The UN Charter

The United Nations, the Christ, the Will of God, and the Avatar of Synthesis

Owing to the stupendous task confronting Christ, the Avatar of Synthesis will fortify Him, and He will be buttressed by this “Silent Avatar” Who (to speak symbolically) will “keep His eye upon Him, His hand beneath Him and His heart in unison with His.”

This Being is closely related to the Will Aspect of divinity, and His cooperation has been made possible through Christ’s Own attainment along the line of the highest, spiritual will. He works under the great natural Law of Synthesis, producing at-one-ment, unification and fusion. His function (in unison with the energy of Christ) is to generate spiritual will in humanity, the will-to-good; His potency works in three fields of activity at this time:

a. Within the spiritual Hierarchy itself, revealing the nature of the divine will-to-good which the Kingdom of God must express, and the nature also of divine Purpose.

b. Within the Assembly of the United Nations, though not within the Security Council; He is there generating a slowly growing will-to-unity.

c. Within the masses of men everywhere, fostering the urge to a general betterment.

His activity is necessarily a mass activity, for He can only channel His energies through the mass consciousness or through a group conscious entity, such as the Hierarchy, the United Nations or Humanity. The focal point of His effort and the Agent through which distribution of His energy can be made is the New Group of World Servers; [Page 78] this group is uniquely related to this Avatar of Synthesis. The bringing together of all the agents of goodwill (who are responsive to the energy of the divine will-to-good) constitutes the major objective of the New Group of World Servers and always has been. Their work can now be constructively and creatively intensified through the association of the Avatar of Synthesis with the Christ. Their task is to usher in the New Age; in that New Age, the five Kingdoms in Nature will begin to function as one creative whole. Their work falls into the following parts, functions or activities:

a. The production of a human synthesis or unity which will lead to an universal recognition of the one humanity, brought about through right human relations.
b. The establishing of right relations with the subhuman kingdoms in nature, leading to the universal recognition that there is One World.
c. The anchoring of the Kingdom of God, the spiritual Hierarchy of our planet, in open expression on Earth, thus leading to the universal recognition that the sons of men are one.

These objectives the Avatar of Synthesis will foster and aid and for this purpose He has associated Himself with the Christ, working through the Hierarchy, under instruction from the “centre where the will of God is known.” These three related events and distributing points of energy have all come into activity during the point of tension in which Christ and the Hierarchy are at this time held. They all serve to re-direct and focus energy in relation to humanity, for all are the result of the decision made by Christ after His point of crisis, and are all connected [Page 79] with the hierarchical preparation for Christ’s reappearance.

-Extract of a statement by the Tibetan Master through Alice A. Bailey in the book The Reappearance of the Christ published by Lucis Trust


[JB: Two major structural flaws of the UN were foreseen by the planetary spiritual Hierarchy since its foundation. They were the recommendation to create the Zionist state of Israel, and the admission of a totalitarian state, Russia, among its members. /JB]


The UN Charter thrashed



[JB: The previous quotes by the Tibetan Master, a Representative of the planetary spiritual Hierarchy, were written before 1950. These quotes explain “the trouble which the United Nations today faces.” However, the way out of this trouble today is not thrashing the UN Charter but, rather, amending it to become better aligned to its founding principles.

For instance, the veto power of the Security Council could be revoked by a supermajority of the General Assembly. A two-third, three-fourth or four-fifth majority in the General Assembly, according to criteria to be agreed upon, would be required to override the veto power of an expanded and representative Security Council. Under such amended UN Chart, i) a two-state solution for the Israel-Palestine conflict could be enforced by the UN General Assembly, ii) to remain as bona fide members of the community of nations, all totalitarian states would be required to transition to UN-verified democracies supporting the Four Freedoms, and iii) all countries would be required to give up their nuclear weapons, with the UN Security Council being charged with enforcing and verifying their destruction, eradicating the threat of humanity’s extinction. /JB]






World Unity

There is no counsel of perfection to give the world or any solution which will carry immediate relief. To the spiritual leaders of the race certain lines of action seem right and to guarantee constructive attitudes.

1. The United Nations, through its Assembly and Committees, must be supported; there is as yet no other organization to which man can hopefully look. Therefore, he must support the United Nations but, at the same time, let this group of world leaders know what is needed.

2. The general public in every nation must be educated in right human relations. Above all else, the children and the youth of the world must be taught [177] goodwill to all men everywhere, irrespective of race or creed.

3. Time must be given for the needed adjustments and humanity must learn to be intelligently patient; humanity must face with courage and optimism the slow process of building the new civilization.

4. An intelligent and cooperative public opinion must be developed in every land and the doing of this constitutes a major spiritual duty. This will take much time but if the men of goodwill and if the spiritual people of the world will become genuinely active, it can be done in twenty-five years.

5. The world economic council (or whatever body represents the resources of the world) must free itself from fraudulent politics, capitalistic influence and its devious scheming; it must set the resources of the earth free for the use of humanity. This will be a lengthy task but it will be possible when world need is better appreciated. An enlightened public opinion will make the decisions of the economic council practical and possible. Sharing and cooperation must be taught instead of greed and competition.

6. There must be freedom to travel everywhere in any direction and in any country; by means of this free intercourse, members of the human family may get to know each other and to appreciate each other; passports and visas should be discontinued because they are symbols of the great heresy of separateness.

7. The men of goodwill everywhere must be mobilized and set to work; it is upon their efforts that the future of humanity depends; they exist in their millions everywhere and—when organized and mobilized—represent a vast section of the thinking public.

It will be through the steady, consistent and organized work of the men of goodwill throughout the world that world unity will be brought about. At present, [178] such men are only in process of organizing and are apt to feel that the work to be done is so stupendous and the forces arrayed against them are so great that their—at present—isolated efforts are useless to break down the barriers of greed and hate with which they are confronted. They realize that there is as yet no systemized spread of the principle of goodwill which holds the solution to the world problem; they have as yet no idea of the numerical strength of those who are thinking as they do. They ask themselves the same questions which are agitating the minds of men everywhere: How can order be restored? How can there be fair distribution of the world’s resources? How can the Four Freedoms become factual and not just beautiful dreams? How can true religion be resurrected and the ways of true spiritual living govern the hearts of men? How can a true prosperity be established which will be the result of unity, peace and plenty?

There is only one true way and there are indications that it is a way towards which many millions of people are turning. Unity and right human relations—individual, communal, national and international—can be brought about by the united action of the men and women of goodwill in every country.

These men and women of goodwill must be found and organized and thus discover their numerical potency—for it is there. They must form a world group, standing for right human relations and educating the public in the nature and power of goodwill. They will thus create a world public opinion which will be so forceful and so outspoken on the side of human welfare that leaders, statesmen, politicians, businessmen and churchmen will be forced to listen and comply. Steadily and regularly, the general public must be taught an internationalism and a world unity which is based on simple goodwill and on cooperative interdependence. [179]

This is no mystical or impractical program; it does not work through the processes of exposing, undermining or attack; it emphasizes the new politics, i.e., politics which are based upon the principle of bringing about right human relations. Between the exploited and the exploiting, the warmongers and the pacifists, the masses and the rulers, this group of men of goodwill will stand in their organized millions, taking no side, demonstrating no partisan spirit, fomenting no political or religious disturbance and feeding no hatreds. They will not be a negative body but a positive group, interpreting the meaning of right human relations, standing for the oneness of humanity and for practical, but not theoretical, brotherhood. The propagation of these ideas by all available means and the spread of the principle of goodwill will produce a powerful organized international group. Public opinion will be forced to recognize the potency of the movement; eventually the numerical strength of the men and women of goodwill in the world will be so great that they will influence world events. Their united voice will be heard on behalf of right human relations.

This movement is already gathering momentum. In many lands this plan for the formation of a group of people who are trained in goodwill and who possess clear insight into the principles which should govern human relations in world affairs is already past the blueprint stage. The nucleus for this work is present today. Their functions might be summarized as follows:

1. To restore world confidence by letting it be known how much goodwill—organized and unorganized—there is in the world today.

2. To educate the masses in the principles and the practice of goodwill. The word “goodwill” is largely [180] used at this time by all parties and groups, national and international.

3. To synthesize and coordinate into one functioning whole all the men and women of goodwill in the world who will recognize these principles as their personal directing ideal, and who will endeavour to apply them to current world or national events.

4. To create mailing lists in every country of the men and women of goodwill who can be counted upon to stand for world unity, right human relations and who will try—in their own lands—to reach others with this idea, through the medium of the press, the lecture platform and the radio. Eventually this world group should have its own newspaper or magazine, through means of which the educational process can be intensified and goodwill be found to be a universal principle and technique.

5. To provide in every country and eventually in every large city, a central bureau where information will be available concerning the activities of the men and women of goodwill all over the world; of those organizations, groups and parties who are also working along similar lines of international understanding and right human relations. Thus many will find those who will cooperate with them in their particular endeavour to promote world unity.

6. To work, as men and women of goodwill, with all groups who have a world programme which tends to heal world differences and national quarrels and to end racial distinctions. When such groups are found to work constructively and are free from scurrilous attack or aggressive modes of action, and actuated by goodwill to all men and are free from an aggressive nationalism and partisanship, then the cooperation of the men of goodwill can be offered and freely given.

[181] It takes no great effort of the imagination to see that, if this work of spreading goodwill and educating public opinion in its potency is pursued, and if the men of goodwill can be discovered in all lands and organized, that (even in five years’ time) much good can be accomplished. Thousands can be gathered into the ranks of the men of goodwill. This is the initial task. The power of such a group, backed by public opinion, will be tremendous. They can accomplish phenomenal results.

How to use the weight of that goodwill and how to employ the will to establish right human relations will grow gradually out of the work accomplished and meet the need of the world situation. The trained use of power on the side of goodwill and on behalf of right human relations will be demonstrated as possible, and the present unhappy state of world affairs can be changed. This will be done, not through the usual warlike measures of the past or the enforced will of some aggressive or wealthy group, but through the weight of a trained public opinion—an opinion which will be based on goodwill, on an intelligent understanding of the needs of humanity, on a determination to bring about right human relations and on the recognition that the problems with which humanity is today confronted can be solved through goodwill.

-Extract of a statement by the Tibetan Master through Alice A. Bailey in the book The Problems of Humanity published by Lucis Trust


It’s just wrong!


“But it’s just wrong. We’re not going to — we’re not going to supply the weapons and artillery shells used, that have been used.”

“Civilians have been killed in Gaza as a consequence of those bombs and other ways in which they go after population centers.”

-Pres. Biden

How many civilian casualties have been needed for the US administration to recognize the fatal error of judgement in allowing Israel to dictate US foreign policy?

How many protesting students and professors on campuses nationwide have been sacrificed for upholding this self-evident truth: it’s just wrong to support Israel’s genocidal agenda in Gaza.

We fully agree with Thomas L. Friedman’s pragmatic position about the campus demonstrations to stop the war in Gaza.

I am a hardheaded pragmatist who lived in Beirut and Jerusalem, cares about people on all sides and knows one thing above all from my decades in the region: The only just and workable solution to this issue is two nation-states for two indigenous people.

If you are for that, whatever your religion, nationality or politics, you’re part of the solution. If you are not for that, you’re part of the problem.

And from everything I have read and watched, too many of these protests have become part of the problem — for three key reasons.

First, they are virtually all about stopping Israel’s shameful behavior in killing so many Palestinian civilians in its pursuit of Hamas fighters, while giving a free pass to Hamas’s shameful breaking of the cease-fire that existed on Oct. 7. On that morning, Hamas launched an invasion in which it murdered Israeli parents in front of their children, children in front of their parents — documenting it on GoPro cameras — raped Israeli women and kidnapped or killed everyone they could get their hands on, from little kids to sick grandparents.

Second, when people chant slogans like “liberate Palestine” and “from the river to the sea,” they are essentially calling for the erasure of the state of Israel, not a two-state solution. They are arguing that the Jewish people have no right to self-determination or self-defense. I don’t believe that about Jews, and I don’t believe that about Palestinians. I believe in a two-state solution in which Israel, in return for security guarantees, withdraws from the West Bank, Gaza Strip and Arab areas of East Jerusalem, and a demilitarized Palestinian state that accepts the principle of two states for two people is established in those territories occupied in 1967.

The third reason that these protests have become part of the problem is that they ignore the view of many Palestinians in Gaza who detest Hamas’s autocracy.  These Palestinians are enraged by precisely what these student demonstrations ignore: Hamas launched this war without permission from the Gazan population and without preparation for Gazans to protect themselves when Hamas knew that a brutal Israeli response would follow. In fact, a Hamas official said at the start of the war that its tunnels were for only its fighters, not civilians.

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/05/08/opinion/campus-protests-gaza.html

Even if we do not agree with the unlawful occupation of Palestinian territory by the Zionists in 1948, the coexistence of Israel and Palestine is the inevitable solution for peace in 2024. Both Hamas and Netanyahu oppose and sabotage the only remaining politically viable option for peace. Thus, the need to support the pragmatism proposed by Friedman.


Friedman’s wise advice is worth pondering on, coming from an experienced and unbiased observer of the Israel-Palestine conflict. His pragmatic proposal, as well as Biden’s shift in US policy, may not be the definitive solution, but steps in the right direction of a possible final one-state solution. If both factions share the disputed territory under a common democratic system of government, then the phrase “from the river to the sea” will have the same meaning for both.


Conflict resolution

Conflict resolution is a critical process in managing and resolving disputes in various settings, from interpersonal relationships to international diplomacy. The process can be broken down into several stages, which help parties involved move from a position of discord towards agreement and understanding. Here are the general stages of conflict resolution:

  1. Identification of the Problem: Acknowledging that a conflict exists and determining the nature of the conflict.
  2. Communication: Opening lines of communication between the parties involved, allowing them to express their viewpoints and concerns.
  3. Analysis: Understanding the underlying causes and dynamics of the conflict, including the needs, interests, and goals of each party.
  4. Exploration of Options: Identifying potential solutions and compromises through brainstorming and discussion.
  5. Negotiation: Actively seeking an agreement that partially or fully meets the interests of all parties involved.
  6. Mediation (if necessary): Involving a neutral third party to facilitate the resolution process when parties cannot reach an agreement on their own.
  7. Agreement: Coming to a mutually acceptable solution or agreement that addresses the needs and interests of all parties.
  8. Implementation: Putting the agreed-upon solution into action.
  9. Follow-Up: Monitoring the situation to ensure the agreement is upheld and addressing any further issues that may arise.

Difference between Mediation and Negotiation

While both mediation and negotiation are integral parts of the conflict resolution process, they are distinct in their approach and execution:

  • Negotiation involves the parties in conflict directly communicating with each other to try and reach an agreement or solution to their dispute. It is a process that requires compromise and cooperation, with each side presenting its views, interests, and offers. The goal is for all involved parties to come to a mutual agreement without the need for external intervention.
  • Mediation, on the other hand, introduces a neutral third party into the conflict resolution process. This mediator does not have the authority to impose a solution but instead facilitates communication, promotes understanding, and helps the disputing parties find common ground and negotiate an agreement. Mediation is often sought when negotiations have stalled or when the parties find it challenging to communicate effectively on their own.

In summary, while negotiation is a direct dialogue between the conflicting parties aimed at reaching a consensus, mediation involves assistance from an external, neutral facilitator to help bridge gaps, improve communication, and guide the parties towards a voluntary agreement.


Q: How does the balance of power between the parties in conflict affect negotiation and mediation? What if the mediator takes sides with either party?

A: The balance of power between parties in a conflict significantly influences both negotiation and mediation processes. Power dynamics can shape the outcomes of these processes, affecting the fairness and sustainability of agreed solutions.

Balance of Power in Negotiation and Mediation

  • Negotiation: In negotiations, power imbalances can lead to outcomes that heavily favor the stronger party. A party with more resources, information, or alternatives can exert greater influence over the negotiation terms. However, skilled negotiation strategies can sometimes mitigate power imbalances, allowing less powerful parties to leverage their positions more effectively. Techniques include building coalitions, changing the negotiation’s scope, or appealing to external standards of fairness.
  • Mediation: Mediation aims to level the playing field by providing a neutral environment where each party’s needs and interests are given equal consideration. A mediator facilitates dialogue in a way that helps balance power discrepancies, ensuring that all voices are heard and respected. This is particularly important in conflicts where power is unevenly distributed, as it helps to prevent the stronger party from dominating the process and ensures that the outcome is mutually acceptable.

The Issue of a Biased Mediator

If a mediator shows bias or takes sides with either party, it can undermine the mediation process in several ways:

  • Loss of Trust: The effectiveness of mediation largely depends on the trust parties place in the mediator’s neutrality. If a mediator appears biased, the aggrieved party may lose trust in the process and become less willing to cooperate, leading to a breakdown in communication.
  • Impaired Legitimacy: The legitimacy of the mediation process and the acceptability of its outcomes hinge on impartiality. A biased mediator compromises this, making any agreement reached suspect and possibly unsustainable, as it may be viewed as unfair or coerced.
  • Escalation of Conflict: Instead of resolving the conflict, a biased mediation process can exacerbate tensions. If one party feels marginalized or unfairly treated, grievances may deepen, potentially leading to an escalation of the conflict.

To prevent such issues, mediators are trained to recognize and control their biases. Ethical standards and practices in mediation emphasize the importance of neutrality and impartiality. If a mediator finds they cannot maintain neutrality due to personal bias or conflict of interest, ethical practice requires them to withdraw from the mediation process and, if possible, refer the parties to another mediator.

In scenarios where power imbalances exist, or a mediator is perceived as biased, it might be beneficial for the parties to seek co-mediation, where two mediators representing diverse perspectives or interests facilitate the process together. This can help ensure a more balanced and impartial approach to resolving the conflict.


Q: How should negotiation and mediation operate when one party has legitimate authority over the other, such as parents of minors?

A: When one party has legitimate authority over the other, such as in the case of parents and minors, negotiation and mediation must adapt to this unique power dynamic while still striving for fair and constructive outcomes. The goal remains to resolve conflicts in a manner that respects all parties’ needs and interests, even within the framework of an inherently unequal power relationship. Here’s how negotiation and mediation can be effectively applied in such contexts:

Negotiation with Legitimate Authority

In situations where one party holds authority over another:

  • Acknowledge the Power Dynamic: It’s important for the authority figure (e.g., a parent) to acknowledge the power imbalance openly but also to express a genuine willingness to listen and consider the other party’s perspective (e.g., their child’s).
  • Empowerment: Encourage the less powerful party to express their views, needs, and feelings openly. This can involve setting clear expectations that their input is valuable and will be considered in decision-making processes.
  • Focus on Interests: Both parties should focus on underlying interests rather than positions. For parents, understanding the child’s needs, fears, or desires behind their behavior or demands can lead to more empathetic and effective solutions.
  • Educate and Guide: Use the negotiation process as an opportunity for education and guidance. Parents can explain their rationale for certain decisions, helping their children understand the broader context or consequences.

Mediation with Legitimate Authority

Even within hierarchical relationships, mediation can play a valuable role:

  • Neutral Facilitator: A mediator can help ensure that the conversation remains respectful and that the less powerful party feels heard. In family disputes, mediators often work to balance the inherent power dynamic by giving minors a stronger voice in the discussion.
  • Safe Environment: Creating a safe and confidential environment is crucial. It encourages open communication and allows minors to share their perspectives without fear of immediate reprisal or judgment.
  • Solution-Focused: The mediator helps all parties move towards a mutually acceptable solution, emphasizing the well-being of the minor while respecting the parent’s authority and responsibility.
  • Building Understanding: The process can help each party better understand the other’s viewpoint, fostering empathy and strengthening the relationship in the long term.

When one party holds legitimate authority over the other, special care must be taken to ensure that negotiation and mediation do not simply reinforce existing power imbalances but instead work towards equitable and beneficial outcomes. In the context of parents and minors, this often involves balancing authority with empathy, listening, and a genuine effort to understand and meet the legitimate needs of the child. The ultimate aim is to resolve conflicts in a way that supports the minor’s development while maintaining healthy and respectful family dynamics.


Q: How should negotiation and mediation operate when one party has administrative or academic authority over the other, such as, in the university setting, i) administrators and faculty, and ii) faculty and students?

A: Negotiation and mediation within a university setting, whether between administrators and faculty or faculty and students, require careful consideration of the inherent power dynamics while striving for fairness, respect, and constructive outcomes. The principles guiding these processes should focus on equity, mutual respect, and the preservation of professional and academic relationships. Here’s how negotiation and mediation can be effectively applied in these contexts:

1. Administrators and Faculty

Negotiation:

  • Mutual Respect: Recognize the professional expertise and contributions of faculty members while acknowledging the administrative perspective and responsibilities towards the institution.
  • Transparent Communication: Both parties should strive for open and clear communication. Administrators should be transparent about institutional constraints, policies, and decision-making processes.
  • Collaborative Problem-Solving: Engage in joint problem-solving where both parties contribute to finding solutions that align with the institution’s academic mission and respect faculty rights and autonomy.
  • Professional Development and Support: Negotiations can also cover aspects of professional development, resources, and support for faculty to fulfill their teaching, research, and service obligations effectively.

Mediation:

  • Neutral Mediator: A mediator with experience in academia can help bridge understanding between administrators and faculty, addressing issues impartially.
  • Focus on Interests: The mediator can guide discussions towards identifying and addressing the underlying interests and concerns of both parties.
  • Confidential Process: Ensuring confidentiality encourages open dialogue and allows parties to express concerns without fear of reprisal or damage to professional reputations.
  • Preserving Relationships: Mediation aims to resolve disputes in a way that maintains or even strengthens professional relationships and fosters a collaborative work environment.

2. Faculty and Students

Negotiation:

  • Empowerment: Faculty should encourage students to articulate their needs, perspectives, and challenges while providing an environment where students feel their voices are respected.
  • Educational Opportunity: Use negotiation as a teachable moment to help students develop their own negotiation and advocacy skills in a respectful and constructive manner.
  • Flexibility and Fairness: Faculty can demonstrate flexibility in resolving conflicts (e.g., regarding assignments, grades) while maintaining academic standards and fairness to all students.
  • Clear Expectations: Both parties should have clear, shared understandings of academic expectations, policies, and outcomes from the negotiation.

Mediation:

  • Student-Faculty Mediation Programs: Some universities offer mediation services specifically designed to address disputes between faculty and students, providing a structured process for resolution.
  • Neutral Mediator: A mediator familiar with academic environments can help ensure that discussions are balanced, fair, and focused on educational outcomes.
  • Solution-Focused: Mediation seeks to find practical and mutually acceptable solutions that respect the student’s needs and the faculty’s academic standards.
  • Relationship Building: Effective mediation can help build positive relationships between faculty and students, characterized by mutual respect and understanding.

In both scenarios, the key is balancing the authority held by one party with the need to foster an environment of respect, open communication, and mutual benefit. Whether dealing with academic or administrative conflicts, the aim is to achieve resolutions that uphold the institution’s values and mission while respecting individual rights and professional responsibilities.


Q: What if factual truths favor one party? How should a mediator operate? Say, Galileo negotiating with the Church authorities about the factual truth of the heliocentric model of the universe?

A: In cases where factual truths favor one party, as in a hypothetical negotiation between Galileo and the Church authorities regarding the heliocentric model of the universe, the role of the mediator becomes particularly nuanced. The primary objective of mediation is not to establish factual truth but to facilitate a process through which parties can come to a mutual understanding or agreement despite their differences. However, when factual truths are central to the conflict, the mediator must carefully balance respect for these truths with the mediation principles of neutrality and impartiality. Here’s how a mediator might operate in such scenarios:

Acknowledge the Factual Basis

  • Recognition of Facts: The mediator can acknowledge the existence of factual evidence without positioning themselves as an arbiter of that truth. This involves recognizing the facts presented by one party while also understanding the values, beliefs, or interests that might cause the other party to dispute or devalue those facts.

Facilitate Understanding

  • Educational Role: While remaining neutral, the mediator can facilitate a process where the party disputing the facts is encouraged to explore or understand the factual basis put forward by the other side. This can involve asking questions that lead to reflection or suggesting the inclusion of expert opinions if appropriate.
  • Empathy and Respect: Encourage each party to express their views and listen to the other side. Understanding doesn’t necessarily mean agreement, but it can lead to a more informed dialogue where decisions are made with a full appreciation of the facts and their implications.

Focus on Interests Rather Than Positions

  • Identifying Underlying Interests: The mediator should help both parties move beyond their initial positions (e.g., “The Earth is at the center of the universe” vs. “The Sun is at the center of the universe”) to explore the underlying interests or concerns driving those positions (e.g., preservation of religious authority vs. advancement of scientific knowledge).
  • Creative Problem-Solving: Once underlying interests are understood, the mediator can guide the parties in exploring creative solutions or compromises that address those interests. In historical contexts like Galileo’s conflict, this might involve negotiating ways to pursue scientific inquiry that do not directly challenge prevailing doctrines or finding alternative platforms for discussion.

Long-Term Relationship Building

  • Future Dialogue: Especially in conflicts involving deeply held beliefs or interpretations of truth, mediators can work towards establishing mechanisms for ongoing dialogue and review. This could involve setting up panels, discussions, or collaborative inquiries involving representatives from both sides.

Ethical Considerations

  • Ethical Dilemmas: Mediators must be aware of the ethical implications of their role, especially when factual truths are involved. They should avoid enabling the spread of misinformation or contributing to harm caused by ignoring established facts. At the same time, they must maintain their commitment to impartiality and respect for all parties.

In the case of Galileo and the Church, a mediator would face the challenging task of respecting the empirical evidence supporting the heliocentric model while navigating the Church’s doctrinal opposition. The goal would not be to convince the Church of Galileo’s position outright but to find a way for both parties to engage respectfully and constructively, perhaps by focusing on shared interests like the pursuit of knowledge and the welfare of the broader community.


Dear reader: The previous Q&A was generated by querying an AI chatbot. The reader is encouraged to apply the principles of conflict resolution to the current student unrest throughout university campuses in the United States, as well as to the Israel Palestine conflict in the Middle East.

What are the factual historical truths since the creation of Israel in 1948? Have fair negotiations been held? Has the United States been a fair mediator in the conflict? Have crimes of war and acts of terrorism been committed by both parties in the conflict? Is the current situation of the civilian population in Gaza ethically sustainable? Does the United States bear any responsibility for it? Should the United Nations, the international community, and the International Court of Justice intervene? -JB


An ethical mediator

An ethical mediator operates under the principles of neutrality, impartiality, and confidentiality, aiming to facilitate a process where parties can find mutually acceptable resolutions to their disputes. However, the ethical guidelines that govern mediation also require mediators to consider the broader implications of their work, including adherence to principles of justice and integrity. This raises important questions about the role of the mediator in conflicts involving established truths and falsehoods.

Quitting the Role of Mediator

A mediator should consider stepping down or reframing their role in situations where:

  • Continuation Impedes Justice: If continuing the mediation would contribute to injustice or harm, particularly when one party’s position is based on clear falsehoods or misinformation that has significant negative implications.
  • Violation of Ethical Standards: If the mediation process requires the mediator to compromise their ethical standards by giving equal weight to falsehoods or by ignoring established truths in a way that could mislead participants or the public.
  • Inability to Remain Neutral: If the mediator finds they cannot maintain neutrality due to the nature of the falsehoods being presented or because of the ethical implications of the dispute.

Ethically Sustainable Mediation Between Truth and Falsehood

Mediation between an established truth and a falsehood might be considered ethically sustainable in limited contexts:

  • Exploratory Dialogue: The process is framed not as validating falsehood but as exploring understandings, perceptions, and the reasons behind the conflict. This can involve acknowledging that the disagreement exists without lending credibility to falsehoods.
  • Educational Purpose: The mediation serves an educational purpose, helping parties understand the factual basis behind positions, provided it does not legitimize falsehood or mislead participants.
  • Focus on Underlying Interests: The mediation focuses on addressing underlying interests rather than debating the veracity of facts. For example, if a conflict arises from fear, misunderstanding, or a sense of threat, addressing those emotional underpinnings can be valid without needing to compromise on factual truths.
  • Promoting Critical Thinking: Encouraging parties to critically examine evidence and sources, fostering a culture of inquiry and openness to learning, without positioning the mediator as an arbiter of truth.

Mediator’s Responsibility

Mediators have a responsibility to uphold the integrity of the mediation process. This includes:

  • Clarifying the Role: Making clear to all parties that mediation is about finding resolution and understanding, not adjudicating truth or validating perspectives.
  • Referral or Termination: When mediation cannot proceed without compromising ethical principles, mediators should refer parties to a more appropriate forum for resolving their dispute, such as a court or a scientific panel, or terminate their involvement.
  • Transparency: Being transparent about the limitations of the mediation process in resolving conflicts rooted in factual disagreements and the potential need for alternative approaches to establish or contest facts.

Ultimately, an ethical mediator must balance their commitment to neutrality with a broader ethical commitment to truth, justice, and the well-being of individuals and communities. When faced with conflicts between established truth and falsehood, mediators must carefully consider whether their involvement would promote understanding and resolution or inadvertently legitimize falsehood and contribute to harm.


I have a dream

UMich Symphony Band – Joseph Schwantner – New Morning for the World: “Daybreak of Freedom” (1982)

https://runyanprogramnotes.com/joseph-schwantner/new-morning-world-daybreak-freedom


Today, January 15, 2024, the United States celebrates a federal holiday in honor of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.’s 95th birthday. This day holds great significance for American democracy and also serves as the formal beginning of the 2024 US presidential election year, with the first GOP Republican Caucus taking place in Iowa. The outcome of this election year will play a vital role in determining the future of the American experiment in self-government. The country has not faced a constitutional crisis of this magnitude since the Civil War.

As we celebrate the life and legacy of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., it is important to reflect on the values he stood for and fought for throughout his lifetime. A key aspect of his vision was the idea of a government that truly represented and served its people – a government of, by, and for the people.

In 2024, we find ourselves at a critical juncture in American history. The upcoming presidential election will determine whether we continue down the path towards true democracy, or if we risk losing our hard-won rights and freedoms to a monarchy-like rule.

At stake is not just the future leadership of our country, but also the very essence of our democracy. We must ask ourselves: are we willing to let one authoritarian leader — unfit to govern in a democracy —have unchecked power, or do we believe in the power of the people to collectively make decisions for the greater good?

So, let’s make use of the Great Invocation “with massed intent” as we commemorate this Holy Day dedicated to the memory of a racial avatar, the last MLK commemoration before the momentous year of 2025.


New Morning for the World “Daybreak of Freedom”

“There comes a time when people get tired – tired of being segregated and humiliated,
tired of being kicked about by the brutal feet of oppression.”1

“We are going to walk non-violently and peacefully to let the nation and the world know
that we are tired now. We’ve lived with slavery and segregation three hundred and
forty-five years. We waited a long time for freedom.”2

“Before the pilgrims landed at Plymouth, we were here. Before the pen of Jefferson
etched across the pages of history the majestic words of the Declaration of Independence, we were here. For more than two centuries, our fore parents labored in this
country without wages – and built the homes of their masters in the midst of brutal
injustice and shameful humiliation. And yet out of a bottomless vitality, they continued
to thrive and develop. If the inexpressible cruelties of slavery could not stop us, the
opposition we now face will surely fail. We will win our freedom because the sacred
heritage of our nation and the eternal will of God are embodied in our echoing
demands.”3

“Now is the time to make real the promise of democracy. Now is the time to rise from
the dark and desolate valley of segregation to the sunlit path of racial justice. Now
is the time to lift our nation from the quicksands of racial injustice to the solid rock
of brotherhood. Now is the time to make justice a reality to all of God’s children. We
cannot walk alone. As we walk, we must make the pledge that we shall always march
ahead. We cannot turn back. No, no, we are not satisfied and we will not be satisfied
until justice rolls down like waters, and righteousness like a mighty stream.”4

“We’re on the move now – neither the burning of our churches nor the beating and
killing of our clergymen will stop us. We’re on the move now – my people listen! The
battle is in our hands – I know some of you are asking, “How long will it take?” I
come to say to you however difficult the moment, however frustrating the hour, it will
not be long because truth pressed to the earth will rise again. How long? Not long
because no lie can live forever. How long? Not long because you will reap what you
sow. How long? Not long because the arm of the moral universe is long but it bends
toward justice.”5

“When the history books are written in future generations, the historians will have
pause and say, “There lived a great people – a black people – who injected new
meaning and dignity into the veins of civilization.” This is our challenge and our
responsibility.” “6


“I have a dream.”7


“The dream is one of equality of opportunity, of privilege and property widely
distributed; a dream of a land where men will not take necessities from the many to
give luxuries to the few; a dream of a land where men do not argue that the color of
a man’s skin determines the content of his character; a dream of a place where all our
gifts and resources are held not for ourselves alone but as instruments of service for
the rest of humanity; the dream of a country where every man will respect the dignity
and worth of all human personality, and men will dare to live together as brothers.
Whenever it is fulfilled, we will emerge from the bleak and desolate midnight of
man’s inhumanity to man into the bright and glowing daybreak of freedom and
justice for all of God’s children.”8

  1. From STRIDE TOWARD FREEDOM by Martin Luther King, Jr. Copyright 1958 by
    Martin Luther King, Jr.
  2. From BEHIND THE SELMA MARCH by Martin Luther King, Jr. Copyright 1965 by
    Martin Luther King, Jr.
  3. From LETTER FROM BIRMINGHAM JAIL by Martin Luther King, Jr. Copyright 1963,
    1964 by Martin Luther King, Jr.
  4. From I HAVE A DREAM by Martin Luther King, Jr. @ Copyright 1963 by Martin Luther
    King, Jr.
  5. From BEHIND THE SELMA MARCH by Martin Luther King, Jr. Copyright 1965 by
    Martin Luther King, Jr.
  6. From STRIDE TOWARD FREEDOM by Martin Luther King, Jr. Copyright 1958 by
    Martin Luther King, Jr.
  7. From I HAVE A DREAM by Martin Luther King, Jr. Copyright 1963 by Martin Luther
    King, Jr.
  8. @ Copyright 1958, 1963 by Martin Luther King, Jr.
    All the above used by permission of JOAN DAVES
https://www.esm.rochester.edu/uploads/EWE_9-21-22_consecutive.pdf

The Great Invocation (1940)

Let the Lords of Liberation issue forth.
Let them bring succour to the sons of men.
Let the Rider from the Secret Place come forth,
And coming, save. Come forth, O Mighty One.

Let the souls of men awaken to the light.
And may they stand with massed intent.
Let the fiat of the Lord go forth:

The end of woe has come!

Come forth, O Mighty One.
The hour of service of the saving force has now arrived.
Let it be spread abroad, O Mighty One.

Let Light and Love and Power and Death
Fulfill the purpose of the Coming One.

The WILL to save is here.
The LOVE to carry forth the work is widely spread abroad.
The ACTIVE AID of all who know the truth is also here.

Come forth, O Mighty One, and blend these three.
Construct a great defending wall.
The rule of evil NOW must end.


Beethoven Symphony No 3 in E♭ „Eroica“ Leonard Bernstein Wiener Philharmoniker



A glimmer of hope


About 1,200 people were killed during the Hamas-led Oct. 7 assault against Israel, a majority of them civilians, according to the Israeli authorities. Israel’s retaliatory war against Hamas in Gaza has killed more than 23,000 Palestinians, a majority of them women and children, according to Gaza health officials.

Warning of a long conflict, the Israeli statements exposed a growing dissonance between the domestic perception of the timing and goals of the war and increasing international impatience in the face of a deepening humanitarian crisis in Gaza.

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/01/14/world/middleeast/israel-hamas-war-gaza.html

On the 100th day of a disproportionate vengeful retribution against Palestinian civilians, with inhuman acts of criminal collective punishment conducted with impunity by the Israeli military, the world observes with dismay the complicity with which the United States continues to support crimes of war with taxpayers’ funded offensive weaponry killing Palestinian civilians. This is well beyond the more justifiable support for the defensive Iron Dome.

Of course, using civilians as human shields and taking civilian hostages are also war crimes to be universally condemned without any justification whatsoever, even in an asymmetric warfare. However, the disproportionate death toll of civilians is only comparable to the imbalance of power to negotiate a just and lasting peace between the warring parties. The genocidal rhetoric of Netanyahu and his extreme right coalition adds fuel to the raging fire.

This imbalance of power is the main reason why all previous peace accords between Israel and Palestine have not stood the test of time. This is made clear by Fareed Zakaria’s historical overview in his GPS Special: The Road to War in the Middle East aired on December 24, 2023. 

In the last segment, despite Fareed’s biased question,

Do you think that fundamentally the problem is that the Palestinians, at some point, have not been educated by their leadership to recognize that, look, they’ve lost this long struggle, that they’re not going to get the whole loaf, they’re going to get 22 percent of that loaf? And you have to kind of admit that. And the unwillingness to admit that is — and, you know, the worry that if you admit that you will be assassinated or you’ll get outflanked by Hamas, that that’s been at the core of it, that there isn’t somebody who’s willing to speak honestly to the Palestinians and say, look, this is all we can get?

Fareed Zakaria

the former U.S. Ambassador Edward Djerejian aptly deflects such offensive and patronizing tone, replying instead with wise advice about the course of American diplomacy in this conflict.

At the end of the day there’s 7.2 million Palestinians and 7.2 approximately Israeli Jews in between the Jordan River and the Eastern Mediterranean. Neither one is going to go anywhere. They’re there. They have to divide the land.

Economic peace simply doesn’t work. But that was the trope, and that trope started in the Trump administration and the Biden administration obviously continued that with the normalization. I have nothing against normalization of Arab countries with Israel, but it was done at the cost of neglecting this central issue, the territorial aspects of peace between Israel and Palestine.

First, American diplomacy needs a deep understanding and appreciation of the basic facts on the ground in the Middle East and where the parties are coming from.

Second, we have to have a spine in our diplomacy. We have to be tough on both sides, or else nothing will happen. You know, we started off in 67 Israeli settlements. In U.S. government proclamations, Israeli settlements are illegal under international law, the Geneva Conventions of ’49.

You’ve seen over the years how the verbiage is that, oh, they’re an obstacle to peace, or they’re a problem. No, they’re illegal. The United States [must stand] tall on principle, and we have to do that with both sides: tough on the Arabs; tough on the Israelis. You have to be skillful in your diplomacy also.

The glimmer of hope is that I really do feel that October 7th is so consequential, akin to Yom Kippur in ’73. That the political landscape has changed. I hope one of the major lessons that everyone learns is that you cannot shunt the Palestinian issue aside and make it a secondary or tertiary issue, that you can make economic peace or peace for peace. We have to focus on land for peace.

And let’s make the hard decision to go for it. There’s a lot of diplomatic history in the archives on settlements, on territorial compromises, on Jerusalem, on refugees. There’s a body of negotiations that can be built on. Let’s get the leadership to get it done.

Former U.S. Ambassador Edward Djerejian has been working on diplomacy in the Middle East for more than 50 years. He’s been U.S. Ambassador to Israel, U.S. Ambassador to Syria and the Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs.

May his words and experience light the way for a just and lasting peace in the Middle East. On this 100th day of the War on Gaza, it is made clear that the military option is not a viable alternative for a peace accord among equals. -JB


A Fareed Zakaria GPS Special: The Road to War in the Middle East

Why has the Israeli–Palestinian conflict been so intractable for so long? Fareed talks with Palestinian scholar Ahmad Khalidi, Israeli historian Benny Morris, former US diplomat Edward Djerejian and more about the attempts, missed chances, and future prospects of establishing a lasting peace in the region. 

https://transcripts.cnn.com/show/fzgps/date/2023-12-24/segment/01



From Anarchy to Hierarchy

Ray 1. Will Power. Transmitted through Aries, Leo and Capricorn.

As 2023 comes to an end, I’m struggling to make sense of the current world disorder, focusing on three major threats to our survival: Zionism in the Middle East, the Russian invasion of Ukraine, and the MAGA movement in the United States. They have one common theme: might makes right. They represent causes out of which other evils, such as (Hamas) terrorism, arise. Which makes me wonder, what is power? How can light, love and power restore God’s Plan on Earth?

In the context of the Capricorn full moon period overlapping Sol Invictus observance this Christmas season, let’s review current thought forms created by humanity on this subject, and how can they can be repurposed for a future of right human relations, goodwill and peace on Earth.

-JB

Two key theories of international relations

Structural realism, also known as neorealism, and human nature realism, often referred to as classical realism, are two key theories within the field of international relations. They share a common premise that states exist in an anarchic international system and that they act primarily out of self-interest. However, they differ significantly in their explanations for why this is the case.

Structural Realism (Neorealism): Structural realism, as articulated by theorists like Kenneth Waltz, posits that the behavior of states is determined by the anarchic structure of the international system1. In this system, there’s no overarching authority above the state, making security a primary concern. States, according to structural realists, are rational actors that seek to survive by maintaining and increasing their power relative to other states. The focus here is on the system, not on the individual state or its leaders2.

Human Nature Realism (Classical Realism): Human nature realism, on the other hand, asserts that the behavior of states is driven primarily by human nature. Classical realists like Hans Morgenthau argue that it’s the inherent flaws in human nature, such as the lust for power, that lead to conflict and competition among states3. This perspective focuses more on the role of leadership, national character, and moral and ethical considerations in shaping a state’s foreign policy4.

In summary, while structural realism emphasizes the anarchic structure of the international system as the determinant of state behavior, human nature realism places more emphasis on the characteristics and behaviors of individuals and groups within the state.

Sources:

Footnotes

  1. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
  2. International Relations.org
  3. Britannica
  4. International Relations.org

Offensive and defensive realism are two key sub-theories within the school of structural realism in international relations. Both theories agree on the anarchic nature of the international system, but they differ significantly in their views on state behavior and security.

Offensive Realism: Proposed by John Mearsheimer, offensive realism postulates that states are power-maximizers1. In an anarchic international system with no overarching authority, states must always be concerned about their security. To ensure survival, they strive to achieve hegemony, as the best guarantee against attack is to be the most powerful state in the system. Offensive realists believe that states should constantly look for opportunities to gain power at the expense of others2.

Defensive Realism: Defensive realism, associated with theorists like Kenneth Waltz and Robert Jervis, suggests that states are security-maximizers3. While acknowledging the anarchic nature of the international system, defensive realists argue that an aggressive foreign policy often proves counterproductive, provoking other states to form balancing coalitions. Therefore, states should maintain a moderate level of power and pursue cooperative security arrangements to mitigate potential threats4.

In summary, while offensive realists see aggression as a necessity for states to secure their survival, defensive realists advocate for a more moderate and cooperative approach to ensure security in the international system.

Sources:

Footnotes

  1. John Mearsheimer’s “The Tragedy of Great Power Politics”
  2. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
  3. Kenneth Waltz’s “Theory of International Politics”
  4. Oxford Research Encyclopedias

Entropy, Anarchy and the Omega Point

Entropy in physics is a fundamental concept that describes the degree of disorder or randomness in a system. In the context of structural realism in international relations, it can be interpreted as the inherent unpredictability and complexity in the international system due to the absence of a central authority1.

Structural realism asserts that the international system is anarchic, and states are primarily driven by their self-interests for survival and power. This could be seen as a state of high entropy where there’s a high degree of uncertainty and disorder. Structural realists argue that this anarchic structure forces states to act in certain predictable ways, such as balancing against threats, which could be seen as attempts to manage or reduce this entropy2.

On the other hand, Teilhard de Chardin’s concept of the Omega Point presents a contrasting view. The Omega Point theory posits that consciousness and evolution are moving towards a maximum point of complexity and consciousness, known as the Omega Point3. This suggests a progression from high entropy (anarchy) to low entropy (hierarchy), driven by the evolution of consciousness.

In contrast to structural realism which views the international system as inherently conflictual and competitive due to its anarchic nature, the Omega Point theory suggests a more optimistic view of the potential for cooperation and integration as consciousness evolves.

In essence, while entropy and structural realism might highlight the disorder and power struggles in the international system, the Omega Point theory offers a perspective on how evolving consciousness could lead to greater order and unity.

Sources:

Footnotes

  1. Entropy, technology, and warfare — understanding world politics through physics
  2. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
  3. Teilhard de Chardin’s The Phenomenon of Man

Liberalism in International Relations

Liberalism is a key theory in international relations that offers an optimistic worldview. It posits that international institutions and interactions can overcome the anarchic nature of the international system, leading to a more cooperative and peaceful world order1.

  1. Democratic Peace Theory: This theory suggests that democracies are less likely to go to war with each other due to shared values, internal constraints, and the transparency of their political systems2. Democratic norms require leaders to resolve disputes through negotiation and compromise, reducing the likelihood of conflict.
  2. Economic Interdependence: According to liberals, economic interdependence reduces the likelihood of war by increasing the costs of conflict and the benefits of peace3. High levels of trade and investment create mutual benefits and dependencies that both sides would not want to jeopardize through military conflict.
  3. Institutionalism: Liberals argue that international institutions, such as the United Nations, play a crucial role in promoting peace and cooperation4. Institutions provide forums for dialogue, help enforce international laws, reduce uncertainty about others’ intentions, and make it more difficult for states to renege on their commitments.

While liberalism recognizes that conflicts and power struggles exist among nations, it emphasizes the potential for cooperation, largely driven by democratic governance, economic ties, and institutional mechanisms.

Sources:

Footnotes

  1. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
  2. Oxford Research Encyclopedias
  3. Journal of Peace Research
  4. International Studies Quarterly

Natural Organic Hierarchies

Systems theory posits that systems, whether they are biological ecosystems, social structures, or organizations, are made up of interconnected parts that form a complex whole. This holistic approach emphasizes the interdependence of all system components and their interactions1.

Natural organic hierarchies, as suggested by systems theory, are intrinsic to the organization of many systems in nature. They are characterized by a structure where elements at each level of the hierarchy interact more strongly with each other than with those at different levels2. This hierarchical organization is seen as an inherent property of nature2.

In ecology, for example, the hierarchical structure can be observed in the organization of ecosystems, from individual organisms (lowest level) to populations, communities, ecosystems, and the biosphere (highest level)3. This hierarchy facilitates understanding and analysis of ecological phenomena.

Similarly, in the context of organizations, there are rational, natural, and open systems. Natural systems focus on the human component in organizations, acknowledging that people and their interactions play a crucial role in shaping an organization’s structure and processes4.

The concept of organic hierarchies also extends to areas like organic farming, where systems thinking is reflected in stewardship towards nature, the ethics of animal husbandry, and recycling principles5.

In essence, systems theory’s concept of natural organic hierarchies highlights the interconnectedness and interdependence of elements within a system, facilitating our understanding of complex natural and social phenomena.

Sources:

Footnotes

  1. Concepts of Systems Thinking
  2. Hierarchical structure of biological systems – PMC 2
  3. The Hierarchical Structure of Ecosystems: Connections to Evolution
  4. Rational, Natural, and Open Systems of Organizations
  5. Systems Theory as a Scientific Approach towards Organic Farming

Symbols

The symbol of anarchy, also known as the Circle-A, is composed of an “A” and an “O”. The “A” stands for “anarchy”, which means “without rulers”. The “O” represents “order”. Together, they convey the phrase “Anarchy is the mother of Order“, which is a part of a quote attributed to Pierre-Joseph Proudhon, a French philosopher and one of the first self-proclaimed anarchists12.

This symbol is said to represent a French anarchist’s maxim “Anarchy is Order“. It implies that society seeks order, but without the imposition of authority or rulers3.

It’s important to note that anarchism doesn’t signify chaos in all its aspects. Rather, it advocates for a society based on voluntary cooperation of individuals4.

While the anarchy symbol has been associated with various movements and ideas over time, it fundamentally remains a representation of a society seeking order through non-hierarchical and voluntary associations5.

Sources:

Footnotes

  1. Rival LA
  2. Quora
  3. Public Intelligence
  4. Reddit Anarchy 101
  5. Symbols

There isn’t a universally recognized symbol for hierarchy that contrasts directly with the anarchy symbol. In contrast, hierarchy often manifests in symbols of structures or pyramids, representing rigid levels of authority or power, often imposed.

I propose that Roerich’s Banner of Peace be adopted as a universal symbol of hierarchy. The streams of Light and Love converging into the One (Power) on the Path of Return, restoring the Plan on Earth.

JB

Hierarchy is not coercion, it is the law of the Universe. It is not a threat, but the call of the heart and a fiery admonition directing toward the General Good.

Thus let us cognize the Hierarchy of Light.

https://agniyoga.org/ay_en/Hierarchy.php

The Three Fundamentals

The First Cause may be construed to comprise three fundamentals: Omnipotent Good, Omniscient Beautiful, and Omnipresent Creative Sound of Light.

These three fundamentals manifest in varying degrees in different philosophies and religions. For example, in Hinduism, the Trimurti consists of three deities: Brahma, Vishnu, and Shiva, representing creation, preservation, and destruction, respectively. In Christianity, the Holy Trinity comprises the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

Three great energies are focused in Shamballa, the seat of fire:

  • The Energy of Purification: This is the power, innate in the manifested universe, which gradually and steadily adapts the substance aspect to the spiritual. It involves the elimination of all that hinders the nature of divinity from full expression.
  • The Energy of Destruction: This is a destruction which removes or changes the forms which imprison the inner spiritual life, and hide the inner soul light.
  • The Energy of Organization: This is the energy which started the impulse which produced manifestation. The relation of spirit and matter cyclically and under law creates the manifested world as a field for soul development and as an area wherein divine purpose is wrought out through the medium of the Plan.

The Shamballa force therefore focusses the will-to-good, leading to right human relationship, and establishing peace on Earth.

The Shamballa Force • Lucis Trust

Let LIGHT and LOVE and POWER restore the Plan on Earth.



Cruelty in Gaza

Why Fear AI When Human Cruelty Knows No Bounds?

Artificial Intelligence (AI) has been a subject of fear and concern, particularly its potential misuse leading to catastrophic events such as the extinction of humanity. However, when we examine the horrors of the current war in Gaza, we must ask ourselves: should we be more afraid of AI or of the inherent cruelty of twisted human minds?

Israel military says 2 civilians killed for every Hamas militant is a ‘tremendously positive’ ratio given combat challenges.

https://www.cnn.com/2023/12/05/middleeast/israel-hamas-military-civilian-ratio-killed-intl-hnk/index.html

The UNESCO Constitution states, “Since wars begin in the minds of men and women, it is in the minds of men and women that the defenses of peace must be constructed” [1]. This profound statement underscores the fact that the root of conflict lies not in technology, but in human attitudes and behaviors.

The ongoing war in Gaza, marked by shocking atrocities, serves as a grim testament to this reality. The initial terrorist attack on October 7, followed by the subsequent disproportionate response by the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF), has resulted in a devastating cycle of violence and human suffering [2]. Yet, it is not AI that initiated this conflict, but rather, decisions and actions resulting from the misuse of the human will.

History bears witness to numerous genocidal wars where AI was not involved. The Rwandan Genocide of 1994, the Bosnian War from 1992 to 1995, and more recently, the Rohingya Crisis in Myanmar are stark reminders of the scale of atrocities that can be perpetrated solely by human hands [3][4][5].

In this light, the fear of AI — the simulation of human intelligence in machines that are programmed to reason and act like humans — might be somewhat misplaced. AI is a tool, as beneficial or destructive as the intentions of those who wield it. The true danger lies in AI’s potential to amplify malevolent intentions. Ultimately, it is the misuse of human will that lies at the core of the issue.

This leads us to an important question: how can human will — individual and national — be aligned with the common good without infringing upon free will, and the right for self-defense? This is a critical test for democracy. Democracies thrive on the principle of individual freedom, yet they also necessitate a collective agreement on what constitutes the responsible use of such freedom by promoting right human relations leading to lasting peace.

From the center where the Will of God is known
Let purpose guide the little wills of men –
The purpose which the Masters know and serve.

From the center which we call the race of men
Let the Plan of Love and Light work out
And may it seal the door where evil dwells.

https://www.lucistrust.org/the_great_invocation

Therefore, while it is prudent to be cautious about the potential misuse of AI, it is even more important to recognize that the root of most atrocities lies in human cruelty, not in technology. Instead of fearing AI, perhaps our efforts would be better directed towards fostering empathy, understanding, and peace within the minds of men and women.

[1] “UNESCO Constitution.” UNESCO. https://en.unesco.org/about-us/introducing-unesco [2] “Gaza conflict: What happened in the most recent clash?” BBC News. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-57053074 [3] “Rwanda: How the genocide happened.” BBC News. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-13431486 [4] “Bosnian Genocide.” History. https://www.history.com/topics/1990s/bosnian-genocide [5] “Myanmar Rohingya: What you need to know about the crisis.” BBC News. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-41566561


On cruelty

Cruelty can be defined as the deliberate infliction of physical or psychological pain, suffering, or harm upon others. It involves acts that are intentionally malicious, inhumane, or lacking compassion. While there may be varying degrees and manifestations of cruelty, it is generally considered a deeply debasing and morally reprehensible act.

More than 18,700 Palestinians have been killed, with 70% of them women and children, according to the territory’s health officials. The vast majority of its 2.2 million people are displaced, and an estimated half face starvation amid an unfolding humanitarian crisis.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/live-blog/israel-hamas-war-live-updates-rcna130070

Human cruelty encompasses a wide range of actions, from individual acts of violence to systemic oppression and large-scale atrocities. Examples include physical abuse, torture, discrimination based on race or ethnicity, genocide, war crimes, and other forms of violence or mistreatment inflicted upon fellow human beings.

A supervisor with the Israeli search and recovery team in charge of collecting the bodies showed CBS News some of the injuries he saw and documented, including women whose bodies had lacerations, stabbings and gunshots to their genital area.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/hamas-israel-witnesses-evidence-show-sexual-violence-oct-7-terror-attack/

The debasing nature of human cruelty stems from its disregard for the inherent dignity and worth of individuals, as well as the violation of fundamental ethical principles such as empathy, compassion, and respect for others. It represents a betrayal of our collective humanity and undermines the potential for harmonious coexistence and progress in society.

While human cruelty is undoubtedly a deeply troubling aspect of our existence, it is important to remember that there are also countless acts of kindness, compassion, and empathy that demonstrate the best of humanity. By striving to cultivate these positive qualities and promoting empathy, understanding, and justice, we can work towards countering the debasing effects of cruelty and fostering a more compassionate world.



Biden Administration Staffers Demand Gaza Ceasefire In Demonstration Outside Of White House

A test for the United States

More Americans support Israelis than support Palestinians.
This finding holds across polls. When a Marist poll (conducted for NPR and PBS) asked people which side they sympathized with more, 61 percent chose Israelis and 30 percent chose Palestinians. When YouGov (in a poll for The Economist) asked a similar question with a third option — “about equal” — the results also favored Israelis:

David Leonhardt NYT

WHY?

The Occupation of the American Mind

Over the past few years, Israel’s ongoing military occupation of Palestinian territory and repeated invasions of the Gaza strip have triggered a fierce backlash against Israeli policies virtually everywhere in the world — except the United States. The Occupation of the American Mind takes an eye-opening look at this critical exception, zeroing in on pro-Israel public relations efforts within the U.S.

Narrated by Roger Waters and featuring leading observers of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and U.S. media culture, the film explores how the Israeli government, the U.S. government, and the pro-Israel lobby have joined forces, often with very different motives, to shape American media coverage of the conflict in Israel’s favor. From the U.S.-based public relations campaigns that emerged in the 1980s to today, the film provides a sweeping analysis of Israel’s decades-long battle for the hearts, minds, and tax dollars of the American people in the face of widening international condemnation of its increasingly right-wing policies.

Narrated by Roger Waters / Featuring Amira Hass, M.J. Rosenberg, Stephen M. Walt, Noam Chomsky, Rula Jebreal, Henry Siegman, Rashid Khalidi, Rami Khouri, Yousef Munayyer, Norman Finkelstein, Max Blumenthal, Phyllis Bennis, Norman Solomon, Mark Crispin Miller, Peter Hart, and Sut Jhally.

The Occupation of the American Mind (original 84-minute version) – YouTube

It was a test for the United States, for it is the American Jews who have created the situation, with relatively little help or endorsement from the Jews of other nations. The United States, urged by expediency, by the financial weight of the Zionists, and by the strategic position of Palestine, have thrown the weight of their influence into the conflict on the side of aggression and of territorial theft. They could have worked for the Principle of Harmony and permitted time and the non-separativeness of the nations to adjust and solve the Jewish problem.

The Rays and the Initiations by Alice A. Bailey (written circa 1948), p. 636


A political weather advisory

Spiritual energies conveying the will-to-synthesis and the will-to-power have been directly impacting post-Atlantean humanity on the first quarter of each century since 1825. Both higher and lower expressions of these impacts are to be expected, as energies are impersonal. It’s up to humanity to choose how to use them.

During the 19th century, several notable initiatives emerged as remarkable demonstrations of the human will-to-synthesis. The Concert of Europe, established after the Napoleonic Wars, aimed to foster stability and cooperation among nations. The International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement emerged as a humanitarian force, providing aid and support to those in need. In 1889, the Inter-Parliamentary Union was founded, promoting dialogue and collaboration among parliamentarians worldwide. Additionally, the World Trade Organization facilitated international trade through its efforts.

However, not all expressions of these spiritual energies were positive. The widespread colonial expansion by European powers, fueled by the desire for power and resources, resulted in numerous negative consequences. This included conflicts in the Middle East and other regions, illustrating the complex interplay between higher expressions of will-to-synthesis and the will-to-power, and the potential for negative outcomes when driven by self-interest and domination.

In the 20th century, specifically in 1925, the impact of these energies had far-reaching consequences. It not only marked the rise of Fascism, a political ideology that emphasized authoritarianism and nationalism, but also witnessed the establishment of the United Nations, a global organization aimed at promoting international cooperation and preventing future conflicts. These events exemplified both the lower and higher expressions of the same energies, albeit with a heightened intensity that shaped the course of history.

As we approach the year 2025, there is a growing recognition of the higher expressions of the will-to-good, rooted in the concept of world goodwill among individuals who genuinely seek positive change globally. However, it is disconcerting to observe that fascist ideologies are gaining momentum across the world. From the alarming resurgence of far-right parties in Europe to the troubling spread of white nationalism in the United States, these trends pose significant threats to our collective well-being. This post aims to shed light on the risk identified by The Economist as “the biggest danger to the world in 2024,” urging us to critically evaluate and address these concerning developments.

In the 38 years since the predictive guide was first published, “no single person has ever eclipsed our analysis as much as Donald Trump eclipses 2024,” the article begins. It goes on to ponder what a Trump victory would mean for the world and claims that parliaments and boardrooms the world over are filled with “despair” at what may come:

A second Trump term would be a watershed in a way the first was not. Victory would confirm his most destructive instincts about power. His plans would encounter less resistance. And because America will have voted him in while knowing the worst, its moral authority would decline. The election will be decided by tens of thousands of voters in just a handful of states. In 2024 the fate of the world will depend on their ballots.

Trump would move his MAGA Republican allies into “the most important positions” in government, the article predicts, and Trump would be “unbound in his pursuit of retribution, economic protectionism and theatrically extravagant deals.”

https://www.redlakenationnews.com/story/2023/11/20/politics/the-economists-world-ahead-guide-declares-donald-trump-the-biggest-global-threat-in-2024/118378.html

Fascism

1. Definition and Classification

Fascism is a form of far-right, authoritarian political ideology that centralizes power, suppresses opposition, and strives for a dictatorial government led by a single leader. It often utilizes a powerful nationalism narrative, advocating for ethnic purity and the suppression of political dissent1.

There are different types of fascism that have been identified over the years. The two primary forms are Italian Fascism, led by Benito Mussolini, and German National Socialism (Nazism), led by Adolf Hitler. Other variations include Spanish Falangism, Brazilian Integralism, and Japanese Statism2. Each of these types shares common elements but also has unique characteristics defined by their cultural and historical contexts.

2. History and Cycles

Fascism first emerged in Italy following World War I, amidst social unrest and fears of communist revolution. Mussolini capitalized on this turmoil, establishing the first fascist regime in 19223. Similarly, in Germany, Hitler rose to power in the wake of economic instability and national humiliation after the Treaty of Versailles.

Fascism tends to emerge in cycles, typically during periods of intense social, economic, or political upheaval. It often exploits societal fears and uses propaganda to gain support, promising stability and order while blaming societal ills on marginalized groups4.

3. Social Determinants and Predictors

Several social factors can predict the rise of fascism. These include economic instability, political polarization, societal unrest, and perceived threats to national identity5. Additionally, the presence of charismatic leaders who can manipulate public sentiment and exploit societal fears greatly contributes to the rise of fascist movements.

4. Current Trends

Currently, there’s a growing concern about the resurgence of neo-fascist ideologies around the world. From the rise of far-right parties in Europe to the spread of white nationalism in the United States, there’s evidence that fascist ideologies are gaining traction6. However, it’s important to distinguish between far-right populism and fascism, as the latter involves a total rejection of democratic principles and institutions.

5. Contrast with Authoritarianism, Monarchical Rule, and Populism

While all these ideologies share a centralization of power, they differ significantly. Authoritarianism is a broad term for any political system where power is concentrated in the hands of a leader or a small elite, but it doesn’t necessarily involve the nationalist and racial elements of fascism7.

Monarchical rule, on the other hand, derives authority from a hereditary line and may or may not be authoritarian. It often lacks the mass mobilization component and the dictatorial aspirations inherent in fascism8.

Populism, meanwhile, is a political approach that seeks to disrupt the existing social order by rallying the common people against elites. While fascism can employ populist rhetoric, it differs in its violent suppression of dissent, its dictatorial aspirations, and its emphasis on ethnic or racial purity9.

In conclusion, understanding fascism is crucial to safeguarding democratic institutions and values. By recognizing its characteristics and societal predictors, society can better guard against its resurgence.

Footnotes

  1. Stanley, J. (2018). How Fascism Works: The Politics of Us and Them. Random House.
  2. Paxton, R. O. (2004). The Anatomy of Fascism. Alfred A. Knopf.
  3. Ebner, M. (2011). Ordinary Violence in Mussolini’s Italy. Cambridge University Press.
  4. Mann, M. (2004). Fascists. Cambridge University Press.
  5. Finchelstein, F. (2017). From Fascism to Populism in History. University of California Press.
  6. Mudde, C., & Kaltwasser, C. R. (2017). Populism: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford University Press.
  7. Linz, J. J. (2000). Totalitarian and Authoritarian Regimes. Lynne Rienner Publishers.
  8. Skocpol, T. (1979). States and Social Revolutions: A Comparative Analysis of France, Russia, and China. Cambridge University Press.
  9. Müller, J.-W. (2016). What Is Populism?. University of Pennsylvania Press.

Project 2025

Project 2025 is an initiative by The Heritage Foundation aimed at preparing for a conservative victory through policy, personnel, and training. The project’s goal is to rescue the country from the grip of the radical Left by establishing both a governing agenda and the right people to carry it out on Day One of the next conservative administration1.

The project builds on four pillars:

  1. Policy Agenda: This comprehensive guide will offer specific proposals for every major issue facing the country, drawing from the expertise of the entire conservative movement.
  2. Personnel Database: The project aims to identify conservatives from all walks of life across the country to serve in the next conservative administration.
  3. Training: To transform this talent pool into effective conservative administrators, the project will offer workshops, seminars, online videos, and mentorship, led by experts who have served in prior administrations.
  4. 180-Day Playbook: This playbook will outline actions to be taken in the first 180 days of the new administration to bring quick relief to Americans suffering from the Left’s policies1.

The Presidential Transition Project, under the umbrella of Project 2025, has been making significant strides, with recent announcements of additions to the Presidential Administration Academy, reaching 75 coalition partners, and continuing development in preparation for the next Conservative President1.

Footnotes

  1. Project 2025 2 3

Project 2025 Key Objectives

Project 2025, an initiative by The Heritage Foundation, aims to prepare for a conservative victory through policy, personnel, and training. It has several key objectives that include restoring integrity, uprooting bureaucracy, and prioritizing the fossil fuel industry12.

  1. Restoring Integrity: Project 2025 aims to restore integrity by ensuring that taxpayer money is used efficiently and effectively. For instance, one of its plans includes ceasing public funding for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB), which they argue will lead to conservative taxpayers not subsidizing what they perceive as a left-leaning organization3.
  2. Uprooting Bureaucracy: To counter bureaucratic inefficiencies, Project 2025 is working on a plan to recruit tens of thousands of conservatives to replace existing federal civil service workers2. It believes that such a move will streamline operations and reduce unnecessary bureaucratic procedures4.
  3. Prioritizing the Fossil Fuel Industry: The project seeks to prioritize the fossil fuel industry over clean energy alternatives. This includes proposals to bar funding for the UN’s Green Climate Fund and radically boost fossil fuel consumption56. However, this aspect of the agenda has faced criticism, with opponents arguing that it neglects environmental concerns and the need for sustainable, clean energy solutions78.

It’s important to note that these plans have faced opposition, particularly in relation to prioritizing the fossil fuel industry over clean energy. Some polls indicate that voters reject this aspect of the Project 2025 plan in favor of President Biden’s clean energy plan7.

Footnotes

  1. Project 2025
  2. Wikipedia 2
  3. Heritage
  4. Project 2025 Mandate For Leadership
  5. The Guardian
  6. People’s World
  7. Climate Power 2
  8. Data for Progress

The “Restoring Integrity” aspect of the Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025 aims to ensure accountability and justice within the U.S. government, including within the Department of Justice (DOJ) and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI)12.

  1. Department of Justice: The project proposes to restore the integrity of the DOJ by ensuring consistent litigation1. This could involve implementing more rigorous checks and balances and increasing transparency in the department’s operations. However, the specifics of how these changes would be implemented are not detailed in the available sources.
  2. Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI): The Heritage Foundation suggests giving the FBI a “hard reset”1. This could potentially involve restructuring the organization, reducing administrative offices3, and decreasing headquarters staff to improve efficiency and effectiveness. They argue that such changes would help fix perceived issues within the bureau and restore public faith in the institution43.

The project also advocates for the dismantling of what it refers to as “weaponized intelligence agencies”5. It argues that there has been an erosion of constitutional safeguards by U.S. intelligence agencies and seeks to correct this.

However, it’s important to note that these proposals have been met with criticism. Opponents argue that the project could potentially undermine established institutions and policies6. These perspectives represent the views of the Heritage Foundation and its Project 2025, and there are differing viewpoints on these issues.

Footnotes

  1. Heritage.org 2 3
  2. Heritage.org
  3. Heritage.org 2
  4. Heritage.org
  5. Heritage.org
  6. Mother Jones

The “Restoring Integrity” part of the Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025 aims to restore faith in the executive branch of the U.S. government by ensuring that it functions based on conservative principles and values12. The project argues that this can be achieved by putting the right people in the right roles34.

However, some critics have raised concerns that this could potentially lead to an overpowering Executive branch, thereby upsetting the balance of power among the three constitutional branches of government – Executive, Legislative, and Judicial5. This concern stems from the belief that if one political ideology dominates the executive branch, it could potentially dictate policy and exert undue influence over the other branches6.

In a worst-case scenario, critics worry that if the checks and balances system were to fail, there could potentially be a shift towards an authoritarian regime, where power is concentrated in the executive branch7. This would be a significant departure from the democratic principles upon which the U.S. government is founded, including the separation of powers and checks and balances.

It’s important to note that these are potential concerns raised by critics and not stated intentions of the Heritage Foundation or its Project 2025. The foundation asserts its commitment to constitutional principles and the preservation of American liberties12.

Footnotes

  1. Heritage.org 2
  2. Heritage.org 2
  3. Heritage.org
  4. Heritage.org
  5. The Atlantic
  6. The Washington Post
  7. The New York Times

However, history has numerous examples of charismatic leaders who have used the guise of “restoring integrity” to centralize power and establish authoritarian regimes.

  1. Benito Mussolini – Italy: Mussolini, a charismatic leader, came to power in Italy in 1922 with the promise of restoring the country’s political and economic stability1. He gradually dismantled democratic institutions, consolidated power within the executive branch, and established a totalitarian regime12.
  2. Adolf Hitler – Germany: Hitler was appointed Chancellor of Germany in 1933. He leveraged his charisma and promises of restoring Germany’s integrity after the hardships of World War I and the Treaty of Versailles3. Hitler gradually centralized political and military power, ultimately establishing a totalitarian regime4.
  3. Hugo Chávez – Venezuela: Chávez won the presidential elections in 1998 on the promise of combating corruption and poverty5. His charismatic leadership and popular support allowed him to consolidate power, rewrite the constitution, and reduce the influence of opposition forces6. His government is considered a model of modern authoritarianism7.

These examples illustrate how charismatic leaders can use the idea of “restoring integrity” to win public support, consolidate power, and establish authoritarian regimes. Although these historical examples do not necessarily predict future events, they should serve as warning signals of potential danger. Not all tropical depressions become category 5 hurricanes, but they should be closely monitored.

Footnotes

  1. Britannica 2
  2. History.com
  3. Britannica
  4. History.com
  5. Britannica
  6. BBC
  7. Freedom House

There is only one way in which this focused evil will which is responsive to the Shamballa force can be overcome, and that is by the opposition of an equally focused spiritual Will, displayed by responsive men and women of goodwill who can train themselves to be sensitive to this type of new incoming energy and can learn how to invoke and evoke it.

You can consequently see why there was more than the casual use of a current word in my mind when I talked to all of you in terms of goodwill and of the will-to-good. All the time I had in my thoughts not just kindness and good intention, but the focused will-to-good which can and must evoke the Shamballa energy, and use it for the arresting of the forces of evil. -Source: The Externalisation of the Hierarchy (quoted text written in April, 1942)

cited in https://hierarchicaldemocracy.wordpress.com/2023/11/17/goodwill-in-times-of-war/

Rachel Maddow’s Prequel traces the rise of a radical strain of authoritarianism that has been alive and well in America for the better part of a century. Taking readers back to the early days of World War II, Maddow, with her inimitable wit and humor, introduces us to a clandestine network of far-far-right American radicals, united by one goal: to overthrow the U.S. government and install authoritarian rule. Through a series of sophisticated and shockingly well-funded efforts—including an astonishing amount of support among serving members of Congress—these extremists would bring America into a much closer flirtation with fascism than we want to remember. Through the heroic resistance of journalists, activists, and ordinary citizens, their goal was never achieved…but the seeds of extremism were planted and have reached forward through history into our present. As we navigate through our own disquieting times, Prequel offers a roadmap from U.S. history, marked both with heroics to emulate and traps and pitfalls to avoid.


What is a just war?

A “just war” is a concept that goes back to classical and medieval philosophy, and it’s used to determine when a nation or state has a right to go to war and how it should conduct itself during the conflict. The idea is to ensure that war is morally justifiable through a series of criteria, which are usually split into two categories: ‘jus ad bellum‘ (the right to go to war) and ‘jus in bello‘ (right conduct within war).

  1. Jus Ad Bellum:
    • Just Cause: War is only permissible to confront a real and certain danger.
    • Competent Authority: Only duly constituted public authorities may wage war.
    • Comparative Justice: The injustice suffered by one party must significantly outweigh that suffered by the other.
    • Right Intention: The intention must be to secure a just peace for all involved.
    • Last Resort: War can only be used after all peaceful and viable alternatives have been seriously tried and exhausted.
    • Probability of Success: There must be a reasonable chance of success.
    • Proportionality: The anticipated benefits of waging a war must be proportionate to its expected evils or harms.
  2. Jus In Bello:
    • Distinction: Combatants and non-combatants must be distinguished. Actions should only be directed towards enemy combatants.
    • Proportionality: The force used must be proportional to the harm caused by the enemy.
    • Military Necessity: Military action can only be taken if it is necessary to achieve a military objective.
    • Fair Treatment of Prisoners of War: POWs must be treated fairly and humanely.
    • No Means Malum in Se: Weapons and tactics must not be “evil in themselves”. These include those that cause unnecessary suffering, such as biological or chemical weapons.

Examples of what some consider just wars include World War II, when Allied forces fought against the Axis powers who were committing mass atrocities, and the American Civil War, which was fought to end slavery.


Israel is not waging a just war

Israel is not waging a just war. That’s why men and women of goodwill must oppose it.

The war declared by Israel against Hamas does not fulfill any of the ‘jus ad bellum‘ criteria for a just war. Hamas is not a competent authority representing the Palestine people. However, Israel is waging war against all Palestinians in Gaza (and in the West Bank since before October 7). The Palestinian right of self-determination in their occupied land is not a “real and certain danger” to the Jewish people, but only to the Zionist supremacists. The true intention of the war effort is not to secure peace through right human relations with the Palestinians, but to ethnically cleanse Palestinians “from the river to the sea,” as evidenced in the criminal collective punishment of Gaza. Moreover, peaceful negotiations have not been exhausted, there is nil probability that anti-Zionistic terrorism will be eradicated in the region, and the current “exchange rate” of 100 to 1 Palestinians killed relative to the October 7 terrorist attack is disproportionate. True, civilians were killed in WW-II as unintended collateral damage, but not in a 100:1 proportion, a disproportionate rate increasing every day.

Therefore, based on the principles of legitimate authority, just cause, right intention, last resort, reasonable chance of success, and proportionality, we must conclude that Israel’s actions towards Hamas do not justify this war. Recapitulating,

  1. Hamas is not a competent authority: This criterion demands that war can only be waged by a legitimate and recognized authority. Hamas, as an organization, does not adequately represent the Palestinian people.
  2. Comparative justice is absent: The right of Palestinians to self-determination is not a real and certain danger to the Jewish people, thus questioning the just cause for war.
  3. Right intention is not present: The true intention is not peace but rather the displacement of the Palestinians, which would violate the criterion of right intention.
  4. Peaceful negotiations have not been exhausted: The principle of last resort requires that all non-violent options must be exhausted before the use of force can be justified. This is evidently not the case.
  5. There is little probability of success: The eradication of anti-Zionist sentiment and actions in the region is unlikely, thus failing the criterion of reasonable chance of success.
  6. The response is disproportionate: The principle of proportionality demands that the violence used in war must be proportional to the injury suffered. The high casualty rate among Palestinians compared to Israelis demonstrates a lack of proportionality.

For all these reasons Israel is not waging a just war. But there is a more fundamental reason: this war is simply not right.

The rational (legal) mind is usually lost in a labyrinth of reasonings ending in either right or wrong inferences, but can’t ascertain a moral truth as self-evident. Only the intuitive mind can discern right from wrong with certainty. This war is simply not right.

World War II and the American Civil War were justified as valid exceptions to the general rule of the evil of war. A rational mind fixed on the ideology of pacifism would consider such valid exception as subjective and arbitrary. However, the intuitive mind would see the truth of the lesser of two evils to justify the valid exception of a just war. Israel’s vengeful retribution for the October 7 terrorist attack is not a valid exception to justify the evil of war. This war is simply not right.

Only a Adept of the fifth initiation, a Master of Wisdom and Compassion, can ascertain truth with perfect intuition. All spiritual aspirants, disciples and initiates under the 5th degree are in the process of calibrating their intuitive sense in a trial and error (quality improvement) process until perfection is attained. That’s why the Master’s viewpoint is useful as a reference, until we can directly see the truth.

The planetary spiritual Hierarchy approved the just war of the Forces of Light against Fascism from 1939 through 1945, culminating in the creation of the United Nations. However, the spiritual Hierarchy did not approve the creation of the state of Israel in land stolen from the Palestinians. Today, we are facing the consequence of this initial fatal error of the United Nations, further flawed by the veto power of its Security Council opposing the liberation of Palestine. The supremacist racial agenda of the Zionists in Palestine is wrong, as evidenced by the greater than 100:1 exchange rate of civilians casualties since the creation of the state of Israel. That’s why this war is simply not right.

May we recite the Gayatri every sunrise, and constantly work, to the best of our ability, to seal the door where evil dwells. The evil of Zionism, and its consequence, barbaric acts of terrorism by Hamas, must be defeated by “the unconquerable nature of goodness and the inevitability of the ultimate triumph of good.”

The Gayatri

O Thou Who givest sustenance to the universe,
From Whom all things proceed,
To Whom all things return,
Unveil to us the face of the true Spiritual Sun
Hidden by a disc of golden Light
That we may know the Truth And do our whole duty
As we journey to Thy sacred feet.

The Great Invocation

From the point of Light within the Mind of God
Let light stream forth into the minds of men.
Let Light descend on Earth.

From the point of Love within the Heart of God
Let love stream forth into the hearts of men.
May Christ* return to Earth.

From the centre where the Will of God is known
Let purpose guide the little wills of men –
The purpose which the Masters know and serve.

From the centre which we call the race of men
Let the Plan of Love and Light work out
And may it seal the door where evil dwells.

Let Light and Love and Power restore the Plan on Earth.

*Many religions believe in a World Teacher, a “Coming One”, knowing him under such names
as the Lord Maitreya, the Imam Mahdi, the Kalki Avatar and the Bodhisattva. These terms are
sometimes used in versions of the Great Invocation for people of specific faiths.


The United States Must Stop Military Aid to Israel

The United States must not approve military aid package to Israel as it pummels Palestinian civilians, most of them refugees and children.

The US is planning to transfer $320 million worth of precision-guided bomb equipment to Israel, according to three people familiar with the matter, amid Israel’s aerial bombardment of Gaza as part of its war on Hamas.

The sale of the Spice Family Gliding Bomb Assemblies – a type of precision bomb kit that can turn unguided bombs into GPS-guided munitions – to Israel was approved by the relevant US congressional committees several months ago, before Hamas attacked Israel on October 7 and sparked a war, one of the sources said.

But the State Department did not formally notify congressional leaders that the transfer was moving forward until October 31, according to the sources and a formal notification reviewed by CNN.

US plans to transfer $320 million in precision bomb equipment to Israel in sale approved earlier this year | CNN Politics

The stock prices of weapons manufacturers have skyrocketed over the recent period and continue to rise as Israel bombards Gaza. These are obscene profits of the US Industrial Military Complex.

In the immediate aftermath of the Israel-Hamas War, shares of military contractors spiked as both institutional and retail investors bought in, according to VandaTrack research.

The iShares U.S. Aerospace & Defense ETF, which tracks companies including Raytheon, Lockheed Martin, Boeing, General Dynamics and Northrop Grumman, has surged by about 7% since the initial attacks on Israel earlier this month.

What the Israel-Hamas war means for defense stocks | CNN Business

It is imperative for the United States to uphold its responsibilities under International humanitarian law and human rights law, along with its commitments outlined in the declaration on explosive weapons in populated areas. By doing so, the nation would demonstrate its unwavering dedication to promoting justice and protecting the well-being of all.


Political Zionism Is Racism

Anti Zionism Is NOT Anti Semitism


An invited essay

A Plea: Please Don’t Look Away. We Are Not Powerless.

Today like every day, we are seeing the horrible traumas of life and death in the multiple areas of conflict around the globe. And they are not decreasing. There are those whose loved ones are far away from them and are suffering this pain of war and famine whilst they themselves remain safe. Their worry is beyond belief. Then there is us, we who just watch. We do not know the names; we do not know the faces. But we see them, and we hear them, and we know this is Not Right. This is not the kind of world we want to live in.

All over the world, hearts are breaking, lives are taken, for nothing. For an idea. That you and I are separate. That you are wrong, and I am right. That we are not one human race.

But please don’t look away. We are not powerless. Our power, first and foremost, is in our steadfastness and peace. Please do not lose your peace. Please do not let the virus of rage, hate and sorrow overtake you.

Zen Master Thich Nhat Hanh once said: “Our enemy is never another person. Our enemy is the wrong perceptions within him. When a doctor sees a person who is suffering, he tries to identify the sickness within the patient and remove it. He doesn’t try to kill his patient. The role of the doctor is to cure the illness which is within.”

But how do we cure the extreme illness of hate, fear and separation that has infected our planet, which overtakes us and our nations? The cure has to begin with me. It has to sincerely begin with me, here and now, in my own life. Every human being is a cell in the planetary being. We need to make our cells healthy. Only our peace and deep understanding will put out the fire of the virus raging within. Hate and anger is an enormous waste of energy, an illness in itself. We hold it at a distance.

Then, as His Holiness the Dalai Lama said: “Don’t just pray; do something.” There are, thankfully, a multitude of groups, organizations and individuals doing something to right the wrongness in the world in every kind of way.

So, we are not powerless. We can all do something. If we ourselves are suffering ill health, overwhelment or busyness, we can know that taking good care of ourselves and those around us, is doing something.

But if we have any time and space in our minds, it behoves all of us to not look away, to do something, any little thing. It begins with understanding and awakening from our self-focussed little lives into the greater whole.

 Do we know what is going on, and why? Do we know what other human beings are enduring? History never begins yesterday. Everyone can find an unbiased, easily-understood source about any given event in history.  Even one, clear source of information can help us understand. We will never find this through popular media. Please question and question again your sources. Please understand the narrative you are hearing, and why. When we put true information to our own hearts, we can see how to act.

Some people say the old world is dying and the new is being born. This, then, is surely the time to act. There are voices being heard in the thousands all over the world. This is not political. This is: Just Stop the Killing. Stop the Wars. Give Peace a Chance. Now.

We can join with and talk to people; we can write a letter; we can speak the truth. We don’t even need to elucidate who is good and who is evil. How often the enemy is within, within ourselves, within our own borders? Do we need to see enemies everywhere? We need to transform the anger, rage, and sorrow within ourselves to positive action of any kind.

At the very least, and yet this is very great, we can light a candle, send up and out a hope and a prayer and a thought for the suffering. Once a day, once a week, once a month. “We know you are there, and you are not forgotten.” Mother Theresa said, “We cannot all do great things, but we can do small things with great love.”

So please do not look away. Not from the facts and truth about the world, about ourselves and what is being done in our name, the human race. Those out there need to know, “Your suffering is my suffering. We hear you and we see you.”

So we are not powerless. As for those perpetrating the killing: Stop it.  Listen to us. You are infected. You will never, ever be well this way. With every human life you take, you are killing a part of yourself, you are killing our beautiful planet.  You will never ever have peace. Who are you anyway? A killing machine? You are a human being, with divine potential. Give up this drug of hate and violence. Lay down your arms. Sit with us.

So please, world, do not look away.

We can hold their suffering in our hearts. And raise our candles high, so we don’t stay dark against the night.  And not just pray, do something.

Alexandra Ratcliffe (meditator, peace activist, educator in English, History, Government and Politics). Revised 4 DEC 2023