YouSaid · the spoken record

Calvani

THE RECORD WRITES THIS SPEAKER AS CALVANI

lines on the record: 135
first: 1969-09-24
most recent: 1973-09-24
sittings or episodes: 5
sources: un-general-debate

Every line below is reproduced as it was said and linked to the record it came from. Nothing here is summarised or generated. Directory · Search · Corrections

“Man dehumanized, one of the mass, has abdicated his fundamental condition as a human being, namely, the predominance of reason. Critical judgment has been replaced by emotional reaction, rational life by emotional life. 117. Thus it is that dehumanized man can easily become the plaything of the most diverse pressure groups. He has become fertile soil for the emergence of every kind of hatred and rancor, for all sorts of sectarian positions, however inconceivable, and for every kind of act, however brutal. Finally, this depersonalized, mass man, is capable of any sacrifice for the sake of myths imposed on him and to which he clings emotionally of every kind of violence, unable as he is to grasp the full significance of his acts. 118.”
1972-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 27 (1972)
“At the same time, the technological revolution, with the profound changes it has introduced in all the material instruments of human life, has generated a growing process of mass phenomena. This is a continuing social process of progressive depersonalization. The human person-man, as a being endowed with reason and liberty is replaced by mass man. In that mass man, primitive reactions prevail over rational life. He becomes the easy victim of manipulation processes; that is to say, he is at the mercy of those who know how to handle the media of social communication and the techniques of psychology so as to influence man's fundamental attitudes. 116. The consequences of these mass phenomena are far-reaching and deep-seated.”
1972-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 27 (1972)
“With the ever-faster migration from the rural to the urban areas, we witness the emergence of metropolis and megalopolis, gigantic cities whose inhabitants live in overcrowded conditions. 114. Man's landing on the moon has enabled us to reach a new dimension: that of space. Our earth is almost beginning to look like an enormous spaceship. As we stated last year in this Assembly: "Thus there emerges a new concept: that of mankind. We think of mankind as all the peoples of the world and, thus conceived, mankind appears to us as a world-wide society which encompasses us all and which is in opposition to individual societies or States, having their own lives, it is true, but dependent on the development of that greater society." [1944th meeting, para. 8.] 115.”
1972-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 27 (1972)
“Many factors have contributed to this phenomenon: distance is no longer the obstacle it once was; we have the means to travel with incredible speed from one part of the earth to another. The revolution in transport has been followed by a revolution in the means of social communication. Thus, in our time, it is possible for men to contact each other at any point or in any region of the world, almost immediately. 113. The impressive growth of the world's population has become a further element of change. Because of the population explosion or to be more precise the demographic revolution the earth is becoming increasingly smaller for an ever-larger population.”
1972-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 27 (1972)
“His outstanding qualities have left an indelible impression on the minds of all those of us who were privileged to know him, and the pleasant memory of his kind personality. 110. I should like especially to offer our warmest congratulations to our present Secretary-General, Mr. Kurt Waldheim. His distinguished career as an enlightened and dedicated man, committed to the loftiest ideals, undoubtedly ensure a promising future for the United Nations. 111. In this general debate we shall refrain from giving our detailed position on the specific items in the agenda. My delegation will put forward the views of my Government in the relevant debates. 112. Never have men felt so close to one another as today.”
1972-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 27 (1972)
“Mr. President, on behalf of my Government, I wish to express to you my sincere congratulations upon your election. It is a well-deserved tribute to your country, a land of age-old culture that has always been present at the crossroads of history, and, above all, a country that has always been a cradle of heroic men. It is, moreover, a proper recognition of your great merits as a highly capable and dedicated public figure. 108. May we on this occasion pay a cordial tribute to your predecessor, Mr. Adam Malik, who had the honor to preside over the General Assembly at the last session. 109. We could not at this time fail to remember our unforgettable friend UThant, or to pay him our most heartfelt tribute for his untiring and distinguished endeavors.”
1972-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 27 (1972)
“He, too, believes that only by pursuing great ideals will it be possible for mankind to realize its aspirations for peace and justice. 47. History teaches us that only human actions inspired by ethical principles have lasting value. We must therefore defend them in the international arena with the persuasive power of truth if we are to free ourselves from the coercive power of violence.”
1971-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 26 (1971)
“44. And yet such a state of affairs cannot be removed unless the developing countries are able to set aside their partisan national egotism and unite in order to deal with an unjust international order, 45. Perhaps members think this is Utopian. This same question was asked last year from this very rostrum, Is it, however, not more illusory to continue along the path on which we are embarked at present? Is it, perchance, the way to the development of peoples and peace among nations? 46. In making these final remarks I cannot fail to invoke the figure of our Secretary-General, UThant. For many years, in the performance of his functions, U Thant has devoted himself to the defense of the great moral principles that should guide relations among peoples.”
1971-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 26 (1971)
“41 The political State is not in itself an absolute, Its general mission Is that of being the nucleus and driving tee behind the development and the progress of communities and the human Institutions it encompasses, If due to the moral corruption of power a State assumes the iniquitous right of dealing on the destinies of other peoples as its political oligarchy sees lit, that State violates the Universal Common Good, There exist peoples that are prisoners of their Governments, In such eases their moral right to determine their own destinies Is usurped by their Governments, 42* The Universal Common Good must not be only a set of material profits and benefits, It Is also and fundamentally a multidimensional balance between the human person, societies and nations, and other human communities and nature in general, That Universal Common Good is and must be material, Intellectual and moral to allow the development of the material, intellectual and moral potential of all peoples, All this presupposes a keen awareness of those realities on the part of the developing countries, 43* It is quite obvious that participation in the international community cannot be based on the selfish and negative idea of benefiting from political or ideological domination or economic exploitation of other peoples.”
1971-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 26 (1971)
“In this great forum, it is fitting for Venezuela to reiterate an earnest appeal to the conscience of the developed countries made a few days ago in international meetings held in Geneva and Panama. 40. It is incompatible with the ideal of a Universal Common Good for a State to seek to set itself up as the sole possessor of truth and the monopolizer of the meaning of history, and it is even more incompatible when that State tries to Impose Its brand (if the truth with violence, People must be persuaded to accept the truth, not forced to accept It. No nation -unless it is willing to be held in contempt by others with regard Itself m the sob possessor of truth. Truth is to be found hi 'he authenticity, hi the nobility of peoples and Individuals.”
1971-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 26 (1971)
“We note with fear that the so-called Group of Ten seeks to assume and maintain the privilege of being the only ones in charge of the operation, alteration and reform of the monetary system. Once again, the developing countries have not been allowed a say in the decisions which so seriously affect them. 37. In international forums the risks involved in the monetary system have been pointed out consistently but the absurd struggle to maintain an untenable national prestige prevented the adoption of realistic decisions with the participation of all nations. 38. Measures adopted unilaterally, and contrary to the Universal Common Good, today seriously endanger the less developed countries. 39.”
1971-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 26 (1971)
“In other words, it is necessary for all countries members of the community of nations to become part of a real and effective universal economic system encompassing all stages of economic activity. This necessarily implies the formulation of a global integral policy of world economy oriented towards the development of mankind-the Universal Common Good-and not towards the development of a small, group of privileged countries. 35. In this connexion we must also point out that the Universal Common Good calls imperatively for the establishment of an international monetary system. But such a system cannot be effective without the genuine cooperation of all the countries concerned. 36.”
1971-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 26 (1971)
“Those sizable investments are in essence the clearest demonstration of how international relations take precedence over the Universal Common Good. 33. In the name of the Universal Common Good we must question the pattern of development of today's industrialized nations. That pattern has led to the division of peoples on earth between the haves-an exclusive closed club-and the have-nots. But this is not in keeping with the concept of the Universal Common Good. To continue on that line is to march towards suicide because that would increase the differences among nations and peoples. This cannot be the fate which history has reserved for mankind. 34. The Universal Common Good presupposes, moreover, a system of international distribution of production.”
1971-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 26 (1971)
“In a recent document a very important religious figure in the contemporary world stated: "Under the impulse of new production systems, national frontiers are coming down and we see new economic powers emerging multinational enterprises which, because of the concentration and flexibility of their means, can carry out autonomous strategies to a very large degree independently of national political powers and, consequently, without control from the point of view of the common good. By extending their activities these private organizations may lead to a new abusive form of economic domination in the social, cultural and even political fields." 32. Neither can we reconcile with the Universal Common Good the struggle for predominance by blocs, their arms race and the expenditures involved in maintaining the balance of power.”
1971-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 26 (1971)
“Nor is the system of foreign investments in the developing countries compatible with the Universal Common Good, when such investments are not oriented towards the development of those countries. Foreign investments that are made only for the sake of gain and one's own benefit are not in keeping with the concept of the Universal Common Good; quite to the contrary, they are a denial of that Common Good since they stem only from egotistical interests that have no social function. 31.”
1971-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 26 (1971)
“In time past the world has seen ritualistic cannibalism which was carried out at the individual level: one man was sacrificed. Today, it is fair to speak of social cannibalism, between nations and peoples. Under the cloak of technological development or "economic assistance", human communities and peoples are swallowed up. In fact, in order that some may develop, the very raison d'etre of the developing countries is taken away from them: their lawful right to forge their own destinies. 29. The introduction of a subtle neocolonialism is incompatible with the idea of the Universal Common Good. Apart from unilateral benefits derived from primary commodities, in the interests of better technological conditions, the use and exclusive development of new resources such as those of the sea and the atom and outer space are sought by some. 30.”
1971-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 26 (1971)
“Similarly, the Universal Common Good implies and demands respect for and recognition of the rights and the fundamental personality of different human communities. Moreover, just as each individual, by reason of the very demands of the Common Good, should be the architect of his own destiny, each State must be allowed to carry out its historic mission and to be primarily responsible for its economic and social development. 27. That Universal Common Good calls for the redistribution among peoples of the wealth that has been unjustly accumulated by a few countries which we have come to call the developed countries. From that need for redistribution flow several conclusions or corollaries. 28. It is not compatible with the concept of the Universal Common Good to sacrifice some peoples for the sake of one's own development.”
1971-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 26 (1971)
“We sincerely hope that this problem will be considered and analyzed in a truly suitable and satisfactory manner. I believe, moreover, that this question should be settled in a positive manner and in the not-too-distant future." 25. These statements by President Caldera will guide the attitude of the Venezuelan delegation in the very difficult debate that will take place on this item-and I say a difficult debate because this problem is highly complex. We must endeavor to reconcile divergences of view through an open and forthright dialog in order to arrive at a formula that will allow for the full participation of continental China without the expulsion of the Republic of China, 26. Mr. President, within each State the Common Good presupposes respect for the fundamental rights of the individual.”
1971-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 26 (1971)
“With this conviction, the President of the Republic of Venezuela on 4 March 1971, at his weekly press conference, stated the following: "There is no doubt that the United Nations, in order to be more effective must, if possible, obtain the representation of the whole Universe. A country so powerful and highly populated, so important in many respects, as continental China should undoubtedly play a role in the world forum that the United Nations represents. In this connexion, we shall raise no obstacle, and we sincerely hope that some of the problems connected with the entry of that country will be solved. For instance, we maintain diplomatic relations with the Republic of China, whose Government is in Formosa, and that country's representation should not be scorned by us.”
1971-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 26 (1971)
“International order cannot exist without harmonious, just and balanced development among nations, and this is only possible if it is oriented towards the Universal Common Good. 23. The achievement of that Universal Common Good, as we have said, calls for the co-operation of all peoples on earth. Th<3 principle of the universality of the United Nations lies, in fact, in that same perspective. We are convinced that our Organization will fulfill more efficiently its lofty purposes to the extent that we can ensure the participation of the largest possible number of countries in the world, 24.”
1971-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 26 (1971)
“The Universal Common Good requires a system of organized co-operation at all levels and in all sectors. In other words, it is necessary to pass from a system of international disintegration, where there is no harmony or over-all goals in the world, to a system of international integration, where we work with responsibility and a full awareness of what we are trying to do, 21. The contents of the Universal Common Good are to be inspired by International Social Justice, in whose name we have the right to demand burdens and responsibilities that are in keeping with the possibilities, the power, the degree of development or wealth of some peoples in comparison with others. 22. Thus we are faced with a logical development. Peace has a new name, and that name is development.”
1971-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 26 (1971)
“This solidarity will be dynamic only to the extent that it is directed towards the universal common good, and only if it is based on international social justice." [184ist meeting, para. 128.] 19. In effect, the Universal Common Good demands and requires active solidarity among nations. Mere coexistence, where perhaps the disintegration of others is expected or perhaps deliberately encouraged in a struggle for world predominance and triumph, is not enough. Far from it, the common good demands that we pass from coexistence to living together, We must turn from a system of relations, whatever they may be-whether of domination or exploitation or use of one State by another-to relations based on profound respect for the dignity of each State, while creating conditions for the liberation of everyone. 20.”
1971-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 26 (1971)
“That adaptation requires that we replace the erroneous and harmful concept of national egotism with the idea of sovereignty and patriotism prompted by solidarity between peoples in the light of the current values in International Social Justice. 16. Thus from an international order based on bilateral agreements between Governments we must turn to another where, through unilateral agreements, it may be possible to have institutions created by peoples. 17. From the sphere of national autarchy we must move towards the creation of a supranational society, through successive stages of integration. 18. We stated last year in this Assembly: "The third condition for peace is the establishment of active solidarity which will truly bind the different peoples of the world together.”
1971-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 26 (1971)
“Health, economy, agriculture, science, the arts, in short all man's activities in the contemporary world, are intimately dependent on the activities of other men and other peoples. Thus, Chen, as it does internally where each State seeks the realization of the common good of all its citizens, in the universal society of nations there is also need for a Universal Common Good wliich is the objective and raison d'etre of international authority and of the action of each of the States making up mankind. 15. That Universal Common Good requires a contribution from all peoples on earth. Our international structures must be adapted to the realization of the Universal Common Good.”
1971-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 26 (1971)
“Society guarantees him a full life and his right to seek perfection. He has obligations towards the community where he lives. Therefore man must devote his endeavors to collective tasks, to the common good, that is to say, the good of all individuals in other words the good of individuals taken as a whole. Society constitutes a whole, because it unifies the action of its members for the benefit of all. It is thus that it has been possible to define the common good as the combination of all social conditions enabling the human person fully to develop all his faculties and perfect himself individually and socially. This is the concept of the common good taken from the point of view of a State. 14. However, States are not alone, nor are they isolated in the concert of nations.”
1971-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 26 (1971)
“Art, science, philosophy and literature are today, more than ever before, the fruits of our collective work, it is thus that, over and above the particular characteristics of each nation, perhaps still not clearly defined but quite perceptible nonetheless, there progressively emerges the concept of the Universal Common Good towards which the interests of all peoples on earth should be directed. 12. In my earlier interventions in this same Assembly on relations between peoples, international order and peace, 1 emphasized the fact that we should seek to achieve an international order inspired by International Social Justice and oriented towards the Universal Common Good. I had occasion to refer only to International Social Justice. Today I should like to speak about the Universal Common Good. 13. Man does not stand alone.”
1971-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 26 (1971)
“There is need, therefore, for a social discipline capable of co-ordinating the activities of all for the benefit of ail. Today we can therefore speak, even in strictly scientific terms, of a universal duty to co-operate devolving upon all individuals and all communities. We, in fact, are here on earth to carry out together a common task: the development of mankind. A/PV.1944 11. The harmonious and human development of a civilization goes far beyond divisions within and between States.”
1971-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 26 (1971)
“We think of mankind as all the peoples of the world and, thus conceived, mankind appears to us as a world-wide society which encompasses us all and which is in opposition to individual societies or States, having their own lives, it is true, but dependent on the development of that greater society. 9. We understand that society-both national and international-seeks not only to satisfy certain needs but rather to organize collective life in order that it may lead to the development of mankind as a whole. This modern concept of development has placed co-operation, both at the national and international levels, in a completely new perspective. 10. The collective task is the development of civilization in other words, of man and of all men; of each people and of all peoples.”
1971-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 26 (1971)
“We are all beginning to have similar problems, similar dwellings, common concerns, identical preoccupations, similar customs. Thus, on the one hand, national communities are becoming aware of their own individuality, while, on the other hand, we are coming to realize how the fate of one affects the fate of all. 8. Gradually, in a somewhat confused though perfectly perceptible manner, we note that States that were regarded yesterday as a whole are today no more than parts of a- greater whole: our earth. Thus there emerges a new concept: that of mankind.”
1971-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 26 (1971)
“Technological advances have brought profound changes to means of social communication and transportation in general. As distances grow shorter and as relations among people are made easier, our earth, has become smaller and we who inhabit it feel closer to one another. When man reached the moon, a new, vital dimension was created: the space age. More than ever we are aware' of the unity and interdependence of the peoples of the world, that we are all members of the human race and that the whole earth is our great home. Can international borders perchance be seen from outer space? 7. In addition, this revolution in time and space offered to us by technology has created on our earthly planet a new situation: a similarity in the way of life.”
1971-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 26 (1971)
“We should also like to pay a tribute of thanks to your distinguished predecessor, Mr. Edward Hambro, who conducted the activities of the last session of this Assembly with skill, prudence and balance. 3. We are especially happy, on this occasion, to extend a cordial greeting to the new Member States of the Organization: Bahrain, Bhutan and Qatar. 4. In this general debate, we shall refrain from giving our position in detail in relation to specific agenda items. Our delegation will give its views thereon in the relevant debates. 5. I should like, instead, to turn my attention, in this unique forum of the nations of the world, to fundamental principles that my Government regards as essential for the consolidation and progress of international order. 6.”
1971-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 26 (1971)
“1. Mr. President, on behalf of my Government, I wish to convey to you our most sincere congratulations upon the special distinction conferred on you by the Assembly in electing you its President for its twenty-sixth session. We are greatly pleased with this election because of the special ties which the defense of the legitimate rights and interests of the developing countries has forged between our two countries. Your election is a token of appreciation of your contribution to the cause of the independence of your country and your long and distinguished career in the service of Indonesia and in defense of the lofty ideals of the international community. It is, likewise, a tribute to the age-old continent, the cradle of civilizations, to which your country belongs. 2.”
1971-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 26 (1971)
“I put it to you whether it is not more Utopian to continue on the road that we are on now and to believe that it will take us towards peace and international security. 136. In examining all these problems we must necessarily think of the heavy burden which our Secretary- General, U Thant, bears on his shoulders. 137. Our children, the men of tomorrow, will require of us categorically at this twenty-fifth anniversary session of the United Nations that we construct a human and just international order in which peace and freedom of spirit shall reign in the hearts of men. Let us all unite our efforts, so as not to disappoint them.”
1970-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 25 (1970)
“It will be a social and revolutionary humanism founded on the recognition of the unity and indivisibility of the fate of mankind and of the eminent dignity of the human person. Its goal will be the development of the whole man and of all men. It will regard as a fundamental right of each national community active participation in the decisions which concern it in the international order. It will at all times be directed towards the promotion of the universal common good, inspired by an ideal of social international justice. 134. A durable and lasting peace is to be the goal that it will try to achieve. It will not be an imposed peace, but a voluntary peace, a peace sought for, a peace accepted and shared. 135. Is this Utopian?”
1970-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 25 (1970)
“This is what we might call the stage of pluralist integration, a more appropriate method than the system of defensive and offensive alliances which is characteristic of bloc politics. 132. Active solidarity among nations requires of us the elimination of the machinery of political-economic subjection imposed de facto by the developed countries of East and West, to the detriment of the underdeveloped countries. 133. Active solidarity among nations, lastly, imposes on us an obligation to impart a new ideological concept to the new civilization, to the new international order which is already knocking impatiently at our doors. This new ideology must start from the historic reality that we are living in now and the profound aspirations of peoples.”
1970-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 25 (1970)
“While there is one part of mankind which considers that the economic and social way of life of another part of mankind is an evil to be destroyed, it will obviously be difficult for real solidarity to prevail; we cannot go beyond mere tolerated coexistence, which is a kind of marking time, or holding war at bay, as it were, simply holding off the destruction of one party by another. Coexistence in this way will remain simply a stage in the game of the unstable balance between blocs. 131. If we want to achieve a shared and non-imposed peace, active solidarity between nations will compel us to embark upon successive processes of integration to get from the sphere of national autarchy towards the creation of a supernational society.”
1970-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 25 (1970)
“The solidarity of mankind is no longer a subject for discussion. 130. But, the barriers to international solidarity must be surmounted. These are two: first, there is the proliferation of overblown nationalism. This nationalism exalts beyond all measure national egoism and creates obstacles to a balanced co-ordination among peoples. Second, there are ideological hatreds which lead to divisions among nations and engender divisive fanatical attitudes which are quite negative and are a rich fertilizer for the appearance and flourishing nature of violence as a system.”
1970-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 25 (1970)
“This solidarity will be dynamic only to the extent that it is directed towards the universal common good, and only if it is based on international social justice. 129. The profound social, political, economic, cultural, scientific and technological changes that have taken place have altered human relations within the various societies, both national and international. The earth is shrinking, and we men are drawn closer to each other. National communities have become aware of their individuality. It is all the time being more clearly understood how the fate of each is bound up with the fate of the rest. Also, admittedly in a confused form but quite visibly, there is emerging the idea of a universal common good over and above the desires of each nation, towards which the interests of mankind should be directed.”
1970-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 25 (1970)
“This means that it is necessary for relations between nations to become ordered in accordance with the principles of international social justice, which leads me to quote again from the words of President Caldera: "... if we believe that there is an international community, and if we truly maintain that all men, all of us, are part of a great society and that this great society has the right to exist and prosper, it is indispensable that on its behalf appropriate responsibilities and burdens, functions corresponding to the possibilities, strength, level of development and wealth of certain peoples vis-a-vis others should be required of peoples". 128. The third condition for peace is the establishment of active solidarity which will truly bind the different peoples of the world together.”
1970-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 25 (1970)
“Otherwise our aid programs will establish new forms of colonialism and will reinforce existing injustices, and the gap between the rich and poor countries will widen constantly. 126. At this point in man's evolution it is impossible to admit that a developed country can impose upon an undeveloped country to which it provides "aid" a counterpart equal to usually it is greater than the "value" of the "service" provided. Under such conditions how will it ever be possible to emerge from under-development? When we spoke before this august Assembly last year we quite rightly said that "the wealth of the developed countries sinks its roots in the poverty of the developing nations" [1779th meeting, para. 88]. 127.”
1970-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 25 (1970)
“There is no difficulty at all in applying this concept to the international community. "Just as society at the national level has a right to impose various relationships upon its members, so the international community requires of the various peoples participation in accordance with their capacity so that everybody may live a human life. The obligations and rights of the various peoples have to be gauged, therefore, according to the capacity and needs of each people, in order to make peace, harmony and progress feasible so that we shall all advance in real friendship." 125. Therefore, if we believe that the development of every man and all men is the new name for peace this implies a fundamental shift in the principles which lie behind the present international order.”
1970-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 25 (1970)
“At this point I would echo the words of my Head of State, Dr Rafael Caldera: "The formula for bringing about happy relation-ships which will take the form of friendship and inter-national co-operation cannot be a fierce struggle to buy more cheaply for ourselves and to sell ourselves at a higher price. The idea that more trade will make aid less necessary is true but only so long as trade becomes fairer and justice for the peoples of the developing countries takes the form of a greater chance to bring about the urgent changes they need. I believe in international social justice. As Aristotle saw it, justice demands that one should give everybody that which is his. As his thought has been developed in Christian philosophy, that which is his as a concept does not apply merely to individual men but also to society for the common good.”
1970-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 25 (1970)
“Reciprocal respect between national communities, which is a prime condition for peace, excludes relations based on domination and subjection between developed and developing countries, and even also among the industrialized States themselves. What is needed is real participation, more social and more democratic, by the community of peoples. Moreover, in order to lie authentic, peace must be shared in both the obligations and rights it involves. In this way, also, international authority will not be regarded as an instrument for world domination. Equality and dignity among States lastly presupposes the elimination of racism as a source of discrimination between States. 123. The second condition for the establishment of peace among nations is the ordering of relations between peoples along the lines of international social justice. 124.”
1970-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 25 (1970)
“This leads us, then, to ask ourselves what are the conditions necessary for real peace among nations. 120. The first condition is real equality among national communities. For this purpose a radical change is required, a change which will involve the thoroughgoing alteration of existing structures. 121. No country on earth, however powerful or developed, has more dignity than any other. Each people has its own personality and specific ways of living that deserve respect. We must accept ourselves as we are, with both our good qualities and our short-comings. 122. Frank and sincere dialog must start between nations as the best way to bring about mutual under-standing.”
1970-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 25 (1970)
“117. The United Nations Charter has an original sin. The United Nations was born of a war and tried to end war in general. The victorious parties in the last world war imposed their peace. However, there is no such thing as an imposed peace. Peace, to be authentic, has to be shared. 118. The United Nations, born of the historic trauma of war has not been able to go beyond that first anxiety of preserving men from the scourge of war. In this respect we could go so far as to say that all that has really been avoided is world war. As such, the phenomenon of war has been a permanent reality even though it has been confined to certain different regions of the earth. 119. But peace cannot simply be reduced to a mere absence of wars. The absence of armed conflict is only the negative aspect of peace, not its true essence.”
1970-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 25 (1970)
“The infraction, to some extent, ratified the true nature of the norm. But this is something different. What we are talking about is a contempt for rules, a disregard for their ethical content. An obvious example can be found in the acts of kidnapping and aerial hijacking which have occurred in recent months. 115. This is a disturbing picture. We believe that it affects the historical reality that we are experiencing now. It dispels all of our illusions and compels us to act. It also makes it possible to understand that fate condemns us if we do not act. 116. But, also, we must ask ourselves: why have so many efforts to produce peace given such results? Why have we confused the avoidance of war with the quest for peace? To understand this, the best way to proceed is to examine the manner in which the United Nations came into existence.”
1970-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 25 (1970)
“The man of today remains in this way at the mercy of those who are able systematically to use the levers of the sub-conscience and of instinct. 114. This picture of the growing advent of mass phenomena is completed with a picture of very considerable mental confusion. Societies see collapsing around them, apparently or really, the scale of values which support them. The phenomenon affects mankind as a whole. There is no country in the world which has not seen challenged all the principles on which we have lived so far. This confusion about values applies to the international sphere too. Norms which have governed relations between peoples since time immemorial are now at a critical stage. It is not a question of violation of these norms. Violations or infractions of rules have always existed in mankind.”
1970-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 25 (1970)
“In this case, of course, it is the oppressors who practice violence; and the right to rebellion, legitimately exercised, represents the people's striving to restore juridical order. 112. Together with all these things, there is a growing process of lowering of Individuality and the arrival of the mass phenomenon. Progressive depersonalization is taking place. There is a loss of a feeling of the human person understood as a rational free being, which is now being replaced by that of the interchangeable man, the individual in the mass. 113. Critical judgment has been replaced by the emotional reaction, and rational life by the life of feeling. In the disappearance of the critical judgment, man has lost his true status as a human being and his fundamental characteristic reason.”
1970-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 25 (1970)
“In this way the consequences of violence now strike individuals who had nothing to do with the drama being played out around them. As a corollary of fanaticism and divinely sponsored aggression, there has been a whole host of crimes of all kinds: kidnappings, assassinations, hijackings, attacks, and so forth. All these acts occur at the expense of innocent human beings, as a way of committing acts of violence against others who are thought to be guilty. In this way mankind has gone back to a time which we thought was permanently in the past. We have released instincts which lead to the explosion of passions, which are characterized by special interests or fanaticism. 111. What we have said, of course, does not exclude the right of peoples to rebel against tyranny, colonialism, racism, or any other form of oppression.”
1970-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 25 (1970)
“Force is the body of all means and procedures used by law for the enforcement of law. On the other hand, violence signifies the illegal use of force meaning the indiscriminate use of force not in accordance with pre-established principles. 109. A new fact about today's world then is this cult of violence; what it amounts to is the consecration of the use of indiscriminate force for whatever purposes are being pursued. Violence is an end in itself. Those who support this new religion of violence proclaim that they will not stop at any crime in order to put an end to injustice. They forget that violence can only lead to further acts of injustice, and if these acts are pursued nothing can be changed on the surface of the earth, for, qualitatively speaking, we would all be living at the same level of injustice. 110.”
1970-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 25 (1970)