21 Aug 2003 @ 12:49, by Roger Eaton
Putting aside the practical questions just for the moment, let's say a voice of humanity really is doable and we go ahead and it works. What should we expect?
When humanity speaks, then of course everyone will listen, and more than that, everyone will realize that everyone else is listening, too. Soon enough it will become apparent even that everyone knows that everyone realizes that everyone is listening! Just as in the 1960’s, among a certain strata of American society, it was assumed that everybody had watched CBS News the evening before (the “Cronkite effect”), so the whole world will be presumed to be up to date. A reference to the latest from humanity will usually be apropos, even with strangers, whether at the beauty parlor, or out for drinks. In sum, the voice of humanity will engender a self-aware global human consciousness.
Isn’t humanity already conscious of itself? Well, yes and no. Though a huge number of people do realize it is one world, still only a much smaller number credit our fellows with this awareness. We know, but we don’t know that others know.
Will it be a good thing, though, this global consciousness? I do think so. Implemented with care, a voice of humanity promises to build a positive awareness of our global identity, making us glad to be associated with our brothers and sisters around the world. The kindly voice of humanity, always worth listening to, will come to characterize the stranger for us, greatly improving our opinion of the "other".
Consider. Can a hateful message be elected by humanity? In general, the answer is no, because messages that tilt toward one group at the expense of another will be disadvantaged. Such messages will attract too many negative votes, and some less pointed message will usually carry the day. Humanity naturally stands above the nations and their sqabbles, so any attempt to target one section of humanity unfairly or with violent feeling will run up against not only the opposition of those attacked, but also against the average good affection and wisdom of those on the sidelines of any particular dispute.
Rather messages of kindly wit and wisdom will generally carry the day. The win-win message will always have the advantage, just as divisive messages will always be at a disadvantage, and no message that ignores our needs at the individual level can succeed. Humanity will prove to be the champion of the individual against the demands of the nations.
Moreover, the voice of humanity will embody the global perspective, legitimizing it and giving it tremendous political power. Nations that disregard the common welfare will come up against a concerted global campaign to make them mend their ways. Finally we will have the platform we need to address the obvious global problems - economic, ecological and political. For the first time we will have a real chance to put war behind us and to stop corporate offloading of economic costs onto the natural and social environment.
We must realize, though, that the fact that divisive messages can't win means that humanity cannot pronounce upon divisive issues. Sure there will be the extraordinary cases where humanity finds a win-win solution that has eluded previous efforts, but in general the voice of humanity will not do as a replacement for government -- and we need to make sure we don't try using it for a direct democracy. Rather, the voice of humanity must be an additional feature of the political landscape, one that will tend to ameliorate and soften, making it easier for the common good to be considered, and harder for the special interests to monopolize and control.
Finally, a caution. A voice of humanity, as presented so far anyway, has the makings of a dominant authoritarian instrument. The same fundamentalist "true believer" personality type that now bedevils the world on behalf of several religions, could conceivably adopt humanity as God, or as the Messiah and who knows what might come of that. And yes, it takes one to know one, I confess. But that is the point -- we all have some of that longing for a simpler world, where we can just do our part and feel that the big picture is being taken care of without our having to think about it. For the voice of humanity to remain benign, we have to stay aware of its malignant possibilities.
The concerted scapegoating of a small group during some difficult period, when global troubles threaten to overwhelm, is a possibility. Scapegoating is all too human to begin with and though one might think there are too many enlightened people for any such event, it is hard to be sure how a voice of humanity might evolve. There is a worrisome possibility that over time humanity might take itself rather too seriously, and we become our own worst tyrant. Especially we need to be careful lest a charismatic political leader form a special relationship with humanity.
We certainly don't want to be too pessimistic here, either. Overall, a voice of humanity offers us an unexpected and very welcome means of getting through the coming critical phase for mankind, where the population curve must peak and begin a long slow decline towards a sustainable future for the earth. Another article, "The Two Sides of the Global Village" will further address the nature of collective communication on a global scale and offer a couple ideas for lessening the chance of a negative outcome.
|
|