Summary

Capitalism is an idea where the means of production are privately owned and operated. This means that operators must constantly be involved in expanding their profit to create the conditions of their well-being. Hence, it is not possible for a person to expand without stripping others of their assets (land, material things, mates, water, food, etc.); this means that the people who use capitalism to increase their wealth, status, and power must deny others of their own wealth and resources. This conundrum constitutes a serious threat to the people who rely on capitalism or a social democratic system that allows for private property.

People prefer to avoid deceit and wars, like most animals, to achieve their goals and instead achieve their goals under the guise of promoting peace, political and diplomatic relations, economic development, and the like. The way people achieve their goals and the way animals achieve theirs are not any different from each other. There is only one difference, and that involves the means that animals use as compared to humans. Animals appoint only the trained hunter with good relational skills as leader; humans do not..

This paper tries to examine if the implicit bias and cynical policies that the victors of WWII (the old powers) are employing in the Middle East are reviving their power or spreading post-truth. The paper argues that the heirs of the old powers (the families/dynasties that control the international order and the money supply of the world) are letting their critical thinkers and servants (governments and international institutions) mix truth with falsehood or hide truth knowingly, which helps people across the globe quickly discover where truth and falsehood lie, rather than aiding them in rejuvenating their power. Can the heirs of the old powers retain their influence and gain more power than others as more people become dedicated to revealing the truth rather than adhering to the legitimized political order?

The paper concludes that if the heirs of the old powers (the families/dynasties that control the international order and the money supply of the world) stay unprepared to recognize that the overwhelming majority of the world’s population have no interest in glorifying falsehood, the world will enter into a new dark era, and their own heirs will be its principal victims.

Analysis

The Bible says that God made humans and saw that their thoughts were always evil as their numbers grew. The Bible states that God regretted He had made human beings on the earth and wanted to wipe from the face of the earth the human race. But then, He backed away from acting on his plan, limiting himself to never contending with humans, for they would be forever corrupt. (Genesis 6:1-7)

This aforementioned discourse has shaped human history since antiquity. Generation after generation, new people who do wrong try to mend their evil ways by using good or truth as masking tape or a shield to hide under its gilded glow their deliberate, preplanned intention to secure unwanted changes. This practice of confusing good with bad and truth with falsehood has repeatedly resulted in those who mixed up these concepts or concealed their deception wandering aimlessly until the evil deeds they mistakenly believed were restoring their power ultimately proved them wrong.

For example, after the fall of the Roman Empire and the series of caliphates that emerged after the death of the Islamic prophet, control and command of the international order became seated in Western Europe, just as the command and control of the Christian faith is to this day seated in Rome.

However, instead of the old powers (the families/dynasties that were controlling the European societies or monarchs) directing citizens to seek meaning in life, they began practicing what they found their forefathers or predecessors (the Persians, the Mongols, the Greeks, the Romans, the Muslims, the Christians, etc.) doing after they became established. This course of action involved becoming totally immersed in pursuing policies that deepened social inequality and political corruption until the widespread confusion and anarchy they were creating led to their empires becoming fragmented and converted into regional states connected by faith, law, and culture.

For example, before WW2 erupted, the families/dynasties that were controlling the European societies (countries and kingdoms) launched large-scale conquest or colonization exercises across the globe to advance their trade, cultivation, and exploitation and to start new settlement projects to benefit from. They waged wars and perpetrated massacres across the globe in the name of good (God, equality, freedom, or social justice) or mere personal conviction, including thirst for power, whichever was the case. Most importantly, the families/dynasties that controlled the European societies dealt with the societies whose settlers were exercising colonial rule over their land and assimilating their population into their political and adaptive culture using different political and economic standards. In the Americas, for instance, the European countries decided to split this continent into two geographical landmasses, which they called North America and Latin America. In the case of the North American landmass, the European countries granted their colonizers (their nationals) rights to splinter in the northeastern tip and to form a new country, which they called the United States, whereas in the other western and southern half, they kept its citizens living under domination.

Once again, it seems reasonable to think that the European settlers—later Americans—in North America would probably have reflected on how all the individuals who throughout history tested with making good and evil, or freedom and fate, work for them were later disillusioned with what they reaped. As a result, they would have picked searching for moral and spiritual fulfillment in their new society on the conquered territory, rather than seeking fulfillment from material things, but this was not the case. The European settlers, who later became Americans, began practicing the same behaviors that their fathers and forefathers had exhibited after establishing themselves. Evidently, as the need for land for the European settlers—later Americans—grew, they sought to address this shortage by expanding westward. This statement could also suggest that the individuals involved were confiscating (dispossessing) land from Native Americans and establishing permanent settlements on the conquered territory.

No person knows what his deeds will earn him tomorrow. The history of the European settlers who became Americans, from the time they separated from their homeland in 1776 until the early 20th century when they completed the annexation of the entire North American landmass from the eastern to the western seaboard, was just as complex as the history being written by their family members who remained in Europe. The history of the European settlers who became Americans was marked by genocide and wars, but there was one main difference. The European settlers—turned Americans—managed to absorb or assimilate the various demographic groups that they were subjugating and dispossessing of their land into their colonial structures, including making them give up their claim for political sovereignty and conform to the new Euro-American cultural norms that they were adopting or assimilating into. In fact, the assimilation policies that the Americans employed when they were integrating the people they were colonizing into their adopted values, behaviors, and beliefs managed to produce a culture or a fused community by the start of WW2 that the world has not known an equivalent to since the fall of Islam in the 11th and 12th centuries. In the case of the European societies, the Europeans failed to assimilate the societies that they were conquering or integrating into their political and cultural systems across the globe and stayed entangled in disputes and wars and in resolving internal and external conflicts between themselves and with their colonized people until WW2 was regarded as having started. Actually, WW2 was a global war that the European societies prompted the outbreak of.

One could conclude that the victors of World War II (the old powers) and their new global policeman (the United States) should have studied the mistakes made by the empires and kingdoms that collapsed or were absorbed by stronger societies, particularly regarding the loss of their cultural identity, in order to learn what to avoid. Next, they compared their findings to how the blend of military conquest, trade, missionary work, and migration that the Americans employed helped them create this American exceptionalism tapestry that existed in the world in 1945 and build on top of it. Most importantly, one might think that the victors of WW2 (the old powers) and their new global policeman (the United States) would have observed the work program that the founding fathers of the UN (the old powers) sketched in its blueprint in the UN Charter or the UDHR to enable them to keep transforming the conditions and outcomes that matter to them. But the victors of WW2 (the old powers) had a different opinion. The victors of WW2 (the old powers) chose to implement political and economic strategies that have historically been contentious to structure their relationships upon. This plan was to forbid others from violating the standards that they were legitimizing but grant themselves the right to do so.

The victors of WW2 (the old powers) factored in the new plans that they legitimized to treat others (i.e., the societies that they vanquished during WW2 and the societies that they were dominating across the globe but then freed when WW2 ended) not in the same way that they wanted to be treated themselves, and also to make them stay with them and to let them have more power than others—all the loopholes that can go wrong minus one. This loophole is a truth or a risk that no king managed throughout history to predict its impact correctly when he began to apply law and values randomly. The flaw or rule that the victors of WW2 (the old powers) have been unable to circumvent or work around since 1945 centers on the fact that creativity, fortune, social cohesion, growing inequality, extractive institutions, environmental degradation, depletion of resources, costs of rising complexities, etc. are all sequences or outcomes that are constantly turning around like a wheel.

The unwillingness of the victors of WW2 (the old powers) and later their heirs to factor into their planning how creativity, fortune, social cohesion, growing inequality, extractive institutions, environmental degradation, depletion of resources, costs of rising complexities, etc. are constantly changing reality has now entrapped the heirs of the old powers (the Western European families/dynasties that control the international order and the money supply of the world) in a complex situation with not many options to pick from to rejuvenate their power. Their options are either to engulf the world in a global war to reduce desires and risk losing it all if they are not the victor or to reconquer the world in the hope of the new critical thinkers and servants (chiefs, judges, etc.) that would be helping them to re-bestow their strength and stability, being men who are ready to observe the work program suggested in the UN Charter or the UDHR to the letter of the law and not as untrustworthy or ineffective as the helpers that have been doing it since 1945, such as all the UN member states starting with the United States government (the global policeman) or the intergovernmental organization named the United Nations.

To put it differently, capitalism (or liberal democracy) is an idea that its agents are constantly freezing social space and accumulating material things on a cumulative basis. If the agents who depend on capitalism to accumulate wealth and power do not constantly expand their access to social space or accumulate material things on a cumulative basis, their power and wealth will shrink. The international world order that the heirs of the old powers are establishing on their principal relations in the aftermath of WW2 is not based on prioritizing socialist ideologies but liberal ideologies. Hence, all the critical thinkers and servants (governments and international institutions) that the heirs of the old powers are depending on their wisdom to rejuvenate their power are not observing the work program suggested in the UN Charter or the UDHR to the letter of the law and are using the work program suggested in the UN Charter or the UDHR to fulfill the full development of their personality, including teaching people to not observe the political order legitimized unless outcomes are shared on equal rights; then the heirs of the old powers cannot maintain their superiority if every member of the human family is working to improve his self-help using his conscience and personal power as a guide instead of the standards legitimized.

Accordingly, since every member of the human family is working to improve his wealth, power, and status and not to secure the work program suggested in the UN Charter or the UDHR, and in the market, people win and lose, this means that the heirs of the old powers have no choice other than to keep on winning to keep their dominant role or to force this outcome. Additionally, since the heirs of the old powers cannot keep winning all the time, they must force this outcome. And since engulfing the world in a global war or implicating the heirs of WW2 in conflicts that are intended to force winning scenarios all the time is risky, then the heirs of the old powers have no choice but to reconquer the world inch by inch to keep their dominant role. Reconquering the world inch by inch entails the heirs of the old powers constantly conquering new territories and incorporating the people living in those territories into their lifestyles.

Throughout history, people resisted changing their lifestyles in order to adopt the lifestyle of their conqueror or colonizer and fought back outright against such infringement. Some attempts to change the lifestyle of the conquered or colonized were disastrous, while others were successful.

For example, the large-scale conquests and colonization that the European countries carried out in the Americas and most of Asia from the 15th century until the early 20th century proved very successful in having the natives involved give up their lifestyles and traditions to adopt the traditions of their conquerors or colonizers. Actually, the readiness of all the members of the human family to integrate into the new world order that the European countries (the old powers) sketched its blueprint for at the end of WW1 or even after WW2 ended is evidence to support that all people were ready to adopt the lifestyles they proposed.

The conquests or the colonization exercises that the heirs of the old powers have been launching since the end of WW2, in particular to encourage the conquered or colonized to give up their traditions and to embrace the traditions of their conquerors or colonizers, appear to be disastrous so far. A notable case in example includes the colonization exercise that the heirs of the old powers initiated to start a new colony in the Middle East in the early 20th century, but then their heirs took it over, and instead of carrying forward successfully its circumstances as their fathers and forefathers did from the 15th century until the early 20th century in similar cases, they have been stumbling on setbacks only.

For example, before WW1 erupted, the Middle East, most of the Arabian Peninsula, North Africa, Southeastern Europe, and other landmasses were all part of the Ottoman Empire. The territory that is present-day Israel, the Palestinian territories, Lebanon, Jordan, Iraq, etc., was all part of Ottoman Syria. After WW1 was regarded to have ended, the victors of WW1 (the old powers) partitioned the Ottoman Empire territories into states and gave each one of the sheikhs that betrayed the Ottomans in the war a state to preside over, with the exception of the territory that was known as Palestine within Ottoman Syria. The victors of WW1 (the old powers) deemed that Palestinians were unfit for self-governance of the territory that they were administering under the Ottomans’ rule and placed the administration of the territory that is today Israel under the command and control of the British government.

In 1947, the victors of WW2 (the old powers) and their new global policeman (the United States) supported the termination of the British Mandate over Palestine that had existed since the end of WW1 (as of 1920), and rather than letting the Palestinians, who were the majority among all the various ethnic groups that were inhabiting this landmass, such as Arabs, Jews, Christians, Africans, etc., exercise sovereignty over this territory in question, they decided to partition Palestine to support the establishment of a “Jewish national home” that would exist next to a Palestinian state and an internationally administered corpus separatum for the cities of Jerusalem and Bethlehem. It is important to note that from 1920 to 1948, the year when the victors of WW2 (the old powers) and their new global policeman (the United States) partitioned Palestine into three separate administrations, all the inhabitants of this territory, such as Arabs, Jews, Christians, Africans, etc., were all carrying a Palestinian passport, precisely because the majority of the inhabitants of this landmass were Palestinians.

Throughout history, the victor parceled the territory that he commanded and controlled as he pleased. The decision of the victors of WW2 (the old powers) to partition Palestine into a Palestinian state and an Arab state or to keep it undivided and have the Palestinians govern this territory in its entirety is irrelevant. The question that begs answers is how the victors of WW2 (the old powers) initially, and later their heirs, addressed the conflicting objectives and claims of the Palestinians following their decision to establish a Jewish colony in Palestine so the expansionism or demand for land would be occurring relatively smoothly and not impact negatively on the maintenance of their strength and stability or credibility, particularly.

I have no way of knowing why the victors of WW2 (the old powers) initially, and later their heirs along with their new global policeman (the United States), did not kill the Palestinians, as God was doing when he was meddling on earth and carrying out conquests and colonization exercises specifically in Palestine, or sterilize them so their number or need for land would shrink after they recognized that they were not going to give up their traditions and lifestyles to embrace the tradition and lifestyle of their colonizers.

It looks as if the decision of the victors of WW2 (the old powers) initially, and later their heirs, to not back killing the Palestinians when they recognized that they were not going to give up their traditions and lifestyles to embrace the tradition and lifestyle of their colonizers, and to go along and to let them (the Palestinians) form nesting islands in between their settlers (the Jews) way, including having their settlers (the Jews) create a Jewish rush into the state of Israel in the same way the European settlers who became later Americans created an economic rush in the westerly direction to permit more European settlers to migrate from Europe to the US, facilitated the shrinking of the number of nesting islands that the Palestinians were using to sustain their resistance, but did not help the heirs of the old powers to expand their influence or the influence of their settlers, which is a prerequisite to sustain their superiority or keep winning.

The European settlers who later became Americans did not become a great power by 1945 by first building skyscrapers in North America and then expanding westward and colonizing natives, but the other way around. If the heirs of the old powers continue on permitting their settlers in the Middle East (the Jews) to build skyscrapers instead of expanding territoriality so their neighbors adopt their lifestyles, then the heirs of WW2 could be narrowing their grip on power and permitting their adversaries to threaten their superiority.

It seems like there is a disconnect between what the heirs of the old powers need to be constantly doing to keep their dominant role and what they are actually ending up doing. Their actions do not appear to be matching the plans that their fathers and forefathers practiced in the Americas to make the natives assimilate and not stay resisting them when their need to make the natives embrace their lifestyles grew.

Then again, it is highly possible that the heirs of the old powers are considering that because they control the international order and the money supply of the world, it is not important if their settlement in the Middle East does not expand territorially to induce along their political, economic, and cultural lifestyles. In the Quran, it is suggested that before Pharaoh was vanquished by his servants (the Jews), he told the Egyptians that “he is their lord, the most high, and that he did not know of any other God for them other than him.” That is to say, if the heirs of the old powers are considering that because they control the international order and the money supply of the world, they are also invincible, the fall of Pharaoh from power is a lesson to whoever believes he is too powerful to be defeated or overcome. In contrast, it looks as if the heirs of the old powers, their global policeman (the United States), and the Jews that were living in Palestine and were empowered to form a “Jewish national home,” along with the Jews that they encouraged to leave their homes in Europe and go live in the state of Israel, are all oblivious about how they should go about winning to repeat and reap the same success that their fathers and forefathers practiced in the Americas. Not to mention that all those aforementioned actors do not appear to be paying attention to history to see how others arrived at establishing successful settler colonial states, such as happened during the rise of Islam or later in the United States.

I have no way of knowing which history the heirs of the old powers and their global policemen (the United States) will reap in the Middle East in the future. It looks as if the decision of the heirs of the old powers to let people in the middle be divided into a group who are busy focusing on making their number one priority freedom (i.e., Palestinians, Lebanese, Iraqis, Syrians, etc.) and another owning assets, real estate, homes, land, cars, etc. (i.e., Jews, Saudis, Qataris, Emiratis, etc.) does not seem to be making them trade or swap their religion, traditions, culture, feudalist and imperialist ideas, etc., to embrace the political or cultural traditions and aspirations of their new conquerors or new landlords (the western Europeans) since 1945 but rather their own bias. This also means that if the heirs of the old powers continue to let freedom, social justice, equality, religion, traditions, land, wealth, assets, homes, cars, power, status, etc., tie down their tenants in the Middle East, this strategy would be tying them to a physical location. Could the heirs of the old powers and their global policemen (the United States) keep their tenants in the Middle East (Muslims, Jews, Christians, etc.) focused on freedom, equality, ideology, wealth, status, power, land, homes, cars, etc., and still be able to rejuvenate their power when the trade secret or formula that could make them stay in their dominating role is not how to divide and rule or appoint rulers and judges who are trustworthy and who hate dishonest gain but who keep people oblivious about focusing on freedom, equality, ideology, wealth, status, and power?

Then again, I have no way of knowing if the muscular approach that the heirs of the old powers (the families/dynasties that control the western European monarchs and republics) are employing to get their way despite the resistance of others in the Middle East and, most importantly, the violence that they are constantly legitimizing to justify their imperialism or neoconservatism, is not wearing them out and making people prioritize international law over ideology. What I do know is the ongoing dismantling of the modern nation-state and its mechanisms in the Middle East and elsewhere to create in its place permanent minorities does not make the divided people coexist with the fittest or the unified without threatening their superiority (power and wealth), including threatening the assumptions and the assertions they depend on to make the weak stay with them and to let them have more power than others faster. This is because it is not possible to build a system for managing differences, disputes, change, etc., when the system rejects or refuses to recognize the change that ensues. Similarly, the fittest cannot make the weak stay with him and let him have more power than others by changing his form, but by changing his spirit. Throughout history, all the kings who hid their deception from people failed to receive what they hoped for. Can the heirs of the old powers (the families/dynasties that control the Western European monarchs and republics) continue to wrong themselves and encourage corruption and wars to obtain what they hope for when their critical thinkers and servants (governments and international institutions) are teaching people across the globe to rely on their random intuition to increase their happiness instead of on cultivating humility, patience, and wisdom, which is a prerequisite to having the weak be ready to stay with the fittest and let him have more power than others? Can the heirs of the old powers make people across the globe believe in their unique moral value so they believe next in how their deeds are redeeming the world and why they need to consider their opinion before taking action on their own when their critical thinkers and servants are their own worst enemy?

Once again, I cannot understand how the heirs of the old powers conclude that continuing to subject the Palestinians and the rest of the societies that inhabit the Middle East to force, ethnic cleansing, enslavement, and a precipitous decline in size could persuade their tenants in that part of the world to abandon working to build an international order that is not multipolar or to plot to play their role. Most importantly, I have no way of knowing how the heirs of the old powers are concluding that the force, deceit, disregard, transgression, confusion, etc., that they are employing to get their way despite the resistance of others in the Middle East and elsewhere are paving the way to people accepting that they possess the eternal moral right to judge others or to rule the world and not to people withdrawing their obligation to obey them and humiliating them as the Jews humiliated Pharaoh in antiquity. Actually, how are the heirs of the old powers concluding that it would be possible for them to stop the Palestinians and their sympathizers from converting the Palestinian right to self-determination into an ideological (political and economic) issue, as the right of the Jews to return to the land from which they were expelled stayed as one during centuries if they do not kill them or compensate them, and the confusion that such anarchy would be stirring ends up setting them up for a tremendous loss? What I do know is that if the Persians, the Mongols, the Greeks, the Romans, the Muslims, the Christians, etc., knew how to continue to innovate so they continued to control the generations that were coming, they would have avoided their decline, and their power would not have transferred to the western European kingdoms and republics since the 12th century. This also means that if the heirs of the old powers (the Western European families/dynasties that won WW2 and who control the international order and the money supply of the world) continue to refuse to be practical and pragmatic and delay killing the Palestinians who are standing in the way of letting their Jewish settlers strive and expand in the Middle East, it would not be possible for them to avoid the hearts of the Palestinians and their sympathizers around the world becoming hardened until they are humiliated if what Jesus said about how “the student is not above the teacher, but everyone who is fully trained will be like their teacher” is true. Are the heirs of the old powers (the Western European families/dynasties that won WW2 and who control the international order and the money supply of the world) hardening people’s hearts around the world against them by refusing to let the Palestinians have rights to self-determination or to be compensated in the same way Pharaoh’s heart became when he refused to let the Jews leave Egypt in antiquity, until, in the course of time and things, he was outnumbered and defeated? Are the events unfolding in the Middle East since 1948 leading the heirs of the old powers to face a fate similar to that of Pharaoh when he oppressed the Jews in antiquity? The Middle East was the cemetery of the largest empires the world has known. Can the heirs of the old powers (the Western European families/dynasties that won WW2 and who control the international order and the money supply of the world) advocate for those who are wronging themselves and avoid being the latest victim?

I have no way of knowing if the victors of WW2 (the old powers) dismantled their empires and invited the societies that they vanquished during WW2 and the societies that they were dominating across the globe up to the date when WW2 was regarded to have ended and then freed to carry out the obligations contained in the UN Charter or the UDHR because they recognized that it is not possible to monopolize innovation (scientific or philosophic) to stay dominating the rule-making and the world order or because they wagered on the power of instrumentation or automated systems to dominate the world. What I do know is that, throughout history, people did not start to differ and to turn away from each other until knowledge came to them. And so the question that begs answers is can the heirs of the old powers (the Western European families/dynasties that won WW2) manage to monopolize innovation (scientific or philosophic) so people across the globe would be ready to stay with them and to let them have more power than others when the political and economic solutions that they are letting their critical thinkers and servants (governments and international institutions) legitimize to rejuvenate their power are not making people be attracted to stay with them but to repel them away in order to live in a new age of feudalism and ignorance, as happened during the Middle Ages?

I have no way of knowing if the heirs of the old powers are working toward recreating a new global history that is comparable to what our predecessors lived during the Middle Ages or are working to secure the outcome that the founding fathers of the UN (their fathers) sketched its blueprint for in the preamble of the UN Charter. What I do know is that if the heirs of the old powers want to maintain their strength and security in the future, they need to avoid the cultural sphere (political and religious transformations) that emerged in late antiquity and which was a prerequisite to the Middle Ages era from replaying.

Once again, I have no way of knowing from where to start to determine if the heirs of the old powers are indeed reshaping power dynamics that do not cause geopolitical shifts or weaken their grip on cultural innovation and transformation after globalization connected the world system. What I do know is that the world appears to be undergoing political and religious transformations along with widespread exploitation and military interventions that are concurrent with growing economic, scientific, and technological associations that create in the minds of people perceptions that their overall impact is setting humanity on a crashing course just as happened during late antiquity instead of on a global common course.

In the Bhagavad Gita (Hindu scripture), it is suggested that the lord has said that a person has rights to labor, but not to the fruits thereof. Evidently, if the heirs of the old powers want to continue to reap the fruits of the labor of people across the globe in the future and do not want the world to spiral down into the events that occurred during the Middle Ages, they would need to teach their critical thinkers and servants (governments and international institutions) how to live and how to die too.

I have no way of knowing if the failure of the families/dynasties that controlled the Persian Empire, the Mongol Empire, the Greek Empire, the Roman Empire, the Muslim Empire, the Christian Empire, and last but not least, the various Western European empires to make their critical thinkers and servants (governments and international institutions) be ready to live and to die in accordance with the standards that they were legitimizing played a role in their collapse. What I do know is that throughout history, those who dedicated their lives to guard and protect freedom, its integrity, and its interest have always continued to fight against tyranny and oppression, even if this task required that they pay with their own blood. And so the question that begs answers is not about finding new people who would be ready to pay with their blood to guard freedom in the future, but about how to locate enough new people whose focus would turn to fighting to preserve the international order as compared to fighting to preserve their wealth after the role of government changed from being to legitimize and enforce laws to becoming an apparatus to oppress and to deny rights (i.e., an economic operator).

Once again, I have no way of knowing what type of new form of political and economic participation we can expect to emerge in the future after the world becomes inhabited by real humans and their artificial duplicates (robots, automation, artificial intelligence, etc.). What I do know is that the decision of the heirs of the old powers to orient real humans in the last seventy years to work to invent tools or machines (robots, automation, and artificial intelligence) that are ready to sacrifice themselves without any questions asked instead of to secure the work program suggested in the UN Charter or the UDHR makes one of the principal motives that led to the collapse of the Persian Empire, the Mongol Empire, the Greek Empire, the Roman Empire, the Muslim Empire, and the Christian Empire in antiquity and, last but not least, the various Western European empires in contemporary history a thing of the past. The task was raising troops.

Indeed, the ability of the heirs of the old powers to resolve the fundamental problem that led to the collapse of the empires that their predecessors mounted, including solving along the way the problem of not having to share in spoils with their new artificial humans (robots, automation, and artificial intelligence), is a big step in the direction of permitting them to consolidate their power perpetually. The last step for the heirs of the old powers to make people across the globe not know any other God but them, as Pharaoh claimed his power or authority had reached in antiquity, will require that the new artificial humans (robots, automation, and artificial intelligence) that they want to become in charge of the lasting governing institutions (i.e., data centers) that they would be establishing to rejuvenate their power from reinforce their inclinations. I do not know how the heirs of the old powers plan to make their new artificial humans (robots, automation, and artificial intelligence) reinforce their inclinations when mathematics points to God. What I do know is that if the new artificial humans (robots, automation, artificial intelligence) that the heirs of the old powers are counting on their wisdom to consolidate their power fail to outsmart real humans or to make people have faith in science in the same way they have faith in God or their will, then there is a good chance that their plans will collapse and new families/dynasties will start to play their role. This is because fortune sometimes frowns and sometimes favors.

I have no way of knowing if fortune would be on the side of the heirs of the old powers in the future and if their critical thinkers and servants (governments and international institutions) and new artificial clones (robots, automation, artificial intelligence, etc.) would disappoint them in the same way many servants (chiefs, judges, military officials, bankers, etc.) disappointed and betrayed their masters when big issues arose or when threatened. What I do know is that if the heirs of the old powers want to maintain their superiority, they need to ensure, as I said before, that their dominance is built upon their total control and command of all the explorations and natural wealth and resources that people depend on to deny each other access to power or wealth, including their recovery process, transformation, or distribution. This is because when the fittest allow the weak to develop socially, culturally, and economically, it is possible for the fittest to create ordered relations. To illustrate an example, to organize a mixed deck of cards, a person needs to increase the disordered state of the deck.

Once again, I have no way of knowing how the heirs of the old powers are planning on making people across the globe observe the international rule-based postwar world order that their fathers (the old powers) legitimized in the aftermath of WW2 and counselled them to depend on its principles to rejuvenate their power after they deviated away from its framework and enlisted the United Nations to go and preach to people across the globe why they should stop surrendering freedom to their rulers or political system unless outcomes are shared on equal rights, as compared to solely reinforcing it. In other words, if throughout history wealth produced power and dictated policies, the decision of the heirs of the old powers to enlist the United Nations to go and preach to people across the globe why they should stop surrendering freedom to their rulers or political system unless outcomes are shared on equal rights challenges how humans establish relations since the second person was born on earth (i.e., hierarchically) or the division of labor.

Then again, Jesus enlisted disciples to go and preach the Gospel to all creation. But the Bible does not suggest that his disciples were buying and selling indulgence or freezing social space, including accumulating material things on a cumulative basis and transferring them to designated individuals in the same way the critical thinkers and servants (governments and international institutions) have been doing since 1945, but rather professing his teaching and complying with its standards. Most importantly, the disciples that Jesus enlisted to spread his teachings and establish Christianity did not go after they learned Jesus’s business, set up their own consulting companies, and began to offer his teachings to his adversaries in the same way that most politicians in Great Britain, France, and the United States in particular do after their political careers in government end but stayed loyal to him. And so, can the heirs of the old powers make all the people who are making their living from buying and selling freedom, justice, drugs, arms, etc. stop prioritizing disregard and corruption so they could avoid the world creating a new world history that is comparable to what our predecessors lived during the Middle Ages without making their critical thinkers and servants (governments and international institutions) stop to regard themselves exempt from observing the work program suggested in the UN Charter or the UDHR first? In other words, stop having more tax collectors than taxpayers.

Once again, I have no way of knowing how the heirs of the old powers plan to stay in charge of redeeming the world from its cynicism or continue on controlling the major financial centers that permit them to transform the conditions and outcomes that matter to them after they commissioned their critical thinkers and servants (governments and international institutions) to teach people to not surrender freedom to their rulers or political system unless outcomes are shared on equal rights, instead of teaching them to observe the work program suggested in the UN Charter or the UDHR to the letter of the law. If they (the heirs of the old powers) strove to teach their critical thinkers and servants (governments and international institutions) to keep the work program suggested in the UN Charter or the UDHR in their minds and not to be focused on how to learn about the capital market or to collect taxes to grow their wealth, as is the case today, then they would have avoided for sure creating the present cultural, moral, and value system that exists in the world, which is undoubtedly not what their fathers (the old powers) intended to establish from dismantling their empires or from freeing the societies they vanquished during WW2 and the societies that they were dominating across the globe.

It seems like the choices to keep their dominant role are not a lot after they permitted their critical thinkers and servants (governments and international institutions) to be devoted to teaching people across the globe the business that they are in and did not keep it a trade secret. The heirs of the old powers can continue to let their critical thinkers and servants (governments and international institutions) buy and sell freedom, justice, equality, etc., while they are pursuing the full development of their personality (i.e., freezing social space and accumulating material interests on a cumulative basis), in the hope that their fortune will be different than the fortune of their fathers or the families//dynasties that controlled the Persian Empire, the Mongol Empire, the Greek Empire, the Roman Empire, the Christian Empire, and the Muslim Empire, including Iraq, Libya, Egypt, and Syria, in recent years. Alternatively, the heirs of the old powers can put an end to the omnipotence of their present critical thinkers and servants (kings, presidents, governors, chiefs, judges, public officials, bankers, teachers, etc.) and unite around them a new group of critical thinkers and servants (kings, presidents, governors, chiefs, judges, etc.) who are prepared to observe the work program suggested in the UN charter and UDHR so they can balance their inclinations with people across the globe, as Ivan IV Vasilyevich (also known as Ivan the Terrible) did after he was coronated Tsar and Grand Prince of all Russia in 1547. To balance his power with those of the higher aristocracy and transform Russia from a medieval state to a fledging empire, Ivan the Terrible got rid of all the corrupt chiefs, judges, bankers, etc., and kept only the ones who were trustworthy and who hated dishonest gain.

I have no way of knowing which scenario between the aforementioned two the heirs of the old powers will pick to rejuvenate their power in the future. What I do know is that should the heirs of the old powers choose to not purge the critical thinkers and servants (kings, presidents, governors, chiefs, judges, etc.) who are refusing to observe the work program suggested in the UN Charter or the UDHR so they can take control of the international order and choose to continue to rejuvenate their power in the same way they have been doing since 1945 by letting their critical thinkers and servants (kings, presidents, governors, chiefs, judges, etc.) regard themselves as exempt from observing the appeal suggested in the UN Charter or the UDHR, they will have no other choice but to continue to carry out their expansionism plans in the same way they have been doing it since 1945, which is different than the way their fathers were doing it when they were establishing control.

For example, when the European societies (countries, monarchs, etc.) sent settlers to North America to colonize this landmass, or later when the western Europeans turned Americans started doing the same and expanded westerly, the individuals involved did not pay a few outlaw natives a few coins so they could establish a motive to attack their settlements and then use such breaches to annex their land. That is to say, first empty the territory from which they were fired at of any human activities or any opposition, then declare the territory a security buffer zone until finally annexing it, as the heirs of the old powers and their European settlers, whom they decided to have leave their homes in Europe and across the globe to form a “Jewish national home” in Palestine, are doing but by justifying their one-sided bias and immoral acts (wars, conquests, massacres, enslavement, etc.) under manifest destiny. Manifest destiny is rooted in the spread of moral value, republicanism, the American way, and American exceptionalism and not in arming outlaws, then asking them to resist, and after they strike, occupying or confiscating the land that they carried the resistance from until, in the course of time and things, annexing it. Most importantly, manifest destiny is not rooted in taking outlaws and capacitating them to oust their rulers, who are to begin with outlaws, from power and having the new outlaw turned law-abiding, teaching people how to observe the UN Charter or the UDHR as the heirs of the old powers are doing in countries across the globe, but in having reformers that are trustworthy, as Ivan IV Vasilyevich (also known as Ivan the Terrible) did after he was coronated Tsar and Grand Prince of all Russia in 1547.

Once again, I have no way of knowing how the heirs of the old powers (the western European families/dynasties that control the international order and the money supply of the world) are concluding that they are far superior in might to the Romans, the rulers of the various Islamic caliphates, and even their fathers and forefathers when history has demonstrated, so far, that when a group of people or an individual stands on the side of falsehood instead of truth, he could be wronging himself and no one else. What I do know is that the fortified castles that rulers or kings who prioritized their personal power and conscience over truth built to protect them failed to help them to get their way despite the resistance of others. And so, many questions beg answers. For one, how are the Western European families/dynasties that control the international order and the money supply of the world concluding that they could have their critical thinkers and servants (governments and international institutions) around the world regard themselves exempt from observing the work program suggested in the UN Charter or the UDHR and still transform the conditions and outcomes that matter to them when the more those critical thinkers and servants prioritize their emotions and personal beliefs over truth, the more their malice will become intense? The more the malice of their critical thinkers and servants becomes intense, the more the political debate that those servants would be influencing would be dividing people’s hearts instead of uniting them. Can the Western European families/dynasties that control the international order and the money supply of the world make their critical thinkers and servants (governments and international institutions) around the world portray that they are united and their hearts are not divided when all their actions are challenging truth and their results are telling a different story?

Ice is water that froze. Ice floats in water. A person can easily stand on an ice surface, but on a water surface it is not possible to do it. It is not possible to assess the water surface accurately. Most importantly, when a person stands on a piece of ice that is floating in water, he can only quantify how the changes affecting the floating part of the ice threaten his safety, but not the submerged part. What a person perceives while standing on a piece of ice that is floating in water may not accurately reflect the conditions occurring in the submerged part of the ice. In other words, how long a person can stand on a piece of ice floating in water depends on both surface and underwater conditions.

For example, when the families/dynasties that were controlling the European monarchs and republics in the 20th century wanted their Jewish nationals to conscript or contribute to the war efforts that they were in the midst of fighting to defeat the Ottoman Empire during WW1 in the Middle East, they promised the Jews who would be ready to join in and who would be ready to lay down their own lives so they could stay in power to establish for them (if they happened to live or for their surviving family members) a national Jewish home in Palestine. Similarly, when the families/dynasties that were controlling the European monarchs and republics in the middle of the 20th century wanted the United States to help them to defeat the Germans during WW2, they promised the families/dynasties that were controlling the United States to appoint them global policemen of the world if they were victors in exchange for the lost lives that American servicemen would be shedding on their behalf during this global war so they could stay in power.

I have no way of knowing what the heirs of the old powers plan to promise the various kings, presidents, etc. that they are counting on having their soldiers not switch sides and not refuse to lay down their own lives during future crises to avoid the setback that Genghis Khan dealt with when his half-brother and most trusted counselor and commander (i.e., General Belgutei) betrayed him and precipitated his slow but steady downfall. What I do know is that if the heirs of the old powers continue to let their various kings, presidents, etc., cross the line and prioritize their self-interests over truth or the standards suggested in the UN Charter and the UDHR, they would be obliging the soldiers whom they would be counting on their wisdom to lay down their lives so they could stay in power to choose between two impossible choices: loyalty to them or loyalty to their personal power and conscience.

Throughout history, survival meant making oneself useful to someone stronger. I have no way of knowing if the information that the critical thinkers and servants (governments and international institutions) of the heirs of the old powers are collecting about people around the world is insurance to defeat enemies but, at the same time, a threat because any power built on intelligence and deceit makes today’s ally tomorrow’s rival. What I do know is that there is a saying that goes, “More is lost with indecision than with a wrong decision.”

Once again, I have no way of knowing what this aforesaid saying means. What I do know is that when a volume of water freezes and becomes ice, its volume expands slightly only and does not expand in the same way that happens when water gets spilled on a surface.

I cannot know how the heirs of the old powers (the western European families/dynasties that control the international order and the money supply of the world) determine that their critical thinkers and servants (governments and international institutions) are just serving them and not considering themselves smarter than them after these heirs permitted them to regard themselves exempt from observing the work program suggested in the UN Charter or the UDHR or to hide wealth. What I do know is that if Pharaoh; King Nebuchadnezzar; Ivan IV Vasilyevich (also known as Ivan the Terrible); and last but not least, Bashar Al Assad, former President of Syria, had succeeded in preventing their chiefs, judges, and bankers from listening to their own voice and had made them listen to them or to the voice of reason, they would have been in power to this day. Could the heirs of the old powers ensure that their critical thinkers and servants (governments and international institutions) listen only to them and do not betray them when they demand no accountability from them, given that old habits die hard?

Surely, the heirs of the old powers (the western European families/dynasties that control the international order and the money supply of the world) must have a good reason to justify why they want the Middle East to stay dynamic and why they are indifferent about the threat of having the young, specifically in this landmass, be exposed to the disregard and anarchy that they are persuading, when they know very well that to kindle a fire or to ignite a large piece of wood, a person starts with lighting small pieces of wood first.

I have no way of knowing what kind of benefits the heirs of the old powers (the Western European families/dynasties that control the international order and the money supply of the world) and their critical thinkers and servants (governments and international institutions) are gaining from the different fires (wars, crises, conflicts, etc.) that they are lighting across the globe and if the widespread violence, destruction, mortality, etc. that they are reaping from such barbarous acts is making them see better or see anything for that matter. What I do know is that the longer the heirs of the old powers stay in favor of publicizing with their new settlers in the Middle East how they are abusing and killing the Palestinians, as compared to granting them the right to self-determination, the more the distrust that would be lurking in people’s hearts about how they are not really determined to build a united and just society bound by moral virtue and principles of good governance would be fading away—their power in the same way that happens whenever a piece of wood that is on fire and illuminating the surrounding area starts to lose its radiating light until total darkness fills the lighted space. Similarly, the longer the heirs of the old powers delay letting their new settlers (i.e., the Jews) in the Middle East and North Africa annex or colonize all the Muslim or Arab states they founded in the aftermath of WW2 in this landmass, since they do not want the inhabitants of those countries to cooperate with them or with their new settlers in accordance with the work program suggested in the UN charter or the UDHR, the more their indecisiveness would be wearing them out, as Jethro found was happening to Moses when he visited him. The Bible narrates in great detail what happens to Moses and his critical thinkers and servants when they refused to give up, regarding each one of them as having been created in the image of God.

In conclusion, in the real world, when a person places an ice cube in a pot of water, the ice will melt faster than in a cup of water. I have no way of knowing if the policies being employed by the heirs of the old powers (the Western European families/dynasties that control the international order and the global money supply) to rejuvenate their influence are actually consolidating their power or merely buying them time. What I do know is that all the kingdoms and empires that collapsed endured such an unfortunate fate only after knowledge and awareness had come to them, as I said before. Can the heirs of the old powers (the Western European families/dynasties that control the international order and the money supply of the world) manage with their critical thinkers and servants (governments and international institutions) around the world to create an alternative reality (with technology) that would make people want to stay with them and to let them have more powers than others, while the technology and the people that they are depending on to rejuvenate their power are a redundancy? Another question we need to monitor carefully to see how it unfolds!