Слике страница
PDF
ePub

Do you mean by this that nationalism is dead or should be dead?

And with specific question for both of you to comment on: Do you feel any form of world government is now in order or that we are moving toward it? Or that there is any possibility that the American people are ready to accept any concept like that?

Mr. FULLER. I have been asking myself the question you asked me for a very long time; and I am a student of large patterns and trying to see what evolution does about some of these things. And I think human beings do not often realize how powerful, knowledgeable and competent is universal evolution. X-ray cinema makes visible organization of a chicken—the gradual assembly from its embryo, all taking place inside the egg-much of which process seems chaotic and discreetly uncontrolled. Humans do not see the logical interrelatedness of big evolutionary development. All the technical happenings which were unpredicted in my youth seem only in retrospect to have been obviously sequitor to their immediate predecessor developments. Humans tend to think that Universe is waiting upon them to make the evolutionary decisions. I do not. That is why I have tried to stress the fact with you today that when considered before they occurred all the technological events in my life were thought to be absolutely impossible. Therefore they were not the consequence of society deliberately undertaking to bring them about. Individual inventors often called "crack pots” brought them into realization. It was completely unexpected. When I was 5 years of age no one realized that we would develop any of the 20th-century technology. Anyone who even suggested humans reaching safely to and returning from the moon were called lunatics and in jeopardy of being incarcerated in a lunatic aslyum.

Ås an infinitely small detail in designing terrestrial ecology Nature designed the honey bees with their chromosomic drive to go after honey in order to have them inadvertently cross-pollinize the vegetation so too, by a million other chromosomically programed behaviors, Nature arranged to grow and sustain humans on our planet. Also 99 percent chromosomically programed humans usually have been doing a lot of the right things for the wrong reasons. What we think of as side effects are usually evolution's main events. The time has come when we must participate directly in the main stream of universe instead of only accidentally while playing lethally biased exclusive survival games instead of the all-inclusive main show.

When our forebears evolved the system of democratic representation of the United States all the first representatives were well and favorably known to their local neighbors, everybody knew them. Their term of office was predicated on the realization that they would have to go to the central meeting place in Philadelphia by foot or by horse over foot paths, Indian trials or very small highways stopping over night at inns and talking with everybody along the way. And while in Philadelphia-or later in Washington—three or four important letters might come from Europe during the whole year you were there. Everybody at the capitol knew what the letters said. They all talked about the letters with one another. Then all of the representatives started back homeward talking to people along the way, at the inns, and homes. They would tell everybody at home about the four letters from Europe this year and what everybody in Philadelphia-or later

in Washington—thought about the situation and what the people along the way think and would then say to their home people "How do you feel about it and what do you want me to do about it?” They were told and then they walked or rode on these often many-days travel to the capital. We had what science calls a one-to-one correspondence between stimulation and response.

With the unexpected development of the telegraph 30 years later news short-circuited the representatives' direct communication system and reached people in minutes instead of in months and the people had no way to respond to the stimulation. Since that time radio and television broadcasting have added to the telegraph-fed newspapers in producing a constant barrage adding to hundreds of thousands of stimulations before any political response could be manifest by the citizenry.

DEMOCRACY IS NOT WORKING TODAY Democracy worked well with the initial one-to-one correspondence. Today, democracy is not working. It is not the fault of the concept of democracy. Democracy is unable to express itself. That is why political view points—samplings—have developed. The Congress conducts as many inquiries as possible to discover in advance of elections what their constituents are thinking. Particularly amongst the young there is a feeling of absolute futility. The system is not working.

ELECTROMAGNETIC COMMUNICATIONS

Over a great many years I have been following the technology of electromagnetic communication to find out if it did not contain its own answer to how the one-to-one correspondence might be regained. In 1940 I was science and technology consultant on the staff of Fortune magazine. After checking with the telephone system engineers and finding it technically feasible and not disruptive of all other regular services—proposed daily telephone voting on all prominent questions before Congress. That was back in 1940 and I published my proposal in my book, No More Secondhand God. Since World War II studies have been scientifically conducted disclosing electromagnetic energy output of human brains. The work has been scientifically conducted in veteran hospitals with electrodes fastened to the heads of volunteers.

Then, using recording oscillographs unique patterns were discovered to be identified with specific dreams. Most recently experiments have disclosed an electromagnetic field surrounding the whole body of humans which field discloses a positive or negative attitude or response to various stimuli very much as does the polygraph or lie detector through direct contact. With the sensors, now mounted in satellites orbiting our planet, broadcasting to us, there is present in this room right now one electromagnetic program amongst several million which if tuned in by the right radio set can tell us where every beef cattle on Earth is located. As a consequence we may soon have the capability to directly senso how each and every human feels about each and every common human problem of the moment as each such problem and its alternative solutions are separately broadcast. This might well develop within the critical 10 years of which I have been speaking. Senator Percy, you have asked me what kind of world government may develop. It may well be akin to the city management concept, where the management has to do whatever the satellite sensor harvested and computer analysis says that the world majority thinks ought to be done. Undoubtedly the world majority would make many mistakes but as the mistake becomes evident the majority of humans will think that this alternative would work better and because they think so it will be satellite sensed and the computer will instruct management to immediately alter the course.

This is the way all mechanical steering mechanisms of airplanes or ships of the sea work. The servomechanisms responding to sensed error in first one direction and then the other successively correct the steering first this way then that way averaging an accomplished course halfway between. The variations get finer and finer trending toward but never attaining absolute "straightness.” This is the essence of cybernetics. This way humans reached the moon. It is the essence of all life growth. Development of such satellite harvested electromagnetic field sensing of how world democracy feels about any proposed solution of any given problem is close at hand or has already been technically prototyped. An incorruptible, true direct planetary democracy with all of humanity franchised and always voting may well render all humanity sustainable, successful. So those are my thoughts, sir.

Senator PERCY. Thank you very much. Do you have a comment, Dr. Bitker? Mr. BITKER. Well, it will be a very brief one, Senator Percy. - In the first place, how can anyone add to what we have just heard? But let me just quote from a leading statesman in the era of the Revolution who asked and was disturbed by the very question you are asking now, Senator Percy. And this is the question which faces this committee today, and this is what George Washington said with respect to the same problem—and this is what he said, very briefly, “We are either a united people under one head and for Federal purposes, or we are 13 independent sovereigns, eternally counteracting each other.”'

Senator PERCY. Thank you.

Senator HUMPHREY. I want to express my deep appreciation to our witnesses. They have added immensely to our better understanding of the problem.

Let me express our thanks on behalf of the committee.

Our next meeting is on May 21. The witnesses will be William Sloane Coffin, chaplain of Yale University; Seyom Brown, of the Brookings Institution; Alvin Toffler, author of "Future Shock”; and Norman Cousins, editor of “The Saturday Review World.”

We thank the witnesses once again.

[Whereupon, at 12:55 p.m., the committee recessed, to reconvene Wednesday, May 21, 1975.]

54–738475-16

THE UNITED STATES AND THE UNITED NATIONS

WEDNESDAY, MAY 21, 1975

UNITED STATES SENATE,
COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS,

Washington, D.C. The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:15 a.m., in room 4221, the Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. John Sparkman [chairman) presiding.

Present: Senators Sparkman, Symington, Clark, Case, Javits, and Percy.

The CHAIRMAN. Let the committee come to order please.

Several other Senators have indicated they will be here, but I think we had better get moving.

OPENING STATEMENT

Today marks the fifth day in the series of hearings by the Committee on Foreign Relations on the United States and the United Nations. We have heard from many distinguished persons so far.

Our topic today is United Nations, other visions", which will be discussed by a panel no less eminent than those who preceded them.

As I introduce them I will ask each one of them to take a seat at the witness table. First, is the Reverend William Sloane Coffin, Jr., who has been university chaplain at Yale university since 1958, but has announced his intention to leave soon. He is equally well known for his deep involvement in various causes, such as civil rights and antiwar efforts.

Next we have a representative from the world of so-called think tanks, Mr. Seyom Brown, who was for many years with Rand Corp. and is now a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution. Among his publications is “New Forces in World Politics," of which we expect to hear something this morning.

The following witness, Mr. Norman Cousins, hardly needs introducing. Since his biographic sketch in “Who's Who” takes some 50 lines, I will say only that he has been editor of the Saturday Review for many years and a noted writer. I understand his plane had been delayed a little but, he is here now.

Then we have Mr. Alvin Toffler, another distinguished journalist, author, and educator, whose visions of the future have kept us intrigued and thinking.

Senator CASE. I admire the chairman's eloquence in introducing these men. He has not repeated himself once and that is pretty good. [Laughter.]

( 237 )

« ПретходнаНастави »