The Global Village Paradox

Technology has changed the world in the last fifty years. People can travel all over this globe in hours. People can talk with each other across continents with ease. People can watch real time soccer games and boxing matches, as well as battle scenes, thousands of miles away. An expert in Chicago can supervise in real time intricate surgery in Indonesia. Machinery produced in Illinois helps build roads in the jungles of Zaire, dramatically changing the lifestyle of that African society, while oil pumped in Arabia and Nigeria strongly affects lifestyle in the USA. Pharmaceuticals developed and manufactured in the US extend life expectancy in Uganda.

On the negative side, narcotics originating in Columbia reduce life expectancy in the US and Canada. A fatal highly contagious viral respiratory disease originating in central China can spread all over the globe within a few days. Man-made environmental disaster - setting the Kuwaiti oil fields on fire by the Iraqi despot - affected the climate and wildlife not only in that region, but also all over the globe. “Dirty” coal burning power plants in eastern China may eventually cause drought in the American Midwest and flooding of coastal towns in Ireland. Intercontinental missiles developed in Iran, loaded with biological agents, might kill millions of people in the USA. Nuclear bombs produced by rogue countries like North Korea or Iran may kill indiscriminately hundreds of thousands of innocent people in cities in England, France or the USA, and cause death from cancer of many additional millions all over the world.

Notwithstanding the qualitative changes in communication, transportation, commerce and warfare, the different cultures that evolved over millennia in isolation from each other have not yet fully adapted to the new reality. These cultures range from pacifistic Hinduism and Buddhism to militant Islam. They include, in addition to contemporary peace-seeking Judaism and Christianity, also Shinto, Taoism and Confucianism, which tolerate people who adhere to more than one religion. Finally, there is also a host of isolated tribal cultures. Each of these civilizations has its distinctive ethical value system; most are tolerant of people of other cultures. Although each desires to preserve its own beliefs and values, they can readily accept the new multi-cultural global reality.

Exceptions to this benign behavior are cultures and ideologies that aspire to politically dominate all of humanity, denying other cultures their right to exist. These include atheistic communism and racist totalitarian Nazism of the recent past, as well as contemporary radical Islamism. Since global political domination is an illusion, the latter culture is least fit for the modern global world. This mismatch has been manifested in global Islamic terrorism and in the rise of Islamic totalitarian regimes such as in Iraq. These belligerent regimes combine militant Islamism with the totalitarian ideology of Nazism or Communism, characterized by a personality cult of the ruler combined with oppression of the populace by a ruthless apparatus of party loyalists.

And yet, our technological interdependency compels us to live in a “global village”. Like in any village there is need for village-wide functions; e.g., sanitation, health, education, etc. Our global village needs global institutions to fill these functions. And we do have them - we have a world health organization, we have a global postal service, there is worldwide control of permitted radio frequencies - traffic control of radio and TV signals as well as traffic control of civilian aircraft and of ships on the high sea, and we even have something approaching a global environmental organization.

However, when it comes to regulation of political issues our global village fails miserably. Ours is not a peaceful village. Like in any village there may be residents who disturb the peace and are a menace to their neighbors. In a typical village it is the village policeman who takes care of such things. In the classical Wild West this was the job of the Sheriff who could deputize others to help him to enforce the law when needed. In our global village the UN tries to fill this role. But the UN turns out to be an utterly dysfunctional “sheriff.” For one, this sheriff carries a badge, but has no gun. It is supposed to keep the peace, but without the authority to arrest a bully who bribes the town clerk and the town judge, and threatens to burn down the whole village if anyone tries to apprehend and disarm him. Moreover, the village bully sets up his own laws ignoring all global village conventions. The sheriff in our global village does not keep peace, but keeps his job by appeasing the bully, taking bribes from the bully’s cronies.

And when one of the villagers says “Enough is enough” and goes to tame the bully by knocking out his teeth, the sheriff and his gang of corrupt buddies jump all over him for disturbing the peace. They yell that this villager is out of line and should be hanged for disturbing the peace... This is a classical script for a mediocre Western. But in our global village no Lone Ranger appears for a happy ending.

We have here an intrinsic paradox. The same people who advocate the concept of a global village, object to enforcement of global law. There can be only one global law, applicable to all the villagers. This law must imply respect and tolerance of all villagers and severe punishment for anyone who infringes on the property rights of a neighbor. But in our global village we have one country, Israel, which is not tolerated by a cabal of bullies, who want to eradicate it. In our global village, the fundamentalist Muslims claim that international law does not apply to them, because it is in conflict with the law of their particular culture, which in their minds takes precedence. They say, therefore, that they are entitled to discriminate against women, abuse children, kill anyone who does not share their religious beliefs, including prisoners of war, violate treaties with infidels, destroy holy sites of other religions, and so on. To resolve this paradox, one must either enforce a universal law, one way or another, or forget the concept of global village altogether. If we give up on this concept, then we have no more use for the UN, the corrupt sheriff. Let him ride off into the sunset and disappear.

Forgetting our metaphor, let us examine the UN and explain why it is intrinsically dysfunctional. This is an organization that was designed by idealists who were oblivious to the reality of a multi-cultural world. Viewing it as an international worldwide law enforcement organization, it is preposterous that the USA, the major contributor to its budget, should have an equal share in its decision-making process as Fiji or Djibouti, which contribute less than 0.1% of its budget, if they contribute at all. No public corporation could function under these conditions - no one would buy its shares... Compare the Arab nation, which is often represented by the Arab League with its 22 votes, with the single vote of the United States of America, a federation of 50 states. Qatar with 800,000 people has the same share in the decision-making process of the General Assembly of the UN as the USA with its 281 million people. And when it comes to veto power in the Security Council, France with its 60 million people and a GDP of $1.54 trillion wields an equal veto power to that of the US with a 4.7 fold larger population and a GDP of $10.082 trillion. The UN is not a democratic institution by any reasonable criterion - it is a self-perpetuating conglomerate of bureaucrats who exploit the gullibility of the public in the economically advanced industrial countries that cover almost all of its expenses. This absurdity has been demonstrated in the recent Iraq crisis.

What would have been the situation of the world if the UN and the League of Nations, its dysfunctional predecessor, never existed? Let us take again the State of Israel as an example. With the collapse of the British Empire after WWII, the Jewish State of Israel would have replaced British colonial rule, in view of the 1917 Balfour Declaration and the influx of Jewish refugees from Europe and Arab countries. Like all other ex-British colonies, the State of Israel would have been recognized by the USSR and the USA as well as by most other countries worldwide. The Arab attack of 1948 (which was never condemned by the UN!) would have taken place just the same; however, in the absence of the UN, there would be no self-perpetuating “international” support (covered predominantly by US funds) for the Arab refugees. These refugees would then have settled in other countries, like all other refugees of WWII, depriving the Arabs of the driving force and excuse to eradicate the Jewish state. A 1967 war would have occurred, possibly at a later date, because the Arabs would have tried another offensive to make up for their humiliation in 1948. However, there would have been no UN international “peacekeepers” or “observers” in Sharm a-Sheikh who disappeared at the whim of the aggressor, just as they disappeared years later in Rwanda and most recently in North Korea. There would also be no corrupt “peacekeepers” in Lebanon to actively help the Hizballah terrorists to kidnap and then kill Israeli captives, using other UN bureaucrats to cover up the scandalous crime. There also would not be a UN “representative” in Israel to substantiate and help propagate Arab propaganda about the Jenin “massacre” that never was. Obviously, there would not be those numerous Arab-sponsored UN condemnations of Israel, which fed a worldwide wave of virulent anti-Semitism that was enhanced by the Arab dominated, UN-sponsored conference in Durban, South Africa. And all this was done by an international organization that has been chartered to enhance international understanding and peace.

As this example shows - and as we just witnessed in the Iraq fiasco, when the UN did its utmost to defend an oppressive, aggressive tyrant, bound to murder millions by whichever means he could muster - the UN is not just dysfunctional, but contrary to its charter, it encourages lawlessness and violence. Let us then fire this corrupt sheriff and find other means to maintain law and order in our global village.

Michael Anbar Ph.D. is Professor Emeritus at the School of Medicine of the University of Buffalo.

As this example shows - and as we just witnessed in the Iraq fiasco, when the UN did its utmost to defend an oppressive, aggressive tyrant, bound to murder millions by whichever means he could muster - the UN is not just dysfunctional, but contrary to its charter, it encourages lawlessness and violence.

The UN should be disbanded. Members of congress should be replaced.

Congress is not just dysfunctional, but contrary to the founding fathers and constitution, it encourages chaos and deterioration of the general welfare of people and society.

In a mass population, the more chaos and less order that is perceived by the population the easier it is to control them. The perception of chaos is pushed on the people. There's the perception of politicians and bureaucrats representing order in attempt to control chaos then replace it with order.

Sadly, politicians and bureaucrats along with a complicit mainstream media and many academics facilitate, if not directly cause chaos.

Issue 101 -- Chaos House of Cards

How is it that people and society in general have prospered and increased their well being for decades yet the politicians and bureaucrats say we must have another 3,000 laws and regulations each year on top of the 100,000+ laws already on the books... That without them people and society face "disaster". People and society have done quite well without next year's 3,000 new federal laws and regulations. Why all of a sudden can people and society not continue to do quite well without them? The fact is, they'd be better off without 99% of them.

So who really benefits from 3,000 new laws and regulations each year? -- not to mention state laws and regulations. Politicians and bureaucrats. They create boogieman problems and with a complicit media towing their boogieman problems cast a net of false fear and unwarranted despair in people.

Quite literally, they create problems where none exist. They're sick in that they chose to frighten people and foist false despair on them and do that to collect their unearned paychecks. Their job security is predicated on deceiving as many people as possible.

It cost more than just two trillion dollars a year to fund government abuse. That abuse hinders people's development, especially children being indoctrinated rather than educated, harms the economy and is largely responsible for causing false booms and reality-adjusting bust cycles in markets.

Flushing that money down the toilet -- save for military defense spending -- would be better for individuals, their families and society. That's a different way of saying, can't we just pay congress to stay home and not leave their houses. Surely we'd be better off. Politicians and bureaucrats are sick and need your help.

Fully integrated honesty is key. That we have the government we have -- delivered by both Democrats and Republicans -- that has gone so far off course from the government the founders created, is a product of irrationality and dishonesty. Changing the laws via the system is almost completely useless. Politicians create dozens of unconstitutional laws before even considering repealing just one unconstitutional law.

That is not a system -- it's a quagmire of deception, irrationality, fraud and abuse.

Politics is not the solution -- politics is the problem.

Who are the parasites?
Who are the producers?
Ostracizing the parasitical value destroyers
Praise the value producers

Step one for helping politicians and bureaucrats:
Get your head out of their sandbox.

Step two: Demand that they address Issue 101. Do the same with the media.

Step three: Ostracize government officials that fail to honestly address Issue 101. Do the same with the media.

Step four: Champion science and business communities -- often under relentless attack by the government. For they create jobs, necessities, luxuries and ever greater advancements that support human life, family and society -- natural order.

* * *

What Really is This New-era Trend and
How Much Does Character Count?

No person can be right all the time. The important thing is that when a person is wrong they correct the error.

People that criticized the war to free Iraq, proclaiming it a quagmire, illegal war, taking too long, claiming American and coalition forces will inflict a high number of casualties, as it turns out, all of those claims were patently wrong.

There was no quagmire, in 21 days the coalition had decimated the Baath party, Saddam Hussein regime and most of the casualties have been at the hands of the dictator's regime.

The people that criticized the war need to set the record straight and acknowledge their errors if they are to have any credibility left in the event they decide to speak out again at a latter date.

When they don't acknowledge their errors, yet go on to criticize another issue, for honest people that want to expose the charlatans for what they are, they need not focus much on how the anti-war person got it wrong regarding the war so they'll probably also get it wrong on the new issue too.

To expose the charlatans for what they are it's not that they're human and make errors, but rather, that they are "anti-human" because they refuse to acknowledge their errors and make corrections. In doing that they show no self-respect for honesty or their own integrity. In the end, it is one's own self that must look in the mirror and answer to at the end of the day.

When they continue to criticize and try to win people over to be like them ask yourself, or ask your audience, "is that person who has no self-respect to acknowledge their errors and correct them -- no honor for honesty and lacks integrity -- is that a person you want to be like?" Is that who you are? Is that who you want to be?

No, you're not like them at all.

Yes, you make mistakes, I make mistakes, everybody makes mistakes. But what separates you and I from "anti-human" parasites is that we correct our errors, learn from them and move on. By those actions we encourage self-respect and honesty and exude that to others as others like us reflect the same.

What separates you and I from them is they want us to be like them with their lack of self-respect, lack of honor and failed character development. Character does matter. The issue or cause is a distant second to the person's character that is championing the cause. Character counts.

Three degrees of errors.

3. The third degree error has short term consequences and can usually be rectified quickly with little harm done. Often with the correction phase comes benefits and knowledge gained. Making the error-correction cycle a net benefit to the person that made and corrects the error.
For most of us -- 90% of the population -- that's who we are. It's how and why we can empathize, have compassion and sincerity with others. That is, we accept responsibility for our actions.
2. The second degree error can have long term negative consequences. This is when a person has made an error but neglects or refuses to exercise the self-responsibility to correct their error. Instead of choosing to solidify a plan for character development the person acts against their own well-being and human nature.
If the second degree error is not identified and corrected the person can slide ever further towards diminishing the essence of their human nature. It's self-defeating, self-destructive, slow suicide. Many of us have experienced second degree error first hand and learned from the experience that it does more harm than good and thus abandoned it.
For most of us, we recognize the roughly 10% that make up this group, as we shake our heads in befuddlement. Wondering why they don't see that they are their own worst enemy.
Being the sincere, compassionate person that you are, you've probably found yourself on more than one occasion trying to help this type person understand where the real problem resides and where a best solution can be found.
1. The first degree error was partially explained in the upper portion of this writing. This is a person in second-degree-error denial that has a cause or crusade they champion. They can often be found on campaigns to get people to join in their cause or crusade -- to jump on their bandwagon. In essence, to be like them. This is less than 1% of the population.
Unlike the second-degree-error person that does it to themselves, the first-degree-error person spreads virus-like harm and destruction.
Insidiously, they put forth a charade that they're sincere, compassionate and empathetic with people. They need to appear as pro-human as the first-degree-error persons that make up 90% of the population. To maintain their position of power they must appear to reflect those same positive values and character traits.
But appearances can be deceiving.
That is precisely the intent of the person in this category. The intent to deceive -- to appear just like the 90% of the population that acknowledges when they're wrong and corrects their error. The first-degree-error person chose not to acknowledge they're wrong and correct their errors. For, if once they show that positive character trait, people looking on will expect to see it in the future.
Thus, they altogether avoid the error-correction cycle for themselves and jump to feigning compassion, sincerity and empathy. They can talk the talk, but they can't walk the walk. They sure sound impressive and caring, don't they?
They jump at the chance to point out that "this, that and the other thing" is wrong and must be corrected -- but they never acknowledge their own errors and correct them.
So how can you trust the first-degree-error person that's marked by their routine failure to demonstrate the good common sense and self-respect to acknowledge when they're wrong and make corrections?
You can't.

The most egregious of the first-degree-error people hold the highest positions of power -- politicians and bureaucrats. Also, they often hold prestigious positions in the media and academia.

Now that you're armed with the facts, context and reality, how can you use them to root out the worst offenders that spread virus-like deceptions that bring only harm and suffering to individuals, families and society?

Mr. Politician, you've worked your way up in your career by appearing compassionate, empathetic and sincere towards us while claiming that "this, that and the other thing" is wrong and that it must be corrected.

However, it has occurred to me and an increasing number of people that while you put on an air of care and compassion that reflects who we are, unlike us, for all the times you've said "this, that and the other thing" is wrong and must be corrected, unlike us real people, who actually acknowledge when we're wrong and take it upon ourselves to correct our errors, you have not done that.

...Have not demonstrated the essence of honesty, honor and integrity worthy of respect. To acknowledge ones own errors and correct them is human nature. What's your excuse?

Sure, us citizens have differing opinions from time to time. But we often acknowledge when we're wrong and make corrections. With politicians and bureaucrats it doesn't work that way, does it? You and your colleagues thrive on differing opinions and none of you ever acknowledges that you're wrong and none of you correct your errors.

Oh so found all of you are in pointing out everybody else's wrongs that must be corrected by you and your colleagues. But for some inexplicable reason you are supposedly never wrong and in need of correcting.

By feigning care and compassion you can camouflage what you're really doing -- spreading your virus-like deceptions. You cherish activists that champion your causes and issues. For they are like you and you're like them. You all want us to be like you so you pretend to be like us in attempt to gain rapport. So sad it is that you're not at all like us. You can only talk the talk. Yet, so grand it is that we are not like you. For we walk the walk.

So there you have it.

You already know that voting for the lesser of evils always begets evil. Unfortunately, the vast majority of people that spend their time discussing politics and political activism have a vested interest in political evil.

They'll champion or diss a Democrat, Republican or third party candidate or an entire political party in general but turn a blind eye to character as they fly the banner, take up the cause, crusade or issue of a first-degree error person.

Character does matter. Character counts. The issue or cause is a distant second to the person's character that is championing the cause. For there is no way a person of failed character can do justice to any cause, no matter how noble the cause may be. The ends never justify the means. Most political activists have let themselves become pawns in a no win Hobson's choice game of politics.

Many political activists think it's good to encourage people to become interested in politics. What they should be encouraging is for people to get interested in rooting out all politicians and bureaucrats that spread virus-like deceptions.

However, despite people's vested interest in the no win Hobson's choice, and despite their denial of having a vested interest in the "evil that always begets evil," there's nothing they can do to stop the new-era trend. What new-era trend? The trend to root out dishonesty and deception while championing that character does in fact count.

The 9-11 terrorist attacks and aftermath are a prime example. Root out terrorist and governments that supported them -- champion the brave firefighters that gave their lives rescuing people from the twin towers. Other examples are the 2002 mid-term election and the war to free Iraq .

Root out the Iraq-regime supporters infesting the UN, French, German and Russian governments -- champion brave soldiers fighting in Iraq and those that gave their lives for a Secure America and praise President Bush for focusing on his prime responsibility to ensure Americans' security.

No politician -- left, right or center -- bureaucrat or political party will escape the new-era trend to root out evil and incompetence. In this new-era trend character not only counts, it has taken the lead.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.