The Urgent Need for a Life-Affirming World Order, Session 6

A Curriculum for One World or None

*The Zoom Link for today’s live session is far below.

We have, until now, described what is happening with our global situation and our collective “Death Spiral.” Now, it is important to analyze why this destructive trend is happening. I have mentioned that our overlooking the psychological consequences of the global structures we have set up have resulted in a “Psychological Age”—in which our inability to master our own minds has brought us to the brink of self-annihilation. We are heading toward “Mutual Assured Destruction” (“MAD”), not only because of thermonuclear weapons, which are hundreds to thousands of times more powerful than the atomic bombs used in World War II, but because our own psychological tendency to use whatever means to carry out our collective suicidality has grown exponentially.

We experience the psychological consequences of our current World Order every day, but we do not recognize them. This is why I will devote the next few sessions to describing how categorizing ourselves into distinct groups such as nation-states creates competition, hierarchy, exploitation, and violence, and eventually attracts unfit leaders who seek to be at the top of the hierarchy but whose goal is destruction. These are the consequences of a structure that leads us away from global Oneness.

Oneness is no longer a utopian ideal but a necessity for survival; ultimately, it is a spiritual choice. However, for now we will discuss the structures that have given rise to our current historical, social, and political fragmentation and division. These divisions have been driven by processes that categorize people into distinct groups, create an “us versus them” mentality, lead to defensive ingroup loyalty, establish hierarchies of power, and promote competition. Hierarchical structures lead to the emergence of unfit “leaders”, who exacerbate social psychological traumas through poor governance, and a cyclical descent into division, conflict, and the creation of more unfit, would-be “leaders”. Unless we consciously choose a different path, we will only further contribute to the disintegration of global unity.

First, a World Order divided into nation-states reinforces the categorization of people into distinct groups based on social, physical, or cultural markers. Instead of the diverse manifestations of Oneness that they could be, contributing flexibility and resilience to a socially cohesive body, they become harmful, institutionalized distinctions that are largely artificial in nature. Consider how racial domination that rose with nationalism and imperialism superseded our ability to perceive the only actual race that exists: the human race. The sharp distinction of groups—by ethnicity, religion, nationality, or other criteria—often foster feelings of superiority among “ingroup” members and hostility toward “outgroup” members (Brewer, 1999). The categorization process reduces complex individuals to stereotypes, which simplifies the perception of others and can justify discriminatory or even violent behavior against the so-called, “other” (Cohen, 2001). Outgroup hostility increases in environments where social, political, or economic structures emphasize distinctions and undermines the potential for empathy, cooperation, and global unity (Gaertner and Dovidio, 2000).

Second, a fragmented World Order fosters competition. The brilliant Anglo-Irish political scientist and historian Benedict Anderson postulated how nation-states have spread as “imagined communities”—where people share a common identity, language, culture, or history without ever meeting or even interacting (Anderson, 1983). The formation of nation-states has been a defining feature of modern political organization, forming territorial boundaries and centralized governance, and serving as primary units of political loyalty and identity in the modern world. This loyalty contributes to ingroup solidarity, but at the international level, it becomes a competitive unit that is preoccupied with the pursuit of power and security in a hostile world (Mearsheimer, 2001). As nation-states compete for resources, geopolitical influence, and economic dominance, intergroup competition is amplified in the current global order. This competition encourages nations to pursue aggressive or expansionist policies, which can lead to conflict and war. The process of constructing and maintaining these political boundaries further entrenches divisions between nations, making it harder for global cooperation to flourish (Hobsbawm, 1990). Therefore, the very existence of these distinct political entities makes the experience of global unity seem remote or unattainable, as other nations are viewed as rivals or threats.

Third, an unequal World Order creates hierarchical divisions in society, whether within nations or globally. As a form of structural violence, or inequality, it positions some groups as “superior” and others as “inferior”. This hierarchical division has historically manifested in colonialism, slavery, and imperialism, which systematically oppressed certain groups while elevating others to positions of power (Fanon, 1963). Modern nation-states then strengthened these hierarchies through institutionalized systems of law, economics, and culture. The influential French sociologist Pierre Bourdieu outlined how social hierarchies influence individuals’ roles, behaviors, and opportunities at a very deep level (Bourdieu, 1984). As some individuals and groups are accorded more power, wealth, and status, while others are marginalized and oppressed, this hierarchical framework is internalized to the point of perceiving those at the top of the social ladder as justifiable in whatever acts they engage in, while those at the bottom are seen as undeserving. In such a psychological environment, nations and peoples that are perceived as “inferior” may be subject to oppression, exploitation, apartheid, or even genocide (Chomsky, 1999). These hierarchies promote a worldview in which people see others as less human or worthy, undermining the prospect of global unity and cooperation.

Fourth, an entrenched hierarchical system of extreme inequalities encourages the pursuit of power, in order to dictate the behavior of other nation-states. Powerful positions within a system of extreme hierarchies are highly attractive to those who are developmentally disordered and unfit to lead. A desire for control of one’s life, where one is not aggressed against as in one’s childhood, can manifest in “preemptive aggression,” or an “attack before being attacked” mentality (Bowlby, 1969). The “solution,” in the minds of aggressors, is to obtain greater power. “Realist” scholars of international relations argue that nation-states seek power to ensure their own security and survival in an anarchic global system (Waltz, 1979). As nations pursue these interests, they often prioritize their own wellbeing over global cooperation, leading to tensions and conflicts that eventually defeat the goal of our collective survival and collective “sanity” (McGovern, 2024). The idea of “great power” politics reinforces a worldview in which international relations are structured around competition rather than collaboration. Russian revolutionary thinker and political theorist Vladimir Lenin, for example, postulated that capitalist nations seek to expand their power by exploiting less powerful states for resources and labor, as was behind the theory of imperialism (Lenin, 1916). The stronger nation-states dominating weaker ones reinforces the hierarchy between nation-states, impeding meaningful international cooperation and defeating our shared, collective goal of survival (Ikenberry, 2011).

Announcement:

Dr. Bandy X. Lee is inviting you to a live session in a series: