* PLANET EARTH*
* Seven (7)* *COMPOSITE* *Conditions for the survival (habitability) of the humanity* *Brief* *notes on* *the* *contents and* the *purpose of the text.* Currently, there is an intense movement (I would say unprecedented) worldwide to avoid human extermination and the danger of a debacle of the Planet Earth. Underlying this materiality, there are feelings of insecurity, instability of living, suffering from the harmful material conditions of everyday life, lack of confidence for a better future and particularly a growing tendency towards dehumanization. – "Homo homini lupus" seems to be the motto. In the meantime, miraculous promises for a better world are forwarded, but they have never known any practical fulfillment – being mere good intentions of style, they lead to nothing. xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Congresses, summits, agreements, pacts, conferences and other movements of this kind, to make Planet Earth more livable, have taken place. It is also known that, for more than a decade, little has been achieved for this goal. But promises do not lack, as, also there is no shortage of protests to prove the vacuity of those achievements and their almost null value. And what is the reason? It is because, each participant in these achievements, is limited by the guidelines he (she) takes from the respective government. Thus, he (she) does nothing but represent the political and economic interests at a national level – that is to say, that everything is conditioned by the defense of the respective industrial productivity in a context of intense economic competitiveness. In short, the policy of "the dense smoke of heavy blast factories” overlaps when confronted with the issue of climate protection. *The present work will not *mention the* names *of* the personalities directed to bear responsibilities. Mentioning them would be a gesture that leads to nothing.* Nevertheless, they are the servers of ideas generated in order to achieve goals that satisfy mere conjunctural objectives. Therefore, if responsibility is enacted, it involves particularly those who hold the Power. Similarly, it is assumed that the phenomena that tear up and destabilize life in the various countries, and accordingly felt, are well known to the citizens of the world – not only by the suffering lot but also, by those who watch the occurrences, however, powerless to obviate them. The citizens of the world know the origin of the menace and who to attribute it. Thus, the purpose of this work is not to accuse, but to try to solve this apparent fatality, in order to make life more desirable to live, *wherever one lives.* *The basic problem is the pending destruction of the assumptions on which human survival is based and the utility, or else, the existence of the planet Earth, the way we wish it to be.* *The gradual increasing practice of destructive acts, despite all the requests and recommendations for their restraint, proceeds progressively and mercilessly. It’s devastating effects are* *felt daily in the span of* *human* *life, signaling the final destruction in a few decades, if this ongoing practice does not stop immediately.* xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx We are entering into the 3rd decade of the 21st century and all that is done and practiced is by invoking Democracy and Civilization – an almost unanimous proclamation of Nations. *But the truth is that nothing quantitatively worthy, corresponding to these values is achieved.* Practically everything is left aside, by way of purposes and / or promises. In other words, and gilding the pill, it may be said that, for each gesture apparently leading to counteract the phenomenon of destruction, *n* situations are generated simultaneously in order* to* neutralize the feat. xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx *It's due to the system.* But what system? One may ask. The one dictated by Capitalism? Or, by Socialism? Or, by the symbiosis of the two? It is known that both are economic/financial systems to manage human societies formatted as Nations. Theoretically, the second system would follow the first one, but the current reality of the world presents us with a picture in which *i) **the two systems coexist,* *ii)* even though, any of the two, assumes shades and changes that vary from country to country. >From this structural context, a conjectural division of the world into* 2* *blocks *is drawn* - *the capitalist and the socialist ones – presently based on the *appetites for the predominance of economic nature, *however, with a major impact of the 1st one. This is the reality with which we cope up till today. It could not be so, if each country confined itself to the economic development of its own people, in a rational sharing of the surplus of its wealth with other countries. *But if this happened what would be the use or the need for the existence of the Block policy?* xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx In the current phase of world development, this fictional existence of Two Blocs, based on economic predominance, is stigmatized by a *political ingredient, which *results in a permanent *state of war tension* – the only way to animate the economic production, namely the highly profiting *arms* *industry.* In order to justify this state of things, different theories abound, destined to maximize dangers, which in the long run represent nothing more than adminicular details or simplistic justification to justify what is unjustifiable. xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Everywhere, movements and protests abound, against the instability of life, affecting all countries in the world. The populations live in a permanent insecurity and emotional tension, produced by real regional conflicts and the threat of war that can unexpectedly arise somewhere in the world. The maxim "homo homini lupus" has never been sneakier, lashing human life as it is now. xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx In global terms, Nature, apart from its adjustments from the universal structure, merely monitors human stupidity, noting only its consequences, which sooner or later will be felt, according to the scientific prognosis. * ###########-* *WHAT TO DO? That is the question.* The problem of the planet’s defense and, more explicitly, of the human survival with dignity, depends, from our point of view, on a set of *factors* or *conditions,* that have been dealt with, individually or *in an isolated form*, as such, losing the impact of a *composite approach**, *which is essential for a minimal understanding of this complex issue. As has already been mentioned, (and we insist again), in this process of appreciation we will *avoid the temptation for any mention or criticism* against any organization, or achievement, or personality, or entity involved in this matter, because what is intended, is not to demolish or shun off whatever has been done, but to achieve a proactive posture in solving the problems that afflict the threatened mankind. # # # This work is based on the impulse of simple ideas, which aim at the much-desired success of the attempts to make the world more dignified to live in, more supportive i.e., more human. The statistical reference has been intentionally omitted, as it can be easily reached through available publications. *By opting for these parameters, avoiding marginal considerations, we tried to leave it up to the addressee – the responsible political entity or the reader – the burden of meditating on each sentence, extracting its meaning in accordance with his cultural formation and the sense of social ethics, assessing the consequences of the 'achievements' so far made and charting the course for the future of the universal community*. *In the course of this analysis, it will be easy and frequent to* *locate the contradictions of the political leaders’ activity, but simultaneously envisage t*he* indicator that can decisively contribute to reassume a healthy coexistence* among the* peoples that inhabit the world.* Given the active complementarity of the ideas - force and the respective assessments and analysis, the addressee will find repeated references to the same aspects, contexts and phenomena. By following such a methodology, the only purpose is to highlight the inter communicability of the attitudes therein contained, involving actions that can only be productive when activated in a *conjugated format* and never in isolation. # * # #* * 1) EXTINCTION OF MILITARY BLOCKS (War Blocks)* The invention of Military Blocs assumes a *provocative nature*, fostering a permanent state of regional or global political tension. Without ever jeopardizing the existence of a military apparatus and consequent arms production for purely *defensive purposes* at the national level of each country, it should be stressed that now, any Military Pact takes an offensive stance, dragging the free choice of a country, as a sovereign country, when in it involved, as far as its existence is concerned. No country or people wants war. This implies the use of weapons to kill. No one wants to die. The intellectual evolution of human society, despite its difficulties in daily life, wherever it may occur, is averse to any war/conflict. War breeds destruction, misery, disgrace and refugees. The recent past has shown that wherever it took place, these were precisely the consequences; the war never having solved any of the problems that were set to be solved. War or its threat, has turned to become a business, either to produce war material or for arms sale to other countries. The war industry is the greatest support of the economic strength of the country dedicated to its production. From this point of view, one can understand the involvement of the military and the militarist administrations and the large private arms production industry. War has always had and continues to have an economic motivation, but disguisedly exhibited as ethical, religious, political, ideological or domination, for its acceptance and its message to be more appealing. The mere existence of military blocks, assumes today, an authentic forum of paroxysm. It is enough to consider the terrible results of its latest exploits, spreading destruction, generating migrations, fomenting hunger and requiring astronomical sums for its pursuit. This is the reason why the maintenance or the creation of new military blocs, *particularly on the fringes of the economically destitute countries*, only contributes to a growing disgrace of their populations. So where does the commitment for the fiction of Military Blocks lie? Apart from the budgetary expenditure for defensive purposes in military matters, I leave it up to the reader to imagine the productive destiny that the money budgeted and spent in the war offensive aspects could have and consequently contribute to peace and welfare of the peoples of the world. * 2) THE FALLACIOUS* *TERMINOLOGY – “POOR COUNTRIES AND RICH COUNTRIES”* Once again, the economic aspect is revealing, not only in the substantial exploration aspect, but also in the existential domain of the countries concerned. Concerning this aspect, it is sufficient to pay attention to the photographic review and the news with which the media toasts us almost daily - badly nourished children marked by the sign of misery, people fleeing in despair, insecurity of life and violence generated in the aftermath of provoked wars, migratory movements of uncertain fate, for many people, all ending in an ill-fated or murderous hope. Among many countries, the factors generating wealth in some of them, have not always been marked by the prism of reciprocity. Many have enriched themselves at the expense of others; as such, there are no rich or poor countries *by the destiny of nature.* Historically, expansion and mercantilist activity starting from the 15th century, (which, later, degenerated into colonialism), gave birth to the category of *dominant* country and *dominated country,* materially expressed in the exploitation of the wealth from the 2nd by the 1st category. This resulted in breaking up completely the productive structure of the exploited (dominated) country. The terms of trade became almost entirely unbalanced, in a process with the clear involvement of the local governmental and economic elites. That’s why we usually see these elites participating in the process of slavery and in the economic exploitation of the indigenous population. (Later on, this phenomenon would be followed by the Liberation movements, led by the bourgeoisie giving rise to Nations, which, with rare exceptions, adopted the political and economic regimes of the dominant countries). Therefore, the dichotomy - *dominant country /dominated country *- is the one that best suits today's reality, despite the political 'independence' of the exploited country. As such, the matter cannot be restricted in the mere terms of the wealth or the poverty of countries. *All countries are self-reliant and, as such, rich.* What can be said is that the "wealth" of some of them is being *added* to the "wealth" of others, without existing any proper compensation for this “addition”. Concerning this aspect one can just refer to the raw materials of all sorts (right from the spices, to oil, precious stones, natural gas etc.) which support the big industrial companies in the so called, developed world. *This disastrous process that continues, more and more forcefully, must be put to an end. Only then, with the balance sheet adjusted, the infrastructural problems duly solved, with uncompromised local elites, that remaining part of human species, today nicknamed poor, will be in the real path of development, making use of its wealth. * * 3) SUPPRESSION OF THE POLITICAL INVOLVEMENT OF RELIGION* "Religion is the opium of the people." Expressed in isolation, the phrase sounds rebellious. The idea-force must, however, be equated in the context in which it was uttered. Its *double* *dimension has* been ignored. On the one hand, it figured religion as an agent, which impelled the believer to passivity, in face of the exploitation of the economic system that victimized him; on the other, it highlighted the active role of religion, whilst involving itself in an adverse political position, counteracting, whenever the metaphysical standards were undervalued in the process of social evolution. Historical data is well known, concerning this disproportionate interventionism of religions in this domain. The different forms of this intromission – be it, under the cover of a doctrinal chauvinism; or, in the form of a missionary proselytism; or under the modality of an adaptation to the static standards of the social life. In all these procedural formats, religion served to legitimize confrontations between human communities, foment wars, generate social differentiations, destroy history, disrespect other religions, all ending in the undeniable support to the established political power (of the moment), no matter how bad it was, provided the system facilitated the social control by "faith". The problem of the influence of religions in human societies is highly touchy and dangerous, since it escapes the rationalized control of individual or group behavior. *However*, the metaphysical standardization is always acceptable when *not fanaticized*, since in this dimension it can generate acts of the purest irrationalism, giving rise to instability, namely, of horizontal effect, in most countries. *The situation becomes more burdensome when religious influence is intertwined by political power itself, giving rise to so-called "Religious States" in a confused but blatant active handling of* *politics/religion.* It is therefore necessary to put an end to this state of organizational abnormality. A conciliatory approach should be focused, not so much on the political sphere, but with the responsible religious heads and advisors of the respective regional and local communities professing the traditional religions. 4)* FOR A RATIONAL* *AND* *ETHICAL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT* For humankind to exist and subsist, it must be productive. "It's the economy – stupid" (is the title of a written script of ours, meaning that most of the issues prowl around *economy)*). But produce! How? How much? To begin with, these are the two questions on which it is urgent to take a definitive posture. The history of human evolution tells us that, today we are faced with two antagonized economic systems - *capitalism* and *socialism* (as already referred above). This situation gave birth to a rivalry, as far as world economic domination is concerned, giving way to hegemonic ambitions of territorial spaces in which Nations with dependent economies are included. An unbridled production by highly developed countries, along with the profit it provides, manages to increase the state of dependence and control of other countries (less developed), thus establishing the necessary state of "tension" to maintain this dominating control. This state allows the development of the war industry, the most profitable one can think of. War is a side product (by-product) of this economic policy. Overproduction is therefore the way to increase *profit *and *achieve the domination of the territorial space* *(sic. Nations).* It is interesting to note how these trends affect specifically the dominated nations (as mentioned in condition 2). Attending that most of these nations have adopted the economic pattern of the dominant nations, the policy dictated by the local elites end up victimizing their own communities, which they control also through a policy of exploitation. In some cases, this state of dependency fosters the personal benefits of these elites, to the detriment of the communities they were supposed to benefit (lack of infrastructure, education and other aspects in general). Nuclear power plants, high industrial furnaces and their smoking tails, deforestation, the uncontrolled extraction and exploitation of the subsoil are some of the most prominent activities included in this program. *It is at this point, that it is necessary to question the volume of production, its repercussions on the sharing of the profit as such generated and its management for the benefit of humankind – this being the central issue that animates us. * For a company*, production* is a variable that is activated according to the *needs of world* *consumption.* An uncontrolled and unbridled production is destabilizing by nature, because it generates surpluses and becomes useless in terms of consumption. As for the *profit, *it is a structural component of any business management and is conditioned by two factors: - its productivity/labor maintenance and, - as a provision/saving for the current development of the manufacturing unit. Everything that goes beyond these two constraints, invades the field of *social abuse and unruliness*, which must be counteracted and avoided. *However**, it is essential to make it very clear, about the importance of the economy at the existential level of world society and with relation to the development of any nation. *The problem lies in the way the product of the economic achievement is used and put to serve countries, i.e., their populations, namely, in terms of the *distribution* and the *use* of the product in order to avoid *malnutrition *and *hunger, as is the case in many countries.* Reasoning a little further, one can easily see that it is precisely at this point that the problem of the dangers concerning *climate change* are being placed, as well as that of moralizing the productive and social sectors of humanity. -- To be continued (end of part 1) António Bernardo Colaço normetica.blogspot.com