"Globalism vs. Global Community"

Copyright© 2000 Hans Swoboda

     "For I was seeing in a sacred manner the shape of all the shapes as they must live together like one being. And I saw that the sacred hoop of my people was one of many hoops that made one circle, wide as daylight and as starlight, and in the center grew one mighty flowering tree to shelter all the children of one mother and one father. And I saw that it was holy."     —Black Elk

     Most people understand these days that we Homo saps are heading toward some very big changes, including a new social order.

     Not many are optimistic about the changes at hand. Who can blame them? The two most influential orthodoxies of our time-Christianity and Darwinism-paint rather grim pictures of the times to come. Christianity tells us that a dreadful Apocalypse will conclude a period of severe tribulations and that very few are booked on the Savior flight out of here. Most will be "left behind." And Darwinism . Darwinism has been telling us for over a century of the coming of a terrible "population apocalypse."

     A good part of my work has been to call into question both of these orthodoxies and to offer an alternative vision of the future based upon the original teachings of certain Great Ones, such as Christ, and contemporary new physics and new biology. Research over a period of four decades has convinced me that humankind can turn our war-savaged world into a Peaceable Kingdom, if only we can re-program ourselves soon enough with positive paradigms.

The principal positive paradigm of which I speak is scientific holism, which will one day replace scientismic materialism, our current ruling paradigm. Scientific holism will be discussed in a separate project posted on this site in the near future. So. what is "global community"?

     Global community is an expression of the holistic attitude, which may be summarized in the phrase "We are all related." Global community residents see themselves as related to all other people, as neighbors. Countries are "neighborhoods" within the community of Earth dwellers.

     Today, certain countries, or ruling factions within those countries, are driven by the un-neighborly idea that their historical destiny is to achieve hegemony (control) over certain other countries-or all other countries! Call this drive, this attitudinal affliction, the "superpower syndrome." This syndrome will recede, more and more, as the global community concept gains acceptance in the minds of individuals and in the councils of governments.

     Is it really possible for humans to change their warfaring ways and become friendly neighbors? Yes. I view the change as not only possible, but inevitable, as a great many powerful factors are pushing us in the direction of positive change. To mention just a few..

     *We are by nature holistics, "live and let live" our primary philosophy. It takes many, many years of indoctrination ("education" we call it) to turn children into soldiers of negative belief systems. We enter the world "trailing clouds of glory," Wordsworth tells us. "As we grow, shades of the prison house grow up around us." To adopt the global community attitude is thus not going against our nature, it is going with our nature. It is recovering our lost, but never quite forgotten, clouds of glory.

     *Mother Earth is singular and sentient, as we learn from the science of Bruce Lipton, and this it may be presumed she is capable of intervening in human affairs. When it comes to instructing humankind, she prefers, as does any good mother, the incentive, or carrot, approach. Ever wonder about the maker of the mysterious "crop circles." Some of the glyphs represent advanced scientific theorems. Are they presents from Mom?-incentives for us to think outside our little paradigm boxes? When the carrot approach fails, Mom uses the stick. "Tough love." Tsunamis, hurricanes, floods, tornados, earthquakes, volcanic eruptions.

     As we know from Lipton science, the people who "die" in these events do not really die. They simply transition to a non-physical state. For those who are not affected directly, "disasters" have a great positive effect: They cause people to put aside their separatist beliefs, their petty differences, and to assist the stricken, neighbor to neighbor.

     *The alternative to creating a global community is not at all attractive. The alternative is generally known as "globalism." What is globalism?

     The term globalism is quite familiar to people these days, but most don't have a clue as to what it's all about. "The wave of future, is it not?" So, we are led to believe.

     Here's a clue as to what it means..

     History is the playing out of an ongoing dialectical struggle between holistics ("We are all related, all equal") and separatists, or elitists ("We happen to be chosen ones, and thus your superiors").

     The Framers of the American Constitution gave the holistics a great triumph when they acknowledged that sovereignty, the ultimate authority, belongs not to special people and special groups but to the people collectively. "We, the People of the United States . do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America." Notice the word ordain. In the Old World Order system, it was the churches that ordained rulers. In the New World Order system established by the Founders, the job of ordination, i.e., legitimization, belongs to the people.

     The Framers called the political system they created "independent republicanism," i.e., republicanism independent of elites. Underlying their creation was a political philosophy called "individualism," which has nothing to do with what is called "rugged individualism." According to this philosophy, the Creator (Sovereign with a capital "S") distributes its power non-locally, to individuals. Every individual is a sovereign kingdom constituted by trillions of citizen-cells! Now .

     Individuals existed before governments appeared on the scene, right? Right. As this was the case, Tom Paine and other philosophers of individualism argued, it may be supposed that governments were created to serve individuals . to protect their sovereign rights. The political order established by the Framers, which is the original "New World Order," was inspired by individualism.

     George III was not at all happy about losing his North American colonies, and so he commissioned British intelligence to put together a plan for destroying independent republicanism in the Americas and wherever else it might raise its ugly head. British intelligence had a few chats with powerful families at home and on the continent, and the result was the formation of a reactionary "New World Order" dedicated to achieving something like world hegemony through the control, first, of economic institutions, and, later, of all important institutions.

     In the nineteenth century, the reactionaries successfully countered the philosophy of individualism with socialism. The eminent historian Jacques Barzun refers to Britain in the nineteenth century as a "sewer of socialism." The key ideas behind socialism are, "The social-organism is the all-important thing, and individuals are readily expendable if they do not contribute to the social organism."

     There are positive socialistic systems (in Finland, for instance), but, by and large, the socialisms that made the headlines in the last century were on the negative side-the National Socialism of Hitler et al (fascism), the International Socialism of Lenin, Stalin, et al (communism), and world socialism, aka "globalism." Is not globalism based on the same social theory (social Darwinism) as that which informed both national and international socialism? Do the globalist ideologues not take the position that the world is in serious trouble and must be governed strictly by a "responsible elite"?

     I am not suggesting that globalists are a bunch of contemporary Hitlers and Stalins. I am simply pointing out that globalism, as a socio-political philosophy, has the same ideological basis as the parties of Hitler and Stalin.

     Now suppose you have an apple tree in your orchard which produces just a few good apples and a lot of poisoned apples. What should you do? Should you take out a shotgun and blow the bad apples to bits? Of course not. What you should do is replace the tree with one that produces only good apples. An arduous process perhaps, but peaceful.

     The ideological tree we need to replace is social Darwinism. I recommend "social fractalism" as an alternative. "Look!-here's a really healthy ideological tree. Let's replace the Darwin tree with the fractal tree." There may be more familiar terms for this alternative tree. Let's call it the "Tree of Life" perhaps.

     Elsewhere, I speak of building a road from our present reality to Peaceable Kingdom Earth. Global community, based on scientific holism, is the goal, the place to which the road leads.