From Humanist Manifesto II: (1973)
TWELFTH: We deplore the division of humankind on nationalistic grounds. We have reached a turning point in human history where the best option is to transcend the limits of national sovereignty and to move toward the building of a world community in which all sectors of the human family can participate. Thus we look to the development of a system of world law and a world order based upon transnational federal government. This would appreciate cultural pluralism and diversity. It would not exclude pride in national origins and accomplishments nor the handling of regional problems on a regional basis. Human progress, however, can no longer be achieved by focusing on one section of the world, Western or Eastern, developed or underdeveloped. For the first time in human history, no part of humankind can be isolated from any other. Each person’s future is in some way linked to all. We thus reaffirm a commitment to the building of world community, at the same time recognizing that this commits us to some hard choices.
So, in addition to paying taxes to the local, state and federal government, we would then have to pay taxes to the transnational federal government? 1040T for Transnational?
36 comments:
We thus reaffirm a commitment to the building of world community, at the same time recognizing that this commits us to some hard choices.
Yes. You will eat the bug, live in a pod, and own nothing....and be happy.
It will be glorious.
Since we're discussing international relations, my first podcast.
"If you prepare for war, what you'll get is war. But if instead you want Peace, you'll have to prepare for peace."
Very good, I enjoyed your podcast immensely.
You can tell from my raspy voice that I am still recovering from COVID.
You sounded OK and came off well.
"Radio Sputnik" though?
Hey, when the media are marching lockstep into a rah, rah, yeah, yeah, USA, USA, dirty commies, support the troops, nuke 'em till they glow frenzy, any source attempting to balance the picture is going to look pro the other guy.
I am by no means pro-Russian. I believe Putin to be a murderous thug, full stop. But remember Rumsfeld saying "You don't go to war with the army you want, but rather with the army you have"? Well, what I say is "You don't negotiate with the negotiating partner that you want, but rather with the partner that you have." In this case, it's Putin.
"Radio Sputnik?"
Heck, you don't think OAN, Newsmax, FOX "News", Steve Bannon, or the pillow guy would give me airtime, do you?
I meant every word of what I said on the podcast. What we're hearing today from every major network across the political spectrum is frighteningly reminiscent of what was being spoon fed to the American public in the run up to the invasion of Iraq. And keep in mind what an unmitigated disaster that was.
"Too long have I had my dwelling among those who hate peace.
I am for peace; but when I speak, they are for war!"
(Psalm 120: 6-7)
What we're hearing today from every major network across the political spectrum is frighteningly reminiscent of what was being spoon fed to the American public in the run up to the invasion of Iraq.
The difference this time is that no one believes the MSM.
I heard a news story on NPR about Sputnik Radio. Said it was owned by the Russian Government and its' purpose is to slant the news in a pro-Russian direction.
Well then, I guess I'll just have to take down my Maryland state flag, and raise the ol' hammer and sickle (and yes, I do have a Soviet flag in my collection - in fact, three of them) until this is over.
I do have a Kiev (Dynamo) football scarf, but no Ukrainian flag.
A pro-Russian slant would only alarm me if I felt the US were the good guys on the world stage. I'm not alarmed.
I'm not alarmed about Sputnik Radio slanting stories to put Russia in a good light either. It was NPR that made that point in the the story they ran. For some reason the left has been stoking Russia/Putin as the boogey man ever since Trump ran for office.
I think the Russian government at this time is doing more to promote Christianity than our own government. Could that be why?
Interesting how you knee-jerk blame "leftists" when it ought to be clear to anyone that it is the neocons and the armaments industries who are currently stoking the flames of warmongering. Every "leftist" organization I deal with (World Without War, Veterans For Peace, Maryland Peace Initiative, Human Survival Project, Global Network Against Weapons and Nuclear Power in Space, amidst several others) is 100% against any armed conflict with Russia. You really need to get out of your bubble.
I am by no means pro-Russian. I believe Putin to be a murderous thug, full stop.
You mentioned that Putin flew an icon over Crimea before the military incursion in the podcast and favorably mentioned a speech of Stalin's. Did you mention to the producers that you thought both were murderous thugs?
Not trying to put you on the spot, but just interested if they screened your content before letting you on their podcast. I'm interested in how the sausage is made as the sayin goes.
Interesting how you knee-jerk blame "leftists" when it ought to be clear to anyone that it is the neocons and the armaments industries who are currently stoking the flames of warmongering.
The "armaments industries" lobby both sides of the aisle, and exactly which party is in power now? It isn't Trump that won't sign an agreement that Ukraine won't be part of NATO.
Time to stop and see that parts of both parties need to be thrown out.
And for the record, I mentioned that the left has been blaming "Russia, Russia, Russia" since Trump was the nominee for president. I have been bludgeonded so much by NPR and the like I have no "knees" left to even have a "knee-jerk" reaction.
...the best option is to transcend the limits of national sovereignty and to move toward the building of a world community in which all sectors of the human family can participate. Thus we look to the development of a system of world law and a world order based upon transnational federal government.
I think they need an argument for that 'thus'.
We're more than halfway there right now. The Law of the Sea, the web of international treaties and monetary arrangements, extradition, alliances, the World Bank, cooperation amongst airlines, allocation of radio frequencies, etc., etc. The world is better off for each of these, and no sane person would advocate that there be no international law in our increasingly interconnected globe.
During the Mitt Romney/President Obama debate, Romney was asked what is the greatest threat to the United States. Romney replied "Russia." President Obama gave Romney a big mocking grin with a little chuckle and said "Russia?" (He was a great politician, even better than Reagan) and scoffed about Romney wanting a new Cold War. The next day in all the media coverage of the debate, Romney was mocked and ridiculed.
Advance four years to the aftermath of the 2016 election. Russia somehow became the greatest threat to our democracy and the world and they had an asset in the White House.
As Miller said, nobody trusts these clowns anymore. I can't think of a single American that wants to go to war with Russia, especially over a corrupt country like Ukraine.
All the more reason to be thankful that Romney never got anywhere near the White House.
A war with Russia today would be a disaster for the Ukraine, for Russia, for the European Union, for NATO, for the United States, and for the planet. There would be no winners. So why on God's Green Earth are the media banging the war drums as loudly as they can? Ratings? Not worth it.
The only reason I can think of that the media is "banging the war drums" is they tried to convince us for four years that the Russians are the greatest threat on earth for domestic political purposes and then started believing their own hoax. Some of them realize we have a memory about what they have said since 2017.
Star,
Would you agree that anyone who claims the Russians are the greatest threat is unqualified to be President?
I don't know about "unqualified", but there are certainly multiple threats far greater than Russia today.
So why on God's Green Earth are the media banging the war drums as loudly as they can? Ratings? Not worth it.
This is what is called "taking the red pill". Considering things outside of one's worldview.
Things are not the way you think they are. Most older people can't accept this.
David,
...the best option is to transcend the limits of national sovereignty and to move toward the building of a world community in which all sectors of the human family can participate. Thus we look to the development of a system of world law and a world order based upon transnational federal government.
I think they need an argument for that 'thus'.
Good catch David. Leaping may be a good exercise, but leaping to conclusions is a bad practically. Let's keep emphasizing STEM in our education systems so we can retain critical thinking at a societal level.
Hello Star, You're right that no one wants international anarchy. But the institutions you list are all treaties between nation states or bodies set up by treaty and governed by councils with seats representing nation states. This not what I understand by 'world law' and 'transnational federal government'. We Brits undertook a 40-year experiment in the latter and then narrowly decided to end it. One of the issues is that transnational law-making is a top-down business that overrides national law, much of which in our case is bottom-up common law derived from judgements locally made to solve locally arising disputes. It's not at all clear to me that this is 'the best option'. As BM says, it's a bit of a leap, and I would add, into the dark.
A war with Russia today would be a disaster for the Ukraine, for Russia, for the European Union, for NATO, for the United States, and for the planet. There would be no winners.
Military contractors would be the winners, hence the media blitz for war.
"Military contractors would be the winners, hence the media blitz for war"
Military contractors and Ukrainian government officials. How many of the multi-million dollar weapon systems we are sending (giving) will be sold by corrupt Ukrainian officials to the highest bidder. I predict most will be sold to Russia by the end of the decade.
But hey, it's minuscule compared to the weapons we left to the Taliban to be sold to Iran. Take it in stride U.S. taxpayer, your government knows what it's doing.
I'm used to our politicians being in the pocket of the weapons industry, but the media? Not so sure there. I think the reason they're so gung ho for war is that war sells (good for ratings) and peace doesn't.
A Little Good News
The reason the media is gung-ho for war is the Russians elected our president in 2016. This brought on great economic, environmental, and military disasters for three years. It was only covid-19 that saved us from the decline. Russia needs to be nuked for hacking of our elections.
Oh, and I also read that our long time friend and ally Aruba felt a strained relationship after the Russians elected our president. Aruba was not happy!
Interfering in our election was a pretty shitty thing for the Russians to do, but it doesn't rise to the level of a casus belli. In any case, the real 2016 interferer was FBI Director Comey. Were it not for his last hour interference, we'd now be happily one year into Hillary Clinton's second term.
I agree Starhopper. If Comey hadn't interfered and kept his oath to uphold the law, Hillary would be one year in second term in jail. But, alas, we can't always get what we want from our government.
"You can't always get what you want
But if you try sometimes,
well, you just might find
You get what you need."
The Stones image in that song of the desire for a woman who would ruin a man. Yep, that relates to Victor's Temptation post.
"I saw her today at the reception
In her glass was a bleeding man
She was practiced at the art of deception
Well, I could tell by her blood-stained hands, sing it"
Post a Comment