Today we are in the midst of an era of radical reformulation of the role of human beings. It is a transition that encompasses all aspects of human life from the inner soul of the individual to the political organization of the planet. It involves the transformation of our religion, our technologies, our education, our family relationships, our industries, and our communities. The transformation we are undergoing is a historical event, not a utopian dream, not an academic study, not a government plan, not a promise from politicians. The transformation is not entirely under control, if it is. We may be recognizing only parts of it. It may be the result of the negligent destruction of the planet’s resources by man. Or it may be the
next step in the creation of the universe.
This document will not explore in depth the indicators that point to the
conclusion that the world is on the threshold of a brilliant new era. The paper will
just explore some of the implications this New Age will have for World Government.
However, it is necessary to establish the framework and context in which
the discussion about the government must fit.
The renewal that happens around us has many roots and many names. Tea
“Environmental Movement” in the United States was started by books like Rachel
Carson’s Silent Spring in 1957 (1). The common property movement in
Britain received a boost with the transfer of ownership of Bader’s works to the
workers (2); In France, Jacques Ellul’s Technological Society (3) caused a
technology evaluation; The future in our hands by Eric Daman (4), in Norway,
initiated a major reexamination of First World-Third World relations. Tea
Penang Consumers Association in Malaysia (5), Co-cop in Bolivia (6), Gandhi
Peace Foundation in India (7), the Tasor Women’s Group in Ghana (8) and the Eco-
Paris Development Center (9) are just some of the independent actions that
they indicate a deep-seated and global desire for change.
The theories of quantum mechanics and relativity have established a
basis for this global transformation. As physicist David Bohm demonstrates in
Totality and implicit order (10) the shift from Newtonian to modern physics
requires a change in our mode of thought from one of atomism and
fragmentation to one of wholeness and continuity. The notion that individuals and
parts of the universe have separate existence if it is an illusion. It is up to a point
It is necessary for human beings to divide things and separate them, in order to reduce
certain problems at a manageable size. But, Bohm argues, we have let fragmentation
become our dominant approach to life. We separate our thoughts in desperate
disciplines. Religion, art, science, work, leisure, all are put into
categories. This proclivity to divide and subdivide ultimately leads to negative results,
destructive and unreal results. In modern physics it is recognized that the
The fragmentary, mechanistic, Newtonian view of the universe is valid only within
certain limited domains. Once we go beyond those domains, closer to reality each
particle or individual becomes part of a continuum that reaches infinity. It’s from Bohm
belief that the new vision of the unity of the universe is affecting world culture in the same way
it is affecting modern science and our general mode of thinking.
The search for integrity and the rejection of fragmented lives was marked in the
1960s by waves of smoke rising from the city-shaking riots of Amsterdam, Newark,
London, Washington, Tokyo, San Fanscisco and Paris. During the 1970s
Counterculture concerns carried over into the mainstream of acceptable society.
Studies such as the Limits to Growth of the Club of Rome (11) made that even the
scholarly scholars look out the windows of their ivory towers; stagflation is felt
chills of fear through all the ruling capitals of the world; the forced energy crisis
that each home recognize the need to reevaluate our social forms. Now in the
1980, the many small beginnings and the many independent actions in all parts of
the world is beginning to merge into a single web for transformation.
The current situation, as described in a recent best-selling book, The
Marilyn Ferguson’s Aquarius Conspiracy (12). The conspiracy of Aquarius, according to
for Ferguson, it is a conspiracy between people who rarely know each other. They
However, they are conspiring in that each one recognizes the twist in the
consciousness that is causing radical change in our culture. She notices
that people’s unspoken beliefs change long before they publicly concede
transformation. Therefore, we are still expressing conviction in past customs and customs.
paradigms while living by different principles.
James Robertson in The Sane Alternative, outlines some of the paradigms
shifts needed and in progress (13). “Wealth”, for example, can no longer be
counted in stocks and bonds, mansions and limousines. The rich person is
becoming the least dependent on the fragile socio-economic system for
his = or his livelihood and welfare. “Work” can no longer be defined only in terms
hours away from home and income. More and more people mix
recreation with employment to combine self-reliance with self-actualization.
Dogmatic “religion” is giving way to personal spiritual transformation;
“Professional” services are being replaced by personal relationships; Y,
the established “government” is being overlooked as communities and individuals
master social innovation.
Chilean Gustafo Lagos links this era of transition and plenitude with the world
Government in The Revolution of Being, one of several articles with decentralization
themes of the World Order Models Project (14). He maintains that “the revolution
to have “has failed to bring justice or happiness. The future world system
it must be based on a cultural and spiritual transition from “having” to “being”. It is
their belief that world culture based on fragmentation and accumulation is being
replaced by one of unity and faith in human beings.
It would be illusory and hypocritical to speak of a great culture and spirituality.
revolution without recognizing that it will not be sustained or effective without
a major structural change in the formal social, economic and political system by
the one who governs us and by whom we govern. It would be equally illusory
talk about a future world government without recognizing the unalterable
transformation in human thought and in the human being now underway. Speak
sensibly from the World Government, we must recognize that formal “government” is
simply a part of an informal and formal “government” complex.
Each of us is governed and governed by many forces. Physical forces keep us
the earth; biological forces dictate what we need to survive physically; internal
spiritual forces determine our requirements for a meaningful life; and social forces
they govern our associations with other people. Families, churches, employers, schools
and technologies are part of the governance system. Each influences what
we can do and how we can influence the behavior of others. The government is only one
element of this governance system. The government is only necessary, and only
effective, when some other element of governance is ineffective.
Current discussions of world order are based on the omnipotence of the
National state. They seldom recognize the full range of forces that are part of the
government system. In fact, the World Governance system of the nation-state is a
invention of some European rulers in the last 200 years. It spread from a
small sector of the earth to the rest of the world by force of arms, the dogma of
a religion molded to carry out his orders, and an economic-industrial system that was based on
over it for control and protection.
The world order based on the nation-state assumes that resources and
people within a political boundary are the inalienable property of that nation-state.
Leaders within each nation-state gain control through a competition that
eliminate opposition. Once in power, and to maintain power, they must
live to maximize your nation’s share of world resources. They are
entered a competitive world system. Although recognizing a degree of
economic independence, no nation dares to recognize its political interdependence.
The fact that all people have an interest in programs and policies that distribute the
the world’s resources have no voice. Neither does the selection of national / world leaders
open to all those affected by the election. It is accepted that each nation-state
politically supreme, autonomous and independent regardless of the effect
Government actions have on people outside or even within its border.
There is nothing inalienable or permanent about this invented European form of
Government. The study of history, including European history, reveals many alternatives
political systems. In fact, history shows that societies with less
Bureaucratic and hierarchical structures have had the greatest stability over time.
many of these societies are based on precepts much more in line with the
emerging new era than the precepts of nation-states. Consider, for example,
the Native American system of government.
END Part 1 – See Part 2