The Progress of Mankind

The discoveries of ancient and modern navigators, and the domestic history or tradition of the most enlightened nations, represent the human savage naked both in mind and body, and destitute of laws, of arts, of ideas, and almost of language.

From this abject condition, perhaps the primitive and universal state of man, he has gradually arisen to command the animals, to fertilize the earth, to traverse the ocean, and to measure the heavens. His progress in the improvement and exercise of his mental and corporeal faculties has been irregular and various; infinitely slow in the beginning, and increasing by degrees with redoubled velocity: ages of laborious ascent have been followed by a moment of rapid downfall; and the several climates of the globe have felt the vicissitudes of light and darkness. Yet the experience of four thousand years should enlarge our hopes and diminish our apprehensions: we cannot determine to what height the human species may aspire in their advance towards perfection; but it may safely be presumed that no people, unless the face of nature is changed, will relapse into their original barbarism. The improvements of society may be viewed under a threefold aspect. 1. The poet or philosopher illustrates his age and country by the efforts of a single mind; but these superior powers of reason or fancy are rare and spontaneous productions; and the genius of Homer, or Cicero, or Newton, would excite less admiration if they could be created by the will of a prince or the lessons of a preceptor. 2. The benefits of law and policy, of trade and manufactures, of arts and sciences, are more solid and permanent: and many individuals may be qualified, by education and discipline, to promote in their respective stations, the interest of the community. But this general order is the effect of skill and labor; and the complex machinery may be decayed by time, or injured by violence. 3. Fortunately for mankind, the more useful, or at least, the more necessary arts, can be performed without superior talents or national subordination, without powers of one, or the union of many. Each village, each family, each individual, must always possess both ability and inclination to perpetuate the use of fire and of metals; the propagation and service of domestic animals, the methods of hunting and fishing; the rudiments of navigation; the imperfect cultivation of corn or other nutritive grain; and the simple practice of the mechanic trades. Private genius and public industry may be extirpated, but these hardy plants survive the tempest, and strike an everlasting root into the most unfavorable soil. The splendid days of Augustus and Trajan were eclipsed by a cloud of ignorance; and the barbarians subverted the laws and palaces of Rome. But the scythe, the invention or emblem of Saturn still continued annually, to mow the harvests of Italy; and the human feast of the Laestrigons have never been renewed on the coast of Compania.

Since the first discovery of the arts, war, commerce, and religious zeal have diffused among the savages of the Old and New World these inestimable gifts: they have been successively propagated; they can never be lost. We may therefore acquiesce in the pleasing conclusion that every age of the world has increased and still increases the real wealth, the happiness, the knowledge, and perhaps the virtue, of the human race.

Edward Gibbon, 1737-1794, Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, Modern Library, Vol. II pp 442-444.

Continued Commentary on American Foreign Policy

The Arafat Decision

The question raised about the decision made by Secretary of State Schultz in early December 1988 not to grant Arafat an entry visa to the United States fails to take account of why he made that particular decision.

Some observers say it was a personal decision based on George Schultz's strong personal feelings about combating terrorism. Some say he violated the headquarters agreement between the United States (as host nation) and the United Nations. Others say anyone should be allowed to enter the United States for the purpose of ad dressing the UN.

Not Anyone Can Speak to the UN

George Schultz is a fine Secretary of State and a man of integrity. All of his foreign policy decisions, including this one, have been made for national not personal reasons.

The U.S. agreement with the UN governs the entry, residence, and exit of UN officials and officials of UN-member nations. It does not contain a commitment, stated or implied, that anyone who desires to address the UN should be admitted.

So, we have arrived at the nub of the matter. The Arafat decision was more political than legal. Legally is unassailable. Politically it is unquestionable.

Arafat Represents People

Few doubt Secretary Schultz's characterization of Arafat as a terrorist. But terrorism is a world wide problem requiring the cooperation of many nations and individuals to curb. Of all nations which have been targets of terrorism, the United States has suffered least within its borders. Therefore, denying Arafat an entry visa on those grounds is almost pointless.

Whether the United States and Israel agree, Arafat represents a group of people, — Palestinian Arabs — who have been greatly disadvantaged since the end of World War II. How to right the wrong they have suffered is a complicated and highly sensitive political matter of enormous importance. Terrorism almost pales by comparison. Hearing Arafat at the UN, where he would have been exposed for exactly what he is (and is not) would have been just as important and useful to the United States — and to Israel — as to the Arabs and other member-nations of the UN. A crass way of saying about the same thing is that there would have been greater political mileage to be gained from hearing Arafat than from preventing his entry into the United States on the ground — undisputed — that he is a terrorist.

The Nub of the Matter

So, we return to the nub of the matter: the failure to recognize the real national security interests of the United States and the concomitant failure to assess and evaluate the interests of other nations. These kinds of failures have plagued American foreign policy since the end of WW II. The Arafat decision was another manifestation of the American tendency to go it alone and to ignore or badly under estimate the underlying realities of international relations.

... Robert Sturgill ...

Postscript

Since the above was written, Secretary Schultz has announced U.S. willingness to enter into a dialogue with the P.L.O. He said the policy "change" resulted from a change in statements made by Yaser Arafat. The media characterized the U.S. decision as a "stunning reversal of policy." Sadly, the media are close to the truth.

Something of great value to the nation was lost in the mismanagement of this sensitive foreign policy issue: the credibility of the United States Government. That loss could have been avoided by an initial correct assessment of real U.S national interests.

Something of Value

And, sadly, something else of real value to the United States is in process of being lost: the goodwill and cooperation of the other nations critical to the peace process in the Middle East. The United States and Israel cannot dictate the terms for achieving a peaceful settlement in the Middle East. Nor can the U.S. continue to pick up its marbles and run home if the game is not played the way we think it should be played.

Problem Solving Without War

Foreign policy problem solving, if it is to be done without war — something that Israel especially has not so far recognized — requires the cooperation of other nations. Cooperation requires compromise. Politics is the art of compromise. Negotiation is the art of achieving compromise. Leadership is the skillful practice of both. Loud voices and menacing words are not viable substitutes.

... Robert Sturgill ...

The Only Constant is Change

Evolution is a gradual process in which something changes into a significantly different, normally more complex or more sophisticated form. And because we live in an evolving universe, the only constant is change. Change means to make different in some way. Change is definable mainly in terms of its opposite, constancy — that which is constant, that which is in variable or unchanging. If every thing were constant, change would not exist.

Constancy and Change

Long-term changes are seen by short-lived human beings as constants. We are comfortable with that which appears to be constant because it lulls us into thinking we know what to expect. We take constancy for granted, however, and are surprised, often hurt, and sometimes even terrified when we find that change has taken place.

We can learn something about change from Buddhism, the whole philosophy of which is based on the acceptance of change. The Buddha taught that the outstanding characteristic of the human situation is suffering or frustration, which comes from our difficulty in accepting that everything around us is impermanent and transitory. "All things," said the Buddha, "arise and pass away."

Flow and Change in Nature

The root of Buddhism is that flow and change are the basic features of Nature, and suffering arises whenever we resist the flow of life, whenever we try to control circumstances and cling to fixed forms, such as things, events, people, or ideas.

It is futile to grasp life from a wrong point of view, from ignorance. We divide the world we perceive into individual and separate things of ignorance and thus attempt to confine fluid forms of reality in unchanging mental boxes. So long as we do this, we are bound to experience one frustration after another. Trying to create anything fixed or permanent in life and then trying to cling to its perceived permanence is a vicious circle driven by the never-ending chain of cause and effect. As stated by the Buddha, "It is the everlasting and unchanging rule of this world that everything is created by a series of causes and conditions and everything disappears by the same rule, everything changes, nothing remains constant."

Focus on the Product

We in western culture focus on the non-evolving end of life — the product. Product is the terminus of process and is therefore a limitation to evolution unless a new progeny or product is sought, which again validates process. The strength of the Institute for domestic Tranquility is in its evolutionary process that countermands the myopia of a product-oriented society.

Gandhi, in his statement, "Full effort is full victory," recognized that life is an intangible process of becoming and the value of life is living. The Institute for domestic Tranquility embodies and safeguards the life of society — cultural and spiritual evolution. As such, a statement of purpose (process) may be defined and is even necessary, but a definition of projected or desired outcome (product) is self-limiting and thus self-destructive. The Institute for domestic Tranquility offers present and future generations an unconditional way to create and to maintain harmonious options for human evolution. A greater gift we cannot bestow.

... Chris Maser ...

© Copyright 1989
Institute for domestic Tranquility