When force (human capital, geographical advantages, cultural evolution) is not a viable option, ahead of the fittest, to create ordered relations and in this way keep his dominance, exploitation, or subjugation, the fittest bunkers under the idea of good (God, freedom, social justice, human rights, etc.) and tricks to persuade the weak to obey him. In other words, the fittest start to use ideas such as laws, standards, norms, impartiality, separation of powers and rights, etc. as magnets to make them into weapons, which would create the same effect as force.

Tricks are great ways to hide the truth. Magicians use tricks to hide small objects. Certain individuals use tricks to hide wealth. Is it possible to use deceptive tactics to obscure the fact that colonization could have ended after World War II with the granting of independence to the societies dominated by the principal victors of the war (the old powers), while in reality, colonization (domination, exploitation, or subjugation) continues to thrive today? If yes, how?

It is important that readers keep in mind that the word “principal victors of WW2” in this work refers only to the old powers, or the Western European monarchs and republics. The United States is not regarded as the “principal victor of WW2” in this work, nor is any other UN member state. In physics, it is suggested that energy cannot be created or destroyed, but it can be transferred and transformed. As of 1945, the only people who are transferring their “power, wealth, and status” voluntarily or involuntarily to new people are the individuals who are taking a vow of obedience to become priests in the Catholic Church and the ones who are dying for their faith. Vatican statistics report a decline in clergy worldwide. The same can be said about those who are striving or struggling with a praiseworthy aim to the point of dying to secure the UN goals. In this work, the United States is regarded as the country that the principal victors of WW2, i.e., the old powers, appointed (promoted) to play the role of the new “global policemen” of the world after the new spoils that they gained from WW2 made it possible for them to transfer (delegate) this responsibility to this country. Since 1945, the United States has been responsible for securing the explicit war aims laid out in the UN Charter on behalf of the families/dynasties that control the western European monarchs and republics (i.e., to ensure that the rest of the UN member states observe them). This role does not include latitude to interfere in securing the implicit goals that the families/dynasties that control the Western European monarchs and republics (or the principal victors of WW2) hide from everyone.

The trick that people depend mostly on to persuade each other to believe things that are not true is called “dazing.” Dazing is a powerful performance or manipulating art because it is capable of distorting or stimulating the senses in an unparalleled way (i.e., in terms of its ability to make people start to see in different ways).

People usually use two methods to daze each other with accounts that have the potential to make the weak voluntarily surrender freedom to the fit. The first is to daze the awareness and knowledge of the weakest with external change. The second is to daze the awareness and knowledge of the weakest with internal change.

For example, Moses, Buddha, Confucius, Jesus, Muhammad, etc. are predecessors who managed to achieve their ways despite the resistance of others (or, let’s say, succeeded at lending God a hand to achieve his ways here on earth) by making people dazed by internal things instead of external transformations. Moses, Buddha, Confucius, Jesus, Muhammad, and others did not compel people to surrender their voluntary freedom to them (or their ideas) by promising adherents (the weak) material rewards such as a sword, a house, a horse, a nice bottle of wine, a sexy wife, or a handsome husband; instead, they offered a place in heaven or hell. In other words, those extraordinary individuals (prophets, leaders, thinkers, geniuses, magicians, etc.) understood that wealth and revolution are two sets of beliefs that do not intersect. Most importantly, those outstanding individuals (prophets, leaders, thinkers, geniuses, magicians, etc.) understood that no truth comes from lies. For this reason, those outstanding individuals (prophets, leaders, thinkers, geniuses, magicians, etc.) relied simply on fear of the unknown to cut away and better shape (prune) people’s character, including making them ready to voluntarily surrender freedom to them or their ideas. In fact, billions of people around the world are, to this day, postponing or forgoing material things in order to reap in the afterlife the advantages that those aforementioned prophets, leaders, thinkers, geniuses, magicians, etc. said await those who observe their teachings.

If we compare how Moses, Buddha, Confucius, Jesus, Muhammad, etc. succeeded at keeping their memories and their ideas alive to this day to the strategies that the old powers (the western European monarchs and republics) adopted or believed were worthwhile embracing to sustain the continuity of their power, wealth, and status before WW2 erupted (despite the crown in some of those monarchs being a person wearing two hats: the head of state and the head of the church), we find that the two styles were totally contradictory to each other.

For example, the old powers were, until 1939 (when WW2 was regarded as having started), relying on dazing people with wars, divide and rule, domination, exploitation, and subjugation to get their way despite the resistance of others. Of course, the old powers distracted people with consumer goods such as washing machines, cars, typewriters, sewing machines, firearms, explosives, alcohol, and tobacco. In addition, no matter how much the old powers tried to entertain (ratify or pledge) closer alliances among each other or tried to treat rightly the societies that they were dominating and exploiting, this virtuous mindfulness increased the desperation and hopelessness of all the individuals involved instead of reducing it. Consequently, instead of all the individuals involved practicing tolerance and settling disputes through negotiation and arbitration, they all kept preferring to turn away from each other, acting arrogantly towards one another, rivaling, and keeping the world in constant war.

In fact, when WWII was regarded as having started in 1939, all the old powers were racing to determine who could design and build the first atomic bomb, instead of racing to find out who could make people love them more (i.e., keep what they were hearing from them). In addition, instead of the old powers keeping their dirty business in Europe (particularly since no good can come out of weapons of mass destruction except fear and sorrow), the British Empire and all the western European monarchs and republics that rotate in its orbit, such as Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Belgium, Spain, France, Portugal, Greece, Italy, etc. (or, in short, the British Empire et al.), decided to use the United States as a staging area (center of gravity) to produce or assemble the weapons and military equipment they will need in their different wars of annihilation or battles to make their adversaries sue for peace.

Indeed, the decision by the British Empire and its allies to use the United States, located 6,000 km away from the fighting in Europe, as a staging area for designing and building all the necessary guns, ordnance, tanks, ships, aircraft, and tactical vehicles to influence the families and dynasties controlling Germany and other nations was not a bad idea.

But again, there is a very puzzling question that challenges ingenuity. The British Empire, French Empire, Spanish Empire, German Empire, Dutch Empire, etc. were all empires where their rulers and political class sustained their power, wealth, and status by relying on domination, exploitation, subjugation, etc. to keep their dominant role. In addition, generally speaking, in periods of war, rulers keep in the country the thinkers (physicists, chemists, scientists, biologists, machinists, engineers, etc.) who know how to divide, partition, fracture, break, etc. to quickly defeat the enemy and not the ones who know how to unite, form a whole, connect, link up, etc., such as Jan Smuts, the author of the philosophical book Holism and Evolution, whose role usually comes after victory. Why did the British Empire et al. literally “ship” or facilitate for their top-notch physicists and scientists, including the German physicists and scientists who defected from Germany, to work on the design and building of the first atomic bomb, including other powerful weapons, in the United States and not in their own territories or countries as the Germans were doing?

Put differently, if, in the aftermath of WW2, no business or UN member states, including the five permanent members of the UN Security Council (i.e., Great Britain, France, the United States, Russia, China, etc.), accept to let any nation have access to their most advanced trade or scientific secrets (missiles, satellites, computers, etc.), why did the British Empire et al. facilitate or accept that the United States, a foreign country, be used as a staging area to design and build an atomic bomb? How did the critical thinkers (priests, philosophers, mathematicians, physicists, military historians, etc.) who were advising the families/dynasties who controlled the British Empire et al. before or during WW2 reach the conclusion that the new people who would be living in the United States in the year 2023 or 2123 would not turn their backs on them on these dates in history and betray them when the second story that is suggested in the Bible to warn about taking risks is the account about how brothers, in the course of time and things, can become worse enemies (i.e., Cain and Abel)?

If the critical thinkers (priests, philosophers, mathematicians, physicists, military historians, etc.) who were advising the families/dynasties who control the British Empire et al. before or during WW2 were not Tarot readers, then only one truth could have propelled the families/dynasties who control the British Empire et al. to not mind if their thinkers and the thinkers of their adversaries (physicists, chemists, scientists, biologists, machinists, engineers, etc.) design and build the weapons and military equipment they need in their war against Germany and others in the United States and not in Great Britain or in one of the western European monarchs and republics that rotate in its orbit. This truth would be true if the British Empire et al. were controlling the international order and the money supply of the world in their entirety, including the United States, long before WW2 erupted. Empires avoid risks that could simplify them.

But again, I strongly believe that all the critical thinkers (priests, philosophers, mathematicians, physicists, military historians, etc.) whom the families/dynasties who controlled the British Empire et al. gathered before or during WW2 to help them “develop a full and complete structure of a world order under law,” as Cordell Hull, an American diplomat, did put it at that time, figured out a solution to every trick that had the potential to derail their project minus one little detail. This small detail was that the majority of their successors would be scholars (priests, philosophers, mathematicians, physicists, military historians, etc.) who would not know how to see beyond their noses.

I have no way of knowing how the critical thinkers (priests, philosophers, mathematicians, physicists, military historians, etc.) whom the families/dynasties who control the Western European monarchs and republics are depending on for their wisdom (or dazing skills) to create ordered relations (i.e., develop a full and complete structure of a world order under law) are reaching the conclusion that extending this tradition of brutal occupation, starvation, wars, fear, want, scandals, etc. in the name of social justice, democracy, equal rights, etc. is a sound strategy to help them and their masters to keep their dominant role intact. What I do know is that in the Gospel of Luke, it is suggested that two followers of Jesus were walking and encountered Jesus after he was resurrected. The story suggests that those two early Christians who encountered Jesus “were blinded by preoccupation that had to do with their own immediate difficulties and, therefore, were unable to see God’s redemptive purpose in things that had happened.”

I have no way of knowing if the critical thinkers (priests, philosophers, mathematicians, physicists, military historians, etc.) who are the principal victors of WW2 are depending on their wisdom (dazing skills) to let what people hear from their rulers and political class remain in them, and who, as of 1945, the majority of them appear to believe that extending this tradition of brutal occupation, starvation, wars, fear, want, scandals, etc. in the name of social justice, democracy, equal rights, etc., are thinkers who are like the two followers who encountered Jesus after his resurrection, unable to discern, or if those critical thinkers are working to prove to their masters that doing wrong can produce different results (i.e., that any good can come out of tearing down all the efforts and sacrifices that our predecessors spent to secure the milestones that were articulated in the UN Charter and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR). What I do know is that Ibn Khaldun, an Arab historian who lived in the 14th century, suggested in his book Muqaddimah (translated to Prologue) “that the cultural difference of another age must govern the evaluation of relevant historical material, distinguish the principles according to which it might be possible to attempt the evaluation, and lastly, feel the need for experience.”

Some people agree with the policies that the families/dynasties that controlled the United States adopted from the date when this country was created in 1776 until the date when WW2 was regarded as having erupted in 1939, and others differ. But when we shine a light on this interval in the history of the world, we will spot that the United States (as a society and as an idea) was the only community (culture) in which its people showed an understanding of themselves that no other society had demonstrated, despite all the wrong they were still doing. In other words, no one can say that the Americans were acting as arrogantly and inhumanly as the old powers were doing around the world from 1776 to 1939, just as no one can say that the South Sudanese are acting as arrogantly and inhumanly as the Americans, Western Europeans, Russians, Saudis, etc. are doing from 2011 until now.

In fact, the understanding that the Americans showed (in actions and not in words) between 1776 and 1939 (when WW2 was regarded to have started), despite all the wrong that their leaders were doing, was a longing with which mankind had a brush from 632 AD to 661 AD, when the four Rashidun Caliphs (translated to wise rulers) who succeeded the Islamic prophet Muhammad ruled the Islamic world wisely, leading to the building of the largest community the world has known to date.

Surely, the aspirations that the founding fathers of the United States in 1776 suggested to secure a world order in which all human beings would be born free (without any religious ties or other distinctions) and equal in dignity and rights are a priceless aspiration. From 1776 to 1945 (when WW2 was regarded as having ended), the Americans (despite all their internal problems) showed that it is possible for citizens and immigrants, in particular, to evolve (to work together) to create a community when all the other societies that existed were either racing to determine who could destroy the other first or had access to everything minus freedom or rights, as the case was as of 1945 in all the UN member states minus the United States.

It is important that readers keep in mind that the United States could be the world’s largest authoritarian regime or an extension of the British Empire et al., which, as I said earlier, could be alive and kicking to this day. But what the families/dynasties who controlled the United States (and their critical thinkers) from 1776 to the early 1990s were very clever (or gifted) at doing, unlike other executives in positions of responsibility, was their ability to make citizens be ready to put their tribalism aside, as the Rashidun Caliph, Moses, Buddha, Confucius, Jesus, Muhammad, etc. were able to do in antiquity. In my opinion, only two criteria can daze people to the point of making them ready to drive out their fear and to voluntarily surrender freedom to others: truth (to create trust) and obedience (to create quantitative change, thus enabling the evaluation). That is to say, the critical thinkers who were advising the families/dynasties that controlled the United States could not be false prophets but individuals who regarded truth sacred.

In retrospect, if we also factor in the role that the old powers (Western European monarchs and republics) played so the Americans could have this space from 1776 to the early 1990s (but mainly till 1945) to let them grow in wisdom or understanding, one could easily argue that the decision of the British Empire et al. (especially their critical thinkers) to involve the United States in WW2 in their ongoing games (wars) to determine who could make the weakest consider the opinion of the fittest before taking action on his own was the wrong strategy. This is because this choice has the potential to make them (the British Empire et al.) lose what they and their fathers have worked for to this date (the year 1941 is when the US entered WW2).

In 1941, the United States was the only society (culture) that the British Empire et al. and their critical thinkers (priests, philosophers, mathematicians, physicists, military historians, etc.) had kept healthy and protected. By involving the only society (culture) that the British Empire et al. started grooming as of 1776 in wars that, in principle, big boys fight, it is like a lion dragging his cub along to teach him how to hunt. Humans don’t prey on each other; they pollinate each other first, and if that fails, they kill. Dragging into war the people (the culture) that the British Empire et al. were going to need later to pollinate the societies that they wanted to conquer in the future with their ideas was not a very smart choice. That is, of course, unless the British Empire et al. (and their critical thinkers) were aware that there would be no need to have real humans pollinate people in the future and that they would be able to easily do it using technology (artificial intelligence).

I have no way of knowing if the church would continue to be a powerful institution (i.e., collect all the tithing this institution earns) if its executives (bishops) closed all worship places and started to pollinate people to observe the teaching of Jesus through the intermediary of artificial intelligence. Until such an approach is tested and confirmed, I believe it would be naive to suppose that the critical thinkers (priests, philosophers, mathematicians, physicists, military historians, etc.) who were advising the families/dynasties that controlled the British Empire et al. before or during WW2 on what those powerful families/dynasties needed to be doing to develop a full and complete structure of a world order under law would have agreed to letting the United States be used as a weapon of war during WW2 and, in particular, after. This is because this maneuver would make it impossible afterwards to continue to pollinate the societies in which the families/dynasties that control the British Empire et al. need to stay in groups with them voluntarily so they can stay in power later. In other words, letting the United States be used as a weapon of war after WW2 is analogous to Jesus beginning to use force to get his way on earth after he was resurrected. In fact, the history books detail clearly how the direct authority of the church shrank when its officials or clergy started to use force to achieve the church’s way despite the resistance of others.

Accordingly, hence, it is highly unlikely that the critical thinkers (priests, philosophers, mathematicians, physicists, military historians, etc.) who were advising the families/dynasties who controlled the British Empire et al. before or during WW2 on what they needed to be doing to keep their dominant role in the aftermath of WW2 recommended that the United States become resized in the near future; nor is it possible to suppose that the Americans could have accepted before WW2 erupted that their role would become a redundancy shortly after technology started to pollinate people, so one of two scenarios could be contributing to this apparent tearing apart of the idea of freedom (liberal interventionism and self-determination) as of the 1990s, in particular. The first is the poor vision of the majority of the critical thinkers (priests, philosophers, mathematicians, physicists, military historians, etc.) to whom the families/dynasties who control the British Empire and others handed the baton in the early 1990s to help them rejuvenate their power, including securing their implicit goals. The second scenario is that the families and dynasties controlling the British Empire, among others, believe that time will always be in their favor.

Things being what they are, I have no way of knowing why the principal victors of WW2 favored that the society that their fathers (the British Empire et al.) started to groom and protect as of 1776 be used (wielded) as a weapon of war in the aftermath of the last world reset (i.e., WW2) instead of keeping this country as a force for peace on earth in the same way the church uses priests or the United Nations uses peace missions. The principal victors of WW2 (i.e., their critical thinkers) know very well that it is not possible for a person to prioritize truth over form. Allowing the United States to become the nation that all other societies would fear after World War II, while simultaneously being expected to serve as a “city on a hill,” is akin to claiming that a blind person is equal to someone who can see.

On the other hand, I strongly believe that if the critical thinkers (priests, philosophers, mathematicians, physicists, military historians, etc.) who were advising the families/dynasties who control the British Empire et al. before or during WW2 were still alive and were even plotting to let the authority of the United States shrink in the course of time and things so the authority of the United Nations rise, they would not have agreed to let the United States be used as a weapon of war in the aftermath of WW2. Only one departure has the potential to create the dynamism that the international order (liberal interventionism and self-determination) has known since 1945. This deviation is the result of the impatience of the principal victors of WW2, their critical thinkers, or both.

Put differently, it would be naive to suppose that the critical thinkers (priests, philosophers, mathematicians, physicists, military historians, etc.) who were advising the families/dynasties who control the British Empire et al. before or during WW2 were unaware that there is no difference between having the United States become, before and during WW2, a staging area to produce all the guns, ordnance, tanks, ships, aircraft, and tactical vehicles that those Western European monarchs and republics needed to make the families/dynasties who control Germany consider their (the British Empire et al.’s) opinion before taking action on their own and, later, in the aftermath of WW2, having all the goods that they (the British Empire et al.) and the United States need be designed and produced in China. This is because those two actions are one and the same. They both involve creating change. What propels wars is change (or accelerated change). Hence, the founding fathers of the UN proposed to the principal victors of WW2 that each UN member state be in charge of its own economic preparation. That is to say, the founding fathers of the UN did not propose in the UN Charter to the principal victors of WW2 (i.e., to their critical thinkers) to teach people how to financialize the world in the aftermath of WW2 but how to practice tolerance.

But again, since individuals (businesses, societies, nations, kingdoms, and empires) do not take risks on issues that have the potential to have any negative bearing on the continuity of their power, wealth, and status, or to revert them to a simpler form, as I said earlier (i.e., there is no zero-sum game in politics), then only two scenarios could have propelled the dynamism that the international order has known in recent years (i.e., wars, trade entanglement, political bottlenecks, and abnormal and excessive disregard toward law and order, standards, norms, etc.).

The first is if the United States served a specific task within a much bigger scheme than the one that the principal victors of WW2 or their fathers (the British Empire, et al.) expressed in the UN Charter. That is to say, the old powers planned for the United States to serve as a staging area only before and during WW2 to produce all the guns, ordnance, tanks, ships, aircraft, and tactical vehicles that were needed to be designed and built for the British Empire et al. to win WW2, including playing the global policeman role afterwards. Put differently, the United States played a role during WW2 that is not any different than the role that the Arab states played in the wars that the United States and NATO launched against Afghanistan, Iraq, etc., or the temporary role that peace missions play in the aftermath of conflicts or wars between states. However, only the United States was not aware that a person cannot prioritize, most of the time, truth over self-interest, and therefore, it was just a matter of time until its own taste of global power would start to dwindle in order to move on to the next activity programmed in this big scheme. The second is if the critical thinkers (priests, philosophers, mathematicians, physicists, military historians, etc.) to whom the principal victors of WW2 handed the blueprint of the project whose details the founding fathers of the UN outlined in the UN Charter built for their masters a different project altogether. In other words, the decision of the principal victors of WW2 to let their critical thinkers (priests, philosophers, mathematicians, physicists, military historians, etc.) deviate away from the work program that the founding fathers of the UN counseled them to observe to keep their dominant role intact and ensure lasting peace triggered this drastic dynamism that the international order started to know, especially at the start of the 21st century.

Then again, irrespective of whether the families/dynasties that controlled the western European monarchs and republics were planning to keep on rejuvenating their power before WW2 erupted or later, their heirs started programming. In mathematics, input and output are terms that relate to functions. Both the input and output of a function are variables. That is to say, a person can choose the input variables himself, but “the output variables are always determined by the rule established by the function.”

This aforementioned statement signifies that it is not possible for an individual (business, society, nation, or kingdom) to choose the output, because it is the function that fixes what result one could expect (it is important that readers keep in mind that the number of variables in the function is infinite).

In other words, the wealth, power, and status that a person currently enjoys, as well as their future worth, are determined by the state of world affairs and the natural world, rather than by the individual or their critical thinkers. Simply put, the state of world affairs is the rule that will determine whether the power, status, and wealth that a person enjoys today will be worth more or less in the future.

If the state of world affairs is a function of the sum of all the changes that people effect, and mankind was not given the right to quantify its impact; and if the changes that people effect are divided into reversible and irreversible transformations and mankind was once again not given the right to reverse them; and if people are mortal and this signifies that there is no guarantee that the new people who inherit the power, wealth, and status of their fathers would be in favor of continuing to form a close web with the people whose fathers were maintaining such close relationships with them, then one of two scenarios could have persuaded (i) the old powers before WW2 erupted to feel not threatened by having the military complex in the United States (a foreign country) become more advanced than theirs in the aftermath of WW2, or later (ii) the principal victors of WW2 (who are the heirs of the old powers) to be doing the same in the aftermath of WW2 and repeat the same mistake and not mind that the goods they would be depending on for their livelihood become produced in China (a foreign country) and not on their own territories. The first is if the families/dynasties that control the western European monarchs and republics (i.e., the principal victors of WW2) have controlled the international order and the money supply of the world in its entirety for two to three centuries already, if not more. In other words, all the dynamism (wars, disregard, etc.) that the world has known since 1945, or in recent years, is being instigated mainly by individuals (businesses, societies, nations, kingdoms) who are fighting with one another for second, third, fourth, etc., position or place. The second is if the wealth, power, and status of the families/dynasties that control the Western European monarchs and republics (i.e., the principal victors of WW2) stopped being of paramount importance to them in the aftermath of WW2. In other words, the families/dynasties that control the western European monarchs and republics do not believe that the drastic dynamism that the international order started to know as a result of their decision to have their critical thinkers (priests, philosophers, mathematicians, physicists, military historians, etc.) build for them a new project that is perhaps different than the one the founding fathers of the UN counselled them to stay faithful to its principles to rejuvenate their power would have any bearing on the continuity of their wealth, status, and power.

Once again, I have no way of knowing which scenario between the aforementioned two could have propelled the old powers before WW2 erupted and, later, their heirs in the aftermath of WW2 (i.e., the principal victors of WW2) to not mind and make the same mistake twice of letting the awareness and knowledge (technical progress) of societies that are relying on different constitutions (political and economic ideals) than theirs be far superior to them when the founding fathers of the UN warned them about the implications of becoming impatient, including letting people (societies, nations, kingdoms) around the world go back to relying on distinctions such as race, color, sex, language, religion, politics, etc. to stay together and form groups, or letting people (societies, nations) feel that some matter more and others matter less and are not all equal, as Article 1 of the UDHR states. What I do know is that it is impossible to isolate the rule(s) that contribute to the output of the function (i.e., the rule that is requiring that the principal victors of WW2 be all the time coercing people (societies, nations, kingdoms) to do what they want by force to rejuvenate their power) given the infinite number of variables and the fact that humans were not granted the right to isolate rules, and to make matters worse, the principal victors of WW2 (and their critical thinkers) appear to be extending the same exact hierarchical polity that their fathers (the old powers) were adopting before WW2 in the aftermath of WW2 (i.e., making some people or places matter more than others), including saying one thing and doing the opposite.

For example, the founding fathers of the UN (the critical thinkers of the old powers) counselled the principal victors of WW2 (the heirs of the old powers) to create an international intergovernmental organization to coordinate their work in UN member states in the aftermath of WW2. However, instead of the principal victors of WW2 letting this legal entity (the United Nations) be devoted to coordinating their work as the founding fathers of the UN advised, they (the principal victors of WW2) shifted and expanded the work of the United Nations, including granting this legal entity the right to become an economic operator.

The principal victors of WW2 (the heirs of the old powers) could have decided to shift and expand the work of the United Nations because they have their eyes fixed on creating a common political authority for all humanity. In other words, the state of confusion, distress, and helplessness that has overwhelmed the world as of 1945 is a result of all the dismantling or weakening of governments in order to make room to establish a global government, or a single state or polity with jurisdiction over the entire world.

Many scholars (commentators) suggest that the principal victors of WW2 are grooming the United Nations (the organization) to establish a global government. Additionally, some commentators believe that such an endeavor would be an important force for peace and human development, while others believe that the standardization of norms, laws, or cultures would be ineffective and would deepen bias and corruption around the world.

Evidently, there is nothing that could stop the principal victors of WW2 from aspiring to appoint themselves as deputies of God for life, but this aspiration could only materialize if they succeed at making those who would be for (yea) weigh more than those who are against (nay).

The word “threshold“ is defined as the magnitude or intensity that must be exceeded for a certain reaction, phenomenon, result, or condition to occur or be manifested.

Accordingly, we cannot deny that what is yet to come from the state of confusion, distress, and helplessness that has overwhelmed the world since 1945 can boil down to two scenarios. The first is if all the disobedience or lack of regard for the dangers or consequences of disobeying the UN Charter and the UDHR by the servants of the principal victors of WW2 in UN member states (such as rulers and political classes and international institutions such as the United Nations System, World Bank, IMF, EU, NATO, etc.) would continue to worsen and divide people until the confusion, distress, and helplessness that people (businesses, societies, nations, and kingdoms) would cleave relations fully and break the will of everyone. The second is if the principal victors of WW2 (the families/dynasties who control the British empire et al.) manage to stay on top of things (stay in control) and succeed at ensuring that all the confusion, distress, and helplessness that rulers and the political class and international institutions such as the United Nations system, World Bank, IMF, EU, NATO, etc. are exhibiting by refusing to observe the work program set forth in the UN charter and the UDHR do not affect their powers, wealth, and status and hence permit them (the principal victors of WW2) to continue to rejuvenate their power or pursue their implicit aspirations.

It is important that readers keep in mind that most of the families/dynasties that control the western European monarchies and republics are either the head of the church in their respective monarchy or state or control the church that operates in the state, as I said before. That is to say, since people’s belief in the idea of God is immortal, but the exploration that people do is always changing, all the families/dynasties who control the western European monarchs and republics need to do to ensure the continuity of their power, wealth, and status is to stay blended with the church or to keep their full grip on this immortal institution.

In this context, we can say that during this ongoing reckoning, which all people and especially the servants of the principal victors of WW2 in UN member states (such as rulers and political classes and international institutions such as the United Nations System, World Bank, IMF, EU, NATO, etc.) are exhibiting to have a happy, favorable, safe, and pleasant life that is free from any unpleasant factors, instead of seeking to be patient as the UN Charter counsels or as most parents usually are, the principal victors of WW2 have an “extracurricular” activity that falls outside the realm of the normal “curriculum,” which most people (businesses, societies, nations, kingdoms) are pursuing (i.e., how to resize their neighbor) in order to keep on transforming safely the outcomes and conditions that matter to them. This “extracurricular” activity centers on ensuring that the way people are changing (transforming) is not shifting along their readiness to accept staying together with them (the families/dynasties who control the western European monarchs and republics) and/or to continue to accept supporting them in the role they play.

Likewise, we can say that all that the principal victors of WW2 need to be doing to ensure that the transformations that people are continually undergoing do not shift along their readiness to accept staying together with them (with the families/dynasties who control the western European monarchs and republics) and/or to accept to let them continue to support them in the role they play is to make people (businesses, societies, nations, kingdoms) not lose faith in the ideas that they promote and depend on to make people be ready to voluntarily surrender freedom to them, such as human rights, democracy, freedom, social justice, etc.

There is no difference between dazing people with the ideas that are included in the different religions and the ideas that the principal victors of WW2 have been dazing people with, such as human rights, democracy, freedom, social justice, etc., as of 1945. History has shown that the ideas that are included in the different religions and the ideas that the principal victors of WW2 are dazing people (i.e., businesses, societies, nations, and kingdoms) as of 1945, who are ready to voluntarily surrender freedom to them, increasing confusion, distress, and helplessness instead of making people tolerant when false teachers become embedded within the ranks and start to use the truth as a tool to rejuvenate their self-interests and not the common interests.

In addition, whenever distrust rises, people become impatient and can become easily persuaded to withdraw their obligation to obey; this situation makes it very difficult to differentiate between who is speaking the truth and who is speaking falsely when deep doubt overshadows everything else. In fact, distrust not only makes it impossible to know if what executives (chiefs, rulers, etc.) keep secret is because it is supposed to stay this way, if the people who are keeping things confidential are acting this way to deny others rights, or if they are making it a lot easier for them to get their way despite the resistance of others, but it also entices subversion. Subversion refers “to a process by which the values and principles of a system in place are contradicted or reversed in an attempt to transform the established social order and its structures of power, authority, tradition, hierarchy, and social norms.“

I have no way of knowing how the principal victors of WW2 plan to make people (businesses, nations, kingdoms) not compete to subvert the processes (ideas or institutions) that they (the principal victors of WW2) depend on to keep their dominant role after they (the principal victors of WW2) decided with their critical thinkers (priests, philosophers, mathematicians, physicists, military historians, etc.) to increase idleness (delegate to technology the transformations that the human body was supposed to be carrying out) and increase the number of people who they want to be preoccupied with what their neighbors are doing instead of being preoccupied with observing first the standards that they are legitimizing and enforcing. What I do know is that the man-made idea that has produced the most violence and death throughout the history of the world has been the idea of government. or the state. Yet instead of the principal victors of WW2 doing as the founding fathers of the UN counseled and ensuring that governments (rulers, political class, judges, law enforcement officers, public and social workers) do not regard themselves exempt from observing the appeal included in the UN Charter or the UDHR, they (the principal victors of WW2) went with their critical thinkers (priests, philosophers, mathematicians, physicists, military historians, etc.) berserk and began to create national and international institutions, thus widening the number of people who are busy preoccupying themselves with what their neighbors are doing instead of preoccupying themselves with observing the standards that they are legitimizing and enforcing. Accordingly, accelerating mistrust and increasing people’s attachments to the parameters that increase violence and death. Those two parameters are mainly distinction and tribalism. That is to say, making people love the world instead of loving them.

Once again, I have no way of knowing how the families/dynasties who control the western European monarchs and republics reached the conclusion that if they let non-state actors and international institutions such as the United Nations become main actors in international politics, the added confusion, distress, and helplessness (i.e., corruption, betrayal, and disregard) that such legal entities would be propelling besides the ones that governments are already instigating would be helping to shift the way people do things to continue to support the continuity (rejuvenation) of their power, wealth, and status. What I do know is that the United Nations is the primary formal intergovernmental international organization that the principal victors of WW2 depend on the wisdom of its critical thinkers (senior managers) to shift the way people do things without the changes they are effecting leading them to be against continuing to support the continuity of the families/dynasties who control the western European monarchs and republics in the role they play. I have no way of knowing how successful the United Nations has been in shifting people’s support toward staying ready to not mind that the families/dynasties who control the western European monarchs and republics have stayed in their power, wealth, and status since 1945. What I do know is that in 2013-2015, a UN staff member refused to stay quiet and let his senior managers approve projects that violated the UN financial rules and regulations because it threatened the success of the project, whose outline the principal victors of WW2 laid out in the UN Charter and the UDHR. Instead of the senior managers of this UN staff reconsidering their wrongdoing, they invented a plot to get him to lose his job, just as the United States invented intelligence that Saddam Hussein was developing weapons of mass destruction at the start of the 21st century to oust him from his role or power.

When this UN staffer filed an application at the UN tribunal, the UN lawyers made him an offer to drop it. However, when he refused to accept the UN lawyers’ offer because he was convinced that such an action would not stop those UN senior managers from continuing to weaken the victors of WW2, the UN Secretary General, the UN Tribunal, and the UN lawyers searched in their bag of rules for a technical administrative rule that they could use as a pretext to dismiss the case of this UN staff member, applied it, and threw this UN staff member and his case in the garbage bin of history forever.

It is important that readers keep in mind that the principal victors of WW2 granted the United Nations privileges and immunities. No person can file an application against the UN except in a UN tribunal. In other words, no person can have his application heard by an independent and impartial tribunal.

This totally biased judgment, which the United Nations System (UN Secretary General, the UN Tribunal, and the UN lawyers) believed they succeeded in getting spelled out to deny this UN staff right to indemnity, was not any different from how the Iraqi government (Iraqi president, Iraqi tribunal, and Iraqi lawyers), whom the United States was manipulating and mentoring, based on what some commentators claim, must have felt when they denied Saddam Hussein’s right to a fair tribunal.

However, when we compare how Iraq transformed after Saddam Hussein was hanged in 2006, or how the United States, in turn, transformed as of this date as well, we find that this impatience (hastiness) that the United States (the victor in the US-Iraqi war) demonstrated from the date when this country decided against the will of the international community to invade Iraq to the date when this country organized a sketch to show that Saddam Hussein got a fair hearing appears to have turned out into a nightmare and a stigma that would be haunting this country for years to come.

And so, if the problem of distrust which the United States appear to be reaping from this venture which its rulers and political class made in Iraq at the start of the 21st century, does not appear to have produced till now the same equivalent outcomes which this country reaped in the Philippine, Korea, Vietnam, etc. etc. or in other similar earlier ventures; can the principal victors of WW2 avoid that people around the world develop the same stigma towards them, as people are increasingly developing toward the United States after this country demonstrated in this last ongoing conflict between Russia and Ukraine that patience (diplomacy, isolationism) as suggested in the UN Charter does not interest its rulers; or the formal organization (the United Nations) who is supposed to be making people “love” them and love their global policemen (the United States), its critical thinkers (UN Secretary General, UN senior managers, UN judges, UN lawyers, and UN investigators) are considering it a proud moment for the principal victors of WW2 and humanity that they succeeded at manipulating the application which this UN staff filed at the UN tribunal to stop his senior managers from continuing of doing wrong, and dismissed it, thus trampling under their feet on the UN Charter, all the UN member states, and most importantly, the principal victors of WW2.

Once again, I have no way of knowing how the principal victors of WW2 and their critical thinkers (priests, philosophers, mathematicians, physicists, military historians, etc.) are establishing that the stigma that has been haunting the United States (the country) in recent years for having acted contrary to what the UN Charter suggests is not something that people (businesses, societies, nations, and kingdoms) would be upholding in their hearts as well towards them. In other words, I have no way of knowing how the principal victors of WW2 and their critical thinkers are reaching that if they let governments (rulers, political class, judges, law enforcement agents, and human development experts) and the United Nations officials (rulers, political class, judges, law enforcement agents, and human development experts) be both using the idea of “government” or “governance” as a platform to prioritize the self-interests of the individuals involved and then a platform to improve the common good instead of a platform to lead by example that such a strategy would not push the awareness of people to stop being dazed by their ideas and repel them or shift their attitude away from them. What I do know is that if all the constant wars that the world has known before WW2 were propelled because the fittest (rulers and political class, rich, etc.) refused to practice the ideas that he was preaching or the ideas that the majority agreed to be instituted (i.e., standards, norms, and rules), then two scenarios could be motivating the families/dynasties that control the western European monarchs and republics to not mind that the United States (the country and the global policemen of the world) use force to secure the UN goals instead of settling its disputes through negotiation and arbitration as the UN charter counsel, or the United Nations becoming a den of thieves instead of a center that just focuses on coordinating the work of UN member states as the founding fathers of the UN suggested.

The first is if the families/dynasties that control the western European monarchs and republics are weakening the power of one to strengthen the power of the other. The second is if the families/dynasties that control the western European monarchs and republics think they can make things fall in certain ways by design.

I have no way of knowing which scenario between the aforementioned two could be propelling the families/dynasties who control the western European monarchs and republics into believing that it would be possible for them to make people pivot around their nucleus (center of gravity, leadership) just as electrons continuously orbit and pivot around protons and neutrons in atoms. What I do know is that despite all the wrongful acts that the United States has propelled since 1945 to preserve its power, wealth, and status, this country could not be propelling this wrong to deepen its hegemony over the world. This is because this country knows that the more it adopts policies that repel people from its center of gravity, the more the United Nations profits. However, the same outcome does not reproduce when the United Nations adopts policies that repel people from its center of gravity. This is because this organization is, in theory, adopting the policies that the victors of WW2 (i.e., the United States) are legitimizing and enforcing as of 1945. And since corruption, disregard, contempt, and betrayal are not going away any time soon, the more the United States becomes disliked, the more the ideas that the United Nations promotes through the UDHR become the only venue that could provide a degree of long-term stability that’s actually quite hard to come by in any other way (hence the call to cease the power of the United States, and perhaps the creation of a multipolar world is ongoing).

Then again, it was the “false” assumption that rulers and kings entertained before WW2 erupted that brought about their doom. In other words, it was the assumptions that rulers and kings made about how the changes that people were undergoing were a fashion, and then they would be going back to their commitment to let them have greater say or power over them, but they were wrong.

Once again, I have no way of knowing if the constant wars, confusion, shock and awe, divide and rule, and disregard that have swept the world as of 1945 and the equivalent overwhelming number of political, economic, and social solutions that governments and non-state and international institutions such as the United Nations are regularly showcasing are equipping people, institutions, and governments with the very practical skills, tools, and information they would always be needing to continue to be shifting and to be believing in the importance of letting the principal victors of WW2 continue to stay in power, as the fathers of the principal victors of WW2 (the old powers) managed to make people, institutions, and governments around the world always pivot back, as the dazing method they were employing shows. What I do know is that most biblical and religious scriptures suggest that when rulers and kings stop wanting to prioritize the truth, their servants will start to make their past and future “misdeeds” appeal to them.

Accordingly, I have no way of knowing if the misdeeds or license for immorality that the families/dynasties who control the western European monarchs and republics are granting the right to governments, and particular the United Nations, to carry out are “preparing in season and out of season; correcting, rebuking, and encouraging—with great patience and careful instruction” people to “fight the good fight” or to “keep the faith” in them (those powerful families/dynasties) or their heirs so they could “finish the race” and preserve their power, wealth, and status as Paul the apostle suggested in his second letter to Timothy to be doing in the city of Ephesus so people could keep the faith in Christianity. [2 Timothy 4:2, 7] What I do know is that it was Moses’s servants (chiefs, judges, rabbis, priests, philosophers, mathematicians, scientists, etc.) who perverted the people he was driving out of Egypt to a promised land, leading to the Israelites going off compass and wandering in the wilderness for 40 years before finding their way back and finishing this journey. In the very same way, it was the servants (chiefs, judges, rabbis, priests, philosophers, mathematicians, scientists, etc.) who were advising the previous rulers and kings of the kingdoms that collapsed on how to make conflict transformative as opposed to violent and who, in the process, led their masters astray, leading to their resizing.

In this regard, the more the principal victors of WW2 continue to be in favor of letting their servants (the United Nations and governments) be economic operators instead of a platform to make people love them (the principal victors of WW2), the more the ill-defined and ultimately unachievable goals that those servants (the United Nations and governments) would be pursuing would be polluting people and creating provocations that would be making it very hard for people (businesses, societies, nations, and kingdoms) to see eye to eye or to prioritize meaningful diplomacy; then the more the principal victors of WW2 grant license to those servants (the United Nations and governments) to be like them regarding themselves, exempt from observing the work program that the founding fathers of the UN counselled them (the principal victors of WW2) to stay faithful to its principles to keep their dominant role and ensure lasting peace, the faster the principal victors of WW2 would be getting closer to having to pick between two choices to keep their dominant role. The first is to create a new reset (a new global war) to reduce desires and keep their positions of authority. The second is if the two Gods (the God who controls the western hemisphere and the God who controls the eastern hemisphere) find the unclear and hubristic policies that the principal victors of WW2 are letting their servants (the United Nations and governments) adopt to be threatening their creations, which they privileged over many other creations, and therefore, decide to dispatch a new son, or a new prophet, to help the principal victors of WW2, in particular, to not reap the same results that the families/dynasties who were controlling the Roman Empire reaped when they decided to deviate away from the work program of Jesus, or the one Saddam Hussein and Muammar Gaddafi reaped when they both decided to deviate away from the work program that the founding fathers of the UN counselled them to observe to keep their dominant role.

I have no way of knowing how the principal victors of WW2 are planning to correct all the policy errors caused by the rush of their servants (the United Nations and governments) for profit along with their own impatience to rejuvenate their power or secure their implicit goals created in the world so far. What I do know is that if the principal victors of WW2 choose to keep their positions of authority by wagering on the effectiveness of global war, famine, pandemics, etc. to create a reset or reduce desires, it would be necessary that the preventive and preemptive heap (destruction, death, etc.) that they would be overloading people with make the vanquished afterwards be ready to consider their opinion before taking action of their own, just as the Germans and Japanese did following WW2 and not as per the way all the societies that they invited to help them defeat the Germans and the Japanese are doing since the end of WW2 (i.e., rejecting their authority). That is to say, the principal countries who would be fighting in this global war would need to make sure that the societies (nations) who would be helping them to win would not be demanding to change the international order to stop it from remaining unipolar and to become multipolar, as they are all doing in recent years. Actually, if when the world is unipolar, all the servants (the United Nations and governments minus the United States) of the victors of WW2 are refusing to observe the work program set forth in the UN charter and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, can mankind expect peace and security to improve in the world when the international order becomes multipolar? Changing the world order and making the international order multipolar does not improve peace and security; it accelerates the reversal to a simpler form of the principal victors of WW2.

Likewise, I have no way of knowing how all the gods are interpreting the speed at which the principal victors of WW2 and their servants (the United Nations and governments) are devesting (emptying) the world of principles and morality or if they will choose to do something about it as some have done in the past. In my opinion, the poor way our ancestors treated the only son of the God who controls the western hemisphere and the fact that he informed his last prophet to let us know that he was not going to be sending any new prophets anymore, besides the Islamic prophet Muhammad [Surah Al-Ahzab 33:40], cast doubt on whether he wanted to have anything to do with people on earth.

As far as the god(s) who control the eastern hemisphere are concerned, they seem to focus a lot on mental purity and human potential to free people from jealousy, boasting, anger, and favoritism. I have no way of knowing if any one of the God(s) who have been administering the Eastern Hemisphere since the story of the flood has a son or a daughter and therefore would be interested in dispatching one over to earth to get some sense in the heads of the principal victors of WW2 about the importance of making their servants (the United Nations and governments) stop to regard themselves exempt from observing the work program set forth in the UN charter and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights to avoid that they (the principal victors of WW2) reap the same fate that Saddam Hussein and Muammar Gaddafi reaped when they supposed that their servants would be there to save them from danger when it encroaches.

But again, I do not believe that the two gods (the god who controls the western hemisphere and the god who controls the eastern hemisphere) are worried about the principal victors of WW2 failing to keep their dominant control after they managed to design and build a tool that has the power to tame people, much better perhaps than if they were to do it (i.e., technology, artificial intelligence, computers, etc.).

In addition, if we factor in how, despite all the challenges that the social and communist regimes that were based in the eastern hemisphere endured to prevent them from growing during the Cold War and afterward, yet despite all the abuse those regimes faced, they managed to keep their citizens calm (observe patience) since 1945 as compared to how the societies that were claiming they were defending the principles and institutions of democracy and open societies have performed, it may not be a bad idea if the soft philosophies that those God(s) who exercise authority over the eastern hemisphere suggested be updated and a new modern version of those rules that integrate fitting technology, artificial intelligence, computers, etc. into them be used as a new doctrine to start to stop people around the world from continuing to reject authority.

For example, I have no way of knowing if a modern version of the caste system that the Hindus used to coerce each other into accepting to consider the opinion of the fittest and which integrates the application of technology, artificial intelligence, computers, etc. to keep the specific place that each person would be occupying in this social stratification order could help the principal victors of WW2 to keep their positions of authority.

Evidently, if the principal victors of WW2 decide to rejuvenate their power by relying on a new modern version of the caste system that integrates the application of technology, artificial intelligence, computers, etc. to coerce people to create ordered relations, it would be necessary to dismantle the idea of freedom at some point. In other words, stop confusing citizens with human rights, equal rights, freedom, social justice, etc., as has been the case from 1945 to now, thus letting the authoritarianism on which most rulers and the political class in the Eastern Hemisphere depend to stay in power become a world government or a single political authority with jurisdiction over all humanity.

Surely the taming methods that China, India, and all the rest of the UN member states are using, with the exception of the United States as of 1945, have shown that when authoritarianism is merged with technology, the odds of citizens becoming calmer and more obedient are much higher than they would be in societies that merge freedom with technology. Take the United States, for example. Citizens in this country are totally untamed. Any society whose constitution permits its citizens to own guns cannot be said to have people who are tamed but people who are free.

Furthermore, we can say that should the principal victors of WW2 decide to rejuvenate their power by relying on a new modern version of the caste system that integrates the application of technology, artificial intelligence, computers, etc. to coerce people to create ordered relations in the future, they would be able to continue to keep their dominant role without knowing if those societies they would be protecting would remain loyal to them as the Americans were from 1776 until today or not.

I have no way of knowing what exactly the founding fathers of the United States and later the rulers and political class of this country were doing from 1776 until 1939 to make citizens be ready to voluntarily surrender freedom to the US Constitution (put their distinction aside) and not be devoted to demanding from the old powers to stop the world from being unipolar and to make it become multipolar, particularly since they are the ones who invented the idea of freedom. In my opinion, only one justification can explain why. The Americans were not “disparaging all the things that they do not understand” and were not letting “all the things that they know by instinct” destroy them. [Jude 1:10]

In conclusion, I have no way of knowing if the principal victors of WW2 would be able, in the future, to stop people from disparaging all the things that they do not understand or let all the things that they know by instinct not drive them to destroy them or their heirs. What I do know is that it is not possible for a person to know that the rear end of a monkey is exposed until one stands up. That is to say, I have no way of knowing if all the government, non-state, and international institutions such as the United Nations, which the principal victors of WW2 empowered and made main actors in international politics, would stay seated as the rulers and political class in the United States did from 1776 to 1939 or if those actors in question (governments and the United Nations) would stand up and destroy them. What I do know is that if the principal victors of WW2 do not start to daze the governments of most UN member states (including the United States) and non-state and international institutions such as the United Nations to start staying seated more (i.e., to recognize that they cannot be acting in the same way their citizens do) and/or as their fathers (the old powers) managed to make the American people be ready to do from 1776 to 1939, then the more they daze societies with wealth, power, and status as they have done in the UN member states, which they considered to matter more than others, the more they would be risking having those societies, which they are empowering, turn their back on them (the victors of WW2) for worldly gains, as the servants (generals, soldiers, rulers, chiefs, etc.) of the families/dynasties who were controlling the Roman Empire turned their back on their masters in antiquity, or the servants (generals, soldiers, rulers, chiefs, etc.) of Saddam Hussein and Muammar Gaddafi did in recent history.

Put differently, if the principal victors of WW2 do not start to daze people as the American rulers and political class did in the aftermath of the American Civil War and daze people with a progressive era as the United States dazed citizens with one after the gilded era, then the more the awareness and knowledge that people would be gaining grow, the more their improved awareness would be making more people devoid of principles and morals. The more people become devoid of principles and morals, the more the statements that rulers and the political class issue and the accompanying Monty Python (or Saturday Night Live) sketches (speeches and conferences) they are putting out will stop dazing people. When people stop being dazed by the different statements and conferences that rulers and the political class issue and organize, their eyes open. When people’s eyes become open, it becomes very difficult to enslave the weak easily or to keep them from being mindful about social justice.

People cannot prioritize social justice while easily guarding their wealth as a secret or stockpiling money and misleading citizens, as different churches or religious institutions have been doing since antiquity. In fact, many churches have had difficulties in recent years with falsifying records and statements or convincing their members that the money they are stashing is for the second coming of Jesus after the awareness and knowledge of their members widened. Many questions beg answers. For one, can the principal victors of WW2 continue to defend the principles and institutions of democracy and open societies in partnership with the United Nations, which announced in the last 2022 scandal that this legal entity was caught red-handed taking part in the fact that the money that was mismanaged was not money the organization obtained from the tithing of UN member states but its own money that it was investing?

Finally, I have no way of knowing if the principal victors of WW2 would be able to preserve their continuity when their three shepherds (i.e., the church, governments, and the United Nations), who are supposed to be making people love them, are feeding themselves first and then people. What I do know is that in countries where Christmas is celebrated, it has been a tradition for children to sit on the lap of a person dressed as Santa Claus to tell Santa what they want for Christmas. I have no way of knowing if the time for the church and governments to sit in the lap of the principal victors of WW2 is up or not. What I do know is that a person cannot place more than one person at a time in his lap, and even when he makes efforts and places two or three, it is not possible to love the two in the same way because in people’s chests there is only one heart. That is to say, I have no way of knowing if the principal victors of WW2 continue to make the United Nations sit in their laps and if the compelling corruption and wickedness that are far worse than what the church or governments are doing are just a temporary trend that would later go away. What I do know is that Gibran Khalil Gibran was a Lebanese-American writer and poet whose work has been translated into more than 100 languages. In his best-selling book titled The Prophet, Gibran suggests that “Your children are not your children…. For their souls dwell in the house of tomorrow, which you cannot visit, not even in your dreams… You are the bows from which your children, as living arrows, are sent forth…” That is to say, the archer has no way of knowing if the arrow will reach its target or not. Hence, we have no way of knowing if the principal victors of WW2 will be able to bend the United Nations to make people love this legal entity as they made people love the United States, or if the United Nations will gang up on them with the rest of the UN member states as its senior managers ganged up on this UN staff member who, in 2013-2015, refused to prioritize the wicked interests of the United Nations over the noble interests of the victors of WW2; we can only give it time and remind the families/dynasties who control the western European monarchs and republics to read from time to time what Jesus warned his disciples in Matthew 7:6 of doing!