whose survival is the issue".
フリードリッヒ • ニーチェ:
Human, All too Human
284 The means to real peace. -
No government nowadays admits that it maintains an army so as to satisfy occasional thirsts for conquest; the army is supposed to be for defence. That morality which sanctions self-protection is called upon to be its advocate. But that means to reserve morality to oneself and to accuse one‘s neighbour of immorality, since he has to be thought of as ready for aggression and conquest if our own state is obliged to take thought of means of self-defence; moreover, when our neighbour denies any thirst for aggression just as heatedly as our State does, and protests that he too maintains an army only for reasons of legitimate self-defence, our declaration of why we require an army declares our neighbour a hypocrite and cunning criminal who would be only too happy to pounce upon a harmless and unprepared victim and subdue him without a struggle. This is how all states now confront one another: they presuppose an evil disposition in their neighbour and a benevolent disposition in themselves. This presupposition, however, is a piece of inhumanity as bad as, if not worse than, a war would be; indeed, fundamentally it already constitutes an invitation to and cause of wars, because, as aforesaid, it imputes immorality to one‘s neighbour and thereby seems to provoke hostility and hostile acts on his part. The doctrine of the army as a means of self-defence must be renounced just as completely as the thirst for conquest. And perhaps there will come a great day on which a nation distinguished for wars and victories and for the highest development of military discipline and thinking, and accustomed to making the heaviest sacrifices on behalf of these things, will cry of its own free will: ,we shall shatter the sword‘ - and demolish its entire military machine down to its last foundations. To disarm while being the best armed, out of anelevation of sensibility - that is the means to real peace, which must always rest on a disposition for peace: whereas the so-called armed peace such as now parades about in every country is a disposition to fractiousness which trusts neither itself nor its neighbour and fails to lay down its arms half out of hatred, half out of fear. Better to perish than to hate and fear, and twofold better to perish than to make oneself hated and feared - this must one day become the supreme maxim of every individual state! - As is well known, our liberal representatives of the people lack the time to reflect on the nature of man: otherwise they would know that they labour in vain when they work for a ,gradual reduction of the military burden‘. On the contrary, it is only when this kind of distress is at its greatest that the only kind of god that can help here will be closest at hand. The tree of the glory of war can be destroyed only at a single stroke, by a lightning-bolt: lightning, however, as you well know, comes out of a cloud and from on high. (R.J. Hollingdale, transl., Human, All Too Human. A Book for Free Spirits, Cambridge Texts in the History of Philosophy (1996), pp. 380-81)