Изображения страниц

We favor an exploratory conference along the lines of House Concurrent Resolution 59 for the purpose of considering steps acceptable to all nations whereby the United Nations would become more effective in enacting, interpreting, and enforcing world law.

We favor the immediate granting of the $65,000,000 interest-free loan for the building of the permanent headquarters of the United Nations. This would indicate something of our American support for our world organization.

- We favor immediate entrance into the World Health Organization and the International Relief Organization as two means of increasing our cooperation with the United Nations.

We urge that it be the policy of our Nation to use the agencies of the United Nations more fully in all matters of international nature.

In lieu of the armaments quotas proposed in House Concurrent Resolution 163, we propose that the Security Council take steps to accomplish the complete elimination of all national armaments. We believe that the further building up of national armies will greatly weaken rather than strengthen the United Nations.

We propose that the Security Council establish an international police force, made up of volunteers recruited exclusively from the citizens of the smaller member states and carefully trained as an international constabulary. We believe that prompt procedure of this character would greatly decrease the present fear and insecurity in the world. It would also permit the redirection of billions of dollars now going into armaments into constructive channels making for the improved health, housing, education, and feeding of peoples in our own land and abroad.

ANDREW JUVINALL, Representative of the World Peace and Brotherhood Mission.


NATIONAL WOMAN'S CHRISTIAN TEMPERANCE UNION The National Woman's Christian Temperance Union has never been unqualifiedly in favor of the United Nations Charter. We have always felt it was overloaded to favor power politics, was top-heavy and unworkable. We testified in its behalf reluctantly and with reservations, because it was the only vehicle offered through which there was a possibility that international understanding might be reached, and we so stated in our testimony before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. We said then that we felt something might be accomplished by providing a conference table around which the nations of the world might sit and exchange ideas and become acquainted with one another.

We have been agreeably surprised at the success which this conference table exchange of ideas has attained in the General Assembly. The joint concensus of opinion of the nations of the world has, it appears, that same saving sense of morality, justice, fair play, and ultimate values that characterizes everywhere the mass thinking of the people when it is allowed to function undisturbed by induced hysteria. It is this foundation of sound sense that has underlain and kept intact the institutions of freedom in this our Government “of the people, by the people, and for the people" in spite of the onslaughts from all sides of many selfish interests.

We feel that UN has proved itself. It is hamstrung and hobbled by the many artificial restraints with which it has been hampered by the provisions of the Charter, but we are willing to trust to its sense of justice the important decisions on world policy which must be made, and we feel the time has come to loose it from its swaddling bands.

Chief among its hampering restrictions is the veto power whose unrestricted use has almost brought about the complete destruction of its effectiveness. We believe these bills, House Concurrent Resolution 163, through House Concurrent Resolution 176 are a step in the right direction. It is imperative that an international police force which would be available to enforce its decisions be set up, and we believe that its early establishment would lead to the settlement of many disputes whose existence now threatens the peace of the world, and that it would be a definite means of averting war, far more effective than unilateral threats and shows of force on our part could ever be.

We hope the committee will favorably consider these bills and report them out at an early date. It would be constructive action, and a real attempt to get at the heart of our international problem.


For the past 3 years the vast majority of mankind has ardently longed for the success of the organization that was set up in San Francisco that optimistically inserted the word “United" before the word “Nations' to form its official title, hoping against hope that it might bring "peace on earth, good will among men.”

I appreciate the invitation of your chairman to express a few thoughts that have come to me as to why it is that the United Nations has not succeeded in bringing forth the much desired unity among the nations of the world. The immediate question before mankind today is whether to try to amend the charter of that organization, so as to make it effective for the purpose intended, or to try to create a new organization-either along different lines or similar ones, on the same or on a wider and saner basis—with the announced objective of bringing into existence the answer to the prayers of all people for a cessation from both needless wars and needless poverty, for I submit, as the first point I would like to make, that those two subjects are but different aspects of the same over-all problem.

During these 3 years the emphasis has been placed correctly upon the need for an organization to bring peace however arrived at—but chiefly by planning to transfer the responsibility for the use of armaments for the defense of individual nations or groups of nations to an over-all organization of nations-of all nations if possible—in the belief that from then on a world police force must do for all of the people of the world as world citizens that which their respective nations or groups can no longer establish for them as national citizens.

That emphasis on peace among nations, as something possible of attainment separate and apart from the attainment of prosperity for the individuals composing those nations, must now be shifted or widened.

From now on, in the minds of men everywhere, the desirability of peace among nations must be associated with the desirability of attaining peace of mind and for individuals on other phases of security apart from that connected with armed combat. The cessation of war is not in itself a complete thing unless it brings to the individual the chance for the prosperity and happiness that supposedly acrompanies peaceful conditions.

The goal to be aimed at from now on is not so much the uniting of nations (and in a "united nations” organization of appointees) as the uniting of individuals of the earth in an over-all government (of the people of the planet, by the people of the planet, for the people of the planet) in a duly popularly elected “planetary government,” with that supernational government related to the existing nations of the world in a manner similar to the present relationship between the various constituent States of the Union and the United States of America.

A three-legged stool cannot stand on one of its legs, nor on two of them. Similarly, a world organization cannot be made to stand steadfast unless it is composed of and stands three-square on the supports of universal peace, economic justice, and individual freedom.

To think out ways and means of providing all three of these things at one and the same time is the task of peace lovers and justice lovers and freedom lovers here and everywhere, while there is yet time to get busy at that task, before the atom bombs begins to fall.

I submit that your committee could, and therefore should, recommend to the United States Congress that that body recomemnd to the United Nations that it consider publicly the suggestions I am making (with its deliberations made a matter of world-wide radio dissemination by right of eminent domain-necessity knowing no other law than its own-over any and all radio transmission at the moment, so all mankind with receiving facilities can hear those deliberations.)

If the present delegates to the United Nations-reflecting world public opinionwere favorable to the idea of that body being transformed from that of one appointed by the rulers of the nations, as at present, to a popularly elected body, representative of all the people of the world direct, instructions could be given out over the radio for all individuals who cared to do so to vote (and all should, on pain of forfeiture by nonuse, exercise their franchise rights on all questions of world importance) at local polls, to be arranged for by the United Nations. I earnestly urge your committee to recommend this procedure to Congress.

Carrying a step further the application of the idea expressed by Winston Churchill yesterday, in Amsterdam, where he told a gathering of 30,000 persons, in connection with the uniting of the nations of Europe : "It must be a Europe where men of every country will think as much of being a European as of being a citizen of his own country," your committee can recommend that Congress recommend that the United Nations recommend to individuals the world over that they should extend their consciousness and loyalty to an over-all world grouping of individuals in which they can each be as appreciative of world-citizenship rights and privileges and duties as they now are of national rights and privileges and duties.

This whole matter of a united world citizenship should be far above comparatively petty national or partisan politics and I assure you that it is not to inject them into these proceedings that I submit herewith, what I would call exhibit A a copy of a brief article to appear in the current issue of Action for Human Welfare, the official organ of the Holdridge-for-President Committee, of which I happen to be the local chairman. This article is entitled “Can We Salvage the United Nations,” and reads as follows:

"On every hand we hear the question raised as to whether the United Nations must go the way of the old League of Nations. What has happened to the high hopes and aspirations of the people, and the expressions of the world's diplomats who met at San Francisco? Was it all talk? Or was it just dust to be thrown into the eyes of the people? Could it have been nothing but a part of the planned fraud of warmongers and the exploiters of humanity to continue their malevolent control of the resources and the people of the earth? Was Dumbarton Oaks only a hoax? Was the gathering at 'Frisco only a planned fiasco? From the results it would seem so.

"But, even taking it for granted that the failure was planned from the beginning by those who wanted it to fail, i. e., the zealots of the free enterprise economic royalists and the latter-day money changers, what are the people going to do about it now? What can we, the people, do? What do we have time to do? Shall we try to salvage it? Can it be converted from a debating society of appointed delegates into a legislative body of elected representatives? And, if so, how?

"It has been said that all the people can be fooled some of the time, and some of the people all the time. The question is: Have the people been fooled enough about this supposed agency for world peace? This paper believes they have. And it proposes to proclaim, even thought it is at first nothing but 'a voice crying in the wilderness,' that the people should insist on the abdication of money lo.ds of the capitalist system insofar, at least, as their control of their puppet United Nations Organization is concerned. The people must act at once. Exactly, how, this paper is not quite certain, but attempt must be made without delay to upset the plans for further wars of the beneficiaries of wars and depressions, those who have fooled us long enough with their misnamed 'United' Nations, when it is all too obvious that the nations, as such, are not united, and that, as such, they cannot unite, and that the behind-the-scenes plotters of the United Nations neither believed nor intended that mankind should thereby become united. "How did this condition come about? Let us go back a bit.

"During the summer of 1940 four items appeared at intervals in the Washington Post; from which we quote:

"First (on May 26): Dr. Hjalmer Schact, former president of the Reichsbank, has been entrusted by Fuhrer Hitler with working out a plan for the economic reconstruction of Europe.” That article went on to say that Dr. Schacht planned "the introduction of a completely new monetary system.'

"Second (on July 12): An announcement that Sir Frederick Phillips, British Under Secretary of the Treasury, was on his way to the United States to discuss with Secretary of the Treasury Morganthau 'the whole problem of gold' and reconstruction of Europe on a gold basis again if England succeeds in defeating Germany."

"Third (on July 16): An article headed 'Fight to Save Gold Begins' stated : 'The United States and Britain began yesterday to map plans for a financial counterattack on Nazi Germany in an unprecedented battle to maintain gold as an international currency.' It went on to state: 'Great Britain and the United States hare viewed with anxiety the tendency of most nations, including themselves, to do without gold in every day exchange.' The article ended with : 'It is believed that the conversations between the American and British Treasuries have as their object the finding of some means to combat Xazi "work standard" theories which threaten the accepted gold standard economies of the democracies.'

“Fourth (July 20): An article headed ‘Britain and United States Map Postwar Economic Plan' began by stating: 'Great Britain and the United States have discussed blueprints for a postwar world that would be free of the present straightjacket controls on money and credit.' It went on to state: 'The new economic horizons were painted in secret conversations between Morgenthau and Sir Frederick Phillips. The talks lasted all week, with President Roosevelt participating at one point. The article ended by stating: The problem of retaining gold as a standard of currency after the war was covered as an incidental to the other conversations, with the understanding that both nations favored continued use of the metal.'

“That was before we were in the war.

“And then, after we had been in the war some time, we heard of the famous (or infamous) Bretton Woods Conference, which was held in secret, and chairmaned by Morgenthau. And then followed the equally secret Dumbarton Oaks Conference. Later on we read that Bernard M. Baruch, a month before the San Francisco meeting, had personally visited not only Roosevelt but Churchill and Stalin. And finally the Charter of the United Nations was brought forth, the most significant thing about which was that neither the word 'moner' nor the word 'bank' appears in it even once. It should not have been omitted, since money is to the business world as blood is to the human body: there should be enough of it, it should be of the right kind, and should circulate properly. This paper contends that money should not be based on gold or on 'credit' debt, because that means always there is an inadequate amount of money in circulation to properly take care of all the needs of all the people all the time, or even part of the time.

“Another fact, an historical one, and one it is contended is of paramount importance to any inquiry as to why the United Nations does not function better than it has, is that the issuance of one kind of money by the united Thirteen Colonies, instead of 13 separate kinds, was absolutely necessary to enable our United States to start to function properly. Similarly, what this old world needs now, more than anything else, is one uniform world currency, to be issued by a duly elected and democratically controlled federal world government, to enable that government to function as it should and as all the people of the worldexcept the beneficiaries of the present false gold standard and debt ('credit') standard—want it to function."

In his now famous book, The Anatomy of Peace, Emory Reeves states, and I believe correctly: “The complicated machinery of world economy, world-wide use of raw materials, distribution on the world markets, demands a stable standard of exchange that only a single world currency can provide." Taking this statement at its face value we should each ask ourselves—and keep on asking until we think we have the answer—as to what that currency should be, in order to then proceed to advocate its adoption and thus head off war by instituting that kind of currency which would provide the three-legged support for an efficient world organization to furnish universal peace, with economic justice and individual freedom for every human being.

I would like to submit here (as exhibit B) a copy of my proposed new kind of world currency as given to the reporter of the Washington Sunday Star, and about which he wrote in his paper on April 25: "He handed the reporter a printed copy of his dollar, which defeats unearned increment because it can be obtained only for an hour's work or for goods that took an hour to produce." It reads as follows: (1) This cert ate for one hour's service cendered-being part of a (1)

universally uniform system of providing legal tender to enable all able. bodied self-respecting human beings to render to society an equivalent service to that which they accept from society-is


in order to pay for the services and goods it receives from individuals and from nations and to provide allowances for the aged and otherwise handicapped and for the support and education of youth.


is redeemed each time it is parted with in payment for either one hour's service or for goods costing one hour to produce and distribute, until its final withdrawal from circulation by its being paid to the United Nations or any subdivision thereof as taxes for the continuous operation of governmental activities.

(Signed) John Doe, (1) No. A71594154

Comptroller of Currency, etc. (1) I would like to present one more exhibit (marked "C"), which is an article from a previous issue of Action for Human Welfare, entitled: "To All Advocates of World Government," which reads:

“Although it would seem that we who were at Asheville, N. C., in February 1947 have dallied too long and have failed to organize ourselves in time to head off the drift toward another world war and the destruction of civilization, nevertheless, as there is still a brief time left for us to keep on trying, let us redouble our efforts and at the same time no longer refuse to face the facts, viz:

"1. All who serve society—or are willing but unable to do so—are entitled to exercise their right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness without fear of depression and war. That is why we want world government.

"2. Although the end of depression and war (a new era of peace and prosperity) is almost within our reach-with atomic energy used for the welfare, not destruction, of humanity—it cannot be realized unless it is based on economic justice to all.

"3. Depressions are planned money shortages, creating needless poverty in the midst of potential plenty, with wars the outcome of needless trade rivalries for 'competitive foreign markets.' Both of these related needless evil things continue because the modern international money changers, through their control of the press, radio, movies, and political parties-purposely misinform and confuse the public upon the subject of what money should be and do.

"4. Just as it was necessary for our Thirteen Colonies to relinquish their up-to-that-time assumed and unchallenged sovereign rights each to issue their separate local currencies before they could successfully form an operating Federal Government here, so in like manner it is now absolutely necessary for the various nations of the world to be willing to relinquish their hitherto unchallenged sovereign rights each to issue their respective national currencies, in favor of a universally uniform currency system, which must not be based on gold or on debt (called 'credit'), but on the labor-time involved in the rendering of service to society, through the production of the various goods and servics that make for human happiness, for the use of all instead of for the profit of a few.

"Therefore you and I, fellow world citizens, and the other conscious victims of these twin evils of war and depression everywhere, should make it our business to learn, without delay, the whole truth about money, in order to act intelligently, as voters, and support only those candidates for office who plan to head off war by providing economic security for every human being, through (a) full employment, () adequate incomes, and (c) properly priced goods and services. Only those of us properly informed about the purpose and possibilities of a correct kind of universal currency can succeed in overthrowing the money changers and establishing 'peace on earth among men of good will’ in a democratic federal world government."

To summarize briefly, may I say that it appears to me that, as self-preservation is the first law of nature, in obedience to that law you and I can no longer delay in our making of a choice between being bombed out of existence, due to limiting ourselves to national citizenship only, and voluntarily accepting individual world citizenship status, with our duty then to proceed to agitate, educate, and organize for a democratically elected federal world government–by all the people partici

« ПредыдущаяПродолжить »