Abstract

Mark Twain suggested that “of all the animals, man is the only one that is cruel. He is the only one that inflicts pain for the pleasure of doing it.” The principal apparatus that man depends on to direct his cruelty or violence at others is the institution that we call government, or the state. This unit of authority (the structure that we call government or the state) is the instrument that most men are unceasingly striving to get in control of its machinery to satiate from its intricate and complex systems the pleasure of pouring their torment and ruse on others (i.e., putting fallacy above truth), including debasing the fittest (the rich).

The western European monarchs and republics (also known as the old powers) began to vigorously rival to get on top of the food chain (i.e., dominate the international order) since the start of the second millennia. The good that the old powers locked away in the last one thousand years, transformed them from being petty societies (or monarchs) to becoming the King of Kings. Yet despite all the evil, cruelty, pain, and ruse that the old powers spread and, to this day, are causing in their ongoing search to keep their dominant role, which even included becoming themselves entangled in internal conflicts to determine who could make the weakest consider the opinion of the fittest before taking action of their own, their gains have never appeared to be as irrelevant and of any benefit to them whatsoever, as the case has been since 1945.

This paper tries to understand if the decision of the heirs of the old powers to reject the counsel of their fathers (the victors of WW2) to rest from wars in the aftermath of WW2 and to opt for letting non-state and international institutions (United Nations, World Bank, IMF, NATO, EU, Arab League, African Union, ASEAN, NAM, NGOs, G7,…., G70, G700, etc.) devise wicked plans and add cruelty besides the plans that national governments are already adding has increased the number of people who started making them (the families/dynasties that control the western European monarchs and republics) their priority and working toward making them an option instead of a necessity, or not (i.e., began to consider their opinion before taking action on their own). The main aim is to understand if the decision of the heirs of the old powers to reduce the stock of men with moral courage since 1945 and increase the stock of people who are becoming their enemies or sources of grief will fare best in the end for them, or if the partiality in all matters of law (violation of the UN Charter and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights) that their two servants (national government and international institutions) are compelling in the international order would accelerate their collapse. In particular, I want to understand if this apparent rise in gossip, violence, conflict, intolerance, grumble, turmoil, wickedness, and other tragedies that swept the world in recent years could make “the love of most grow cold” until the power of the heirs of the victors of WW2 fades and falls away, or if those heirs would be able to overcome this rejection of morality and law that their critical thinkers and servants (national governments and international institutions) are spearheading, thus permitting them to continue to get their way despite the resistance of others.

Glossary

Let the word “victors of WW2” refer to the families/dynasties that control the international order and the money supply of the world. Let “the families/dynasties that control the international order and the money supply of the world” refer to the individuals (families/dynasties) who are deciding the course of the world and history. Since the start of the second millennium, “the families/dynasties that control the international order and the money supply of the world” have been the old powers (i.e., the western European monarchs and republics). Let the word “heirs of the old powers” refer to the children of the families/dynasties that control the international order, and the money supply of the world. The latest global war that became known as World War Two (WW2) was fought between the western European monarchs and republics (the old powers) to determine who could make the weakest consider the opinion of the fittest. It was not a cultural clash that resulted in new families, different races, or religions starting to dominate the world and history. Accordingly, let the word “victors of WW2” refer to the families/dynasties that control the western European monarchs and republics only. The victors of WW2 are also the ruling class that controls all the UN member states, including the United States, and the formal international intergovernmental organization named the United Nations since 1945.

Let the word “critical thinkers” refer to the political and military theorists, mathematicians, physicists, priests, philosophers, and historians whose wisdom the principal victors of WW2 or the elites depend on to keep their dominant role (rejuvenate their power) and secure the UN goals suggested in the UN charter and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR).

Let the word “servants” refer to the different titles, such as “chief, executive, ruler, king,” that the individuals who exercise supreme or prominent authority on behalf of the elites in a particular group, category, or sphere give to themselves to distinguish their level of fitness in the group. Let the word “government” refer to the legal entity (machinery or apparatus) on which the elites depend to enforce the legitimized policies. Let all the non-state actors and international institutions, such as the United Nations, World Bank, European Union, NATO, African Union, IMF, Red Cross, etc., on whom the elites depend to enforce the legitimized policies be referred to as servants as well. In other words, the different governments, non-state actors, and international institutions are the different legal entities on which the elites depend to rejuvenate their power.

People protect themselves from each other (i.e., from conflict or from letting their animalistic attitude prevail over their humanistic conduct) by inviting each other “to surrender some of their freedoms and submit to the authority (of the ruler or to the decision of a majority) in exchange for protection of their remaining rights or maintenance of the social order.” In the field of political and social theory, this aforementioned relationship is called a social contract. For example, the role of the government, non-state actors, and international institutions is to administer the social contract. Likewise, the role of the “chief, executive, ruler, and king” and their subordinates (judges, law enforcement officers, administrators, engineers, cleaners, etc.) is to ensure that the social contract, or the natural and legal rights that the majority (citizens) approve of, are preserved. Let the social contract that all governments, non-state actors, and international institutions are implementing on behalf of the elites be referred to in this work as the UN goals that are included in the UN Charter UDHR only. In this work, none of the goals that UN member states added in the aftermath of WW2 and began seeking, such as ending poverty, ending social injustice, ending pollution, ending sea rise, etc., are included.

In this work, the United States is regarded as the custodian of the idea of freedom despite all the arrogance, disregard, acts of aggression, and breaches of peace that rulers and the political class in this country have demonstrated since 1945. In other words, the Americans are the only society that is fighting to preserve the idea of freedom, and they are not employing theatrics to preserve the idea of freedom with their tongues, but their hearts are in denial. If mankind loses the American culture, it will be doomed.

Problem

Some biologists and scientists define life as “a process which involves the metabolism, growth, and reproduction of an organism and that organism’s manipulation of and adaptation to its surroundings for its survival.” We can say that this organism, whether it is a living being or a plant, is the system in which this process takes place. In addition, if we want this system to respond to stimuli or changes in the environment in a controlled way, it is important to keep the internal environment balanced to allow the system to do its work according to its specialized role, irrespective of its genetic makeup.

For example, fruits and vegetables ripen differently. Many fruits and vegetables produce ethylene, which is responsible for the way such products ripen. Farmers and fruit and vegetable merchants understood that change is constantly shaping fruits and vegetables in a manner that makes them unrecognizable and that the role they play accelerates or slows this process. Accordingly, farmers and fruit and vegetable merchants increase their profit by controlling the environment of the different fruits and vegetables to ensure that they do not ripen at the same time.

Throughout history, the people who wanted others to consider their opinion before taking action of their own and the ones who believed that God commissioned them to ensure that his will be done, on earth as it is in heaven, refused to accept that people’s hearts are constantly whispering evil, just as fruits are constantly producing ethylene. Those individuals in question believe that they can subdue the evil that people’s hearts whisper without requiring that they put in the efforts that farmers and fruit and vegetable merchants put in to increase their profit or avoid having the different fruits and vegetables they are selling ripen at the same time. In other words, those individuals who want others to consider their opinion before taking action of their own and the ones who believe that God commissioned them to ensure that his will be done, on earth as it is in heaven, refused to accept that when they do not practice what they preach, they shape people in a manner that makes them unrecognizable to them, just as farmers and fruit and vegetable merchants stop to recognize their products when they do not control their environments.

The problem that the individuals who want others to consider their opinion before taking action of their own and the ones who believe that God commissioned them to ensure that his will be done, on earth as it is in heaven, create when they refuse to practice what they preach (i.e., shape people in a manner that makes them unrecognizable) is that people grow dumber. In addition, people stop to be color blind, and the predictions that those individuals in question make about how the political, economic, and social solution that they are positing is improving peace and security shrink.

For example, as of 1945, the intelligence level of most rulers and political classes has been going downhill, and a large number of them are evolving stupider at a frightening rate. If the intelligence of most rulers and political classes continues to decline, the natural and legal rights they posit and enforce to keep their dominant role will stay ignored. When rulers and political class fail to make people observe the standards they legitimize to keep their dominant role, their idiocracy is pushing them to employ the same solution that farmers and fruit and vegetable merchants adopt when they do not control the environment of their fruit or vegetable, and their products turn into an unrecognizable shape.

When farmers and fruit and vegetable merchants slack and do not control the environment of their products, and their fruits or produce reap at the same time, they are obliged to destroy what they cannot sell. Since antiquity, the people who want others to consider their opinion before taking action of their own and the ones who believe that God commissioned them to ensure that his will be done, on earth as it is in heaven (i.e., the fittest), have been subjecting the people who they want to consider their opinion before taking action of their own to the same fortune that confronts the produce that farmers and fruit and vegetable merchants do not sell. This situation has prevented the fittest to reap anything good from the standards and norms they legitimize and enforce to keep their dominant role besides catastrophe or disaster. This is because when the fittest refuse to practice what they preach, or kill, imprison, frustrate, or disenchant the people who refuse to observe the natural and legal rights they posit and enforce, they excite or confound the evil inclinations that are constantly whispering evil in the hearts of people into a higher energy state than they should be or stay at, just as happens to products that are best kept at room temperature to increase their shelf life and people refrigerate or vice versa. When the evil inclinations that are constantly whispering evil in the hearts of people become excited or confounded way faster than the state they should be, people become unable to know if they should turn to the right or to the left, and they convert into becoming snares and traps for their leaders, just as the Israelites became a whip on the back of their rulers and a thorn in their eyes after they turned away from the laws of Moses in antiquity. [Joshua 23:13]

Additionally, farmers and merchants destroy the fruits and vegetable products that ripen and transform into a shape that they do not recognize (i.e., go bad). The people who want others to consider their opinion before taking action of their own, and the ones who believe that God commissioned them to ensure that his will be done on earth as it is in heaven (i.e., the fittest), refuse to destroy (kill) the people who reject to abide by the standards and norms they are legitimizing, or kill the individuals who let their evil inclinations (personal power and conscience) dictate their actions. This is because if the fittest destroys (kills) the people who refuse to consider his opinion before taking action of their own, he would be left alone (or with few people with him only), and he (the fittest) would be obliged to do the chores of the people he expunged himself. Other reasons that propel the fittest to evade destroying or killing the people who refuse to observe the natural and legal rights he legitimizes include the following: First, people do not move on with their lives like animals do following the problems (tragedies, misfortune, injustice) they run into, but such calamities or events build (deepen) hate in their hearts and propel them to want revenge. Not to mention that all people do after birth is preoccupy themselves with what their neighbors are doing and not to preoccupy themselves with leading by example or practicing tolerance so social cohesion improves. Hence, all people have relatives and friends who sometimes refuse to move on when the fittest treats, injures, or kills their loved one unjustly, the fittest prefers not to kill the people who refuse to consider their opinion before taking action of their own, for fear of being harmed by the relatives and friends of the individuals seeking revenge for their loved ones. Second, after man discovered that law and order are two profitable concepts that make it possible for the fittest to depend on their procedural power to dominate, subjugate, and exploit the weak without the need to rely specifically on force all the time to achieve this end, people started to rival to get in control of the apparatuses that are in charge of legitimizing and enforcing rules (standards and norms); hence, this route kills two birds with one stone. In the first place, this route eliminates the need to waste (i.e., destroy or kill) human power and to profit from this output for free by just passing it over to the judiciary and law enforcement complex. In the second place, this route eliminates the need for the fittest to worry about a rise in the awareness of people discouraging them and persuading them to question the political order that he (the fittest) is legitimizing and enforcing, because he can easily argue that all the killing that he is affecting is programmed to improve peace and security and not to keep his dominant role.

It is important that readers keep in mind that after man invented technology that is capable of controlling and command humans without the need for real humans to do it, the fittest began a phase of downsizing the role of government or the state and relying on the power of technology to do the killing.

Throughout history, the fittest avoided that the distrust and patience of the weak wear down to the point of pushing the weak to refuse to accept to stay with him, including ganging on him to stop him from having more powers than others or to oust him from his glory by convincing the weak that the political and economic strategies that he is legitimizing and enforcing are increasing the happiness of both. However, since all people (for the exception of children, monks, and people who are dying) appear to have their plans (which is mainly to kill, lie, betray, defraud, freeze social space and accumulate material things on a cumulative basis and then transfer it to designated individuals), and the truth (i.e., God or the natural world) appear to have its own plan, and the plan of truth is contradictory to the plan of people which usually only lasts for a short period of time in the history of the world, this means that the fittest can only increase his happiness and the happiness of the people that are staying with him and on whom he depends to provide for his own protection if he makes them do unto others what others don’t do unto them. This dilemma makes the fittest, or the people that stay with the fittest, constantly entangled in stripping each other’s power or forming a tag team to strip others of their power. Most importantly, this dilemma prevents people from reversing the dystopian world that governs relationships, which keeps taking a turn for the worse.

The problem of having many people rivaling for power (i.e., defrauding, betraying, and lying) within the same group and with people that are not members of the group makes it very hard for the individuals who own everything to avoid that their power does not get stripped from them and become handed to new people, in the course of time and things. This is because it is not possible to create ordered relationships when the name of the game is how to extract value or power from others.

Correspondingly, the societies in which their fittest were capable of keeping power centralized were also capable of extending or prolonging their power over the interests of others the longest. For example, the old powers (the western European monarchs and republics) managed to successfully bestow or extend their dominant role over the entire world since the start of the second millennium because they kept the citizens that they depended on to keep their dominant role disciplined and the societies that they were dominating, subjugating, and exploiting on a short leash. In other words, the old powers avoided that the number of people who were like them preoccupying themselves with what their neighbor was doing instead of preoccupying themselves with observing the standards legitimized gets large. Likewise, all the people who aroused their anger and disobeyed them were defeated and killed. The lucky ones were imprisoned, exiled, or promoted.

Wealth, power, and status are known to blind people. In other words, instead of the people who consider that power, money, and status are important to them continuing to focus on what it takes to get the money, power, and status, they start to focus on what money, power, and status do for them and therefore think that it is possible to create a balance between the two.

For example, instead of the old powers (the victors of WW2) continuing to preserve their power in the aftermath of WW2 in the same way they were doing before WW2 erupted, that is, by killing or imprisoning anyone who does not consider their opinion before taking action on their own, they decided to relent and to begin to focus on letting others help them with what it takes to get the money, power, and status, so they can spend some time attending to what money does for them. Put differently, instead of the old powers continuing to extend their empires into the third millennia, the old powers decided to dismantle the direct, visible role they were playing to get their way despite the resistance of others in every corner of the world and tasked critical thinkers and servants (national governments and international institutions) with playing this visible role while themselves playing the role of the puppeteer.

In my opinion, the old powers dismantled their empires in the aftermath of WW2 because they were convinced that if they continued to build on the philosophical work of Adam Smith, a Scottish economist, as suggested in his book The Wealth of Nations, which he published in 1776, they could keep their dominant role. In the book The Wealth of Nations, Adam Smith suggests that a person does not need to be controlling the money supply at every step of the supply chain to keep his dominant role, but at key spots. The weaving of what Adam Smith suggested and what technology can facilitate means that the old powers can have a less visible role in legitimizing and enforcing natural and legal rights while still extending their dominant role over the international order.

The weaving of what Adam Smith suggested with what technology has throughput history facilitated to the people whose knowledge was more advanced than others is surely a win-win situation in a world where its inhabitants want reality to be about power or an all-out competition for power. This false pretense prevents people from being organized to build a perfect world and motivates everyone to be devoted to denying each other rights; thus, creativity becomes an aspect that has no meaning. This is the reason why people’s relationships were always a zero-sum game throughout history and not a positive-sum game except during a short period of time. That is to say, the only time when people had a period of peace was when the fittest managed to daze the weak the longest. However, as soon as the weak realized that the fittest was denying him the right to prepare for war, not necessarily to build a perfect world but to keep his hegemony, their relations took a different turn.

Indeed, the selectivity that the old powers learned from the work of Adam Smith and applied to the societies that they were dominating as far as what they would be permitting them to do and not do (for example, fabricate knives but not guns, plant cotton but not produce machines that can process cotton mechanically, etc.) helped the old powers to keep their dominance over most societies unchallenged from the middle of the second millennia until 1945 (which is when WW2 was regarded as having ended). In fact, the major wars that were fought from the middle of the second millennia until 1945 were conflicts that were the result of internal disputes that occurred between the old powers themselves to determine who could make the weakest consider the opinion of the fittest rather than a consequence of an external rising force that challenged their superiority.

One could perceive that the heirs of the old powers would be in control of the international order in the aftermath of WW2 in the same way their fathers were before WW2 erupted (during the colonial era), but the picture looks grim, blurry, and different on all fronts. People (including the heirs of the old powers) are increasingly depending on violent practices to get the resources that would later become commodities or the right manpower to build them, instead of on practices that are safe and not regarded as inimical to the public interest. Evidently, when the heirs of the old powers do wrong or keep silent whenever people turn aside from observing the political order, their mannerism makes it a lot harder for people to perceive that they are intelligent, adaptable, creative, and working to create prosperity for all since 1945.

Octopuses are sea animals famous for their ability to change color to disperse threats or to blend with their natural habitat before attacking prey. If the heirs of the old powers do not think that taking rest from wars and bringing in everlasting righteousness after their fathers united all the people in the aftermath of WW2 and counselled them to be doing is smart, then the heirs of the old powers need to to be able to blend, transform, or change color in the same way Octopus’s are capable of doing to disperse threat or attack without their prey knowing from where the attack is coming.

The insecurity that has swept the world in recent years means that the heirs of the old powers are not capable of providing the right reasons to make people trust them, or to subjugate them to fulfill their command. The inability of the heirs of the old powers to accurately blend, transform, or change color as they are going about getting their ways despite the resistance of others has been putting them in the spotlight and exposing their evil side instead of their good side only. Evidently, this drawback makes it very difficult for the heirs of the old powers to regenerate their power without constantly having to rely on force to achieve this goal. The more the heirs of the old powers use force to get their way despite the resistance of others, the more this situation tears their relations with people apart and jeopardizes their stability. This is because force brings forth what is within people. Furthermore, the more a person brings forth from the evil that is within him, the faster the anger that he releases awakens others to the very reality around them and empowers them to no longer trust the dualistic mind of the person who demonstrates by his deeds that deep inside him runs a river of inherent negative energy. This is because people do not fight and kill to improve the truth but to please the envy, ego, or stories that reside in their imagination.

In my opinion, this sharp shift as of 1945 in the ability of the heirs of the old powers to make people more receptive and ready to voluntarily accept surrendering freedom to the same manipulative and controlling attitude that their fathers depended on to keep their dominant role before WW2 erupted is due to the heirs of the victors disregarding or underestimating the implications of several fundamental axioms, two of which are the following:

First, when Adam Smith suggested in his work The Wealth of Nations that a person does not need to be controlling the money supply at every corner of the supply chain to keep his dominant role, but at key spots, he could not have suggested that the person who wants others to consider his opinion before taking action on their own sit in front of dashboards and monitor how his servants are securing the money, power, and status for him, but he suggested that the person who wants to keep his dominant role be doing the control himself from the key spots. This is because Adam Smith must have known, as most people do, that wealth, power, and status are known to blind people and are the instruments that people depend on to humiliate each other.

To give an example, it would be naive to suppose that Adam Smith suggested that whoever controls the international order and the money supply of the world needs to do to keep his dominant role is to let the people who live on the river banks of the Suez Canal (known by many as Egyptians) control this water passage and to send them at the end of each month an account of how much money they stripped from the people who used this water passage, but suggested that the people who want others to consider their opinion before taking action of their own be doing the looting themselves. Throughout history, no king managed to make his servants (chiefs, judges, officials, etc.) prostrate or bow down to their master when they learned his business.

Second, the heirs of the old powers are unable to control and command national governments and international institutions as their fathers were capable of doing before WW2 erupted because they are not reading as much as their fathers were doing. This is because if they were doing enough reading in as much as they appear to be busy transgressing and perceiving that they are far superior in might than their fathers, they would have gained the same virtues that their fathers gained upon recommending making the World War II war aims be about taking a rest from war instead of continuing this tradition. In other words, if the heirs of the old powers have been doing any reading since 1945 in as much as they appear to be focused on how to transgress, they would have learned that people throughout history have been plotting against each other, arguing falsehoods, discrediting the truth, and in this way, they would have learned what they must be doing to avoid having their servants (national governments and international institutions) humiliate them as the constant wars that engulfed the world ascertain.

It is suggested in the literature that the Islamic prophet Muhammad counselled his close followers to keep reading the Quran (and other religious books) after his death, because it contains the news of what came before them, the news of what would come after them, and the news of how to judge between them.

Throughout history, the kings who abandoned the truth suggested in biblical scriptures and other religious scriptures were punished. Likewise, the kings who sought guidance in ways that were different from what is suggested in biblical scriptures and other religious scriptures were ultimately misguided by their servants (chiefs, judges, officials, etc.) until, in the course of time of things, they were resized.

For example, the Bible suggests that in antiquity, the Egyptian kings oppressed citizens and treated them unfairly, especially the poor. The Bible suggests that the Israelites, who were particularly oppressed, decided to accept God’s offer (who stayed invisible but communicated with them through the intermediary of an interlocutor named Moses) to help them migrate to new territories in order to legitimize and enforce fairer laws or standards between them if they turned their backs on the Egyptian kings. [Exodus 3:7-10]. The Israelites, who usurped (rebelled) against their Egyptian rulers, succeeded in getting away with their wish to leave Egypt to live in a new land that the Bible suggests that God had reserved for them. Surely, the Israelites would not have hardened, listened to Moses or God, agreed to leave Egypt, and broke all ties with the families/dynasties that were ruling Egypt if the servants (chiefs, judges, officials, etc.) who were in charge of interpreting the policies (or laws) legitimized were doing their job in a manner that would make them voluntarily stay prostrating or bowing down to their masters (the Egyptian kings) and were not repelling them.

If whenever rulers or kings allow their chiefs, judges, or officials to interpret policies (or laws) incoherently, they could be defeated, then there is a good chance that the old powers (the victors of WW2) or their heirs will be humiliated and defeated in the same way the Egyptian kings were humbled in antiquity if the constant wars that swept the world in recent years are because they are allowing their critical thinkers and servants (governments and international institutions) to interpret the policies (or laws) legitimized in the UN Charter or the UDH the wrong way or through the intermediary of unskilled shepherds.

In fact, the heirs of the old powers could confront in the future not only the threats that the Egyptian kings encountered when they allowed their chiefs, judges, officials to regard themselves exempt from observing the policies (or laws) legitimized if they are allowing their critical thinkers and servants (governments and international institutions) to regard themselves exempt from observing the policies (or laws) legitimized in the UN Charter and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), but the threats the Israelites faced after they left Egypt and began to interpret the laws of Moses on their way to their ultimate destination (the promised land) and after they settled in it in the same way the Egyptian kings, chiefs, judges, officials, were doing it as well.

For example, after Joshua distributed, in antiquity, all the land to the families/dynasties that had left Egypt with Moses, he warned them against turning away after his death and allying, or intermarrying and associating, with the people (societies) whom they went to war against, conquered, showed pity, and kept alive to use in labor-intensive chores when they were going to the promised land or after settling in it. Joshua said that those people (societies, nations, etc.) would later become a snare and a trap for them, whips on their backs and thorns in their eyes, until they stripped them of their glory and began to play their role. Most importantly, Joshua warned the individuals who would be playing the role of king to not consider themselves better than their fellow Israelis or to stop reading all the days of their lives the law of Moses and to follow all its words carefully so their descendants can reign for a long time. Sadly, the Israelites kings refused to act on Joshua’s advice, and in the course of time and things, they were resized and defeated.

As of the start of the 20th century, the old powers began to behave in the same exact irresponsible manner that the Israelite kings exhibited in antiquity.

First, the old powers refused to observe the common standards they proclaimed in the constitution of the international organization they created and named the League of Nations in 1920 and pledged to keep them in mind all the time to ensure lasting peace following World War 1.

Second, the old powers decided to grant rights to the people who subscribe to the Jewish faith and who were scattered in every corner of the world to reenact a similar journey to the one that their ancestors carried out with Moses and Joshua in 1290 BC from Egypt to repossess the same land that their forefathers were in 722 BC expelled from, mainly because they disobeyed the counsel of Joshua. The old powers and the Jews, whom the old powers empowered because they did not want them to continue to be scattered in every corner of the world, succeeded in 1948 in having the inhabitants who were living on this land that their ancestors had been expelled from since 722 BC in denying them rights to exercise sovereignty over this territory so they could do it themselves, and renamed it Israel.

Third, as if the crisis that the old powers created in the world after they violated the covenants they were preaching in the League of Nations from 1920 to 1948, which included entangling the world in a second world war and displacing many people around the world from their homes to give it to new people, was not enough, the old powers decided in 1945 to dismantle their empires and to invite the societies they vanquished during WW1 and WW2, and the societies they were dominating until this date, to secure a vision for the world that they said would be capable of reducing fear and want worldwide. In other words, carry out the same exodus journey that the Israelites carried out from Egypt to the promised land, but without this journey carrying a physical change from one point to another but rather a behavioral change in the same space.

As far as I know, it is not God who asked the old powers in the first half of the 20th century (i.e., before WW2 erupted) to have the people who subscribe to the Jewish faith and who were scattered in all corners of the world leave their homes and go displace the people (i.e., the Palestinians) who were living on this land that their ancestors were conquered and kicked out from, because they were not observing the laws of Moses, but the old powers. Likewise, it is not God who asked the old powers to dismantle their empires and to invite the societies they vanquished during WW1 and WW2, and the societies they were dominating, to secure a vision for the world that they said would be capable of reducing fear and want worldwide, but this decision was made by them as well.

People have been trying to undermine the truth included in the biblical scriptures since the beginning of time. People believe that if they create institutions (units of authorities) that fix (posit) common rules (standards and norms) that people later buy and sell according to each mean (wealth, power, status), that the half-ass transformative truth they would be creating (generating) would ensure the maintenance of their strength and stability, and that such a tactic could rewrite human history differently. Unfortunately, this strategy has not worked so far.

I have no way of knowing if people could build regulatory institutions (units of authorities) in the future that would be capable, with the help of technology, of helping the servants of the heirs of the old powers (i.e., national governments and international institutions) to react to things as they develop so the disregard that those helpers are propelling would not be subjected to the absolutism suggested in the biblical scriptures, or if people would remain preying on each other as they have been doing throughout history, especially whenever the weak refuse to consider the opinion of the fittest before taking action on their own. Until technology helps the fittest react to things as they develop, humanity will be ruthlessly trapped in perceiving that their deeds are increasing their happiness and fulfilling them, while with such errant behavior, people would be fulfilling the prophecies suggested in the biblical scriptures.

For example, the Bible suggests that the land which the Israelites settled in after they left Egypt (i.e., present-day Israel or Palestine) in antiquity but later were expelled from for refusing to govern while administering it in accordance with the laws of Moses as the house of God on earth (Psalm 132:13-14). Instead of the heirs of the old powers and all the people who their fathers empowered in all corners of the world in the first half of the 20th century to leave their homes to come and live in this land (i.e., present day Israel or Palestine), observing the appeal that Joshua suggested to their ancestors (i.e., the laws of Moses) or the appeal suggested in the UN Charter and the UDHR, thus avoiding that if they disobeyed them (since they are basically one and the same), they would not confront the same challenges that those predecessors dealt with in antiquity (i.e., becoming stripped from exercising their inalienable right over this land), they are increasingly repeating the same mistakes as of 1948. In other words, the heirs of the old powers and all their critical thinkers and servants (the Israeli government, US and western European governments, and international institutions) are continuing to regard themselves as the measure of all things and ignoring the warnings suggested in the biblical scriptures about what they might face if they continue to disobey the laws of Moses when doing their affairs on it. In other words, the heirs of the old powers and all their afore mentioned critical thinkers and servants are continuing to extend this phase of desecrating this land that the Bible says is the house of God on earth, and abusing the people who live on it (jews, muslims, christians, buddhists, etc.), just as their fathers did in the first half of the 20th century, when they used their power to strip from the people who were exercising authority over this land (i.e., the Palestinian) in order to hand it to new people to administer on count of them being descendants of those initial people who inhabited this territory, or heirs who said that they never gave up their right to reclaim this territory that their forefathers were expelled from many centuries ago.

In the Bible, it is suggested that when Moses led the Israelites from Egypt to this land, which in this same book is referred to as the house of God on earth, the people who were traveling with him began to rely on their natural freedom instead of on the laws of Moses and wandered for 40 years until the generation that was refusing to observe the laws of Moses passed away and a new generation that was ready to do so was born. Likewise, in the Bible, it is suggested that after the Israelites settled in the promised land and began to disobey the law of Moses or the appeal that Joshua suggested to them, they were conquered and expelled from this land. In fact, all the kingdoms that conquered this land, such as the Greek, Roman, Muslim, Ottoman, Persian, etc., were defeated and expelled from it, including failing afterwards to resist the fall of their empires after they allowed their chiefs, judges, or officials to administer it or govern it in the same way the Israelite kings were doing it.

Many questions beg answers. For one, how did the heirs of the old powers conclude that people around the world are going to want to stay with them, to let them have more power than others, and not take up their anger directly at them in the same way the Iraqis, Tunisians, Egyptians, Libyans, etc. took up their anger directly at their rulers and political class during the uprisings that were known as the Arab Spring, if they continue to let their critical thinkers and servants (national governments and international institutions) say one thing and do another? For example, the Soviet Union did not collapse in the second half of the 20th century because the United States and the western European monarchs and republics won the Cold War, but mainly because the rulers and political class who were controlling the Soviet Union converted the different units of authorities of this bloc into a platform to deepen political corruption instead of a platform to assess the needs of the people and to design and secure for them solutions in accordance with the provisions suggested in the Marxist philosophy, the UN Charter, or the UDHR. Likewise, the United States, the western European monarchs and republics, NATO, and others did not defeat Saddam Hussein of Iraq at the start of the third millennium after those countries falsely accused Iraq of being a threat to the international order because of their military superiority, but rather because the Iraqi military generals betrayed their chief and betrayed their country for a fistful of dollars. Since 1945, no UN member state has observed the UN Charter or the UDHR, starting with the United States (the custodian of the idea of freedom and the global policemen of the world).

Can the heirs of the old powers prevent that their critical thinkers and servants (national governments and international institutions) betray them in the same way the servants (i.e., chiefs, judges, officials) of the families/dynasties that were controlling the Soviet Union or Saddam Hussein in Iraq let their own masters down after those heirs oriented their own servants (i.e., chiefs, judges, officials) to convert the role of the state from being a platform to teach citizens public good (tolerance, morality, etc.) as their fathers suggested they should be devoted to orienting them to be doing in the aftermath of WW2 to a platform that provide local and national monopolies, especially in sectors that are natural monopolies? That is to say, can the heirs of the old powers rejuvenate their power while the servants (national governments and international institutions) who are responsible for maintaining their strength and stability are stealing, cheating, and hurting people in the name of God, the truth, law and order, peace and security, democratic control, human rights, freedom, etc., while no UN member state is observing the UN Charter and the UDHR (starting with the United States)?

The heirs of the old powers persuade people to stay with them and to grant them more powers than others by specifically convincing them that they would be better off surrendering part of their freedom to them to increase their happiness in return than to others. The concepts that the heirs of the old powers sell to people to invite them to stay with them are truth, law and order, peace and security, democratic control, human rights, freedom, etc. Two motives could be propelling this lack of apprehensiveness toward the danger that could encumber the heirs of the old powers if they continue to let their servants (national governments and international institutions) say one thing and do another. The first is if the heirs of the old powers believe that technology and the element of time can protect them. The second is if the heirs of the old powers believe that they can predict the deeds of people before they happen, thus deflecting any conspiracy that their enemies may hatch against them.

I do not know which motive between the aforementioned two could be persuading the heirs of the old powers into perceiving that they are mightier than the kings who refused to have the necessary courage to make their critical thinkers and servants (national governments and international institutions) lead by example, until they learned that this was not the case the hard way. What I do know is that the Bible suggests that when God was meddling on earth and persuading the Israelites to disobey Pharaoh and leave Egypt, he remained invisible. In fact, the Bible suggests that even after the Israelites settled in the promised land, God remained invisible. In other words, God was not motivating the Israelites to disobey Pharaoh or the Israelite kings from fortified strongholds or from behind walls in the same way the heirs of the old powers (western European monarchs and republics) are demanding that people around the world stop to obey their rulers and political class if they are not observing the UN Charter and the UDHR, but without demanding an account from them if they do not do it. In antiquity, the Israelites, who were dissatisfied with the policies or choices that Moses, Joshua, prophets, etc. were legitimizing and claiming were instructions from God, could not take up their anger directly with God and were resized in the course of time and things. This luxury is not something that the Greek kings, Roman kings, or Muslim caliphates enjoyed as well.

Can the heirs of the old powers prevent that their critical thinkers and servants (governments and international institutions) gang on them and not humiliate them in the same way the chiefs, judges, and officials ganged on the Israeli kings, Greek kings, Roman kings, and Muslim caliphates humiliated in antiquity and humiliated those kings after they granted them rights to regard themselves exempt from observing the rules (standards and norms) that were legitimized? In other words, those kings were doing exactly what the heirs of the old powers have permitted their critical thinkers and servants to be doing since 1945. This is to steal, cheat, and hurt people in the name of God, the truth, law and order, peace and security, democratic control, human rights, freedom, etc., but without holding them accountable for not practicing what they are preventing people from doing?

I do not know the answer to the aforementioned question. What I do know is that reality appears to be a jungle where the fittest prey on the weak, and when the fittest refuse to increase the happiness of the weak, the weak gang on the fittest until the latter falls prey to the ruthless predatory instincts or nature of the human person. Accordingly, given that mankind has not yet ascertained if the mythological narratives that are suggested in the biblical scriptures are true or false, and all the calculations and decisions that people make are not made purely to improve ordered relations, truth, or morality, but how not to be a prey but a predator, could the heirs of the old powers be doing right by letting their critical thinkers and servants (governments and international institutions) steal, cheat, and hurt people in the name of God, the truth, law and order, peace and security, democratic control, human rights, freedom, etc. but without holding them accountable for not practicing what they are preventing people from doing? For example, did the heirs of the old powers do right by allowing that President Mohamed Morsi, who was elected President in Egypt democratically, be ousted from power and Egypt returned to being ruled by a regime that is worse than the regime that people in Egypt rebelled against in 2011. Likewise, are the heirs of the old powers doing right by allowing Russia to destroy Ukraine because the Ukrainians want to join NATO or the European Union and do not want to stay with them? Most importantly, are the heirs of the old powers doing right by allowing the Israeli government to kill 30,000 Palestinian civilians, destroy an entire city, and displace two million people to find a handful of criminals who are not worse than the criminals who are searching for them?

Once again, I do not know the answer to any of the aforesaid questions. What I do know is that in the Quran it is suggested that some people are born naturally ungrateful and wicked while others are gracious and moral, and humans have no choice in this matter [At-Taghabun 64:2]. For example, I have no way of knowing if the torture and total disregard of the UN Charter and the UDHR that the heirs of the old powers are granting rights to the Israeli government to subject the Palestinian people to endure since 1948 is by design or because God is raising the number of ungrateful and wicked people in this land that the Bible suggests is the house of God on earth, thus raising along chaos and the number of people who are distrusting them and withdrawing their obligation to obey them around the world until they become replaced with new people. What I do know is that the longer the heirs of the old powers take to stop their critical thinkers and servants (national governments and international institutions) from regarding themselves exempt from observing the work program suggested in the UN Charter and the UDHR, mankind will not be able to rest from wars. If mankind would not be able to rest from wars, then all the efforts that the fathers of the heirs of the old powers exhausted to unite the world in the course of centuries would have been done in vain. People around the world would start to gang on them, and there is no guarantee that they would not destroy them, as happened to many kings who refused to listen to the advice of their fathers.

Again, as I said before, if the heirs of the old powers (the victors of WW2) are not worried if people around the world rest from wars in the aftermath of WW2, as their fathers counselled them to be devoted to ensuring so the international order does not become dynamic and they lose its control, then the heirs of the old powers do not think that it is important to believe in the unseen or believe that they can be defeated and their powers handed to new people. In other words, the heirs of the old powers (the victors of WW2) must believe that they are invincible or more powerful than their fathers.

I have no way of knowing which scenario between the aforementioned two could be persuading the heirs of the old powers into perceiving that they are far superior in might than the truth suggested in biblical scriptures or the truth that even their fathers arrived at during WW2 and which they spelled its blue print suggested in the UN Charter and the UDHR. This truth is that if the old powers have their eyes on dominating the world, they need to rest from wars.

Many pundits suggest that it would not be possible for the heirs of the old powers to keep their dominant role if they continued to preserve their power in the same way their fathers were doing it before WW2 erupted. This was done by keeping the societies they depended on to keep their control (i.e., the industrialized societies) engaged in wars and by denying the societies that the industrialized nations dominate (i.e., the undeveloped societies) rights, thus preventing everyone from observing the principles suggested in treaties, constitutions, or the different approaches suggested in religious and philosophical scriptures. For example, the irresponsible and immoderate method by which the heirs of the old powers are permitting the Israeli government to entertain the Palestinians who refuse to abandon this political idea that was spread since the Israeli-Palestinian conflict started about the Palestinians right to return to occupy the land that they were kicked out from in what is now Israel is strange. In other words, the decision of the heirs of the old powers to be against making the Palestinians abandon this right of return all together, even if this means organizing a genocide and finishing off (killing) all the Palestinians if need be, highlights how violence is not a universal aspect of human nature but a programmed aspect in that its goal is to prevent the political order from reaching a playoffs moment (state) and stay in a continuous play-off elimination mode (state) between players (people). This is because if the heirs of the old powers (western European monarchs and republics) let the Israeli Jews kill or finish off all the Palestinians, then those two players would have to rival to determine who would make the weakest consider the opinion of the fittest and would not move on to improve social cohesion. Therefore, the heirs of the old powers (western European monarchs and republics) are better off letting the Israeli Jews and the Palestinians stay engaged in finishing each other off instead of the victor beginning to rival them.

Accordingly, we can say that the constant wars that have swept the world as of 1945 are mainly due to the unwillingness of the heirs of the old powers to do as their fathers suggested and take a rest from wars in the aftermath of WW2, just as sport tournaments in any field are not continuous and include breaks or periods of rest. In other words, the decision of the heirs of the old powers to let all their critical thinkers and servants (governments and international institutions) regard themselves exempt from observing the appeal suggested in the UN Charter, the UDHR, or the appeals suggested in religious and philosophical scriptures, and to be constantly rivaling to determine who could make the weakest consider the opinion of the fittest before taking action of their own, could be inducing an ongoing brawl just as happens in a bench-clearing brawl, which is a “form of fighting that occurs in sports, when most or all players on both teams leave their dugouts, bullpens, or benches, and charge onto the playing area in order to fight one another or try to break up a fight.” The challenges that such brawls endanger are that they can escalate into altercations that can expand to involve the fans or the crowds. Hooliganism is “disruptive or unlawful behavior such as rioting, fighting, and vandalism, usually in connection with crowds at sporting events.”

I have no way of knowing if the constant wars that have engulfed the world as of 1945 are due to the large number of people who are flouting the laws around the world and therefore inducing or entangling mankind in a form of hooliganism without being aware of it. What I do know is that if the heirs of the old powers continue to let their critical thinkers and servants (national governments and international institutions) scoff at the principles suggested in the UN Charter and the UDHR, it would be important that they start to crackdown on any illicit reckless behavior and apply stricter legal penalties to maintain the stability of the international order.

Accordingly, the more the critical thinkers and servants (governments and international institutions) of the heirs of the old powers crackdown on violence while regarding themselves exempt from observing the appeal suggested in the UN Charter, the UDHR, the more the stricter security measures that those helpers (national governments and international institutions) would be enforcing to maintain the stability of the international order would be infuriating and disenchanting people of all races and classes, the greater the odds are that it would not be possible to deflate the raging tension without putting out a fight first. Most people (including the heirs of the old powers) rely on deceit to get their way despite the resistance of others. When deceit, betrayal, corruption, violence, etc. rise, a culture of distrust and political taboo rises. When political taboo rises, individual, contextual, social, and environmental factors interact and influence people at all developmental levels. The fury, frustration, and dynamic that would be embroiling people would strain the international order and create what David Émile Durkheim, a French sociologist, coined collective effervescence. David Émile Durkheim defined collective effervescence as a phenomenon in which “a community or society come together and simultaneously communicate the same thought and participate in the same action.

For example, following the October 7, 2023, Hamas attacks, the collective effervescence that this event created did not make people unify behind the people of the state of Israel, but this attack provided an impetus for people around the world to demand that the Israeli government end its culture of apartheid over the Palestinians and to free them. In fact, since October 8, 2023, the more the Israeli government kills innocent people and fabricates stories to justify their unmerciful actions (i.e., search to kill the perpetrators of the October 7, 2023, attacks), the more protests that people are staging and are demanding that the United States (the country that is providing the Israeli government with weapons) stop violating the UN Charter and the UDHR and to grant rights to the Palestinians to form a sovereign state.

If whenever the fittest take the laws into his own hands, he can risk having the wider mass repel from him as the United States began confronting on the Israeli-Hamas war after its political ruling class decided to violate the UN Charter and the UDHR which supposedly their predecessors drafted and counselled them to follow to keep their dominant role, and sidelined with the Israeli government instead of the truth (i.e., either to kill the Palestinians since the heirs of the old powers do not want them to live in this land that is now called Israel, or abandon giving the Israeli Jews hope to create greater Israel and resize the state of Israel, and neighboring states such as Egypt, Jordan, Syria and Lebanon if needs be, in order to give the Palestinians land to live side by side with everyone), then the political choices that heirs of the WW2 are allowing their critical thinkers and servants to take may later haunt them. This is very serious and worrisome. This is because the aforesaid suggest that instead of the different units of authorities (governments and international institutions) that the heirs of the old powers are depending on as of 1945 to keep their dominant role succeeding in creating the ordered relations necessary to ensure the maintenance of their strength and security, their different legal entities could be acting as a staging point that is accelerating their reversal to a simpler form so new people start to play their role.

Put differently, the Bible suggests that when the Israelites were on their way to the promised land from Egypt and were violating the laws of Moses and teaching their children to depend on arrogance, deceit, betrayal, corruption, etc., to exploit each other, their servants, and their neighbors, as compared to cooperating in accordance with the Laws of Moses, it took them 40 years before they recognized that only if they started to observe the laws of Moses could they stop wandering, stop leading each other astray, and be able to arrive at their final destination. In fact, according to the Bible, it was God who helped the Israelites who survived and did not die during this interval speak the same language to be able to finish this trip. The number of rulers, chiefs, judges, officials, etc. who are in modern history violating the UN Charter and the UDHR and doing exactly as per what the Israelites were, in antiquity, doing is countless.

This means that it might take humanity a lot longer if people around the world continue to lose confidence in the institutions that the fathers of the heirs of the old powers built during the course of the second millennia, God decides to remain silent and not interfere just as the entire world population of more than 8 billion people have been sitting on the sideline since October 8, 2023, watching the Israeli defense forces (principally the United States and the western European monarchs and republics) commit the biggest human crime the world has known (i.e., kill the Palestinian children, men and women, in plain sight of the entire world population) and no one has had the courage to say to say that this carnage should stop for the exception of one. This person is Aaron Bushnell, a US serviceman who set himself on fire to protest the flagrant violation of the UN Charter and the UDHR by the United States and the western European monarchs and republics, and to demand that those superpowers stop relying on their self help to increase their happiness and to abide by international law. And so, if the insecurity that swept the world in recent years continues to expand and people’s distrust of the international order continues to shrink, can the heirs of the old powers and their critical thinkers and servants (national governments and international institutions) make people around the world stay with them and let them have more powers than others when the individuals who would be protecting them are also the ones who are responsible for the international order running astray?

In general, when a person is lost, he does not know how to find his way without someone else showing him the right path. Will the servants (governments and international institutions) who would be showing the heirs of the old powers the way to stabilize the international order accept to do it voluntarily and without demanding that the spoils be divided with them as their fathers were obliged to do to win WW2?

I have no way of knowing how the heirs of the old powers are concluding that when the number of people who discover that if they turn from the law to the right or to the left as their government officials (judges, police officers, politicians, etc.) are increasingly doing that, they would want to stay with them (the heirs of the old powers) and to let them have more powers than others, so their descendants can also reign for a long time. What I do know is that in the Bible, it is suggested that it was God who helped the Israelites defeat the people (societies) who were trying to forbid them from finishing their journey from Egypt to the promised land, and also the one who initially counselled the Israelites, after they arrived at their destination, on how to avoid that their command and control of the promised land do not slip from their hands, and new people start to play their role over it. At the same time, the Bible also suggests that it was God who abandoned the Israelites and left them at the mercy of their adversaries when they began to violate the law of Moses.

In my opinion, God is not going to counsel the heirs of the old powers on what they need to do to make people stay with them and to let them have more powers than others to stabilize the international order, if He (God) did not ask their fathers (the old powers) to dismantle their empires and to have all the people of the world abandon their traditions and way of life in order to unite with them under the auspices of the United Nations to secure the common standards that are suggested in the UN Charter and the UDHR, and to make matters worse, the heirs of the old powers are letting their critical thinkers and servants (governments and international institutions) regard themselves exempt from observing the UN Charter and the UDHR, and to behave in the same way the Israelites were doing when they were violating the law of Moses and acting ruthlessly toward each other and their neighbors.

In addition, hence God did not sideline with the Egyptians kings when they were oppressing the Israelites based on what is suggested in the Bible, thus permitting us to rule out that he would act differently pursuant to the decision of the heirs of the old powers regard themselves exempt from observing the work program (standards and norms) suggested in the UN Charter and the UDHR, then we cannot exclude the possibility that a poor man rises in ranks and succeeds in assembling others to defeat the heirs of the old powers, as happened when, for example, Moses assembled the Israelites against Pharaoh and defeated him, the followers of Jesus defeated the Roman kings, the Islamic prophet Muhammad defeated, the Roman and the christian kings, and their fathers (the old powers) defeated the Muslim kings. This is very serious and worrisome.

Put differently, can the heirs of the old powers empower national governments to defeat all the poor who would be regarding that the disregard of the UN Charter and the UDHR that governments and international institutions have been effecting since 1945 is threatening human worth and consider that it is incumbent on them to fight for the dignity of everybody as Moses decided to fight for the dignity of the Jews in Egypt? That is to say, can the heirs of the old powers come up with credible stories that are capable of controlling the emotions of people around the world so as to make them ready to obtain the benefits of the political order when their critical thinkers and servants (governments and international institutions) have been behaving since 1945 in the same way Pharaoh and his critical thinkers and servants (chiefs, judges, officials, etc.) were behaving in antiquity and the history of the world is about nothing but stories of kings who were defeated and resized mainly by their critical thinkers and servants (chiefs, judges, officials, etc.) after they allowed those helpers to outsmart the truth? Most importantly, can the heirs of the old powers count on the poor betraying their rulers and political class (i.e., the state) as kings were empowering the poor into doing in antiquity whenever feudal lords refused to share outcomes with them proportionally or threatened them, after they weakened religiosity, strengthened individuality, killed individual physical creativity, and shut down people’s ability to think? This is very serious and worrisome. This is because history gives perspective on the problems of the present. If the heirs of the old powers continue to let their critical thinkers and servants (governments and international institutions) weaken religiosity, strengthen individuality, kill individual physical creativity, and shut down people’s ability to think, then the knowledge of the past would stop being useful for people to build relations. In other words, the ideas that our predecessors depended on to get their way despite the resistance of others, such as the inalienable right of all people to equal rights, human rights, freedom, dignity, brotherhood, etc., will stop to have any meaning, and these concepts will be overwritten by progressive concepts that do not distinguish between what is right and what is wrong, as the case has been in recent history. This is very dangerous. This is because when intellectual and moral instruments stop to reshape the world and technology becomes responsible for doing the lion’s share, people risk becoming indistinguishable from animals.

I have no way of knowing if the heirs of the victors of WW2 would be able to preserve their power, when the number of people who would be buying and selling evil and wickedness (as people have increasingly done since 1945) instead of buying and selling love and tolerance (as people were doing when they were drafting the UN Charter and the UDHR). What I do know is that it is not the short-term results (returns) that the critical thinkers and servants (governments and international institutions) secure for the heirs of the old powers that establish if the strategies that those helpers are employing are correct or not, but the longer the critical thinkers and servants manage to let the heirs of the old powers get away with getting their ways despite the resistance of others is the real measure. Accordingly, we can say that the longer the heirs of the old powers grant rights to their critical thinkers and servants to regard themselves exempt from observing the appeal suggested in the UN Charter and the UDHR, the shorter their power to stay in power becomes.

In other words, since the longer the heirs of the old powers engage in overthrowing the governments that refuse to consider their opinion before taking action of their own, or to reward the governments who do by letting the individuals involved get away with not having to observe the UN Charter and the UDHR, the greater people confusion would be preventing them from better understanding, comprehending, and adjusting to what they are learning from what is happening, and therefore, unable to put the change that is happening in a context that the heirs of the old powers could benefit from, then the longer the heirs of the old powers expose people to such mongering insecurity, the further away such strategy would be putting them away from people and from their targets, including taking them down the wrong road.

For example, instead of the western European monarchs and republics (the heirs of the old powers) and their global policemen (the United States) instructing the state of Israel to refer the October 7, 2023, Hamas attacks that killed 1,200 Israelis to the United Nations, as the founding fathers of the UN counselled that any dispute in the aftermath of WW2 be arbitrated or settled in line with to ensure that conditions under which justice and respect for the obligations arising from treaties and international law can be maintained, the heirs of the old powers and especially their global policemen decided to take the law into their own hands. The media outlets that the western European monarchs and republics and the United States own and control around the world succeeded in making Hamas (the Palestinians) the enemy of mankind in the same way they made Saddam Hussein, Muammar Gaddafi, and Vladimir Putin be one in a short time.

However, since the date the western European monarchs and republics (the heirs of the old powers) and their global policemen (the United States) decided to take the law into their own hands on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and to destroy Hamas, as they have destroyed any person who stood up against their constant violation of the UN Charter and the UDHR since 1945, things have not been going well and according to plan so far. Since the Israeli Defense Forces began to destroy Hamas and reduced Gaza into a rubble, people around the world have been condemning the violations of international laws that their assassins (the Israeli Defense Forces) are employing to catch the Hamas militants who carried out the October 7 attacks and are organizing protests to demand that the Israeli government split the state of Israel in two in order to grant the Palestinians territory to accommodate or establish a side by side new Palestinian state. What the people are demanding is anti-logic, very serious, and very worrisome.

In other words, instead of people around the world giving the Israeli government unconditional, unqualified support to finish its job and to destroy Hamas and its supporters, people around the world are being repelled by the level of destruction or lives lost that the Israeli defense forces are carrying out to destroy Hamas. The level of pushback that people are feeling is pushing them to the point of regarding as if the October 7, 2023, Hamas attacks never happened and demanding that the Israeli government end the Israeli-Palestinian crises and grant the Palestinians territory to form an independent side-by-side state. This is very serious and worrisome. This is because what the Israeli forces could be doing as of October 8, 2023, is not only killing Hamas fighters and civilian Palestinians, but at the same time, fighting the war of independence that the Palestinians desperately need to wage if they want to be free and want to form an independent state. This is both anti-logic and something that is hard to believe.

The aforesaid means that the heirs of the old powers cannot count on people buying the false ideas that they are constantly pushing on people to make them believe that they are really increasing their happiness and distancing them from threats. Therefore, they (people) are better off staying with them (the heirs of the old powers) and granting them more powers than others than betraying them and letting other people play their role. This is very serious and worrisome.

Put differently, throughout history, people convinced each other about putting off their ambitions because the happiness that their neighbors were offering them was greater and required less toil on their part to get. If people stop to trust each other so they can then surrender freedom to each other, mankind is doomed.

That is to say, if whenever people deviate from the truth, they can be humiliated as the western European monarchs and republics (the heirs of the old powers), the United States (the global policemen of the world) and the Israeli Jews are being humiliated as of October 8, 2023, for refusing to cooperate with the Palestinians in accordance with the UN Charter, the UDHR, the laws of Moses, etc. since 1948, then there is a good chance that the unconstitutional choices that the heirs of the old powers are permitting their critical thinkers and servants (governments and international institutions) around the world to adopt on their behalf fire back on them in the same way their deeds fired back on them 75 years later for allowing the Palestinians to perceive that they are living under domination hereditarily.

In addition, if we factor in how any political culture dominated by hatred, revenge, and lies can easily be open to explosive envy that transforms people from shy to confident to arrogant to megalomaniacal to megalymaniac, then there is a good chance that the heirs of the old powers are busy with their critical thinkers and servants (governments and international institutions) organizing hatred and decaying truth and justice instead of organizing the will of people.

Accordingly, I have no way of knowing how the heirs of the old powers count on galvanizing people around the world to become a countervailing force against envy and greed, so such intrinsic qualities do not take over and make people unprepared to want to let them have more powers than others or be ready to lay their own lives on their behalf if need be. What I do know is that as of October 8, the Muslim leaders, who before this date were racing to orbit in the shadow of the State of Israel, are now sitting on the sidelines, watching this country being ripped to pieces just as scavengers do to ultimately get their share of spoils, instead of uniting with the Israeli defense forces to destroy Hamas and their supporters, even if this means killing all the Palestinians.

Once again, I have no way of knowing if the critical thinkers and servants (governments and international institutions) of the heirs of the old powers are going to be there for them to do their dirty work as the Israeli government is doing following the October 7, 2023, Hamas attacks in the future. Nor do I have a way of knowing if those same critical thinkers and servants are going to be uniting and ganging on them as the Muslim countries that normalized relations with the state of Israel have been doing since October 8, 2023, when not even children are usually known to have been of any benefit to most parents.

Nonetheless, the constant wars that swept the world since 1945 support that the decision of the heirs of the old powers to deviate from the work programs that their fathers (the victors of WW2) sketched in the UN Charter and the UDHR, and counselled them to stay faithful to its principles to keep their dominant role intact in the aftermath of WW2 does not appear to be making the societies that they vanquished during WW2 and the ones that they freed bow down to them as happens in ordered relations (such as in numbers) or as most people were doing to their fathers before WW2 erupted, but rather empowering them (the poor) to humiliate them (the rich) in the same way our predecessors humiliated the Persian kings, Greek kings, Roman kings, Christian Kings, Muslim Kings, and now most people around the world are putting their most precious possession (i.e., the state of Israel) to the test through in front of our eyes. That is to say, instead of all the UN member states helping the state of Israel without qualifications to defeat Hamas so the Palestinians in the first place and the entire world could have a better life afterwards, most UN member states are being critical of the government of Israel, including filing a petition in the International Criminal Court demanding that the state of Israel be investigated in relation to its inhumane actions in Gaza.

In fact, the United States, which has expressed openly its staunch readiness to defend the State of Israel since this country was created in 1948, has refused since October 7, 2023, Hamas attacks to put its words where its mouth is, and has been limiting its role to sending Israel weapons, ammunition, and military advisors instead of putting troops on the ground, so they fight alongside the Israeli defense forces to finish the job of destroying Hamas quickly, including killing all the Palestinians if need be, so no one can cast doubt about its commitment to the security of this country. In other words, the decision of the United States and the western European monarchs and republics to limit their support for the state of Israel to include weapons, ammunition, and military advisors puts those countries on par with Iran, Hezbollah, the Houthis, etc., who are also doing the same thing and sending Hamas weapons, ammunition, and military advisors. In other words, the United States and the western European monarchs and republics are behaving in an indistinguishable manner toward the people they are trying to confront.

Actually, the decision of the United States and the western European monarchs and republics to limit their support to the state of Israel to destroy Hamas by supplying them with weapons, ammunition, and military advisors instead of placing boots on the ground so no one can cast doubt about their commitment to reduce fear and want makes people wonder if it would have made a difference if Israel was a member of NATO, so the famous slogan “attack upon one is an attack upon all” would apply to them as well. I do not believe that the United States, the western European monarchs and republics, or any nation would have defended the state of Israel even if this country were a member of NATO. This is because throughout history, no king placed the interests of his servants above his own (except Jesus), nor were his servants ready to defend his ideas without splitting spoils with them. In fact, even when entire kingdoms and empires confronted existential threats, citizens always backstabbed their kings when they distrusted them. If this were not the case, our world history would have been written totally differently.

In psychology, dissonance cognitive is when one consciously clings to two contradictory or more contradictory moments. It looks as if the heirs of the old powers need to have their critical thinkers and servants (governments and international institutions) come up with better theatrics to justify why they are not observing the work program suggested in the UN Charter and the UDHR so people’s disenchantment with them does not deepen. Alternatively, make sure that their strongholds are powerful enough to prevent that when their critical thinkers and servants defy them and humiliate them, as all the friends of the state of Israel are humiliating the rulers of this country, it does not happen to them; they would not be resized as happened to all the kings who ran short of new stories to manipulate the emotions of their dependent people or to justify why the approaches they are adopting to fix (repair) the world are not producing the results that matter.

Surely, the constant talking stories (propaganda) that the heirs of the old powers constantly hide behind to influence the emotions of people and keep their dominant role (i.e., kill, exploit, etc.), such as “they are terrorists, they are fabricating weapons of mass destruction, they are coming for us, they are savage (beheading children and raping women), they are making the sea water level rise, they are making the environment collapse, etc.,” has been a successful tool throughout history to dominate the visceral emotions of people, and to distract them (throw them off balance), including motivating them to act irrationally (focus on what the fittest want them to focus on), but the number of people who were distracting, lying, and spreading false rumors was a lot less than the case is today, especially after the introduction of social media, whereby the fittest and the week are doing it to each other. Many questions beg answers. Can the United States and the western European monarchs and republics (i.e., the fittest) convince the world that the state of Israel is a democracy, Hamas is a terrorist organization, Russia is a threat to world peace, and they are peace-loving societies, etc., when it is their unpreparedness to lead by example that is making people distrust them? Most importantly, make people stay unprepared to rest from wars or shelf the Roman expression “Si vis pacem, para bellumis” (if you want peace, prepare for war) and to prioritize tolerance and democratic control, thus increasing the odds of their servants ganging on them, or act as the Muslim nations have been doing since October 7, 2023, waiting like scavengers on the side for Hamas to defeat the state of Israel so they can share in the spoil, when before this date, they all pledged that they would be preserving the interests of this country against any threat?

Indeed, the decision of the heirs of the old powers to orient UN member goals to secure the UN goals while societies are diverting the majority of their budgets to improve armament instead of ensuring that accountability and democratic control are strengthened so people could rest from wars shows that the heirs of the old powers are not thinking about the day after. Likewise, the decision of the heirs of the old powers to organize societies in the international order in the aftermath of WW2, contrary to the way farmers and fruit and vegetable merchants preserve fruits and vegetables, and that is by keeping and displaying each type of fruit and vegetable product alone to avoid that if they all get mixed up, the ones that ripen faster than others do not accelerate the ripening of the products that are still unripened, shows that the heirs of the old powers are not growers (cultivators), but just plowers. Can the heirs of the old powers avoid that the societies that their critical thinkers and servants (governments and international institutions) are plowing and weakening their ability to hold on to values consider their opinion before taking action of their own, when everyone becomes like their critical thinkers and servants, desiring nothing but peace while they are all “preparing for war” at the same time?

Evidently, if the heirs of the old powers do not believe that letting their critical thinkers and servants (governments and international institutions) regard themselves exempt from observing the work program suggested in the UN Charter and the UDHR could ripen faster the evil inclinations of the societies that the state of their hearts is not fully ripped with wickedness yet can threaten the maintenance of their strength and stability, this means that the heirs of the old powers must believe that the security network and redundancy that they have built in UN member states can safely permit them to dissipate any threat.

Until now, no kingdom has managed to preserve its power without implementing the strategies that grocery store owners employ to deal with situations when a ripe fruit stays among the unsold fruit, and the ethylene that it is releasing ripens the good fruits faster, thus not cutting their losses. Grocery store owners destroy the unsold fruits that lose color and turn brown. The large number of political and economic crises that are proliferating around the world could be due to the different security networks that the heirs of the old powers depend on to bend the will of societies that refuse to consider their opinion before taking action, of their own, thus increasing death rates disproportionately.

“What does not destroy (kill) me makes me stronger” is aphorism number 8 from the “Maxims and Arrows” section of Frederich Nietzsche’s Twilight of the Idols. Could this one-off approach that the heirs of the old powers have been adopting since 1945 to rejuvenate their power, which usually runs short of killing the people who refuse to consider their opinion before taking action of their own, be making people stronger? In other words, could the anger, resentment, frustration, discontent, bitterness, disappointment, rage, etc. that people are putting up with as a result of the heirs of the old powers saying one thing and doing another be preventing the international order from being stabilized and topping its decay?

I do not know the answer to the above-suggested questions. What I do know is that throughout history, there was never any merit in using force (killing) to obtain the objects or the perceptions that people fought to deny others. This is because force destroys the trust that people depend on to make others stay with them and to give them more powers than others. And hence, it does not make a difference if a person kills one person or kills twenty people to lose the trust of others; this means that the longer the heirs of the old powers take to begin to reduce the number of servants (governments and international institutions) who are intervening in the lives of citizens and denying others rights to cooperate in accordance with the principles suggested in the UN Charter and the UDHR, the harder it would be for them to move away from this wave of insecurity that has swept the world, and force would be the way to preserve peace and security under such normalcy. Many questions beg answers. For one, can the wealth and military superiority of the heirs of the old powers be useful to them to maintain their strength and stability when self help becomes the parameter that drives people’s convictions and their servants (governments and international institutions) are tearing up what the fathers of those heirs gathered instead of reconfiguring people to make them love them. This is because force (killing) is not about creating balance but is about who succeeds at directing his violence at everyone else the fastest. Do the heirs of the old powers know that greed and envy are natural and that people are capable of concealing evil in their hearts and pouring it on their adversaries in a manner that they would not know from where it is coming from?

Salt and sugar look the same, and it is not possible to distinguish them from each other when they are mixed together in a solid mixture or a liquified solution. Can the heirs of the old powers (aided by technology) identify the false from the genuine among people, or specifically among their servants (governments and international institutions)? Can the heirs of the old powers replace the blind with individuals with vision so their efforts can transform people into becoming better humans and the atrocities that happened in the past will never be repeated again when the number of people who are rivaling to get their ways despite the resistance of others and the ones who believe that God commissioned them to ensure that his will be done on earth as it is in heaven has extended this culture of exploitation, including letting their brutality intersect across all social levels? Can the heirs of the old powers organize an effective coalition to deter or respond to threats that have the potential to weaken their strength and stability when the disruptive behavior of their servants (governments and international institutions) is the reason why their problems are not going away and their credibility worldwide is shrinking? Most importantly, can the heirs of the old powers prevent the grim or dim that Joshua said could await any person who disobeys the law of Moses or associates others in his wrongdoing from devouring them when according to Franz Kafka, a German novelist, a person starts to know the true feeling of himself only when he is unbearably unhappy. Most importantly, can the heirs of the old powers prevent their collapse if they continue to let their critical thinkers and servants transform people back into animals after their fathers (the old powers) transformed people into real humans?

I have no way of knowing if the heirs of the old powers can adjust and prevent the reconfiguration of their power or collapse when the number of human animals (wolves in sheep’s clothing) and tools (technology, artificial intelligence) that would be roaming the world, just as their critical thinkers and servants (governments and international institutions) are roving doing, confusing and contaminating people with their predatory behavior instead of spreading patience and values among them, increases in the future. One could think that the upbringing that the children of the old powers (the founding fathers of the UN) received or were exposed to would have enabled them to comprehend that history does not occur in isolation and that they would be better off taking a rest from war, as their fathers suggested. Likewise, one could think that the innate nature of the heirs of the old powers would have also helped them to understand the importance of commanding and controlling the international order in accordance with the work program suggested in the UN Charter and the UDHR, which, by the way, organizes people in the same way farmers and fruit and vegetable merchants preserve their products to prevent the fruits or vegetables that ripen faster than others from accelerating the ripening of the good ones, but this was not the case. The heirs of the old powers decided to become oblivious to the counsel or warning of their fathers about always being vigilant of their deeds are putting forward for tomorrow and decided to continue to extend the practice of war, deceit, ruse, Gish gallop, and chaos that they found their fathers depending on to preserve their power, wealth, and status. To make matters worse, instead of the heirs of the old powers being devoted to reducing (minimizing) the role of government, thus breaking through the power of such violence-wielding apparatus, and in this way taking back control of the international order, they (the heirs of the old powers) decided to be devoted to adding fuel to the fire by granting rights to their servants (governments and international institutions) to create new bodies, institutions, unions, coalitions, agreements, and contracts, so the new units of authorities that get created put up their wealth, power, and status for sale faster instead of preserving it.

In other words, instead of the heirs of the old powers shrinking the number of bodies, institutions, unions, coalitions, agreements, and contracts that their servants (governments and international institutions) are constantly creating, thus decreasing the number of people who are preaching about democracy and equal rights, while they are pursuing the realization of the full development of their personalities at the same time (i.e., freezing social space and accumulating material things on a cumulative basis), they are constantly increasing this number, thus giving people a reason to withdraw their obligation to obey. And so, if the number of people who would be using law and political order as a means towards an end (i.e., to benefit the individuals involved) should be theoretically rising in the future instead of shrinking if the heirs of the old powers continue to let their servants (governments and international institutions) use standards and norms to financialize the world instead of as a tool to reduce social injustice and enhance transparency, accountability and democratic legitimacy, can the heirs of the old powers prevent the ongoing transformations of governments from instruments to improve law and order to corporations that ripens faster the awareness of the poor and persuade them to be against wanting to be united with them to secure the goals fixed in the UN Charter and the UDHR (i.e., create ordered relations), but to share outcomes on equal rights from resizing them?

The heirs of the old powers can continue to turn control of the international order over to governments and international institutions that the highest bidder (i.e., financial corporations, special interest groups, lobbies, industrial complexes, rich people, etc.) command, instead of turning control of such units of authorities over to people who would shape individuals who would be ready to practice tolerance as their fathers (the victors of WW2) wanted the purpose of having people come together to cooperate in the economic and political fields jointly serve.

Evidently, if the heirs of the old powers want that corrupt governments, financial corporations, special interest groups, certain lobbies, certain industrial complexes, rich people, etc. control and command the international order as compared to contracting this responsibility to people (institutions, units of authorities, etc.) who are ready to abdicate their right to wealth, nor afraid of losing their position or their social and tribal status and interests so the principles suggested in the UN Charter and the UDHR are secured, requires that they (the heirs of the old powers) constantly find ways to keep people ready to surrender freedom voluntarily to them and not be tying this end to strings, such as counting on outcomes or spoils being shared with them on equal rights. This is because the latter does not create ordered relationships. Only when people relinquish their self-pride and arrogance and accept to practice tolerance can such conduct provide the space that the heirs of the old powers need to make people want to stay with them and to let them have more powers than others.

Accordingly, in almost all the religious and philosophical scriptures, including the UN Charter and the UDHR, people are invited to constantly keep in mind that what their deeds send forth for tomorrow is what will determine if they will recoup joy or sorrow. Not to mention that the kind of wealth, power, status, good health, etc. that people enjoy is not something that a person can preserve without constantly striving to avoid that the people who believe that the happiness they enjoy is not enough strip it from them.

People are unaware of what tomorrow holds for them. In addition, it appears that people must constantly strive to ensure that the people who believe that the happiness they enjoy is not enough do not strip them of the wealth, power, status, good health, etc. they enjoy. If the heirs of the old powers believe that they could disobey the counsel of their fathers on how to go about keeping their dominance in the aftermath of WW2, and on top of that, not mind that their servants (governments and international institutions) are selling the work program suggested in the UN Charter and the UDHR, then either the heirs of the old powers can foretell what tomorrow reserves for them, or they are undermining the risk of letting the hearts of people be filled with burning hatred. In other words, the heirs of the old powers believe that they can deprive people of truth (i.e., have their servants say one thing and do another) and still morph people in such a way that they could get away with it (i.e., make people be ready to accept that the heirs of the old powers have more power than others no matter how the events of the international order change).

The heirs of the old powers could let suspicion, disregard, corruption, etc. save people from each other, and save them from facing searing accusations for letting the world become more violent, including letting their critical thinkers and servants (governments and international institutions) posit and enforce political solutions that contradict the principles that their fathers (the founding fathers of the UN) suggested in the UN Charter and the UDHR. However, their (the heirs of the old powers) decision to create balance between the dark arts of politics and the framework suggested in the UN Charter and the UDHR, could be mortgaging their future (i.e., their political survival) to unpredictability rather than certainty.

For example, on December 26, 2004, people in Thailand, Indonesia, Sri Lanka, and other places in the Indian Ocean were relaxing without imagining a single second that all their investments would disappear under a giant wave on that day. In other words, the people involved were not rethinking about investing in a tsunami warning center to prevent that their investments become washed in front of their eyes and were thinking about how to make the weakest consider the opinion of the fittest, betray each other, backstab each other, build hotels, casinos, roads, etc., to increase their profits only, just as the heirs of the old powers are not rethinking about the danger of letting their servants (governments and international institutions) sell the work program suggested in the UN Charter and the UDHR (i.e., say one thing and do another) on the maintenance of their strength and stability.

That is to say, the affluent people that controlled the societies where the 2004 Tsunami struck were like the heirs of the old powers oblivious about the importance of ensuring that their servants (governments and international institutions) observe the work suggested in the UN Charter and the UDHR to avoid that the disregard and contempt that they are provoking does not transform into a wave that would sweep and sink (destroy) them, just as the water wave that swept and sank (destroyed) the affluent people that controlled the societies where the 2004 Tsunami struck grappled with. Obviously, if the heirs of the old powers are reading the UN Charter and the UDHR as their fathers counselled them to be devoted to doing every day in the aftermath of WW2, or putting their servants to doing it as Joshua asked the Israelites kings in antiquity to be doing reading the laws of Moses every day, they would have learned about what happened to those rulers or kings who sold their political framework to servants who later sold it to fat cats in return for staying in power or political favors on the maintenance of their strength and stability.

Since antiquity, people’s attention has been diverted to riches and away from the truth. Likewise, history has shown that concepts such as divide and rule, apartheid, social engineering, creative chaos, etc. are all tactics that stop working when people’s awareness rises. Can the heirs of the old powers continue to let their servants (governments and international institutions) hurl falsehood against truth and still avoid having their own deeds crush them?

Once again, I have no way of knowing if the servants (governments and international institutions) will backstab the heirs of the old powers in the future, just as most (or all) servants deceived their masters in history, should they (the heirs of the old powers) continue to heedlessly turn away from their responsibility of following what their fathers suggested to keep their dominant role. What I do know is that, in antiquity, people used to determine how much others valued them or wanted to be in their company based on how their wives and their donkeys treated them. In other words, if the person asked his donkey to steer to the right and the donkeys carried out this command right away and without hesitation, this meant that the donkey was satisfied with the way his master was treating him and was not disenchanted with the power that his master was exercising over him.

I have no way of knowing how the heirs of the old powers are determining if people are content or not with the political policies that they are granting rights to their servants (governments and international institutions) to legitimize and enforce to keep their dominant role or to keep people wanting to stay with them and to be steered to the right or to the left, just as the donkeys who are at ease or in peace with their owners behave. What I do know is that Ibn Khaldun (1332-1406) suggested in the book The Muqaddimah, which he published in 1377, that in antiquity the Arabs lived with and ate camel meat, so they took jealousy and cruelty from them. The Turks lived with and ate horses, so they took their strength and ferocity from them. The Franks lived with and ate pigs, so they took from them their filth and lack of jealousy. And the Negroes lived with and ate monkeys, so they took away the love of dancing and singing. Actually, Ibn Khaldun was not alone in perceiving that people who lived with real animals and were nourished by their meat acquired their nature and character, but other philosophers also perceived the same conviction. For example, Ibn al-Qayyim (1282-1350), a very influential Muslim scholar, perceived the same convictions. In the book “The Paths of the Travelers,” Ibn al-Qayyim suggests that the longer a person coexists with a real animal, the greater the behavioral similarity (i.e., nature and character) would be.

Once again, I have no way of knowing what people in modern history are taking away from each other after the heirs of the victors of WW2 decided to make them trade living with real animals as our ancestors were doing in antiquity in order to live with human animals. This is because, according to Mark Twain, “of all the animals, man is the only one that is cruel. He is the only one that inflicts pain for the pleasure of doing it.” And so, if, as Mark Twain suggests, humans are the cruelest animal among all the animals, then this rise in treachery, deceit, abuse, wars, disregard, etc. that has swept the world in recent years could be due to two motives.

The first is because the heirs of the victors of WW2 are hurling people away from continuing to live with real animals as our ancestors were doing in antiquity in order to live with real animals and acquire their nature and character, which is not something that their fathers (the victors of WW2) proposed to them to be doing in the aftermath of WW2 as well. The victors of WW2 (the old powers) proposed to their heirs to let people determine their own political and economic solutions and not be hurling people to abandon their traditions and values so they can start to live with each other and, in this way, take from each other traits or behaviors known as being trademarks of human animals only. That is inflicting pain for the pleasure of doing it.

The second is if knowledge (science, modernization, etc.) confuses people and causes them to be arrogant and directed to encourage evil and forbid good. In other words, knowledge strengthens or reinforces the traits that Mark Twain said characterize human behavior as compared to other animals. That is to say, knowledge makes people impatient instead of helping them to endure patiently, irrespective of whatever befalls them.

I have no way of knowing which motives from the aforementioned two could be persuading the heirs of the old powers to not mind the implications of people turning their backs on each other and the truth, or waking pridefully, on their strength and stability. Most importantly, why are the heirs of the old powers allowing their servants (governments and international institutions) to act arrogantly and bray like donkeys about how they are working to reduce fear and want, but without practicing what they are preaching? What I do know is that if humans are, indeed, an animal that is the cruelest among all the animals, this means that the heirs of the old powers may not be able to prevent that people resize them if they do not return mankind to live with real animals, so they take away from them what Ibn Khaldun said our ancestors were taking from such living species. Similarly, if knowledge (science, modernization, etc.) confuses people and causes them to be arrogant and bray like donkeys about how they are working to reduce fear and want, but without practicing what they are preaching, then the heirs of the old powers may not be able to prevent that people resize them if they continue to let people distance themselves from eating with the sweat of their brow as decreed in biblical scriptures.

Indeed, haste and hurry appear to be among the many weaknesses that are inherent in human nature. Could the decision of the heirs of the old powers to hasten people away from eating their food by the sweat of their brows, as suggested in the biblical scriptures, and to make them devoted to distancing themselves from this biblical curse in order to delegate to technology this role be causing this profound shift in consciousness or refusal by most people to observe the political order that national governments and international institutions legitimize and enforce? As I said before, the victors of WW2 (the old powers) counselled their children to be devoted to orienting people to secure the outcomes suggested in the UN Charter and the UDHR while eating by the sweat of their brow, and not to secure the UN goals and the UDHR while tractors are doing the sweat and they are preoccupying themselves with what their neighbors are doing.

Once again, I do not know the answer to the aforementioned question. What I do know is that if we compare how our predecessors were organizing themselves and establishing relations with each other when they were living with real animals to how mankind is organized and establishing relations after they began to live with each other or with only human animals mainly, we find that our predecessors created a better balance.

For example, Buddha believed that animals and humans had the same origins. Buddha also believed that a human can be the reincarnation of an animal and vice versa. Actually, from this belief, the Shaolin fighting styles that mimic animals emerged. These styles, which were based on religious introspection and the observation of animals themselves, allowed our ancestors to mimic the behavior of all the different animals and not be focused on one behavior. This variation enabled them to create balance. In other words, the usage of people in every foreseeable situation of a different animal fighting style or character when attacking or when mimicking its postures and defensive tactics made the people who were fighting to determine who could make the weakest consider the opinion of the fittest not be all of one color; hence, some were mimicking how a hyena behaves and fights, others a snake, others a tiger, others a chicken, a horse, a fish, etc.

Accordingly, when we compare how after people stopped to live with real animals or to rely on fighting styles that such animals use to surprise and disorient their enemy or determine who could make the weakest consider the opinion of the fittest and began to rely on the characteristics that are inherited or specific of any human animal, such as deceit, treachery, abuse, disregard, etc. or technology, such as computer, artificial intelligence, etc., we find that the individuals who are rivaling to get their ways despite the resistance of others, or the ones who believe that God commissioned them to ensure that his will be done, on earth as it is in heaven, are unable to keep their dominant control stable or to create balance. And so, if a small number of people are coexisting in these days with real animals so they could acquire from them their behavioral nature and character as some philosophers believe happens when a real animal and a human animal interact, and the majority are coexisting with human animals and taking away from each other the characteristics that are specific or inherent of any human animal such as deceit, treachery, abuse, disregard, etc, can the heirs of the old powers continue to get their way despite the resistance of others, and avoid that people strip them from their power, wealth and status after they decided to disobey the counsel of their fathers on how to go about to keep their dominant role intact in the aftermath of WW2, and did let the number of people who are like them saying one thing and doing another become countless?

Put differently, Shaolin has been at the center of China’s endless civil wars since antiquity. Yet, the men who administered this religious movement, which to this day some see as a traditional military organization and others as a secret society, managed to survive all the wars that this country knew because they prioritized religious tolerance over political gain. The men who administered Shaolin acted as a safe haven or a refuge for persecuted people, defeated soldiers, banished officers, etc. In other words, Shaolin was a center where persecuted and disenchanted individuals could go to find peace and security. The persecuted and disenchanted people brought to the Shaolin monks their griefs, information on who was plotting against who, who killed who, etc., and the Shaolin monks taught the distraught people tolerance, knowledge, martial arts, or ways that they could use to take revenge.

I strongly believe that in the last two hundred years, the United States or the American Constitution fulfilled the role that the Shaolin monasteries fulfilled in antiquity in China, or after the Catholic Church failed to practice the religious tolerance that its clergy were preaching and lost any credibility to this day.

However, if we compare between how the old powers managed to make the United States be perceived from 1776 until 1945, i.e., a city on the hill or a place that could be regarded to have stood for what the Shaolin monasteries stood for throughout history, to how the heirs of the old powers converted this country or society in the aftermath of WW2, and that is a society that is out of control or gone mad to say the least, then one of two scenarios could have prompted the heirs of the old powers to perceive that the role that the United States (i.e., the idea of freedom) played to create balance between good and evil became obsolete and that they could preserve their wealth, power and status without counting on the existence of such a “transfer station.” The first is if the heirs (the children) of the old powers believe that they are invincible. The second is if the wealth, status, and powers of the heirs (the children) of the old powers stopped to be of paramount importance to them.

I have no way of knowing which scenario between the aforementioned two could have propelled the heirs of the old powers to perceive that they are smarter, more powerful, and, most importantly, more apt to convince people to accept staying with them and to let them have more powers than their fathers. In my opinion, two motives could be persuading the heirs of the old powers to perceive that they are invincible. That is to say, to perceive that it is not necessary that they preserve their power as their fathers (the old powers) suggested in partnership with national governments only, and not as the case is right now, where we have national governments and non-state actors or international institutions providing political, economic, and social solutions while regarding themselves exempt from observing the appeal suggested in the UN Charter or the UDHR, and are all focusing on stripping the heirs of the old powers from their power, wealth, or status so they can start to play their role. The first is if the heirs of the old powers are suffering from grandiose delusions or narcissistic behavior. The second is if the heirs of the old powers are convinced that their wealth and military superiority (or technology) can protect them. In other words, the heirs of the old powers do not want to accept that if wealth and military superiority could preserve someone’s authority, their fathers would not have converted from being warlords to kings.

Once again, I have no way of knowing which scenario between the aforementioned two could be propelling the heirs of the old powers to perceive that they are more powerful than their fathers. Most importantly, to perceive that it is not necessary that they keep people regard the United States as a city on the hill in the aftermath of WW2, just as per the way people in antiquity were regarding the Shaolin monasteries. What I do know is that irrespective of the convictions that are persuading the heirs of the old powers to perceive that they are more powerful than their fathers and therefore unstoppable, we know that there are only two choices that the heirs of the old powers could follow to preserve their power. They can follow what their fathers counselled them to observe, and that was the appeal suggested in the UN Charter or the UDHR. Alternatively, they can follow what they found their fathers and forefathers practicing.

Indeed, the constant wars that have engulfed the world as of 1945 signify that the heirs of the old powers are preserving their power by following what they found their fathers and forefathers practicing. Most importantly, we can say that the decision of the heirs of the old powers to have the United States become entangled in wars in the name of preserving freedom and to end them without rebuilding the countries that the United States wrecked back to better than they were before means that the heirs of the old powers do not think that the role that the United States played for their fathers from 1776 to 1945 is useful anymore. In other words, the heirs of the old powers do not think that they need to have one society (culture) stand out above the rest, just as the Bible suggests that God had the Israelites stand out, so the unique positive understanding that the Americans are constantly gaining of themselves and of concepts such as the idea of freedom, liberalism, democracy, etc., be used to wreck or conquer with such weapons the societies that are rivaling them, or the ones they believe that if they wreck, they could maintain their strength and stability better. Indeed, the liberal internationalism philosophies that the heirs of the old powers adopted since 1945, along with the transformation of the ideas of freedom, liberalism, democracy, etc., into commodities that state foreign missions and international organizations buy and sell, succeeded in convincing citizens to betray their own rulers and wreck their human progress, as happened in Korea, Vietnam, Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Yemen, and many other countries since 1945. Surely, the constant wars that swept the world in recent years cannot be a sign of the satisfaction of UN member states with the friendly relations that the United States (the global policemen of the world) is adopting to safeguard the interests of the heirs of the old powers (western European monarchs and republics), but their displeasure. If people around the world continue to perceive that the United States is not a player that can be trusted, then few people would be ready to betray their rulers to safeguard the interests of the heirs of the old powers, and this country would be left to form coalitions with only dictators, as it appears to be doing more so in recent years, thus accelerating its reversal to a simpler form.

Then again, the world is not short of human animals, as much as of people who are ready to behave in the same way real animals do (only kill to eat and not to deny others food). That is to say, the stock of human animals that the heirs of the old powers can enlist and supply them with money and weapons to assassinate, betray, or overthrow peacefully or forcibly the individuals who refuse to consider their opinion voluntarily before taking action of their own or do threaten them is countless.

Actually, the aforesaid perception invites many questions. For one, why did the old powers counselled their heirs to take rest from wars and to be devoted to securing the work program they suggested in the UN Charter and the UDHR if tapping into the strategies that they were practicing before WW2 erupted was sufficient to help them keep their dominant role? That is to say, there must be a profound reason why the old powers did not want their children to adopt the same divergent political strategies they were practicing to keep their dominant role.

I have no way of knowing why the old powers did not want their children to rejuvenate their power as they were doing by implementing political and economic policies that alternate between repelling people and making them move away from them and from each other, or attracting them and making them want to stay with them and to let them have more power than others. Alternatively, adopt political and economic policies that make people go in circles (i.e., just as happens when the divergence of a vector field becomes zero everywhere).

In my opinion, there is only one detail that the old powers were worried about that their heirs may not have control over if they adopt the same divergent political strategies they practiced to keep their dominant role. I believe that the old powers were worried that their children would not know how to rise like a phoenix (i.e., make people trust them) if their critical thinkers and servants (governments and international institutions) dragged them down to their level.

To put it differently, Karl Marx suggested that when a society becomes industrialized, the various working classes will overthrow the capitalists and hence establish socialism. The decision of the heirs of the old powers to deviate away from the political and economic work program that their fathers suggested to them to depend on to rejuvenate their power and to connect all the people of the world together has generated economic and cultural interdependence, thus converting the earth into appearing as if we are living in a one-world government or society. If the recent advances in transportation and communication technology make the world appear as if everyone is interconnected, then the claim that Karl Marx suggested that whenever a society becomes industrialized, its working class will overthrow the capitalists and hence establish socialism could be a requirement that may have been met, and people are in the process of carrying out this toppling without knowing or realizing that they are doing it. That is to say, the fact that the advances in transportation and communication technology make the world appear as if everyone is interconnected and we are all living in a one-world government or society means that the constant search by people of all walks of life in recent years to identify an alternative to capitalism so everyone could improve their happiness could mean that we might be living in the midst of a world revolution, which is not any different than the different Russian revolutions that ousted the Tsar at the start of the 20th century. This is very serious and worrisome.

Said differently, the political movement that Josef Stalin spearheaded to oust the Tsar at the start of the 20th century was not due to Russia having become industrialized by then or that Russia counted on the existence of a large industrial worker army, and the class struggle between the capitalists and the workers induced the events of the revolution, but it was a revolt that was programmed by design. In other words, the people who participated in the revolution that Lenin led to oust the Tsar assumed or supposed that the class struggle that Karl Marx suggested would happen when Russia becomes industrialized would have been a condition that was met even though Russia was not industrialized by then, and decided to induce the outcomes that Karl Marx proclaimed would happen when people overturn capitalism and let socialism take over instead of waiting until this foreseeable revolution happens naturally.

Indeed, this abnormal rise in intolerance that swept the world in recent years and the constant struggle by the people so rulers and political class could do more to increase their happiness or shrink the gap between the rich and the poor contain patterns that match a lot the discontent that the working class in Russia were going through before the Tsar was removed from power. The only difference is that during the revolution that the people of Russia waged against their rulers and political class, the revolution had clear leaders who were leading the revolt, but in the protests that are sweeping around the world in recent years, no protestor is accepting to play a leading role during the organized demonstrations for fear of paying with his life for opposing his rulers or political class.

In the Bible, it is suggested that when the Israelites began to cooperate with one another in sin and transgression instead of in goodness and righteousness, they became incapable of reaching any decision and wandered for forty years, until they eventually agreed to stand firm and to go back to speaking the same language. Most importantly, the lesson that one could draw from this biblical story about how the Israelites were scattered during these forty years and devoted to making lots of decisions and harming each other is that no person, including Moses, who was acting as leader during this interval, had control over anyone except himself when the hostility and enmity were raging.

I have no way of knowing how Moses managed to preserve his power during this chaotic period in the history of Judaism. All the religious books tell the same story about how he managed to do it. The religious books suggest that God protected him and held the hands of his adversaries and enemies away from harming him, not his wealth, soldiers, or military superiority.

In this context, I have no way of knowing if all the hatred and intolerance that people have manifested in recent years will lead to people wandering and stopping to speak the same language as happened to the Israelites in antiquity. Likewise, I have no way of knowing if the widespread disregard, deception, and corruption that swept the world in recent years will continue to deepen in the future and if our successors will confront the same challenges that the Israelites faced in antiquity when they were wandering. Likewise, I have no way of knowing if the heirs of the old powers would have control over anyone in the future, or if they would be like Moses, not having control over anyone except himself, as the Bible suggests when the Israelites were wandering. Most importantly, I have no way of knowing if God would be protecting the heirs of the old powers as he protected Moses or if the wealth, soldiers, or military superiority (technology) that the heirs of the old powers control and command will be sufficient to fend for themselves.

In this work, I want to try to understand if the decision of the heirs of the old powers to deviate away from the counsel of their fathers on how they should not let people draw lots of decisions and to invite them to form governments and international institutions, thus increasing the number of people who are regarding themselves exempt from observing the appeal suggested in the UN Charter or the UDHR and dragging them down to their level, is helping them to rejuvenate their power, wealth, and status, or if it is accelerating their collapse and reverse to a simpler form. In other words, I want to know if the heirs of the old powers will be able to keep their dominant role if they do not let go of all those wrong people who are dragging them down to their level and go back to implementing the work program that their fathers suggested. That is to say, I want to know if all those critical thinkers (governments and international institutions) that are surviving from their mercy or pity would be there to defend them when they need them to lay their lives for them, or if they would be standing on the sidelines watching them be ripped to pieces, just as most animals do when a clan of hyenas singles out a lion, rips him to pieces, and no one from the animals who are watching comes to his aid. This scenario is actually being played out since October 7, 2023, between the Israelis and the Palestinians, despite the largest elephant in the room (the UN Security Council) having demanded on March 25, 2024, that the ongoing slaughter of Palestinians by the Israelis stop.

Analysis

Clothing labels refer to a permanent attachment that provides important information about the garment, such as “brand logo, clothing size, ingredient list, the country of origin, manufacturer, and care instructions, among other things.”

Newborns (new people) undergo two types of labeling right after birth. First, the natural system labels the newborn based on criteria such as race (physical characteristics), color, sex, and other genetic criteria. Second, the parents of the newborn label the new person based on manmade criteria such as language, religion, nationality, political or other opinion, social origin, property, birth, or other status that they found their fathers practicing or the fittest imposed on them.

Throughout history, people have accepted the label that the natural system tagged them with but refused to accept the manmade label that the fittest usually legitimize and enforce to keep their dominant role over the weak.

Since antiquity, people have been exploring ways to get rid of the manmade labels (distinctions) that the fittest usually want the weak to uphold to keep their dominant role. The people who want others to consider their opinion before taking action on their own refuse to accept that those they want to dominate are also objects (bodies, masses, forms, etc.) that were created in their own image. In other words, they are programmed with goodness and wickedness, and their goodness or wickedness can either be greater or less than the qualities that the entity that wants to rule over them possesses.

The refusal of the fittest to admit that all the people were created in his image has entangled mankind in complex crises that range from wars to gang violence, poverty, political repression, and so forth throughout history. In other words, the search by the fittest to convince everyone that he is the only one who is really genuinely working to defend or preserve freedom, and everyone else who does not consider his opinion before taking action is attacking this concept and doing terrible things to it, has prevented mankind from becoming able to create balance until today. This drawback persuaded people to divide ideas and be divided at all the social hierarchical levels into an inclusion group and a resistance group throughout history.

In fact, the unpreparedness of the fittest to accept that most people know that they would be better off preserving their power by defending the cause of freedom than attacking it, and that at the same time, the majority keep away from doing it because they know that it would later come back to bite them, has been hurting the fittest more than helping him.

For example, the old powers managed when they were not focusing so much on what power and wealth can do for them and were focusing more on what it takes to amass power to convert the United States from an outlaw territory in 1776 to being regarded as the leader of the free world and the arsenal of democracy by 1945. In other words, the old powers managed from 1776 to 1945 to make people around the world perceive that the United States is preserving world peace just as the Shaolin monks were doing in antiquity, or getting what they wanted while staying out of conflicts, and not as per the way the Catholic Church was doing it after this religious movement became politicized.

Earlier, I said that wealth, power, and status are known to blind people. Therefore, instead of the heirs of the old powers keeping the United States out of conflicts in the aftermath of WW2, just as their fathers (the old powers) to a great extent did from 1776 to 1945, the heirs of the old powers began to use the United States as a weapon to amass power and wealth. To make matters worse, the heirs of the old powers entangled the United States in complex treaties whose aims were to make people doubt if its determination to reduce fear and want was genuine. The conflicts and complex alliances that the heirs of the old powers entangled the United States in so far against their fathers’s counsel or George Washington, the first president of the United States, make it impossible to avoid that the bias that all people are programmed with exposes their greed, deceit, and corruption. This double standard field that the heirs of the old powers wanted the United States to play in (i.e., fighting and rewarding injustice at the same time) has been making people around the world distrust the Americans commitment to reduce fear and want and that of their masters, the western European monarchs and republics. The decision of the heirs of the old powers to be against the United States (i.e., the American idea or US constitution), continuing on doing and representing for them what this country did or represented for their fathers before WW2 erupted (a city on the hill), has been increasingly pushing people around the world to stop regarding the United States as the custodian of freedom. This increasing doubt by people around the world about the claim that the Americans make about being shepherds who stand on the side of truth in the aftermath of WW2 is creating two challenges:

First, this doubt is making it very difficult for the heirs of the old powers to avoid that the United States (the global policemen) depend on force and on allying with popular militant movements (such as Al Qaeda, ISIL, Hamas, Hezbollah, Houthis, etc.) to get its way despite the resistance of others, thus increasing a lot the number of people who are losing faith in the international postwar world order.

Second, this doubt is making it very difficult for the heirs of the old powers (the western European monarchs and republics) and the Americans, or vice versa, to be on the same side, thus making it very difficult to align interests and not push in the wrong directions.

I have no way of knowing how the heirs of the old powers are concluding that they can keep their dominant role while they are with their global policemen (the United States), saying one thing and doing another. That is to say, I have no way of knowing for how long people are going to put up with the heirs of the old powers and their global policemen (the United States) reaffirming imperatives that have the potential to make people endure and persevere, such as defending values, when their actions speak totally differently since 1945. What I do know is that people do not use the idea of good (human rights, democracy, freedom) as a tool to improve the truth, but as a tool to lure the weak to stop to honor his pledge of allegiance to stay and protect the fittest in his group, in order to pledge his allegiance (i.e., render it) to a competing authority.

Unfortunately, none of the political and economic arguments that the heirs of the old powers and their global policemen (the United States) presented since 1945 to justify that they knew what worked, or said included what people needed was right. This situation has not been helping the heirs of the old powers and their global policemen (the United States) to make the people who dishonor their political loyalties and pledges in order to honor (reaffirm) theirs observe the standards (i.e., the political order) that they are enforcing to keep their dominant role. Actually, this challenge also means that the heirs of the old powers and their global policemen (the United States) do not know what is right in terms of what works.

For example, the old powers (the victors of WW2) counselled their heirs to establish and maintain international peace and security with the least diversion for armaments of the world’s human and economic resources. The old powers counselled their heirs to regulate armaments as well. Instead of the heirs of the old powers (western European monarchs and republics) and their global policemen (the United States) practicing tolerance and resolving disputes astutely and in accordance with the measures suggested in the UN Charter, as Moses was doing in accordance with God’s decrees and instructions, the heirs of the old powers decided to sideline with Ukraine in the Ukrainian-Russia war and to provide this country with weapons. The heirs of the old powers believe that supplying Ukraine with weapons would kill two birds with one stone. First, defeat Russia, and second, keep citizens looking outward instead of inward; hence, their defense industrial base is staying up and running and creating lots of jobs.

Unfortunately, the biased propaganda (i.e., public relations battle) about how Russia is threatening the world order failed to create an international coalition of UN member states to defeat Russia, as happened to Iraq. Likewise, the weapons that the western European monarchs and republics and their global policemen (the United States) supplied to Ukraine, along with the sanctions and export control that were imposed on Russia, failed to secure a political, economic, and military defeat of Russia. Instead of the heirs of the old powers and their global policemen (the United States) going back to the drawing table and reviewing whether or not practicing tolerance and resolving the Ukraine-Russia crises in the same way their fathers counselled them to resolve disputes in the aftermath of WW2, the heirs of the old powers (and their global policemen) are testing a new method to defeat Russia after their previous attempts, during two years so far, failed to produce the outcomes they anticipate. The heirs of the old powers (western European monarchs and republics) and their global policemen (the United States) are now helping Ukraine to develop its own military defense products (i.e., having western European and American military defense companies open up offices in Ukraine to build this country’s military industrial complex in situ).

I have no way of knowing if the decision of the heirs of the old powers (western European monarchs and republics) and their global policemen (the United States) to strengthen and ship weapons to them could secure the defeat of Russia. Likewise, I have no way of knowing if the dissimilar way the heirs of the old powers (western European monarchs and republics) and their global policemen (the United States) are supporting militarily, and economically the UN member states that do as they say, or the ones they regard as strategic to keep their dominant role, from the ones they dislike and regard as a threat is making people around the world start to love them (the heirs of the old powers and their global policemen), trust them, value them, and want to play a role in burden sharing to protect them. That is to say, making people around the world appreciate (value) the way they are strengthening democracy, human rights, and freedom, and in this way, accepting to do their share, staying with them, and letting them have more powers than others, instead of repelling them. What I do know is that throughout history, people have advanced peace, securities, and opportunities in the same way a chess game is played.

Chess is a game that is based on war. It is “a board game for two players, each controlling an army of chess pieces.” The objective of the game is to checkmate the opponent’s king (i.e., attack and kill the opponent’s chess pieces to prevent them from doing the same to the pieces of the attacking player). As the game “spread geographically, modified versions of the rules became popular in different regions.” These variants introduce “changes in the mechanics of the game, such as movement of pieces, rules for capturing, or winning conditions.”

Killer chess is a game variant that requires considerable skill to play because a player “has to kill on the first move or be killed.” The killer chess variant was “developed to make a chess game faster. In other words, the aim of killer chess is “to cut the chase (i.e., no more foreplay) and get to the end of the game faster.”

I have no way of knowing if this rise in insecurity that swept the world in recent years is because the heirs of the old powers (western European monarchs and republics) and their global policemen (the United States) are cutting through the chase and attempting to get their ways despite the resistance of others without first giving political actions (the selection of alternatives) careful considerations to ensure that the alternative (choice) that they are picking is producing results that make them better off but without making the rest of the people around the world lose or become worse off. This is because if the political actions that their critical thinkers and servants (national governments and international institutions) are implementing are not making people appreciate their helpers (shepherds) and are producing relations that are making people perceive that a limited number of people are becoming better off and the majority are getting worse off (i.e., losing instead of gaining), this situation could make the individuals who do not believe that their social well-being is improving develop new ways of thinking that their goal would be to cut also the chase (i.e., no more foreplay) and to get to their goal faster also. This is very serious and worrisome.

To put it differently, people are all the time developing new ways of thinking that their goal is to cut the chase (i.e., no more foreplay) and to get to their goal faster. This makes people perceive that the knowledge that they are gaining or the tools that they are developing can help them get to their goals faster (i.e., to kill and avoid being killed). However, if categorically speaking, the reason why the heirs of the old powers are unable to control the international order in the aftermath of WW2 is because they are not able to outperform the rest of the people who are rivaling them in their own game(i.e., breaking their own will), this means that if the heirs of the old powers do not implement political actions that do not make people perceive that their well-being is getting worse off, it would not be possible for them to avoid becoming resized and new families/dynasties start to play their game. This is because in wars, outcomes are determined by the choices that each belligerent takes, with minimal or no randomness involved. In other words, even if a person has no perfect information about his adversary, he can formulate plans, including doing a review of similar events to gather complete information.

On the other hand, the finale of all the wars is known. Wars make the victor of the vanquished become infused with religion, bias, shrewdness, hate, apathy, etc. by both. This phenomenon has always persuaded the victor and the vanquished to perceive that they have the right to do whatever they want. When people listen to their personal power and conscience, they tend to create a significant shift in reason and skepticism, which can get out of control if no limits are established to stop it from spreading. Can the heirs of the old powers shape people’s minds in such a way as to make them want to stay with them and to grant them more powers than others when more people around the world become detached from values, knowing that their critical thinkers and servants (national governments and international institutions) are not sitting from morning till evening since 1945 as Moses was doing in antiquity, listening to disputes and judging between people in accordance with the Gods’ decrees and instructions, but are sitting from morning till evening looking for ways to enhance their own security against internal and external threats?

To put it differently, the old powers (the victors of WW2) believed that if they dismantled their empires in the aftermath of WW2 and had the people they vanquished and the people they were dominating observe the work program suggested in the UN Charter and the UDHR, they culd cut the chase quickly and get to their ultimate goal of reigning until eternity. In other words, the old powers believed that if national governments played their role in UN member states, they would not have to kill as much as they were doing before WW2 erupted, thus prompting lots of people to dislike them at the same time, because their critical thinkers and servants (national governments and international institutions) would be doing the killing on their behalf and, in this way, bear the consequences when people refused to obey. However, their heirs (i.e., their children) reevaluated their fathers’s strategies (i.e., the victors of WW2) and decided to let national governments and international organizations focus on what it takes to amass power and wealth for them instead of leading by example or observing the UN Charter and the UDHR. Not to mention, destroy religiosity, which throughout history has shown that it was an effective instrument to make people user-friendly and to reject materialism principally.

Can the heirs of the old powers (the western European monarchs and republics) prevent their collapse after their critical thinkers and servants (national governments and international institutions) made people turn their back on religiosity to embrace politics and modernization? Most importantly, can the heirs of the old powers (the western European monarchs and republics) avoid having people resize them after they decided to ditch the city on the hill role that the United States was supposed to play in the aftermath of WW2 so all members of the human family have faith and observe the rules of the international postwar world order? In other words, can the heirs of the old powers avoid having people resize them after they pushed the United States to climb down from the tree and to play the same game that the rest of the UN member states have been playing since 1945 (i.e., racing to determine who could knock the other off first) instead of finding the courage to make the United States lead by example so everyone can climb into the tree?

I have no way of knowing if the decision of the heirs of the old powers to have their critical thinkers and servants (national governments and international institutions) ignore the political work program that their fathers worked tirelessly during centuries to make people find the courage to accept and to let those helpers (the different units of authorities, including, first and foremost, the United States the global policemen of the world and the custodian of freedom) depend on force, corruption, lies, bias, deceit, etc. to make people surrender freedom to the political work program enshrined in the UN Charter and the UDHR is altering people’s behavior and making them wanting to let them (the heirs of the old powers) have more powers than others. What I do know is that this constant double standards game that the heirs of the old powers are allowing their critical thinkers and servants to peddle and to get away with in the aftermath of WW2 about how the political solutions they are positing are keeping the world safe, would have been fine if the heirs of the old powers did not dismantle their empires, and continued on playing with their servants a chess game that its its mechanics are not analogous to how a killer chess game is played where a player cannot avoid to kill on the first move or be killed, but a regular chess game where a player has the option to not kill on the first move or be killed.

To put it differently, in a killer chess game, the level of stress is very high. A player must “kill on the first move, as I said before, and make sacrifices more often than not, unlocking a new puzzle on every move.” If a player is not careful, a chess killer game can be over before either player knows it. Can the heirs of the old powers keep up with the pace of the disregard and contempt (carnage, corruption, etc.) they created in the world and not risk losing the thread after they decided to let their critical thinkers and servants (national governments and international institutions) regard themselves exempt from observing the appeal (work program) suggested in the UN Charter and the UDHR and made them focus on what it takes to amass power and wealth?

Actually, can the heirs of the old powers (western European monarchs and republics) avoid that the societies they depend on to administer their wealth and produce the weapons that they frighten the poor countries with, such as the United States, stop from doing their dirty work and gang on them and their rulers even after they (the heirs of the old powers) let them (the Americans) loose among the wolves when they need them to stay perfect in order to not discover that they are being used as chess pieces to rejuvenate the powers of a limited number of families/dynasties and not to increase their own happiness or reduce their own fear (i.e., improve freedom)? When the people who live in industrialized nations stop trusting their rulers, they stop being ready to lay their own lives to defend the political ideas that their rulers bunker under to make people stay with them and to let them have more powers than others. Can the heirs of the old powers prevent people around the world from ganging on them after they allowed their critical thinkers and servants (national governments and international institutions) to corrupt the world?

Once again, I have no way of knowing if the heirs of the old powers would be able to keep their dominant role (keep their command and control over the international order) after they allowed their critical thinkers and servants (national governments and international institutions) to destroy the international postwar world order that their fathers worked tirelessly to build and handed over to them to administer. Most importantly, I have no way of knowing how the heirs of the victors concluded that if they let the United States be involved in the political affairs of other countries in the aftermath of WW2, that the dirty work, wars, military alliances, mutual defense pacts, etc. that the Americans would be involved in would be useful to rejuvenate their power far better than if they were to showcase with the conduct of the Americans how the WW2 war aims that their fathers laid out in the UN Charter and the UDHR can reduce fear or want. What I do know is that it is not possible for a person to keep his bias hidden and not exposed in a world where its members agreed to be united to destroy the structures and rules that are supposed to ensure that disputes (and wars) do not erupt, and when they do erupt, there are rules of conduct and consequences.

It looks as if the heirs of the old powers are letting their critical thinkers and servants (national governments and international institutions) pilot them along with the idea of freedom that they depend on to keep their dominant role in a dark, perilous tunnel or on a ledge with deep abysses on both sides. The biggest challenge that the heirs of the old powers need to balance on this perilous road to avoid falling into the abyss is going to be how to convince people around the world that all the killing, assassination, torture, human rights violations, deceit, etc. that they allow certain nations to carry out is not programmed to extend their hegemony but programmed to defend freedom) and that all the killing or assassination that others do is to attack and banish freedom.

Once again, I have no way of knowing how the heirs of the old powers are concluding that when they permit the Americans (or a proxy) to kill or assassinate a person or a leader who refuses to consider their opinion before taking action of his own, such an action would be programmed to defend freedom, and when an ISIS militant orders the killing or assassination of an American or British national, he would be attacking freedom and using his power to get his way despite the resistance of others, when the behavior of either violates the rules (standards, norms) that the fittest is always trying to enforce to avoid that the weak return to his state of nature. Likewise, I have no way of knowing for how long people around the world will continue to take seriously the threats that the servants (national governments) of the heirs of the old powers make about how they will not tolerate conduct that can threaten civil peace when everyone knows that the more modernized people get, the harder things get to make the individuals involved ready to lay their own lives on behalf of leaders or to defend ideas that threaten their own happiness. In other words, the statements that French, British, and American rulers and political class, etc. constantly make about how citizens in those countries would be honoring the security treaty or mutual defense pact that they are regularly approving are just rhetoric, because no society has accepted to put itself in harm’s way to defend its rulers except when the case was to defend the truth, and none of the servants of the heirs of the old powers have been defending the truth since 1945, starting with the United States (the custodian of the idea of freedom). For example, after seven months of western European monarchs and republics, the United States and their allies, such as Egypt, Jordan, the Gulf States, etc., ganging on the Hamas leaders to kill them and converting Gaza into almost a rubble in the process of finding them, the entire 2 million Gazans are still to this day defending the Hamas leaders with their own lives.

It looks as if the heirs of the old powers are lost in the woods (i.e., not seeing the big pictures and seeing the small details only) after they decided to preoccupy their critical thinkers and servants (national governments and international organizations) with how to amass power and wealth and how to prevent citizens from ousting them from power, instead of how to lead by example so people would have no reason to distrust each other or to rely on contempt and disregard to increase their happiness. Not to mention the special settler colonialism conduct that the heirs of the old powers (the western European monarchs and republics) granted the Israeli Jews to keep alive. Most importantly, it looks as if the heirs of the old powers (the western European monarchs and republics) need to stop making their critical thinkers and servants regard themselves as the deputy of God on earth, just as they consider themselves to be one, so people around the world go back to perceiving that God does not have so many deputies roaming on earth at the same time since 1945, but only one. In other words, if the heirs of the powers do not stop the imagination of their critical thinkers and servants from continuing to confuse those helpers and to make them (those helpers) perceive that God appointed them to play the same role that their masters (the heirs of the old powers) are playing (i.e., deny others from natural and legal rights), then there is a good chance that the heirs of the old powers are going find themselves sooner or later in an oppositional position with the same thugs (critical thinkers and servants) that they are depending on to administer the different units of authorities they regularly create to keep their dominant role. That is to say, the same people who the heirs of the old powers are granting rights to strengthen the financialization of the world instead of fighting the world’s financialization, and the people who are delegating the role of humans to technology instead of the human body or violating the principles suggested in the UN Charter and the UDHR instead of observing them would gang on them and humiliate them.

Once again, I have no way of knowing how the heirs of the old powers plan to bring modernity, progress, civilization, etc. to all the people of the world when almost everybody nowadays can see with their own eyes that the critical thinkers and servants (national governments and international organizations) are saying one thing and doing another.

Surely, Moses, Muhammad, and many other Biblical and religious figures were conquering, killing, and assassinating people supposedly on instructions from God and getting away with it. But at the same time, the Bible or the Quran does not state that Moses, Muhammad, or God were running around and declaring themselves as the leaders of the free world and the arsenal of democracy, including recruiting freedom fighters and giving them money and weapons to do the dirty work on their behalf. Moses, Muhammad, God, and others knew that, sooner or later, they would have to put their money where their mouths were. Moses, Muhammad, God, and others knew that people would start to look for different people to play their role when they started to compare the factual accuracy of what they would be saying with the truth if other people were created in their image. For example, Moses, or God, knew that if they let the Israelites sign security treaties and mutual defense pacts with the people that they were vanquishing or crossing, including starting to create new bodies, institutions, unions, etc., and tasking them with fixing dates to end poverty and social injustice, this strategy would not be good for them, and especially good to help them take the Israelites wherever they were taking them. The same can be said about Jesus, Muhammad, Buddha, Confucius, and other biblical and religious personalities.

Indeed, the careless and indiscreet methods that the heirs of the old powers are using to convince the weak (people, national governments, international institutions, etc.) to stay with them to avoid that might make right do not appear to be strategies that are making people fear them or to trust their principal enabler (the United States).

Evidently, if the heirs of the old powers do not start to accept that goodness and wickedness are found in all the categories of being, as I said before, and start to establish ordered relations based on truth or moral causes instead of continuing on belittling people, reducing crises to electoral political strategies, testing with new conjectures before securing the conjectures that were already legitimized, or finding excuses to justify defeat or unmet goals, the harder things would be getting for them to make people want to stand with them or to let them have more powers than others. In other words, the longer the heirs of the old powers refuse to prioritize the truth or look for ways to let falsehood be the norm, the more their actions will repel people away from them. The world is not what it was before 1945 (i.e., the balance of forces). Ultimately, when people start to distrust the national governments and international institutions that the old powers depend on to do their dirty work or refuse to lay their own life on their behalf unless the spoils are shared on equal rights, the heirs of the old powers will ultimately lose strength, and that will count to hurt them in the long run or in the course of time and things.

Indeed, the heirs of the old powers can use their wealth and power to manufacture consent, obscure the truth, or try to convince people that the disregard that their critical thinkers and servants (national government and international institutions) are perpetrating by not observing the work program suggested in the UN Charter or the UDHR is not really happening. But the doubt that the heirs of the old powers could be sewing around people’s legitimate questioning of the policies that are being constantly shoved on them can be feeding the frustration that is building in people’s hearts, which throughout history has been a catalyst for revolutionary change.

Once again, I have no way of knowing if the insecurity that has swept the world in recent years is helping the helping the heirs of the old powers to make progress on the implicit goals that their fathers (the old powers) dismantled their empires and invited the vanquished and the dominated to cooperate with them to attain. What I do know is that this prevalent withdrawal by people from observing the standards that the critical thinkers and servants (national government and international institutions) of the heirs of the old powers are constantly legitimizing could mean that citizens are no longer finding what is right, what is rational, and/or what is found in the relationship between them (right or wrong) to make any sense to them (the people). In other words, people are not capable of knowing if goodness is only in the things that the heirs of the old powers want them to love or if it is in the things they hate. That is to say, the policies that the critical thinkers and servants of the heirs of the old powers are legitimizing is creating confusion that is making people perceive that there is harm or evil in the things they love. This is very serious and worrisome. This is because the things that the heirs of the old powers want people to love are to surrender freedom to the work program suggested in the UN Charter or the UDHR so they can keep their dominant role. If people are not finding any goodness in the common standards that the critical thinkers and servants of the heirs of the old powers are legitimizing or the ideas initially suggested in the UN Charter or the UDHR, this means that the heirs of the old powers and their critical thinkers and servants are regarding the essence as consisting of whatever originates from them and all that surrounds them as absolute, and not from whatever people are tolerating, and that there would be a time in which people’s patience would run thin and that they would lie in wait for them to say no to their arbitrary power.

Surely, the heirs of the old powers have not had any respect for any kinship or treaty since 1945 and are perceiving that the self-truth that their imagination is constantly validating can create the balance that permits them to rejuvenate or preserve their power. The heirs of the old powers are underestimating the importance of having people flatter them with their tongues, but their hearts are in denial, just as the Prime Minister of Israel learned since Hamas attacked Israel on October 7, 2023. The neutral position that the Muslim rulers in the Middle East have been taking since the Hamas attack does not correlate with the close relationships that the Prime Minister of Israel claimed he had built with neighboring Muslim rulers when he presented a map during a speech he was given at the United Nations in 2023, showing in it how much his close relationship has gotten with them.

Once again, I do not know how the heirs of the old powers are concluding that their critical thinkers and servants (national government and international institutions) would be honoring their agreements (pledges) with them when, throughout history, only a few servants did not turn away from their masters and backstabbed them.

Jesus encouraged people to stay with him so he could get his way despite the resistance of others, and his pride went to the extent of saying, “Whoever is not with me is against me, and whoever does not gather with me scatters.” [Matthew 12:30] But at the same time, Jesus understood that a branch cannot bear fruit by itself. Can the heirs of the old powers manage to encourage people to stay with them while they are permitting their critical thinkers and servants (national government and international institutions) to ignore that a branch cannot bear fruit by itself and are like them devoted to serving their own propensities instead of the collective good?

I do not know how the heirs of the old powers are concluding that their critical thinkers and servants (national government and international institutions) would be true to them and that they could continue to have the upper hand over them when those helpers have been since 1945 regarding themselves exempt from observing the work program suggested in the UN Charter and the UDHR.

Throughout history, people have been conspiring against each other and shaming each other in their struggle to determine who could make the weak consider the opinion of the fittest before taking action of their own. In fact, the fittest refused throughout history to enforce the natural and legal rights he legitimized and perceived that if they strived with their wealth and power to embrace concepts that were based on baseless assertions that such conjecture could help them preserve their power.

For example, when the individuals who wanted others to consider their opinion before taking action of their own failed to make the weak observe their commends in antiquity, the fittest conjectured that if they peddled that a God created the world and to bunker under legitimizing standards that they would say that they were suggested by God, they could get their way despite the resistance of others.

This storyline about how God created the world found listening ears and proved useful to the fittest to make the weak surrender freedom to him voluntarily. And so, like any profitable storyline, this narrative had to have a sequel so people would keep buying into it. The next plot included how God was operating an invisible parallel world (a kingdom) to the one that we exist in. Most importantly, to invent characters such as Satan, Lucifer, the devil, the goblin, etc., label them as rebellious, and to have them travel between the invisible parallel world (kingdom) that God operates and the one that we exist in to specifically perverse the individuals who refuse to accept the guidance or ideological and philosophical beliefs of the person who is above them in the hierarchy.

The decision of the fittest to recognize the natural power of people to invent characters and spirits and to continue to carry this classification of letting people’s deeds be divided into good whenever the change effected contributes to their wellbeing and evil when it threatens their prosperity has not proven to be a sustainable endeavor. This is because people are a function of the natural world, and many times, the explorations or changes that the fittest classify as good do not tie up with how the natural world classifies the same change. This is very serious and worrisome.

Put differently, people do not know if there is a link between what they say and their actions. That is to say, people do not know if there is a link between their deeds and what the natural world also regards as right. If there is a link between what is right and deed, then the heirs of the old powers could be harming themselves if they are or their critical thinkers and servants (national government and international institutions) saying one thing and doing another. This is because when the heirs of the old powers or their critical thinkers and servants regard themselves exempt from observing the standards and norms that they legitimize to keep their dominant role and let their perceptions justify their actions, they would be letting their irrationality, negligence, and treachery preserve their power instead of the principles that people agreed to voluntarily surrender freedom to attain. Throughout history, the fittest failed to stop discord from spreading and from preventing people from becoming enraged when they perceived that the fittest was lying to them about why the good that he was saying he was doing was not increasing their happiness or when they became critical of the way the fittest was distributing outcomes. That is to say, when the people perceive that what their leaders are telling them is that their enemies are not actually their enemies, it is the ones who have been telling them about who their enemies are who are really threatening them.

In the book of Matthew, it is suggested that “a tree is recognized by its fruit, and that a good or a bad tree is recognized by the type of fruit it bears.” [Matthew 24:33]. People have only one life to live. Most trees bear fruit after 2 to 15 years. A person is capable, before his death, of reaping or tasting the fruit of his toil. It is the fruit of the toil that rulers and the political class claim they are working to secure on behalf of others what most people are not able to taste.

In addition, one could suppose that the old powers or their heirs would have profited from the reset that WW2 permitted them, thus carrying forward only the good things from the many things that are constantly whispering in their hearts and leaving the evil that dominated their relations or behavior up to this date in the basket of history. This was not the case, unfortunately. The heirs of old powers decided to follow what they found their fathers practicing. That is to say, before WW2 erupted, the old powers nurtured a tree with branches of all types and shapes. No branch abides by any specific values or principles. Everyone was practicing capitalism without a conscience. In addition, while some people believed that Satan, Lucifer, the devil, etc. referred to names or characters that echo evil or diabolic behavior, there were others who were venerating Satan and viewing him as a positive archetype patriarch that represented pride, carnality, and enlightenment.

In fact, when we read about how our predecessors were organized until the outbreak of WW2, we find that they were divided and doing exactly what we have been doing since 1945, which is when WW2 was regarded as having ended. This is to extend this evil conduct, in which some manage to get their ways despite the resistance of others in the name of goodness and others by engaging in devilish activities. However, despite the different ideas that people were depending on before WW2 erupted to justify the rational or irrational notions that each person (or group) was depending on to get his way despite the resistance of others, we can notice that those predecessors managed to enforce conformity much better than we are doing, despite all the poverty, injustice, domination, subjugation, and exploitation that most people were knowing. In other words, people were capable of living with their anger and frustration much better, despite their capacity to oppose, disobey, or resist, as most people have done in recent years. That is to say, existing people were capable of being good guides to newborns (new people). Most importantly, we could have an idea about which newborns (new people) would grow to become what in the future, have access to what in the future, or what each society could look like in the future.

I have no way of knowing if people were more tolerant in antiquity because parents were capable of giving more advice to their children or because children were by nature wiser. What we do know is that two people cannot fill the same voice space. That is to say, if rulers (the rich) continue to legitimize natural and legal rights without the standards and norms that they are legitimizing or enforcing to present their citizens with a better future, or continue to hide the truth from their citizens about law and order being a means toward an end (i.e., to help the individuals involved to increase their happiness and not to improve democratic control), then their citizens are going to continue to believe the lies or imaginary stories that they tell them about how they are working to reduce their fear and want, when the truth is that they are staying in group with them to use their labor value to operate the means of production.

In addition, if rulers (the rich) do not tell their citizens the truth about how they manage to increase their happiness better than other rulers who are doing the same thing (i.e., by killing and denying the weaker ones rights), then mankind will not be able to create balance. In other words, citizens will continue to believe that their rulers (the rich) are working to increase their happiness so outcomes can be shared on equal rights, when in reality they are working to create ordered relations.

Therefore, the longer rulers (the rich) hide from their citizens the truth about how they increase their happiness or how they increase the happiness of the people they depend on to stay with them (i.e., by using them to forgo others from their own happiness), mankind would be continuing to extend this vicious circle of misinformation about why people stay in groups (i.e., to dominate each other) and why mankind are not able to improve peace and security (i.e., stay warped in ideas). Accordingly, people would continue to perceive that people stay together in groups to improve justice when the true reason is, as I just said, for the fittest to prevent the weakest from advancing their own unique perceptions, traditions, and cultures, and in this way strip or displace the fittest (the alpha) from continuing to exercise his supremacy or impose his will on everyone else.

The question that begs answers is simple and straightforward. We know that there are a lot of things that we do today, such as lying to each other about the reason why we stay in groups (i.e., to dominate, subjugate, and exploit each other, not to improve the truth), that are not going to change in the next 10, 50, or 100 years, and that means that we are going to be making use of such actions indeterminately to determine who would be making the weakest consider the opinion of the fittest before taking action of his own. What is not clear to me is: how did the heirs of the old powers conclude that they would be able to control with their critical thinkers and servants (national government and international institutions) the repercussions of letting people distrust them on the economic, social, and political system that they depend on to keep their dominant role if they continued to tell people one thing and do another? In other words, if all the insecurity that swept the world in recent years is by design (i.e., a result of the policies that national governments and international institutions implemented), how are the heirs of the old powers planning to make people turn a blind eye to the emotional stress that their policies are levying and to make them regard the corruption or crime that such policies are spreading (or raising) as normal and not as a motive to uproot them from their glory in the same way floods or hurricanes uproot trees from the ground?

I have no way of knowing how the heirs of the old powers are concluding that if they continue to allow their critical thinkers and servants (national governments and international institutions) to confuse people and to make them not know what to believe and not to believe, including being reactive and angry and losing trust in their leaders, in mainstream media, in political institutions, and most importantly, in each other, the standards (truth or justice) that people would be searching to improve would not sideline them and would not uproot them from their glory when everyone would be aware that it is their apathy that is creating this bottleneck except them. What I do know is that when Jozef Stalin, Adolf Hitler, Mao Zedong, and others were telling people to disrespect their leaders and political class (the rich) because they were not going to get anything in return for their allegiance except what the people in Zaire (now the Democratic Republic of the Congo) got from Leopold II of Belgium for their faithfulness, the people who were supporting the policies and political purges that those warlords were adopting were regarding them as saviors and were convinced that all the mass repressions that they were organizing were necessary to promote good and increase their happiness.

I have no way of knowing what people are going to lose if the heirs of the old powers continue to allow their critical thinkers and servants (national government and international institutions) to reset their goals and make people mirror themselves after Jozef Stalin, Adolf Hitler, and Mao Zedong, rather than men like Moses, Buddha, Jesus, and Muhammad, who managed to extend a pattern of deploring effects but without their followers challenging them or coming to grip with its causes. That is to say, can the heirs of the old powers allow their critical thinkers and servants to be honest, to acknowledge the state of our broken culture, or to stop accepting excuses, but without practicing the truth that they are preaching, as Moses, Buddha, Jesus, Muhammad, etc., managed to make their followers perceive that they were observing so people would want to stay with them and to let them have more powers than others?

Then again, if the heirs of the old powers are not scared that their critical thinkers and servants (national government and international institutions) become incapable of controlling people if they continue to wake up their awareness, as happened throughout history when people became fearless of the lynching of their kings, this means that the heirs of the old powers are no longer believing that decency in the ideas that their fathers counselled them to observe to keep their dominant role can help them to continue to get their ways despite the resistance of others. Most importantly, the disgrace that the heirs of the old powers are allowing their critical thinkers and servants to manifest against their fathers counsel means that the heirs of the old powers stopped believing that connecting the moral or immoral conduct that people manifest to a benchmark in human behavior is important to keep their dominant role. Accordingly, the heirs of the old powers must believe that if they deepened the role of the state (and technology) in governance, such a strategy would not make people run away from them but would ultimately make them listen to them.

I have no way of knowing how the heirs of the old powers are concluding that they would be able to make people get rid of the legitimate criticism that is metastasizing their hearts and minds about how their national government and international institutions have not led by example since 1945, so they could trust them and surrender freedom voluntarily to them without requiring that those critical thinkers and servants use force to get their ways despite the resistance of others, which has failed throughout history to produce permanent stability. What I do know is that before the allies managed to make the Germans, the Japanese, and others start doing as per what they told them, they had to bring the Germans, the Japanese, and others to a total surrender during WW2. Likewise, before China transformed in the aftermath of WW2 from being a semi-colony to a leading world power, Mao Zedong, whom many historians have considered to be one of the most controversial leaders that the world has known in modern history, killed between 40 and 50 million people from 1949 until his death in 1976. The number of people that historians suggest Mao Zedong killed from 1949 until his death in 1976 is close to the number of people that the allies (Great Britain, France, and their allies such as the United States) killed during WW2. Let us put aside the priceless cost that some of our fathers and forefathers paid in China and around the world so Mao Zedong’s convictions and the convictions of the allies during WW2 materialize. We cannot say that the visions of Mao Zedong or the allies were ill-thought-out until now. This is because the systematic killing that Mao Zedong embraced created the impetus that leaped China into becoming industrialized. Likewise, the Germans and the Japanese were throughout the second millennium difficult to control, but as of 1945, they seem to have been totally tamed and fully under control so far.

I will give an example to show how well-thought-out policies (i.e., decisions based on convictions and calculations) produce ill-thought-out outcomes. At the start of the 21st century, the United States destroyed Iraq and Afghanistan worse than the way the allies wrecked Germany or Japan. Instead of the well-thought-out policies of the United States producing results that would make the Iraqis or the Afghans want to surrender their freedom to the United States, those two countries have been demanding that this country break its relations with them, and Iran, which was not involved in the US-Iraq war or the US-Afghanistan war, appears to be the country that profited from the US well-thought-out policies. In order for the unfavorable outcomes that the United States reaped from its well-thought-out policies so far to be reversed (i.e., get the Iraqis, Afghans, Syrians, Lebanese, Yemenis, Libyans, Sudanese, etc., to trust the US so the Americans can go back to shaping those poor countries without doing it with warlords or people who distrust their empathy as the case is today), the United States has two choices. The United States needs to defeat those poor countries as it defeated the Germans and the Japanese during WW2 (i.e., increase death rates), so those who survive know their real place and begin to voluntary surrender freedom to the United States as the Germans and the Japanese have been doing since 1945. The second is if the United States appeals to God to send a new son or a prophet on condition of taking charge of the cost of his stay until he gathers all people under a new political or social program or continues praying to God that he keeps Hassan Nassrallah (in Lebanon), Abdul-Malik Badruldeen al-Houthi (in Yemen), Muqtada al Sadr (in Iraq), etc., who are teaching people why they need to choose their fate freely in good health, especially since the philosophical ideas that those warlord leaders are preaching appear to match exactly with the philosophical ideas that the United States preaches. Most importantly, those aforementioned warlords appear to be very successfully achieving what the delegated servants of the heirs of the old powers (i.e., the kings and chiefs that the old powers ordained to rule over the different societies that are located in the Middle East in the aftermath of WW2) are not capable of doing. This is to make those Muslim societies work together as one instead of staying working independently, which is a strategy that the kings and chiefs that the old powers ordained or appointed desire because it helps them to keep their hegemony or control over the territories that the old powers appointed them to administer.

Once again, many questions beg answers. But first, we do know that liberal interventionism, self-determination, freedom, etc. are concepts that people promote because they appear to be concepts that are connected to our senses of truth and justice, and therefore, nine times out of ten, they are winning tickets. In addition, such ideas appear to be set to tend human relations naturally towards such endeavors. Accordingly, when the fittest use those aforesaid concepts as tools to rejuvenate his power as compared to other political ideas, he will always find listening ears as far as the former rhetorics are concerned.

For example, at the start of the 20th century, certain societies started to depend on communism (or socialism) to keep their dominant role instead of on liberal interventionism, self-determination, freedom, etc., but all the attempts that the individuals involved tried to make those two political systems make people resist change failed to secure for the families/dynasties that were profiting the most from such ideas to keep their dominant role intact toward the end of the 20th century. The collapse of communism (or socialism) in the 1990s proved that liberal interventionism, self-determination, freedom, etc. are political weapons or tools (systems) that are far better crafted to help the rivaling force that uses them to keep its dominant role. In fact, the collapse of communism (or socialism) in the 1990s cleared the United States from all the transgressions that this country committed around the world to stop communism from spreading and confirmed that all the immoral actions that its rulers and political class committed in the name of US values had been right.

As I just said before, many questions beg answers. For one, how are the heirs of the old powers concluding that they could make people around the world hold their nose and to tolerate all the immoral actions (political lies, political corruption, etc.) that are sweeping the world without the disenchantment that people are knowing, pushing them to gang on them and to replace them with new people? Said differently, good and evil are two sides of the same coin. However, communism and socialism are political ideals that are theoretically far better placed to strengthen democratic control and equal rights than self-determination and liberal interventionism. This is because communism and socialism place restraint on human envy, greed, and bias, which are natural characteristics that people have no control over. The collapse of communism and socialism in the 1990s is due to the individuals who were profiting the most from those two concepts refusing to put a restraint on their greed and envy. This development left the individuals who profit the most from self-determination and liberal interventionism (i.e., western European monarchs and republics, along with the states that float in their orbits, such as the United States), in the spotlight and obliged them to put their money where their mouth is. Since the collapse of communism (or socialism) in the 1990s, the heirs of the old powers are trying to make Islam the enemy of freedom to divert people away from obliging them to put their money where their mouth is. Could the heirs of the old powers succeed in convincing people that Islam is preventing their critical thinkers and servants (national government and international institutions) from improving self-determination and liberal interventionism when, according to the Quran, all people were created free and equal?

It looks as if the old powers tasked the United States with playing the role of global policemen in the aftermath of WW2 so that the political and economic solutions that this country would be instituting to enslave people on their behalf, would fire back against this society (the United States) when people around the world become disenchanted with the standards and norms suggested and withdraw their obligation to obey, instead of pouring their angers against their heirs. Since 1945, the United States has been transgressing around the world like a mad person and applying sanctions on the people (societies, businesses, and nations) that refuse to surrender freedom to its irrational behavior in the same way it is suggested in the Quran in Surah al Baqarah under verse 14 that hypocrites do. The Quran states that when the hypocrites meet the believers, they say, “We believe.” But when alone with their evil associates, they say, “We are definitely with you; we were only mocking.”

In antiquity, when the church leaders granted rights to priests to preach the word of God, and pursue the full development of their personalities at the same time, the church was resized in the course of time and things. The ideas that the political rulers in the United States are preaching do not differ from the ideas that are included in the biblical scriptures.

The United States is a complex society, not any different from a yoghurt culture. It is not possible to transform milk (a simple product) into something complex without adding a yoghurt culture. A person can add any other natural culture to milk, such as cheese, mayonnaise, peanut butter, etc., but only yoghurt convert milk into yoghurt (i.e., an edible product into another edible product). That is to say, if people around the world want to be modernized while preserving limited government, free markets, free trade, etc., and not be doing it while preserving big government, protectionism, and authoritarianism, which is what the United States has become in recent years since the fall of the Soviet Union in the 1990s, it is incumbent to preserve what is left from the US constitution before it is too late. This is because if the few US scholars and politicians who understand what the US constitution is all about, such as Thomas Sowell, Ron Paul, Tulsi Gabbard, etc., continue to be brushed, the entire world could lose the understanding that mankind gained in the last three centuries on how to preserve and advance freedom, and could return to living in the dark ages, as was the case in the first half of the second millennium, but while riding driverless cars instead of donkeys.

In the animal kingdom, studies show that animals could gang on the beast that tries to terrorize others. How can we be sure that the United States will not discover after a while that it is itself under siege by the individuals (societies, businesses, and nations) that its rulers and political class are sanctioning when none of the individuals or legal entities that the US is disenchanting are working to secure the UN goals but are like most of its rulers and political class, making decisions that revolve around money and personal influence? Said differently, how do we know that all the UN member states and international institutions that the heirs of the old powers empowered and are depending on their wisdom to keep their dominant role would not betray them and betray their global policemen (the United States) after they converted the international order into a system of buying and selling and not a system of common interests, which is what their fathers suggested to them to be doing in the aftermath of WW2, to avoid having their power, wealth, and status stripped from them and handed to new families/dynasties?

I do not know the answer to the aforesaid questions. What I do know is that a matchstick in the dark is very important. It lights people’s paths, guides them into the right path, and makes them see and be aware of where there is danger and where it is safe, as well as how one could arrive at his destination with ease. But at the same time, when the matchstick burns and reaches the end, it burns the fingers of the person who is holding on to it. I have no way of knowing if the decisions of the heirs of the old powers to sum up democratic control, social justice, freedom, and human rights into a ballot box that usually people are told in advance who they could elect (i.e., meaning they have no choice but to vote for the candidate who the financial lobbies shortlisted) are creating the change or the necessary consistency in the behavior of people that would make them win everything in the long term, and that this strategy is not leading them down a bad path and making them win in the short- and medium-term only. Said differently, people will not be running ahead of them (the heirs of the old powers) instead of behind them, and they will be pushing them to prioritize short- and medium-term goals when it is the long-term goals that preserve their (the heirs of the old powers) strength and stability. What I do know is that the old powers (i.e., their heirs) began in 1945 with a series of educational movements aimed at wresting or cleansing political and economic ideas and organizations from within societies around the world. The aim of the heirs of the old powers was to override old customs, old culture, old habits, and old ideas and institute new relations that they laid out in the UN Charter and the UDHR. In addition, the heirs of the old powers tasked critical thinkers and servants (national governments and international institutions) with teaching people to secure the goals suggested in the UN Charter and the UDHR in the same way Mao Zedong in China tasked his followers to strive to secure the political and economic outcomes he designed.

As of 1945, the critical thinkers and servants (governments and international institutions) that the heirs of the old powers appointed and tasked with helping them to secure the philosophical and ideological ideas postulated in the UN Charter and the UDHR were killing, subjugating, and exploiting people, just as the critical thinkers and servants of Mao Zedong were doing from 1949 until his death in 1976. Can the changes (i.e., destruction or chaos, and building or order) that the critical thinkers and servants of the heirs of the old powers are effecting around the world since 1945 produce the same cult that the critical thinkers and servants of Mao Zedong managed to achieve upon his death thus enabling the heirs of the old powers to know that the concepts that their critical thinkers and servants are wresting with are rejuvenating their (the old powers) power and transforming the international order in the same way the economic and political solutions that Mao Zedong practiced transformed China from being a semi-colonized country in 1949 to one of the leading world power?

I have no way of knowing what political concept Mao Zedong (or Josef Stalin) used to enable him to make his critical thinkers and servants ready to surrender freedom to him. This is because people have refused to surrender their freedom to ideological and philosophical beliefs that make them give up part of their freedom to guarantee the protection of their remaining rights throughout history. It would be naive to suppose that Mao Zedong did not know that people live as “radical individuals” who are fine with sanctifying (adoring, venerating, etc.) and violating (desecrating) at the same time, and that they are alright with not sharing or having anything in common with others except with specific individuals. If the critical thinkers and servants that Mao Zedong was counting on to help him navigate his way among the midst of agitation, revolts, and uprisings during his tenure in office were capable of resisting the forces or currents that were working against them to make them prioritize their self-interests as all people in positions of power usually do, thus preventing the social order that they were trying to straighten leap forward, there must be a rule that Mao Zedong was enforcing to ensure that his critical thinkers and servants (governors, chiefs, judges, etc.) do not vulgarize his concepts. In other words, there must be a rule that Mao Zedong was practicing from 1949 until his death in 1976 that made all the families that had a family member tortured or killed on his hands or on the hands of his critical thinkers and servants not conspire to try to overturn or reverse their work program as the critical thinkers and servants (governments and international institutions) of the heirs of the old powers have been doing since 1945 at the international order. The aforesaid is analogous to how, in modern history, the Palestinians who lost a member of their family during the ongoing Israeli-Hamas War are not revolting against the Hamas fighters and tolerating the onslaught in the hope that the sacrifices that they are paying ultimately free them from having to live under the domination of the Israelis.

Once again, I have no way of knowing what specific rules (standards and norms) Mao Zedong enforced to ensure that his adversaries in China and around the world did not vulgarize his concepts. What I do know is that the critical thinkers and servants that Mao Zedong was counting on their wisdom to torture or kill so he could get his way despite the resistance of others had to have been doing something from 1949 until his death in 1976 that the critical thinkers and servants (governments and international institutions) of the heirs of the old powers have not been doing since 1945 at the international order. Accordingly, this difference could be an essential rule among the many rules that could have been preventing the heirs of the old powers from making headway on their work program to rejuvenate their power and to reduce fear and want around the world without this exercise happening in total chaos, as the case appears to have been since 1945.

On the other hand, when we compare how the heirs of the old powers are allowing their critical thinkers and servants (national governments and international institutions) to rejuvenate their power and secure the goals stipulated in the UN Charter and the UDHR, we find that their working approach does not require that their servants include any criticism or self-criticism component, as Mao Zedong (or Josef Stalin) ensured that it was a major component of the Marxist-Leninist-Maoist political thought that they were practicing.

For example, the founding fathers of the UN (the old powers) counselled their heirs (their children) to let all their critical thinkers and servants (governments and international organizations) observe the work program suggested in the UN Charter and the UDHR to avoid that nationalism surge in the societies that were vanquished during WW2 or freed in the aftermath of WW2. This is to ensure (avoid) that no ideological or philosophical beliefs rise above the international rule-based postwar world order, which they laid out in the UN Charter and the UDHR. However, for reasons that only a few people must know, the heirs of the old powers decided to disobey the counsel of their fathers and allowed their critical thinkers and servants to regard themselves exempt from observing the appeal suggested in the UN Charter and the UDHR. In fact, the heirs of the old powers did not only allow their critical thinkers and servants to regard themselves exempt from observing the appeal suggested in the UN Charter and the UDHR since 1945, but they also decided to let the concept of God (i.e., religion) or philosophy that the fittest depended on to make the weak have fear or to self-criticize stop to project any value on the personalities of people as of this date as well.

I have no way of knowing why the heirs of the old powers do not want to believe that people are “radical individuals” who prioritize their own commitment and requirements, including form groups or political entities, to serve their egoistic requirements and not the political requirements or agenda of the person who is above them in the hierarchy. Additionally, I have no way of knowing how the heirs of the old powers are counting on observing (detecting) weaknesses and making it difficult for their adversaries (governments and international institutions) to gang on them when none of those critical thinkers and servants are leading by example and are all regarding themselves exempt from observing the appeal suggested in the UN Charter and the UDHR. What I do know is that the constant wars that have engulfed the world in recent years could be due to the heirs of the old powers letting their critical thinkers and servants secure for them the work program suggested in the UN Charter and the UDHR without observing any form of criticism or self-criticism. Accordingly, this strategy appears to be rallying the critical thinkers and servants of the heirs of the old powers behind the international rule-based postwar world order to convert this instrument into a pass-way to consolidate national security instead of a barrier to prevent civil wars, political division, power vacuums, or warlordism. The consolidation of national security shifts the attention of national governments from being devoted to preserving the wealth, power, and status of the heirs of the old powers to promoting national supremacy. Can the heirs of the old powers preserve their power, wealth, and status when the world falls victim to the national supremacy complex, knowing that all people are born with instincts to prey and that the social order is nothing but a platform to refine people’s preying skills?

Put differently, before WW2 erupted, all the societies were consolidating national security over global security, which was problematic for the old powers, and therefore, wars were rampant. The victors of WW2 (the old powers) dismantled their empires during WW2 and invited the vanquished societies and the societies that they freed to observe the appeal suggested in the international rule based postwar world order, in which the UN Charter and the UDHR act as its archetype. That is to say, the heirs of the old powers (the victors of WW2) were counting on the international rule-based postwar world order to consolidate their power (prevent the societies that they vanquished and freed from raising their own armies) and, in this way, preserve their wealth, status, and power ceaselessly.

The decision of the heirs of the old powers to disobey the counsel of their fathers and to be in favor of letting their critical thinkers and servants (governments and international organizations) regard themselves exempt from observing the appeal suggested in the UN Charter and the UDHR instead of being devoted to holding them accountable and ensuring that they lead by example, made it impossible to suppress corruption and to rid governments of bureaucratic officials (rulers and political class) who are using their authority to prioritize their self-interests instead of the interests of their masters (i.e., the heirs of the old powers). Accordingly, this strategy appears to be forestalling the capacity of the heirs of the old powers to rejuvenate their power, including placing them in front of two unpleasant courses of action in order to prevent their resizing and collapse.

The first is to give up using the international rule-based postwar world order as a tool to rejuvenate their power, and to go back to using pre-1945 political orders to achieve this end. This switch will entail that the heirs of the old powers (the victors of WW2) create a new reset either by entangling the world in a new global war or by continuing to program the same local crises or conflicts that have swept the world in recent years on account of their outcome, weakening their adversaries (national governments and international organizations) and keeping them strong. The second is to not fight the disregard and contempt that the critical thinkers and servants (governments and international organizations) of the heirs of the old powers are effecting or to push it away, in the hope of time aiding in letting it pass without its impact having any bearing on the maintenance of their strength and stability.

Either one of the aforementioned courses of action can help the heirs of the old powers keep their dominant role. The problem is that to get the results that each course of action anticipates, it requires that the heirs of the old powers first stop the governments that are violating the international rule based postwar world order from continuing to get their ways despite the resistance of others. To do this, the heirs of the old powers need to make sure that citizens withdraw their obligation to obey their rulers or political class, so the disorder that gets created makes the individuals who are not ceding their authority to them (the heirs of the old powers) feel humiliated and convinced that people do not love them and need them to be deposed.

Since 1945, all the anti-government movements that the victors of WW2 sponsored implicitly or explicitly to make the national governments that were not considering the opinion of the heirs of the old powers before taking action on their own be deposed succeeded in achieving this end, but without this change securing the institutional change or trust that the heirs of the old powers were anticipating. This is very serious and worrisome.

According to the second law of thermodynamics, all things trend toward disorder. That is to say, “As one goes forward in time, the degree of disorder in any closed system will always increase, or at least stay the same.” In other words, if the heirs of the old powers continue to financialize the world as they have been doing since 1945 without this strategy, including measures in the system (the intentional order) that make people perceive that they are increasing their happiness, it would not be possible for them (the heirs of the old powers) to make people trust them. When people distrust the heirs of the old powers, it would not be possible to avoid that they (the people) do not distrust the international rule-based postwar world order that the heirs of the old powers are depending on to keep their dominant role. When people distrust the international rule-based postwar world order, it becomes very difficult to make them not prioritize national security or their self-interests. Can the heirs of the old powers succeed at establishing balance with their critical thinkers and servants (governments and international organizations) if they continue to let them focus on how to rejuvenate their power as they have been doing in the last seventy five years so far instead of focusing on how to observe the work program suggested in the UN Charter or the UDHR, which we know is the only work program that can make people trust them and not perceive that they are being used just as chess pieces on a chess board?

I do not know the answer to the aforesaid question. What I do know is that following decades of reforms by the Qing dynasty to dissipate the agitation, revolts, and uprisings that were waging in the monarchy, the families that were controlling the Qing dynasty failed to consolidate their power, and in the year 1911, during the Xinhai Revolution, this dynasty, which had been in power for 276 years, was overthrown. Next, the newly established Republic of China that emerged following the 1911 Xinhai Revolution, which ended China’s last imperial dynasty, struggled to form a legitimate central government, and the revolutionaries involved became entangled in decades of political division and warlordism that included failed or botched attempts to reestablish the monarchy.

I have no way of knowing if the heirs of the old powers are struggling to keep their power over the international order intact or not, as of 1945. What I do know is that the constant wars that have engulfed the world in recent years do not support that the series of cultural, economic, educational, military, diplomatic, and political reforms that the critical thinkers and servants (governments and international institutions) of the heirs of the old powers are implementing are translating those efforts into tangible outcomes that are consolidating their power.

The Qing dynasty collapsed because the individuals who were controlling this monarch did not believe that it would be impossible for them to control all the revolutionaries or citizens who were disenchanted with the political order that they were legitimizing. In other words, the individuals who were controlling the Qing dynasty were trapped at the start of the 20th century in the same trap that the families/dynasties that were controlling the Soviet Union were trapped in toward the end of the 20th century. The families/dynasties that were controlling the Soviet Union were not perceiving that the central government would not be able to defeat the resistance or uprising. In other words, the families/dynasties that were controlling the Soviet Union were not willing to admit that complexity is not what happened but what might happen in the future.

Then again, the collapse of the Soviet Union in the 1990s was the flashpoint or the culmination that put an end to decades of agitation, revolts, and uprisings that were occurring in the years prior. This event invites a question that begs answers. Why did the families/dynasties that were controlling the Soviet Union as of 1945 collapse in the 1990s, and Mao Zedong and the families/dynasties that were controlling China from 1945 until the 1990s managed to stay in power and convert China to great power when the two units of authorities were depending on the same ideological and philosophical beliefs and the same degree of authoritarianism (or human rights violations)?

In my opinion, what Mao Zedong and the families/dynasties that were controlling China from 1945 until 1990s were doing to enable them to stay in power and to put China at the door steps of becoming a great power by 1990s, which is also what the families/dynasties that were controlling the Soviet Union as of 1945, or the families that were controlling the Qing dynasty until 1911 were not doing, was creating a balance between the number of critical thinkers and servants (chiefs, judges, government officials) who they were killing and suppressing, and the number of critical thinkers and servants (chiefs, judges, government officials) who were violating the natural and legal rights that they were legitimizing.

Could the reason why the heirs of the old powers are not able to reduce the dynamism that the world has known in recent years be due to their inability to create the same balance that Mao Zedong managed to achieve during his years in power? Most importantly, how can we be sure that the heirs of the old powers would not stumble on the same setbacks that the families/dynasties that were controlling the Soviet Union in the 1990s or the families that were controlling the Qing dynasty until 1911 confronted if they continued to be against letting their critical thinkers and servants (governments and international organizations) observe the work program suggested in the UN Charter or increase death rates to purge or flush those who were refusing to lead by example, thus creating the balance or the culture of tolerance that Mao Zedong and the families/dynasties that were controlling China from 1945 until the 1990s managed to build?

Once again, I have no way of knowing if the number of conflicts, civil wars, crises, etc. that the heirs of the old powers are implicitly or explicitly backing or operating is creating a balance between the number of critical thinkers and servants (governments and international organizations) who are being killed and suppressed and the number of critical thinkers and servants who are violating the natural and legal rights legitimized in the UN Charter and the UDHR so they can keep their dominant role. What I do know is that there are two ways to increase death rates or purge the souls whose owners are not willing to observe the natural and legal rights that the fittest legitimize. The first is to rely on a mass purging exercise such as a global war. The second is to continue to excoriate the national governments that the heirs of the old powers want weakened by engulfing those societies involved in constant civil wars through the intermediary of local militarists, as happened during the series of anti-government protests, uprisings, and armed rebellions that spread across much of the Arab world in the early 2010s and are known as the Arab Spring.

It is important that readers keep in mind that the power vacuum, disorder, or chaos that has been happening in the Middle East since the start of the 21st century is not a phenomenon that the people who inhabit this geographical territory will be contending with forever; rather, it is an exercise that the old powers (the families/dynasties that control the international order and the money supply of the world) rotate around the world. Once the heirs of the old powers finish knocking down the will of the people who inhabit the Middle East (of which as of October 7, 2023, Israel is its victim), they will leave them alone and begin to wreck the will of other societies in other parts of the world. The measures that the heirs of the old powers would be depending on to determine which society is to be wrecked depend on many factors. Critical factors, such as the level of awareness of the society and the rate at which the political and economic order of a given society is displacing the political and economic order of another order, are essential. Additionally, the control of an encroaching political and economic system does not have to be thwarted by engulfing the society that its political and economic system is invading a dominant society in a civil war, but can be done initially by containing its expansion. For example, when China’s (or India’s, Iran’s, etc.) political and economic influence was encroaching on Afghanistan, the victors of WW2 engulfed Afghanistan in a civil war to stop or contain the Chinese (Indian, Iranian, Russian, etc.) expansion in central Asia.

In this context, it is also important to keep in mind that the heirs of the old powers do not like to engulf the world in a global war because this path obliges them to make compromises, as they did in the aftermath of WW2, to the people (societies) who laid their own lives on their behalf. Likewise, if the heirs of the old powers decide to design a new global war to create, through such an event, a new reset, they will have to divide part of their spoils with the societies that they would be relying on their soldiers to lay their own lives on their behalf. For example, the old powers promised the Muslim Arabs to help them establish monarchs if they betrayed the Ottoman rulers during WW1.

The constant wars that have swept the world in recent years are due to all the rulers and the political class in UN member states refusing to observe the work program suggested in the UN Charter and the UDHR. Accordingly, the heirs of the old powers need to rely on civil disobedience, civil resistance, guerrillas, riots, secret societies, underground organizations, etc. to overthrow the regimes that are refusing to consider their opinion before taking action on their own, just as happened during the Arab Spring that spread across much of the Arab world in the early 2010s.

Then again, when we compare how the political order developed in the Middle East following the Arab Spring that spread across much of the Arab world in the early 2010s, we find that until now the demonstrations, riots and social violence that occurred has toppled some of the rulers (regimes) that were in power, but did not mark a switch toward the individuals (rulers, warlords, chiefs, etc.) involved either agreeing to begin to cooperate in accordance with the principles suggested in the UN Charter and the UDHR, or becoming entangled in an elimination exercise as happened in China when following the 1911 Xinhai Revolution a warlord era emerged until it formally ended in 1928 with the fittest unifying all the warlords under a new republic that was called the Republic of China. This is very serious and worrisome.

To put it differently, when the Soviet Union collapsed, the victors of WW2 (the heirs of the old powers) absorbed all republics of this former bloc and prevented those societies from staying stateless, as was the case in Lebanon, Libya, Iraq, and Yemen, or from becoming ruled authoritatively, as the case is in Egypt, Jordan, Israel, Saudi Arabia, Dubai, Oman, etc.

It is important that readers keep in mind that the victors of WW2 did not let the Arab Spring destabilize the GCC countries by design due to the drawback that such circumstances could have on the world oil supply (or earnings from Hajj) if Saudi Arabia, for example, had become stateless and ruled by warlords as Lebanon, Iraq, Yemen, etc. are ruled today. However, the fact that the GCC countries did not become destabilized by the Arab Spring does not mean that the central authority that dominates those kingdoms is balancing relations any differently than in Lebanon or Iraq. This is because the GCC countries are absolute monarchs. In other words, the GCC countries are ruled by a single warlord instead of this control being done by multiple warlords, as is the case in Lebanon, Libya, Iraq, Yemen, etc.

If we compare how the victors of WW2 (the heirs of the old powers) decided to keep the Arab states in the aftermath of the Arab Spring either stateless and ruled by warlords or ruled authoritatively by formal regimes or institutions but without making any efforts to have them observe the UN Charter and the UDHR as Mao Zedong (or Josef Stalin) were doing to the officials that held key positions in the government to make them build loyalty (discipline, order, cult), or without entangling them in wars to eliminate each other as happened following the 1911 Xinhai Revolution until in 1928 the fittest (i.e., the Kuomintang also known as the Chinese Nationalist Party) coerced all the rivaling forces, we find that the longer the heirs of the old powers are extending this period of warlordism, the more this exercise appear to be propelling the individuals involved to abstract idealistic ideas that differs from the ideas that the victors of WW2 (the heirs of the old powers) legitimized in the UN Charter and the UDHR or their fathers freed the vanquished and the dominated in the aftermath of WW2 in order to teach them to observe.

For example, since 1948, the Israeli Jews believe they are God’s chosen people (i.e., superior to everybody), and, therefore, their supremacy complex makes them perceive that they are above international laws. Likewise, since almost the same date, the Egyptians believe that they need to recreate the glories that their ancestors enjoyed in antiquities. The Saudis believe that they need to make a name for themselves and build modern cities with towers that reach to heaven. The Lebanese believe that if they can steal people’s deposits in banks, people will later move on and forget. That is to say, when we try to compare “what every soul [in the Middle East] has sent forth for tomorrow” [Surah Al-Hashr 59:18] or to leap forward toward starting to cooperate in accordance with the principles suggested in the UN Charter or the UDHR, we find that none of the critical thinkers and servants (governments and international organizations) who the heirs of the old powers are depending on their wisdom to rejuvenate their power or ensure lasting peace are putting the interests of their masters before theirs.

The international order can be said to be analogous to a pie of pizza. Pizza is “a dish of Italian origin consisting of a flat, round base of dough baked with a topping of tomato sauce and cheese.” Some people add other ingredients, such as meat, mushrooms, onions, etc. People usually cut or partition the round-backed pizza into slices for ease of handling or sharing. However, when one examines the contents of a sliced or cut section closely, we find that all the pieces contain the same ingredients and show the same behavior.

The heirs of the old powers divided the command and control of the international order in the same way a person can cook a pizza with some sections topped with ingredients over the tomato and the cheese. Additionally, the heirs of the old powers allowed some societies to advance more than others, contrary to what their fathers (the old powers) counselled them to stay away from doing. That is to say, at the end of WW2, the old powers succeeded in uniting all people under the auspices of the United Nations in the same way an uncut pizza dish looks when it comes from the oven, but then their heirs (their children) began to partition people into nations just as most people do when they want to eat pizza instead of keeping it as a whole, holding it with their own hands, and consuming it as one piece (i.e., transforming the pizza into the next stage). Said differently, avoid having people perceive that they are not all being treated equally.

I have no way of knowing if the rest of the UN member states that are located beyond the region that geographically is known as the Middle East are observing the principles suggested in the UN Charter and the UDHR, or if the individuals who run all spheres in those other countries such as government, industry, agriculture, education, etc., are also doing the same as the warlords that control the Middle East are doing and regarding themselves exempt; but, if, as I said before, the international order is analogous to how an uncut or cut pizza look likes (i.e., it consist of the same ingredients cheese and tomato), then the heirs of the old powers could be allowing their critical thinkers and servants (governments and international organizations) to set them up to confront damaging circumstances that they would not be able to reverse its outcomes on their wealth, status or power, if all of them are doing as the warlords that control the Middle East being scattered and not speaking the same language. This is because if we take the level of confusion and defiance that the warlords that the victors of WW2 appointed to command and control the Middle East from before the date when the Arab Spring that spread across much of the Arab world in the early 2010s was regarded to have started to after, we find that in all the societies that became stateless and the ones that stayed authoritative, their level of confusion and defiance increased to levels that were higher than before the series of anti-government protests started. Presently, the societies that live in the Middle East are not only defiant, scattered, confused, and blind, but are behaving not any differently from how ferocious animals or animals that are in heat behave.

In addition, if we consider that people try their best to not repeat the same mistake twice, the heirs of the old powers could be piling up a countless number of challenges around them if they continue to delay having their critical thinkers and servants (governments and international organizations) stop to regard themselves exempt from observing the appeal suggested in the UN Charter or the UDHR. Put differently, if the heirs of the old powers continue to delay engulfing the world in a global war or begin to enforce or purge the critical thinkers and servants whose members refuse to cooperate in accordance with the principles suggested in the UN Charter or the UDHR to create the same culture that Mao Zedong (or Josef Stalin) did to transform China from being a warlord state to a superpower, then there is a good chance that the efforts and determination that the heirs of the old powers would be exhausting to keep their dominant role could be a step too late. If the efforts and determination of the rulers and kings who were overthrown exhausted were successful in surmounting or solving the challenges that were piled on them when their critical thinkers and servants ganged on them, then we would have been living under the Egyptians, Greeks, or Chinese imperial dynasties until today.

On the other hand, I strongly believe that the only reason why Pharaoh, the Greek empire, and the various Chinese imperial dynasties collapsed is because the rulers of those kingdoms thought they were more powerful than the kings or chiefs that were overthrown. In other words, the kings and chiefs of those kingdoms that collapsed thought that their wealth and military superiority would save them or protect them from their own critical thinkers and servants (i.e., the officials who were running all spheres in those kingdoms, from government, industry, agriculture, education, etc.).

I have no way of knowing if the wealth and military superiority that the heirs of the old powers possess today would put them out of the harm of their critical thinkers and servants (i.e., the officials who are running all spheres in those kingdoms from government, industry, agriculture, education, etc.), thus enabling them to thrive and propound perpetually. What I do know is that historians suggest that the Arab Spring that spread across much of the Arab world in the early 2010s began in Tunisia in response to corruption and economic stagnation, underdevelopment, unemployment, humiliation of citizens by government officials, and unfair distribution of wealth. When the Tunisian government agreed to introduce reforms to address the disenchantment of citizens with its performance, the anti-government protests, uprisings, and armed rebellions had spread to much of the Arab world. A major slogan of the demonstrators in the Arab world was “the people want to bring down the regime.” In other words, the torment and horror that touched or were cast over the rulers that were overthrown came upon them from places they never expected. This is because those rulers did not think that the fortifications that they built would collapse and not be enough to save them or that the critical thinkers and servants who were counting on their wisdom to protect them would betray them. That is to say, those rulers that were overthrown did not think that the repression or false promises that they were always breaking would spark movements for change or freedom that would cost them everything they worked for. And so the question that begs answers is: how can we be sure that because the heirs of the old powers are allowing their critical thinkers and servants (governments and international organizations) not stop to regard themselves exempt from observing the appeal suggested in the UN Charter or the UDHR, that they are not demolishing their wealth, power, and status that their fathers and forefathers started building since a millennia already?

I do not know the answers to the aforementioned questions. What I do know is that instead of the heirs of the old powers using the fall of the Soviet Union in the 1990s or the uprising that spread during the Arab Spring to rid the governments that were reset or freed from functionaries (critical thinkers and servants) who were undermining the appeal suggested in the UN Charter or the UDHR, the heirs of the old powers decided to sideline with the warlords that were protecting them and to suppress the anti-government protests, uprisings, and armed rebellions that citizens in eastern Europe and the Middle East were spearheading to demand that their rulers and political class prioritize the values enshrined in the UN Charter and the UDHR. In other words, the heirs of the old powers behaved contrary to the way Mao Zedong (or Josef Stalin) acted to ensure that they rid their governments of functionaries who were trying to undermine the Marxist philosophy. That is to say, instead of the heirs of the old powers protecting the people who were demanding that relations start to be based on the principles suggested in the UN Charter and the UDHR in the societies that demanded that their regimes be overthrown, the heirs of the old powers directed the violence of their warlords at them and kept the same warlordism culture in place.

As I said before, the heirs of the old powers managed with their critical thinkers and servants (governments and international organizations) in the Middle East and around the world (i.e., pro-government militias, counter demonstrators, and the military) to meet the anti-government protests, uprisings, and armed rebellions that spread across much of the world during the Arab spring in the early 2010s with violent responses and to make its wave fadeaway by 2012. However, since the date the heirs of the old powers and their warlords in the Middle East (i.e., governments and international organizations) brought the Arab Spring under control, multiple large-scale conflicts have emerged around the world. I have no way of knowing how effective the response of the heirs of the old powers and their critical thinkers and servants has been to control the power struggle that emerged in the new conflicts that are waging around the world. What I do know is that the ongoing conflicts that are waging around the world appear to show an upgrade in the type of grievances that the individuals involved are demanding that goes beyond “the wider call for an end to corruption, an increase in political participation, and the bringing about of greater economic equity to improve democracy and human rights, or address excessive costs of living and high unemployment rates.” People appear to be turning away from the faith (religious or philosophical) and are betraying and hating each other.

In the Bible, it is suggested that Jesus told his disciples that at the end of times, people would be betraying and hating each other. He even suggested that “when the end of times nears, many false prophets will appear and deceive many people.” Most importantly, Jesus suggested that at the end of times, wickedness will rise and the love of most will grow cold. [Matthew 24:10-12]

I have no way of knowing what Jesus meant when he warned about God’s coming judgment, or, as Jesus put it, the end of times. What I do know is that since antiquity, the world has been in constant turmoil, precisely because of people (kings, chiefs, lawmakers, etc.) who claim to be peacemakers but then turn out to be monsters. Accordingly, since people appear to vary peace and war in the same way currents are constantly moving the ocean water and creating waves and tides (periods of low and high), we can say that for as long as the heirs of the old powers refuse to create balance between good and evil, they (the heirs of the old powers) would not be able to control peace and war in the same way celestial bodies like the sun and moon push and pull the earth’s water, but without the waves and tides created constantly damaging life on earth or dislodging from the earth and flying off into space.

Hence it would not be possible for the heirs of the old powers to create balance between peace and security in the same way the natural world lets people, animals, plants, etc. that live near the ocean create balance with the rise and fall of the oceans each day, we can say that for as long as the heirs of the old powers allow their critical thinkers and servants (governments and international organizations) to regard themselves exempt from observing the values enshrined in the UN Charter and the UDHR, the more those helpers would be creating unbalanced or irregular transformations, including drawing the international order toward greater chaos or disorder than peace and stability or staying in the center.

To put it differently, the heirs of the old powers decided to preserve their power in the aftermath of WW2 by practicing the same methods their fathers and forefathers were adopting before WW2 erupted instead of adopting the new work program they suggested in the UN Charter and the UDHR. The fathers and forefathers of the heirs of the old powers were preserving their powers before WW2 erupted by ensuring that one part of the world stays peaceful and the other dynamic, exactly as per the way celestial bodies like the sun and the moon are constantly pushing and pulling on the earth’s oceans to create tides, currents, or waves.

The method that the heirs of the old powers appear to be adopting to preserve their power as of 1945, and which I said works in the same way their fathers were doing before WW2 erupted, i.e., by keeping societies divided and some experiencing peace and other wars, or the way the tides and waves work, whereby the force of tides makes the earth’s ocean water continually shrink and expand, is a formula (tactic) that is workable. In other words, this formula is capable of producing the desired result for the heirs of the old powers, but it is not durable.

For example, the fathers of the heirs of the old powers thought before WW2 erupted, just as their children are doing in the aftermath of WW2, that if they practiced the same haphazard political and economic methods that their fathers were practicing instead of the principles suggested in constitutions, they would be able to prevent the challenges that they dealt with from threatening their dominant role (i.e., World War Two). The heirs of the old powers are, as of 1945, supposing, just as their fathers were doing before WW2 erupted, that they would be able to violate the principles suggested in the UN Charter and the UDHR and still be able to surmount all the difficulties that they would be stumbling on. In fact, let us for argument sake suppose that the fathers of the heirs of the old powers (the victors of WW2) dismantled their empires in the aftermath of WW2 (i.e., freed the vanquished and the dominated) because they thought that they would be able in partnership with technology to create a world government, or because they knew that if they do not divide the spoils of WW2 with the societies that supplied their war machineries with weapons and ammunition, such as the United States, or the societies that were ready to betray its colonizers, such as the Muslim Arabs and others that they would have not been able to defeat the nations that were rivaling them over the control of the international order. Many questions beg answers. For one, how did the heirs of the heirs of the old powers conclude that if they disobey the counsel of their fathers and let their critical thinkers and servants (governments and international organizations) regard themselves exempt from observing the values enshrined in the UN Charter and the UDHR, that they would be able to be successful like their fathers at avoiding their collapse, when the constant wars that have engulfed the world as of 1945 appear to support that they want that people’s relations be organized in the same way their fathers were doing it before WW2 (i.e., as per the way water waves or moving sand works) and not as per the way their fathers suggested be in the aftermath of WW2 (i.e., as per the way water in a pipe / an open channel flows or a Galton board with a Pascal triangle)?

In addition, even if, for argument sake, we accept the two aforementioned motives as reasons for the decision of the old powers to dismantle their empires, how did the heirs of the old powers conclude that their critical thinkers and servants (governments and international organizations) would not dare fight against them even if they protected themselves in fortified strongholds, when it was the malice that resided in the hearts of the critical thinkers and servants that their fathers were depending on to keep their dominant role that produced the barbarous acts that ensued during WW1 or WW2?

That is to say, how are the heirs of the old powers concluding that the critical thinkers and servants (governments and international organizations) who they are united with and who they granted the right to regard themselves as exempt from observing the values enshrined in the UN Charter and the UDHR would not dare fight them, when if they had the slightest understanding of themselves, they would be leading by example and not busy dividing people and making people hate them (i.e., the western European monarchs and republics)?

Once again, I have no way of knowing if people’s fortunes and riches are decided upon here on earth or if the distribution of fortunes and fates is decided by God (or some natural force). In other words, I have no way of knowing if the critical thinkers and servants (governments and international organizations) that the victors of WW2 are united with and are granting them the right to regard themselves exempt from observing the values enshrined in the UN Charter and the UDHR would defy them, betray them, backstab them, or would want to have absolutely nothing to do with them when they do need them to lay their own lives for them, as compared to standing firm with them. What I do know is that, throughout history, the worst of all being in the sight of kings and chiefs have been their critical thinkers and servants (governments and international organizations). The critical thinkers and servants refused to admit the truth that was made clear to them and drove their masters (kings and chiefs) to their demise or death in the course of time and things. For example, in 1879, Sir Francis Galton, an English mathematician, managed to show via the Galton board “how a normal distribution could be formed through the occurrence of multiple random events.” In other words, Sir Francis Galton managed to “provide a visualization of math in motion.” Can the heirs of the old powers manage to organize their critical thinkers and servants so they can create relations that can plot in the form of normal distribution (i.e., hierarchical) or any shape and form while they are disobeying the UN Charter and the UDHR (i.e., accelerating the occurrence of multiple random events) without creating a gap (i.e., a discontinuation of power and transition of power to new families/dynasties)?

I have no way of knowing if the heirs of the old powers can manage to control and command their critical thinkers and servants (governments and international organizations) in the same way Moses, Confucius, Buddha, Jesus, Mohammad, Socrates, Aristotle, Ali, the founding fathers of the United States, the founding fathers of the UN, etc. managed to continually control and command people since they began to preach the same ideas that the heirs of the old powers are depending on to keep their dominant role. What I do know is that if the heirs of the old powers want to keep their dominant role intact, they need to ensure that people do not find any goodness in the truth that Moses, Confucius, Buddha, Jesus, Mohammad, Socrates, Aristotle, Ali, the founding fathers of the United States, the founding fathers of the UN, etc. preached. This is to ensure that the truth that those aforementioned individuals suggested does not stand between the heirs of the old powers and people’s hearts and create a gap (i.e., a discontinuation of power and transition of power to new families/dynasties).

Once again, I have no way of knowing how the heirs of the old powers are planning on controlling and commanding their critical thinkers and servants (governments and international organizations) without the randomness (i.e., chaos, disorder, corruption, disregard, betrayal, backstabbing) that they are creating standing between them and people or creating a gap, just as happened to the kings or chiefs who were resized and became trapped in. What I do know is that if the heirs of the old powers do not want that the randomness (i.e., chaos, disorder, corruption, disregard, betrayal, backstabbing) that their critical thinkers and servants are provoking create a gap between them and people, they need to ensure that the randomness that the individuals involved are creating stays weak in the same way the moon is always standing between the earth and the sun but without this mass cutting in between as it is rotating around the earth or taking away from the power of the earth (i.e., people) or the sun (i.e., the heirs of the old powers).

For example, I have no way of knowing if the story of the Flood, which the Bible suggests killed almost all life on earth for the exception of one family (i.e., created a gap or a shift in power), was programmed by God or if this natural event happened because of a destabilization in the way the sun, the moon, or the earth were rotating or behaving. What I do know is that, with the exception of the story of the Flood, which killed almost all life on earth and created a gap (a shift in power), it is not mentioned anywhere in the literature that there was a change in the way the relationship of those three celestial bodies (the sun, earth, and moon) has been staying the same and did not include any gap.

That is to say, since antiquity, the moon did not try to stand between the earth and the sun or influence changes on earth that go beyond creating tides, waves, currents, etc., thus permitting us to say that the moon gravity pull has been inconsistent and its irregularity is creating gaps between those three celestial bodies. Accordingly, we can say that if the heirs of the old powers want that the randomness (i.e., chaos, disorder, corruption, disregard, betrayal, backstabbing) that their critical thinkers and servants are creating does not cause a gap between them and people, they need to ensure that the damages that their refusal to obey the UN Charter or the UDHR stays limited to creating outcomes that its impact falls within the usual drawbacks that the force of gravity of the moon creates on earth, such as tides, waves, currents, etc.

The problem is that the forces that the moon, the sun, and other celestial bodies exert on earth and the behavior that each mass exhibits are somehow understood by now. However, even though scientists know a lot about how our solar system (planets, stars, etc.) works and behaves (i.e., the science involved), the impact of the different planets, stars, moons, asteroids, comets, etc. on the planet earth and on human life on the planet earth is not something that is fully understood or is possible to control.

For example, while the earth and the moon are constantly hurtling in space, and despite the moon’s gravity being insignificant and weak (for a person on earth), the moon’s gravity is constantly pulling on the earth’s ocean water, thus creating a water bulge in the direction of the moon. This phenomenon is responsible for the constant shift between parts of the earth’s ocean water experiencing high tide (i.e., the portion of the ocean water that is in the direction of the moon and the one we notice in it that the ocean water has covered the beach) and low tide (i.e., the portion of the ocean water that we notice in it that the ocean is at its lowest point of the beach).

In addition, scientists suggest that as the earth is rotating, the movement of the ocean’s water and the forces acting from all the planets are not affecting the side of the earth, whose location is in the direction of the moon only, but the whole earth. According to scientists, the forces that are being exerted on the earth from all the celestial bodies and atmosphere (push, pull, heat, Coriolis effect, etc.) make the earth’s crust show putty characteristics across great expanses. In other words, the celestial events (squeezing, pulling, heat, etc.) that are taking place prevent the earth from keeping its rigid shape and prompt it to bend under specific conditions, just as happens when a person holds a water balloon between his hands and pushes down on the balloon from both directions. That is to say, the different forces acting from all the planets on the earth cause the ocean water to bulge on two sides, not only on the side that is in the direction of the moon.

Generally speaking, when the forces that are being exerted on the earth intensify and their effect amplify (i.e., the squeezing forces cause the ocean water to bulge on two sides), they can cause flooding in communities near the coasts, irrespective of whether the earth’s waters are experiencing low tide or high tide.

As the above shows, the natural system was designed to create balance and regulate itself so high tides do not amplify and spill onto streets or agricultural fields. However, this does not mean that when the forces that control the atmosphere and the celestial bodies intensify, their effect does not spill into the communities that live near the coasts and cause widespread destruction. In other words, the flood does not distinguish between people based on sex, race, religion, nationality, political status, etc., but destroys everything that is in its path.

I have no way of knowing if the heirs of the old powers have developed enough power to prevent all the randomness (i.e., chaos, disorder, corruption, disregard, betrayal, and backstabbing) that their critical thinkers and servants (governments and international organizations) are inducing and is squeezing on their wealth, power, and status, in the same way the tidal forces can create (more often than not) balanced high and low tides or not. That is to say, the natural system does not get out of control when the tides are high, contaminate vast drinking water supplies, destroy vast areas of agricultural fields and buildings when the tides are high, or affect maritime shipping and fishing for a long period of time when the tides are low. What I do know is that if all the randomness (i.e., chaos, disorder, corruption, disregard, betrayal, backstabbing) that the critical thinkers and servants of the heirs of the old powers are subjecting the international order to sustain are pushing on this order in the same way the atmosphere and the celestial bodies can exert intense force on the earth’s water on both sides, thus creating a phenomenon that resembles what happens when a person holds a water balloon between his hands and pushes down on the balloon from both direction, then the heirs of the old powers could be taking great risks if they continue to allow their critical thinkers and servants to regard themselves exempt from observing the work program suggested in the UN Charter and the UDHR. This is because when a person holds a water balloon between his hands and pushes down on the balloon from both directions, he risks bursting the balloon. In other words, if the disenchantment of people (societies) with the political policies that the heirs of the old powers are adopting continues to grow and to squeeze on the international order (i.e., on the western European monarchs and republics and their global policemen, the United States) from all directions, then there is a good chance that the world loses its humanity and people could become entangled in a world revolution that may not end up according to what the heirs of the powers anticipate.

That is to say, if the heirs of the old powers fail to create balance between the regions that their critical thinkers and servants (governments and international organizations) are keeping engulfed in wars, crises, conflicts, etc., and the societies that they are keeping stable, in the same way the force of gravity of the moon rotate in a balanced way and rotate which part of the world shall experience high tide and which part experience low tide, then the heirs of the old powers could be taking great risks if the randomness (i.e., chaos, disorder, corruption, disregard, betrayal, backstabbing) that their critical thinkers and servants are subjecting the international order to sustain gets out of control. This is because people are a natural species that can betray, backstab, and uphold wickedness in their hearts. To beware of trial, the heirs of the old powers need to ensure that they are destabilizing the wealth, power, and status of the people whose awareness and knowledge pose a threat to the maintenance of their security and strength, and not the societies that do not pose any threat. This is to avoid that they (the heirs of the old powers and their critical thinkers and servants) would destabilize the societies that do not pose a threat on their strength and security, or keep the societies that pose a threat stable, thus making the disenchantment and rivalry of both present a threat on their wealth, status and stability just as happens when the forces of the atmosphere and the celestial bodies on the earth intensify and their effect causes the tidal force to amplify and induce floods that spill into the communities that live near the coasts, including causing widespread destruction instead of staying under control as per the way the gravitational forces of the moon and sun on the earth’s oceans usually stays.

Indeed, the constant wars that have engulfed the world in recent years do not support the idea that the heirs of the old powers and their critical thinkers and servants (governments and international organizations) are controlling the international order in the same way the natural world is capable of keeping currents, waves, and tides under control. Of course, the heirs of the old powers could continue to be in favor of letting their critical thinkers and servants regard themselves exempt from observing the work program suggested in the UN Charter and the UDHR in the hope that all the randomness (i.e., chaos, disorder, corruption, disregard, betrayal, and backstabbing) that their deeds are creating does not drive them to the point of regret.

Then again, if the fathers of the heirs of the old powers knew that randomness (i.e., chaos, disorder, corruption, disregard, betrayal, and backstabbing) could have been of any benefit to them, they would not have asked their heirs (their children) to turn away from such practice and to secure the work program suggested in the UN Charter and the UDHR only. And so if the heirs of the old powers have not been able to stabilize the international order despite all the randomness (i.e., chaos, disorder, corruption, disregard, betrayal, and backstabbing) that they have been with their critical thinkers and servants planning or implementing, this means that the people who they want to observe the standards that they are legitimizing must also be planning and conspiring on them in the same way as well. This is very serious and worrisome.

To put it differently, the exploration and change that people create could be changing reality in the same way that moving sand art creates a new sandscape each time the art is turned over. In other words, the new sandscape (i.e., mountains, valleys, dunes, etc.) that gets created each time the art is turned is not a landscape that looks in the same way the ocean’s water alternates between being stable (which is an imaginable landscape) or unstable (which is an unimaginable landscape but somehow conceivable due to how wave shapes, longevity, and direction can be predicted or perceived), but rather one that is totally unique, in the same way no two people look alike or think alike.

In addition, if we factor, as I said before, how no one knows if the fortune that a person enjoys or the adversity that a person experiences were programmed or not, this means that the heirs of the old powers have no idea whatsoever if all the randomness (i.e., chaos, disorder, corruption, disregard, betrayal, and backstabbing) that their critical thinkers and servants (governments and international organizations) are effecting is helping them to maintain their upper hand over the international order or is weakening it.

That is to say, since we have no way of knowing if the randomness (i.e., chaos, disorder, corruption, disregard, betrayal, backstabbing) that the critical thinkers and servants (governments and international organizations) of the heirs of the old powers are effecting is helping them to maintain their upper hand over the international order or is weakening it, this means that we have no way of knowing if the insecurity that swept the world in recent years and appears to include signs or patterns of what Jesus suggested would be happening at the end of times is because we are living through the downfall of the heirs of the old powers, or if all the political and economic insecurity that people around the world are experiencing is by design the main aim is to rejuvenate their power, wealth and status.

I have no way of knowing if the good fortune that the heirs of the old powers are knowing will be discontinued or not. What I do know is that the similarities between what Jesus suggested would be happening at the end of times and the way people are losing faith in the international rule-based postwar world order in which the founding fathers of the UN laid out its principles in the UN Charter and the UDHR appear to be growing instead of shrinking in recent years. In other words, people of all walks of life, rich or poor, are not hesitating to wield their power as a weapon to bulldoze through their enemies and crush anyone who opposes them. Can the heirs of the old powers prevent people from linking up and resizing them after they tasked their critical thinkers and servants (governments and international organizations) in the last 75 years to be devoted to ensuring that outcomes are shared on equal rights, including fixing dates to achieve this end, instead of securing the UN goals? In other words, the heirs of the old powers oriented their critical thinkers and servants toward teaching people that if they wanted something, they better get it or they would be held to pay. That is to say, make people make the calls they need to make or pull the strings they need to pull to strike secret deals and get what they want instead of using their power and influence to teach people to observe the work program that they were preaching, as Josef Stalin or Mao Zedong did to change China from being a semi-colonized society to being one of the societies in which its people are the most disciplined and ordered.

In fact, to show how Mao Zedong (or Josef Stalin before WW2 erupted) put his critical thinkers and servants (governments and international organizations) fall in line in the aftermath of WW2 to the way the heirs of the old powers (the western European monarchs and republics) were doing it in the aftermath of WW2, let us take this example.

In the aftermath of WW2, Mao Zedong and the western European monarchs and republics (the victors of WW2) were both bound by their personal power and conscience instead of the work program suggested in the UN Charter or the UDHR, and they redistributed land according to the natural and legal rights that they were positing or legitimizing. For example, the British Empire (the most powerful player among the western European monarchs and republics) confiscated the land that until 1948 was known as Palestine and transferred its ownership to the Jews to create a new state, just as Mao Zedong was redesigning the map of China and confiscating land from its rightful owners and handing it to new owners.

However, when we compare how Mao Zedong managed to establish balance between the new landowners and the rightful owners whom he confiscated their land and even killed millions of them when they tried to prevent him from getting his ways despite the resistance of others, to the way the western European monarchs and republics (the victors of WW2) managed to create balance between the Israeli Jews and the Palestinians who they kicked out of their land and handed its ownership to new tenants, we find that the heirs of the old powers failed so far to make those two peasants (the people of Israel and the people of Palestine) agree to live together in peace with one another.

In my opinion, one of two scenarios could have allowed Mao Zedong to convert China into a great power since 1945, and the western European monarchs and republics (the victors of WW2) could have converted their territories and the international order into what rubbish inside a trash basket looks like. The first is if the heirs of the old powers were not making a fearsome example of their critical thinkers and servants (governments and international organizations) as Mao Zedong was doing, so perhaps those who would follow them may be deterred. The second is that the heirs of the old powers thought in the same way the Rothschild family/dynasty, who most historians claim are the wealthiest around the world and who had a reputation for being extremely ruthless, amassed their power and influence.

I have no way of knowing why the heirs of the old powers are not able to use their money, violence, and power to reshape the international order in the same way the Rothschild family managed to get their way despite the resistance of others by living by the code that money is power, or Mao Zedong and his critical thinkers and servants remolded China according to their own convictions. What I do know is that the Rothschild family did not only know how to manage money or power but also how to manipulate people and situations to their advantage.

Once again, I have no way of knowing if dominating the flow of money as the Rothschild family did or the flow of power as Mao Zedong did is more important than learning how to daze people to make them voluntarily capable of surrendering freedom as Moses, Confucius, Buddha, Jesus, Mohammad, Socrates, Aristotle, Ali, the founding fathers of the United States, the founding fathers of the UN, etc. did. What I do know is that if time is the only enemy that could destroy everything a person builds, then definitely, history shows that the individuals who wagered on values, such as the aforementioned individuals suggested, including Mao Zedong (despite all the brutal things he propelled), have preserved their status better.

Put differently, history shows that the people who were killing in the name of improving truth or values, such as Moses, Muhammad, the founding fathers of the United States, Mao Zedong, the Rothschild family, and the followers of Buddha, Confucius, and Jesus, managed to defeat their enemies without the horror that they were propelling, making people perceive that they were doing it in the most terrible way or taking advantage of them as the critical thinkers and servants (governments and international organizations) of the heirs of the old powers are taking advantage of their determination to reduce fear and want in the aftermath of WW2 have so far levied.

For example, despite how long it has been since people began to depend on the values enshrined in Judaism, Confucianism, Buddhism, Christianity, Islam, Maoism, etc. to kill or impose them on others, the people who depended on such ideological or philosophical beliefs to make the weak consider their opinion before taking action of their own refused to change the way they think about their author or the principles being advocated. As of 1945, the heirs of the old powers have not been capable of controlling how people think, so the majority perceives that the killing that they are depending on to get their way despite the resistance of others is programmed to improve the values enshrined in the idea of human rights, freedom, and social justice, not their own propensity or the propensity of the critical thinkers and servants (governments and international organizations) who they are depending on to rejuvenate their power.

In my opinion, the heirs of the old powers have only two choices to reverse this lawlessness that emerged in the world since they decided to disobey the counsel of their fathers to ensure that their critical thinkers and servants (governments and international organizations) do not regard themselves exempt from observing the work program suggested in the UN Charter or the UDHR and granted them right to provide economic, political, and social solutions and to preach about equal rights, freedom, and social justice while they are pursuing the full development of their personalities (i.e., increasing randomness such as chaos, disorder, corruption, disregard, betrayal, and backstabbing). The first is to do what is suggested in the Quran that God counselled Muhammad, the Islamic prophet, to do to keep his dominant role. In the Quran, it is suggested in Surah Al-Anfal that God suggested to Muhammad, “Openly terminate his treaty with the people who refuse to embrace the values that he was preaching. [Surah Al-Anfal 8:58]. The second is to do exactly as God also counselled Muhammad to deter his enemies and God’s enemies from getting their ways. In the Quran, it is suggested in Surah Al-Anfal that God suggested to Muhammad “to motivate the believers to fight.” [Surah Al-Anfal 8:65].

I have no way of knowing which scenario the heirs of the old powers are adopting to keep their dominant role and ensure lasting peace. What I do know is that in the same Al-Anfal Surah (i.e., The Bounties), it is suggested that God reminded the Islamic prophet Muhammad that in all the wars that he was waging, he was not ending up victorious because of his power or strength, but his victories were all from Him (God). In verse 17 of Surah Al-Anfal, it is suggested that God reminded Muhammad that the people that he was with his followers killing in battles were not being killed by the punches that they were throwing or stabs that they were effecting but killed by Him. [Surah Al-Anfal 8:17].

Surah Al-Anfal (i.e., meaning the spoils of wars, earnings, savings, profits, bounties, etc.) is a Surah in the Quran that  “alludes to what is given as an extra sum past what is required.” This Surah suggests that all “spoils belong to God and his Apostle.” [Surah Al-Anfal 8:1].

I have no way of knowing if God will enjoin with the heirs of the old powers to help them defeat or destroy their rivals or infidels, as he enjoined with the angels according to the Quran to help the Islamic prophet Muhammad have more power over his enemies and win in most of his battles. What I do know is that God, in the same Al-Anfal Surah, warned Muhammed about turning his back on the infidels because God favors the true believers, or those who reject oppression and corruption.

The good news is that no one needs to be worried about what his deeds are sending forth for tomorrow except the heirs of the old powers. In other words, no one needs to be worried about how people appear to be united more than before in recent years, but their hearts are divided, and no one is observing the work program suggested in the UN Charter or the UDHR except the heirs of the old powers. This is because it is the wealth, power, and status of the heirs of the old powers what would be stripped from them and handed to new families/dynasties if they continued to allow their critical thinkers and servants (governments and international organizations) to destroy all that their fathers [the old powers] built in the course of the last millennia. Then again, the heirs of the old powers could be perceiving that the progress that was made in the digital age in recent years could help them to control the malice that exists in the hearts of people toward them and toward each other in the same way their fathers (the old powers) were able to do it before WW2 erupted.

In conclusion, I have no way of knowing if technology or the digital age has the power to fully know what the souls of people whisper. What I do know is that throughout history, it was not until knowledge came to people that they differed out of mutual envy. For example, when Jesus started preaching the truth, the Jews, Greeks, Romans, etc. opposed him. Likewise, when Muhammad began to preach the truth, the Christians, Jews, Greeks, Romans, etc. opposed him.

It looks as if, just as people before WW2 erupted have always refused to get rid of their biases and prejudices and opposed the person who was teaching the truth, people are doing the same in the aftermath of WW2. That is to say, they appear to be united, but their hearts are divided. I have no way of knowing if their critical thinkers and servants (governments and international organizations) are divided or if they have accepted the truth that the heirs of the old powers began preaching in the aftermath of WW2 to keep their dominant role and ensure lasting peace. What I do know is that the UN officials, who the heirs of the old powers are depending on their wisdom to rejuvenate their power and secure the UN goals, were in 2015 using the UN bank account to launder money in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. The UN staff member who refused to prioritize his self-interests as his supervisors were doing, paid a big price when he opposed them. They ganged on him, accused him of being a threat to the UN, and ended his contract. In 2022, the supervisors who denied this former UN staff member any rights were caught and dismissed from the UN instead of being put in jail; hence, UN officials are granted privileges and immunities. Following this scandal that overthrew those UN supervisors in 2022, this former UN staff wrote to their successors in order to request to reopen his case and to review it. For mysterious reasons, the new supervisors who were appointed in the positions that became vacant refused to reopen the case of this former UN staff and to review it. This former UN staff member contacted the UN judicial system, which dismissed his application, and this office refused to reopen the case as well.

Finally, many questions beg answers. For one, can the heirs of the old powers preserve their power, wealth, and status when the new UN supervisors who were appointed in the positions that became vacant are a much bigger threat to them than the UN supervisors that were dismissed?