Click here for PDF format of this essay








THE ROAD TOWARDS A GLOBAL SOCIETY






Chapter 1




Short-lasting moments of confidence and optimism.
Unchanging scenes of lifeless devastation.
Physically and mentally, man may become a caricature of what he was, once.
The unstoppable momentum of all-out belligerence.
The fragile, lumbering, giant-creature of "mankind as a whole".
Once we have become a single creature, there is no chance for a partial "cullular" survival without sophisticated organ-systems.
An analogy that is not "science-fiction".




1          My moments of confidence and optimism do not last very long, because I am constantly reminded how easily man reverts to violence, and, how deep-rooted and nearly unstoppable this momentum of violence becomes; especially, when violence begets violence. Yet, ironically, the violence that leads so often to destruction is also a major factor in the rise of opportunities for a younger, more vigorous, alert and expansive lifeform, because this new entity of life fills the gap, or the vacuum, that arises, when belligerent parties are in the process of annihilating each other. The rise and fall of nations, as well as the rise and fall of families and individuals, would not be nearly as dynamic and rapid, if man would not give-in, time and again, to the temptation to engage in violent conflict.


2          However, when strife becomes a warfare that is so devastating and all-encompassing that there is no-one left to fill the vacuum, after the dust and radio-active fall-out has settled, then, we can visualise only silence and unchanging, lifeless scenes of devastation. Perhaps, man will indeed have spent, finally, this pernicious ability to make devastating warfare, after the nuclear holocaust has taken place. Perhaps, the surviving creatures will be so intimidated and perplexed, so vulnerable and weakened by disease and the effects of chronic radiation-poisoning, that they can only accept placidly their miserable life and their inevitable slide into extinction. Probably, these miserable creatures, who will then be a caricature of what man once was, and still is, will, fortunately, not even know what has happened to them, and the loss of culture and technology may be so great, that the final decades of man's existence are, once again, lived under circumstances that resemble the dawn of man's conscious awareness; but now, without the prospect of a glorious rise to world-dominance.


3          Most likely, the beliefs of man will then be so coloured by fantastic myths and incredible legends, that knowledge and insight, as we know them, today, will have been replaced by a primitive, diseased and desperate attempt to come to grips with the realities of their existence. Just as their diseased and defective bodies will be a caricature of what man's genetic code once was, before the nuclear holocaust, so is it likely that man's mind, his thoughts and beliefs, his knowledge and behaviour, will only be a miserable shadow and a distorted reflection of what man was, once upon a time.


4          There is another reason why man will really never know what happened, when this nuclear holocaust has taken place. At least, it seems reasonable to postulate that the events will come so swiftly and that communications will be so severely disrupted, that nobody is able to form an overall picture of what is happening. Even in minor disasters, we see how confusing the events become when communications fall-away. Besides, we know, that belligerent people, at the height of their bellicose engagement, lose completely sight of the overall event and are not able to give an objective account or summary of what is happening. Therefore, the world during its final moments before the nuclear conflagration will be so involved with the rising tensions of an escalating warfare, that everyone will have the feeling that they are caught-up in a momentum over which they have lost control.


5          It is, indeed, so easy to lose control over the momentum of belligerence. Then, we mistakenly believe to be at the mercy of "fate", rather than the victims of a momentum we have set into motion ourselves; back in those "good old days", when we were powerful and confident; when we thought that we could bluff our adversaries in the ever rising stakes of the nuclear poker-game. This momentum of belligerence becomes so easily uncontrollable, that we have great difficulties seeing where it started, and how we all contributed to this momentum, at one time or another.


6          The huge gene-pool of mankind, with its many thousands of different communities, societies and nations, has been able to overcome gigantic set-backs in the past. Large areas of civilisation could be destroyed and valuable insights and techniques could be lost, without jeopardising the viability of the gene-pool as a whole. Another center of growth and expansion would surely arise, just as a vital plant will start to grow new roots, or sprout another shoot, if it has suffered losses and damages. However, as we become more intertwined and inderdependent; as our technologies and industrial capabilities increase, we begin to resemble more and more one giant, living organism that has spread itself out all over the globe; a giant organism that is huge and lumbering in its behaviour and poorly in tune with the precarious and fragile life-support systems of the planet upon which this creature has been born. This giant creature is, not only, hampered by a lack of adaptability to its fragile circumstances, but, its own cohesion and existence is constantly jeopardised by the fighting that is going-on between its "cells". The communities of cells still exist in a state of competitive strife and do not have the necessary regulatory mechanisms to keep them in line, and make them behave for the good of the "creature as a whole". This slow and dull creature is the giant of "mankind as a whole".


7          The viability of this creature is constantly in doubt. Because of the rising interdependence between the cellular communities, it is obvious that a serious disruptive warfare between them, or, an erroneous direction of development for this "creature of mankind", will mean, not only, the death of mankind as a whole, but also, a near-impossibility for isolated cellular communities to survive and start rebuilding the gene-pool of mankind once again. Once we have become a single "creature", a living entity of mankind as a whole, it may well mean, that we all are going to die, if we lose a large and vital part of this creature of mankind. This is especially true, if large, sophisticated and technically advanced systems are essential to keep the terrestial environment more or less safe. As soon as these vital organs of the creature of mankind have disintegrated, none of the remaining cell-groups have a chance to stay alive. Can any of the cellular communities of our body survive, if the kidneys or the liver have been destroyed? These are the organs that keep the blood, or the "cellular environment", free from dangerous pollutants and toxic substances.

 

8          Do not reject this imagery out of hand as science-fiction, because I believe that an awareness of this essential analogy will be a key to our efforts to avoid a nuclear holocaust, or a disastrous deterioration of our terrestial life-support systems. Many of us already live under conditions where an interruption of essential supplies and waste-disposal mechanisms would seriously undermine our ability to survive. If we are already so vulnerable now, how much more vulnerable will we be, when the air has become too dangerous to breathe-in without special filters; or, if all our water and food have to be passed through complex de-contamination processes with a high level of technological sophistication?


9          Whenever we reach this state, we are all inextricably linked to each other for survival, because then, we can not hide in the woods or retire to a remote island. Without these sophisticated technological aids, we will die, and none of us could make and maintain such equipment without extensive help and cooperation from other people. Then, we will have completed the analogy with our own multi-cellular body and multi-organic system of existence, because none of our cells can survive outside the body without extensive "life-support" systems. If any one of the vital organ-systems of the body would fail, even, if it would only be for a short period of time, the integrity and coherence of the living organisation will inevitably fall-apart, and its particular configuration will be irretrievably lost. All cell-groups will die, regardless of the fact that most of them were in excellent condition and could have lived for many more years to come.




.......








Chapter 2




We can sustain injuries and stresses only for "so long".
A critical point of no return;.
Why we have a tendency to be conservative.
We all live in our particular world of mental imagery.
We may exterminate our enemies and ourselves simultaneously.
Speculative images from a concerned thinker.
How to give viability to a globally organised society of mankind.




1          Just as our body can sustain injuries and losses of cellular units, as well as chronic situations of stress during periods of strong existential demands, so can a society survive for many years, even many decades, processes that are clearly unhealthy and detrimental to its existence. Just as an intelligent individual realises that he or she will have to consider the need for sensible and healthy living conditions in order to reach a ripe old-age, so are disease processes in society, together with all sorts of stresses and tensions, posing a threat to the existence of a social unit; these are warning-signs that have to be taken seriously.


2          Unless we are able to formulate, collectively, ideas and mechanisms that will improve the internal organisation and functions of our social units, we will find, some day, that this "creature of mankind" as a whole is terminally ill. Then, no amount of insight or regret, and no amount of frantic corrective actions will save us. The pressures of natural selection have given us a limited amount of time and a limited scope in which to carry-out a search for better and healthier living conditions, but, any solution or effort after this critical point of no return has been reached, will be futile and too late. Unfortunately, or, perhaps, fortunately, nobody knows, when or where this critical point of no return lies, or, what signs and symptoms will be visible when we start to reach this critical point of no return. All we can do is to make ourselves aware of these concepts. Let us become convinced that it is useful to look at reality in this way. It is useful to see our collective and individual existence in the context of a single but complex global organism.


3          As soon as a sufficient number of people agree with this perception of reality, we should be able to improve the health of "mankind as a whole", and we should begin by taking-away this suicidal device from the creature of mankind; the nuclear war-head. However, even, if it is possible for these ideas to spread and for a large number of people to agree that we have to do something, we still may not be able to accomplish a turn-around in the momentum of current trends, because this momentum is gigantic. We may come to the conclusion that we have already lost control over this momentum; that we can not stop the down-hill slide and the inevitably fatal crash.


4          Let us look at the various momenta we are already caught-up in. We have discussed extensively the economic momentum of our affluent world, and indeed, so many of us are trapped in this momentum that there is precious little we can do about freeing ourselves from an impending down-fall or crash. Our economic entrapment lies at the heart of this feeling of chronic insecurity, because we realise that we need the continuation of this economic momentum in order to survive. Perhaps, this is the main reason why so many of us opt for a "conservative stance", because we know that our entire affluent world will come crashing-down upon us, if we fail to keep this momentum going; or, if we fail to revive this economic machinery after an economic depression or recession. This is the main reason why so many of us feel that the threat from a Communist take-over is intolerable, because aside from all the arguments about social justice versus the freedom of individual initiative, the crux of the matter is the fact that so many of us would lose completely the ability to continue the way of life we have become dependent upon. Perhaps, this is the reason why we support the build-up of nuclear arsenals and the installation of hundreds of new, land-based missiles in Western Europe, because there is not much difference between perishing in a nuclear holocaust and a Communist take-over; because the latter will destroy completely the social system that gives us our high, affluent incomes.


5          For many people, their ultimate concern is only their particular world, and it does not really matter to them, whether their particular world is coming down, or everybody's world is coming to an end. After all, our realities and beliefs, including the perception of the world and everything in it, is a product of our individual conscious awareness, and there is a strong tendency for all of us to be totally unconcerned with the ability of other people to sustain their lives, if we feel that our world is coming to an end.


6          The momenta of a search for security, a maintenance of the economy, and a rather "desperate unconcern" for everyone and everything outside our own social environment, are, therefore, closely related. These factors are based upon strong instinctive behavioural trends, which may well turn-out to be essentially incompatible with the type and form of large-scale social life and a sophisticated technological interdependence upon which so much of our viability has come to rest. If this is the case, then, we are already firmly planted upon a road towards an evolutionary dead-end; the inevitable extinction of the human species. The point is, that we will never know for sure, whether or not we have already lost long-term viability and all our efforts are in vain. We will never be sure about this, and, most importantly, we would never be able to live with such a gloomy and hopeless reality-perception. Really, we are dealing, here, with a retrospective judgement for another, post-human intelligence, or the speculative imagery from an anxious and depressed thinker.


7          Collectively, we will never accept such a reality-perception, because it paralyses us, and it negates or denies the freedom of action we still feel and experience to be part of our existence. Therefore, regardless of the chances for success, and regardless of the final outome, we have only one choice; to avoid and correct dangers and dangerous trends, as soon as we have become aware of them. This means, that some of us may see clearly dangers and trends that are not recognised by sufficient people to be able to do something about these dangerous trends. Then, we become helpless spectators who are watching the development of a down-fall. This down-fall could, perhaps, have been averted, if sufficient people had realised, in time, what was happening.


8          So far, the road towards a global society seems rather bleak, in particular, if we realise that we have, in essence, already become a global society; that we are going to die, if this lumbering, global society of mankind would ever suffer fatal injuries. However, the imagery of a global society that is being born, allows us, also, some freedom and time to make this lumbering creature of mankind a little more agile and responsive; a litle more aware of the fragile environment in which it lives, and a little stronger, internally; if we learn to subdue and control the suicidal frustrations and tensions between the communities of human beings, which constitute, in essence, the cells or "building blocks" of this "creature of mankind".


9          Ironically, then, the problem is not a feeling of despair and disbelief about the possibility how to create the existence of a global society, but, the problem is how to infuse a measure of viability into this global society, which is already rapidly becoming a reality. The global society is rapidly making us all so interdependent upon each other, that we will be sucked into the final death of extinction, if this lumbering global society falls-apart completely; either from a nuclear suicide or from suffocating in its fragile terrestial environment. Therefore, our concerns about the road towards a global society are not a reflection of any desire to build a utopia, but a reflection of the need to recognise an urgent reality.




.......




Chapter 3




What can we do to make the world safer?
Watching helplessly.
Why we need a more optimistic outlook.
A gigantic momentum needs a gigantic effort to slow it down.
A search for common bonds.
We have to know ourselves.
The art of the discussion.
A genuine dialogue between East and  West.
Common grounds with the Marxist regimes?




1          "Allright", you may tell me, "I recognise this urgent reality, and I agree with you about the need to come to grips with the many problems we face. I agree, that we have to improve our chances for survival, and, that we have to leave the future generations of mankind a planet that can still support human life. But, tell us how to go about it; what can we do? Is there anything we, as private individuals, can do to help the situation, while we are locked-in, somewhere on this world, into the circumstances and the momenta of our particular social environment? Is there anything we can do to bring a little more sense and sanity into the circumstances and the conditions we live under?


2          Is there anything we can do, or, are we, who have recognised the problems, doomed to watch helplessly, as we drift towards the irrevocable abyss? Tell us what can be done, because, if there is nothing we can do except to contemplate and regret that we did not make the decisions any sooner, we will eventually have to look for a more optimistic and hope-giving reality-perception; even, if it means an even faster fall into the abyss, or an accelerated process of losing control over the momenta which we, our forefathers and the generations before us, have set into motion, a long time ago. Is there something we can do? Do you have any practical suggestions to hep us create an opposite momentum, which may, eventually, be successful enough to reverse the course of present trends?".


3          I will try to give you a number of practical suggestions, which may alleviate this feeling of helplessness, as we begin to understand what is going-on; while realising, at the same time, how little we can do about it. However, I like to sound a note of caution. We are all inclined to measure the progress of what we are doing or want to do on too limited a scale. We can not expect to see sudden and dramatic changes in the course of history. A gigantic momentum takes a gigantic and sustained effort to slow it down, let alone, change its course. Besides, we have to realise that there are already forces at work to halt these momenta, and, therefore, we are not as alone as we think; nor can we take all the credit for the beneficial changes that may be taking place. We will have to learn to see changes in a truly global perspective, and over prolonged periods of time. This will help us to avoid the sharp ups and downs that are likely to occur, if we evaluate happenings on too narrow a scale. We will have to learn to be really humble and to minimise the significance of our own existence and efforts; without coming to the erroneous conclusion that nothing matters, then, if we are so insignificant ourselves.


4          We will have to learn to identify with this creature of "mankind as a whole", and we have to recognise our common existential bonds and needs. Indeed, in acknowledgeing the drive to compete as a common factor of our biological heritage, we create, at the same time, one of the strongest and most fundamental insights that bind us together.


5          "All these exhortations and recommendations still fall within the reflective sphere", you say to me, and you repeat that you want to hear more practical considerations. Let me assure you, that all your eagerness and willingness to start working for a better world will come to no avail, and may only create suspicions and frictions, unles you have been able to really master the essence of your own existence; unless you know how you "work"; what drives you; what motivates you, and, how easy it is to believe that you are absolutely right and your opponent absolutely wrong. Unless you know this, you will be powerless to do anything right, or to contribute anything worthwhile to the cause of peace and justice; regardless, how anxious you are, and how full of good intentions and enthousiasm. Never has the saying been more truthful than it is today; those, who want to better the world should start by bettering themselves.


6          Now, we know better what this means. It means, above all, a good insight into our own personality; a good insight into the fact that it is so easy to slide into an attitude of confrontation with those who do not agree with us; a good insight into the concept that we resemble each other so much more than we differ from each other; that we are bound to compete for the same things, because we are so much alike. When we know this, and, when we have practiced the art to discuss, calmly and wisely, especially with those who think so differently, then, we may be able to take the next step. This next step is indeed "the discussion".


7          Let us talk with each other about all these ideas; let us discuss and see, whether or not it is possible for widely divergent people to recognise the same realities. Let us excercise the ability to recognise the similarities in each other's view-points, and let us excercise the ability to recognise the specific, local or individualising concerns and motivations that may colour our realities and determine our priorities. As long as we still have a tendency to slide towards a confrontation and our emotions of hostility are able to dominate, we know, that we have lost "the battle" for a genuine dialogue; that we are sliding into a situation of "verbal warfare".


8          Whenever we feel that this has happened, we are better-off to apologise for the unintentional atmosphere of acrimony, and to indicate our willingness to start, once again, the search for a genuine dialogue; whenever our feelings and emotions have subsided, and we are capable to start exploring the potentials for agreement and compromise, rather than the certainties of victory or defeat. As long as we can not distinguish, clearly, between a genuine dialogue with the intention to understand our adversaries, and, a verbal battle where we are trying to "win", or are squirming to avoid a "defeat", we have not mastered ourselves sufficiently to engage in a fruitful discussion.


9          These conditions of self-knowledge or insight, and the ability to discuss with patience and wisdom, appear rather passive factors that do not appeal to our desire for "doing something". Let me re-iterate my belief that we are dealing, here, with the most important and practical efforts we can make to bring-about a better world. Let us not underestimate the difficulties in the objectives that have been sketched, here, and I am the first one to admit that I have not masterd at all the art of discussing calmly and wisely with people who think quite differently from myself. I tend to become impatient and my emotions come into play quite easily, and this is the reason why I stick to writing rather than discussing these ideas in public. As a writer, I can think at my own pace, and I do not feel so easily irritated, because the paper in front of me absorbs patiently my thoughts and ideas, page after page.


10        Let us assume that most of us have made a genuine attempt to understand some of the mechanisms that guide our behaviour; that we have learned to recognise our bellicose instincts in many circumstances. Let us assume that we are genuinely willing to engage in a "peaceful dialogue", and, that we have foresworn our instinctive desire to score points on the battlefield of verbal warfare. Now, we are ready to formulate a more specific political goal for which we can work. This objective will require a great deal of skilful and honest discussions, before we get enough people to agree with us, and get a significant momentum going. I am thinking, here, about a highly ambitious, but, at the same time, a totally realistic political goal. We all should start working towards a genuine dialogue between East and West. We all, peoples on both sides of the Iron Curtain, should pressure our leaders to begin an honest debate between Nato and the Warsaw-Pact countries; not only, with the aim to reduce the risk of nuclear confrontation or a conventional war, but to come to a compromise about the way society should be organised.


11        Let us not forget that the Western democracies and the Marxist societies have far more in common than we are led to believe. Because of this pernicious propaganda-war and the biased reporting that has been going-on on both sides, many people have gotten the erroneous impression that these two systems of social organisation are arch-enemies of each other. In fact, nothing is further from the truth. Certainly, there are important differences of opinion, but, let us look first at the areas of agreement. Marxism, and Socialism in general, arose as a protest against prevailing working conditions, which were an undesirable by-product of the early phases of the Industrial Revolution. However, the Western democracies have come a long way since, and not a single Communist thinker can maintain, in all honesty, that there is still a large and powerful exploitative ruling elite in the Western democracies. This is not the case, not even in the United States.


12        Certainly, there is an increasing danger that such a polarisation may take place, once again, but it has not taken place as yet, and the United States are still firmly rooted upon the principles of, and a commitment to, universal suffrage. Therefore, the real enemies of the Socialistic Ideal are not the Western democracies, not even the proponents of free-enterprise in a firmly democratic society, but, those countries which have a military dictatorship; where a military and wealthy ruling elite has formed a right-wing dictatorship, which keeps the poor suppressed, ignorant and enslaved. These leaderships and those social conditions are the real enemies of the Socialist Ideals, and we see, indeed, that, under these circumstances, Marxist or leftist guerilla-movements have a chance to win-over the population, and, eventually, overthrow a hated and exploitative elite.




.......







Chapter 4




Do we really have to fear the Marxist ideology?
The many beneficial aspects of the Socialist Ideal.
A look at dissenters in Communist societies.
A package of rights and obligations.
A common Constitution.
A potential rapprochement between East and West.
The desire to impose social justice on a world-wide scale.




1          It is a ridiculous and insane situation that many of us in the West believe the Communists to be our arch-enemies. It shows, how we have been poisoned by biased and misleading propaganda. We forget, completely, how much we have in common with them, because we fear their power and their challenge to world-domination, while we emphasise our disgust for their tendency to be dictatorial. No doubt, we, in the West have a legitimate complaint or argument with the Communist practice or doctrine of imposing, with force, the blessings of a Socialist State. These Socialist Ideologues genuinely believe that it is "madness" to reject the advantages of a doctrine that promises everyone an equal opportunity, a freedom from want and exploitation, and an opportunity to work for the well-being of the State. They honestly come to the conclusion that there must be something wrong with people who reject the Socialist Ideals, and this is one of the reasons why they put these strange dissenters into mental institutions.


2          We, in the West, have grossly abused and exaggerated the problems of dissent in the Communist countries, because we have failed to recognise that the hard-core dissenters are a small minority, who have always used the Western press and media to focus attention upon their personal struggles with the State. If we analyse, in detail, their motivations and reasons for dissent, we see, that the reasons have little to do with the rejection of the Socialist Ideals. Their motivations are frequently entirely personal. They often protest against the refusal of the authorities to let them emigrate to another country, or, the inability to practice the religion of their choice; or, the protest is against some of the mal-practices of a bungling bureaucray, but, indeed, some of the dissenters are genuinely trying to bring more opennes and freedom of expression into the Communist society.


3          Such a huge, one-party ruling elite with its unwieldy bureaucracy is a rich target for criticisms, because there will inevitably be incidences where party officials and bureaucrats have become corrupt. Unfortunately, the protestors and dissenters always high-light the negative aspects of the Socialist societies through the Western media, and one never hears a truly balanced criticism or evaluation of life under Marxist rule. No wonder, that the sense of loyalty and patriotism of these dissenters is questioned by their own people; especially, since the reporting of their activities and misfortunes has become such a blatant propaganda tool for those people in our Western democracies, who can only see the negative side of the Marxist societies.

 

4          It is about time that we see through this. It is time that we have a fresh look at the accomplishments, as well as the failures and short-comings of the Communist regimes. It is about time, that we start to emphasise the common goals and ideals between the Communist regimes and the social democracies of the West. Let us acknowledge that we both believe in the principles of equality in opportunity. We both believe that every member of society has the right to receive a package of support and assistence, which will allow the individual to live in a way that corresponds to the ideals of a decent human existence.


5          Let us also acknowledge, however, that such a package of rights has to be matched by a package of obligations, where each healthy individual should embrace the principle that he or she has the obligation to make a contribution to society that is in accordance with one's capabilities and the opportunities of the moment. If we can agree in broad outlines with our Marxist counter-parts about the way people should live, then, we can argue about the differences in our approaches. Perhaps, we, as proponents of the universal franchise to vote will be able to convince our Marxist colleagues, that, indeed, it is possible to extend the right to vote to everyone in society; that it is not necessarily the end of the Socialist State or the Socialist Ideal, if political parties with a somewhat different philosophy and approach are allowed to compete for the favours of the public in free and universal elections.


6          However, it is reasonable to expect that our Marxist counter-parts would like to see a compensatory tightening of the Constitutional Guidelines in return for an agreement to universal suffrage. If we can agree, after a full and lengthy debate in which all segments of the population should have a say, that the Constitutional Guidelines will safeguard the Socialist principles for a just society, and will spell-out, in detail, the rights and obligations of citizens, as well as the structure of government and its bureaucratic arms, then, I believe, that there is a reasonable opportunity to formulate a Common Constitution for all Socialist democracies.


7          Let us think for a moment about the enormous implications such a rapprochement in ideological thinking would accomplish. It would be possible to replace an atmosphere of suspicion and rivalry with an increasing degree of trust and cooperation. At the same time, an enormous amount of energy would come free on both sides, because the basic reason for maintaining those gigantic arsenals of weapons and armed forces, will become largely meaningless. What an enormous influence will a United East and West have upon the rest of the world, because it would then be relatively simple to persuade all other countries in the world to adopt the same Constitutional Guidelines. Countries all over the world will reform their governments and bureaucracies according to the principles of the "just society", as they will have been formulated, then, in a Constitution embracing Marxist and Western social ideals. Then, it would be a relatively easy matter to give the entire world a uniform code of justice, together with a framework of guidelines to eradicate the most blatant incidences of injustice and exploitation.




.......




Chapter 5


The "great federations", and hopelessly small nations.
A gradual fading of national boundaries.
Motivations under the Socialist Ideals.
A blunted instinct for survival.
Being obsessed with "making a living".
The Socialist Ideology has many problems.
The obstacle of fear; the fear of losing our privileged positions.
Paying lip-service to social and democratic ideals.
Weaning ourselves "off" affluence.
A difficult dialogue between East and West.
Can we curb our instinctive drives?
There is still a chance to avert disaster.


1          When all countries in the world have a similar Constitution with the same package of basic rights and obligations, it will become clear how arbitrary most of our contemporary national boundaries really are. Some nations, like the federations of the United States, the Soviet Union and the projected federation of the European countries, as well as those of China, India and some others, are "continents" in themselves. Here, many hundreds of millions of people live already in some sort of legal and social framework. Some countries are so small, so forlorn, so helpless in their geographic isolation and economic insignificance, that they do not have the slightest chance to give their people even the hope of achieving the same basic opportunities that are being given to those who are born into a "great federation". Therefore, it will become natural for these smaller national entities to be absorbed, voluntarily, into the surrounding countries. Eventually, the idea of national boundaries will lose its significance all-together, and the administration of large regions will organise itself in such a way, that the regions represent about equal populations, with equal opportunities for development and equal standards of living.


2          Even, if we are all ruled by the same basic principles of social justice, the tensions created by incidences of injustice, as well as the frictions of envy and suspicion, will not disappear easily. It will be necessary to equalise the way of life and the standard of education for everyone on earth; taking into account, of course, that a "standard" of living may still mean or imply large variations according to the traditions or preferences, as well as variations resulting from geographic and climatological differences. An equal standard of living means, primarily, that a minimum standard of well-being is guaranteed and given to everyone as a birthright. In this way the level of stress is more or less the same for people and population groupings all over the world.


3          We all have the right to be able to eat enough food to keep us healthy, but we have to be willing to accept a reasonable burden of stress or work-load; each according to our specific capabilities. This is necessary to ensure the possibility to distribute this package of rights and minimum living standards to every human being on earth. The principle of equal rights and opportunities also means, a chance to learn and to become educated, but, at the same time, the gift of education brings the obligation to use our capabilities and skills for the common good.


4          For many, who have been educated and grown-up with the ideals and philosophy of free enterprise, the notion that it is possible to be motivated "for the common good" seems irrealistic and utopian. We have been so brain-washed into believing that man can only be motivated to work hard, if he sees an opportunity to get rich, or, at least, to obtain a significant financial gain, that we, affluent free-enterprisers, scorn any other motivation as utopian. However, in our discussions about the nature of man, we have seen that the motivations of financial gain are, to some extent, a distortion, or a somewhat diseased expression of our drives. These motivations have been given undue prominence by the philosophy of free-enterprise. We forget to see, that, in a highly competitive atmosphere, where each individual has to fight hard to stay alive, the motivation to work hard and amass a fortune, is only in part based on the motivation of "greed", because it has as its foundation the instinct of survival.


5          Under the Socialist Ideal, the existential concerns are far more blunted, because this package of rights includes the promise that nobody will starve or be treated unjustly. This means, that the motivation to work hard will not be based on this fierce drive to secure individual survival, nor will there be a strong drive for power or wealth. Under the Socialist Ideal, the road of power through wealth will be blocked, and the road of power according to merit and the privilege to excercise a socially oriented sense of responsibility, will be able to absorb all our motivations for personal fulfilment. If one has enough to eat, a roof over one's head and a large number of interesting things to learn or do, we do not see this frantic drive to gain the power and the freedom that become available in our affluent societies with the possession of wealth.


6          At the same time, it is clear how important it is for a just society to prevent their people from taking all these blessings for granted. This is the reason why the Socialist State has to be firm with people and has to remind them, constantly, that all these benefits of the Socialist State are a result of hard work by countless anonymous citizens; that each individual has, therefore, an obligation to contribute to the State.


7          Is it not remarkable how a simple shift in attitudes would set us onto the road of a viable global society? Is it not remarkable what a giant step forward it would be, if we could persuade our leaders to engage in a genuine dialogue about a common Constitution for East and West? Is it really so difficult to work-out an agreement that could be acceptable to a great majority of people on both sides of the Iron Curtain?


8          I do not think so, and I believe that it would be surprisingly easy to work-out such an agreement, in particular, between the peoples of Western and Eastern Europe. Why, then, is it so unlikely that this will happen, and, why is it much more likely that we will see an increase in the level of confrontation rather than a decrease? I believe, that the greatest single obstacle is the psychology of our leaders, including the many people who fear, not only, the Communists or the Socialists, but, who fear the principles of social justice themselves; who fear a loss of sovereignty, national independence, and an infringement upon the powers of a privileged position. Many members of the establishments in East and West are greatly hampered by these fears. This is the reason, why they tend to pay lip-service to the ideals of social justice. They are all for it, as long as it does not affect their lifestyle or positions of power.


9          And, peoples of the affluent world, we all are inclined to pay lip-service to the ideas and ideals of social justice, because we all are afraid that these ideals pose a threat to our way of life; that they will undermine the economic momentum upon which our affluent lifestyle is based. Perhaps, too many of us are not sincere, if we profess to believe in the ideals of democracy and equal opportunity for all, because we are afraid that a truly universal implementation of these principles will ruin our affluent way of life, and we do not know, anymore, how to get along without this affluence.


10        Perhaps, then, the unwillingness of our leaders to engage in a true dialogue reflects the fears which many of us share, and, perhaps, then, the most difficult task we face is the task to wean ourselves off our affluence. We have argued before, that the first and most crucial step in this process, is to get rid of our individual and collective debts, because these debts are consuming more and more of our earnings, and they depress our standards of living to an extent we are hardly aware of.


11        It is not so easy, then, to engage in this necessary dialogue between East and West. At least, let us form a more honest and clearer image of the reasons why we seem to be so impotent in our efforts to solve our problems; why we seem to be so irrevocably caught-up in a momentum of increasing hostilities and confrontations. Fear, my friends, fear plays a dominant role in sustaining this momentum of the arms-race, of the nuclear build-up, of our pre-occupation with verbal warfare. In the mean time, we neglect to look after this fragile terrestial environment in which this sluggish and vulnerable creature of mankind can so easily suffocate.


12        It is somewhat ironic, that, even a search for practical things to do in our enthousiasm to build a better world, brings us back to ourselves; our basic, instinctive behaviour patterns, as well as the conclusion that our emotions of fear and suspicion may well be the ultimate root-cause for the self-immolation of human life. Our primary task, therefore, lies in understanding ourselves and controling our instinctive and emotional drives. We have to learn to take a few risks, and, if we can indeed overcome our massive dependence upon affluence in the West, and the fear for dissent and crtiticism in the East; if we can truly embrace the principles of social justice, then, the dialogue between East and West may become a reality, and we may be able to create a momentum that is going to lead to a negotiated settlement in the struggle for dominance between East and West. Then, we may begin to anticipate the time that all the peoples of the earth will be living under the same Constitutional Guarantees for social justice.


13        If we are successful, we will, not only, have advanced the cause of social justice and mitigated many of the sufferings human beings are exposed to, but we will, at the same time, have secured a decent way of life for the future generations of mankind. Then, our generations will have laid a crucial foundation for the long-term viability of mankind.


14        If we fail, however, we may soon see the end of human life, in spite of the fact that we may never quite understand, when, or why, we lost the ability to survive. Will mankind soon die, after it has just been born into this fragile state of global unity, or, will mankind gradually gain strength, as it overcomes its internal stresses and starts to pay more attention to the requirements of survival on a global scale? Ultimately, the question, whether or not the newly-born and vulnerable creature of "mankind as a whole" will live or die, depends on our collective will and insights. Will there be enough people to opt for the tools of compromise and negotiation, creating a contract of social justice all over the world, or, will the forces of suicidal warfare prevail, sucking us all into an utterly irreversible holocaust of nuclear warfare?


The choice is ours.

.......








Summary.

1.   Short-lasting moments of confidence and optimism.
Unchanging scenes of lifeless devastation.
Physically and mentally, man may become a caricature of what he was, once.
The unstoppable momentum of all-out belligerence.
The fragile, lumbering, giant-creature of "mankind as a whole".
Once we have become a single creature, there is no chance for a partial "cullular" survival without sophisticated organ-systems.
An analogy that is not "science-fiction".

2.   We can sustain injuries and stresses only for "so long".
A critical point of no return;.
Why we have a tendency to be conservative.
We all live in our particular world of mental imagery.
We may exterminate our enemies and ourselves simultaneously.
Speculative images from a concerned thinker.
How to give viability to a globally organised society of mankind.

3.   What can we do to make the world safer?
Watching helplessly.
Why we need a more optimistic outlook.
A gigantic momentum needs a gigantic effort to slow it down.
A search for common bonds.
We have to know ourselves.
The art of the discussion.
A genuine dialogue between East and West.
Common grounds with the Marxist regimes?

4.   Do we really have to fear the Marxist ideology?
The many beneficial aspects of the Socialist Ideal.
A look at dissenters in Communist societies.
A package of rights and obligations.
A common Constitution.
A potential rapprochement between East and West.
The desire to impose social justice on a world-wide scale.

5.   The "great federations", and hopelessly small nations.
A gradual fading of national boundaries.
Motivations under the Socialist Ideals.
A blunted instinct for survival.
Being obsessed with "making a living".
The Socialist Ideology has many problems.
The obstacle of fear; the fear of losing our privileged positions.
Paying lip-service to social and democratic ideals.
Weaning ourselves "off" affluence.
A difficult dialogue between East and West.
Can we curb our instinctive drives?
There is still a chance to avert disaster.








.......