New Beginning of a Human World

NEW BEGINNING OF A HUMAN WORLD

Maxims and Guidelines

J  MICHAEL HEYNEN

_______________________________

               Humanization

1             Human | Transpersonal Individuality

2             Human World | Societies World

3             Societies World | World Society

4             Participation | Principal Governance

5             Power | Legitimization

6             Justice | Legal Development

7             Transcendence | Secularity

8             Concordance | Nature and Culture

9             Societal Economics | Freedom and Commitment

10           Self | Cocoon | Process Control

              _________________________________

Humanization through Spirituality and Enlivenment:
From Human for Human

The initiation of the new beginning of a human world is an individual and systemic quantum leap into the self. This is firstly accomplished through transformative detachment and crisis management, in order then to enter the development of a societies world as a real human world [for foundation and deduction see: "World Power Self" in this Blog].

The quantum leap into self means lesser a cleaning process, but mainly consists of clarification and emancipation processes from domination, limitation and burden of the traditional ego-world. In this metamorphosis, the self takes over the decisive determination and leadership based on spirit and transcendence. Dehumanization - alienation and separation from human self - is individually and socially reversed.

For the new societies world beginning the constructive, hence humane structures and functions of the ego-world are internalized and converted as part of a "cocoon". So at first in the external the creative, social/societal evolvement area of the ​​transpersonal individual is generated and ensures then to come from the inside out to the transformative structuring of the human-world.

This societies world is absolutely free of religion, ideology or other externalizing projections of power. The same applies for trailing dynamics of political and states systems so far they go beyond the initially used, necessary adjusted administrative functions. Because the top requirement is the human formation of a societies world determined by the self: by humans for humans!

For the initiation of the transition and implementation of a new beginning seems to be especially the European constellation (diffusion, destabilization, fragmentation, "failing governance" etc.) highly appropriate for a crisis-transformational change. Above all, Europe is basically predestined to be a facilitator and initiator of crucial processes for the world development. This time turned in a constructive way, with the introduction of an European syncracy a centrifugal, at the same time decentralizing innovativeness facilitate the potentials to generate a societies world and at least a global society as a pure human world.

From the first step on, this development process is based on following key maxims:

1             Human | Transpersonal Individuality

The human is the first and highest purpose of the human-world, the person is a medium for this. The human as transpersonal individual is more free, central support and determiner of his human world. For this he is fully and entirely responsible and lives in/from full connection with people and nature in coexistence - concordant and adequately cooperative.

The quantum leap into the self, means overcoming of material duality and ego-limitation, is developing the human world further. The unfolding and implementation of his essential, transcendent potentials result out of the spirit and in the spirit of uppermost human reference; and for the human’s inner self and its culture and education are of paramount importance:  the sustainable promotion of free determination out of the self-awareness as a transpersonal individual.

The self-guided ego especially forms a humane culture of communication/interaction because the individual self internalizes basically and inherently also the you-self and is essentially connected to the other human. Out of this, the world of the transpersonal individual (co-) creates the societies world of the human.

2             People World | Society World

The human world is constituted as a society world, which is led and responsible by the individual self of inside and outside connected humans and societies. Societies - regional and/or interregional/supra-regional/systemically associated – are forming the basis for processes like the building of will, clarification and decision-making. Hereby they are autonomous, and it applies this principle in case of systemically associated societies.

Societies are core cells and developers of the human world. They are carriers of inherent inclusion and participation as well as legitimation/authorization, and organize the inner governance system, which is firstly to perform. Societies are direct images of the transpersonal individuality, and at one time they facilitate and dynamize especially the inversion of the paralyzing ego-world at the new beginning.

Internal and external processes of the societies world are to stabilize in bi-/ multilateral discourses and transformative coordination processes. Especially in the transition to the new beginning, adjusted accordingly, the traditional statehood or governmental institutions as an efficient service of a human world can be included for necessary administrative tasks.

For this, the reasonable governance and procedural regulation shall be settled in each association treaty and/or basic treaty of associated societies.

3             Societies World | World Society

A human world is based on the adequate connection of transpersonal guided individuals and societies. This transcendent emerging and concordant connecting societies world is peaceful, co-existent and/or progressive in its cooperation. The purpose is in any case humanely coexistence in accordance with bilateral/multilateral respect and regards to freedoms and developments. So the forms and media of exchange are constructive and are under the supreme command of non-violence – actually as well psychologically mediated.

In a human-world, societies are central entities and the societies world top carrier and recipient of the recent "international systems"; the primacy is no longer with states/ nations. The classical methods and functions of diplomacy are to use for concordant balancing and mediating procedures (equilibrium) as crucial clarification and development processes, and proactively to facilitate them transpersonally as well transsystemically. This is even more important, as classic distinctive functional pattern as ‚interior/foreign policies' analogous to the diffusion processes of the traditional international world of states are in dissolution.

Conflicts have to be regulated free of fear as well to be managed preventively and sustainably. Conflict potentials are to be understood as a strong developmental task towards transformative deepening of concordance, based on humane balancing and exchange of perceptions, confidence-building, and verification/transparency. Here reigns the clear commandment of non-intervention, and the (time-) limited humanitarian intervention is only to apply in strict transparently substantiated exceptional cases.

In such a transpersonal individually based, constituted and governed societies world, above disarmament and non-violence, meta-systemically founded basic treaties for cooperation and coordinating government functions are being completed and also adequately implemented. Here is the priority to establish and stabilize sustainable bilateral/multilateral discourse methods as part of a strategic concordance diplomacy, which also serves the preventive awareness/management of conflicts.

Therefore, a world society is evolving in stages and will replace the international regime of states and institutions unfolding transformatively, and include constructive institutions with humane adjustment ( "cocoon") at the beginning of a new human-world.

So the human-world opens up – in analogy to the individual in the systemic transcendence – from a societies world towards a world-society, which are connected  inter-regionally and inter-societally as multilateral alliances – meta-systemically organized and universally aligned. Also here, the transpersonal/trans-systemic evolving dynamics and therewith the different pace/rate of development of single entities are facilitated and transformed in concordance. This way, the dynamizing change emerges and performs the change towards a humane world order, formed out of the dimension and balance of the ‚world power self '.

4             Participation | Prinzipal‘s Governance

The society world, governed, connected, and organized by the self, inherently guarantees full inclusion and participation. In this process, only an active as well systemically relevant participation for and from transpersonal human development is acceptable. In order to preserve the sovereignty of the societies world it requires a clearly identifiable and reasonable as well a transparent organization and structures of governance.

The same applies to the organization and structure of inter-/societal discourses and coordination processes: For the purposes of adequate moderation, mediation and coordination the introduction of an adequate just transpersonal/trans-systemic governance is to guarantee.

Such principal’s governance is non-conditionally to save, in particular fully to ensure the governance function of the equilibrium and the humane concordance of will formation and decision as well as their implementation processes. For this transition period, necessary structures and service functions of previous, traditional stateshood has to be adapted to the terms of excellence of pricipal’s governance/governing.

5             Power | Legitimation

Individually generated, a human-world constitutes itself and lives from transcendence and for concordance. Therefore, principals’ governance and governing don’t describe the power as an individual medium, but as the purpose for humane leadership and function. This power is entirely to legitimate as well legitimized from three sources:

(a) from the universal and transpersonal law of thinking and acting

(b) from the respective society and basic treaties of meta-systemic affiliated societies/ regions

(c) from the transparently communicated will formation of transpersonal individuals and/or their joint decisions.

In crisis and conflict situations the coordinating governance is considered as provisional legitimized; in each case, this should be formally rectified as early as possible.

The same applies for the transition to a new beginning of the human-world when societies are not yet sufficiently constituted and organized in a transpersonal individual way. Before reaching the full functionality of the "cocoon" and depending on the degree of the evolvement of a humane societal structure - inclusion and internalization of constructive achievements of the ego-world, simultaneously expanding transpersonal/trans-systemic structures – the governance/governing are then based on the legitimacy of (a).

6             Justice | Legal Development

Justice and righteousness (rule of law) are central principles of a human-world. It is essential to close the gap between law and justice, i. e. to develop law as a transpersonal individual law:

Based on equality of rights derived out of really lived human dignity, fundamental human rights are less decisive as defensive rights (ego-world), but primarily as creative structuring rights. Central reference for this is (a) in the universal as well transpersonal law of thinking and acting, and (b) in the humanely constituted and lived legal system of a societal contract and/or basic treaty of a societal association.

When weighing questions of primacy and/or ranking of jurisdictions and legal orders, it is to decide in accordance with the relevant requirements for a transpersonal evolvement of a society and/or a societies association and its peace as well concordance-creating development. In any case here firstly applies the principle of subsidiarity.

Litigation is firstly to solve on the way of mediation and arbitration, especially in order to ensure a creatively targeting, transpersonal legal development.

7             Transcendence | Secularity

Within the transpersonal-individual, especially the transcendent development, it is unavoidable for a human world the individual to respect external faith projections from i.e. religions as timely part of the holistic process of a human inner development.

Nevertheless, basically any kind of systemically important religious missionary is to refuse, especially in the sense of traditional public worship. A continuation or a relapse into traditional religious/ideological power and domination patterns - usurpation/absorption of human transcendence in the external world - are therefore necessary to prevent not finally to impede the further progress of a human world.

Because the humane societies development should be freed from relapse into external, hypocritical, substitutive projections and from abuse of internal, individual transcendence and its supremacy. Last is untouchable: The self of the transpersonal, spirit-led individual is absolute, autonomous and therefore sacred. Therefore, a humane societies world is strictly secular fully to ensure the individual space of evolvement towards the quantum leap of the self.

8             Concordance | Nature and Culture

Out of an individual transcendence and societal, systemic connectedness an evolving human world is targeting to balance or to harmonize structures and functions. All ordering social, cultural and economical measures of a society are only humane if they are in concordance with nature.

That is unconditionally regarding the physical existence, but at the same time metaphysical as well: beyond the aesthetic and contemplative significance, nature is basically a direct expression and reflector of universal, also notably concordant and balancing functions.

Living in harmony with nature is particularly the grounding process of individual consciousness in its existence. Nature is then the least means, but left for (self) purpose that inspires the dignity and creative culture of the human in an enriching way: deepening and progressing development of the respect and attentiveness for creation, essential forms of life, alternative ‚worlds‘  of life.

9             Societal Economics | Freedom and Commitment

In the human world economic activity is basically free, providing creativity and qualitative evolvement (productivity and market), and as such it also has top priority as a strong humane societal commitment: In the human world individual prosperity is existing as long as there is no poverty.

It is not about social equality as such nor the ideological "combating wealth", but it is about the appropriate redistributive combating of existential poverty. Essentially because of the freedom of existential angst - generally as well especially here -, the transpersonal individual is extensively able to combine, to interfuse its development with the societal one so as to entangle constructively and efficiently in mutual enrichment.

The focus of economic processes is on securing and developing individually-humane adequate productivity and creatively as well socially beneficial potentials. Individual property and ensuring social productivity are appropriate to correlate and compensate. At the level of operating organizations mergers in form of cooperatives seem most suitable.

The factors capital and labor are therefore means, not object of the human world, because the being carried by consciousness of the human world is primarily crucial, not the have and possess. The societal purpose of economic activity corresponds with the requirement of an adequate distribution function to be applied also in affiliated societies: for dynamic exchanges of knowledge, products, capital, etc., and therefore for the entire further development and adequate equal opportunities beyond individual societies.

Here competition as a classic paradigm of a market economy is not decisive, but primarily the mutually qualitative optimizing, complementary learning and creatively connected evolvement of the "human capital" and the transpersonal societies world.

10           Self | Cocoon | Process Control

The development of the human world is based on the quantum leap into the self of individuals and societies. By conviction, inspiration and inner/outer transcendence, each individual social process is compressed and cross-linked as to the  further guidance of interconnectedness and synergy of the human self.

At the same time, knowing the archetypal as natural weakness of man – being aware of his own and societal development blocked by old ego buildup consciously or unconsciously (relapse and/or resistance) – is essential for a highly-effective individual and societal self-perception and process control.

Therefore, in the societies world, - individually as well systemically – is synchronically to ensure that with the quantum leap into the self the mechanism of cocoon formation is entirely comprising. In the metamorphosis of the human world the cocoon is established as a kind of "systemic self" in order to guarantee stringent self-management and enforcement, an adequate humane guidance and order of sustainable conditions of traditional as necessary ego-worlds.

Beyond the backup, control and ordering features of the cocoon for the development of systemic transcendence, this also serves as evolvement of equilibrium under the rules of the ,world power self': as humane, transformative equipotential of consciousness and being, inner and outer, transpersonal individuality and societies world by humans for humans - finally leading to a global society forming process.

The same applies to the self-governing and coordinating governance of transpersonal as well trans-systemic will formation as a continuous process of internalizing qualification, processing and compression of creative connectedness of humans: first out of inner joy and happiness, then external fulfillment of life guided by the self.

________________________

For further reading:

‘WORLD POWER SELF’ as a philosophical-political concept is the foundation of the systemic-structural as well as innovative, human- / society-centric framework of  M E T A P O L I T Y  as a conceptional contribution to the world formula of governing:

http://metagovernance.blogspot.de/2017/01/m-e-t-p-o-l-i-t-y-definition-function.html

_________________________

©  J MICHAEL HEYNEN |  06.2016

Texts in German

http://weltmacht-selbst.blogspot.de/2016/04/weltmachtselbst-reflexionen-zum.html

http://weltmacht-selbst.blogspot.de/2016/04/neubeginneiner-menschen-welt-maximenund.html

J Michael Heynen, Executive Director
International Relations Counseling
Institute for Intersocietal Diplomacy

Heynen.IRC@gmail.com

How to Save Europe From Itself


BY THOMAS PIKETTY, JEREMY ADELMAN, ANNE-LAURE DELATTE | APRIL 4, 2016

At the heart of the continent’s numerous crises is a broken democracy. Here’s how to fix it.

The old world is in trouble. A prolonged economic slump, a debt crisis it can’t shake, malaise in the face of the humanitarian catastrophe generated by waves of asylum-seekers from the Middle East and North Africa, and security institutions seemingly incapable of keeping citizens safe — together, they have revealed the crippled state of EU institutions. Europeans are more interdependent than ever, but their system of government is unable to cope with the pileup of crises. A great half-century experiment in integration is on the ropes.

This is bad for everyone. Frailty in Europe means a weak link in the wider interdependent world. As the world’s largest economy, Europe is an engine of global wealth. It is a major front in the fight against terrorism. It is the main hope for terrorism’s first victims — the refugees. With prosperity, security, and humanity at stake, a weak Europe weakens everyone else. For this reason, it’s in the world’s interest to understand how integration went away — and how to get it back on track.

* * *

For the past six decades, the continent has followed a model of integration that brought it astonishing success: peace, affluence, and social betterment. That model is now exhausted.

After 1945, a coterie of European leaders agreed that a lasting peace required more than the simple coexistence of rivalrous countries on the crowded fringe of Eurasia. Coexistence had been the mainstay of European diplomacy since the Congress of Vienna in 1815; it broke down in 1914; it imploded in 1939. Instead, these new federalists argued, European states needed to embrace their interdependence and bury old enmities. What followed was the systematic dismantling, step by step, of national sovereignty on the continent.

The process started with the alignment of France and Germany under the Schuman plan in 1950, which put their coal and steel production under a common, binational roof. The Netherlands, Belgium, Italy, and Luxembourg soon followed, forming a core of relatively homogenous democratic welfare states, built upon industrial societies that shared a common identity and common values, all sharing pooled resources.

This initial tightly knotted union eventually sprawled, spreading southward and eastward, incorporating states like Spain and Greece. (Even the standoffish Brits joined in 1973, though they did not embrace the common currency.) This spread diluted the homogeneity of the original club — but the union held, thanks in part to the Cold War, which created a common foe and allowed Western leaders to hold up the union of democratic, capitalist European societies as a counterpoint to the centrally planned regimes.

The fall of the Berlin Wall removed the threat from the left and the Soviet Union. With no common enemy and no common identity, what remained to hold Europe together? All that was left was the economy, which, for a time, looked like a powerful binding force. Indeed, the sprawl eastward to Poland and other former Warsaw Bloc countries was part of a general effort to support market-friendly transitions from planned economies.

But this foundation has grown increasingly shaky since the union’s early days. The original stolid coal-and-steel coalition has given way to a nimbler moneyed market, transforming the union from a trading bloc to a dynamic financial bloc. Today, capital crisscrosses European borders in sums and velocities that eclipse the older flows of commodities. The introduction of a common currency only sped up this transformation: In the wake of the euro rollout in January 1999, the financial imbalances between lending countries and borrowing countries billowed.

Today, we are left with a Europe comprising disparate states, its economy on the ropes, and plagued by a common enemy in some of its major cities that, rather than uniting them, divides the continent into two separate blocs. Indeed, more than any time in its modern history, the threats to Europe’s common fabric come from within, not from without.

The past decade or so has exposed almost all of Europe’s fundamental weaknesses, starting with its economic defects. The massive capital flows across the continent weren’t a problem, as long as the money kept moving, from richer countries to poorer ones, from savers to spenders, from the old core to the newer peripheral members. But capital flows suddenly reversed themselves in 2010, in the wake of the Wall Street meltdown: After a decade of infusion, suddenly households, banks, and firms in borrowing countries saw money stampeding out, leaving them unable to service their debts.

The structures of the union snapped under the weight of the crisis. The priorities of the two founding countries did not align: Today, Germany is a creditor and France a debtor, and they diverge on how to manage the string of financial crises that have affected Europe since 2008. Thus, instead of a coordinated and collaborative response, leaders resorted to emergency last-minute solutions that only just succeeded in preventing catastrophe but set off a ruinous spiral of public-sector borrowing. Budget deficits ballooned, putting governments at the mercy of their creditors. The effect was to partition Europe into two blocs locked in a winner-take-all struggle. Gone was any sense of shared interest, not to mention higher purpose: Creditor countries came together to impose conditions on debtors; Greece and other borrowers withdrew, after a ruckus, into a kind of sullen silence. In a horrible, perverse trap, governments have had to muzzle the discontents of their citizens lest unrest spur more capital flight and more misery. All that is left on the horizon is endless austerity, deteriorating faith in public institutions, and a Europe more divided than any time since the fall of the Berlin Wall.

Then Europe got thumped by the migrant crisis, which, perhaps even more than the financial crisis, has brought the union’s incapacity for decision-making into sharp relief. Unrest in the Middle East and parts of Africa has sent more than a million asylum-seekers across the Mediterranean, about half of them from Syria. Attempts to share the humanitarian burden have pulled back the veil on the depth of Europe’s various divides. Unable to act in concert, the current governance has pushed crisis management down to the national level. Countries like Germany and Sweden have thrown open their doors, to the dismay of many of their neighbors; Poland and Hungary have refused to take in asylum-seekers. Fences are going up all over the Balkans. One of the pillars of European integration, the Schengen system, which created open borders for the internal movement of people, is on life-support.

The spate of terrorist attacks in Paris and Brussels have only emboldened the skeptics’ view of European authorities as singularly incapable of doing the bare minimum expected of states: keep citizens safe. That the latest attacks unfolded blocks from the capital buildings, set off by bombers who rely on regional networks for training, shelter, and coordination, only darkened the clouds hovering over the European polity. While it was largely Belgian and French security officers who failed to connect the dots, faith in Europe as a whole took a hit.

Then there’s the gathering political crisis, stemming from a growing lack of confidence in the ruling classes. The above crises, dire as they may seem, might not loom so large were not the EU also confronting a phenomenon that has swept across the advanced, industrial world: The populist rebellion against government by closely knit insiders, who govern by consensus building and share the same underlying ideologies and values. In the United States, this rebellion has been marked by the rise of radical candidates like Ted Cruz and Donald Trump. But they, at least, do not threaten the dissolution of the union and, in fact, burnish their brand of nativism in the name of defending it. Not so with the heartened nativists in Europe, who blame the plutocrats in Brussels for their countries’ woes.

The old Franco-German bond was based upon intergovernmental agreements between ruling circles that were willing to share sovereignty — but not necessarily open up decision-making to democratic principles and practices. The original founders formed a cliquey, visionary group and promised the public greater opportunities for consumption and personal betterment but kept the reins of public power for themselves. The result was a union with some technocratic prowess but weak democratic foundations. At first, this was a limited concern — as long as the Eurocrats delivered, their legitimacy went relatively unquestioned. The past few years, however, have shown clearly what happens when they don’t. Those who decried unaccountability and lack of transparency once sounded like cranks; today, those cranks seem like prophets. In their reform efforts, those who wish to save the EU must focus on this above all else: If European leaders can’t fix the union’s underlying political foundation, their efforts to tackle the continent’s lethargic economy, ongoing migration crisis, and security weaknesses will be in vain.

* * *

Europe badly needs a reset. The threats of the past few years have revealed the limits of a model of integration better equipped for an earlier, simpler, crisis-free era. The representative institutions no longer work; they do not articulate the diversity of Europe into a functioning democratic polyarchy — a regime that accommodates a diversity of interests and lets constituents feel that their claims are honored, which breeds loyalty, or are effectively voiced, which breeds legitimacy. Faced with waves of crises, officials retreated into their bunkers. Emergency management eclipsed democratic decision-making. And when that failed — as it often did — national leaders found themselves corralled into hastily arranged summits to prevent disaster, which have done nothing to bolster confidence in the underlying structures.

Sound grim? It should. But all is not lost: There is a fix.But first, a primer on European integration.

If there is a central weakness to the union, it is its feeble bicameral system. The system has two chambers: the European Parliament, with its 751 MEPs, and the Council of the European Union, which comprises a rotating cast of ministers from national governments. (Just which ministers turn up for meetings depends on what is being discussed at the time.)

The Parliament is supposed to grapple with region-wide concerns. But the scale and heterogeneity of the union makes it large, ungainly, and immune to the creation of ruling cross-country coalitions. Meanwhile, the Council of the EU has evolved into an important decision-making body. An outgrowth of the old Special Council of Ministers charged with managing the coal-and-steel pact, it has become more important as the EU has grown. But since it is made up of one single representative from national governments that are looking out for their domestic interests and often blame the union for the mounting problems, there is little incentive to compromise and come to shared agreements — and this leads to deadlock, most notably over how to handle the refugee crisis. Meanwhile, a complex latticework of intergovernmental institutions, composed of much-derided “Eurocrats,” has grown over the years to fill in the gaps.

To handle the emergency traffic, what were once occasional summits of European leaders have been repurposed into a European Council. Technically mandated to meet every six months, this group has had to resort to hasty, ad hoc summits to deal with the mounting crises and break regional impasses. Emergency summitry is exhausting. It is also failing. Partly, this is because member countries’ interests no longer align and so leads to endless wrangling — as we saw in the handling of Greek debt. As is so often the case with emergency management, when getting through the day stands in for planning, the solutions that Angela Merkel, François Hollande, and others conjure up are often the result of elite deal-making behind closed doors. This damages any sense of democratic accountability; the quest for expedients has come at the expense of legitimacy.

Europeans might be willing to swap a bit of illegitimacy in return for some efficiency. But they don’t even get that. Summitry, as it has become a habit, also allows spoilers to wreck any deal. We saw this dynamic at work in the handling of the migrant crisis: The recent efforts to use a summit to cobble together a deal between Turkey and the EU to stanch the flow and steer payments to Turkey nearly fell apart over the provincial concerns of the government of Cyprus, which wanted Ankara to officially recognize its government and open its ports to Cypriot vessels. Weeks of carefully laid plans on the part of European Council President Donald Tusk for a deal to resolve the crisis were rendered moot, when Merkel and Turkish Prime Minister Ahmet Davutoglu bilaterally forged a different deal, that they presented to their colleagues for approval.

The EU’s complex chains of pluralistic representation are made up, in other words, of many weak links. Finding the way forward requires acknowledging two points. The first is that any resolution to Europe’s various crises has to invent a democratic, public, and deliberative arena — so that the decisions are understood. Democracy is more than a method for making collective decisions; it’s a way of legitimating them, which is all the more important when the decisions involve sacrifice.

The second is that Europeans need to see beyond the dichotomies of having national sovereignty or European rule. Old federalists and new isolationists agree on one thing: Both see “integration” as an either-or solution — either leaders surrender national sovereignty to supranational authorities or they defend the homeland. Those who hope to keep the union together need to find a way out of that deadlock — because, right now, it is very hard to make a compelling case for deepening a union that promises anything more than austerity, more dysfunction, and less control. National leaders are more hesitant than ever to transfer power to a distant European Parliament, at the very time we need coordinated, representative decision-making to make Europe functional again.

We have a proposal. Create a model of union that transcends the either-or logic of integration or sovereignty, that will provide further decision-making capacity without simply relocating power from democratic nation-states to a less democratic supranational state, and can burnish the democratic and deliberative credentials of European lawmakers.

Our proposal: Scrap the exhausted Council of the EU. Replace it, instead, with a new, second, parliamentary chamber; let’s call it the “European Chamber,” which at least has the merits of not being a council — a word now so overused that it has been drained of significance. The original Parliament needs to remain in place, just as congressional systems often rest on large assemblies to express the full diversity of a polity’s membership. But the new body will be not unlike an upper house. Its members would be chosen by and drawn directly from the corps of elected national parliaments. In other words, the assemblies of France or the Netherlands would select their representatives to the Chamber. The selection process for the European Chamber deputies could be left to national parliaments. Importantly, the number of delegates from member states should be scaled to each country’s population. These chosen national parliamentarians would do double duty for their constituents, representing them in national arenas and in the Europe-wide body.

Unlike the European Council and the Council of Ministers, the European Chamber’s members would be elected to serve European-wide interests rather than just serve as advocates of their national stakes in region-wide affairs. And unlike the sprawling European Parliament, the Chamber’s deputies would be tasked with doing more than just representing local constituents at the pan-European level. (The notoriously low, and sagging, turnouts for MEP elections is an index of how little stock citizens place in the fractured assembly.) Finally, unlike the U.S. Senate, the European Chamber would be composed of a balanced representation of EU member states by population.

The European Chamber would tackle several challenges at once in the reconstruction of European pluralism. First and foremost, the Chamber would redress the democratic deficit of the current regime: It would be elected and make decisions in open, deliberative fashion. With no end of emergencies in sight, the habit of ad hockery has to be broken to restore confidence in the publicness of Europe’s policies.

Second, it would also solve stubborn coordination problems. The Chamber’s regular meetings and public debate would take some of the burden off emergency summitry and weary national leaders who have one eye trained on their polling data. Regular deliberation would also get around the sense that Germany functions as a Leviathan behind closed doors. It would put the brakes on smaller polities that can act as spoilers when the doors are open. And it would encourage badly needed coalitions across states to legislate in the regional interest. A tighter body of deputies, meeting on a regular basis, would dispense with widespread ad hockery, which favors spoilers and unilateralists.

What is important to underscore is that members of the Chamber would function as bridges between national parliaments and the European Union. Members of the European Chamber would, in effect, be elected not to represent constituents at the national or regional level; their loyalties would not be split but reconnected. 

Instead of seeing integration and blurred borders as coming at the expense of nations, why not think of models that recombine national and wider notions of sovereignty?

Members of the Chamber would be chosen on the basis of ideology, interests, and style, each step of the representative system working to aggregate the sum of a polity’s diversity. Imagine a national election in France in which French citizens send a gamut of deputies to the National Assembly, including far-right and some fringe left delegates; from the corps of that assembly would be drawn a subset to serve simultaneously in Paris and Brussels. Each step along the way, extremes would tend to get weeded out; remember, few elected assemblies are as diverse as the constituents that choose them.

The subset of national parliamentarians would shuttle back and forth, articulating the national concerns at the European level and regional matters at the National Assembly. It is important to understand that they would not be tasked with any one perspective, either national or regional. Their job would be to represent their voters by finding means to reconcile both — and if they are seen to fail, they’ll be deposed. Since they would serve in national parliaments, they would not compete with fellow MPs, but rather serve as their envoys in Brussels. As a smaller group than the lower house of the European Parliament, and thus less prone to fringes, the Chamber would facilitate the forging of new political coalitions.

Combining transparency and accountability with better cross-border coordination between members who have gotten to know each other and formed habits of co-governance would reverse the strong impression among Europeans that region-wide rule has to be autocratic to be effective or dysfunctional if representative. Furthermore, it addresses the underlying contradiction plaguing the union in its current state — that representatives are always forced to decide between loyalty to local constituents versus loyalty to a wider project. The European Chamber transcends the either-or logic that inspires massive resistance to more integration. It provides a legitimating response to the turn of anti-elite feelings sweeping the Western world.

How to proceed? This new European Chamber should only include the eurozone countries first. One of the lessons of the debt crisis is that having a common currency without budgetary integration is a recipe for failure; the Chamber would curate revenue and spending rules and design fiscal transfers through democratic deliberation. By making membership contingent on the democratic management of fiscal policy, it would resolve the deadlock produced by having a common currency without a shared budget.

In the long run, the objective may be to convince all EU countries to join the Chamber. But we urge that such a Chamber grow in steps, starting with the four countries — Germany, France, Italy, and Spain — which together represent more than 75 percent of the combined population and GDP of the eurozone. If these four countries endorse a European Chamber, then the new institution can be put in place very fast and begin to tackle the obstacles to better management of the region’s hobbled economy. Once the rules and norms of democratic deliberation start to work and show their worth, especially in economic affairs, the Chamber can become more inclusive. There remain many important technicalities to be sorted out. Should budgetary decisions be made by majority rule? How to dispense of the veto power — which comes as a result of each decision requiring unanimity — that has trapped Europe in its current state of paralysis? These important details, however, are more easily tackled within a vision of a stronger union to come.

* * *

Creating new governance institutions from scratch is no easy task. But the alternative is a nightmare of paralysis. The current impasse over economic growth, migration, and the rising tide of Euroskepticism threatens to turn into a rancorous and dysfunctional equilibrium trap, in which countries feel locked in because to leave would be punishing, while other countries feel they are perpetually subsidizing their spendthrift neighbors but can’t kick them out of the neighborhood. We might get the occasional outright Brexit, or even Grexit. But the trend will more likely be a slow gradual degradation — a dismantling by stealth of the sort we’re already seeing, as the Schengen agreement falls apart, and as Balkan governments spit at one another over their fences.

Ours is a proposal imagined in the spirit of overcoming what are seen now as the intractable obstacles to integration. It requires fleshing out important details. But we believe that what is intractable is also a matter of perception. Integration was good for democracy and prosperity in the wake of the horrors of World War II. To keep it alive means reinventing the democratic foundations of the union.

To address Europe’s mounting crisis, the solution is not to retreat from integration. Disintegration panders to defeatists and extremists. What is needed is a campaign to reimagine Europe’s representative institutions and to restore a strong sense of European citizenship. It is time to take a look at the core institutions of the union and reinvent them. A strong Europe gives ballast to a strong world economy. A strong Europe is better poised to grapple with wider problems of security and the deteriorating humanitarian crisis in the adjacent Middle East. A strong Europe is a counterpoint to nativists and isolationists everywhere.

http://foreignpolicy.com/2016/04/04/how-to-save-europe-from-itself-european-union

10 FUNDAMENTALS FOR CHANGING THE WORLD

BY GHANDI






You must not lose faith in humanity. Humanity is an ocean; if a

few drops of the ocean are dirty, the ocean does not become dirty.



The difference between what we do and what we are capable

of doing would suffice to solve most of the world’s problem.






1. Change yourself.


You must be the change you want to see in the world.

As human beings, our greatness lies not so much in being able

to remake the world – that is the myth of the atomic age – as in

being able to remake ourselves.





2. You are in control.


Nobody can hurt me without my permission.





3. Forgive and let it go.


The weak can never forgive. Forgiveness is the attribute of the strong.

An eye for eye only ends up making the whole world blind.

4. Without action you aren’t going anywhere.


An ounce of practice is worth more than tons of preaching.




5. Take care of this moment.


I do not want to foresee the future. I am concerned with taking care

of the present. God has given me no control over the moment following.





6. Everyone is human.


I claim to be a simple individual liable to err like any other fellow mortal.

I own, however, that I have humility enough to confess my errors and

to retrace my steps.

It is unwise to be too sure of one’s own wisdom. It is healthy to be

reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err.





7. Persist.


First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you,

then you win.





8. See the good in people and help them.


I look only to the good qualities of men. Not being faultless myself,

I won’t presume to probe into the faults of others.


Man becomes great exactly in the degree in which he works for the

welfare of his fellow-men.


I suppose leadership at one time meant muscles; but today it means

getting along with people.




9. Be congruent, be authentic, be your true self.


Happiness is when what you think, what you say,

and what you do are in harmony.

Always aim at complete harmony of thought and word and deed.

Always aim at purifying your thoughts and everything will be well.




10. Continue to grow and evolve.

Constant development is the law of life, and a man who always tries

to maintain his dogmas in order to appear consistent drives himself

into a false position.

World Power Self - Reflections on the New Start of a Human World

WORLD POWER SELF

Reflections on the New Start of a Human World

J  MICHAEL HEYNEN

              __________________________________

               Introduction

               I             Spirit and Word

               II            Inside and Outside

               III           Self and Ego

               IV           Human and Society World

               V            Societies Power and World Order

               VI           Transcendence and Concordance

               VII          World Power Self

                 Epilogue

              ___________________________________

Introduction

It happened like this: Representatives of intellectual and real power come together and reflect on the state of the planet. They think of the world from the human point of view. With the critical discourse they overcome the mostly well-kept contrast of spirit and reality, and thereby they simultaneously leave the immanence of existing systems as the whole visualized picture reveals inevitably:

At present, the currently prevailing, mostly selfishly driven power systems erode increasingly with unknown extent. Accelerating polarities, existential fears, broad systemic failures driving the paralysis ahead; inversely proportional to the effected systemic crises and conflicts the dangerous regress of the so-called functional elites is ongoing: The traditional as well as over-molded regimes are increasingly returning to their original bearers, the society/societies, than degenerated and emptied.

Based on actual as well structural power monopolies without sufficient social legitimacy and transparency, dominant regimes have decoupled from the people and and established themselves in inhumane. Governments mostly just react, reacting to changing terms of a crisis-driven reality. And the majority of the governed has comfortably established itself in this state paternalism, where effects and developments have been mostly ignored, and tolerate the insidious loss of their maturity.

The failure of state, the loss of meaning, and the regression of civilization prove the final and ultimate self-limitation of the previous systems’ immanence: an ego-centered reality as the circularly repeating past and a future as suggestively compensating faith of ego-maniacal projections. Messianic doctrines and "world redemption" are essential causes of the crisis and destructive developments. Alternative options and mostly outward directed drafts for change of the world have proven highly useless.

Therewith, the responsibility for warranting an equivalent co-creative development of mankind has been tainted and led to absurdity. The "empirical test series" of the regressive ego is finished, and since a long time, the reckless run "experiment" is threatening even the physical existence of mankind and nature. Obviously, a long timeline of human development has been reaching its end, the end of a great era as catalytic disillusioned upheaval, which carries the incentive of a new beginning:

The age of ‚Ego’ is supposed to be finalized completely in order to start a new one with the purpose of a quantum leap! This paradigm shift is to appreciate as a fundamental metamorphosis, which is to shape actively and creatively:  from the full human potentials for survival and life of mankind and nature. If humans want this and are able to do so, it needs to be asked: What are the essence and path for the basic transformation aligned to a humane, livable and also natural civility for the new beginning of a human world?

I              Spirit and Word

In the beginning, there is not the word, in the beginning - and especially with this new beginning - there is the spirit. The word is outside, the spirit is inside. Mind includes spirituality and cognition, generates knowledge and inner recognition, binds intelligence; the word makes believe,  which is an expression of projection and targets on external effects. But spirit is always cause, never effect. And acting without spirit is cause of new beginning.

Spirit is the source of determination and, supported by awareness and reflection, will be implemented by word and deed. Spirit refines the person and ennobles the human. Spirit is the ground of the human, provides the meaning for his grounding. Spirit is timeless, eternally and all time present. Spirit is universal, dissolves opposites and connects, includes the individual phenomena of being and emancipates at the same time.

The human mind is free, clarifies, structures, opens up to all, the all-one, the unity of universal and self-awareness. Spirit is the carrying substance of the human self, the only absolute, the decisive reference and indispensable authority of the individual. So mind is supreme authority of the conscious human being and therewith first prerequisite of his dignity, of his humanity.

II            Inside and Outside

What and as always the individual perceives, recognizes, discovers, either as cause or effect, it refers to interior or exterior, his inner and outer world. This may arise contrasts; and it needs substantially to differentiate: The inner world is the objective determination, the absolute, the autonomously generated cause; the outside world is that of subjective conditions, of the relative, of the correlating effects.

So spiritually self-determined, thus free life is always conducted from the inside to the outside, from the inner connectedness into the outer. At the same time, both worlds form the respective living environment of people. Therefore, for the fulfillment of equivalent human life a continuum of vibrant perception, communication and coordination processes between "Forum Internum" and "Forum Externum" is needed.

The spiritual human lives and creates from the synergy of both worlds by inspiring balance and creative harmonization. Thus, the connection between inside and outside is perpetuating the process as equilibrium, which is comparable to a control circuit repeatingly striving for balance, consecutively and dynamically. These dynamics - under proviso of the inner world – continuously ensures the mutual complementary completion of both worlds: the spirituality of life and enlivening of spirit.

The Equilibrium is a central medium of transcendence and facilitates adequate cause and effect towards an ever-unfolding ‚coincidentia oppositorum‘ . This kind of process, where opposites in vertical and horizontal coincidence are being processed, connects and fuses the adequate governance and functional elements required for the development to be human.

Coincidence is - internally and externally - preserved and inspired by unifying, transcendent life-worlds, as there especially are: human love, nature, joy, beauty, harmony, grace and goodness, contemplation and peacefulness. Here, the human discovers what he naturally bears in himself - and at the same time he gives in return; his life gets to be co-creative process and essentially fulfilled.

III           Self and Ego

The self and the ego are both, the inner and outer worlds of the individual. The self recognizes and experiences itself universally through mind and consciousness; the ego identifies itself by being, therefore limited by space and time. The ego is existential, the self is sacred. For the self is effective in/out of the sphere of the absolute, the ego lives in the sphere of the relative. The ego is enlivening spirit, the self spiritualizes life.

The self assures determination, leadership, clarification of the ego; the ego connects the self with the terms of the reality. The self describes idea, source code, essence, and summarizes the will, out of which the ego forms the outward identity. The self is the center, the ego describes the periphery. The self constitutes the human, the ego the person. The person is born, the human is initiated.

The human, then free of the person and for the person, is so created by the consciousness of his self, from its determination and spiritual/mind leadership. The individual is getting to be a human through awareness and inner knowledge, through reflection and knowledge determining the order and the conditions of his being. And by the transcendental (re-) connection of self and ego, i. e. inner and outer worlds, the individual is emancipating, is transpersonal and just as that really free.

The will generated out of the self is also free, because the individual inner, transpersonal essence forms and controls the existence of the personal ego. Its processes of human grounding and materialization are guided by the spiritually determined self: from inner center to the inner and outer periphery. Metaphysical and physical merge into spiritually characterized unity, the worthy human is created - both internally and externally. That is the power of the self.

IV           Human and Society World

The internally (re-) connected human is - according to his nature and free will - also related in the exterior to other humans as well the nature. The ego guided and determined by the self communicates, cooperates and maintains relationships. This can be created just aesthetically and/or free of purpose, and it also can implement its targeting determination. Out of this crosslinks, groups, societies can be constituted - at least coexistently qualified according to inner/outer connectedness and equivalence.

What arises as absolute out of free will, is outwardly being relativated/correlated to the free will of other inndividuals. The self and the essence of other humans are inherently part of an individual reflecting and perceiving, thinking and sentient consciousness. Herein lies the prerequisite of truthful humanity that is not exhausted in (inter-) personal equality/comparability of individuals as mere ego otherwise diverse and varying, but fulfills itself through internal and external holistic as well authentically lived humanness in/out of connection with other humans and nature.

This way different free individual wills do not create competing opinions, competition, polarity, but reasoned positions, which are learned, weighed, optimized and inspired, complementary transitively merged and socially/societlally united in the processes of substantial understanding and conviction.

Spirit and inner knowledge, reflection and cognition, communicated openly and calibrated, are than in principle leading to an authentically created consensus and identification with the whole of a forming human society itself. Also minorities are not longer dominated by the majority of a collective or a collective superego: The respective fundamental will is transpersonal-individually decided as well as holistically correlated, primarily co-creating a societal dynamic for progressive development: by humans for humans!

Consequently, in the new beginning lies the highest challenge and performance in the transpersonalizing social/societal transformation, created by the spirit, for and from the humans’ individual self. Therefore, the human being and its creation, its evolvement to transpersonal individual in external societal processes reflects a kind of holistic identifiable responsibility and adequate accountability. Then the alleged human dignity is less a form and defensive right, but it is a proactive, substantive assignment and socially/societally formative force of the human: with others, with the You of the other self, so basically with all for all!

 ‚All‘ means to identify humans as individuals, who transpersonally guided share the social decision-making process and substantially legitimize societal decisions. The individual free self shapes the real and truthful processes of social/societal emancipation and transcendence, which can be - as long as it is deemed necessary - incorporated in a state for the implementation of the will and can set up derived state power functions for coordinating governance.

All bearers of this kind of mandate for coordinating the implementation of social/societal will are challenged by special requirements as they - beyond any kind of personal ego limitation - have to act out of internal and external connectedness: guided by the spirit of the ‚categorical imperative‘, reflecting and inspiring transparently and openly, persuading integreous and dynamically, and evolving reasonably referenced on the existing human dignity.

Than, inner guidance is reflected consistently in the outer one. This type of really principal’s guidance serves the human society, their will and their further evolvement,  at the same time also the parts of the society, which are - in dependence on type, state and speed of development – still in the self-determined step-building towards necessary transpersonal individuality.

Transpersonally created and legitimized power is service from humans for humans - according to the development potential of their dignity – constituted, mediated, and lived in a humane way. This power as coordinating governance function is based on spirit-led qualifying participation and legitimization processes:  the individual and societal self-regime for the formation, decision, enforcing of social will as a continual transformational process of societal development dynamics and an absolute requirement for humane and competent governance.

Depending on the societal development within the meaning of transpersonal individuality, this self-regime governance can be classically institutionalized in monarchies, syncracies, direct/representative democracies or in mixed forms. About this – in transition to the new beginning - the respective civil society and/or the resulting associated societies’ systems, considering their own development, have to decide constitutively on the extend of the self-regime as far as the states’ and governmental power as coordinating/administrating monopoly are still required.

V            Societies Power and World Order

With the new start, transpersonally led societies are evolving to decentralized key actors of a forming and constituting system of in-between social, inter-regional and global relations of humans. The supremacy is then with the forming societies and associating networks in accordance with their legitimate creation of will and power dynamics, and therewith a bonding is created, which is no longer based in the traditional world of states within the international system. This relic of the ego-systems, being far from humans, degenerated and globally paralyzing/paralyzed, dominated in particular by religious, monetary and military-industrial interests, is then history.

For a transpersonal-individually guided and interacting society world is striving less towards non-violence and distributive justice, but inherently lives this as a consequence of its consciousness, its thoughts and feelings. In particular, also here applies the notion: from humans for humans, from inside to outside, outer through inner peace!

Proactive peace formation, preventive conflict containment and management, purely humanly constituted as well lived exchange and equalization determine the essential basic conditions for peaceful coexistence and free creative cooperative relations. Here, the human-cultural plurality and diversity of development constitute the trans-personally related, inherently as complementaryly connected, and qualifying learning and creation processes.

Derived out of this, the shaping structural change in the interaction of the substantially free as well peacefully evolving world order is based on internalization, not anymore on internationalization of egomaniac projections of interests and egocentric missionizing out of ideological and/or theological messianisms of "world redemption". The international system as ego-centered, traditionly states driven and still anarchic power world is then taken over and directed by the societies world of holistic connectedness of the individual self in mutual completion and thus universally comprehending humans.

So this systemic paradigm shift is grounded in the interweaving of transcendence (inside) and the internalization (outside) as crucial coordinates of a new beginning. Especially for the phase of desolution and transition, when the societal self-regimes take over the governance and create a dynamically transforming societies world, the timeless cognition (Napoleon, Memoirs) applies: "There are only two major powers in the world: the sword and the spirit! But in the end the spirit always wins!"

VI           Transcendence and Concordance

According to the universal law of cause and effect, the following applies: A future is not without the presence and is therefore conceived out of it. As the spirit: presence is cause. Presence decides about the future, it is the a-priori of any development. And presence as consecutive development is transforming synchronicly.

As today's presence was still future, the ego took over an absolutizing, at the same time degenerating dominance. Empirically experienced causality and technical feasibility started without measure and mean to dominate life - human and nature. Apparently irreversibly, decoupled and thus overestimating itself, the ego fell towards its egomaniacal compensating and also collective omnipotence power projections, at least being purely fixed on the outside, and remained blindly trapped in the duality of the matter.

The subordination to the regime of the material has created technical-economic benefits and practical functional elites, but therewith it only forstered the external conditions of existence. This systematic as well as systemic externalization and technically rational illusion detached the huans from their inside, their individual determination and inner connectedness, stimulated their fixation on the exterior, usurped and absorbed their inherent humane capacities – in analogy to prevailing theistic systems.

In order to use such ultimately nihilistic "life" and therefrom derived emptiness especially symbiotically, belief systems, promises of salvation and prophecies have projected a "better future", a future that could never start and was not allowed to “live”, because the presence was not shaped out of the determination and meaningfulness of the human self, but was "dominated" by egocentric power demanding ignorance, fiction and illusion.  This is revealed in the foreseeable, ultimate failure of ideologies, religions, sects as well as analogously compensating welfare systems, ultimately in the failure of a "Messiah" to appear, an apocalypse, and a return to paradise to occur.

The failure of egomaniac power projections and the outside centered binary immanence logic hypocritical as well as at one time materially fixed and conditioned ego-systems leave a high degree of deformation of humans and their development, emptied personalities, which is largely mirrored by nature as a direct expression of universal law: While humans believed to control the conditions of existence, they have ruined this and about that they lost intoxicatingly the consciousness of self, the center. Such a presence may not create a future, which will adequately create and save the conditions of a humane determination of humans and their natural environment.

If the transcending human wants to shape the presence adequate to the nature as well as himself, following his highest potentials and human determination, he has individually to accept his full responsibility and to draw appropriate consequences: Only out of the holistic essence of the conscious human being and its creative substance the regulation and governance of further development is to realize and still to implement in time.

So the key challenge here and now is to inspire, to balance, to harmonize, and to unify humans and their societies regarding reality and spirit, presence and eternity, life and nature. Such processes of concordance start originally always inside and continue into outside to evolve.

To produce exterior concordance and to stabilize it, systemic crises and conflicts provide the facilitatory opportunity to merge the transitional desolution with the transformation processes and consciously controlling to steer it. Creating this causality is an indispensable requirement of further dynamic developments for/in the new beginning: individual and societal concordance in process, function and substance through coordination, cooperation, synergy.

This transformation process as well as the reorganization of the constructive performance of the ego-world and its consequences reveal exclusively the presence as a transition that begins decisively as well as inevitably inside: the transcendence! If the human reinforces its most important and significant capacity, the transcendence, than he recovers his inner determination and leadership, and – then autonomeously ruling and freely being reconnected with the functions of the ego – he innovatively regulates the external conditions and adequte governace in accordance with humanity and nature. Transcendence is the non-conditional requirement for a successful transformation of appropriate living environments - for man and nature.

With the primacy of transcendence another necessity is directly to be fulfilled: the a-priori! - When Napoleon left his realization "at the end always wins the spirit" for the posterity, he wrote this on his deathbed, so in the face of the afterlife. In this way, he gave another, at least as well essential insight: Early before acting in and for this world spirit and knowledge are to be set as the cause. The importance of the a-priori is historically verified (f. e.): The learning and comprehension of Ashoka as truly great historical personality two thousand years before Napoleon would have influenced the development of Europe and other parts of the world much more constructive.

The future of society worlds can thus be only begotten from clear as well as true mindfulness and self-control of the holistic human being: a new beginning of the reconnected ego directed by the self, inner transcendent, outside internalizing and transforming from the inside out, just for and from the concordant human being as inherent creative and constructive life fulfillment, - out of self-consciousness, out of spirit!

VII         World Power Self

If at the end Spirit "wins", it is not the end of the world, but finally the beginning of the real human world. The silence at the time of the transition to a new beginning is the initiation point of transcendent reconnection inwards and upwards, the absolute of the individual self, the returning to the inner temple, the re-creation and justification of people in and out of the self, the source code of his existence, his consciousness and thus his being.

If at the end of Spirit "wins", the dominance of the ego-world dissolves. The ego is freed from its restraints and fictions in the exterior, especially "the saber" is then finally to sacrifice no more lives. Even the "divine" projected apocalyptic "cleaning processes" in the outside world no longer help and run out. This end is transformed to the beginning, once the individual rules itself as a human being out of his self, out of the spirit.

And if at the end the Spirit "wins" and a new beginning is formed, the individual, the human being, the presence won its sustainable future as crucial requirement. Because spirit cannot fight and win ultimately: Spirit is the cause, timeless as well as universal omnipotence and -presence, it’s the holistic reference for the determination of human life, for the concordance of a human world.

The primacy of the spirit generated according to inner guidance and self-government of individuals and society worlds is enlivening the present being of a truthful human: Paradise is finally not to project outwardly or any more to seek there, it is only to find in the human fulfilling himself when he does finally wish it! Because for that his potentials are unbroken and unlimited: for the quantum leap into the self!

As at the beginning is spirit - and spirit as the highest power - the real world power self overtakes the new start! For the human - probably less creator than mandatory preserver of the physical world – by determination and potentials of himself is especially predestined and privileged to be a sensitive and wise creator of a human world. Thus in order to perform „being human“universally, in reality he has only one world and one power: the world power self!

EPILOGUE


On the occasion of his state visit to Italy nearly thirty years ago, Mikhail Gorbachev said in a speech: "The way out lies in the spiritualization of life, the rethinking of attitude towards human, nature, fellow human beings, and even towards himself. A revolution of consciousness is necessary … “

I

The takeover of the governance by the world power Self does not describe an automatic process, even if the further evolution is in adequance with the natural human potentials. Because this quantum leap into the transpersonal individuality should have been initiated much earlier. Recently, around the time of the so-called enlightenment the most essential credentials have been provided to do so; this resulting pending change was obviously overlapped and eventually delayed by the industrial revolution. By this technical-economic development, the human evolvement lost itself, largely emptied and soleless in a material and thus outside world.

As a result therefore, in analogy to systemic heteronomy instead of self-determination, democratic formation of will and decision processes have been abandoned in favor of a convenient screen of selfish  power surrogates and ego-maniacally degenerated compensation of real freedom and substantially legitimized power; out of this, the mostly bureaucratically molded statehood has been cancelling the virtual contract with the societies.

With this total utilization of humans it’s been proven that transformation neither is triggered by governing/governance systems with that kind of immanence, nor clearly decided with free will in order to be implemented. On the contrary: degradation, fragmentation, dissolution as a result of this inherent limitation of systems at presence additionally give an urgent reason for building and forming scenarios finally and permanently to ensure the evolvement of humans out of their individual self. The time of entry in this transition – beyond the crisis management - is the initiation point of a new beginning.

II

This initiation can only be performed by people, who have analyzed and understood the one-dimensionality of existing systems‘ immanence, who are developed as transpersonal individuals acting with full responsibility out of the human self: being free as humans, being a reference as principals – coordinating, inspiring, and creatively as protectively using the societal space for the further development of humans.

High probably, these “pioneers” are legitimate by the self,  a minority characterized by humanity, and as such not to be confused with systemic functional elites. These humans should be trusted to initiate the human evolvement. Because of above all, they do not act against the systems immanence starting the transition - also to preserve constructive achievements -, but also initiate, internalize, and include the resolution of systems as far as necessary  in order to turn the stagnation of final self-limitation into transformation.

III

This internalization and inclusion can only be achieved from a meta-level, so "from the outside, from above” beyond the system's immanence, in order then to connect with individuals, regions, and societies being open for real humane development in order to establish a coordinating governance. Because of the new beginning, the introductory transition preliminary to the transformation anticipates - analogous to the process of the transpersonal developing individual self - a systemic transcendence: What starts first from the outside / from top in order to internalize and innovatively to reorganize the immanence of the ego-systems and to establish the transforming governance of the self, is then holistically fused as an inner societal systems’ self.

In analogy to the self-guidance of the transpersonal individual, a holistic governance system as a transitional meta-level encompassing and including the ego-systems is to establish. In order to ensure an efficient function of this "cocoon” in the metamorphosis, especially in the initiation phase the governance model of syncraty (German: Synkratie) is highly appropriate. Because it is not dealt any longer with fragmented opinions, but rather with substantial, homogeneous as well as realistic decision-making and solution processes based on transpersonal-individual competence. Based on syncratic connectedness and networking transpersonally shaped decisions are developed and implemented with the legitimized societal representatives: from humans for humans!

IV

Though during the initiation phase also applied as a crisis transformation is applied, a long-term meta-systemic development is to initiate and to implement. Despite inclusion and integration of the existing constructive system functions associated destructive and failing elements can provoke a kind of resistance as a kind of “revanchism”.

The main reasons for this are mainly based in the trailing dynamics of old modus operandi of the states world - adaption or anarchy – as well as the impact of global effects of policy and government failure. In addition, the carrier of the previous ego-systems have neither sufficient insight nor disposition to accept the responsibility for the consequences of their actions and consequences even out of lost development opportunities.

Such resistance is foreseeable, though at the same time in the long run meta-systemically irrelevant as "at the end always the spirit wins". But still in single cases as well as structurally it is necessary with every means to present a legitimate, ultimate answer to full extent finally and sustainably to ensure the functions and spaces of creative transpersonal and meta-systemic development: the adequate forum externum as an expression of the forum internum.

V

In order to inspire and to initiate a new beginning of mankind out of the world power self, in particular Europe – here especially Western / Central Europe - due to its internal and external historical development seems to be  predestined and privileged. Europe was significant "pacemaker" of world development - for the better as well for the worse.

Above all, particularly there are to see  the worldwide effective trailing deformations of egomaniac, eurocentric projections and interventions, which are to be used offensively for the paradigmatic change as inversely proportional energy of initiation. With high priority the crisis-driven and destructive developments and functions of the European system  - regress in society and civility, anarchic distortions and fragmentations, final crisis progressions and over-formed, at the same time failing statehood – are to change and to transform at first.

VI

Legitimized by the beginning of the self-concordance and in particular by the a-priori introduction and establishment of a "European Syncracy", even far more than just for the crisis management, the necessary conditions are offered, to develop and to institutionalize a peace and regulation power system and governance regime for establishing a sustainable, transcendent, and transformative societies world.

Once this implementation is initiated, in the meaning of mutual completion of societal relations, it is the target within the exterior of the connecteness with other societies to inspire and co-create a meta-systemic human world on a global, universal scale. Here,  in the transition,  the coordinating governance/governing for the formal interaction of society worlds has - systemically depending on the development level - still to distinguish between inside and outside. In the self-perception of a then further evolving world of humans such mechanisms will be omitted.

Because of these transpersonal/trans-systemic connectedness of the societies and their associations, the substantial chances and potentials for an evolvement of a real human world as a global society are qualified and dynamized. The social contract, having started as a "contrat social", is then universally to compose newly: as ‚contrat social human‘ or ‚contrat de l'humanité‘. A world order being constituted as a real free concordance order, governed and coordinated by self-ruled regimes, is regarded as the real-fulfilling universal world power self. 

________________________

For further reading:

‘WORLD POWER SELF’ as a philosophical-political concept is the foundation

of the systemic-structural as well as innovative, human- / society-centric framework

of  M E T A P O L I T Y  as a conceptional contribution to the world formula of governing:

http://metagovernance.blogspot.de/2017/01/m-e-t-p-o-l-i-t-y-definition-function.html

_________________________

©  J MICHAEL HEYNEN |  06.2016

German Text

http://weltmacht-selbst.blogspot.de/2016/04/weltmachtselbst-reflexionen-zum.html

http://weltmacht-selbst.blogspot.de/2016/04/neubeginneiner-menschen-welt-maximenund.html

J Michael Heynen, Executive Director
International Relations Counseling
Institute for Intersocietal Diplomacy

Heynen.IRC@gmail.com