Summary

Magicians are known for being creative and for performing brilliant tricks that baffle spectators. Bank robbers are known for executing foolproof plans that law enforcement agents fail to solve. Filmmakers are known for choreographing ideas to create the illusion that what people are watching is real. The United States (the global policeman of the world, a permanent member of the United Nations Security Council, and the principal custodian of the idea of freedom) launched a military operation on Venezuela on 03.01.2026 and snatched the president of this country from his bedroom in a well-played show of compellence that rivals the acts magicians, bank robbers, or movie directors devise or choreograph.

This latest international headline that the victors of WW2 (the Western European monarchs and republics) allowed their global policeman, the United States, to execute in Venezuela fulfills their dream of removing Maduro from power and demonstrating that they can dictate actions in this country and potentially anywhere in the world. However, like any action taken by individuals, this one has significant ramifications. For one, it leads people around the world to consider that when Gilad Erdan, the US ambassador to Israel, publicly shredded a copy of the UN Charter at a meeting of the United Nations General Assembly on May 10, 2024, he may have been justified in his actions. The world premiere that the United States government released on 03.01.2026 of the capture of Nicolas Maduro does not only provide undeniable proof about how the victors of WW2 or their heirs are trampling upon the norms suggested in the UN Charter but also about how they have become, with their global policeman, the United States, the threat the UN Charter was designed to prevent. Most importantly, this travesty provides a sneak preview of the ongoing dismantling of the international order, the ongoing sequestration of the idea of freedom, and, in particular, an early glimpse at the ongoing decline and fall of the Western European monarchs and republics.

This paper tries to support that people use religion, philosophy, and knowledge to organize behavior, which in turn they use to translate into interests. Unfortunately, after the heirs of the old powers ignored their fathers’ counsel about ensuring that their critical thinkers and servants (governments and international organizations), including their global policeman, the United States, observe the UN Charter or the UDHR and permitted all those stewards to regard themselves as exempt from this appeal, the world is now completely lawless and disordered.

It is not possible to create ordered relations out of a disordered relation without increasing the disorder further. Therefore, there is no guarantee that many people would be willing to lay down their own lives on behalf of the heirs of the old powers after the awareness or knowledge increased around the world without making significant political compromises; it is perhaps a lot safer to rely on diplomacy to create a reset as compared to engulfing the world in a new global war in the hope of walking out a victor to consequently stay in power. For example, the Board of Peace initiative is an attempt to build a new world order using a business mindset instead of a humane mindset to create ordered relations.

The goal of the paper is to argue that if the heirs of the old powers do not rethink their strategy and dismantle the United Nations and its organs before attempting to dismantle Venezuela, Iran, Hezbollah, ISIS, Russia, and others and then rebuild this global council the way their predecessors imagined—only requiring governments to provide political and economic solutions—they will probably lose their power and new families/dynasties will take their place.

Analysis

People around the world learned on Saturday, 03.01.2026, that the United States military struck inside Venezuela, captured President Nicolas Maduro, and extracted him to the US to face charges related to drug trafficking and other crimes.

Since the US attacked Venezuela, people from around the world are responding with a mix of condemnation and support. Some people suggested that no one should shed any tears, and others considered the attack a flagrant violation of Venezuela’s national sovereignty and international law. The Western European monarchs and republics, who emerged victorious in World War II (i.e., the victors of WW2), chose to remain silent and expressed minimal disapproval.

If we search in the playbook of history, we discover that a large number of the actions that the United States government carried out leading to the abduction of Nicolas Maduro were events or aspects that were already employed in the script that the United States government concocted in 1954 to overthrow President Juan Jacobo Arbenz Guzman of Guatemala from power. The United States feared that the communist links that Arbenz maintained and the social and land reforms that he was carrying out in Guatemala could weaken its political influence and economic interests further on this continent because they could serve as an example to inspire similar reforms throughout Latin America.

The synoptical collage that the United States cast out in 1954 to remove Arbenz from power and the plot that the United States played out to abduct Maduro in 2026 do not differ significantly from each other from the point of view of constructivism but differ in terms of realism. Each event happened at a point in the history of the world where people’s degree of cultural awareness or their categorization of thought was different.

Throughout history, the fittest dictated what type of rights the weak could enjoy. The fittest denied the weak the right to fulfill their dreams of improving social justice and used democratic mechanisms and scientific development to create systems that erode social justice instead of strengthening it. The United States’ attack on Maduro to protect its political and economic interests in Venezuela and Latin America is natural. All natural species, including animals, adhere to a living system where the fittest consistently prevent those who attempt to challenge their supremacy from doing so. Nicolas Maduro is really lucky that the US forces that captured him did not assassinate him as happened to Muammar Gaddafi at the hands of Libyan outlaws that the United States and NATO had empowered during the Libyan Revolution or humiliate him as happened to Saddam Hussein in the aftermath of the Iraqi-US War when the United States and NATO had an Iraqi tribunal try him and condemn him to death in 2005.

In my opinion, this unique military operation to remove Nicolas Maduro from power is unprecedented, as its orchestrators are unafraid of the potential impact on human sensibilities.

Since the establishment of the United States, its leaders have proven they are not novices in the political world. The American leaders showed their understanding of the consequences of upholding fragile frameworks and institutions, as well as the potential for stereotypes. They demonstrated an understanding of the importance of minimizing public attention and maintaining a low profile, particularly when dealing with issues that involved securing outcomes contrary to the principles (norms and laws) they claimed to uphold, as well as the significance of avoiding the election of ruthless and unpredictable leaders. In fact, the US leaders are witnessing the constant efforts that the Western European monarchs and republics have been dealing with since 1945 to change people’s perception about their colonizing past. Why did the present leaders of the United States kidnap a sitting president and undermine their predecessors’ efforts to demonstrate their support for freedom and avoid being a threat to it?

I have no way of knowing why the families and dynasties that control the United States (i.e., the heirs of the old powers) agreed to allow the US government to disregard many years of efforts to prove that this country is not a colonial power or a threat to liberal democracy, but rather a custodian of the idea of freedom. What I do know is that since the fall of the Soviet Union, the United States government’s political strategies seem to ignore, rather than strengthen, the mechanisms of the international order.

This reckless and uncontrollable behavior that the heirs of the old powers are permitting the United States to exhibit recently, which appears to be analogous to a person who decided to take the whole world as hostage and to have them walk on a ledge that would throw them into unending wars if they fall on one side and, on the other, into a mafia-style compellence or coercion order, cannot be about undoing the present and returning the world to pre-1945 standards but is a much darker, deeper plan.

Once again, I have no way of knowing how the families/dynasties that control the United States (the heirs of the old powers) are concluding that they would be safe and out of harm’s way if the world slips into either one of the aforementioned scenarios. In other words, even if the heirs of the old powers perceive the world accurately and believe that it is dominated by the strong, they may still be harmed if they ignore the rules-based international system their fathers told them to follow to continue shaping the conditions and outcomes that are important to them. When friends allow a drunk friend to drive and crash, they all risk severe injury.

The heirs of the old powers are not instructing their drivers (governments and international institutions), especially their global policeman, the United States, to drive sober or appoint philosopher kings to organize the world, suggesting two possible scenarios. Either they have a more sinister and profound plan, or their power stopped being of paramount importance to them.

All the wrong deeds that people commit and the negative consequences that they reap are meant to encourage individuals to think deeply and carefully about what might await them if they carry out the same acts. For this reason, when one studies how different people behave, he is likely to discover that the individual who deeply thought about the benefit of sticking to a principled stance or perspective in their earthly aspirations profited more than the individuals who did not think that it was important to learn from past experiences to guide future behavior or decisions and preferred to let a situational stance guide their action in the communities or the different systems of living that they maintain.

Given that this military attack that the United States (the global policeman) carried out to remove Nicolas Maduro from power was not about democracy or about addressing a principled stance but a situational stance, we can say that the families/dynasties that control the United States (the heirs of the old powers) believe that they would be more prosperous and not be hurt if peace in the world slips and either one of the two scenarios suggested earlier emerges. This conviction could be due to the heirs of the old powers not reflecting sufficiently on how easy it is for weaker people to take away from powerful people their wealth, status, and power; or perceiving that their power, wealth, and status are grafted into the fabric of the world in the same way many kings and emperors before them supposed they were until their dependent people rebelled against them and proved them to be wrong; or divine forces punished them according to biblical narrative.

If the world does not work all the time the way a person wants, then there is a good chance that if the heirs of the old powers continue to let their critical thinkers and servants (governments and international institutions) and their global policeman, the United States, implement political and economic solutions in UN member states that do not lead to a more stable and prosperous future, the hearts and minds of people across the globe will turn away from letting them be ambassadors of good will and responsible for securing their interests to start to want to rely on their own self-help to reduce their fear and want.

The heirs of the old powers rejuvenate their dominant role by undercutting the values they claim they stand for. Since 1945, the heirs of the old powers have been removing the leaders that they do want to stay in power by making their dependents undermine their popularity. When their soft efforts fail to make the leader or the regime that they want to consider their opinion before taking action on his own accept their instructions, they justify the use of force by mounting a case against the leader or the regime they want to be removed, in the same way it happened to Saddam Hussein and now Nicolás Maduro.

Building trust takes a significant amount of time. Throughout history, whenever a public official (king, president, chief, judge, cop, etc.) abused his authority (deceived, lied, used dirty tricks, tactics, corruption, etc.) to pursue his way despite the resistance of others, he failed to form a whole or to narrow the wedge that his actions were prompting among the majority, except among the group that was benefiting from his disregard. Old habits die slowly If the heirs of the old powers believe that they can let their critical thinkers and servants (governments and international institutions) and particularly their global policemen, the United States, violate the work program suggested in the UN Charter or the UDHR and still accumulate power after they commissioned the international organization named the United Nations in the last seventy years to export the idea of freedom (self-determination, human rights, democracy, social justice, etc.) to people around the world just as Jesus’s apostles were spreading the Gospel after his crucifixion, then one of two scenarios could be prompting the heirs of the old powers into perceiving that this strategy would amplify their power and not set them up or their successors to confront Jesus’s fate or his apostles. The first is if they can now control the human mind and easily enchant others to do what they want, unlike Jesus or his apostles, who had trouble keeping people with them. The second is whether they think that the advances made in technology or weapons and defense products can protect them.

With each new generation, our predecessors believed they were more powerful than the generation before them. The majority disturbed the peace, defamed religions or constitutions, and claimed to be on a moral quest to end injustice and improve human rights. This quest to reclaim liberty (justice, democracy, freedom, etc.) that people hand each other from one generation to the next has helped our predecessors, as it is now doing for us, to create and shape the lengthiest fantasy epic invented by mankind. However, the core characteristics of this “epic” have evolved or fallen under two overarching themes.

The first epic portrays the journey of a roguish hero, typically from a lower social class, who survives through his cunning in a corrupt society. As he matures, becomes more competent, and gains wisdom, he begins to reject the injustices prevalent in his surroundings. Next, he applies his wits and common sense to challenge his rulers, who consider themselves exempt from following established rules and who oppress the people.

The second epic depicts the adventure of people who follow a roguish hero turned charismatic leader (president, king, chief, etc.) to expose and ridicule his poor and brutal governing style after rising to power until a new roguish hero rises and stops his mismanagement and oppression.

If all the plans or plots that the old powers ramped up before WW2 erupted and the new plans that their heirs carried out since 1945 with their global policemen, the United States, to isolate, remove, or discourage chiefs, rulers, kings, etc. that they deemed their popularity or actions were threatening their power did not result in other chiefs, rulers, kings, etc. fearing them and surrendering freedom to them but being devoted to figuring out in a very deliberate way how to backstab them or to diminish their power, then there is a good chance that the disregard, corruption, deceit, etc. that the heirs of the old powers are increasingly permitting their critical thinkers and servants to carry out may be undermining their popularity until eventually their name is added to mankind’s moral quest to end injustice and oppression.

If, throughout history, the strongest leaders managed to convince their supporters to turn against their enemies but later struggled to keep those supporters loyal unless they improved accountability and shared benefits fairly, it’s difficult to see how the heirs of the old powers expect to achieve different results than those kings who continued to allow injustice and oppression with the help of their advisors and followers.

The laws (standards, norms) that people legitimize are the bridges that the fittest depend on to keep the people who stay with him and give him more power than others from eluding, teasing, or humiliating him. They are the eponymous magical instruments that grant power to the person who observes them. They are the specter that the individual who seeks to dominate others draws power from so others could trust him, reduce doubt or suspicious feelings about his intentions, and, most importantly, have them back away from resorting to situational stances to increase their happiness or power. The heirs of the old powers know all this. Their fathers (the old powers) ordered them to have their critical thinkers and servants (governments and international institutions) and particularly their global policeman, the United States, observe the work program suggested in the UN Charter or the UDHR to rejuvenate their power. Why are the heirs of the old powers behaving as if they have nothing to fear from all the disregard that they are permitting their critical thinkers and servants (governments and international institutions) and, particularly, their global policeman, the United States, to propel?

The numerous nations that the heirs of the old powers sent their global policemen to destroy their human progress since 1945 under the pretext of building them better, but with only the conversion to total illiberal democracies to show for it, caused the devastated societies to abhor the United States, not trust it. In fact, the societies that the heirs of the old powers and their global policeman, the United States, destroyed and embittered hate themselves for being naive and incapable of detecting how they were being misled with sweet promises and for not turning against them or their deception sooner. The situation is very serious and worrisome. When the nations they antagonized start to do what’s best for them and stop fearing the heirs of the old powers and the US, and begin to withdraw their obligation to follow the UN Charter, the heirs and the US won’t be able to follow through without force. This situation raises a new question. Are the heirs of the old powers setting the United States up to continue its global policeman role rather than relinquish it to the United Nations?

During WW2, when the idea to establish an international organization that would be responsible for building and maintaining post-conflict peace and stability around the world arose, many philosophers suggested that the implicit purpose of this intergovernmental organization was not to make people love their neighbors as they love themselves but to create a world government. To establish a world government, the heirs of the old powers (the victors of WW2) need to first tear up the independent political structures in the world and then, when societies (nations) become lost and without any directional worldview, bring them back together to establish this concept of a single political authority with jurisdiction over all the earth and humanity under the motto of “Let each of you look not only to his own interests but also to the interests of others.” (Philippians 2:4). Could this laid-back attitude that the victors of WW2 have been taking since 1945 toward seeing their global policeman, the United States, and their critical thinkers and servants (governments and international organizations) demonstrate that they are incapable of increasing peace and security in the world or enforcing the mechanisms suggested in the UN Charter to expose the weakness of those exclusive legal entities until they ultimately break down and recognize the importance of having a universal governance to stabilize the world by design?

Indeed, this blunt arrogance that the US government began to antagonize through its methods and means with their traditional allies in recent years resembles the case of a blind bull who became loose and started to run and strike people blindly without considering what happens to whomever he is striking and whoever he should evade. This reckless attitude that the US government has exercised in recent years cannot be accidental. This is because each time the allies of the United States allow the US government to antagonize and bully them, they give themselves a reason to coalesce and gang against them in the same way the Western European monarchs and republics ganged against Germany when its leaders and political class began to get ahead of the herd.

Hence, it would be naive to suppose that the individuals who are developing the national and foreign policies of the United States (the global policemen) are unaware that there is strength only in unity and that each time they act singly, they would be reciprocally imposing a coalition against them; this means that the US leaders who are developing the national and foreign policies of the United States (the global policemen) are acting in this antagonizing manner either by design or because the families/dynasties that control and command them do not know how empires fall. They know that empires collapse when leaders fail to protect their people and allow power imbalances, not from outside invasions or a lack of resources and military strength.

The families/dynasties that controlled the Roman Empire influenced citizens through a core concept that shaped thought and society. This core concept was order, law, duty, and civic and martial excellence. In addition, Rome was the custodian of those key concepts and the city that enforced them. The families/dynasties that were controlling the Roman Empire did not abandon the core concepts that they were depending on to rejuvenate their power and decided to switch and want to rely on the core concepts included in the Christian faith because they wanted to start to love their neighbors as themselves. They made the switch because they threw all the standards, norms, and laws legitimized to shape thought and society under the bus with their critical thinkers and servants (chiefs, judges, public officials). Even after the families and dynasties controlling the Roman Empire began to shape thought and society based on Christian principles, they did not prevent their critical thinkers and servants (chiefs, judges, and public officials) from continuing to misuse these concepts for their own interests. In other words, the families and dynasties controlling the Roman Empire expected to gain benefits from having citizens build a Christian community, but this did not reverse the damage caused by their refusal to improve democratic control within the empire. When citizens became fed up with the families/dynasties that were controlling the Roman Empire and their critical thinkers and servants (chiefs, judges, and public officials) telling them not to believe their own eyes about how they are abusing their authority and how they are incapable of translating the core concepts of the Christian faith into peace and security, they withdrew their obligation to obey them. Accordingly, when citizens refused to be united with the families/dynasties that were controlling the Roman Empire and their critical thinkers and servants (chiefs, judges, and public officials), as all the Germans were united with their leaders before WW2 erupted and ready to die for a wonderful Germany, the Roman Empire split first in two and then disappeared. After embracing Christianity, the families/dynasties that controlled the Roman Empire could not create the right checks and balances among citizens or organize citizen behavior into beneficial conduct.

If we superimpose the history of the Roman Empire onto the narrative that the old powers (the victors of World War II) began writing in 1945 and that their heirs continue to write today, we discover that the events that have transpired so far are closely related. The families/dynasties that control the international order and the money supply of the world (i.e., the victors of WW2) have core concepts that shape thought and society, which are equivalent to those employed by the families/dynasties that once controlled the Roman Empire. Those concepts are freedom, self-determination, social justice, human rights, democracy, etc. The United States is regarded as the custodian of those concepts, just as Rome was the custodian of the Roman ones. The families/dynasties that control the international order and the money supply of the world (i.e., the victors of WW2) are unable to stabilize the international order in accordance with the core concepts (ideas of freedom, self-determination, etc.) legitimized in the UN Charter, constitutions, and other international treaties since 1945. This situation is occurring because the heirs of the old powers are allowing their global policeman, the United States, along with their critical thinkers and servants (governments and international organizations), to consider themselves exempt from adhering to the standards, norms, and laws outlined in the aforementioned framework, similar to how the families and dynasties that controlled the Roman Empire acted before they transitioned to Christianity.

If the ongoing dismantling of the ideas of freedom and self-determination by governments and international organizations continues, and if the United States persists in undermining the global system while pursuing national and foreign policies based on situational stances, it is highly likely that the heirs of the old powers will unite the world to recreate the same history that the families and dynasties of the Roman Empire wrote, which ultimately led to their downfall, rather than creating a new narrative.

First, the global policeman role that the United States has been playing since 1945 would be taken away from its different national institutions and transferred either to the United Nations or divided between two units of authorities, just as happened during the Roman Empire, when the empire was split in two.

Second, regardless of whether the global policeman role is transferred solely to the United Nations or divided between two units of authorities, as occurred during the Roman Empire, both options would fail to persuade the officials responsible to establish the necessary checks and balances to align their behavior with the interests of the heirs of the old powers or successors or to enforce the standards among citizens.

Once again, I have no way of knowing how the heirs of the old powers or their successors expect to not rewrite the same history that the Roman Empire wrote after they decided to let their critical thinkers and servants (governments and international institutions) abdicate their responsibility to develop partnerships that transfer standards in each UN member state and not partnerships intended to loot each other’s resources and progress, including teaching each other to be loyal to their political parties or ideological dogmas instead of servants to their electorate.

In markets the power of a seller is not established based on cleverness, price, or control over market share but on the ability of the seller to project trust and an image of humility. This is because people do not easily forget who shatters their trust, as I said before. Despite their withdrawal from the role of international rule setter and the transfer of this responsibility to the United States, Great Britain and the other Western European monarchs and republics have been unable to change public opinion regarding the exploitation they inflicted on the societies they once dominated before World War II erupted.

Throughout history, every society (kingdom or empire) that outsourced its security to a powerful society had their protectors later deal shrewdly with them or their descendants. Joseph’s descendants in Egypt suffered greatly as their numbers increased. The Bible narrates that the Egyptians oppressed Joseph’s descendants when new kings, to whom Joseph meant nothing, assumed power.

The decision by Great Britain and other Western European monarchs and republics (the victors of WW2) to withdraw from their role as international rule setters and transfer this responsibility to the United States could be part of a power consolidation strategy devised by these old powers to shift blame onto the United States when poor political policies fail. But this strategy doesn’t ensure that those they outsourced their security to would stay with them and allow them to have more power than others when they become successful and numerous.

I have no way of knowing how the heirs of the old powers (the families/dynasties that control the Western European monarchs and republics) inferred that all the people that their fathers vanquished during WW2 and the ones that they freed when WW2 was regarded as having ended, and to whom they outsourced their production security (militarily, economically, institutionally, etc.) but kept wealth and a finger on the firing pin, would make people stay with them and would not break away and decide to deal with them shrewdly when they become numerous.

What I do know is that the political and economic policies that the heirs of the old powers (the families/dynasties that control the Western European monarchs and republics) have permitted their critical thinkers and servants (governments and international organizations) and their global policeman, the United States, to adopt in UN member states have maintained their role so far and given them leverage that demonstrates that they are creating an asymmetric balance instead of equilibrium between people. For example, their strategies have divided the world into two spheres, rather than fostering balanced relationships and opportunities among all members of the human family through the political and economic solutions created by the heirs of the old powers. One sphere uses political pressure and intimidation to shape thought and society (case of China, Russia, India, Iran, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, etc.), and another sphere uses financial and economic pressures or intimidation to shape thought and society (case of the United States, Great Britain, France, Italy, Australia, etc.).

Throughout history, whenever politics controlled money in the state (case of China) or money controlled politics in the state (case of the United States), the result that each system reaped was utter chaos when the individuals involved departed from enforcing the plans, legitimized, and abused their authority. Political leaders who were eager for power and fame, and who encouraged acts of civil resistance or disobedience both within their systems and in those they perceived as threats to their power, ultimately found that their misguided actions led to significant changes in their societies that contributed to their downfall.

Accordingly, as long as rulers and kings fail to seek a more just and peaceful coexistence among peoples, individuals will continue to prioritize situational stances over principled perspectives. We can say that our successors will resemble us, living as strangers and refusing to abandon their animalistic behavior to embrace a humane life guided by the bond of love in social and political matters.

If the heirs of the old powers, their critical thinkers and servants (governments and international organizations), and their global policeman, the US, keep driving the world crazy so that they and those with capital and expansionism agendas can exploit it while saying that no one can buy them out and their goal is only to fix or end political and economic corruption, then we cannot expect that our successors will be merciful in the future. This is because the more people become tired of being pushed and tired of paying off politicians, the more the wealthy and influential among them will be turning against the political and economic frameworks that the heirs of the old powers are legitimizing through their critical thinkers and servants (governments and international organizations) and seeking to seize power to handle their affairs themselves. This scenario means that our successors will likely be divided into two groups: one group that seeks to dismantle state-imposed restrictions by manipulating emotions, fears, and racism, and another group that aims to implement comprehensive protectionist methods to enhance the welfare state and social services, as we have been doing since 1945.

For example, the heirs of the old powers spent the last seventy-five years building various international intergovernmental institutions, such as the United Nations, the World Bank, the IMF, the EU, NATO, the African Union, the Arab League, etc., so they could use them as instruments to maintain their strength and stability. Following the ceasefire signed by the Israelis and Palestinians regarding the Israeli-Hamas war that erupted in early October 2023, the families/dynasties competing for dominance in Gaza chose not to utilize the institutions that the heirs of the old powers have developed since 1945, opting instead to create new intergovernmental organizations to ensure compliance with the ceasefire and facilitate reconstruction (i.e., Board of Peace).

If our successors don’t choose to be kind in their relationships as our past predecessors were and instead act like we do now—caught between building and destroying—then the successors of the heirs of the old powers will only try to reach agreements through force, not dialogue. In other words, the successors of the heirs of the old powers would be fighting to build on top of the existing international system that they spent the last seventy-five years building its various international intergovernmental institutions, such as the United Nations, the World Bank, the IMF, the EU, NATO, the African Union, the Arab League, etc., and if they fail to prevent its deconstruction and absorption by new intergovernmental institutions such as BRICS, Gaza’s Board of Peace, corporations, etc., they will stay on top of such new institutions as well.

Force is a rapid and efficient method to subjugate or gain peace. In fact, Saint Augustine, in his work The City of God, suggested that “for what else is victory than the conquest of those who resist us?” However, Force is a knife with two edges. On one side, force allows a person to achieve their goals despite opposition from others, but on the other side, it creates enemies and attracts many friends who seek to further their interests. This scenario means that the successors of the heirs of the old powers would not be able to avoid a global divide between those who would balance against them and those who would share in the spoils, as in ancient Rome, when one group claimed that a god created the world and gave humans a superior status to animals, and another group rejected this view and used their power and conscience to dominate others.

In the past, the rulers of the Roman Empire, Islamic Caliphates, Ottoman Empire, etc. failed to get rid of sectarian mentality, so the strategies that they were employing to build an integrated military or political and economic force so its instruments would enable them to impose their conditions and deepen unity failed. The social order of the aforementioned world powers continued to fluctuate between periods of war and peace, fear and hope, defeat and victory, with a large number of citizens remaining poor while a small number enjoyed prosperity. One after the other, their policies inevitably drained their power, causing internal collapse. In this situation, since the world order has not changed smoothly since the advent of written communication, we can assert that if the heirs of the old powers or their successors continue to ignore criticism or prevent their critical thinkers and servants (governments and international institutions) from adhering to the principles of the UN Charter or the UDHR, peace and security will deteriorate further until the world order completely fails, collapses, and is replaced by a new one.

Many questions beg answers. For one, can the heirs of the old powers or their successors manage to retain people’s loyalty and maintain more power than others after allowing their critical thinkers and servants (governments and international institutions) to become aware of and witness the tragedies of humanity and the suffering of nations, primarily due to their refusal to be truthful about their commitment to improving unity?

I have no way of knowing how the heirs of the old powers intend to convince people that the human rights violations that they are permitting their critical thinkers and servants (governments and international institutions) to carry out are necessary to ward off the encroachment of baseness, injustice, misconduct, and moral depravity, when their critical thinkers and servants are not producing outcomes that make people perceive that the laws or standards that they are constantly legitimizing and enforcing are improving social justice but are instead benefiting and protecting the individuals involved. Throughout history, might made right, but a bully never keeps his victims submissive forever. They accept it for a while, but after a while, they start to develop their capabilities and either oust him from power or kill him.

Since the fall of the Soviet Union in the 1900s, the heirs of the old powers and their global policeman, the United States, began to impose a hegemony on the world in a clear, immoderate way. This situation prompts people to question not just why countries challenge the old powers and the United States, but also what issues the old powers and the United States face with the societies they have bullied or destroyed.

If the heirs of the old powers and their global policeman, the United States, continue to perceive that there are rising powers they need to deter to maintain their superiority, they will be unable to prevent the societies threatened by their hostile behavior from transforming that conviction into a security or military dimension. Whenever people recognized that their personal power and conscience could protect them better than staying in a group with others, their immediate neighbor became their staunch enemy. In other words, they stop deferring or outsourcing their security to their neighbor.

When children are playing and one child engages in inappropriate behavior, the other children present often grab his shirt to pull him back or to stop him. Are the heirs of the old powers and their global policeman, the United States, feeling overtaken financially, economically, and politically by the societies that they vanquished during WW2 and the societies they freed when it was regarded as having ended? Is all the skirmishing, bullying, and insecurity that swept the world because they are pulling back the societies that have overtaken them so they do not cling to dust?

As long as the heirs of old powers allow their critical thinkers and servants (governments and international institutions) to maintain their sanctity while masquerading as benevolent entities and resisting any form of change, humanity will remain trapped in its savagery, regardless of the number of new leaders, great men, reformers, commanders, or valiant conquerors that emerge in the future; the path forward has already been established. The heirs of old powers will continue to search for ways that would translate their fruitless efforts to stay in power into something that others could accept until they reach the end of the line and either choose the Samson option to prevent others from enjoying their power or agree to be absorbed by another growing power so life would go on.

I cannot predict which of the two scenarios the heirs of old powers will choose to avoid their collapse: continuing to destroy the institutions their fathers built or undermining the trust, confidence, and relationships that people rely on. What I do know is that if the heirs of old powers want to ward off defeat and stay in power, they need to be capable of warding off danger from them in the same way a buckler wards off or deflects a sword attack.

Throughout history, the rulers and kings who strove with their wealth and their lives to teach their critical thinkers, servants, and citizens how to use tricks, lies, and force to ward off danger ultimately faced defeat and fell at the hands of the very people they were teaching. In fact, by teaching their critical thinkers and servants (chiefs, judges, public officials) and citizens to use tricks, lies, and force to ward off danger, the rulers and kings hastened their own decline and downfall. Only when rulers and kings accepted the need to translate power into rules or truth did they succeed in converting the principles they spoke into actionable strategies.

Considering how many times it has already been shown throughout history that observing laws and speaking the language of principle helps to ease envy, quell jealousy, relieve the distress of the afflicted, and calm the sorrow of the poor and the oppressed is far better than letting circumstances and temporary adjustments (wars, hostilities, force, and deceit) provide such appeasement, as the heirs of the old powers appear to be increasingly doing since 1945, I think it is fair to say that the heirs of the old powers could be trapped in resolving situational stances or perspectives since their fathers dismantled their empires and counselled them to prioritize the work program suggested in the UN Charter or the UDHR to not experience the challenges that they confronted when they were doing the same and not resolving how to make people love them more.

The old powers focused on specific circumstances, neglected the bigger picture, emerged victorious in two global wars, and avoided their downfall, which allowed them to pass on their power, wealth, and status to their heirs after World War II. Can the heirs of the old powers or their successors be as lucky and ward off danger as their fathers and forefathers did after they stopped relying on rules to get their way despite the resistance of others and started to rely on fear, or will their superiority be taken away from them in the same way it was taken from the descendants of the founders of the Roman Empire, Islamic Caliphates, the Ottoman Empire, etc.?

I do not know the answer to the aforementioned question. I know that God, with all the angels, prophets, and messengers sent to earth, could not integrate the infinite circumstances, capabilities, and differences occurring across time and place to guide people to the right path and prevent them from remaining in generational horror. The same can be said about the families/dynasties that were controlling the Roman Empire, Islamic Caliphates, Ottoman Empire, Soviet Union, etc. The families/dynasties that controlled those empires did not know how to renew themselves or the ideas they relied on to maintain power and earn the trust of people willing to sacrifice their lives for them or their beliefs.

When God and all His angels, prophets, and messengers appealed to people to focus on principles (standards and norms) to prevent their neighbors from taking away their worldly gains, those who ignored these pleas lacked satellites, drones, and technology that would have allowed them to assess their situations in real time, resulting in temporary adjustments that did not reduce the perceived danger.

The heirs of the old powers might believe that their fortresses, along with the satellites, drones, and technology they control, can protect them from experiencing the same burdens that their predecessors faced when they prioritized situational stances and temporary adjustments over principled perspectives. But to do so, they would need to transcend worldly limitations and rise above the boundaries of time and space.

I have no way of knowing how the heirs of the old powers plan to transcend worldly limitations to avoid being weighed down by the envy and jealousy of their helpers and the general public. I know the heirs of the old powers cannot be at war forever, and they will soon see that the military hostilities they allow their critical thinkers and servants to engage in to bolster their expansionism cannot last. New types of relationships would be needed to keep people with them and give them more power.

Before WW2 erupted, whenever disregard and contempt in the world deepened, rulers and kings guarded against their impulses by reviving interest in free will and morality. Regrettably, all the revivals that the heirs of the old powers and their critical thinkers and servants carried out to persuade people to improve morality failed to increase their power and capabilities. This was because the type of awakening that was carried out was not intended to improve truth, freedom, democracy, collective security, or self-determination, but rather to deepen competitiveness, instability, imbalance, violence, conflicts, and their control.

In this context, since this last impulsive action that the United States (the global policeman) carried out in Venezuela has assassinated its raison d’être and started the countdown of its ultimate collapse, I do think that the heirs of the old powers will be working on shrinking or resizing the role that the United States started to exercise in the international order in the near future to have a more sophisticated or smooth operator carry out this global policeman role. In this context, hence, the unpredictability that the United States (the global policeman) has demonstrated since the fall of the Soviet Union in the 1990s has been rough and unsophisticated; it is highly likely that the heirs of the old powers (the Western European monarchs and republics) would be making the case to revive interests in multilateralism or collective governance as an alternative to having another great power exercise exclusive hegemony over the international order. Therefore, the only effective strategy that the heirs of the old powers can rely on to renew their influence and maintain popularity is to deceive (bluff) people into believing that creating new approaches for collective decision-making is the best solution. There is no better way to persuade people to back down and allow the heirs of the old powers to continue shaping the conversation about reducing fear and want than for the United Nations to assume the role of a global policeman.

It appears that the heirs of the old powers are caught in the same complex predicament that historically led to the decline of kingdoms and empires. This predicament involved choosing between continuing to bluff their way in and out of the situational circumstances they were relying on to rejuvenate their power or focusing on studying historical events to understand the role that truth played in empowering those who preferred to concern themselves with their neighbors’ actions.

The heirs of the old powers are figuring out which step could delay their downfall, provided they do not return to the work program their fathers suggested in the UN Charter or the UDHR. One question is worth brainstorming on: in a world that never stops changing, would the United States, with all its arrogance and evil, be a better servant to the heirs of the old powers in the future, or could the United Nations, as most governments and international institutions are saying, serve the interests of the world better?

I do not know the answer to the aforementioned question. What I do know is that the old powers are the ones who created those two personhoods and who empowered or elevated both. Furthermore, upon reflection, we discover that it was the United States, not the United Nations and its destructive ideologies, that enabled them to maintain a foothold in the old world and a foothold in the Vanguard, particularly after this intergovernmental organization transitioned into an economic entity.

Once again, I have no way of knowing why the heirs of the old powers decided to grant rights to the United Nations (World Bank, IMF, EU, NGOs, banks, foundations, etc.) to be economic operators when all the economies of nations are built on protectionism. In addition, it was the old powers (the victors of WW2) who freed the societies they had vanquished during WW2 and those they dominated when the war was considered to have ended, empowering these freed societies to fulfill the obligations outlined in the UN Charter. It would be naive to suppose that the old powers (the victors of WW2) gave the United Nations power to enforce the UN Charter or the UDHR on themselves because power, status, and wealth remain of paramount importance to them.

Furthermore, hence, for as long as wealth (money, capital, resources, human power, and military weapons) stays concentrated in the Western world and the global payment system stays operated and controlled equally by the Western world, we cannot say that the old powers (the victors of WW2) intended for the international organization named the United Nations and others to be providing economic and political solutions that distribute outcomes on equal rights but to develop a full and complete structure of a world order under law. This phenomenon makes it easy to quantify the cause of the insecurity that swept the world recently.

Accordingly, given the political, economic, and social relations that have emerged in the world since 1945, it is clear that the heirs of the old powers did not intend for the societies that they vanquished during WW2 and the societies that were freed in the aftermath of WW2 to share outcomes with them based on the principles of equal rights but among themselves only; thus, we can say that the insecurity that swept the world was by design and not by accident.

In other words, the shifting away of the United Nations and international organizations from coordinating the work of governments in UN member states as suggested in the UN Charter to providing economic, political, and social solutions could not have been by accident but by design, and so was the volatile behavior that the United States started exercising on the international order since the fall of the Soviet Union. Those two actions were deliberate strategies devised and implemented by the old powers, similar to how companies draft and execute plans to enhance their business operations.

When companies execute plans, they typically aim to simplify operations to increase profit. This usually involves making changes that result in facilities closing down and staff losing their jobs. Companies often conceal the operations they plan to close in order to attribute the blame for their actions to the weak market rather than their own planned projects.

As I mentioned earlier, the precarious behavior exhibited by the United States in recent years is not turning this country into the center of the world; instead, it is empowering people globally to become stronger, more successful, and more prosperous than ever, thereby diminishing its own power. This phenomenon is because the security of one person is forgone by his neighbor. If the fittest or their successors were capable of making the weak forgo their security, we would all be speaking Hebrew or Aramaic today.

Abu Nuwas (756–814) was a classical Arabic poet who lived in the 8th century during the first years of the Abbasid Caliphate. He is best known for his wine poetry. In one of his poems, Abu Nuwas criticizes a philosopher for questioning his drinking habits by telling him, “You have learned some things, but much more escapes you!”

I do not know how much the individuals determining national and foreign policies in the United States know about human nature. Therefore, these individuals believe that everyone who applauds their achievements, even if those achievements do not align with the UN Charter or the UDHR, will support them when needed. What I do know is that since people began using their knowledge and human ingenuity to enhance their security, they have tended to trust changes (whether structural or non-structural) that they believe will increase their happiness, while distrusting changes that result in outcomes they do not like. For example, many people are prepared to accept that AI could rebel against humanity in the future, but when Moses, Jesus, the Islamic prophet Muhammad, Buddha, etc., lived, most people likely did not foresee that the ideas those individuals preached would cause the world’s ongoing insecurity.

In this context, hence the heirs of the old powers cannot let the United States (their global policemen) collapse the United Nations and let private companies aided by artificial intelligence rejuvenate their power because people around the world stopped being ready to postpone their happiness to the afterlife as they were doing when religion was strong, or let the United Nations weaken their power after they transformed this intergovernmental organization from being a platform intended to coordinate the work of UN member states to secure the UN goals among the societies that they vanquished during WW2 and the societies that they freed in the aftermath of WW2 into a political organization and an economic operator that its staff members and the societies that were vanquished during WW2 and the societies that were freed in the aftermath of WW2 use to shield themselves from their exploitation and the exploitation of their enforcer (the United States), this means that the heirs of the old powers have a choice to make. They can work toward deconstructing the United States and the United Nations and task private companies with administering the international order following the irreparable damage that they have done to their credibility, or they can work toward influencing political changes that would bring to power in the United States and the United Nations officials who are less ambitious and stupider so they can keep their dominant control unchallenged.

Once again, I have no way of knowing how the heirs of the old powers expect the United States and the United Nations to maintain their power after they outsourced their security to those two legal entities with an endless appetite for power. I know they cannot maintain their strength and security using the UN Charter’s ideas unless the United States becomes a global policeman instead of a global highwayman, and the United Nations becomes a global coordinator instead of a global usurper. Such an outcome also means that if the United Nations continues as an economic operator and spreads false expectations to keep itself relevant, the heirs of the old powers will be unable to rectify the imbalances that this non-state actor is creating worldwide. This situation is because kindness does not always create love, but sometimes it creates hatred and envy. Only when the heirs of the old powers dismantle the United Nations and reconstruct this legal entity according to the blueprint suggested by the UN’s founding fathers can the United States, acting as their global policeman, interpret their implicit goals into results that differ from those achieved since 1945, culminating in the last lawless action committed by the United States in Venezuela at the start of 2026 to maintain its superiority.

People try to use the knowledge, awareness, and consciousness they gain from changing nature to organize the information they acquire. Until the end of WW2, people were organizing the knowledge, awareness, and consciousness that they were gaining by relying on two ethical systems called “philosophy” and “religion.” Since 1945, people are no longer relying on philosophy or religion to organize the knowledge, awareness, and consciousness that they are gaining from the changes that they carry in reality but on science or artificial intelligence. In other words, people do not want religion or philosophy to play a role in the organization of their behavior, but they want artificial intelligence and technology to guide this parameter. People prefer technology to create an ethical system for their daily behavior instead of using the knowledge, awareness, and consciousness they gain from changing nature.

People derive their interests from their behavior rather than from the knowledge and awareness they gain. I am uncertain about the extent to which the heirs of the old powers have benefited from the UN’s political, economic, and social solutions designed to organize people’s behavior, allowing them to start reaping interest from all the investments made in this international organization since its formation in 1945. What I do know is that in 2026, the heirs of the old powers sent their global policeman, the United States, to Venezuela to arrest Nicolas Maduro, the president of Venezuela, and to bring him to face charges for crimes against humanity, but in 2015, when a UN staff member refused to let his UN agency use the UN bank account to launder money in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, the United Nations accused him of threatening a subordinate, placed him on administrative leave, and ended his contract. In 2022, the corruption scheme that these UN staff members accused their senior managers of running was finally revealed, and instead of the heirs of the old powers (Western European monarchs and republics) and their global policeman, the United States, arresting those senior UN managers and sending them to jail, they just ended their contracts and followed the rule that gives UN staff certain privileges and protections while they do their jobs.

The above example illustrates that the heirs of the old powers are not treating similar situations equally. This hypocrisy, or the apparent doubling down in the way the heirs of the old powers are cracking down on or treating rogue servants (the president of Venezuela, UN officials, the president of France, the president of Turkey, China, Russia, etc.), is strange.

Indeed, violating international law to remove Nicolas Maduro from power could benefit the world, as he is preventing mankind from profiting from Venezuela’s resources; however, the same cannot be said about the UN officials’ disregard at this global council. In other words, we cannot say that the decision of the heirs of the old powers (Western European monarchs and republics) and their global policeman, the United States, to end the contract of the UN senior managers who were using the UN bank account in UN member states to launder money is not obstructing the course of the political and economic life cycle in the world, and therefore, it is justifiable to just send them home and not imprison them for their ill action or compensate the UN staff member who refused to abuse his authority and have the UN become a market to buy and sell power. This argument is because removing Maduro from the world adds to the political and economic life cycle in the world deeds that benefit the heirs of the old powers, but the latter (letting UN officials go unpunished and not compensating the UN staff who refused to prioritize his self-interests as his supervisors were doing) adds deeds that shrink their power.

Once again, I have no way of knowing how the heirs of the heirs of the old powers (Western European monarchs and republics) and their global policeman, the United States, are concluding that uprooting leaders who refuse to observe the standards suggested in the UN Charter or the UDHR is helpful to transform the conditions and outcomes that matter to them, but keeping UN officials who violated UN financial rules and regulations from 2013 to 2022 and then sending the individuals involved home when they are caught is useful to rejuvenate their power. The international order is more like a ship, which can be sunk by a small hole, than a building that can be demolished and rebuilt at will.

It looks as if the heirs of the old powers (Western European monarchs and republics) and their global policeman, the United States, lack the knowledge of how systems work and how to extract energy from people’s constructive energy, rather than their destructive energy. For example, the circulatory system in the human body does not prioritize or exclude certain organs but engages them all on an equal basis.

God knew how to let time and space be fundamental elements in extracting energy from the constructive energy of the universe, not destructive energy. God knew that the mind, or the memory, can never be imprisoned, and therefore, he deemed that keeping the human body busy distracts the mind and contains its limitless capability within the boundary of the body.

Hence, the heirs of the old powers (Western European monarchs and republics) seem to disagree with God’s suggested way to contain the mind and instead think that prioritizing certain societies over others or delegating to technology the role of the human body in sustaining the survival needs of this mass is better to rejuvenate their power. Then, one of two scenarios could be prompting them to act in this irrational way. The first is whether their power, wealth, and status stopped being of paramount importance to them. The second is if they perceive they are invincible.

I do not know which scenario between the aforementioned two is prompting the heirs of the old powers to act in this irresponsible way. What I do know is that in 2023, the ambassador of the state of Israel shredded the international rule-based world order that the fathers of the heirs of the old powers legitimized in the UN Charter in front of the entire world.

I have no way of knowing if the families/dynasties that were controlling the Roman Empire, Islamic caliphates, and Ottoman Empire, leading to the ousting of Nicolás Maduro, had one of their servants stand up in front of them and shred the legal system that they enforced to reap interest in it in the same way this courageous ambassador did in 2023. What I do know is that since 2023 the heirs of the old powers have been refusing to reflect on this great moment in the history of mankind that the ambassador of the state of Israel carried out in 2023 to prevent their critical thinkers and servants (governments and international institutions) from returning back to them the good that their fathers did by dismantling their empires and freeing the world with a merciless stab in the back in the same way the families/dynasties that the Roman Empire, Islamic caliphates, and Ottoman Empire led to the ousting of Nicolas Maduro reaped from their critical thinkers and servants.

Throughout history, the generous became poor, the supportive became exhausted, the kind became broken, and the strong did what they wanted, and the weak suffered what they must. The world did not reject the people who were excluded, betrayed, poor, exhausted, or broken, but their conditions and defeat gave them the strength to understand in a realistic way how they should stop blindly trusting or giving without taking. I can only hope that before transgression and selfishness in the world rise to higher levels and people do oust the heirs of the old powers or their successors from power in the same way people’s distrust with the families/dynasties that their strongholds could not protect them endured, that the heirs of the old powers would take time to reflect on what Ibn Khaldun wrote more than seven hundred years ago, thus sparing them from standing alone as Nicolas Maduro is now doing, remembering the evenings he sacrificed and the money he generously gave and the kind words he offered without expecting anything in return while his critical thinkers and servants are spreading his secrets and distorting his image. Ibn Khaldun suggested that kindness or force does not breed obedience only but hatred and envy as well. He, therefore, said that freedom should be regulated not because giving is detrimental but because some people cannot handle generosity.

I cannot understand how the heirs of the old powers expect to stop people from justifying their actions or convincing themselves that the disregard they observe in governments and international institutions is for their benefit, especially when both goodness and weakness can lead to not only obedience but also hatred. People resent the tools that the heirs of the old powers allow them, tools that distance them from what the natural world (or God) intended for the species to sustain its continuity. People want to use tools meant to improve their well-being to weaken the heirs of the old powers.

In conclusion, I cannot determine whether the heirs of the old powers will ever acknowledge their responsibility for the global insecurity that has arisen, allowing them to rebuild their self-image before it is too late. Most importantly, they should recognize that their power comes not from military superiority, wealth, status, or offerings, but from their mind, wisdom, and understanding, qualities they have lacked since 1945. This phenomenon is due to the fact that individuals are unique and cannot be treated uniformly. People do not forget, abandon their past, or relinquish their historical responsibilities, especially when they are defeated. In fact, even when people live under an autocratic regime, they tolerate and do not rise up against their leaders because of psychological attachment or allegiance to their national identity, including commitment to reproducing their historical superiority rather than fear. In addition, when they are being dominated by a foreign power, they pretend to be defending and sympathizing with their subjugators, but deep down they are working on liberating themselves from his subjugation. When the heirs of the old powers let their critical thinkers (governments and international institutions) make people realize that they are seeking to achieve their aspirations, goals, and interests by inviting every member of the human family in the aftermath of WW2 to abandon their traditions and stay with them, it does not improve their security but accelerates their collapse. At the end of the Cold War, all the walls that the Americans and Russians in Europe had built came tumbling down, thus supporting what Victor Hugo, a French writer, once said: “When the time of an idea comes, it is more powerful than all the armies in the world.” It is irresistible.”

Naivety comes at a high price, just as this UN staff member paid when he believed in the determination of the victors of WW2 to reduce fear and want but later lived to regret it. In this context, only time could tell if the heirs of the old powers would succumb to bitterness and become a distorted version of themselves, just as this UN staff member was when he agreed to protect their interests instead of his own interests, as his supervisors were doing. Alternatively, if the heirs of the old powers would accept the lesson that he learned about human nature when he prioritized good over evil, only to discover that not everyone can translate good into gratitude or kindness, but rather, a good number of people can only translate good into evil!