The Need and Feasibility of the UN to Lead the Human Community in Creating a Digital Planet(006)
4. UN reform and self-help
Previously, we have used a lot of facts and figures to present and analyse the current situation of the UN. This is not a dissatisfaction with the UN, nor is it an attempt to blame the UN, nor is it an attempt to attack and discredit the UN. Rather, we want the UN, and especially the Secretary-General, to realise that the UN today is not only itself constrained and stifled by money. Is the inability, or inability, of the United Nations to act in this situation not also constraining human society and stifling human civilisation as well? This is not alarmist talk, but a stark reality.
Secretary General Guterres may feel aggrieved, but I have no intention to deceive myself or to feed on illusions. The crisis facing humanity, the dilemma facing the United Nations, I have made it public on the UN website, on Twitter, without reservation. Yes, it must be acknowledged that Guterres is honest and open, he is not hiding anything. But we must also be clear that the vast majority of ordinary people do not follow the UN website or the Secretary-General’s tweets, they think that it is a matter between your countries and governments, not between us ordinary people. Even if they did, they would not be able, firstly, to assess whether these issues constitute a crisis and, secondly, to believe how serious these crises really are. It is the unshirkable responsibility, duty and mission of the United Nations, its Secretary-General and officials, the wise men and women of the global community, and the learned people of the world to face up to the crisis, to resolve it, and to reshape a fairer, more rational and better human society.
Perhaps the United Nations and its Secretary-General could reflect on the idea expressed in Tao Te Ching 37: what kind of Tao does the United Nations need to hold in order to allow countries and regions to nurture naturally within it? And when each country and region presents its own needs and desires, how can the United Nations hold on to the simplest, or most primitive, heart of the unnamed, so that the world can finally become peaceful, tranquil and beautiful.
Combine this with the previous example of China’s reform and opening up. Deng Xiaoping said: “Development is the hard truth”, and the development referred to here is mainly economic development. Hu Jintao stressed that “safeguarding people’s right to survival and development is the first priority in the protection of human rights”. Perhaps, the United Nations is trying to protect the most basic right to survival and development of all countries in the world by all means. And that fundamental, which cannot be named in the simplest sense, is the most basic economic condition to guarantee people’s right to survival and development, that is, the minimum funds. It took China’s reform and opening up to create the miracle of rapid economic development for more than 40 years to fundamentally solve the problem of the financial resources needed to guarantee the right to survival and the right to development. Only then did China have the backbone for sustained development that it has today. And how can the United Nations, the world’s only association of sovereign states for more than 70 years, guarantee the right to survival and development of the many developing and economically backward countries in the world when it itself is in desperate straits under the constraints of money? In such a situation, how can the world be peaceful, tranquil and beautiful.
The UN realised its crisis early on, was clear that it had to reform, and made a sustained effort to do so. But the core issue has never been resolved. What is at the heart of the UN’s reform is undoubtedly financial reform. And financial reform, in this current global capitalist financial system, is simply impossible to promote, let alone make any substantial progress.
Rachel Carson, author of 《Silent Spring》, pointed out in 1963 that “the world today worships speed and quantity, the cult of quick profits, and this blind worship breeds monstrous evil.” In a market economy, capital, in order to make quick and massive profits, has neither conscience nor humanity; it has neither long-term vision nor global awareness; it has neither environmental awareness nor ecological thinking. As the saying goes: after I have made a profit, I don’t care about the flood. In order to maximise its profits and returns, capital can only choose to have its value possessed by a very small number of people or to monopolise it, or to realise it quickly. This is the nature of money in the capitalist system. The UN’s financial reforms, on the other hand, seek to ensure that value is shared by more people and that value is reflected in the longer term. Clearly, this runs counter to the properties of capital. And when capital dominates the entire human economy and society, the UN’s quest for financial reform is doomed to failure.
In January 2022, Guterres listed “a raging new crown epidemic, a morally bankrupt global financial system, a climate emergency, a state of lawlessness in cyberspace, and weakened peace and security. “This is a five-alarm global fire. These five crises, like fires, are posing a serious threat to the survival and security of humanity and require urgent action by the world’s governments to put out this global fire.
For the global financial system in particular, Guterres not the least bit polite. The pandemic has highlighted the system’s failure. Guterres was particularly outspoken about this: “Let’s tell it like it is: the global financial system is morally bankrupt. It favours the rich and punishes the poor.” This view of Guterres is in line with that of Lao Tzu, who was perhaps also influenced by the Tao Te Ching. Lao Tzu said: “It is the Way of Heaven to diminish superabundance, and to supplement deficiency. It is not so with the way of man. He takes away from those who have not enough to add to his own superabundance.” According to Lao Tzu’s thinking, the current financial system is contrary to the Way of Heaven.
In a tweet dated 19 March 2022, Guterres further argued that the global financial system does not create a level playing field. Its logic is to maintain existing inequalities rather than promote development. It allows the rich to get richer and the poor to get poorer. This mechanism is not conducive to unlocking human potential and building strong economies. There is no doubt that Guterres wants to change this irrational and inequitable financial system. But this can only be a fond wish. In reality, there is no possibility for the UN to change it.
Not only can you not change it, but you have to be careful not to offend it. It is reasonable to say that “a clever woman cannot cook without rice”. With the UN so short of money, the heart of reform must be financial reform. But everyone has seen it. For so many years, the UN has been reforming that it does not even dare to touch this topic. According to its official statement, the idea of UN reform was first proposed by Kofi Annan, the seventh Secretary-General, in 1997.
The 2005 UN World Summit placed UN reform and development at the top of its agenda, and in 2011 the eighth Secretary-General, Ban Ki-moon, established a dedicated UN reform team to promote UN reform. 2017 saw an even stronger push for UN reform under the leadership of the current Secretary-General, Guterres. The most notable outcome was the revitalisation of the Resident Coordinator system, which comes into effect in 2019. The revitalisation is in fact a deep management reform, essentially an attempt to break out of the UN’s funding dilemma.
Among Guterres’ three main themes of focus in promoting radical reform are “development”, “governance” and “peace and security”. But, like several of his reforming predecessors, there is still no direct reference to financial reform. Why, and what is the reason for this, is it not worthwhile for each of us to ponder?
(to be continued)
The English translation is mainly done by AI and is inevitably not accurate enough. Please refer to the original Chinese text below for a more accurate understanding.
联合国引领人类社会打造数字地球的必要性和可行性（006）
— — 致联合国秘书长古特雷斯及全球贤达的公开信
4，联合国改革与自救
前面，我们用了大量的事实和数据，来陈述和分析了联合国的现状。并不是对联合国不满，也不是想指责联合国，更不是想攻击和诋毁联合国。而是想让联合国、尤其是想让秘书长意识到，今天的联合国，不仅自身被金钱制约着、扼杀着。联合国在这种境况下的不能作为、或者无法作为，是不是也在制约着人类社会，也在扼杀着人类文明呢？这并非危言耸听，而是严酷的现实。
古特雷斯秘书长或许感到很委屈，我并没有自欺欺人的想法、也没有画饼充饥的意图，人类现在面临的危机，联合国现在面临的困境，我都毫无保留的在联合国官网中、推特上公开了出来。是的，必须承认，古特雷斯是坦诚的、公开的，他没有隐瞒任何事。可我们也必须清楚，绝大部分的老百姓是不会关注联合国官网和秘书长推特的，他们认为那都是你们国家和政府间的事，与我们普通老百姓无关。即使他们看到了，第一，不会去评估这些问题是否构成危机；第二，更无法去相信这些危机究竟有多严重。而正视危机和危机的严重性，团结和引领人类社会直面危机、化解危机、重塑一个更公平、更合理、更美好的人类社会，这正是联合国、联合国秘书长及官员、全球社会贤达，以及全球有识之士不可推卸的责任、义务和使命。
或许，联合国及秘书长可以思考一下《道德经》37章表达的思想：联合国需要持守一个什么样的道，才能让各个国家和地区在其中自然化育。而当各个国家和地区都呈现出自己的需求和欲望时，联合国又该如何去安稳地持守住那个叫不上名的最朴素、或者最原始的初心，让世界最终变得和平、安宁、美好。
结合前面中国改革开放的例子。邓小平说：“发展是硬道理”，这里指的发展，主要是经济发展。胡锦涛强调“把保障人民的生存权、发展权放在保障人权的首要位置”。或许，联合国要持守的道，就是要千方百计保障世界各国最基本的生存权和发展权。而那个说不上名最朴素的根本，就是保障人民生存权和发展权的最基本经济条件，也就是最低限度资金。中国的改革开放，创造出了40多年经济高速发展的奇迹，才从根本上解决了保障生存权和发展权所需要的资金问题。中国才具备今天这样的持续发展后劲。而联合国成立70多年来，作为世界上唯一的主权国联合体，当他自己都在金钱制约下陷入名存实亡绝境时，又如何能保障世界上众多发展中国家、经济落后国家的生存权和发展权呢？在这样的形势下，世界又怎么可能和平、安宁、美好呢。
联合国很早就意识到了自己的危机，清楚自己必须改革，并为此付出了持之以恒的努力。可核心的问题始终没有解决。联合国改革的核心是什么，毫无疑问是金融改革。而金融改革，在当前这种全球资本主义金融体系下，根本无法推动，更不可能取得任何实质性进展。
《寂静的春天》作者蕾切尔·卡逊于1963年就指出，“当今世界崇拜速度和数量，崇拜快捷地赚取利润，这种盲目崇拜滋生了滔天罪恶。”在市场经济环境下，资本为了快速而大量的攫取利润，既无良知、又无人性；既无长远眼光、又无全局意识；既无环保认知，又无生态思维。正所谓：我攫取利润之后，那管它洪水滔天。资本为了谋求利益最大化、回报最大化，只能选择价值被极少数人占有或独占、只能选择价值的快速变现。这就是资本主义制度下的金钱属性。而联合国的金融改革，谋求的是价值能被更多人分享，价值能在更长远的将来体现。显然，这与资本属性背道而驰。而在资本主宰着整个人类经济社会时，就注定了联合国寻求金融改革必然失败。
2022年1月，古特雷斯将“肆虐的新冠疫情、道德沦丧的全球金融体系、气候紧急情况、网络空间的无法治状态以及和平与安全受到削弱。 ”列为一场五级警报的全球火灾。认为这五大危机像火灾一样，正在对人类生存和安全构成严重的威胁，需要世界各国政府紧急行动起来，共同扑灭这场全球大火灾。
尤其是对于全球金融体系来说，古特雷斯毫不客气。认为这场大疫情，凸显了这个体系的失败。古特雷斯对此特别直言不讳：“让我们实话实说。全球金融体系道德沦丧。它偏袒富人，惩罚穷人。”古特雷斯这个观点与老子是一致的，或许他也受到道德经影响。老子说：“天之道，损有余而补不足。人之道则不然，损不足以奉有余。”按照老子的思想，现在的金融体系是违背天道的。
古特雷斯在2022年3月19日推文中进一步认为，全球金融体系并没有创造一个公平竞争环境。其逻辑是维持现有的不平等，而不是促进发展。让富人越来越富，穷人越来越穷。这个机制并不有利于释放人类潜力和建立强大经济体。毫无疑问，古特雷斯是希望改变这个不合理、不公平金融体系的。但是，这仅仅只能是一个美好的愿望而已。现实中，联合国没有任何改变它的可能。
不仅不能改变它，还得小心翼翼不去触犯它。按理说，“巧妇难为无米之炊”。联合国这么缺钱，改革的核心一定是金融改革。可是，所有人都看到了。这么些年，联合国改革，甚至都不敢触及这个话题。按其官方说法，联合国改革这个提法，最早由第七任秘书长科菲·安南在1997年提出。
2005联合国世界首脑会议，就把联合国改革、发展列为首要议程。2011年，第八任秘书长潘基文成立了专门联合国改革团队，推动联合国改革。2017年，联合国改革在现任秘书长古特雷斯的领导下，有了更大力度的推动。其最显著成果是2019年生效的重振“驻地协调员系统”。说是重振，实际上是进行了深度管理制度改革，实质在于试图突破联合国的资金窘境。
在古特雷斯推进彻底改革的三大重点主题中，有“发展”、有“管理”，也有“和平和安全”。但与他的几任改革前任一样，依然没有直接提到金融改革。为什么，这其中的缘由，难道不值得我们每个人深思吗？
（未完待续）
