Very well said! Many have good reason to fear a UN that is like the tyrant nations that it was purportedly set up to defend helpless nations from. A reformedMessage 1 of 8 , May 1, 2003View SourceVery well said!
Many have good reason to fear a UN that is like the tyrant nations that
it was purportedly set up to defend helpless nations from. A reformed UN
may be both more effective and less of a threat to the freedom and
sovereignty of diverse cultural, local and national communities around
Direct Democracy for Iraq?
- I'd like to see that!
"Next the statesmen will invent cheap lies, putting the blame upon the
that is attacked, and every man will be glad of those
and will diligently study them, and refuse to examine any refutations of
and thus he will by and by convince himself that the war is just, and
will thank God
for the better sleep he enjoys after this process of grotesque
-- Mark Twain (1916)
Please note, if this petition does not gain momentum in the next few
days I will have to terminate it. Maybe it is due to shortcomings of
ipetitions.com or maybe people really do not care for this proposal? As
an alternative, maybe people could join the DDF forum at YahooGroups and
use the online voting to make a similar proposal? See
I've stopped 2,032 spam messages. You can too!
Get your free, safe spam protection at
> -----Original Message-----<SNIP>
> From: David R. Garcia [mailto:drgarcia@...]
> Sent: Thursday, 1 May 2003 7:54 AM
> To: WorldCitizen@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [WorldCitizen] United Nations
> Hi! Here are some thoughts on why the United Nations is
> ineffective in
> maintaining collective security and therefore peace.
> 1) The UN is not able to function in accord with a democratic
> 2) The UN does not have true legislative, judicial and<SNIP>
> executive power.
Yes, I think we should also boycott soldiers and others who continue to support war and the culture and industry of war. I think it would be wrong to boycottMessage 1 of 8 , May 1, 2003View SourceYes,
I think we should also boycott soldiers and others who continue to
support war and the culture and industry of war. I think it would be
wrong to boycott Americans or Anglo-Saxons, for that would be
nationalism or racism, but it makes perfect sense to choose to avoid
business dealings with war-mongers and people who treat with contempt
those who are not born into privilege or who do not have power and the
luxury of leisure through personal wealth.
Direct Democracy for Iraq?
- I'd like to see that!
> -----Original Message-----<SNIP>
> From: elran [mailto:elran@...]
> Sent: Monday, 28 April 2003 8:34 PM
> To: WorldCitizen@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [WorldCitizen] United Nations
> we, as Citizen of the worl MUST be attention on what we buy.
> it is money that rules the world, it is by boycotting
> companies that we can
> take some power back without having to get our hands bloody...
> nous, en tant que citoyen du monde, devont faire attention à
> ce que nous
> c'est l'argent qui mène le monde, alors c'est en boycottant
> les industries
> que l'on peut reprendre un peu de pouvoir, sans en venir aux mains...
Tu as parfaitement raison, le droit de véto n a aucun sens. Il doit être éliminé. Tous les débats doivent passer par l assemlée générale des NationsMessage 1 of 8 , May 2, 2003View SourceTu as parfaitement raison, le droit de véto n'a aucun
sens. Il doit être éliminé. Tous les débats doivent
passer par l'assemlée générale des Nations Unis. On
doit avoir un systême juste et compétent. Comme tu
l'as dit un système non démocratique ne peut pas
régler des problèmes de démocratie. Je suis d'accord
quand tu dis qu'un jour viendra que nous serons
obligés de créer une assemblée juste et équitable.
Cela ferait plaisir aux peuples du monde parceque la
liberté la démocratie régneront.
Do You Yahoo!? -- Une adresse @... gratuite et en français !
Yahoo! Mail : http://fr.mail.yahoo.com
Hi I agree with most of these comments except that: A. I do not believe that the UN was ever intended to be effective in its overt function. It was designed toMessage 1 of 8 , May 5, 2003View SourceHi
I agree with most of these comments except that:
A. I do not believe that the UN was ever intended to be effective in its
overt function. It was designed to fail.
B. I do not believe some sort of catastrophe is necessary for people to be
"forced" into realizing what is necessary. In fact, a truly catastrophic
disaster might well set the unification back by many years or decades.
Peace and Unity,
At 09:53 AM 5/1/2003 +1200, you wrote:
>Hi! Here are some thoughts on why the United Nations is ineffective inGary K. Shepherd
>maintaining collective security and therefore peace.
>1) The UN is not able to function in accord with a democratic principle.
>Having a Security Council with 11 or so privileged member nations of which 5
>have extra privileges such as a veto power is not democratic. This is
>authority by power and wealth not by justice. The only possible foundation
>for any kind of government, whether local, national or global, is justice.
>And that means that there must be a democratic foundation. All peoples must
>have fair representation in such a world body. This could be in accord with
>population. The current system of having a voting power in accord with
>power is not just and fair and must ultimately fail. All matters should be
>handled through the General Assembly. All its subsidiary bodies would
>report to it.
>2) The UN does not have true legislative, judicial and executive power.
>It makes beautiful resolutions and declarations that many nations sign and
>then ignore. As 'Abdu'l-Baha' said, they are like a bunch of drunkards who
>meet and discuss the evils of alcohol, make various resolutions to renounce
>it, and then all go out and get blind drunk. Laws that are agreed to have
>to be enforced. There is no possible way to do this except by having all
>nations agree that a global governing agency overrides the authority of
>national governing agencies -- just as national governments override the
>authority of local governments. The nations have to cede their sovereignty
>where international matters are concerned and let national sovereignty
>operate only in its legitimate realm which is within the nation. Individual
>nations should have no rights of authority outside their nations just and
>cities, provinces and states within nations have no rights outside of their
>respective realms of authority. Cities must deal with civic issues,
>provinces with provincial matters,
>nations with national affairs, and a global governing agency with
>international matters. This is simple System Theory. This is how living
>organisms operate. The central governing agency of the body, which is the
>central nervous system and its brain, does not interfere with the internal
>affairs of the cells that make up the next lower level of organization of
>the body. The cells have their own central governing agency in their
>nuclei. And these cells don't interfere with the unified program of the
>operation of the body as a whole, which is the business of the brain. Cells
>that don't follow this principle are cancerous. Nations that don't follow
>this principle, that interfere in the affairs of other nations are similarly
>cancerous -- from a System Theory point of view. Cancer kills.
>Therefore, a global governing agency for our planet needs to have the
>authority and power to enforce its legislative acts and judicial decisions.
>This is the only possible hope for our planet.
>This requires that there be an international law that no nation have more
>weapons than are necessary to maintain order without its borders. All
>weapons of mass destruction, in all nations, must be dismantled, destroyed
>or removed in some way -- simultaneously by all nations under careful
>inspection by an international agency. It also requires that all national
>borders be clearly established and agreed on in this international
>institution. Consultation and vote in a democratice manner, not war, are to
>be the means of establishing these borders. Then a potent pretext for war
>will be removed.
>The UN must fail to establish collective security among the nations of the
>world because it is not designed in accord with the principles of justice
>and democracy, and because it lacks the power to enforce its collective
>The nations of the world, especially the most powerful ones, now abuse the
>meaning of the words "justice" and "democracy" to such an extent that they
>are no longer meaningful. We have to get back to the original meanings.
>That the current UN is incapable of bringing about order and peace in the
>nations of the world because of its structural defects and lack of power
>where it is required doesn't mean that it is completely useless. It's many
>agencies that help with emergency aid, health, children, scientific,
>educational and other matters have been greatly helpful in our world.
>The League of Nations established at the close of World War I was the embryo
>of a global governing agency. Embryos don't function well in the world.
>The current United Nations established at the close of World War II is the
>more developed fetus. It also does not function well. That an embryo or
>fetus are unable to run and dance is no reason to dismiss them. They are
>essential stages in the development of a genuinely working global governing
>agency. Just as these two were established only after suffering and
>destruction on a planetary scale -- a suffering that awakened us just long
>enough to understand what we should be doing -- so also will we need another
>global catastrophe to shake and awaken us into establishing a global
>governing agency that will at last be able to truly function as a world
>governing body that can genuinely protect us from ourselves. This will be
>the actual birth of a global institution that saw its embryonic and fetal
>stages in the League of Nations and the United Nations. This is how we
>learn in the stages of immaturity -- by brute experience, by suffering the
>consequences of our own foolishness. And when we've finally grown up enough
>to realize what is for our own collective good, then we will have approached
>our first stage of maturity, our "coming of age" as a species.
>Any thinking person who studies these matters carefully will see these
>things clearly. The UN is failing, and cannot possibly succeed in
>establishing collective security because it doesn't have the structuring by
>which a just and democratic system for our world can be instituted. But
>it's a necessary step and stage in our development towards the birth of a
>genuinely functioning world body. And we will have the good sense to
>establish this genuine world agency only after we have punished ourselves
>sufficiently to realize what is for our own good.
>There is a program of disinformation and broadcast ignorance by some groups
>that views any form of world government as dangerous and oppressive. This
>is a failure to grasp what a global government actually is. They view it as
>a kind of global national empire or an international business cartel. If a
>powerful nation were to conquer the entire planet and rule it, this would
>not be a world government; it would be a global national empire -- just as
>the Roman Empire was not a nation but rather a city-state empire ruled by
>Rome. The whole point of a genuine world government is to protect us
>against such tyranny and injustice in the form of empire.
>System Theory shows us that we simply must have some kind of governing
>agency for our world -- now that it is interacting on a global level in so
>many ways. The alternative is global anarchy and chaos. The cells need a
>nucleus, the body needs a central nervous system and brain, cities need
>civic governments, nations need national governments, and our world needs a
>global government. Without it we experience global wars, disturbance and
>chaos -- as World Wars I and II so clearly and painfully showed us, and as
>we will surely very painfully learn before too long. System Theory also
>shows us that we must not get rid of lower levels of government to establish
>a higher level. Each level must simply function primarily in its own domain
>of authority and not try to reach outside of it.
>At present we see the vain attempts of a highly-interconnected world to
>solve international problems by national means. It won't work.
>International problems can only be solved by international means -- and this
>clearly requires international agencies that have the ability to function
>Justice is the only foundation on which a stable, peaceful, happy and
>prosperous world can lastingly be established. A time will come when wiser
>humans will have been so shaken, chastened, and sobered by the consequences
>of the actions of the foolish and immature at the helm of leadership that
>they will convene a great gathering and decide how a genuine world governing
>agency can be instituted -- one in which all peoples of the world, through
>their elected or chosen representatives in a world council, will vote as a
>body, come to a majority decision, and then be able to enforce this decision
>with all the authority and power at its disposal. There will be no such
>thing as the undemocratic veto. There will be no such thing as individual
>powerful nations trying to impose their will on the rest of the world. It's
>world government or annihilation! I think we'll do the right thing. We
>will grow up and reach our first stage of collective maturity!
>"I have believed that the only way peace can be achieved is through world
>government" (Jawaharal Nehru)
>For more information: www.worldservice.org and info@...
>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Carbondale, IL 62901