World Peace is Possible and Will Happen

[CG Didymus]

The US is a special case. (Special as in "special needs".)
They reserve the right to attack anyone and everyone if they so wish. The people there don't even care when they get manipulated into a costly, unwinnable war. They even re-elect a man who lied them into it.

Yes, it's just too easy for those in power to lie and manipulate. So, can we trust some world tribunal to do the right thing? Or will they be controlled by the rich and powerful? I even wonder about the leaders of religion. The Baha'i Faith is dependent on their leaders being honest, just and always doing the right thing. But they are just people, fallible people.

 

[Heyo]

Yes, it's just too easy for those in power to lie and manipulate. So, can we trust some world tribunal to do the right thing?

What is the alternative? Possibly being attacked by a random nation on a whim.
And it isn't that we don't know about measures of checks and balances (and which of them failed to work in the past).

 

[QuestioningMind]

That is what the Baha'i Faith is proposing. Here's another excerpt of their peace plan...

Some form of a world super-state must needs be evolved, in whose favour all the nations of the world will have willingly ceded every claim to make war, certain rights to impose taxation and all rights to maintain armaments, except for purposes of maintaining internal order within their respective dominions. Such a state will have to include within its orbit an International Executive adequate to enforce supreme and unchallengeable authority on every recalcitrant member of the commonwealth; a World Parliament whose members shall be elected by the people in their respective countries and whose election shall be confirmed by their respective governments; and a Supreme Tribunal whose judgement will have a binding effect even in such cases where the parties concerned did not voluntarily agree to submit their case to its consideration.

“A world community in which all economic barriers will have been permanently demolished and the interdependence of capital and labour definitely recognized; in which the clamour of religious fanaticism and strife will have been forever stilled; in which the flame of racial animosity will have been finally extinguished; in which a single code of international law—the product of the considered judgement of the world’s federated representatives—shall have as its sanction the instant and coercive intervention of the combined forces of the federated units; and finally a world community in which the fury of a capricious and militant nationalism will have been transmuted into an abiding consciousness of world citizenship​

I don't see how we're ever going to get to a place where every nation is going subordinate themselves to some global tribunal. Unless... like you say... it's our last chance.

Unfortunately, part of God's plan includes forcing us to have to come together in a common cause. To me, this is what is so annoying about God and religion.

Supposedly, God knew the words of the Baha'i prophet would be rejected. So, God's great plan for peace has him putting the people of the world through all sorts of trials and tribulations to get us to submit to him and adopt his plan. Maybe it's a good plan. Maybe it's exactly what we need to do. But we are being forced into it? But... what I'm wondering... is it really all that great of a plan? Or... is it just another religion making promises... that if we listen to their prophet and follow his rules, all will be well?

The only way we can hope to achieve such unity is if we start acting like adults instead of children. That means taking responsibility for our situation and acknowledging that we are the only ones who can fix it, instead of childishly convincing ourselves that there is some magical god being in charge that's trying to steer us in the right direction. That's because the only way to solve our problems is by recognizing demonstrable facts, not by trying to manipulate people into believing that this is what their imaginary friend wants them to do.

Time for humanity to grow up and put away childish superstitions and face reality head on. The stakes are too high to do otherwise.

 

[Mock Turtle]

That's the claim of the Baha'i Faith. Is it true? The claim is that their founder, Baha'u'llah, was sent from God to bring humanity the social and spiritual teachings needed to bring the world together in peace and harmony. So, what are those teachings?

In 1985 the Baha'i governing body, the Universal House of Justice, put out the "Promise of World Peace". Here's how it ends....

In the earnestness of our desire to impart to you the fervour of our hope and the depth of our confidence, we cite the emphatic promise of Bahá’u’lláh: “These fruitless strifes, these ruinous wars shall pass away, and the ‘Most Great Peace’ shall come.”​

And here's an excerpt from the middle of it...

Acceptance of the oneness of mankind is the first fundamental prerequisite for reorganization and administration of the world as one country, the home of humankind. Universal acceptance of this spiritual principle is essential to any successful attempt to establish world peace. It should therefore be universally proclaimed, taught in schools, and constantly asserted in every nation as preparation for the organic change in the structure of society which it implies.

In the Bahá’í view, recognition of the oneness of mankind “calls for no less than the reconstruction and the demilitarization of the whole civilized world—a world organically unified in all the essential aspects of its life, its political machinery, its spiritual aspiration, its trade and finance, its script and language, and yet infinite in the diversity of the national characteristics of its federated units.”

Elaborating the implications of this pivotal principle, Shoghi Effendi, the Guardian of the Bahá’í Faith, commented in 1931 that: “Far from aiming at the subversion of the existing foundations of society, it seeks to broaden its basis, to remold its institutions in a manner consonant with the needs of an ever-changing world. It can conflict with no legitimate allegiances, nor can it undermine essential loyalties. Its purpose is neither to stifle the flame of a sane and intelligent patriotism in men’s hearts, nor to abolish the system of national autonomy so essential if the evils of excessive centralization are to be avoided. It does not ignore, nor does it attempt to suppress, the diversity of ethnical origins, of climate, of history, of language and tradition, of thought and habit, that differentiate the peoples and nations of the world. It calls for a wider loyalty, for a larger aspiration than any that has animated the human race. It insists upon the subordination of national impulses and interests to the imperative claims of a unified world. It repudiates excessive centralization on one hand, and disclaims all attempts at uniformity on the other. Its watchword is unity in diversity”.​

For Baha'is... How's the plan going? For others... What do you think? Will it work?

I don't believe world peace will happen any time soon. Mainly because of the two things that often mean most to the larger majority in the world - these being nationality and religious belief. I think it will take a major event - either a serious war or a global catastrophe - for change to come about. But even then I can't see religions losing their divisive power or as to how such will even develop. What is happening in Europe, as to the waning of religious belief, might not happen elsewhere for some time, if ever.

As mentioned by others, how can we get a consensus as to actions when so many religious beliefs have some kind of 'end scenario' as dogma. It's as if they are content to mindlessly contribute to such - which is hysterically funny if it wasn't so dumb too, in my view.

 

[Brickjectivity]

Actually because we're a social species it's never logical and reasonable. That's why every civilized society has laws in place to prevent people from taking what isn't theirs. We simply need to start thinking of ourselves as a global society.

Logic, reason, and accepting demonstrable facts isn't all that's needed. But unless we can finally move away from the 'my feelings are equal to your facts' mindset we don't stand a chance. It's going to take a global society if there's any hope at all that we'll manage to deal with climate change in time. That's means accepting and acting on demonstrable facts, not on simply taking it on faith that it's all a huge hoax.

I object that defining humanity to be a social species does not make it one. Can climate disaster or some other global disaster bring this antisocial species together into a single society? More likely it results in wars of decimation by one group or another, and they might say there was no choice and that it was the only way and that it was logic and reason which forced their hands. With global warming came new land claims to the icy land at the pole. The islands cried for help, and nobody listened. Streets began to flood in the Eastern USA, and nobody listened.

This is a global society, and war is part of how we deal with it....at least up until now. War has been part of how things have been managed. It has decided the winners and losers. When the telegraph was invented in early 19th century some people thought it would end wars. Instead it became a necessary component in wars.

But I believe in peace. I don't believe it is logical or reasonable, but I believe it is better. Childish superstitions may play an important part in this.

 

[Balthazzar]

That's the claim of the Baha'i Faith. Is it true? The claim is that their founder, Baha'u'llah, was sent from God to bring humanity the social and spiritual teachings needed to bring the world together in peace and harmony. So, what are those teachings?

In 1985 the Baha'i governing body, the Universal House of Justice, put out the "Promise of World Peace". Here's how it ends....

In the earnestness of our desire to impart to you the fervour of our hope and the depth of our confidence, we cite the emphatic promise of Bahá’u’lláh: “These fruitless strifes, these ruinous wars shall pass away, and the ‘Most Great Peace’ shall come.”​

And here's an excerpt from the middle of it...

Acceptance of the oneness of mankind is the first fundamental prerequisite for reorganization and administration of the world as one country, the home of humankind. Universal acceptance of this spiritual principle is essential to any successful attempt to establish world peace. It should therefore be universally proclaimed, taught in schools, and constantly asserted in every nation as preparation for the organic change in the structure of society which it implies.

In the Bahá’í view, recognition of the oneness of mankind “calls for no less than the reconstruction and the demilitarization of the whole civilized world—a world organically unified in all the essential aspects of its life, its political machinery, its spiritual aspiration, its trade and finance, its script and language, and yet infinite in the diversity of the national characteristics of its federated units.”

Elaborating the implications of this pivotal principle, Shoghi Effendi, the Guardian of the Bahá’í Faith, commented in 1931 that: “Far from aiming at the subversion of the existing foundations of society, it seeks to broaden its basis, to remold its institutions in a manner consonant with the needs of an ever-changing world. It can conflict with no legitimate allegiances, nor can it undermine essential loyalties. Its purpose is neither to stifle the flame of a sane and intelligent patriotism in men’s hearts, nor to abolish the system of national autonomy so essential if the evils of excessive centralization are to be avoided. It does not ignore, nor does it attempt to suppress, the diversity of ethnical origins, of climate, of history, of language and tradition, of thought and habit, that differentiate the peoples and nations of the world. It calls for a wider loyalty, for a larger aspiration than any that has animated the human race. It insists upon the subordination of national impulses and interests to the imperative claims of a unified world. It repudiates excessive centralization on one hand, and disclaims all attempts at uniformity on the other. Its watchword is unity in diversity”.​

For Baha'is... How's the plan going? For others... What do you think? Will it work?

I didn't read all of this, but ... The goal is, for many, world peace and goodwill, but under which umbrella? Bahaluahs? Jesus'? Mohamad? I truly like the secular nations, who understand the need for freedom of religion. I don't like the conquests for one world governments that deny independent thought and practice. Religions cool when contained and respectful of others, but when it isn't, it becomes the vehicle of war and stifles peace as well as prosperity.

 

[loverofhumanity]

Contrary to popular perception the world is more peaceful than it ever was in the past. But it is still a long, long way towards (relative) world peace.
"Its purpose is neither to stifle the flame of a sane and intelligent patriotism in men’s hearts, nor to abolish the system of national autonomy so essential if the evils of excessive centralization are to be avoided." And that is exactly what has to be done. "Patriotism", which too often easily swaps into nationalism has to be overcome and national autonomy, at least when it comes to the military, has to be sacrificed for a more secure world.

Within our nations we accept that there are laws against theft and aggression and we accept that a police force is there to enforce these laws. Outside of our nations we accept and expect that our diplomats act like toddlers in our behalf. They won't agree to outlaw war and they won't transfer a little part of their autonomy to a global police force.
That's why the Baha'i plan failed so far and why it will not succeed in the futur.

I agree with almost every thing you so intelligently pointed out only that the Baha’i plan does indeed advocate an international force to enforce rulings of a world court if the recalcitrant member continues its warring or oppressive ways. It will be similar to local governance but on a world scale. In other words law and order will become internationally enforceable by the world tribunal.

But this is for humanity to decide upon not the Baha’is. We only offer it as a solution.

An International Executive and Standing Army

Series: Building a World Federation

 

[idea]

Yes, it's just too easy for those in power to lie and manipulate. So, can we trust some world tribunal to do the right thing? Or will they be controlled by the rich and powerful? I even wonder about the leaders of religion. The Baha'i Faith is dependent on their leaders being honest, just and always doing the right thing. But they are just people, fallible people.

I like the "by the people" system - individual leaders cannot be trusted, any government needs to be bottom up, by the people, not by the king, not by the pope, not by the prophet - by the people.

 

[idea]

I didn't read all of this, but ... The goal is, for many, world peace and goodwill, but under which umbrella? Bahaluahs? Jesus'? Mohamad? I truly like the secular nations, who understand the need for freedom of religion. I don't like the conquests for one world governments that deny independent thought and practice. Religions cool when contained and respectful of others, but when it isn't, it becomes the vehicle of war and stifles peace as well as prosperity.

I agree, separation of church and state is imperative.

 

[Heyo]

I agree with almost every thing you so intelligently pointed out only that the Baha’i plan does indeed advocate an international force to enforce rulings of a world court if the recalcitrant member continues its warring or oppressive ways.

OK, so do I. It was just that one snippet from the OP that (maybe out of context) did contradicts that idea.

 

[Heyo]

But I believe in peace. I don't believe it is logical or reasonable, but I believe it is better. Childish superstitions may play an important part in this.

Logic doesn't tell us what is "good", only what is the most efficient way to reach what we deem as good. And logic tells me that the only thing war is efficient at, is filling the bank accounts of arms dealers and weapon manufacturers. Sometimes it is also useful when a leader is in trouble and needs a distraction (but the costs are high).
The idea of "winning" a war is obsolete since over 100 years. No matter the intended goal, reaching it through war isn't worth the cost or can be reached cheaper by other means.

 

[F1fan]

At least the initial "lesser" peace of the Baha'is, they say, has nothing to do with their religion. It's all people coming together and agreeing to put aside their prejudices. But... will that even work?

This is the sort of idealism that comes with dogmas, and not knowledge or reason. The problem with ideals is that they seldom account for, nor are consistent, with reality, so reality has a way of making ideals unworkable as an option. For example, mental health is a serious cause of social disorder. And I don't mean serious mental health problems, but also minor issues like a lack of emotional development, or a exposure to others who hold anti-social attitudes and beliefs, like racism. The solutions are not just people changing their minds, but people who are incapable of self-reflection and awareness, thus incapable of social cooperation.

So how does Bahai propose overcoming the influence of prejudice, and the other problems of emotional intelligence? And then we have sociopaths who are born with a defect and are simply incapable of empathy. They tend to avoid trouble in life by following the behavioral patterns of others, but if they are in a position of power they will act in ways that are dangerous to society and peace. So what does Bahai suggest? These are ruthless people and often find themselves in power as a result.

There is just so many things that keep people divided. Do Baha'is expect those things to just go away and no longer be an issue?

Many people can do this. Most of the liberals I know are very tolerant and cooperative with conservatives, even extreme conservatives. Liberals are better at compromise than conservatives these days, at least in the USA. So how does Bahai suggest conservatives be convinced to be better at cooperation? And be better at true media reporting? Tribalism is a very strong emotional behavior, so the solution?

It's easy for the Bahai to adopt and promote the idea of global unity because it is part of THEIR dogma.

Which with some things, that is what they seem to be saying. Racial, religious, gender differences... just get rid of them? Sure, and it's happening... slowly. But for racial and gender equality, it's been a fight and struggle. Was that part of God's plan? Either way, that is what it took.

Getting rid of categories won't solve anything. There are biological genders, and then there are gender identities. I am male, no ambiguity about it. If others are not comfortable with their biological gender identity, well, they can be whatever they feel they are. It affects me in no way. Call me mature, self-aware, confident, and tolerant of difference. There are many people who take advantage of difference as a means to divide and create social advantage, albeit superficial and a sort of social violence. Bahai needs to address the mental attraction to this violence.

 

[Brickjectivity]

Logic doesn't tell us what is "good", only what is the most efficient way to reach what we deem as good. And logic tells me that the only thing war is efficient at, is filling the bank accounts of arms dealers and weapon manufacturers. Sometimes it is also useful when a leader is in trouble and needs a distraction (but the costs are high).
The idea of "winning" a war is obsolete since over 100 years. No matter the intended goal, reaching it through war isn't worth the cost or can be reached cheaper by other means.

War isn't always a product of desperation. Sometimes its simply for the pleasure. Some people love it. This is your real obstacle.

 

[Heyo]

War isn't always a product of desperation. Sometimes its simply for the pleasure. Some people love it. This is your real obstacle.

I hate to be a buzz-kill but they should get into MMA or paintball or something that doesn't involve a lot of people who aren't asked if they want to participate.
But they are not the real obstacle. The real obstacle are the people who are indifferent or too lazy to inform themselves. They are the ones who could stop the "warriors for fun" and don't.

 

[Brickjectivity]

I hate to be a buzz-kill but they should get into MMA or paintball or something that doesn't involve a lot of people who aren't asked if they want to participate.
But they are not the real obstacle. The real obstacle are the people who are indifferent or too lazy to inform themselves. They are the ones who could stop the "warriors for fun" and don't.

You're not a buzz kill.

 

[QuestioningMind]

I object that defining humanity to be a social species does not make it one. Can climate disaster or some other global disaster bring this antisocial species together into a single society? More likely it results in wars of decimation by one group or another, and they might say there was no choice and that it was the only way and that it was logic and reason which forced their hands. With global warming came new land claims to the icy land at the pole. The islands cried for help, and nobody listened. Streets began to flood in the Eastern USA, and nobody listened.

This is a global society, and war is part of how we deal with it....at least up until now. War has been part of how things have been managed. It has decided the winners and losers. When the telegraph was invented in early 19th century some people thought it would end wars. Instead it became a necessary component in wars.

But I believe in peace. I don't believe it is logical or reasonable, but I believe it is better. Childish superstitions may play an important part in this.

Sure, we'll have a lot better chance of growing up and doing what we need to if we rely on superstition instead of logic, reason, and facts. It's settled... we're doomed.

 

[firedragon]

@CG Didymus
As one of the "others" you refer to,
I think the attempted murder of Salman Rushdie shows why world peace is not currently possible. We value freedom of speech within the bounds of not harming others. Other people value religion even where it harms others. Since the two are not reconcileable there will be conflict until one of the two parties gains ascendancy.

As to whether world peace is eventually achievable I do not know, but I do feel confident to say it is unlikely to happen under the banner of the Baha'i faith. People are simply too divergent. Some value science and reason, some flee from science and reason, and others are somwhere in between like the Baha'is who have science and reason as marketing slogans but do not practice them closely.

In my opinion.

You missed Snowden, Asange, and many others like them. It's obvious that you have to bring a little bit of hatred towards Islam in every possible way exploiting every possible opportunity.

I think more than Rushdie's stabbing, this kind of sickness in people like you are sure shot signs of world not having any kind of peace ever.

 

[soulsurvivor]

That's the claim of the Baha'i Faith. Is it true? The claim is that their founder, Baha'u'llah, was sent from God to bring humanity the social and spiritual teachings needed to bring the world together in peace and harmony.

That there will be eventually peace on Earth is absolutely true, but not quite the way the Bahai's expect. When the real Christ returns to Earth (which will be pretty soon), the conflicts based on religion will cease because everyone will follow the new Savior. And where there is conflict based on language and ethnicity, the Christ will mediate to create peace..Bahaullah's teachings are good, but they have not created peace yet and won't improve with time.

 

[CG Didymus]

I agree with almost every thing you so intelligently pointed out only that the Baha’i plan does indeed advocate an international force to enforce rulings of a world court if the recalcitrant member continues its warring or oppressive ways. It will be similar to local governance but on a world scale. In other words law and order will become internationally enforceable by the world tribunal.

But this is for humanity to decide upon not the Baha’is. We only offer it as a solution.

An International Executive and Standing Army

Series: Building a World Federation

This thread was meant to have input from the Baha'is, so I'm glad you showed up. Recalcitrant members, or nations, is one thing, but what do you do when it's people that are spread out over different nations? Even in the U.S. the problem is spread out over every state. We have red states, blue states and purple states. Within a red state there may be a major city that is mostly blue, but the less populated rural areas are mostly red. We could easily be heading for a civil war. Then we have extreme weather disasters, that includes rising sea levels, too much rain and flooding in one area and extreme drought in another.

So, this could be the types of catastrophes that Baha'is and other religions have predicted. What we gonna do? What are Baha'is going to do? Their prophet says he has the remedy. It's kind of outlined but what are the specifics? It's too easy to say, "Well, we must put an end to racism." "We must get rid of the extremes of wealth and poverty." Yeah, how we going to do that? Rich people are just going to say, "Yeah, you're right. I don't need all this money... Which includes a lot of power." And just tell people to stop hating people that aren't the same as you?

But the big question for Baha'is... What can they do to help without making it about them? Because once they say, "And this is God's plan as given by our prophet, Baha'u'llah." You know people in some of the other religions are going to reject anything Baha'is say. And you know atheists will too. All you have to say is "God" and you know they're going to stop listening.

 

[CG Didymus]

The nature of humans...

These kids were all pretty much the same - same race, same gender, same religion, same families... and they still decided to hate one another. It would take unlimited resources - nothing to compete over, equal abilities - no heirarchies

I asked Baha'is about that. Is their God going to suddenly change the hearts and minds of people? Make them so loving and so unselfish that they won't want to or it will pain them so much to do wrong to others that they won't do it? Kind of like what happened to the guy in "A Clockwork Orange"?

But if this God can do that and will do that, why didn't he do it sooner? Or from the beginning?