The Alliance of Civilizations

The Alliance of Civilizations is an initiative proposed by the President of the Government of Spain, José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero, at the 59th General Assembly of the United Nations in 2005. It was co-sponsored by the Turkish Prime Minister, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan. It is a political drive to inspire greater ecumenism between faiths.

In the wake of 9/11 and Islamic terrorism around the world, fear of further chaos from belief systems is being used to push an agenda that will work to look at the different belief systems in a more common light, and in-so-doing will dilute each of the belief systems into a more common melting pot blurring the distinctions between them all. This works to bring divergent faiths together and also to essentially create a new religion that allows all beliefs, a new age belief system where the focus on mankind and self take precedence.

For reasons that will be laid out on this page, I believe this could be the beginning of the union of politics and religion which will morph into the framework that will facilitate the war on the saints. According to scripture, there is a time coming when the man of sin will be given free reign over the earth and will have power over it to force worship of himself.

I can’t claim with absolute certainty that the AoC will be the vehicle for this war on the saints, but I recommend you research for yourself the following information and keep watching events as they unfold. That is the purpose of this website, to raise awareness to possibilities and assist believers all over in watching. I would recommend keeping up-to-date with the AoC at Richard Peterson’s blog, A Time, Times, and a Half a Time, which is tracking the Alliance of Civilizations as the vehicle to be used to conduct the war on the saints and those who keep the commandments of God as foretold by the prophet Daniel.

What is the Alliance of Civilizations

An article by Richard from August 10, 2007, he pointed out the following information published in December of 2006:

The final report of the United Nations’ Alliance of Civilizations (AoC) initiative was released last month. In addition to its usual goal of combating exclusivist ideology, the report contains some interesting elements:

Exclusivist ideology is defined as “those who feed on exclusion and claim sole ownership of the truth. (Christians, read John 14:6 as you consider this statement.)

John 14:6
Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.

The core issue identified to be the bridge between the West and Islam is resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
The global and problematic players in this conflict have been identified as the adherents of the three monotheistic faiths.
Failure to resolve this conflict will result in a failed Alliance of Civilizations.

Also noteworthy is that the AoC has identified the European Union’s Barcelona Process as one of the frameworks in which it intends to operate. For those unfamiliar with the Process, it is the foundation of the EU’s political, economic, and social policy. The Process, also known as the Euro-Mediterranean Partnership, is represented as the only platform that can solve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The social dimension of the Process, with implementation facilitated by the Anna Lindh Foundation, cooperates with the AoC and shares the common goal to combat religious fundamentalism worldwide. So what happens to the adherents of the monotheistic faiths if the peace process fails? Lucis Trust, one of the contributors to the AoC initiative gives us an idea. In its publication The Rays and the Initiations, Lucis Trust says that those faiths are but three dead and gone religions with Judaism being old, obsolete, and separative. Christianity, they say, has served its purpose and the new age Christ will replace the Gospel with a new truth. As for Muslims, they will accept the new age Christ as their Imam Mahdi “who will lead them to light and to spiritual victory.”

The objective of the AoC, therefore, is “to enforce an Alliance of Civilizations against all those who…give prevalence…to a logic of division and confrontation.” Since the Alliance intends to be fully prepared to enforce its objectives by 2009, I suspect that’s when they will introduce their symbol. Timing is everything. The European Commission has just submitted a document to the author of the Barcelona Process that it is time to deliver.

If the planners of the AoC really mean what they say, may God help us all.

Ground Zero Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf speech at the Council on Foreign Religions explains Cordoba Initiative’s purpose: to wage war on religious extremism. What is absent from the speech is that the Cordoba Initiative is an Alliance of Civilizations partner initiative and the definition of extremism. This video provides a definition.

There is much information at the official UN website for the Alliance of Civilizations. One of the first is the following laying out the foundations of the AoC stemming from the desire to bring Islam and the West closer together.

Statement by the Secretary-General at the opening session of the Second Meeting of the High-level Group for the Alliance of Civilizations Javier Solana (February 26, 2006)

Your Highness, [Abdallah al-Thani, Prime Minister of Qatar] Excellencies, Ladies and Gentlemen, First let me thank Your Highness for hosting this meeting and providing an environment conducive to its very important task. I am very grateful to you all for being here today.

When we set up the Alliance of Civilizations last year, we said that it was “intended to respond to the need for a committed effort by the international community – both at the institutional and civil society levels – to bridge divides and overcome prejudice, misconceptions and polarization”. We should all be grateful to the Prime Ministers of Spain and Turkey for being prescient in anticipating a vital issue in today’s world.

We also said that the Alliance would “aim to address emerging threats emanating from hostile perceptions that foment violence;” and we specifically mentioned “the sense of a widening gap and lack of mutual understanding between Islamic and Western societies.”

The passions aroused by the recent publication of insulting cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad, and the reaction to it, show only too clearly that such threats are real, and that the need for a committed effort by the international community is acute.

Of course, the Alliance was not launched to deal with immediate crises like this. But the intensity of feeling that we have witnessed in the last few weeks comes from a deep reservoir of mistrust and resentment, which was there long before the offensive cartoons were first printed. In fact, this present crisis can be considered an expression of a much deeper and longer-standing crisis, which is precisely the one that the Alliance was intended to address.

At the heart of this crisis is a trend towards extremism in many societies. We should beware of overemphasizing it, because extremism in one group is almost always fed by the perception of extremism in another group. Few people think of themselves as extremists, but many can be pushed towards an extreme point of view, almost without noticing it, when they feel that the behaviour or language of others is extreme.

So let us always remember that those who shout loudest, or act in the most provocative ways, are not necessarily typical of the group on whose behalf they claim to speak. I think one can safely say that most non-Muslims in western societies have no desire to offend the Muslim community, and that most Muslims, even when offended, do not believe that violence or destruction is the right way to react.

Let us also remember that neither “Islamic” nor “Western” societies are homogeneous or monolithic. In fact, there is a great deal of overlap between the two.

In past centuries one could speak of clearly distinct Islamic and Western (or Christian) civilizations, but many modern societies embody the heritage of both those civilizations, and many individuals today see no contradiction between their Muslim religion and their membership of Western societies.

In truth, the present conflicts and misunderstandings probably have more to do with proximity than with distance. The offensive caricatures of the Prophet Muhammad were first published in a European country which has recently acquired a significant Muslim population, and is not yet sure how to adjust to it. And some of the strongest reactions – perhaps especially the more violent ones – have been seen in Muslim countries where many people feel themselves the victims of excessive Western influence or interference.

Whether or not those who published the caricatures were deliberately seeking to provoke, there is no doubt that some of the violent reactions have encouraged extremist groups within European societies, whose agenda is to demonize Muslim immigrants, or even expel them.

Similarly, the republication of the cartoons, and the support for them voiced by some leaders in Europe, have strengthened those in the Muslim world who see Europe, or the West as a whole, as irredeemably hostile to Islam, and encourage Muslims always to see themselves as victims.

So misperception feeds extremism, and extremism appears to validate misperception. That is the vicious circle we have to break. That, as I see it, is the purpose of the Alliance.

It is important that we all realize that the problem is not with the faith but with a small group of the faithful – the extremists who tend to abuse and misinterpret the faith to support their cause, whether they derive it from the Koran, the Torah or the Gospel. We must not allow these extreme views to overshadow those of the majority and the mainstream. We must appeal to the majority to speak up and denounce those who disrespect values and principles of solidarity that are present in all great religions.

If they fail to do so, the essential dialogue between cultures and societies will be reduced to an angry exchange between the fringes, with each side assuming that extremists speak for the other side as a whole and – in turn – allowing its own extremists to frame its response.

Yesterday we had a meeting of leaders from concerned international organizations – the Organization of the Islamic Conference, the League of Arab States, as well as the United Nations – and the foreign ministers of some concerned countries – Spain, Turkey, and our hosts here in Qatar.

We all agreed that everyone is entitled to freedom of worship and freedom of opinion and expression, as defined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

But we also agreed that these rights carry with them an inherent responsibility, and should not be used to degrade, humiliate or insult any group or individual. On the contrary, we should all exercise great sensitivity when dealing with symbols and traditions that are sacred to other people.

We also agreed on the need for dialogue on these issues between people of different beliefs or traditions, and on the need to work together to overcome intolerance and exclusivism.

But we also realised that that is much easier said than done. We had to ask ourselves an uncomfortable question: how effective are our voices of moderation and reconciliation, when it comes to countering the narratives of hatred and mistrust?

The sad truth is that these narratives, however deceptive, can be very compelling. Incidents like a caricature of the Prophet, or a death threat to the artist who drew it, make far more impact on the popular imagination than pious statements issued by foreign ministers and secretaries-general.

And this is where we look to you, the High-Level Group, for help. Lofty ideas alone are not enough. We need to develop a language that will carry them. We need to develop sobering, but equally compelling counter-narratives of our own. We need to engage in dialogue not only scholars, or diplomats or politicians, but also artists, entertainers, sports champions – people who command respect and attention right across society, and especially among young people, because it is very important to reach young people before their ideas and attitudes have fully crystallised.

I very much hope that you can come up with specific, concrete suggestions for ways of carrying this dialogue forward so that it can really catch the popular imagination; so that we are not just a nice group of people agreeing with each other, but people with a message that can echo round the world.

That message must say that free speech involves listening as well as talking. It must tell people of all faiths that it is too late in our common history to go back to wars of religion, and urge them to ask themselves whether they want their children to grow up in a world of hate. It must say – but in better, more compelling language than I can find – that diversity is a precious asset, not a threat. It must be a divine message – heard not in the earthquake, nor in the fire, nor yet in the rushing mighty wind, but in the still, small voice of calm. Thank you very much.

Alliance of Civilizations - THE REPORT - To advance the Alliance of Civilizations, the UN Secretary-General established a High-level Group of eminent personalities and tasked this Group with generating a report containing an analysis of the rise in cross-cultural polarization and extremism and a set of practical recommendations to counter this phenomenon. The High-level Group met five times from November 2005 to November 2006, at the conclusion of which it produced a report which takes a multi-polar approach within which it prioritizes relations between Muslim and Western societies. The report is structured in two parts: Part I presents an analysis of the global context and of the state of relations between Muslim and Western societies. It concludes with a set of policy recommendations, indicating the High-level Group's belief that certain political steps are pre-requisites to any substantial and lasting improvement in relations between Muslim and Western societies. Part II of the report reflects the High-level Group's view that tensions across cultures have spread beyond the political level into the hearts and minds of populations. To counter this trend, the Group analyzes and presents recommendations in each of four thematic areas: Education, Youth, Migration, and Media. The Report concludes with the High-level Group's suggestions for the implementation of its recommendations. The Report of the High-level Group was presented to UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan and to Prime Ministers José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero and Recep Tayyip Erdoðan on 13 November 2006 at the final meeting of the High-level Group in Istanbul, Turkey.

The High Level Group Report Alliance of Civilizations (November 13, 2006)

To advance the Alliance of Civilizations, the UN Secretary-General established a High-level Group of eminent personalities and tasked this Group with generating a report containing an analysis of the rise in cross-cultural polarization and extremism and a set of practical recommendations to counter this phenomenon

The High-level Group met five times from November 2005 to November 2006, at the conclusion of which it produced a report which takes a multi-polar approach within which it prioritizes relations between Muslim and Western societies. The report is structured in two parts:

Part I presents an analysis of the global context and of the state of relations between Muslim and Western societies. It concludes with a set of policy recommendations, indicating the High-level Group’s belief that certain political steps are pre-requisites to any substantial and lasting improvement in relations between Muslim and Western societies.

Part II of the report reflects the High-level Group’s view that tensions across cultures have spread beyond the political level into the hearts and minds of populations. To counter this trend, the Group analyzes and presents recommendations in each of four thematic areas: Education, Youth, Migration, and Media.

The Report concludes with the High-level Group’s suggestions for the implementation of its recommendations. The Report of the High-level Group was presented to UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan and to Prime Ministers José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero and Recep Tayyip Erdoğan on 13 November 2006 at the final meeting of the High-level Group in Istanbul, Turkey. Download the full Report (pdf)

This cooperation extends through the UN to many nations from all around the world and I expect that no nation would reject the ideas behind the AoC, Europe taking the lead in acceptance of it.

Council of Europe and Alliance of Civilizations agree on future co-operation - Draft MOU egovmonitor.com (October 1, 2008)

Preamble The Alliance of Civilizations and the Council of Europe,

1. Recalling the values of pluralist democracy, the rule of law and human rights for the development of all societies;

2. Recognising that cultural diversity is an essential characteristic of every society and a potential factor for economic and social development;

3. Reasserting the need to build bridges between cultures and societies through dialogue and co-operation as well as for political will and a collective commitment to live together by strengthening mutual respect, tolerance and understanding among people of different ethnic, linguistic, religious and cultural background;

4. Convinced of the need for intercultural dialogue to be based on the principles of the indivisibility and universality of human rights and on observance of the human rights standards of the United Nations and the Council of Europe;

5. Affirming the role of the Council of Europe as the benchmark for human rights, the rule of law and democracy in Europe, and acknowledging the close co-operation between the member states of the Council of Europe in promoting intercultural dialogue based on these common values and principles;

6. Renewing their commitment to these common values and principles which are rooted in Europe’s cultural, religious and humanistic heritage – a heritage both shared and rich in its diversity;

7. Bearing in mind the principles of intercultural dialogue as established for the Alliance of Civilizations by the High Level Group’s report of 13 November 2006, and as laid down in the Council of Europe White Paper on Intercultural Dialogue “Living Together as Equals in Dignity;”

8. Wishing to support the ratification and implementation of the UNESCO Convention on the Protection and Promotion of the Diversity of Cultural Expressions;

9. Recognising the role of the Council of Europe as a member of the “Group of Friends” of the Alliance of Civilizations;

10. Having regard to their respective competences, specific characteristics and programmes of activities, and building on their existing good relations;

11. Wishing to intensify co-operation and mutually benefit from each other’s experience concerning matters of joint interest;

Have agreed as follows:

Objectives and Principles of co-operation in intercultural dialogue

12. The Alliance of Civilizations and the Council of Europe (hereinafter referred to together as “the Parties”) will enhance their co-operation in the field of intercultural dialogue in all areas of joint interest in order to achieve complementarity and avoid overlapping.

13. On the basis of partnership and complementarity, taking due account of their comparative advantages and expertise, the Parties will take all necessary steps to further their co-operation through exchange of information concerning their respective activities and through the development of joint action as set out below.

14. The cooperation will aim for added value and make the best possible use of existing resources. Measures implementing this Memorandum of Understanding will be subject to the application of the Parties’ respective rules and policies and also subject to the availability of the appropriate financial and other resources.

Priority areas of co-operation in intercultural dialogue

15. The Parties will ensure that their co-operation will further their aims and objectives, notably the promotion and protection of democracy, human rights and the rule of law; the fight against all forms of discrimination on any ground; the equal dignity of every human being and gender equality; inclusive and cohesive societies; the democratic governance of cultural diversity; intercultural dialogue, including its religious dimension, as well as intercultural exchange ; and the strengthening of democratic citizenship and participation and the promotion of civil society.

16. The Parties are committed to developing joint activities in fields of common interest wherever appropriate and feasible. Priority areas of co-operation between the Parties cover:

Human rights, democracy and rule of law: The Parties will explore possibilities for joint action aimed at strengthening human rights, democracy and rule of law, including the values underpinning intercultural dialogue.
Education: The Parties will co-operate in such areas as education for democratic citizenship, human rights, tolerance, mutual respect, intercultural awareness and global education. They are committed to initiate and support educational programmes which are inspired by the principles of equal rights, inclusiveness, fairness and multiperspectivity, and which foster cultural sensitivity and critical thinking. Within their areas of competence, the Parties will promote interaction among educational institutions, educational staff and students in Europe and its neighbouring regions. The European Resource Centre on Education for Democratic Citizenship and Intercultural Education in Oslo will play a role in this context.
Youth: The Parties will develop their co-operation through joint priority areas of action designed to promote increased youth participation in intercultural dialogue and decision-making processes and aimed at giving all young people the means to play an active role in political and social life without discrimination. They will foster non-formal education and training opportunities for youth workers in human rights and intercultural dialogue, and will facilitate youth exchanges as well as promote long-term bridge building activities between diverse cultural and religious groups. The Parties will promote the development of youth policies with a particular emphasis on intercultural dialogue by encouraging co-operation between policy-makers, researchers, young people and youth workers.
Culture: The Parties will investigate the possibility of co-operation in cultural, audiovisual and heritage policies, including the exchange of information on good practice and policy strategies at local level as well as the joint development of existing tools for information and co-operation.
Media: The Parties will seek to co-operate in the promotion and defence of freedom of expression and information and freedom of the media. They will explore the possibilities of promoting the access of all persons to media and new information and communication services. They will explore co-operation in the area of media literacy development and journalists training programmes in intercultural issues. They will seek to foster the awareness of media professionals of the need for intercultural dialogue, mutual respect, tolerance and co-operation across ethnic, cultural, religious and linguistic boundaries.
Migration and social cohesion: The Parties will co-operate in the field of social cohesion on the basis inter alia of the Revised Social Charter of the Council of Europe and the relevant instruments of the United Nations. They will particularly promote the social and cultural inclusion of migrants and vulnerable and minority groups in society, the fight against discrimination, and measures aiming at strengthened democratic citizenship and participation.

17. Other areas of co-operation may be determined by mutual agreement.

Co-operation arrangements

18. The Parties will designate “focal points” within their secretariats to be responsible for permanent contacts between them. Ad hoc contacts at a political level may be organised on topical issues of joint interest.

19. The “North-South Centre” (Lisbon), given its position as a bridge between the Council of Europe and neighbouring regions, is expected to play a specific role in the implementation of this Memorandum of Understanding.

20. The Alliance of Civilizations will consider participating in the “Faro Open Platform of inter-institutional cooperation for intercultural dialogue”.

21. This Memorandum of Understanding will cover a period of three years at the end of which the Parties will evaluate its implementation and, based on this evaluation, will agree in writing on its renewal and upon modifications as necessary.

Visibility

22. The Parties will take measures to enhance the visibility of their co-operation and joint activities to the general public. The Parties mutually will support each other in their relations with the media and with regard to web contents.

Done in two copies (French and English), on [...]

For the Council of Europe For the Alliance of Civilizations

There are several other concerns related to this integration of politics and religion and the militarization of this organization.

The Militarization of the Alliance of Civilizations Richard Peterson (August 24, 2007)

Over the months that followed the cartoon crisis, I paid very close attention to the Alliance of Civilizations’ web site. Daily search engine inquiries and AoC web visits had become routine. July and August yielded more than enough reading material. One such report, the OSCE contribution to the Alliance of Civilizations initiative, was released in June. The OSCE originated from the Helsinki Final Act of 1975 (also known as the Helsinki Process) and changed its official name to the Organization for Security and Co-operation of Europe in 1994. To this day, the Helsinki Process remains active working to implement a one world government. What I found was that the OSCE had been particularly impressed with how the EU’s High Representative Javier Solana and the Alliance of Civilizations had turned the cartoon crisis into opportunity. Now they were on board and had written of their unique position to contribute to the implementation of the AoC initiative. Although I found aspects of the report somewhat troublesome, it wasn’t until I read the Alliance’s July 17 Report of the Hearing with the International Community and Civil Society that I decided to give the OSCE a second in-depth look. The International Hearings report contains the following:

“The Military Staff Committee, instead of being abolished, should be revived so that meetings of military leaders at different levels could be introduced for the international practice.” (page 26)

It appeared that the defunct Committee was about to be revived! I also read: “On the national level, constitutional democracy does not entail the existence of a police state or military watchdog, but implies observation of the laws that have been worked out by the elected representatives, as well as the adherence to the value system.” (page 26) This reminded me of a statement in the OSCE report that I found puzzling. They said that the OSCE is the world’s largest regional security organization, comprising of 56 participating states and that “decisions are based on consensus and are politically but not legally binding”. What did that mean? I found my answer in the Helsinki Process Papers--Building Democracy From Manila to Doha: The Evolution of the Movement of New or Restored Democracies as follows:

“Under its human dimension objectives, the OSCE has adopted instruments, created norms and initiated activities for the promotion of democracy and governance. The OSCE instruments are “politically binding commitments” for the participating states, and become effective upon adoption and implementable without having to wait for subsequent domestic approval or ratification. This process allows also the OSCE to react quickly to new needs.” (page 67)

Now I really had much more reason for concern considering:

The United States is one of those participating states politically bound to OSCE decisions.
The OSCE, which is connected to the European Union, sets mandates in crisis management situations (note that it was the OSCE that justified the relentless bombing campaign against Kosovo).

But exactly who enforces OSCE’s decisions? Before answering that let’s take a second look at NATO’s Working Together for Peace and Security chart.

The circles so accurately portray the words of the Helsinki Summit Declaration of 1992. Page 5, section number 10 of the declaration establishes the OSCE as a crisis management organization which derives its power from:

The Council of Europe
The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO)
The European Community (European Union)
The Western European Union (WEU)

Isn’t it interesting that’s exactly the arrangement of the circles? Also stipulated in the Helsinki document is that a “peacekeeping operation, according to its mandate, will involve civilian and/or military personnel…and may assume a variety of forms including observer and monitor missions and large deployment of forces”. (See second section--Helsinki Decisions, page 19).

Notice how the Alliance of Civilizations is embedded into each circle. The outermost circle, the United Nations, is the administrator of the initiative. Moving inward, the OSCE has adopted the Alliance and, by treaty, politically binds its member states to the initiative.

The next circle, the Council of Europe, is administrator of the social dimension of the Barcelona Process. The Barcelona Process, established in 1995, set among its goals the responsibility of straightening out the clash of civilizations as well as combating religious fundamentalism worldwide. The Alliance of Civilizations intends to start operations within the framework of the Barcelona Process and then amplify the AoC initiative globally.

Next is NATO and the AoC. NATO is also on board with the Alliance of Civilizations and, unknown to most Americans, has split under the Berlin-Plus Agreement. In the event of a crisis situation, NATO assets are transferred to the European Union’s Political and Security Committee presently presided over by EU High Representative Javier Solana. Crisis management drills have already been conducted to test the Berlin-Plus arrangement.

Moving in we have the European Union which has at its disposal the crisis management Battle Groups which can simultaneously sustain multiple offensive operations. These battle groups are intended for rapid deployment while awaiting reinforcements from member states’ militaries and NATO assets. The European Security Strategy has committed to strengthening the United Nations so that it may fulfill its role in global governance. Anything that undermines global governance is considered by Solana to be a threat. Statewatch’s report, Arming Big Brother, provides an excellent analysis of the EU’s militarization. The EU is fully committed to the Alliance of Civilizations as it has appointed the Anna Lindh Foundation to oversee its implementation.

Finally, the innermost interesting circle, that of the Western European Union (WEU). The WEU is the 10-nation military alliance of the European Union. The Assembly of the WEU has in place crisis management Recommendation 666 which provides that military authority be granted to EU High Representative for Common Foreign and Security Policy in the event of an emergency. As noted above, this position is presently held by Javier Solana.

The Assembly of the WEU also adopted Recommendation 735, on a European initiative to strengthen the role of the United Nations in promoting peace and security. This recommendation is designed to strengthen the UN militarily in the event of a crisis situation. The WEU, having recognized that:

“The only common structure envisaged to assist the Security Council on military matters has never actually functioned: this is the Military Staff Committee composed of the chiefs of staffs of the permanent members of the Security Council.”

has committed to changing that situation as such:

“…The proposed provisions on tasks outside the European Union should state that the Union is ready to make its military capabilities available to the United Nations for the purpose of taking coercive action in the event of a threat to peace…”

Every organization represented by a circle on this chart has committed to the implementation of the Alliance of Civilizations initiative. That ought to debunk the myth that the United Nations is “insignificant” in world affairs. Incidentally, with all of these measures for crisis management in place, does anyone else detect another crisis in the very near future?

Daniel 8:25
And through his policy also he shall cause craft to prosper in his hand; and he shall magnify himself in his heart, and by peace shall destroy many: he shall also stand up against the Prince of princes; but he shall be broken without hand.

1 Thessalonians 5:3
For when they shall say, Peace and safety; then sudden destruction cometh upon them...

Mobilising People and Actions for War Richard Peterson (April 13, 2008)

This article is the second of a three part series which compares the legal and cultural changes being made by today’s global government to those made by the Nazis. Part I, Ghost of Nazi Past, Ghost of Nazi Present focused on cultural, media, parliamentary, and judicial manipulations while this part focuses on science, religion, religious education, and spiritual mobilization. The format of this post is as follows: texts in bold font are citations from Richard Evans’ book The Third Reich in Power. Italicized texts that follow Evens’ citations are quotations from global governance actors along with some of my commentary.

Writing of the hostilities between the Nazis and the Catholic Church, Evans explains “…the German government repeatedly told the Vatican that its fight against Marxism and Communism demanded the unity of the German people through the ending of confessional divisions.” (pg. 241) Today, we see the identical argument being advanced by the Alliance of Civilizations, the World Commission on Global Consciousness & Spirituality, et al. In the interest of combating extremism and terrorism we are told a global code of conduct which embraces only common spiritual and political ideologies must be adopted. Contributors to this code of conduct are groups such as the World Commission on Global Consciousness & Spirituality which will “activate” the evolutionary process of global consciousness; the Alliance of Civilizations which is currently developing guidelines for how religions must interpret scripture; Religions for Peace which is advancing A Common Word, an initiative designed to undermine religious doctrines and hijack religion; etc. Orchestrated efforts to incite violence against those who refuse to set aside their doctrines—particularly against the monotheistic faiths – have intensified on multiple fronts. Evans writes “Nazism imbued the German language with the metaphors of battle: the battle for jobs, the struggle for existence, the fight for culture…The language itself began to be mobilized for war.” (pg. 214) We are in this same place today. Christians who dare voice an unpopular opinion are accused of having a violent ethos. The existence of the new civilization is threatened if the egocentric are permitted to continue with their “defective disconnection”. It is, as they say, a fight for civilization. Setting the stage for the new religious ethos is Karen Armstrong, Alliance of Civilizations High Level Group member.

**Video posted in original link**

See use doctrine. The full version of the Karen Armstrong presentation can be found here.

Science

One criticism consistently launched against the adherents of the Abrahamic faiths’ is that the doctrines cannot be scientifically proven and the faithful have abandoned rational scientific inquiry. Yet many of the same critics who claim superiority have no problem advancing unproven occult doctrines such as notions of a “planetary spiritual hierarchy”; the existence of the Aryans and Atlantis; evolutionary advancement through Luciferic initiations; etc., etc.

“The real core of Nazi beliefs lay in the faith Hitler proclaimed in his speech of September 1938 in science – a Nazi view of science – as the basis for action.” Pg 259

“But humanity has hitherto lacked an adequate global grammar and a global lens to fully activate this integral/holistic/dialogic technology of mind; and since our living realities are co-created by out patterns of minding, the supreme technological advance in the human condition is this advance to the integral technology of minding.” – World Commission on Global Consciousness & Spirituality

Religion

Here the comparisons I draw are between the Third Reich’s attempts to control Christianity and the global government’s plans to control the three monotheistic faiths. The below World Commission citations that refer to the egocentric mind refer to individuals who believe their religious texts to be true and are not prepared to abandon their convictions for a new revelation. The egocentric mind also pertains to political dissenters of the globalization process.

“National Socialism is not only a political doctrine, it is a total and all-encompassing general perspective on all public matters. So our entire life has to be based on it as a matter of natural assumption. We hope that the day will come when nobody needs to talk about National Socialism any more…One day, the spiritual awakening of our time will emerge from this will to culture.” - Joseph Goebbels Pg 211

“Our great spiritual traditions and teachers were all in diverse ways fostering and opening the way to the awakening of global consciousness.” – World Commission on Global Consciousness & Spirituality

“One striking result of the general global law – we are as we mind…But humanity has hitherto lacked an adequate global grammar and a global lens to fully activate this integral/holistic/ dialogic technology of mind; and since our living realities are co-created by our patterns of minding,, the supreme technological advance in the human condition is this advance to the integral technology of minding.” – World Commission on Global Consciousness & Spirituality

“As an SS plan put it in 1937: ‘We live in the age of the final confrontation with Christianity. It is part of the mission of the SS to give to the German people over the next fifty years the non-Christian ideological foundations for a way of life appropriate to their own character.’…Christianity, Himmler was to declare on 9 June 1942, was ‘the greatest of plagues’; true morality consisted not in exalting the spirit of the individual but in abnegating oneself in the service of the race. Moral values could be derived only from consciousness of one’s place in, and duty to, the chain of ‘valuable’ heredity.” Pg 252

“Perhaps the single most powerful event facing humanity today is a great awakening on a planetary scale that has been millennia in the making. We humans are in the midst of a profound advance as a species to a higher form of global consciousness that has been emerging across cultures, religions and worldviews through the centuries. This awakening…is nothing less than a shift…from more egocentric patterns of life to a higher form of integral and dialogic patterns of life.” – World Commission on Global Consciousness & Spirituality

“…it should now be apparent that global spirituality is precisely this crossing from egocentric life into the deep–dialogic life of global consciousness: this is the highest telos and consensus of our great planetary spiritual endowment…True Spirituality is the highest expression of our rational essence and is not to be confused with egocentric religious life. Spirituality is the awakening of our highest being, bringing us into direct relation with Reality as the Logosphere; it is the process of self–transformation from ego life to the awakened life of mature Integral Natural Reason and flowing in harmony with the Lawlike Moral Energy of the Logosphere. And Global Spirituality is this awakening of the Global Mind, the highest mature form of spirituality in its global power. Global Spirituality then is Awakened Critical Reason and is thus free of all ego ideology and ego dogma. Now, hopefully, the direct link between global consciousness and global spirituality should be more manifest.” – World Commission on Global Consciousness & Spirituality

“By 1937 the Protestant Church was either deeply divided between the German Christians and the Confession Church…biblical fundamentalism and Nazified Christianity were equally repellent.” Pg 228

“The egocentric… mind is a stage in our human development (evolution) which tends to separate and objectify the thinking subject from the objects of though, and to remain centered in and privileging its particular worldview (religion, ideology, cultural lens) as the exclusive measure of reality (meaning, truth, fact, value, experience, existence). The egocentric mind is broken off from the Integral Field of Reality and packages, constructs, separates, divides, polarizes, fragments all its touches….ego minding is the primary cause of the spectrum of human pathologies. And the consensus prescription is that to change this mentality is the single most important factor in transforming the human condition.” - World Commission on Global Consciousness & Spirituality

“Anti-Christian writings of the Nazi ideologue Alfred Rosenberg, who publicly rejected such central doctrines as the immortality of the soul and Christ’s redemption of humankind from original sin. In his book The Myth of the Twentieth Century, Rosenberg excoriated Catholicism as the creation of the Jewish clericalism” pg 238

“Robert Ley, leader of the Labour Front, went even further than Rosenberg in his disdain for Christianity and his rejection of the Divinity of Christ…” pg 251

“Jesus, whom the Muslims regard as a prophet, as in fact do many of the New Testament writers. Luke’s gospel calls Jesus a prophet from start to finish; the idea that Jesus was divine was a later development, often misunderstood by Christians.” Karen Armstrong, Alliance of Civilizations

Karen Armstrong, a apostate and former Catholic nun, is certainly aware that this is considered heresy by the Catholic church and that her words were intended to attack an entire religion. At least the Alliance of Civilizations is no longer attempting to pretend to be something they are not.

Religious Education

“Remoulding the educational system would create a new generation of young Germans who had known no alternative source of values to Nazism. Yet there was of course one area in which such values did persist…That was religion. For reasons of political expediency and caution, the Third Reich had stopped short in 1933 of attacking the Churches and their dependent secular institutions. As it became more self-confident, however, it began to turn its attention to Christianity too, and to seek a means of either converting it to a form more suitable to the new Germany, or, if that did not work, of doing away with it altogether.” Pg 218

“Nazis now launched a sustained campaign to close denominational schools and replace them with non-religious ‘community schools’…Parents were forced to sign prepared statements declaring that they ‘did not want the education of my child at school to be misused by stirring up religious unrest’ Pg 246

“By the summer of 1939, all denominational schools in Germany had been turned into community schools, and all private schools run by the Churches had been closed down or nationalized…By 1939 religious instruction in vocational schools had been reduced to half an hour a week, and in many areas it had to follow guidelines…Parents who objected to these moves…were obliged by the local authorities to withdraw their objection, summoned to special meetings at the school to pressure them to sign their children up for ideological instruction instead of religious education…” pgs 246-247

“The German Christian’s attempt to create a synthesis between German Protestantism and Nazi racism had effectively collapsed…Hitler reluctantly abandoned his ambition of convereting it into the official state Church of the Third Reich. Instead, he ordered the creation of a new Ministry for Church Affairs, established in July 1935 under the 48-year-old Hanns Kerrl…The new Ministry was given wide-ranging powers, which Kerrl did not hesitate to deploy in order to bring refractory pastors to heel…Pastors were banned from preaching, or had their pay stopped. They were forbidden to teach in schools. All theological students were ordered to join Nazi organizations.” Pg 230

Such measures are most likely to succeed if supported by religious education that is based upon a sound interpretation of religious teachings. – Alliance of Civilizations High Level Group

“Education as we understand it here makes it possible to view with equanimity the completion of the process of secularisation, first of structures, then of society itself, as just one of several possible reflections of a modern way of life. School should give children a clearer understanding of the psychosocial, cultural and sometimes political functions of religion. This sort of approach would undoubtedly help to sharpen and challenge their critical faculties and combat the wilder excesses of particularism. This has fundamental consequences for the educational system, particularly as regards the teaching of religious education. Who should teach religion? Who can make a valid comparison between the different doctrinal elements of religions? We must beware of confusion here. A clear distinction needs to be drawn between religious education in the sense understood by adherents of a faith, which consists of transmitting the values, teachings and liturgy of their religion with a view to the proper practice of that religion (e.g. the Catholic catechism), and the teaching of comparative religion which aims only to instil knowledge about religion and the history of religion. Only the latter forms one of the bases of learning for the intercultural dialogue through education. Religious education of the first kind is perfectly legitimate, but is not relevant to the objective under discussion. Comparative religion should therefore be taught by professional teachers capable of providing a comparative analysis of religions, regardless of their own religious choice, with the objectivity of an expert, not the passion of a devotee. This is an essential choice that will determine the success of the dialogue through education. The difficulty of the exercise lies in integrating religion, which is such a sensitive issue in the Euro-Mediterranean area, into the field of education, taking into account its irreducibility and its mission to provide absolute truth, but without altering the educational philosophy of mutual knowledge based on curiosity, self-respect and openness to the Other.” - Dialogue Between Peoples and Cultures in the Euro-Mediterranean Area

Propaganda & Spiritual Mobilization

“Hitler had created a new Ministry of Popular enlightenment and Propaganda on 13 March 1933 and put Goebbels himself into the Ministry…the Ministry’s task as the ‘spiritual mobilization’ of the German people in a permanent re-creation of the spirit of popular enthusiasm…” pg. 121

“In other words, religions and the institutions that represent them cannot be banned from the public sphere but must be brought in under the leadership of the international civil bodies when it comes to questions concerning mutual recognition, universal justice, and lasting peace.” – Alliance of Civilizations High Level Group

“The revolution we have made’, declared Joseph Goebbels, on 15 November 1933, ‘is a total one. It has encompassed every area of public life and fundamentally restructured them all. It has completely changed and reshaped people’s relationship to each other, to the state, and questions of existence.’ Page 120

“One striking pattern and disclosure that is of the utmost importance for seeing that entering the global perspective is a dimensional shift....This dimensional shift to the global lens is well beyond a mere “paradigm shift”…It actually taps a deeper ground of Reality – it is an existential shift.” - World Commission on Global Consciousness & Spirituality

“To what extent is the current state of “American civic discourse” dominated by egocentric politics and ego democracy= egocracy? Have we truly matured into a secular civic space? A truly secular civic democracy can only arise through spiritual citizenship. That would be the true American revolution. - World Commission on Global Consciousness & Spirituality

“That is the secret to propaganda: to permeate the person it aims to grasp, without his even noticing that he is being permeated. Of course propaganda has a purpose, but the purpose must be concealed with such cleverness and virtuosity that the person on whom this purpose is to be carried out doesn’t notice at all.” – Joseph Goebbels Pg 127

“What the Nazis wanted from books was demonstrated in propaganda events such as the German Book Week, held annually from 1934 onwards. ‘Sixty million people will be roused at the end of October by the drumbeat of book promotion,’ declared one of the leading organizers of the 1935 event. These ‘days of mobilization’ would ‘implement inner military preparedness from the spiritual angle in the cause of building up our people.’ Pg 162

Last November I posted an article, Aligning the Masses, regarding the 2008 Euro-Mediterranean Year of Intercultural Dialogue. The campaign, “Mobilising People and Actions for Dialogue,” intends to mobilize civil society and “raise awareness” of 500 million European citizens and develop an active European citizenship which is “open to the world, respectful of cultural diversity and based upon common values”. I had intended to write in-depth analysis on this mobilization project but while looking for a reference document found a blog space called Euro-Med which had already written everything I had intended to cover. I have not read this entire blog, but the previous link contains good information.

“Advertising and design began to incorporate Nazi symbols and to adopt approved Nazi style.” Pg 211

“Symbols can be very effective tools in advancing a cause. The creation of a house or temple of religions or civilizations in as many cities as possible will be a tangibleand important step in this direction.” - Alliance of Civilizations High Level Group

On a personal note, my apologies for the delay in updating the blog. Life has been quite busy lately plus I’ve found it necessary to write at a local level as well as other other locations. Once I complete the next post in this series, I will share some of the issues I’ve needed to address and post my local writings here, thus making them “glocal.”

UNESCO: Its purpose and Its Philosophy by Julian Huxley, First Director-General of UNESCO

Quotes and excerpts arranged by crossroad.to:

“UNESCO [UN Educational, Social and Scientific Organization] also can and should promote the growth of international contacts, international organizations, and actual international achievements, which will offer increasing resistance to the forces making for division and conflict. In particular, it can both on its own and in close relation with other UN agencies such as the FAO [Food & Agriculture Organization] and WHO [World Health Organization], promote the international application of science to human welfare. As the benefits of such world-scale collaboration becomes plain (which will be speedily be the case in relation to the food and health of mankind) it will become increasingly more difficult for any nation to destroy them by resorting to isolationism or to war.” Page 14. [See The UN Plan for Food and Land]

“Further, since the world today is in process of becoming one, and since a major aim of Unesco must be to help in the speedy and satisfactory realization of this process... Unesco must pay special attention to international education - to education as a function of a world society, in addition to its function in relation to national societies, to regional or religious or intellectual groups or to local communities.” p. 29-30

“The fact has also been emphasized by the development of intelligence testing, some authorities in this field going so far as to assert that only 10-20% of the population are capable of profiting by a university course.” p. 29-32

“...peace must therefore be founded, if it is not to fail, upon the intellectual and moral solidarity of mankind.” p. 5

“In the forefront is set Unesco's collaboration in the work of advancing the mutual knowledge and understanding of peoples, through all means of mass-communication.” p. 6

“It must be an evolutionary as opposed to a static or ideal humanism.... In the last few decades, it has been possible to develop an extended or general theory of evolution which can prove the necessary intellectual scaffolding for humanism....” p. 7 [See the last part of Saving the Earth]

“In addition, we now know much about the biological evolution, the existence of several types of selection... the evolutionary conflict between the limitations set by an organism's nature and past history and the requirement of the present, and its solution by means of some new adjustment.... This last point immediately recalls the thesis, antithesis and synthesis of Hegelian philosophy, and the Marxist 'reconciliation of opposites' based on it. Indeed, dialectical materialism was the first radical attempt at an evolutionary philosophy. Unfortunately, it was based too exclusively upon principles of social as against biological evolution.” p. 11

“...a priori reasoning is inadequate to arrive at truth.... truth is never complete and explanations never fully or eternally valid. On the other hand, the scientific method... leads steadily to more truth, both in the quantitative sense of a greater amount of truth as well as qualitative sense of the accurate and more complete truth.” p. 36

“...taking the techniques of persuasion and information and true propaganda that we have learnt to apply nationally in war, and deliberately bending them to the international tasks of peace, if necessary utilizing them -- as Lenin envisaged - to 'overcome the resistance of millions' to desirable change.

”Using drama to reveal reality and art as the method by which, in Sir Stephen Tallent’s works, ‘truth becomes impressive and a living principle of action,’ and aiming to produce concerted effort, which -- top quote Grierson once more -- needs a background of faith and a sense of destiny. This must be a mass philosophy, a mass creed, and it can never be achieved without the use of the media and of mass communication. Unesco, in the press of its detailed work, must never forget this enormous feat.” p. 60

“There are thus two tasks for the Mass Media division of Unesco; the one general; the other special. The special one is to enlist the press and the radio and the cinema to the fullest extent in the service of formal and adult education, of science and learning, of art and culture. The general one is to see that these agencies are used both to contribute to mutual comprehension between nations and cultures, and also to promote the growth of a common outlook shared by all nations and cultures.” p. 60

“Conclusion: ...The task before UNESCO... is to help the emergence of a single world culture with its own philosophy and background of ideas and with its own broad purpose. This is opportune, since this the first time in history that the scaffolding and the mechanisms for world unification have become available and also the first time that man has had the means... of laying a world-wide foundation for the minimum physical welfare of the entire human species. And it is necessary, for at the moment, two opposing philosophies of life confront each other from the West and from the East....”

“You may categorize the two philosophies as two super-nationalisms, or as individualism versus collectivism; or as the American versus the Russian way of life, or as capitalism versus communism, or as Christianity versus Marxism. Can these opposites be reconciled, this antithesis be resolved in a higher synthesis? I believe not only that this can happen, but that, through the inexorable dialectic of evolution, it must happen....”

“In pursuing this aim, we must eschew dogma - whether it be theological dogma or Marxist dogma.... East and West will not agree on a basis of the future if they merely hurl at each other the fixed ideas of the past. For that is what dogma's are -- the crystallizations of some dominant system of thought of a particular epoch. A dogma may of course crystallize tried and valid experience; but if it be dogma, it does so in a way which is rigid, uncompromising and intolerant.... If we are to achieve progress, we must learn to uncrystalize our dogmas.” p. 61

“...society as such embodies no values comparable to those embodied in individuals; but individuals are meaningless except in relation to the community.” p. 62 more...