Blog

Dear friends

Dear friends,

Power is yours, please, make good use of it on the 8th of March by supporting human unity so that Madrid City Hall cooperates with the organization of a World Congress where to apply and set up an inclusive decision-making system for Humanity as we are proposing from HUM – Human Unity Movement. Because the result of inclusive decision making will be only our benefit instead of mutually harming as we have been doing up to now as the consequence of partial or exclusive decision making.

Read more

HUMAN UNITY CONGRESS PHILOSOPHICAL FOUNDATION

It is very interesting to see that Confucius and Aristotle use similar ethical concepts. By the dog! We could think they were in contact. The main Nicomachean Ethics principle is the Mean or the Intermediate and one of the Confucianism Four Classics is, besides the Analects, Mencius, the Great Learning, the Doctrine of the Mean expressing the same idea as Aristotle’s does. The Mean is what society values most, as much by praising as by pricing it and does it so by comparing and refusing the extremes.

Read more

HUMAN UNITY CONGRESS CALLED NOW FOR 2021

武汉加油!! –  Courage Wuhan!!

Dear Friends,

We have applied again together with the NGO Peace and Cooperation for a meeting with Madrid City Hall in order to retake or propose anew the celebration in Madrid of a Congress on Human Unity in 2021 since 2020 as planned would be to short time now for arranging it.

Read more

HUMAN UNITY AND POLITICS. THE NEW CIRCULAR SILK ROAD; RELATIONS BETWEEN SPAIN/EU AND CHINA

As the director of Chinese studies in Instituto Complutense de Estudios Internacionales, ICEI, I have participated in a seminar about “Experience of the Chinese investments in Spain”, inserted in the general project: “A new impulse in China Spain relationship in the political frame of the European Union”.

Read more

STOP THE WAR

It is time to think about war, just as simple people and in an open way.

I think it would be a good reference to look at it in the Iliad and The Art of War because war is the topic of both books, what could be for us, poor humans, more important?

Written in a similar time, both works ground and configure two main development lines of human civilization, Western and Chinese. Both are clear about war definition; war is the art of deception.

Say it so The Art of War without delay nor palliative in its first page and so the Greeks win it by deceiving the Trojans with the wood horse honoring the goddess Pallas Athenian.

But, if deceiving the enemy is prompted, deceiving the subordinate is permanent. The Iliad is by itself a case of political falsity; nationalist propaganda, which particularly justifies the invasion with Helena’s story or tale and, in the end, war, they say, is caused by the Gods.

While The Art of War does not care about any origin of war and simply says it is state´s way of life, the Chinese book illustrates very well the need to materially and mentally manipulate the subordinates or soldiers, among others resources those of propaganda and mystification put in practice by the Iliad.

War causes that we deceive each other (or vice-versa), so we need to make things clear; human problem is not a question of misunderstanding or even of lacking of communication capabilities, we have those enough and we all know who we are, where do we come from and where are we going, the real problem is that we deceive each other.

 

Now, how to use or set up the truth or some truth to get along with each other, in order to cooperate instead of look for mutual destruction and to trust each other? God was an idea.

Indeed personal freedom makes it uncertain because we are free, and each person can change her view from one to next second. However, this is nothing to worry too much about, because if she changes her view, before acting unilaterally and upset others, first she’s got to tell, expose and coordinate in the same ways we do with any initiative since it has an individual origin, right?

But something is for sure; we have to start proposing it, I think.

And if something is also sure it is that the truth requires transparency and transparency is the same as universality. That was unfeasible in the past, but now globalization allows it and it is actually requiring it because most important of all is that we are proposing it to everyone without distinction nor discrimination; is it not its guarantee and at the same time its novelty?

For this reason, we are calling for an open and transparent World Congress on human unity so that we can all cooperate according to common sense and to the objectivity of actions and objects which constantly reveal the truth by its practice, here its simultaneity or concerted effort for a common objective.

The Congress is not an idea, it is an activity we know, or at least preview (such as a journey) from the beginning to the end and that Congress is about how to get all along for cooperation instead of for destruction. In that activity time, money, management is invested because those services are being bought –in order to add value to them.

Bye!

Read more

BREAK RANKS!

Soldiers have right not to violate human rights

Read more

ON HUMAN SECURITY

Very happy holidays!

We are celebrating the best of the year, (in) New Year´s Eve, but it has not merit enough, it is that we all are celebrating together, so ¡this is the date!

Life is not to be bought
To look for a job to live, for satisfying basic needs like to eat, dress and lodge is falsely defined in economic relations terms –as much in the right as in the left parties, when, actually, it concerns to security, namely, the regulation and control of our lives (physically, materially), the means of linking the people to the command chain.
Inclusive decision making or human unity means, for instance regarding food, that we share it. It does not mean that we will necessarily have it always available and in abundance since a catastrophe could cause some shortage. The question is that we manage this shortage together since it is a human security question, which raises the use of inclusive and non-discriminating criteria to face the shortage.
Certainly, since we do not have a guarantee on the supply and without a predetermined criteria available now for food distribution, Fatalism could find something to hold on to. We could think that if we have enough certainty on having assured food, dress and lodging we will ending up avoiding any effort and, after a while, we will not have enough for eating. Given this uncertainty accentuated by the risk of change, we are not actually feeling ready to proceed.

However, regarding human or shared security we have absolute certainty and Fatalism vanes under clear light because it is obvious that we shall not expend our energies against each other as we are doing now. If weapons, more demanding than hunger, are not used, it is a waste, and if they are used, even worse.
Beyond sharing resources, human unity is basically about to eliminate the obstacles for our development, by working altogether and dedicating our cooperation to common benefit only. It happens, however, that what refers to the need of satisfying some life requirements, instinct is enough and we all understand it by just checking our stomach, but what refers to eliminate those obstacles for our development, the weapons, it requires communication, which does not mean to use the same language, but our intelligence.
A person certainly is an individual entity, but a person`s activities are necessarily linked to society, they make sense in and from our relationships.

The alternative to genocide is human unity; we want human unity and propose to implement inclusive decision making as soon as possible with an open and transparent World Congress this year 2020. You can see this alternative to genocide if you think about your options: or human unity or, if not, genocide, destruction of one army or the other, one part or the other. Here there is no way out. Syria´s conflict has not ended yet and forces from several countries are ominously gathering in Libya to fix the head of the command chain there.
The press, the media accept and propagate Fatalism of partiality because unconditional submission was needed in the past in an unknown world, but today we have to look for friends of humanity to talk to them about human-unity, universality, inclusion so that those politicians, those media also will have available the alternative to genocide and, in their turn, they will transmit the good news to their peers or counterparts and to every person everywhere in the world; put in short: the human right to shared security.

Happy New Year!

Read more

ON ECONOMIC FREEDOM

First, I would like to inform you that we have received a kind email from Mr. David Llistar, Director of Global Justice and International Cooperation of the Barcelona City Hall, where he writes:

“Thank you for your proposal (‘the possibility of cooperation for celebrating an open and transparent Universal Congress on Human Unity’ –he mentions). Once we have carefully studied it and given the sensitive situation of the issue, we do not consider well-timed at this moment to cooperate with this kind of initiative”.

We do not understand well what he means with the expression “given the sensitive situation of the issue”, (we think he is probably meaning the political situation in Catalonia since we mentioned our understanding of it and our wish to contribute to solve it with our human-unity and inclusive decision-making proposal) and we have required some clarification about it. Also, we do not understand well what is referred with the “kind” of this initiative or what “kind” of initiative would be of the City Hall interest

In any case, we sincerely appreciate his attention

Now our options for a Congress venue are dependent on to retake the contact with Madrid City Hall next year, as they suggested, or we could think of another place. It could also be a Virtual Congress.

 

Today we would like to go back to the idea of freedom we talked about in our previous post, namely, about economic freedom which usually refers to the free market.

According to our Master Mo, among the world governance (human unity) features are consequentialism –we value everything according to its effects, and utilitarianism –we value each thing, object or activity according to its use, benefit. This utilitarianism is also a main piece of theory of the modern liberal democracies.

However, as Amartya Sen points out in his Introduction to Rationality and Freedom, referring to Utilitarianism:

“But what exactly is utility-maximizing behavior? It is the same as maximizing behavior in general (without any restriction as to what is to be maximized), or is it the maximization of the fulfillment of one´s self-interest in particular? That distinction is lost in a large part of modern economics….” (Harvard University Press, 2002, page 26)

Let’s try to see this clearly. Utility-maximizing does not ‘distinguish’ between ‘general interest’ and ‘one´s self-interest in particular’ at one point; if you earn more, accumulate more, the state obtains more from you via taxes, resources, etc. There is no problem here and this is the concept of the modern economy (If you just change the word rationality by nationality you will read it clearer –it actually happens to me since I cannot see well near). Therefore, our current economic questions are ¿how to create jobs? Which is the same as questioning ¿Where can we (the state) invest to be more competitive? What could be our monopoly, talent, innovation, cheap workforce..?

Further than this, however, the ‘utility maximizing’ concept breaks up and indeed makes some distinction or is no longer harmonious when it deals, at once side, about exploiting a person paying her as less as possible while maximizing her utility, which is of ‘general interest’ and, at the other side, ‘maximization of the fulfillment of one´s self-interest in particular’ (to be pretty, for instance), this is personal interest, ‘yours’, ‘mine’, ‘her’, the interest of the real people.

Obviously, those different interests are not confronting each other in a ‘dialectical’ struggle; definitely and without any doubt ‘one´s self-interest’ is subordinated to the ‘general interest’ as it is shown by the vital fact that it is not that you want to eat but that you have to eat to go on living and you can only eat if you are first integrated in the ‘utility-maximizing’ system. Those who already have enough to eat, some eat a lot and some, those who can go on eating with their savings for a while without working, are motivated with new needs or desires, for instance, a car which, even if it could be substituted by public transport, it ‘maximizes self-interest’ as it does a luxurious perfume, etc.

Here we have that this ‘maximizing of self-interest’, consumption, is also ‘utility-maximizing behavior’. I will tell you here an anecdote. I have asked my mother what does she need or wish for a Christmas present. She says that sneakers because the sneakers we gave her last year she does not dare to use new for kitchen works. Oh my friend, I am afraid now that I will not be able to find a present for my mother; I am looking in every shop and I cannot find old sneakers.

There is not a real social contract, just maybe a representation, theater, even cirque, because society origin is the state, the armed unit, and also state prevalence is above society and so its strategic relationship with other states. This is manifested in all aspect, just we need to pay some attention to it or lift the veil because we are not told the whole picture.

I have the impression that Fatalism has substituted human evil nature as explanation or cause of the scourge humans are permanently experiencing, like misery, exploitation, perfidy, and war. This replacement might have been caused in view of a great majority of people sacrificed and resigned to be submitted and exploited long and intensive journeys just for being able to lodge somewhere and to eat so that actually they are allowed to go on living. This picture probably prevents the added scourge of qualifying people´s nature as ‘evil’, it would be too shameless, so that we have got the Fatalism of the new Illustration, legitimating Despotism as the old one (and as Confucianism did).

Despotism, which according to very alarming indicators, is vertiginously leading us all to collapse by ruthless exploiting the people not only as tools but also as, supposedly, insatiable and relentless consumers. A Despotism legitimated by a scientific Fatalism, as exposed by Steven Pinker, a Harvard professor and author of Enlightment Now (2018). Pinker deals in that book first page with the world’s evil according to a Fatalism based in the Second Law of Thermodynamics, called Entropy. It justifies the irrational or violent characters of all human relationships as the Mother Nature way to avoid the natural tendency to inactivity. Once the possibility of freedom eliminated by this Fatalism, Pinker expends the whole book claiming Enlightment´s or Illustration´s achievements, we could name them also Historical merits, this is; an always more scientific manipulation, reduced to everything goes better (but ourselves).

Indeed, as much in China as in the West, manipulation or exploitation of the people has become more explicit and intensive than before since the state uses scientific progress at its service. Equipped by the most modern technologies of all kinds; psychological or induced motivation, along with sophisticated baits, doping or directly by cameras control, all transactions registration, localization, etc. all possible surveillance at service of the state security. Security is indeed the supreme interest of the state and its people, but it is not the ‘one´s self-interest in particular’ the interest of the real people, of persons as you, me, she, everybody for whom, obviously, is of more interest a shared security system.

At the same time, the system falls apart; a crack grows in the state monopoly on information since globalization (different countries people can actually interact, live peacefully together) and the web which have generated or facilitated the fake news, mainly those funded by foreign states, or just no official news, as in former communist countries, for instance, in China some decades ago when every information outside the propaganda frame was qualified of “pornography”. HUM is located in this area. Fake news, pornography? Please, decide for yourself.

Why we are not sharing security? It is clear that our main source of insecurity is originated from the (around 200) armed units in the world, the states aggressions against each other. Therefore, the key and disruptive word or consign for us (those supporting inclusive decision making or human unity), is that used by Mozi, “universality, inclusivity without exclusion, simultaneity…” As you like to put it. Everybody understands the meaning of shared security so that such a claim transcends countries and becomes binding for all of them. Thus they will be deprived from sovereignty or their right to destroy –and aiming at it.

Once on this stage, where we all share security and, therefore, we do not harm each other, will Entropy effects start leading us to inactivity? I do not think so, we have a lot to do, as cleaning and embellishing our environment which is much, better our bodies to be more loved which is not little, and expand in the cosmos as it suits.

Regarding economic freedom, indeed everybody has the right to eat, everybody has the right to lodge, every person in the world has the right to go on living with her material conditions of subsistence ensured without dependency from her work because we know that dependency has nothing to do with justice (freedom) but it is a way of violent submission. Those mentioned above are the right to live together, call them HHRR if you like, but remember there is no right without freedom first and there is no freedom without universally sharing security.

All the same, we all will work, contribute to society, but just voluntarily, freely, and this is if only we agree with other initiative aims, the common cause we will add our will, our effort, and our work to, a Utilitarianism without contradictions because it does not any longer go about doing anything to buy food, it simply lines up universal and personal interest. ¿Any problem?

Read more

THE RIGHT TO BE FREE

THE RIGHT TO BE FREE
II HUMAN RIGHTS FORUM (AT THE 71TH ANNIVERSARY OF ITS DECLARATION)
HUMAN UNITY MOVEMENT, HUM, SPEECH BY MANUEL HERRANZ

INTRODUCTION

Dear friends, thank you very much for your presence. Many thanks to the Rioja Center for organizing the event and also my deep appreciation to the distinguished speakers: Mr. Joaquín Acuña, president of Peace and Cooperation, Mr. Emilio Ginés, of the UN Committee for Torture Prevention and Mr. Enrique Gaspar of the Instituto Seda España.

Human Unity Movement, HUM, whose sole purpose is to promote and achieve human unity and inclusive and joint human decision making, wants to claim on this day a new and most needed human right: The right to freedom.

PRAISE OF THE RIGHT TO BE FREE

The right to be free shall be the first human right because, without it, if others decide for us we cannot even agree with it, even if we would like to since we don’t have the right to agree or to disagree.

And even more important; without the right to freedom we are not responsible nor can we ask for responsibilities to anyone.

WE UNDERSTAND WHY THE RIGHT TO FREEDOM HAS BEEN FORBIDDEN UNTIL NOW

Until now the right to freedom was not possible because the world and its inhabitants were unknown and, therefore, inclusive decision making and universal cooperation were not viable. Although the expression ‘more inclusive’ is often heard, in the real world the only alternative to exclusion or partiality is inclusion or universality and there is no intermediate point between inclusion and exclusion or partiality and universality.

Exclusive, partial, sovereign decision necessarily causes contradiction and confrontation between those who are mutually excluded. This circumstance brings about that defense is the greatest need and priority and therefore societies were necessarily organized as command chains, as hierarchical or pyramidal systems and this is, precisely, the way and form of denying personal right to freedom.

WE NEED THE RIGHT TO BE FREE

Today all human are connected, all humans are actually living together and we have the conditions for inclusive and joint decision-making, but we also find out that the current obstacle to peace, harmony and common well-being –those being the consequences of inclusive, join decision making or human unity- is that we do not have the right to freedom.

– The current situation:

Given that without the right to freedom, current rights are enforced by violence, their implementation can always and only correspond to the strongest party, so that the result of the application of human rights is not the fairest or most human but that one according to the interests of the strongest state.

Worse; human rights implementation is just adding evil to evil. Once some human rights are not implemented or are violated, the way of dealing with those cases is just punishment, destruction.

Besides, law is no human. It does not see what any human eye sees; this is a bad intention. The law does not judge on armies and weapons production and development, or on international blockages, or on provocations or threats, and in general, all strategic decisions meant to dominate the other, to put the other party at mercy by whatever means, either by threat or by deprivation.

FREEDOM NOW

The reason why we are claiming the right to freedom is to be able to unite, to set a system of join and inclusive decision making so that consequently we will not produce or undertake for damaging ourselves and/or violate humans rights.

Also, inclusive, universal decision making will no longer be conditioned by the need and priorities generated by the parties’ confrontation relationship. Inclusive decisions will be meant only for human benefit and well-being of each and every one of us, thus including the true implementation of all other human rights.

Today we have within reach the possibility of peace and harmony, the problem turns out to be now that we have no personal freedom, we are constrained to positive law, the right subordinated to the state, the right subordinated to partiality so that we are limited, we can only choose what refers to our part, which unavoidably is discord, confrontation, and war and we are not allowed to be concerned about humanity we are already living together with and we are able to make peace and cooperate with -this is really a scandalous abuse.

– This is not an abstraction; the questions posed by the state to the people are constrained to its borders and its purposes, those emitted by its communicators, its media, and its televisions. The public sphere is limited to that frame preventing humanity in us, prevent human feelings from its free and natural flow. Not only are the questions rigged but also the answers.

REFERENCES

We, those supporting human unity or joint and inclusive decision making, are followers of an ancient Chinese sage, Mozi, who was already promoting human unity, universal love, 25 centuries ago. He would say: “If you love someone, it does not mean that you love all people. However, if you do not love someone it does actually mean that you do not love anybody because in this way you are forcing all people to take sides: your side or his side…”

Thus, when we have the right to freedom we are going to take care of each other because that is certainly our most beautiful and finest natural disposition, that is why this same philosopher, Mozi, also continually said that human union was Universal Love and that it was Heaven’s Will which had arranged it that way, in spite of opposite ideologies talking about evil in human nature and thus justifying the chains.

– Chains of Zeus rule on humans we have lived imprisoned with so far, as ancient Greeks put it. Indeed, Greeks were well aware of the terrible inhumanity in which we all live in, pushed or forced to fight and kill each other, but now we can finally overthrow Zeus rule on us and set up the human rule on Earth and in Cosmos as was foresaid and announced to men by Prometheus.

BE FREE

Well, dear friend, thank you for your attention to my talk. Obviously, what I said was a joke. How can be there a right to freedom? That makes no sense because the law is given to you by the government or authority to which you are precisely a subject so that claiming the right to freedom to somebody else is an actual contradiction.

Indeed, freedom can´t be but a personal decision. It is about assuming personal sovereignty the actual way to become free and our human-unity movement is made of free people because only in this way we can propose human unity to each other, without nationalities discrimination, specifically supporting the Human Unity Congress.

How can people refuse to be free? Once we invite people to be free, everybody will join and cooperate with us, each person from her current political, social position; the poor and the rich, those from below and those from above in the current command chain, those on the left and those on the right, those from the north and those from the south, we are all the same, all good people, able to understand, willing to cooperate for human unity, just many do not know about that freedom is possible now. Another thought you might have is wrong, I assure you. As Mozi well says: it is the Will of Heaven, it is arranged this way: all´s interest is precisely the interest of each one of us.

Now you can be free!

Enjoy!

Manuel Herranz
December 9, 2019

Read more