Sabbat and Holocaust

I remember Kant those days when his homeland, Kaliningrad or Königsberg is blocked, as also because the meetings of the most lethal powers, as G7, NATO, BRICS…

He says in the Appendix I titled: “On the opposition between morality and politics with respect to perpetual peace”:

“a state (USA, China or even a West or an East coalition) which once is able to stand under no external laws will not submit to the decision of other states how it should seek its rights against them; and one continent, which feels itself superior to another, even though the other does not interfere with it, will not neglect to increase its power by robbery or even conquest.” The maxims which he (the politician) makes use of -though he does not divulge them- are, roughly speaking, the following sophisms: Fac et excusa (Do and justify) Si fecisti, nega (If you did (evil), deny it), Divide e impera”, “Certainly no one is now the dupe of these political maxims, for they are already universally known”, “for they still have political honor which cannot be disputed -and this honor is the aggrandizement of their power  by whatever means.(2)” And this footnote 2, says: “Even if we doubt a certain wickedness in the nature of men who live together in a state, and instead plausibly cite lack of civilization, which is not yet sufficiently advanced, i.e., regard barbarism as the cause of those antilawful manifestations of their character, this viciousness is clearly and incontestably shown in the foreign relations of states”

All this is clearer if we put the right word to reality, if we see that states are actually arms, this is; the expression of the arm among humans, the armed unit, as I am trying you to look at to see also the way out. Also Kant sees it:

In the II Appendix called “Of the harmony which the transcendental concept of public right establishes between morality and politics”:

“This artifice of a secretive politics would soon be unmasked by philosophy through publication of its maxims, if they only dared to allow the philosopher to publish his maxims” (Where or what is democracy? Maybe it is based upon the killing of Socrates).

“In this regard I propose another affirmative and transcendental principle of public law, the formula of which is: “All maxims which stand in need of publicity in order not to fail their end, agree with politics and right combined.”

This proposal “in need of publicity (universality) in order not to fail its end” is disarmament, and this is also human unity, cosmopolitanism, since disarmament (ending with evil or purpose of harming) can only be carried out jointly by inclusive decision making. Those opposing the G7, or the NATO want to make political advantages -opposition politics, since they propose disarmament but forget about human unity, which is absurd. Unilateral disarmament is surrender, serving another arm anyway.

We saw it above: “a state (USA, China or even a West or an East coalition) which once is able to stand under no external laws will not submit to the decision of other states how it should seek its rights against them; and one continent, which feels itself superior to another, even though the other does not interfere with it, will not neglect to increase its power by robbery or even conquest.”


Read more



This message is a request to all people in the world, politicians or not, to make peace and humans never again attack humans because nowadays the cause of war is just ignorance, and we just need to spread the truth (the author apologizes and asks understanding for his shortcomings as bad writing and/or translation, and humbly requests the reader to kindly be indulgent, disregard them and not detract this message from its sense)

War and information

The very few people that have access to the information media of other countries or are so lucky to travel -activity so sadly limited by the pandemic, surely are experiencing the famous saying that truth is the first victim of war. But war, more precisely, reduces our horizon like the blinders on the horses for them to just see a narrow front only. Indeed, most people ignore some or many of the most relevant facts or alternative arguments regarding the conflict and it is because that the info they get is that of their own side or state which will always justify its acts and behavior while accusing as unjustified those of its enemy.

This experience about information control by the state was the breeding ground for cosmopolitanism or even the philosophy since the two go hand by hand. As much in the Chinese as in the Greek antique areas, where the two civilizations shared language and culture, they were divided in many states or polis which were unable to stop fighting among themselves and regulating information as right now to lead and encourage their people/youth/fighters.

The cosmopolitan proposal is human unity, human inclusive decision-making whose logical consequence is that it only deals with common good and avoids and prevents the arm, the (purpose of) harm, as it would be the incongruence of harming oneself. With human unity, even if decision-making keeps a subsidiary character and decisions are made by those concerned by the issue under question, its motives, purpose, and procedure are public or published, in this way the decision is universal, since universality, publicity or exposition of the truth, as Kant says, is contradictory with the purpose of harming.

However, antique cosmopolitanism was not feasible in an unknown world populated by unknown people and, therefore, it was uncommunicated and impossible to act jointly and simultaneously as is required by unity or inclusive decision-making. And their proposal was not only inviable, but it would weaken the state and the side where such a proposal could be heard, therefore the cosmopolitans were first refused, and their works later destroyed.

However, today in our globalized world peace is already possible because the whole world is at our reach to propose and carry out a transparent and open Congress on Human Unity where to openly deal with the establishment of an inclusive decision-making system and with disarmament and the dismantling of the borders. No need to hesitate or to call for elections, because no one can refuse peace and because it is not only hateful but contradictory/impossible to be in favor of being deceived and ignorant which is equivalent to deciding to renounce one´s own decision.


Words and Peace (Dear reader, please kindly allow me to illustrate this part with the help of The Quixote)

Many of The Quixote´s characters had read chivalry books, so that they could easily talk and act according to the jargon and manners of those books and enter the world of don Quixote and interact with him accordingly, but while some of them, feeling safe, would follow don Quixote’s craziness for entertaining or mocking purposes, many others followed it because they felt threatened by his arms and the latter is the case with our world of ideologies or figurations, first induced and then sustained by the pressure of the state’s means. The state needs to keep cohesion, and alignment with its allies around such figurative systems, while it must take care of the fake news which can disintegrate or demoralize it, news that could also be spread by foreign interests, enemies.

Christianism, Islam, Socialism, Democracy…. are some of those ideologies or figurations that, as don Quixote would require regarding Dulcinea´s beauty, we “have to believe, confess, swear, affirm and defend” without having seen or experienced it, because those figurations are ‘contingents’ and not independent, substantive realities and we can only refer to them after an initiation or learning about their contents and terminologies, so that, for instance, all the people in North Korea are communists, while all the people in South Korea are liberal democrats, the children in the areas now occupied by Russia in Ukraine are already learning how to be Russians, the original people of America converted to Christians and learned Spanish once they were conquered, and so it goes on and on.

On the other side, given the lack of success of those ideologies in the domestic field, people often appeal to “true” justice or “true” human rights, “true” democracy, “true” socialism, or “true” religion while attributing the cause of their misery to human being´s corruption and evil nature, but our history and present alike always show us poor humans, besides being intentionally induced to addictions or vice, living enslaved, exploited, persecuted, frightened and terrified by the (mutual) threat and action of the arms and finally forced to kill or die.

War is exposed in The Quixote like the charge against the windmills, as a fight of opposing figurations, nowadays the fight goes around the (cuasi-sacred) character of the political and economic management of the state as before was about religious beliefs, while the infinite dialectical fight goes on along with the also incessant and unending genocide.

But, in contrast with the figuration of a (other) ‘ideal’ world that we have to confess without seeing it, the human, direct, experimental way of knowing the real world is to put ourselves in other people´s shoes, so that if we see someone whose arm is twisted, we can believe, confess, affirm, swear, and defend willingly and without being urged to that it pains him and this is the way we know with certainty; therefore human cultures, separated in time or space, have got to identify in one way or another the so-called Silver Rule: “do not do to others what you would not like for yourself”, or the Golden Rule: “treat others as you would like to be treated”.

And this common human understanding helps us to truly understand the world, objects, and things according to its use or relation with our bodies since everything is to serve us. We can only properly understand what is a pen once we understand how it is used, what it is for, in the same way as if we see a table with its legs upwards we immediately know that is wrongly placed as we put it virtually in relation with our body and with our virtual perception of its service, it is meant to support our elbows or to sustain things on its top and we do not know that it is badly placed by means of a scheme, a syllogism or a dialectical movement.

That understanding based on things’ use or aim also implies our knowledge of what improves something as that which makes it easier to reach its end, and not only that but also when that object or thing shall be used, who shall use it, to whom it shall serve in first place, etc. There is no problem among humans to live together in peace, concord, harmony since we all share that common sense, and we can rule ourselves well by following it.

However, among those objects there is one, the arm, that is not meant to serve us, but to destroy and kill us, something we easily identify just by seeing the peak of the sword, of the spear, of the arrow, of the bullet…or in the explosive purpose of the bombs, missiles, howitzers, etc.  The arm was already present in nature before humans turned up and they had to adapt to it the best they could. The arm’s manifestation among humans is the hierarchically organized armed unit and any arm not integrated is illegal or is an enemy and shall be destroyed.

An arm means all possible arms, the arm and peace are incompatible because nobody can accept to live under death threat which is the immediate perception coming from the arm’s existence, however, nobody puts the arm under question, there we have the UN meant to justify and preserve it. It happens also that this threat does not demand to behave well, as sometimes is assumed and exposed, but to behave badly, to harm the other and in this way to be forced to expose oneself to be harmed, killed too. Cervantes says in the Speech on Arms and Letters that “without peace (and “it is the same arms or war”) there cannot be any good”, because our service to the arm absorbs us completely and puts us on the unrideable wave of war which does not even allow us to deal with issues of common interest or benefit such as fighting against human misery, environmental pollution, the possible climate change disaster and so on; our urgency and priority comes always from the arm’s contradictory demand which possesses us and divides us forcing us to harm each other and everything else is subordinated to it and without control.

Now, if we think about how to improve it, we see that increasing destruction capability matches with human top priority, activity and aim anytime and anywhere, and when shall the arm be used? Not just now and then, it is virtually and constantly used as a threat, making people confess and do or practice whatever it orders and requires, which in the end is for us to integrate in it and to assume its purpose of harming and destroying, of course, another arm, something we are all forced to without intervention of any (evil) human will, but because of an uncontrollable, logical, and mutual reaction. The arm is actually used to destroy the enemy´s arms when at war, as Clausewitz says, independently of the concrete aim of any war, war´s activity is only one: to disarm the enemy which will put it at our mercy for any possible purpose. And who can use the arm? Those who have more, as we see that the actual result of possessing arms means to be able to make decisions (basically when to destroy) and not to possess them means to be at mercy of others.

The so-called Public Law, meant to mediate among people and states to keep some order, judges the harm or evil caused by someone and condemns and punishes the criminal, so that one harm is compensated by another harm. However, getting armed, joining together as an armed unit to project harm and threat others, depriving them of their own decision and forcing them, is obviated by justice -the arm and humanity are obviated together. The consequent and logical effect of it is that justice is only the will of those who has more harming capacity; the most armed one makes others confess what is justice and then what is just or unjust. The reader can check the first adventure of don Quixote with the Shepperd Andres and the rich owner Juan Haldudo where justice is delivered several times according to shifts of power.

However, even if the arm is the top human production anytime and anywhere, its harming purpose makes it practically invisible, and when war breaks up it seems arms are casually there, before they have hardly been noticed in the newspapers, TVs, etc. And it is not just about the arm’s production and development, but about the type of arms, its deployment, its particular aims, etc. nothing is casual as it appears; on top of that invisibility, the arm aims to the greatest harm and destruction of its objective, namely, a real, living enemy that is in the same business against us, so we both are most concerned about how to counter, weaken and annihilate each other, and along with the arm is also hidden the strategy of every action of the state or armed unit. So, it is those harming (and consequently hidden) purposes that generate the need for those figurations meant to hide or disguise reality because harming purposes cannot be published, revealed because it would be self-defeating.

Even if peace was not viable in the past when humans lived uncommunicated, almost a century after the first world round trip, Cervantes shows us the “white flag of peace”, in the First Part of the Quixote, namely by the first encounter between the two representatives of the two irreconcilable faiths in an unending state of war, the Moorish woman and the Christian captive, and he shows us it again in the Second Part, written 10 years later, once the lions are locked in the flags’ cart, don Quixote raises the white cloth upon those flags calling back those flying terrified.

The white flag’s actual effect is to stop the arm´s activity, so it also suspends or puts on hold those colored flags of the armed units, but in the past the use of the white flag could only be temporary, ephemeral, there was not possibility of unity, inclusive decision-making and, therefore, raising it was close to surrender. But, in any case, the white flag is already the manifestation of the distinction between the arm or armed unit and the humans. And today we raise it to keep it at the highest forever.

Universal Congress on Human Unity

We raise the white flag calling for an open and transparent Congress on Human Unity, first requiring ceasefire there where arms are right now used for killing and destroying, because the human flag does not take sides, or better, it belongs to both sides. The white flag also means to suspend our confession and service to our armed unit or state and its coalition and its strategies, so that we show ourselves as simple humans but not as representatives of the state. Otherwise, if we step forwards for peace while keeping our state´s flag raised and our service to the arm, whose unavoidable activity is war and aggression, how could we ask for peace, or even ceasefire to other people from other states?

We certainly understand that politicians, military, officials, state servants and ideological and religious leaders, etc. might be placed in an awkward position, but this is in fact the same situation for every person, whose salary, rights, ownership, etc. are tied to the state. Indeed, this made it impossible and contradictory for the old cosmopolitans to claim for the cancelling of the state and we have some rare records of some personal experiences, but nowadays all those means of living are preserved and granted by Humanity´s sovereignty replacing state´s sovereignty, if we want to put it under these terms.

We might also need some patience and understanding because, even if it is amazing to say it, the people, politicians included, are ignorant of reality as yourself probably was unaware of it before reading this. People live in a figurative world, and this is very different and far apart from each other in different cultures, but this figurative world is of no importance for peace, and reality is all the same for all humans. We just need some perseverance in communicating the truth about the reality determined by the arm, because the reality is simple and it is impossible not to see how things are once they are pointed at and the eyes are put on them, as you, friendly reader, might have seen it once you have read this manifest for peace, but still some people might twist back their head for avoiding to see it (as it has happened with The Quixote’s reception), afraid of losing their living means, since they have clear understanding of their dependence on the state.

However, on the other side, there is nothing to be afraid of, because we raise the white flag of peace to make a universal call to let all people know the human unity proposal, but we can only act when all together and not before. The need for universality is our guarantee and security during the unity or disarmament process. Disarmament can only be universal because the arm, a tool to destroy, only exists because/against another arm, or, what is the same, the arm is by itself and not for any motive whatsoever, consequently disarmament must be reciprocal, as much as agreed and joint, while unilateral or partial disarmament is not disarmament, it is only to shift service with all forces and means, perhaps even more than before, to another arm.

We do not need to do anything unilaterally, something which might harm our own side, because we cannot disarm if not all together, but surely, we need first to be precise, accurate in our communication and request for peace and this is the contribution of the white flag I am hoisting.

Finally, in our days we can communicate with all people on Earth in an easy and fast way; it can be done from night to morning. Let´s do it right now. We cannot consent the genocide to go on when we have already an alternative in place.


Manuel Herranz Martín                                                                       16/05/2022


Read more

How to stop the war

Nowadays we have an alternative to war. Peace, cooperation, and concord are possible by stablishing human unity. War is the result of exclusive decision-making, something unavoidable in our past of mutual ignorance which has brought about our current division in states or armed units and almost mutual annihilation, but today we can overcome it and unite because we are basically all connected and the unity proposal and what it implies is easy to understand by everybody. Therefore, to achieve peace and concord, we just need to publish it -by sharing this message if you find it difficult to expose.

Unity means inclusive decision-making, this is, considering the whole Humanity, the condition, position and opinion of all and each human, and this is achieved just by publishing the decision-making process in an open and transparent way, so that anybody can propose new criteria, objections, and considerations to it. Publicity means universality, but the decision-making process is ruled by the principle of subsidiarity, this is each issue shall be solved by those close to the object under question, those affected by the decision are those who take part in this decision-making process. The decision-making is based on common sense and equality of each person according to her needs, fears and wishes, and therefore those decisions are not based on some people´s command upon others as it happens with the states and politics adapted to the state of war we live in now, but on the knowledge on the issue under question.

But the most immediate issue and the one which concerns us most equally is to put an end to the arms’ development and/or production, since arms’ aim is to kill someone else, whose actual, real and constant effect is depriving us of freedom or our own will. Therefore, they have no place for those who claim for a united world since no one can give up deciding by herself or himself (something that is impossible as well, since the arm is denying us even that option), and nobody can agree about being the (possible) arm´s killing target. Consequently, it is also a priority for all humans to carry out joint and agreed disarmament, which is the same as the human unity.

But even before disarmament comes, a first joint inclusive decision is needed which is immediate ceasefire in the conflict areas, where arms are being used (this might be the occasion to overcome our lack of own will which is submitted to the arm). As long as this human unity proposal is published, known, accepted and supported, the logical consequence of it and also the prove of its effectiveness, which brings us all freedom and without it nobody is free, is that we feel ourselves humans and we associate with all humans, we are thus on both sides in the fight and, therefore, that conflict is also our conflict and the fighters mutual destruction is our own harm and loss, and this drives us to act and grants us authority to intervene legitimately demanding ceasefire in order to proceed with human unity, disarmament, which is the opposite and definitive alternative to war (While appealing for peace without appealing for human unity, disarmament, is futile, even false -or fake news for common sense).

Read more


Dear Mr. Biden, Mr. Putin, and you all:

Human unity is the way to eliminate war, because inclusive decision-making excludes (mutually) harmful purposes and promotes and seeks common good only.

While partial or unilateral decision-making necessarily leads to conflict, as each part logically thinks and decides according to his/her interests without considering the others and this brings about struggle for the resources and impossibility of understanding.

If this (civil, dependent on the state) particular interests were just economic, it would not be enough to cause a war or mutual destruction, because destruction surely is worse than renouncing to obtain some resources.

However, what we are seeing in Ukraine now at stake is the control of the strategic position of that country and of its armed forces, while its alternative is only to have them against you in the opposite side, and this is enough to cause war.

The existence of the arm in nature before humans appeared had made us all HUMANITIES´s ENEMIES. However, today when the entire world is at our reach, whoever calls for HUMAN UNITY is a HUMANTY´S FRIEND because unity makes the arm, which manifests in armed units, redundant and eliminates it. And a humanity´s friend looks for the others to become it too. While this possibility now makes it that to be a Humanity´s enemy is out of one´s will.

You might think that since states cannot assume this initiative and the people are busy and closed in the state`s shoes box, human unity is a dream, at least by now… However, a ‘critical mass’ of people supporting it or a relevant event exposing it is enough to make human unity public which is now also global, and this will make a public answer unavoidable where unity cannot be refused because the harming purpose of the arm, needed for the unilateral decision-making, can no longer be justified by the other arm, precisely when he/she is renouncing it. Indeed, our reality of absolute war is the product of our history and mutual ignorance, but it cannot proceed from the human beings´ intelligence and will. Now we have a chance to reset.

And what is inclusive decision-making? It is quite simple. Inclusive decision-making is based on publishing its motive or cause and its purpose or aim, just like this message, and those that can be derived from it.

Read more

Letter to the UN Secretary-General, Mr. Antonio Guterres

Dear Secretary-General, Mr. Antonio Guterres,

My name is Manuel Herranz, I am the president of Human Unity Movement, HUM.

HUM first initiative has been to call for an open and transparent Congress of experts to deal with the establishment of human unity because, if we unite within an inclusive decision-making system, we will only pursue the common good and avoid, prevent and renounce mutual threats and harm. For me, disarmament (peace) and human unity are the same.

Read more


Dear friend,

My name is Manuel Herranz, PhD. For a great part of my life, I have been working as an international and executive consultant and only since 2017 as a professor of Humanities and Philosophy.

Very impressed by the possible annihilation of Humanity during the Cold War when I was a philosophy student in the eighties, I have been researching as an autodidact the possibility of human peace and concord and even then I tried to organize a world peace and disarmament festival with all world universities.

I moved to Berlin in 1986 where

Read more


It is surprising that the two most prominent philosophers in the East and the East, Confucius, and Aristotle, without any possible communication between them, both consider the Mean as the Virtue. Why? Here is the answer:


Read more

Truth and Peace

Read more

Interview on Human Unity – On private property

This is an interview I think quite interesting to understand the Movement of Human Unity, it refers to private property most people have a misperception about, actually what they have been taught, but clearly wrong

Read more