The United Nations, Universal Peace Federation and World Government
This is a bit of an addition to my previous post.
One of the major efforts of Reverend Moon is to create a body in the United Nations, similar to the Senate in our own government, made up of religious leaders. Reverend Moon has said that the United Nations has failed. So what is the goal of His work? Here is how I see it.
World government is the natural result of universally shared values. Do we really need to give one single body authority over the world? No. We need a body that can coordinate worldwide cooperation with disasters, space exploration, and in some regards resource management, but they don't need power over those underneath them. A world of shared values would eagerly recognize the value of arguments and plans well designed and based on truth, real facts not manufactured facts. In such a world, as today, governance in a more specific fashion is best done on a local level. We can see in the United States itself that the federal government has long left the people behind and reform is building beginning with the state governments, those more directly accountable to the people.
In the same way an overbearing world government would only be a disaster, and even in an ideal world would prove itself unnecessary. Free trade and the removal of armies in an ideal world and you would have to ask yourself; What use is a world government?
But let me illustrate how the existence of a body of religious leaders in the United Nations would promote world peace. Radical Islam, some may dispute the word radical, is the greatest source of violence in the world today. Islam itself claims it is a religion of peace and tolerance. So what happens when we have a body of religious leaders, representing all religions, represented in the United Nations? If that body consists of perhaps ten or twelve religious leaders of Islam?
Well, Nations such as ours have often walked out of UN meetings at the rantings of leaders from Islamic nations. They preach the destruction of Israel and defeat of the west. Just as nations respond to such threatening language, so will this body of religious leaders have to respond.
If a national leader claims he is speaking on behalf of Islam then how will the leaders chosen to represent Islam to the world respond? And how will the Islamic public respond to the representatives in the Unite Nations? We will see clearly how much Islam is truly a religion of peace and how much it is not. It will bring everything out in the open for the world to witness and judge clearly. It could be a catalyst for Islam to leave behind their violent past and truly share the future with the rest of the world.
And it would be a catalyst to promote universally shared values. In this case a bit of moral confrontation may be a good thing. As many Christian religions embrace issues such as homosexuality as part of God's creation, Islam may shame such faiths to return to a more Godly view. And Islam may be shamed by their treatment of women in many Islamic nations. A debate by those claiming moral authority over their faithful on what is a moral life taking stage before the entire world. Something that has been sorely lacking in the United Nations, which is corrupt to the core.
I see the Unification Church's view on world government as this; promoting 'universally shared values' brings peace and harmony where 'interdependence' and 'mutual prosperity' can bring prosperity to everyone. A lot of work needs to be done to get to that point, but then we won't need many of the organizations that worked for those goals.
One of the major efforts of Reverend Moon is to create a body in the United Nations, similar to the Senate in our own government, made up of religious leaders. Reverend Moon has said that the United Nations has failed. So what is the goal of His work? Here is how I see it.
World government is the natural result of universally shared values. Do we really need to give one single body authority over the world? No. We need a body that can coordinate worldwide cooperation with disasters, space exploration, and in some regards resource management, but they don't need power over those underneath them. A world of shared values would eagerly recognize the value of arguments and plans well designed and based on truth, real facts not manufactured facts. In such a world, as today, governance in a more specific fashion is best done on a local level. We can see in the United States itself that the federal government has long left the people behind and reform is building beginning with the state governments, those more directly accountable to the people.
In the same way an overbearing world government would only be a disaster, and even in an ideal world would prove itself unnecessary. Free trade and the removal of armies in an ideal world and you would have to ask yourself; What use is a world government?
But let me illustrate how the existence of a body of religious leaders in the United Nations would promote world peace. Radical Islam, some may dispute the word radical, is the greatest source of violence in the world today. Islam itself claims it is a religion of peace and tolerance. So what happens when we have a body of religious leaders, representing all religions, represented in the United Nations? If that body consists of perhaps ten or twelve religious leaders of Islam?
Well, Nations such as ours have often walked out of UN meetings at the rantings of leaders from Islamic nations. They preach the destruction of Israel and defeat of the west. Just as nations respond to such threatening language, so will this body of religious leaders have to respond.
If a national leader claims he is speaking on behalf of Islam then how will the leaders chosen to represent Islam to the world respond? And how will the Islamic public respond to the representatives in the Unite Nations? We will see clearly how much Islam is truly a religion of peace and how much it is not. It will bring everything out in the open for the world to witness and judge clearly. It could be a catalyst for Islam to leave behind their violent past and truly share the future with the rest of the world.
And it would be a catalyst to promote universally shared values. In this case a bit of moral confrontation may be a good thing. As many Christian religions embrace issues such as homosexuality as part of God's creation, Islam may shame such faiths to return to a more Godly view. And Islam may be shamed by their treatment of women in many Islamic nations. A debate by those claiming moral authority over their faithful on what is a moral life taking stage before the entire world. Something that has been sorely lacking in the United Nations, which is corrupt to the core.
I see the Unification Church's view on world government as this; promoting 'universally shared values' brings peace and harmony where 'interdependence' and 'mutual prosperity' can bring prosperity to everyone. A lot of work needs to be done to get to that point, but then we won't need many of the organizations that worked for those goals.
Comments