Soldiers have right not to violate human rights
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!
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?
THE RIGHT TO BE FREE
II HUMAN RIGHTS FORUM (AT THE 71TH ANNIVERSARY OF ITS DECLARATION)
HUMAN UNITY MOVEMENT, HUM, SPEECH BY MANUEL HERRANZ
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.
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.
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.
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!
December 9, 2019
PLEASE, SUPPORT PEACE
Dear and excellent friend,
I am Manuel Herranz, president of the transparent and non-profit NGO, Human Unity Movement, HUM, and I addressing you requesting your support for the most ambitious and hopeful project.
According to our understanding, we are in a position to make a decisive change towards a human world, where people move from discord and competition (to death) to a world of harmony and cooperation. A change made possible only in our time.
Indeed, one of the most relevant circumstances of our present is globalization, a crucial human condition already dreamed by many wise and / or independent thinkers.
They became aware that discord, war, and human misery is due to exclusive or partial decision taking.
Exclusive or partial decision-taking necessarily leads to contradiction and confrontation among the parts and when the world was unconnected and unknown there was no way out of it because the alternative to partiality and exclusion is universality and inclusion and there is no an intermediate point.
These same thinkers knew that peace – which is the common cause – depends on inclusive decision-making because the logical consequence of inclusive decision-making is the end of entrepreneurship for harming -which would be as absurd as harming oneself.
With inclusive decision taking the aim of harming each other is fully replaced by the cooperation of all for common benefit.
Once we eliminate the purpose of harming, which obviously needs to be hidden or disguised in front of the others, we will be able to use common sense with transparency and without discrimination for the management of our relationships based on common objectives of cooperation.
In order to launch inclusive decision-making, we are convening a World Congress in Fall of 2020 to be broadcast live and open to everyone in the world. We propose to organize it into 6 working groups: Development, Security, Technologies (in turn divided into Food, Health, Environment, Energy, Mobility and Infrastructure), Women and Communication.
We will invite to participate in the Congress the best experts in those fields from around the world in order to produce consensus proposals for establishing and organizing coexistence and coordinate joint human common development. Then we will ask for support to those proposals from all people in the world regardless of their nationality and, therefore, those consensus proposals are of binding nature for the states
And now hereby we are requesting your support and cooperation for the convening and holding of the Congress because we expect your reflection and understanding of this proposal to be outside the framework of politics, nationalities. The point where we all can meet and forge a new way of dealing with ourselves, on the basis of common sense is not the ideologies, but the rationality we all share.
We all are human beings, we all have bodies, needs, and conditionings that we can understand by putting ourselves in the place of the other regardless of the country in which we were born or the ideological figurations we have been indoctrinated with.
An immediate and principal effect of the World Congress is the recycling of the world current investment in defense, meant against each other, for the benefit and well-being of humanity -this is the initial humanity asset because only human unity makes this investment for harming redundant and also, we, all the people, are the cause and guarantee of this investment becoming redundant, useless.
With human inclusive decision-making, we also eliminate the ‘strategic or confrontational need and priority’ of partial decision-taking, which subordinates and undermines people’s needs, desires and interests and causes exploitation, abuse, and discrimination. Inclusive decision-taking lets us all decide, plan and act only for humanity, people´s benefit.
That ‘strategic or confrontational need and priority’ of partial decision-taking also causes overexploitation of the planet and its natural resources, fast and uncontrollable environmental deterioration, fauna and flora extinction and prevents us from acting properly against climate change. Right decision making in response to these challenges is possible only if it is inclusive.
I thank you very much for your consideration and stay at your disposal so that no aspect remains without clarity and transparency and also looking forward to your cooperation in order to convene and organize the Congress.
Thank you very much for your attention
Manuel Herranz Martín
HUM – Human Unity Movement
C/ Puerto Serrano, 32 5ºA
Phone: +34 91 031 40 10
We have received notification from the Madrid city council indicating that this year they cannot take on more (preparation of) activities, so we could talk about it next year. However, we hope that Barcelona city council will accept the proposal to hold the Unity Congress shortly and we can begin with its organization for celebrating it in the autumn of 2020.
We have started this week to send sponsorship proposals to various companies thanks to the great work of our Fundraising Manager, as well as we appreciate the progress of our Communication Group, volunteers from IE University. I invite you to follow their work on Instagramm, now @humanunityhum. They are also preparing a video promoting inclusive decision making, human unity.
The next two weeks will be dedicated to climate change, as we proposed an open workshop on “Strategies for control or mitigation of the effects of climate change and common decision-making possibilities” at IE University. Depending on the participation, the workshop could be divided into several groups that would segment the analysis to finally share conclusions and generate recommendations. We will have it in mind as a model for the Union Congress. We would also like to participate in the climate summit, have sent application, we understand that HUM’s proposal for inclusive decision making is the key factor for the summit to be successful.
Regarding climate change, our individual experience is limited to little more than, usually it is hotter in summer here in Madrid than in winter, but accumulated data as well as other scientific certainties well reported and popularized, have identified a process of global warming, largely or entirely caused by the human action which will lead to big damages we must prevent and avoid, or at least mitigate.
It is, therefore, a matter of common human security and this climate change summit should find measures agreed as wider as possible with this objective of prevention. The weight that each country gives to this matter is different and, for instance, it has been informed that the US refuses to any commitment about assuming measures agreed upon by that multilateral framework.
Even if global warming is a fact and its negative effects for the planet and humanity are highly probable, the priorities of the countries are diverse and it is difficult to reach effective agreements. The fact that the state´s approach to it is necessarily strategic can generate suspicion as about the possible benefit of some and detriment of others. For example, some countries may take advantage of those measures to establishing standards for homologating products and services worldwide as part of the fight against climate change resulting in increased exports of their own and undermining the sales/exports of other countries dependent on the first countries technologies. It does not mean that these countries are not rightly claiming their leadership on this innovation and accordingly reward as usual and proper in such cases, just it shows different interests. But, this is only one case to quote some of those possible suspicions or interest differences between countries, apart from the unequal impact of warming in different areas, etc.
And beyond that fact, although very committed voices have been raised for human action in the against climate change, it is shocking that there are no voices so committed in the struggle for human dignity crying out against abuse, oppression and war. What expectation can these voices have against climate change about unanimous response from humanity? It will necessarily be a political one, this is a particular yield, because while common measures are required to tackle the (potential) damage that climate change can cause to mankind, the damage that many people now (actually) suffer is not considered and, therefore, humanity (solidarity) seems not to include them or to discriminate them as part of humanity. That could be the case of Extinction Rebellion, we have addressed to cooperate, and have not replied. I could be that, in addition to fight against climate change, it does not go without a political gain (or political management).
COMMUNICATION AND DECISION MAKING
Ecological awareness, the fight against climate change, fauna and flora diversity preservation and many other issues that concern humanity have very different readings in very different countries, despite being obviously matters of common human interest, for it makes an inclusive decision-making system increasingly urgent.
The enormous disagreement between ideologies, countries, etc. on information can make us doubt about the possibility of global governance, but communication is really no different from decision making. The clear awareness of this is what leads us to request Communication companies to be both a Working Group of the Union Congress and the Co-organizers of it. Actually, it is enough that our communication pretend to be inclusive, so that the decision-making process is also inclusive.
The current communications system is based on confrontation and war and, therefore, the objective of communication is the expansion of the domain of the publisher (actually the one who finances the publication) over the others. Any interpretation / communication about the facts, needless to say, is intended to claim a right (a past right is the fundament for present right) and also the assessment of those facts or data that manifest a trajectory, as is the case of warming, for each one will imply different effects in a way that each one will expose them or emphasize something to be used to imply something that favors their particularity; a right, a privilege, a primacy, etc.
In this context, it is surprising that we, those who are for inclusiveness –are you in?, are being able to go little by little spreading the proposal of human unity. This would be impossible without the existence of common sense because in the state of violence we live in as absence of common sense makes the medium equal to the message and there does not seem to be an actual message. This is assumed by politics (not cosmopolitan politics). I explain it:
Information in China, for example, is controlled by the state and the communist countries in the past, or some populisms simply seek to control information or propaganda, as they assume it is its real name, as a means to achieve their political goals. And, on the other hand, according to Chomsky, the media in the capitalist countries, particularly in the United States, are under the big companies control which “manufacture consensus” according to their interests, since they have a monopoly on information.
As some Chinese friends told me, in Hong Kong Western social networks, which are not allowed in mainland China but have deep roots in Hong Kong, do not allow to propagate arguments in favor of mainland China. If this would be the case, on the other hand, the many (human) resources of the Chinese state would occupy quickly those media by publishing massive arguments in favor of the interests of the People’s Republic, so that these media only admit information in favor of the protests. The situation reaches the absurd that since YouTube does not allow such content, some of these videos exposing arguments in favor of mainland China case are loaded in PornTube since it does not censure them, which, perhaps, also look beyond their actual message pointing out to that censorship in those Western supported media… Regarding the information some countries media give about others countries, I just very much wish this could be the last word on the subject.
INCLUSIVE DECISION MAKING
Mozi said: “Criticizing without alternative is like trying to put out a fire with fire or stop a flood with water. Therefore, Mozi always said: Partiality must be replaced by universality. ” Communications have to be transparent, this means that they have to make their purpose explicit. The purpose includes the definition of what is intended and the benefits it shall provide as well as the means available for achieving it and the effort it requires. At this point, it is not even about our will to be inclusive, but just the transparent exposition of the purpose reveals its suitability for all of humanity and, therefore, in that way amounts to inclusive, joint decision-making, whose realization is common cooperation. Such are all advances in medicine, food, transport, etc. They are for everyone’s benefit without discrimination.
Each of the working groups of the Union Congress, as experts in their sector and knowledgeable about their resources, proposes the development objectives that best meet human needs and desires, assign tasks and cooperate for their achievement. The reorganization for cooperation that replaces the competing motivation for the monopoly (of innovation) is generated by replacing the imposition and violent submission by deprivation by rational and voluntary cooperation. The shared transparent purpose creates community.
We would like to organize as soon as possible a visit to Israel and Palestine, Gaza, and we are trying to raise funds to cover expenses for it in order to draw attention to the situation of the people there, particularly in the Gaza Strip, a place where there is no other interest than humanitarian and where, therefore, we precisely want to express and spread our proposal for human unity, as well as beginning our mediation work in Western Asia (Middle East) that leads to the truce prior to the Universal Congress.
ON THE DATE AND PLACE OF THE WORLD UNION CONGRESS
The celebration of the Human Unity Congress obtained the support and, to some extent, the commitment of the Madrid city council under Manuela Carmena team. However, despite the efforts of its head of International Action and Global Citizenship, Antonio Zurita Contreras, for the city to host the event as such and not as a partisan initiative, that approach seems not to be having continuity on the part of the new government of Madrid which has not contacted us yet.
The Call to the World Union Congress, however, is already made, it is published and what we try to agree with the city council is its date and venue to be able to issue preliminary invitations to the participants who are the most relevant people and companies in the following Groups of Work: Education / Humanities, Development, Technologies (divided into Food, Health, Mobility, Energy, Environment and Infrastructure), Security, Women and Communication. The Congress will be broadcast live and open to everyone and the plan is for its financing to be borne by the participating and sponsoring companies.
THE END OF VIOLENCE
The Call to the Congress cannot be delayed because it is the means of spreading human unity proposal and also the means of the ceasefire, necessary for the celebration of the event. Truce has to take place as the Congress is gaining support because the Congress purpose is inclusive decision making and this is the end of partiality or sovereignty so that in this way violence stop making sense since violence inevitably claims for exclusion or sovereignty
Furthermore, the World Unity Congress cannot be carried out if there is no previous inclusive will, that is; if violence has not ceased. It would be contradictory to a united world or to a universal congress if there are parties (of course, of it) destroying each other so that stopping violence would constitute the greatest urgency and this would consist in setting the limits of the sovereignty of each party, again, the opposite of the purpose of the Congress.
The human condition of partiality or sovereignty in History gives rise to Law as a means of conflict resolution, but law cannot be the means for peace. The latter because its implementation always and only corresponds to the strongest, which does not mean that the result is the fairest but that according to the strongest interests, and the worst thing is that it only adds evil to evil because its operation is punishment after evil is accomplished.
But the Law is not human, it presupposes innocence (it is idealistic) refuses to see what eyes see: the bad intention or the strategy of the agents, that is, that all their movements tend to subdue, put the other at mercy (needless to say and vice versa) to manipulate and exploit it, does not see or judge about the production and distribution of weapons, whose purpose is damage, destruction, and homicide, etc.
However, the time of the Law has passed because today we can all live together, make inclusive and join decisions and we no longer need to put a blindfold on our eyes, self-deceive ourselves, deceive others, remain silent, lie and mystify youth when globalization allows and invites us to unity, to joint decision-making, which causes the purpose of harm to be absurd (or not inclusive) and transparency – the form for mutual and universal responsibility.
Are we, perhaps, incapable of it? That is a pointless question for those of us who call the Congress. In the meantime that the city council of Madrid does not answer we have made the proposal to the city council of Barcelona and we propose to the Catalans that they cease their claim to sovereignty and also to the Spanish state to release the independence prisoners expressing both their support for human unity or inclusive decision making and so their support to the World Unity Congress.
The Spanish state (the armed unit) cannot cancel its sovereignty, since this is a question or decision about itself as a subject – doing so would be equivalent to ceasing to be that subject and therefore would not even be a valid decision. But, the truth is that the Catalans assume that the constitution of sovereignty is a matter of popular will and, therefore, could not say that they are not in a position to propose human unity or human sovereignty.
Likewise, Spain, by accepting hosting the Congress shows its disposition towards the inclusiveness that would end up with sovereignty, all sovereignties, because, of course, it is a proposal to humanity that is only put in practice with the unanimous agreement of all (in the assumption that the Congress fails, it proves inclusive decision making unfeasible, prisoners would return to jail and the Catalans could continue to claim for their independence …)
Since the greatest implementation of HUM is in Spain, as Spaniards we have a limited right to request the release of prisoners, but Human Unity Movement is an NGO and does not discriminate against the nationality of those who support human unity.
In this sense, it is not the case that we ask the Spanish state for the release of prisoners because the cosmopolitans are not subjected to any partiality, we are not a ‘people’ in that sense of one who asks their leaders to do something (as protesters or climate change fighters, etc. do putting pressure on governments, asking them to enforce something), but we are free and equal human beings who assume personal sovereignty and we decide according to our own judgment and we make it public and we count for it not more just with only force, but with rationality and common sense.
Only in this way can we reject, mediate and dissolve violence in Western Asia (Middle East), where we want to move as soon as possible once we fix the data of Congress, in Latin America, in Hong Kong or where the violence is occurring, while as a ‘people’ (submitted to a state) we can only take part in favor of one side and against another.
Only if we assume personal sovereignty first can we then act from our institutional, political, business or personal positions to achieve the necessary truce for the celebration of the congress as well as later in the Congress to accept and act accordingly with human sovereignty.
In fact, the people who support the Congress cannot do it otherwise than from each one autonomy or personal will, assuming so our own will for peace or inclusive decision making, first becoming sovereign ourselves instead of submitting to an entity that only rules against another partiality under the absurdity of whatever (it might allies us with Russia, with China, with Turkey, with Iran, with Israel, with the EU, with the US, with India… ..) so these are our options, ever constrained or limited to whom (which armed unit or coalition) to attack, to defend from, whom to repress, etc. all that kind of possibilities, but peace.
Let us be cautious, but do not be afraid, truce could even be unilateral but peace cannot. Peace only occurs with agreement and cooperation of all, because we are all involved, so that partiality, which was a necessity a human condition, is now a mistake, the success right now is humanity striving to become a subject.
PLAN TO BE HAPPY
Ancient thinkers who already summoned us to human unity, most prominent of all both Mozí and the Western cosmopolitans, appealed also and at the same time to human Logos or Common Sense as the basis and foundation of their hope and their proposal, even if human unity was not possible at their time since decision taking could not be inclusive then and, therefore, it could only be strategic. And so this message today has the purpose of addressing the Common Sense of each person in a transparent way, this must be sincerity here, and, logically, from what one thinks and knows. And it is open to greater clarification or detail you might think of because we propose and hope to put into practice a new human relationship with important effects for each and every one of us.
A transparent and open Worldwide or Universal Congress to be held in Madrid in the autumn of 2020 and broadcast to the whole world to deal with how we human can live together, or what it is the same; to set up an inclusive decision-making system since the consequence of joining together is that we, consequently, will act and cooperate only for our benefit and never for our damage.
GLOBAL GOVERNANCE IS TRANSPARENCY
Those of us who now are calling this Conference, or also those who feel called or convened to it understand and want to make understand that the effect we want to achieve with our decision and invitation to unite is to end with evil, this is, bad intention, and to that end we just need transparency as the form of global governance.
Transparency is incompatible with both violence and the current command system, so is it the military, but also it is so with the political and business sectors, since current command necessarily includes exclusive knowledge, superior knowledge regarding the possession of data and the disposition of not sharing it, as well as the mystification of subordinates is the key for manipulating them. (You can see Socrates case in the Apology who refused to cooperate with the polis in making young Athenians to believe in the gods or how it is explicitly said in the Art of War, Chapter XI)
Thus, this is the understanding, the being and the commitment of the cosmopolitan citizen, one who is loyal to mankind, who frees himself and frees others by not submitting to an armed group – now, supervening; in the future, offender- because we give ourselves a basic law: No association can be established to harm others. That is our constitution, the source of the new human, cosmopolitan right. And so, we, all the people become the foundation and guarantee of unity from our direct and immediate commitment to each other.
It is not, therefore, that institutions, our current representatives or companies, will make, as usual, this decision of unity for us. We, each of us, personally, as subjects of judgment, reason and Common Sense, who, by using these capacities, emit our judgment and decision to unite and thus we free ourselves, we empower each other as human beings. And only after this the positions humans occupy in companies or institutions become humanized, serve humanity, because humanity has been constituted, it has become the subject of positive law, a law stating that humanity is the source of all rights and all resources and that people with and by their Common Sense are legislators, executors, judges and sovereigns -in replacement of the brute, irrational and uncontrollable force peculiar of the partiality of the states.
Our problem is not that we lack the capacity to understand each other and, therefore, are unable to cooperate in a mutual, common and universal way for mutual common benefit, the problem is that what we need to see or to know to understand and to judge is hidden from us. However, with human unity everyone’s eyes serve humanity and with them we all see the last and most remote confines of Earth and so we all know everything we need to know and we will use it, first of all, to put an end to bad intention, this is; investment in armament and then inclusive, agreed and joint disarmament.
Bad intention, the damaging aim, needs to be hidden and, therefore, cannot be judged (prevented). But it manifests itself in the means of harming which are the weapons. Thus, only if we are willing to adopt transparency, we have security with respect to our goodwill and desire to avoid and prevent damaging others. Although this will be put into practice only with the agreement and cooperation of all, since unilateral disarmament is just nonsense and, therefore, it is necessary to first spread this proposal for human unity to the whole world. This communication is actually the World Unity Congress Call.
Damaging necessarily has one objective: the other. But this objective disappears with human unity. And human unity takes shape, it is staged in the World Unity Congress. In it, being it inclusive, lacking the other as an object of harm, the task of the participants is to establish objectives of service, welfare and human development only. Objectives to which they redirect the resources released from destruction or strategic objectives – the cause of the current irrational production, doping, exploitation and abuse of people.
It is not capitalism -as it is usually indoctrinated and believed- which prevents human resources from being allocated to meet people’s needs, but rather strategic interests -people are also of some strategic interest, but quite limited. State leadership directs ineludibly its utmost effort towards strategic objectives (relative to the army = strato in Greek) because their security is the most important issue. This is its reason to be and for that reason the state rescues the banks and not the people or invests in high technology and not in feeding those who die of hunger. States are looking for what gives them a competitive advantage over other states and makes the others dependent, no matter what it costs in human terms.
War, as Clausewitz would put it, is constant or absolute and productive or capitalist investment is made out of strategic sense. Contrary to what Marxism anticipated, the socialism of the Soviet Union could not bear / compete against the strategic superiority of capitalism and consumerism. United, however, our development is relative to the common interest, development ceases to be ‘capitalist’, stop being strategic to become human. For example, if we develop ophthalmology we serve humanity, because we all have eyes, and so on and so forth and so will the case of high-tech developments that are also useful and valuable, but their purpose will be exclusively its service to humanity, while their current development aim is the superiority or advantage of some states over others, that is why that development is so intensive, that is what strategic means.
INCLUSIVE DECISION MAKING
All the work of the Congress derives from that inclusive will and, therefore, goodwill, expressed in the very fact that the Congress is held. With the Congress, on that particular date and at that point bad intention or evil ceases, this is; arms investment, development, purchase, etc. around the world stops. This is the beginning. We all give up to the will, conception, design and production of objects whose purpose is damaging and it will be followed by the dismantling of the existing means of destruction, their recycling, which is also the improvement of cooperation: barriers elimination and bridges building.
The outcome of the Congress, as well as in general the inclusive decision-making system, is accurate, predetermined, clear, safe, sure in that it ends with evil and seeks only benefit, it is only uncertain regarding some details, specifically the evaluation of the proposals for improvement or development of human well-being raised by any person, here mainly by the experts summoned to the Congress, where these evaluations refer to the relationship with the resources available, as well as their order of priority or opportunity cost in relation to the common interests of humanity, etc.
PARTIAL OR NOT INCLUSIVE DECISION MAKING, THE ORIGIN OF EVIL
On the other hand, we know from the same logic that the potential (the strategic aim) or actual development of destruction means of others worries us and that our own development of destruction means worries them (whatever they may be). And the result of it is the infinite arms race and war – the purpose of destruction of the other’s means of destruction – as the way of human relationship is neither desirable nor advantageous to anyone. The maintenance, justification or defense of this system can only originate from deception, superstition.
THE COMMON CAUSE
Any destructive development (particular development) puts us more at the mercy of others or others of ours. Does it happen that you cannot think of a world without some at mercy of others or without violence? It can be thought, in fact many have thought about it, it is the ‘common cause’, the shared objective, this is the form of peace – a common cause that is only possible today, that is: of all (if not inclusive (universal), cooperation keep being strategic) – and this common cause is, after the coverage of needs, well-being and inclusive development. To this basic understanding we are referring when making the decision to join. Let´s replace aggressive (partial) decision taking by inclusive decision taking.
‘THE GREAT VIRTUE’
The will to make decisions inclusive or to unite is to be a punctual decision which is taken now, here, already and it is staged in the World Unity Congress and from that point it remains indefinitely. However, people´s behavior, our relationship towards one another needs a period for our habits to adapt towards the harmony of the community that, in turn, the community will facilitate by also staging the appropriate conditions for this purpose – in contrast with the current brutalization, abuse, deception and mystification of people as consequence of partiality
We are already some people working on the World Unity Congress Call and with some more help we will be able to communicate with people involved in violent acts and that will allow us to stop violence, so in Western Asia as in other areas of the world, including the riots in Hong Kong, Chile, Catalonia and other places, because destruction caused by violent activity has as its objective, target and justification the other´s means of destruction, just as the means of destruction of one are based on the means of destruction of the other and have no other justification nor possible reason to be, so those means are a bottomless pit of waste.
Violence enters in contradiction with human unity will, whose consequence is the elimination of all means of destruction without violence and with everybody´s cooperation. Therefore, violence can now be stopped by the Call to the World Unity Congress, which is universal and real peace and not illusory wish and so the Call immediate effect is truce, until the celebration of the Congress next autumn where peace or unity enters into force and with it the effective elimination of the means of destruction.
If you understand the end, the means and the consequences of this Call, you also have to make it also because, if you want human coexistence you cannot at the same time have bad intentions, this is to sustain destruction means. Unity ends with destruction means, so the will to unity is good intention, and unity requires the Call (to Congress), while a (supposedly good) will no calling the Congress is a hidden will which is the feature of bad will, the one not allowing to be judged, whose result is other´s also prevented from being judged too (perhaps and sometimes only when the crime is already committed). Be aware.
The Call to the World Unity Congress is the Call to human coexistence, human living together instead of in confrontation and aggression and does not need these above perhaps complex reasoning because the Call to the World Unity Congress by itself implies everything said.
Thus, you see how your participation is possible and necessary; we all depend on you.
معكم مانويل هيررانز رئيس حركة الوحدة الإنسانية، (www.human-unity.org).
أدعوكم للمشاركة في الحدث العالمي للوحدة الإنسانية الذي سيعقد في خريف عام ٢٠٢٠، وفي هذا الحدث سوف نُناقش ونُؤسس الوحدة، حيث تتخذ القرارات المشتركة والشاملة.
سيقام المؤتمر في مدريد “حضورياً” مع نخبة من المختصين في مواضيع متعلقة بالوحدة البشرية، سوف يٌنشرالمؤتمر عن طريق بث عالمي مفتوح بشفافية كاملة.
إذا وصلتكم الرسالة أرجو نشرها، أفهم حقاً أنها تهمكم وتعني لكم الكثير. في الوقت الراهن نحن فقط مجموعة من الأشخاص بمواردنا المحدودة الراعي لهذا الحدث. على العموم نُرحب بإقتِراحاتكم بخصوص التحسين أو الإعلان والنشر بالتواصل معنا على firstname.lastname@example.org.
بهذه الوحدة نعتزم العمل على الوضع الحالي للضرر (أسلحة، جيوش) أو الضرر المتناقض الغير مقبول (ضرر الشخص نفسه إلحاق الآذى بنفسه)، بأن تصبح التنمية والأمن منتشرة ومشتركة. بهذا الفهم المنطقي ووفقًا لهذا الغرض، فإن الاتحاد هو الإرادة الجماعية لجميع الأشخاص، وبهذه الطريقة سيكون كل فرد على حدة والبشرية بالمجمل مسؤولين هذا يضمن لنا الوحدة. (يمكنك الحصول على مزيد من المعلومات حول مفهومنا لهذا المشروع على صفحتنا واستقبال استفساراتكم، على سبيل المثال في الجزء السفلي من هذا المنشور).
خلال المؤتمر سوف نُنشيء نظام للأمن واتخاذ القرارات للتعاون من أجل تنمية شفافة وشاملة ومشتركة. لهذا نحتاج إلى وسيلة اتصال موثوقة ومستقرة تسهل مشاركة الجميع دون تمييز، لذلك هذه الدعوة موجهة إلى الشركات أو خبراء فريق العمل للاتصال في الكونغرس, للمشاركة في تنظيم الحدث مع HUM (ألق نظرة على مجموعة الكونغرس على موقع http://www.human-unity.org/congreso-universal/).
نظراً بأن جمهور المؤتمر من جميع أنحاء العالم وأيضاََ الشركات المشاركة، ينبغي أن يسهل لهم الوصول إلى جميع الأسواق بالإضافة المشاركة في تصميم مستقبل التواصل واتخاذ القرارات مع التطورات الجديدة المضاعفة لانفتاح الأسواق العالمية، في الوقت الراهن موجهة لأغراض عسكرية.
في الواقع نهاية الحدث الإتحاد الإنساني يجب أن يكون قد شُكِل وأن يكون لديه الصلاحية لتفعيل السياسين في كل الدول لتنسيق الاتحاد والتعاون الدولي ونزع السلاح أن يكون بطريقة جماعية مشتركة ومتفق عليها ومتبادلة. وأيضاً لأجل تشكيل فريق للتنسيق يسهل ويضمن الشفافية والتفاهم والاتفاق. الجهد الاستثماري لكل دولة في أمنها أو دفاعها ينقل إلى شركات وفقا لأولويات التنمية التي اقترحتها مجموعات العمل في الكونغرس، والجيوش الحالية الفعالة تنشغل بمهام التنمية العاجلة إلى أن يتم تسريحها بالكامل (الشرطة تتبع عملية أخرى).
المحرك لهذه الوحدة هو الإنسانية (لا ينبغي أن يكون صعب ما هو طبيعي)، الهدف إنساني وليس سياسي. نطالب بالإنسانية ونرفض الإبادة الجماعية، شيء لا يظهر بين الإجراءات / الخيارات السياسية، وندعم الاتحاد دون تأخير لأنه يجب ألا (نوافق) على إلحاق الضرر للكثير من الأشخاص الذين يعانون منه الآن عندما يمكننا تجنبه.
إن دعم الوحدة الإنسانية يعادل أن يكون جزءًا من جميع الأطراف، وأن يعاني مثلنا الضرر من الحقوق المنتهكة. هذه الدعوة تطلب الهدنة حيثما يوجد صراع من أي نوع، دولي أو محلي، عام أو خاص، على الرغم من أننا ندعو بشكل خاص أشخاصاً من غرب آسيا.
إن أصل الصراع بين البشر هو “شرعية” العنف، والتي سننهيها في أقرب وقت في خريف عام 2020 ، لذلك لم يعد يستحق إلحاق الضرر للحصول على هذه الشرعية.
Yes, it is our business, because, unlike other issues, such as climate change, gender-based violence, etc., on which the ‘people’ asks and urges the authorities (of the states) with demonstrations, strikes and pressures to enforce ‘measures’; peace is human unity and, consequently, it calls into question state sovereignty.
Indeed, peace is unity or the system of inclusive and joint human decision-making, instead of the partial decision-making of the states, which inevitably leads to their confrontation. Unity makes damage or entrepreneurship for damage absurd and human activity is limited to cooperation for common benefit. And yet in unity we, people, are still the cause, responsibility and guarantee of peace, for we ‘outlaw’ violence, that is, any association whose purpose or effect causes harm to others.
Despite how obviously beneficial such a relationship of universal cooperation for the common benefit would be for all people, proposing human unity involves questioning state sovereignty and therefore cannot be exposed to public opinion which is partial ( limited to the population of a state), where the information is generated or controlled by it. What people know, think or talk, but what’s on TV and newspapers? Everything else vanishes. For this reason, the convening of a Universal Congress on Unity, even without the support it needs, visualizes that this questioning is projected and has a universal reach, as it needs.
But what does it actually mean that states cannot question their own sovereignty? It is not a theoretical question or an abstraction; it means that the state cannot consider a joint command over all the armed forces of the world including their own so that the dissolution and elimination of all weapons follows, because weapons are only one because another. (Certainly this possibility has only become possible in our day with globalization, but a lot of thinkers, then hidden or misrepresented, both in the West; as the Cynics, the Stoics, the monotheistic religions, etc., as in East; Mozi, Confucianism, etc., clearly perceived that unity is the only form of peace, even without knowing the limits of the world or its inhabitants – while we now know them well).
However, today 21 September we celebrate the day of peace, a wish of all, but whose condition is ignored; the agreed union of the armed forces under a single command (as those of Iran, the US, China, the Taliban, Russia and about 200 more there) because of their unity, in whatever form, it is their dissolution. The question to our will in this regard puts us in the right position, in the disjunction between being a ‘people’ of a state, the (legitimate) violence, or humanity and peace, the ‘illegitimacy’ of all violence, which makes us free and interdependently sovereign people.