Please enable JavaScript.

Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.

Council's Push for World Government (minor Reasons for which they try…

- - - - World Constitution Page 156 of Global Class War "Constitutions are not interest-free. The Constitution of the United States reflected the powerful economic interests of the time-slave holders, to name one example. Therefore, we should not expect the people in charge of writing the global constitution to ignore their own interests in establishing the rules for "who gets what." :check:
 - - The New World Order :check:
 
 Global Governance :check:
 - - I will need to address this strange new age view of hating soveriengty :check:
- - - - Butler, Harold, Sir. "A New World Takes Shape." 1948 "How far can the life of nations, which for centuries
 have thought of themselves as distinct and unique, be merged
 with the life of other nations? How far are they prepared to sacri-
 fice a part of their sovereignty without which there can be no
 effective economic or political union?...
 Out of the prevailing confusion a new world is taking shape.
 When it finally settles into its mold, its structure will be so
 different from anything that has gone before that a comfortable
 Victorian risen from the dead would detect in it little resemblance
 to the world which he knew." :check:
 
 "Religion: American Malvern." Time
 Ultimately, "a world government of delegated powers."
 Complete abandonment of U.S. isolationism.
 Strong immediate limitations on national sovereignty.
 International control of all armies & navies.
 "A universal system of money ... so planned as to prevent inflation and deflation."
 Worldwide freedom of immigration.
 Progressive elimination of all tariff and quota restrictions on world trade.
 "Autonomy for all subject and colo nial peoples" (with much better treatment for Negroes in the U.S.).
 "No punitive reparations, no humiliating decrees of war guilt, no arbitrary dismemberment of nations."
 A "democratically controlled" international bank "to make development capital available in all parts of the world without the predatory and imperialistic aftermath so characteristic of large-scale private and governmental loans."
 This program was adopted last week by 375 appointed representatives of 30-odd denominations called together at Ohio Wesleyan University by the Federal Council of Churches. Every local Protestant church in the country will now be urged to get behind the program. "As Christian citizens," its sponsors affirmed, "we must seek to translate our beliefs into practical realities and to create a public opinion which will insure that the United States shall play its full and essential part in the creation of a moral way of international living."
 Among the 375 delegates who drafted the program were 15 bishops of five denominations, seven seminary heads (including Yale, Chicago, Princeton, Colgate-Rochester), eight college and university presidents (including Princeton's Harold W. Dodds), practically all the ranking officials of the Federal Council and a group of well-known laymen, including John R. Mott, Irving Fisher and Harvey S. Firestone Jr. "Intellectually," said Methodist Bishop Ivan Lee Holt of Texas, "this is the most distinguished American church gathering I have seen in 30 years of conference-going."
 This was the JFD thing I think
 :check:
 
 Cousins, Norman. Modern Man Is Obsolete. do no use as a quote Norman Cousins 1945We even debate the question of “surrendering” some of our sovereignty — as though there is still something to surrender. There is nothing left to surrender. There is something to gain. A common world sovereignty ... would men that no state could act unilaterally from the central authority as a method to achieve its aims. ...
 There is no need to discuss the historical reasons pointing to and arguing for world government.
 :check:
 
 United States. Report On the First Meeting, September 1946. By U.S. National Commission for UNESCO, Appendix 6, P.25. N.p.: U.S. Government, 1947. Print. William Benton (CFR) "We are at the beginning of a long process of breaking down the walls of national sovereignty and persuading the peoples of this world to study each other and cooperate with each other. In this process UNESCO can be - and indeed must be the pioneer." The next card explains a little bit about UNESCO and the stuff they said about nationalism. https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=umn.31951d035630421;view=1up;seq=31 :check:
 
 "Declaration of Interdependence." World Affairs Council , 1976. http://www.americaismyname.org/uploads/7/9/1/7/7917170/us_declaration_of_interdependence_1976.pdf
 This is a co-council document that declared the need for world government and world citizenship. It had major backing from the Council on Foreign Relations and
 among them CFR members George McGovern, Clairborne Pel, Christopher Dodd, Les Aspin, and Patricia Schroeder, sign a Declaration of Interdependence written by historian Henry Steele Commager (CFR),
 :check:
 
 Source:
 Haass, Richard. "State Sovereignty Must Be Altered in Globalized Era - Taipei Times." Taipei Times. The Taipei Times, 21 Feb. 2006. Web. 11 Nov. 2016.
 Cues:
 Incomplete
 Paraphrase:
 In his article http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/editorials/archives/2006/02/21/2003294021 he hardcore bashes soveriegnty. He is also the president of the council on foreign relations.
 :check:
 
 1 more item...
 
 Clarification on the Church Quote: “Our Commission held its first full meeting in September, 1941, just after the promulgation of the Atlantic Charter. We immediately launched a campaign to educate United states public opinion for the need for world organization. Most of the protestant churches for the country set up study groups on world order. The commission conducted a “national missions on world order” which took leading ministers and laymen to principal cities of the United States.” JFD War or Peace Page 34 :check:
 - - The program draws on the resources of CFR’s David Rockefeller Studies Program to assess existing regional and global governance mechanisms and offer concrete recommendations for U.S. policymakers on specific reforms needed to improve their performance, both to advance U.S. national interests and to ensure the provision of critical global public goods. The program will take an issue area approach, focusing on arrangements governing state conduct and international cooperation in meeting four broad sets of challenges: (1) Countering Transnational Threats, including terrorism, proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, and infectious disease; (2) Protecting the Environment and Promoting Energy Security; (3) Managing the Global Economy; and (4) Preventing and Responding to Violent Conflict :check:
 
 Throughout its activities, CFR will engage stakeholders and constituencies in the United States
 2
 and abroad, including governments, non-governmental organizations (NGOs), civil society representatives, and the private sector, whose input and endorsement are critical to ensure the appropriateness and feasibility of any institutional reforms. The program is led by Senior Fellow Stewart Patrick...We believe that the research and policy agenda outlined here constitutes a potentially significant contribution to U.S. and international deliberations on the requirements for world order in the twenty-first century.
- - - - But what about a worldwide “we”? Are not communities typically defined by their sepa- ration from some other people? Can there be a “we” without a “they”? My response is that the new “they” are weapons of mass destruction and pandemics; they fully qual- ify as enemies of humanity. 319 :check:
 - - - Environmental degradation poses particular problems for national governments because most environmental damage is not limited by borders, as pollution from one country invades another, over- fishing by one country affects another country’s ability to maintain its catch, and so on. Attempting to manage the global commons goes beyond the capabilities of any one country, hence the large number of environmental treaties that have been concluded in the last thirty years. Nonetheless, the environment continues to fall behind as govern- ments flout the restrictions they agreed to in those treaties, which were to begin with often symbolic rather than substantive commitments. The struggle that preceded reaching an agreement on the text of the Kyoto Protocol highlights the difficulties in reaching agreements that often are more rhetorical than realistic. From Empire to Community Page 243
 
 Similarly, if the world were to face what would be a clear and present danger due to sizeable global warming, it likely would act. (Some may well argue that once warming becomes a clear and present
 danger, it will be much more difficult to deal with it than it is now. However, the attentive publics must be convinced that the current and anticipated level of warming poses a serious threat before they will agree to burdensome measures that must be under- taken to reverse this trend.) Meanwhile, the global environment, which has a wider appeal than wel- fare, will draw some resources—but not enough to prevent further degradation. As with welfare, those who wish for more action are better off finding new interests to further engage the nations of the world and stronger normative arguments to present than berating the rich. 280 :check:
 
 World Order 2.0 Richard Haass "Climate change is in many ways the quintessential manifestation of globalization. It reflects the sum total of what is going on; countries are exposed and affected unevenly by the problem regardless of their contribution to it." Haass says that Climate change fits under Sovereign Obligation, and that international incentives and penalties should be given out to nations who do not comply with the internationally established rule set. In addition, he states that the developed countries have the sovereign obligation to pick up most of the tab for the less developed countries to combat climate change. :check:
 - - - In short, a key source of legitimation for the new global architecture is that it will not tolerate mass killing, whether by WMD or by genocide, thus pro- viding the very first element of a state on the global level—a measure of security. The new global archi- tecture thus will draw on replacing respect for na- tional sovereignty with a growing respect for a human good—the right to live, whatever one’s na- tionality. This is a much more compelling standard for action than the enforcement of a whole slew of human rights. The list of these rights is too long (and yet some argue not long enough) and too un- clear to justify forceful intervention in the internal affairs of other countries at this stage in the devel- opment of the Global Safety Authority and the Unit- ed Nations. This standard does apply, however, for fighting terrorism and deproliferation, and increas- ingly to pacification and humanitarian inter- ventions, and—one day—to general arms reduc- tion. replacing national rights with human rights :check:
- - - - He continues by saying that due to the Weapon's State, there is no alternative to this international regime, and that the United States must lead the way.
 
 "We are in for abnormal times. Our best hope for safety in
 such times, as in difficult times past, is in American strength
 and will?the strength and will to lead a unipolar world,
 unashamedly laying down the rules of world order and being
 prepared to enforce them. Compared to the task of defeating
 fascism and communism, averting chaos is a rather subtle call
 to greatness. It is not a task we are any more eager to
 undertake than the great twilight struggle just" :check:
 - - The Intimate Papers of Colonel House-Charles Seymour 41 After the Napoleonic wars public opinion
 in Europe believed that Jacobinism was the great danger to
 peace, just as now we believe, with more justification, that
 Prussian Militarism is what we have mainly to fear. Accordingly,
 the principal nations entered into the Holy Alliance,
 with a view to suppressing Jacobinism whenever they saw
 it raising its head. Very soon Great Britain withdrew from
 the League, but it persisted with the most disastrous results
 for many years in Europe . I am dreadfully afraid that we
 may make the same mistake now . Prussian militarism is
 indeed a portentous evil, but if, misled by our fear of it, we
 try to impose on all the nations of the world a form of government
 which has been indeed admirably successful in
 America and this country, but is not necessarily suited for
 all others, I am convinced we shall plant the seeds of very
 serious international trouble . Lord Robert Cecil to House- This is an incredibly wise contention, the writer of this letter understood the boogeyman and realized that maybed the first boogeyman that they could think of was jacobinism. And then after that prussian military might, in the institution of the world order due to this is not intelligent. :check:
 - - I join here with those who hold that an arms-control approach—allowing states to keep what are, in effect, the means for pro- ducing nuclear weapons while relying on inspec- tions to ensure their peaceful use—is too risky. The new world order requires the removal of such capacities—through peaceful measures if possible and by force if necessary. Page 203, he wants to use non proliferation as a reason for global government
 
 I fully realize the complexities of the issues involved—the long history of animosity, the inevitable religious and ethnic confrontation, and the sense of prestige that nations claim to de- rive from being members of the “nuclear club.”¹⁴ However, none of these takes precedence over sav- ing the lives of millions of their citizens and making nuclear war less likely. Page 205 saying that National sovereignty does not take precedence over safety :check:
 
 Finally, deproliferation—which has been pur- sued in ways similar to the war against terrorism— is adding a whole wing to the Global Antiterrorism Authority, and thus providing another element for the formation a Global Safety Authority. That is, this added mission meets the criteria of transnational institution building and hence can serve as part of the development of a global community. page 207
 
 If deproliferation is to be accorded our top priority, it would follow that all means of persuasion— economic and ultimately military—should be ap- plied to this purpose. That is, there is a global need to move from a basically voluntary system, which the non-proliferation treaties entail, to a system that has a coercive fall back, in which force would be used if all else fails. (The European Union acknowl- edged as much when it released the “Strategy Against Proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruc- tion,” a document that calls for “coercive mea- sures”—including force—to prevent proliferation when all other options have been exhausted.)²⁰ Given the dangers involved, coercive deprolif- eration is justified only if all other means have been exhausted page 209-210 :check:
 
 The most important reason, which alone justi- fies respecting national sovereignty much less than in recent generations, is the threat of wholesale ter- rorism, the use of weapons of mass destruction (WMD) directly by rogue states or by rogue states providing such weapons to terrorists. The value of deproliferation, of protecting the world from nu- clear devastation, trumps the respect for the na- tional sovereignty of nations that insist on clinging to WMD. 232
 
 Similarly, if the world were to face what would be a clear and present danger due to sizeable global warming, it likely would act. (Some may well argue that once warming becomes a clear and present
 danger, it will be much more difficult to deal with it than it is now. However, the attentive publics must be convinced that the current and anticipated level of warming poses a serious threat before they will agree to burdensome measures that must be under- taken to reverse this trend.) Meanwhile, the global environment, which has a wider appeal than wel- fare, will draw some resources—but not enough to prevent further degradation. As with welfare, those who wish for more action are better off finding new interests to further engage the nations of the world and stronger normative arguments to present than berating the rich. 282