Dear Leo,
The Security Council of the United Nations (English: United Nations
Security Council - UNSC) is one of the six main organs of the
UN,[1][2] with the mission of maintaining international peace and
security. Also, its mission is the admission of new members to the
organization.[3] Unlike the General Assembly, it has the power to
decide on relevant issues by issuing resolutions. Under the UN Charter
all UN members agree to implement the decisions of the Security
Council. Therefore, its decisions are binding and enforceable by all
UN members.
So the peace may be achieved if it's members decide and propose the
end of a war to United Nations.
If United Nations do nothing, then why they exist?
I think we as GGHA , creators of GPS , must inform the countries
members of Security Counsil to be activated asap.
Respect to humanity globally.
With respect to all
Panagiotis -Takis D Ioannides
Co-founder, Vice President of GGHA
Στις Παρ, 10 Μαρ 2023, 9:09 μ.μ. ο χρήστης rsieb3@xxxxxxx <
dmarc-noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> έγραψε:
*Dear Leo:*
*Here is once more my **answer for the text book question, as far as the
psychological sphere is concerned. *
*Without the conversion of the authoritarian or the fascist personality
into a democratic character, there will be no true peace beyond that of
Yalta. *
*Leibniz, Kant, Hegel,Gandhi, Martin Luther King, etc. were democratic
personalities and true peacemakers.*
*Adolf Hitler was an extreme authoritarian character and a catastrophic
war maker: he marched with 4 million authoritarian individuals from all
European nations, who are Nato today, into Russia and killed 26 million
Russians and 6 million Jews. *
*The authoritarian personality has for its main character trait an
**overwhelming
death instinct and drive, directed against others and himself. *
*Therefore the authoritarian characters and movements must never be
allowed to come to **power.*
*In Solidarity, *
*your Rudi *
*from the House of Peace*
*From Authoritarian to Democratic Character*
*By*
*Rudolf J Siebert*
*Professor Emeritus in Comparative Religion*
When in the past in a particular, positive religion the children were
going decorated and dressed up togeather with their parents, to the
worship, and participated in the liturgical functions, and had their own
business in them, and thus in any case learned the prayers and heared and
saw the reprensentations and images of the religious community, the people,
and put themselves into them, and accepted them in the same immediate mode,
as well as the same kind to clothing themselves, and the customs and the
morals thus reproduced themselves, then this whole process was the *natural
authority.*(5) Its power was the greatest in the spheres of the
subjective, objective and absolute spirit. The individual may be conceited
about his or her independence, he or she could not fly over this spirit,
the natural authority, because it was the substantial, his or her
spiritulity itself. First of all, this *natural authority *was completely
impartial, unprejudiced and uninhibited and stood immediately solidly,
strong, and sturdy, and soundly in the people, the nation,without
prohibition or ban of the opposite, the principle of subjective freedom, or
free subjectivty, or interiority, or secular enlightenment, or democracy.
Under the *natural authority *the individuals were neither free nor
unfree, since there was no contrast of reflection, of critical
understanding and of subjective thinking present at all yet. Modern people
say, that the older nations have brlieved this or that religious
content.The nations themselves did not call it *believing,*in so far as
this believing or faith contained a contrast in itself. The Christian
believing or faith may be unique to Christianity as the*Religion of
Freedom. *On the Protestant Left, the Anabaptists, or Baptists, rejected
the baptism of children precisely out of opposition to the former Catholic
*natural
authority. *There existed , however, in the history of religions
different forms of believing, different positive religions, who could come
in collision with each other. As far as this meeting of positive religion
was concerned, it could happen on the ground of the representation and of
the reflection and of critical understanding, and the defense, or
apologetics could be based on reasons and prooves for the truth: as e.g.
the after the bourgeois enlightenment almost forgotten cosmological, or
teleological, or ontological prooves for the exisence of God. But the
coming together of the nations could also take the form, that they forced
other nations to be oboediant, and adapt to their own faith. Thus, the
faith turned into forcing, authoritarian state power. This happened
partially in the state itself, and partially also toward the outside, the
other states. This collision caused innumerable religious wars: e.g. the
wars of the Hebrews against all the other nations living in Canaan or
Palestine, the battles among the Indians between the worshipers of Schiva
and Wishnu, the wars between Catholics and Protestants in Christianity,
also the heresy courts, the Holy Inquisition, which invented waterboarding
and ibherited it to the SS and the CIA, the wars of the Muslims. It was the
honor of God, for which the believers fought in such collisions, that God
would be recognized in the consciosuness and that the truth of the nation
would come to recognition. Against such compulsion and coercian arose the
modern principle of sujective freedom or free subjectivity, the freedom of
faith in general, of democracy.This freedom of religion could then also
give itself the position, that it was to stand above the different content,
which asserted itself as truth.Thus in a formal sense the truth was, what
religious freedom was as such, where it was to remain outside of the game,
what was really believed. agnosticism, relativism. That became then the
formal demand of freedom, which did not look at the truth of the faith, and
which related itself only to the subjective freedom: the content may have
been of whatever quality it wanted to be: agnosticism, relativism.There the
difference stood inbetween the interior, the location of the conscience,
where Ego was with itself, and the essential religious content.The interior
was the holy, the location of the person's freedom, which was to be
respected.That was an essential demand,which man made, insofar as the
consciousness of freedom awakened in him.Here the ground is no longer the
substantial content of the religious faith, but the formal side of the
belief.This formalism was characteristic for the modern , bourgeois; civil
society in its totality..Here belonged also the pluralistic, formal
democracy, and the inclusive democratic character and movements in
oppostion to the exclusive, authoritarian personality and movements in the
spheres of civil society, state and religion. The authority for the
liberated thinking were its own principles alone. To the natural individual
in his or her sensuous perception the truth had still come as authority.The
autonomous reason, and thinking, turned against the external authority of
religion andof the blind obedience of the subject toward the princes, the
authoriies, the administrations, and the governments. The modern, formal
democracy was born in state and church, family and civil society, with the
exception of the private, capitalistic economy: there has been no democracy
in private capitalistic corporations from thr start. In American
corporations there does not ecen exist co-determination, which in European
businesses has become a reality. Certainly, democracy would interfere with,
or would not function adequately, or would not be effective in the process
of the private appropriation of the collective surplus value. Therefore
private, capitalistic coporations are authoritarian, and are administered
by authoritarian personalities. Like authoritarian churches so do
authoritarian corporations support authoritarian political movements and
states. The following 20 top, global, authoritarian companies aided the
Nazis:[1]Coca-Cola;[2]Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer [M.G.M], [3] Chase Manhattan
Bank, [4] Dow Chemical; [5]Brown Brothers Harriman,[6] Woolworth, [7]
Alcoa, [8] Ford Motor Company [Ford], [9] General Motors [GM], [10]
International Business Machines [I.B.M],(11) Krupp, (12) Thyssen, (13)
Siemens, (14) Deutsche Bank ,(15) Dresden Bank, (16)Quandary business
empire, (17), August Baron von Finch, (18)Friedrich Flick, (19) Dr. Oetkers
and (20)Porsche-Pinch clan. Toward the end of the book, de Jong addresses
the family of Albert Riemann and its JAB Holding, We can not speak about
fascism without speaking about capitalism. Nazi Billionaires, Hitler’s
financiers, are still in business today. The harmony between democracy and
private capitalism is a myth. Where democracy seems to appear in private
capitalistic corporations, it is merely a matter of appearance, of
ideology, understood critically as false consciousness, the cover up of
particular economic interests, shortly as untruth.In America the economic
elite does not even allow a functional labor party in the federal state, in
congress, which is dominated by business lobbyists. The task of the future
is the supersession of the contradiction between authoritarian and
democratic characters, private approproation of surplus labor, and its
collective production, the establishment of economic democracy, and peace
inside and outside the nations. Otherwise, Tacitus Agricola's epigram was
not only true concerning the ruling class of the late Roman empire, but it
also still remains true concerning that, what President Eisenhower called
at the end of his Adminstration the military - industrial - congressional
complex in late Modernity:
*They ravage, they seize by false pretenses, and all of this they hail as
the construction of empire. And when in their wake nothing remains but a
desert, they call that peace.*
When adult citizens believe the false propaganda in state and church,
particularly in war times, then this happened because the natural authority
continues beyond the time, when it should have been replaced by autonomous
reason and critical thinking.People refuse to grow up and want to remain
like chidlren, and thus are in need of secular and religious fathers,
telling them the truth, or the untruth. Jesus of Nazareth, criticizing the
hypocricy and vanity of the scribes and the Pharisees, taught his disciples
and the people:
*You, however, must not allow yourselves to be called Rabbi,since you have
only one Master,and you are all brothers. You must call no one on earth
your father,since you have only one Father,aand he is in heacen Nor muust
you allow yourselves to be called teachers, for you have only on Teacher
,the Christ.The greatest among you must be your servant. Anyone who exalts
himself will be humbled ,and anyone who humbles himself will be exalted.*(
Matthew 23.1-12 )
However, the present church, which Jesus founded, is full of fathers and
other authorities, and even a holy father and a *pontifex
maximus*.Authoritarian
personalities must convert into democratic characters in church and state,
family and civil society, if there is to be peace.
On Friday, March 10, 2023, 1:20:23 PM EST, Leo Semashko <
leo.semashko@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Dear friends peacemakers,
To the existential question: WHAT PEACE AND HOW TO ESTABLISH in our time,
on the brink of nuclear war/suicide, no one has an answer acceptable to all
nations due to traditional peacemaking ignorance. Therefore, its
understanding must be sought together, in dialogue, what we, the GGHA have
been doing during 18 years, discussing different, sometimes alternative
peacemaking ideas and integrating the true ones into our spheronics:
“*Gandhian
Spherons Global Peace Megascience*”. Now, at a critical time, on the
nuclear death brink we offer a new dialogue for our collective peacemaking
textbook: "*Spheronics: True Peace Paradigm*", in order to get out of
total peacemaking ignorance and start a constructive peaceful narrative:
https://peacefromharmony.org/?cat=en_c&key=1116.
This will be a model and example of a peaceful dialogue for all, which
today has been nullified and drowned in militarism. Unfortunately, today,
not a single peace organization in the world offers or organizes any
similar dialogue of different peaceful ideas and approaches being satisfied
only with its own. At least we, the GGHA, did not receive an invitation
from anyone to publish our ideas that illustrates the authoritarian, racist
and dictatorial order in global peacemaking, determining its failure. *We
would be happy to participate in any peace dialogue on the platform of any
organization*, if one is found with it. Why is the dialogue killed today,
how will it turn out in the future and how to revive it?
To revive it, we invite every responsible peacemaker, *without delay,* *to
sit AT ONCE and write ONE page of your answer to the above question for a
peacemaking textbook, or find and send me a similar fragment from your
article or book.* (More details are in the *first attachment*, 3 p. *The
second attachment*, 8 p., is my interview to an international magazine in
January 2023, dedicated to the system core of peacemaking spheronics and
its textbook, any thesis of which you could make the subject of your
critical or constructive discussion at your dialog page, which will be
guaranteed to be published in the textbook). To understand the social role
of peacemaking dialogue, we must take into account two eloquent historical
facts in order to learn from them.
*Firstly*, the tragic result of Hitler's refusal from the dialogue
offered to him by Mahatma Gandhi (
https://peacefromharmony.org/?cat=ru_c&key=1000) on the eve of WWII,
which led to 80 million victims and the inglorious death of the Third Reich
along with Hitler. The moral of this fact: the refusal from dialogue is the
refusal from peace, this is death, this is the limitation of the mind,
destructive for all, its dogmatism, stagnation and fanaticism, like
Hitler's. Therefore, let's not be like Hitler and repeat with our silence
his sad refusal from dialogue in his arrogant, racist silence, which is
being reproduced today. Or does his experience teach us nothing?
*Secondly*, the saving result of the wise dialogue between John F.
Kennedy and Nikita Khrushchev during the Caribbean crisis (
https://peacefromharmony.org/?cat=en_c&key=1113). They were able to
overcome the fierce military, political, economic and ideological
confrontation between the two nuclear powers (exacerbated today), and save
their peoples and humanity from nuclear genocide, which would have been
inevitable in the absence of their dialogue, had they become like Hitler.
Kennedy and Khrushchev proved that the essence of true peacemaking is the
achievement of peace in the dialogic overcoming of deadly confrontation in
recognizing the common denominator/goal - saving the lives of their nations
that modern leaders lack in order to proceed in the logic of peace dialogue
from the reverse, from the common.
*Another fundamental, ontological question* is the question: WHAT kind of
peace is possible and necessary to prevent the nuclear suicide of humanity
in our time? Why do we emphasize the “*true peace*” and what does it mean
really, ontologically? True peace: - this is not a temporary and ghostly
peace, such as Yalta, filled with wars and an arms race, which prepared for
80 years the humanity nuclear genocide and is impossible today with the
extreme depth of total confrontation and disagreements between two nuclear
civilizations in all spheres: social, spiritual (informational) , political
and economic.
The true peace is briefly expressed in the following historical
definitions, which are integrated by spheronics. It is the “*divine peace
of pre-established harmony*” by G. Leibniz; "*the perpetual peace of
harmonious social nature*" by I. Kant; "*universal peace of humanity
nonviolent spherons*" by M. Gandhi; "*the humanity absolute peace, which
must end the war before the war ends with mankind*" by J.F. Kennedy; “*world
peace built on understanding and a substantially new manner of thinking*”
by A. Einstein, etc. Only on similar true scientific peace can a true
peacemaking be built and its global peace eradicating its ignorance along
with its offspring, with nuclear suicide, wars, arms race, military budgets
and other militaristic pathologies.
Let innovative spheronics be created, figuratively speaking, only by 1%,
but it carries the core of the spherons true peace, which is fundamentally
verified at all levels from the individual and the family to humanity as a
whole and constitutes an acceptable to all peoples and practically
realizable constructive alternative to nuclear suicide that is revealed in
my interview.
We hope that the above facts and arguments will be enough to motivate a
responsible peacemaker to participate in the peacemaking textbook-dialogue
with your one page.
With respect and wish for true peace in dialogue,
Dr. Leo Semashko,
GGHA Founder (2005) and Honorary President
