Until we learn how to live without killing each other World Peace is not possible. We have democratically elected Governments in many parts of the World who are signatories to the International Convention of Human rights.
That convention does not allow children to die of starvation or from war. But they do – every day. We have also allowed crime to become too acceptable a part of our lives.
Yet our Governments appear on television and tell us how important it is that we allow all persons not to be harassed or bullied. They tell school children not to bully and harass. They tell us the People we will be arrested and go to Prison for life if we commit murder.
They (our Governments) shake hands with Government who lock up their citizens because of their ethnic group or faith, who put them in labour camps, and who shoot then without trial.
Our Governments then increase their hypocrisy by visiting those same countries and giving them AID money which allows those same Countries to arm more military and suppress their citizens rights with an even greater excess of force.
How can there ever be World Peace without adherence to the Principal of Defending the Weak and the Innocent and the Principal of respect for another human?
If I ever become the Prime Minister the United Kingdom I would close down every embassy in the UK whose Government abused human rights – and that would include China.
We must reform the U.N and use overwhelming Military Intervention to bring conflicts to an end and that means all of the Security Council not just the U.S.A the U.K and their allies.
Until we draw the red line of human rights and defend that red line we will never have World Peace.
Because ‘We the People’ have no democracy at the International Level. We have no say in who represents us at the United Nations.
This is a very strange state of affairs considering that the United Nations is meant to be the ‘peak’ organisation in the World representing human rights’.
In face none of the International Organisations that exist have representatives of Countries in which the people have a say in whom is to speak and act for them.
I live in Sydney, Australia. I work alongside all race and their respective cultures. In Sydney Jew works and plays with Arab. In the Gaza they kill each other.
It is not the people preventing the World from enjoying World Peace it is our Governments and vested interests.
On the day that ‘We the People’ have a say in International Democracy then that is the day when the road to World Peace will begin.
I have written a new United Nations. It is not the people who do not read it or prevent it from being read – it is Theresa May, Donald Trump, Nikki Haley, Malcolm Turnbull and the media who do not acknowledge and support my work.
We must ask the Question ‘ When are we the people going to be able to vote in the United Nations for Peace?’
Photo by May on Unsplash
Q&A on Quora
World Peace is subjective. To a child who was moments before sitting chuckling to herself as she amused her imagination with her tatty and dust laden angel who had promised her that all the dreams she could ever had would come true, it was very subjective. After her chuckling came a sound she had never heard before. It was loud, very loud. If pain could be given a name then that was the sound she heard. Her Angel was gone. Instead two mangled bleeding bloody legs remained. She was a victim of collateral damage – that is the term the Generals use so that they don’t scare their own children.
To the Prime Minister or President who ordered the bombing attack World Peace was also subjective. But he or she never felt the pain or the fear whilst in the Vatican shaking hands with the Pope.
I have used the illustration above to show that World Peace is indeed subjective. If you are a victim of the lack of World Peace then your view is very different to those who are not,
War does not innovate. All it does is speed up the rate of technology change that produces more weaponry to kill us with. More weapons are developed in so-called Peacetime than in major conflicts.
World Peace will provide the People of the World with the opportunity to live lives of mutual self-respect. Unfortunately at the moment it is unlikely to occur.
Until the United Nations is reformed to ensure that no sides are taken by all the members of an enlarged Security Council in any conflict then we will never have World Peace.
Also on Quora
It is not an easy question to answer as Climate Change is increasingly beginning to affect the decisions made about our future.
Example. Would you invest in a new fruit farm in California?
Would you build a high-rise on a low-lying coastal area?
Would you increase the Federal Budget for flood and bush-fire damage?
It does not matter if you agree that Climate Disasters are man-made or not you still have to plan for the increase in Climate Disasters.
Therefore, any technology has to take Climate Change into account.
I would say any technology that is related to Disaster Management and Control, any to do with water and food production and any technology that involves Civil Defense will all be in demand.
As for the subject ‘World Peace’, without technology advances in the areas I have just described I believe the possibility of World Peace to be increasingly remote without them.
Climate Disasters will increase in frequency and in magnitude causing vast movements of people – we are already seeing a yearly increase in movements of people affected by Climate Disasters. Countries will seek to manage their borders in order to ensure that food and water is available for their own citizens.
This could lead to an increase in regional Conflicts and perhaps even a constant state of ‘World Conflict’.
If we want World Peace we must be able to address the ‘conflict of interests’ that will occur with Climate Change and for that we will need technologies that will provide, food, water and shelter.
This is my answer to this Question on Quora.
How the war is viewed by people is very much going to be a subjective perspective.
I was in my local supermarket in Bicester U.K not so long ago and I pointed out to the man next to me the horrors of the then Alleppo destruction and deaths. His answer was selfish in that he sought to remove the deaths of innocent civilians by saying that ‘they are always fighting we should leave them to it’.
Many people seek to hide the murder of innocent civilians from their conscience by putting the blame on the Syrians themselves.
However, as one who has been subjected to the physical threat of a Goverment I know how difficult it is to protect yourself from the State and its Forces.
The innocent Civilians in Syria cannot rise up against an armed militia, they cannot just walk into the United Nations Security Council and say to Russia stop bombing us. They cannot protest in the streets of Damascus where Assad’s Security Police will photograph and video them so that at the dead of night they can be taken away never to be seen again.
When Hillary Clinton decided to arm the rebels in order to ensure that Iran’s militia and support of Assad was countered she did not do it for the Syrians she did it for Israel. America must stop taking sides in Syria so too Russia.
Syria is all that is wrong with the United Nations. It is a toothless tiger that provides costly ineffective rhetoric and no practical solutions. It needs urgent reform.
My own opinion of Syria is that Assad should be arrested and that the members of the Security Council should combine as one united force without taking sides to disarm the whole country. The amount of weaponry in Syria held by various factions means that a long-lasting Peace is unlikely.
I would expect that there are many like me around the World who are of the same opinion.
By providing a ‘World Legal Unified International Organisation’. This would be given a renewable mandate by the World to ensure any conflict which immediately puts at risk the safety of civilians and related infrastructure is immediately brought to an immediate end by overwhelming force.
It would be comprised of the relevant region military and would be under one command which does not take any side in the conflict.
If we cannot reform the United Nations to provide a Peace Mandate and the organization to enforce it then we should disband the U.N and form a new Organisation which will ensure Peace in the World.
The Organisation that will be required to enforce the peace Mandate would not be a massive military force that spends all its time marching up and down.
It would be a leadership and logistics organization which would use the relevant military.
This is the only way we will ever get World Peace and an end to terrorism.
This is my answer to this Question on Quora.
For me personally World Peace is a practical achievable state of World Affairs.
My solution for World Peace is simple and available;
To achieve World Peace we either reform the United Nations or replace it with the following Mandate.
‘To achieve World Peace a renewable World Mandate is required for a Legal Unified Overwhelming World Force, under a single command and without taking sides, to bring to an immediate end by all means available any conflict which immediately threatens the people and stability of the Country and Region involved’.
However, we live in a World where Governments do what is best to keep them in Political Power and not what is best for the World.
Therefore, until such times as such a Mandate exists without the veto then World peace is a fantasy.