by
Peter A. Zuckerman
President, Human Progress Network
Introduction
The recent terrorist attacks on the United States highlight the new dangers to human
progress and survival. The media published many theories concerning the motives and
backgrounds of the terrorists. Past manifestations of human violence had their own
causes. The genocides of Nazi Germany were based on racism. The mass murders of Stalin
and Mao were justified by alleged capitalist exploitation of workers. The terrorists
attacking America claimed religious justification for their wicked deeds. But a more
realistic explanation is based on the major differences among human societies.
Most of the underdeveloped countries of the world suffer from extreme poverty, ill
health, environmental destruction, low quality of life, and a feeling of humiliation
when comparing themselves to the developed world. These conditions are exacerbated
by the reality that the problems of many countries are not solved -- and are even
made worse -- by incompetent and even corrupt governments. The desperate conditions
of existence for many in these societies -- as compared to the high standards of
living in the advanced countries -- then provide a fertile ground for the terror
planners and executers.
The recently published "Freedom in the World 2004" by the Freedom House
(a New York-based think tank that monitors political and civil liberties) explains
the causes of the negative human conditions. Of the world's population of 6.3 billion,
only 46% live in "free" societies. Of course, there is a strong relationship
between political freedom and economic development. The "partly free" or
"not free" countries control the remaining 54% of the human populations,
or more than 3.5 billion human beings.
Diversion of Resources from Human Needs
Armed with increasingly powerful weapons, military forces rule or dominate much
of the world's population. When we count the totalitarian (not free) and authoritarian
(partly free) governments, which could not exist without military force, more than
half the world's population lives under direct or indirect military rule. But even
in democratic countries huge amounts are spent every year on maintaining their military
forces and on weapons research and procurement. These expenditures by necessity are
diverted from solving or alleviating the many social and economic problems of the
world. Totalitarian and authoritarian leaders of their countries find it more useful
to maintain large armed forces than to increase the living standards of their oppressed
subjects.
This diversion of resources from human needs creates the following negative conditions:
Analyzing and understanding the fundamental causes of the support of terrorism
enable us to develop the solution. We have reached a situation where we have to
shape our future into the right direction with new social inventions.
As we begin the 21st century, the dangers to human survival multiply. A rapidly growing
world population is afflicted in many countries with a harmful way of thinking. An
emotional mindset, which is conducive to enmity against different clans, tribes,
nations, ethnic groups, religions and others is reinforced by logical inventions
of technologies. Thus, authoritarian leadership can use communications and military
technologies to gain and stay in power, frequently by waging war against domestic
opposition or neighboring countries. Religious fundamentalists are using electronic
communications to spread their message of hate. Even in democratic countries many
politicians use racial or religious appeals in their election campaigns. This fatal
human weakness explains the negative conditions of many societies and nations.
The Development of Human Societies
Physiologist and evolutionary biologist Jared Diamond in Guns, Germs, and Steel
provides a basic classification of human societies as evolved from the primitive
origin of our species.
"Bands are the tiniest societies, consisting typically of 5 to 80 people,
most or all of them close relatives by birth or by marriage. In effect, a band is
an extended family or several related extended families." Chimpanzees and gorillas
also live in bands, but today human bands exist only in remote parts of New Guinea
and Amazonia.
The next stage of human society development is the tribe. The tribe "...differs
in being larger (typically comprising hundreds rather than dozens of people) and
usually having fixed settlements." Both bands and tribes lack a bureaucracy,
police force, and taxes. Their economies are based on reciprocal exchanges between
individuals or families, rather than on tribute paid to a central authority.
The subsequent stage of human society development took place in the Fertile Crescent
around 5500 B.C., with the emergence of chiefdoms. Chiefdoms were considerably
larger than tribes, ranging from several thousand to several tens of thousands of
people. The problem of potential internal conflict among thousands of people was
solved by the appointment of "one person, the chief, to exercise a monopoly
on the right to use force."
The final stage of society development is the modern state. The first states
emerged around 3700 B.C. in Mesopotamia, but today they rule all the world's habitable
surface. "Central control is more far-reaching, and economic redistribution
in the form of taxes is more extensive in states than in chiefdoms. Economic specialization
is more extreme." "Internal conflict resolution within states has become
increasingly formalized by law, a judiciary and police."
All existing societies now have complex centralized organizations. There are several
obvious reasons for this human condition:
While the development of human societies was strongly facilitated by the creation
of centralized states, a negative condition emerged in parallel with these developments:
"Considerations of conflict resolution, decision making, economics and space
thus converge in requiring large societies to be centralized. But centralization
of power inevitably opens the door -- for those who hold the power, are privy to
information, make the decisions, and redistribute the goods -- to exploit the
resulting opportunities to reward themselves and their supporters." Taken to
an extreme, this condition converts many societies into "complex kleptocracies."
Kleptocracy: A government characterized by rampant greed and corruption.
Kleptocratic governments are very common in authoritative societies. But even in
democracies politicians and other powerholders are corrupted by their desire to obtain
power and maintain it. Their need to gain and hold office (and power) requires contributions
from special interests. These in turn expect and receive favorable legislation, government
contracts and other economic and financial benefits. This excessive shifting of resources
to the well-to-do ensures that many social and economic problems remain unresolved.
In effect, a form of mild kleptocracy comes into existence, based on the human weaknesses
of greed and hunger for power. The current Enron scandal disclosed that even the
highly democratic political system of the United States can be tainted by this weakness.
Negative Social Developments
While the development of human civilization provided great advances in science, technology
and general prosperity, some negative conditions also emerged. As human societies
evolved from bands to states, basic human characteristics shared with other primates
remained. The many institutions of civilization converted the human savages into
intelligent and civilized beings, with ambitions even to extend into space and the
exploration of other planets. But frequently the institutions of humankind are controlled
by men and women more interested in power and domination than in advancing human
survival and progress.
These traits then transform many countries into harmful entities. Centralized decision
making leadership facilitates the keeping of power. The establishment of powerful
military forces is supported by modern technology able to develop affordable weapons
of high killing power. Such institutions as secret police, supported by the military,
can easily control populations and suppress dissent. The leadership of political
institutions can use ideologies and other motivations to threaten and even attack
other states, if motivated by their quest for power.
Thus the emergence of organized warfare paralleled the development of human societies.
As societies emerged into chiefdoms and states, more violence-prone males became
available for combat. Economic specialization provided the means to support standing
armies. The development of increasingly sophisticated tools for killing -- weapons
-- made the military forces more decisive. The powerholders of the more powerful
states find it rewarding to threaten, attack and even conquer their neighbors. To
defend against these threats, even relatively peaceful nations need to maintain armed
forces, with the resulting wasteful military expenditures.
Worldwide Political Mismanagement
Both democratic and non-democratic governments suffer from a chronic condition
of political mismanagement. This is not surprising in authoritarian regimes. Authoritarian
leaders use mass propaganda, brutal repression, control of the media, electronic
surveillance, secret police and the military to stay in power. They have no mechanism
for the orderly transition of authority -- in fact, the sole purpose of such regimes
is to stay in power, regardless of the costs to their unfortunate subjects. The continuous
struggle against their own people leaves few resources to improve the economy and
society. Thus the world's environmental and social problems continue to worsen, and
human development is even regressing in many places. Only in countries where repressive
governments are allowing market forces to emerge is there economic and social progress.
Democratic governments are also becoming the victims of political mismanagement.
The need to gain office requires an excessive amount of time for non-governing activities,
the courting of special interests, fund raising and the like. In some nations --
such as Italy and Japan -- links to organized crime exist. Pork barrel politics and
political corruption are encouraged, and ethnic and class divisions are fomented.
All this contributes to a gradual withdrawal of the electorate from the governing
process, which is very damaging to democracy.
Political mismanagement is intensified by the war institution and militarism. In
non-democratic countries the military either controls the government directly, or
provides the means for maintaining the powerholders. In democratic countries the
military is under civilian control. But in either situation the war institution and
the military divert huge resources from their country's social and economic problems.
Advancing Beyond the Traditional State
Jared Diamond's summation of the evolution of human societies discloses the weaknesses
of the traditional or conventional state. Powerholders have special access to information,
can make decisions and redistribute surplus goods. This centralized leadership and
decision making enables them to reward themselves and their supporters at the expense
of the general welfare of their societies. Throughout history this was the common
characteristics of authoritarian governments. But even the more democratic and civil
societies can be tainted by this negative potential. The recent examples of "crony
capitalism" -- more accurately described as "klepto-capitalism" --
in Malaysia, Indonesia and other Asian countries demonstrate the harm done even by
non-authoritarian governments.
To overcome this potentially fatal trend, a new type of state has to emerge. The
reinventing and strengthening of institutions to form a civil society will provide
the infrastructure of the next development of human societies: the common good
state.
Common good: 1. A desirable end for government or public policy,
which is good for the whole society.
2. The communal approach to the structuring and operating of a society, to reach
an optimum level of economic and moral achievement and satisfaction for its participants.
The Common Good State
The common good state would modify the traditional state's institutions
and operations, so that a higher level of civilization would be achieved to ensure
continued human survival and progress. The "Traditional State vs. the Common
Good State" table summarizes the changes that should be made to the negative
characteristics of the traditional state.
Traditional State vs. the Common Good State
Reaching the Common Good State
Obviously the concept of the common good is highly desirable for the continued survival
and progress of humankind. However, a major obstacle remains in reaching it. How
can people of highly diverse values, opinions and outlooks reach agreement on what
is the common good?
Reaching the common good state becomes feasible, because rational procedures can
be followed in setting up societal goals, and selecting the best public policy alternatives
for implementing these goals for the common good. Our considerable intellectual and
information resources will provide the means of accomplishment. Only a logical approach
can enable us to identify our problems, their costs and the resources available for
solving them, without the conflict that all too frequently accompanies major social
or economic problems.
For the first time in human history, it is possible to develop and implement economic,
social and public policy decisions designed for the needs of societies. An excellent
example is the evolution of the conflicting European countries into the European
Union. This process was facilitated by such policies as the Marshall Plan and various
unifying institutions, such as the European Common Market.
Implementing the Common Good State
The common good state, implemented worldwide, is a highly desirable evolution for
the human species. But how can such a major change be accomplished?
Exploring the evolution of human societies provides the answer. Our species' social
evolution started with bands. Each band occupied a small territory, and was continuously
in conflict with other bands. Eventually a powerful band realized that it was more
beneficial to absorb a defeated band into their group, instead of killing them. This
converted bands into tribes, as other bands realized the benefits of a larger social
organization and copied the institution.
As with bands, the tribes continued to struggle with each other for additional territories
and resources. Again a successful tribe realized the benefits of uniting with other
tribes to form chiefdoms. The success of chiefdoms in expanding their territories
caused the other tribes to unite into chiefdoms.
The first government that could be considered the state (or city-state) emerged in
Mesopotamia. The Sumerian chiefdom, using the resources of irrigated agriculture,
was able to absorb other chiefdoms, and developed such social inventions as bureaucracy,
priesthood, law, writing, factories and armies -- all the attributes of the traditional
state. To survive, other chiefdoms then gradually formed states. While much violence
resulted from the interactions of states, they also facilitated the emergence of
modern civilization.
The above examples suggest that the evolution of the common good state will follow
the same model. The most successful traditional state, realizing the need for
human survival and progress, will initiate the first common good state. The benefits
of the new form of society will be so obvious that eventually all the failing traditional
states will find it necessary to convert to common good states. Of course, the first
common good state will find it useful to assist the other states to reach this desirable
condition.
World Leadership for the Common Good State
With all its imperfections, the United States is still the most successful of the
traditional states. As the remaining superpower, America has all the resources needed
for world leadership.
World leadership is based on three major power factors: economic power, military
power and moral power. The foreign policy of the United States currently neglects
the importance of moral power. Yet the values of America, reflected in the Declaration
of Independence and the Bill of Rights, the Four Freedoms, the Atlantic Charter --
and continued adherence to them -- provide an irresistible appeal to the repressed
people of the world. The moral principles of America are actualized by its democratic
institutions, the influence of organized religion and a tradition of tolerance and
acceptance of cultural diversity.
The European Union and Japan are economic superpowers comparable to the United States.
Russia remains -- because of its nuclear capabilities -- a military superpower. But
only the United States has all three components of world leadership, including the
all important moral leadership factor:
1. After World War II the United States provided the Marshall Plan for the rebuilding
of Europe and made non-vindictive peace treaties with the vanquished.
2. American history also provides successful models of major social change: the abolition
of slavery; the New Deal, the improving status of women and minorities. In the past,
periods of spiritual and moral revival -- Great Awakenings -- gave birth to extensive
social reform and renewal.
3. The influence of organized religion remains strong. Many state churches of Europe
became discredited because of their condoning two world wars, their acquiescence
to the Nazi persecution of Jews, and their support of imperialism and colonialism.
In contrast, the Christian denominations of this country generally upheld their values
and retained their moral influence. The religious organizations of other faiths are
also strongly supportive of moral causes.
4. The multiracial, multi-ethnic society and institutions of the United States can
serve as models to the world, notwithstanding the remaining practices of racism and
discrimination.
The unique combination of economic, military and moral potential make the United
States a hyperpower, uniquely qualified to lead the world in the 21st century.
During the Cold War the superpower nuclear arsenals could have destroyed the world.
Now the principal threat to human survival is the harmful impact of political mismanagement
and a bloated war institution. The United States has both the capability and the
moral imperative to eliminate these two dangers. Still, America cannot serve as the
world's policeman -- it is simply not affordable, and does not fit the value structure
of the nation. Instead, United States must become the Tribune of Humanity
-- defender of democracy, protector of human rights, advocate of economic and social
justice, liberator of the oppressed (especially women, children and minorities).
This is the role uniquely suited to a hyperpower. This world leadership role also
will regenerate America and help solve its economic, social and environmental problems.
Foundations of the New American Foreign Policy
We are faced with a formidable task when we are considering not only the resolution
of our own national problems but also the exercise of world leadership. The only
reason we can even consider undertaking the mission is because, for the first time
in human history, all the key components are in place.
First and foremost, a global consciousness is emerging. The dramatic developments
in communications technologies finally are opening up even the most closed societies.
The best exertions of totalitarian or authoritarian societies cannot keep information
and awareness of the world away from their people.
Science and technology can satisfy the economic, health, educational and other needs
of humanity, if only governments and powerholders will let these developments happen.
We have also reached a condition when most of the world's problems, and the prevention
of their resolution, can be traced to the true causes. The elimination of political
mismanagement and the downsizing of the war institution is becoming feasible.
The tremendous financial savings from reduced military expenditures could be applied
to the alleviation of our national problems and the strengthening of our economy.
We could balance the budget with only moderate new taxes. Our productivity would
be bolstered through increased investments, a better-educated labor force, and the
transfer of scientists and engineers from the defense industry to innovation in manufacturing
and development of new products. With the assistance of our allies, we also would
have the resources to address the other issues of human survival. Human needs could
be met by transferring military expenditures to economic development, education,
health improvement and other deficiencies of less developed countries. Cutting down
the flow of weapons non-democratic regimes also would speed up the worldwide trend
toward democratization and civil societies. Finally, by eliminating mistrust among
countries we could undertake the massive cooperative efforts needed to restore the
global environment.
The Grand Moral Strategy of the United States
Once we realize that our foreign policy -- and our domestic policies mutually supporting
each other -- must be based on the elimination of political mismanagement and the
downsizing of the war institution, our democratic political processes can take over.
We must solve our internal problems to maintain our capacity of moral leadership
and serve as an example and model to the rest of the world. Our economic and social
problems are readily identifiable, and rational programs to deal with them can be
developed.
A cohesive set of programs and policies addressing our national and world problems
should be assembled, to become a coherent, consistent, long-term national program
of economic buildup, social reform and moral revival. The part of this program that
would address our relationship to the rest of the world is the U.S. Grand Moral
Strategy. The objectives and goals would be the following:
The Grand Moral Strategy will replace the present aimless drifting of our foreign
policy. The Grand Moral Strategy will gradually reduce the infrastructure of terrorism
and other manifestations of the resentments directed at the developed societies.
The grand strategy of our foreign affairs will be conducted as the New Human Order,
to replace the failures of the traditional states. Existing policies of promoting
human rights, democratization and civil societies will be intensified and pursued
vigorously. Worldwide military downsizing will achieve substantial multilateral disarmament,
including the elimination of the most dangerous weapons systems. Resources will be
transferred to the meeting of human needs, including the alleviation of social and
environmental problems. Economic development under market economies will be fostered.
Simultaneous efforts will be made to promote the freeing of oppressed minorities,
while reducing the levels of ethnic and religious violence. The ultimate goal
of the New Human Order would be the bringing about common good states throughout
the world.
* * *
References
D. Stuart Conger, Social Inventions, (Prince Albert: Saskatchewan Newstart,
Inc., 1973)
Jared Diamond, Guns, Germs, and Steel (New York: W.W. Norton & Company,
1997)
Yehezkel Dror, The Capacity to Govern (Portland, OR: Frank Cass, 2001)
Freedom House, Freedom in the World 2004: The Democracy Gap (New York, 2004)
Marcus G. Raskin, The Common Good: Its Politics, Policies and Philosophy (New
York: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1986)
U.N. Development Programme, Human Development Reports 1992-2004 (New York,
1992-2004)
Peter A. Zuckerman, Beyond the Holocaust: Survival or Extinction? (Web www.hpn.org/beyond:
Human Progress Network, 2003)
* * *
Note: The contents of the research paper were abstracted from my book Beyond the Holocaust: Survival or Extinction? (published on the Internet at http://www.hpn.org/beyond). Chapter 5 of the book is especially relevant to my conclusions.