Introduction

Introduction
In this century, where means of communication and transportation have gone beyond all expectations, cross-cultural awareness has become widespread. And with the collapse of communism and consequently the Soviet Union and many other communist countries, many proposals are being presented urging the adoption of universal laws, values and morals to govern relationships among the peoples of the world.
Recently, the idea of a so-called New World Order was proposed through the United Nations in order to prescribe values and impose laws on people of various cultures. The question that will immediately emerge is whose values, laws and was of life are they going to adopt? Of course the American way of life will become the only choice presented, because the United States is, presently, the only superpower among all the nations of the world, as well as the largest financial contributor to the United Nations. Charles Krauthammer, an influential American colunmist, wrote in The Foreign Affairs that 'a unipoler moment had arrived and that a confident United States should
7
learn to accept its new role, aggressively imposing its own vision.1 Given the natural richness and military power of the U.S., why have its values not provided happiness and peace of mind to the millions of Americans whose lives have been wrecked by alcoholism, violence, drug use and other family and social dilemmas? Can such a way of life that has failed to uproot discrimination against blacks and other minorities bring justice among the social castes of India? Can the American way of life that has resulted in grave failure when attempting to solve the problems of the homeless in America, provide solutions to the problems of poverty in South America or Africa?
Such questions should be raised against V. S. Naipauls claim that Western Civilization is the Universal Civilization that fits all men. However, David Gergen, Editor at large of U.S. News & World Report disagrees with Naipaul by saying:
The United States cannot achieve order in its streets or even in its capital, much less in the rest of the world.2
--------------------------------------------------
1 In David Gergen (1993). American Missed Opportunities. Foreign Affairs (P.I).
2 In David Gergen (1993). American Missed
8
Some sources might say that the New World Order does not have to be that of the Americans; it could be that of the British, the French, the Russians or the Chinese are not permanent members of the Security Council.
Nevertheless, these governments have brought neither happiness nor security to their own nations. No sensible person in the whole world would choose or suggest a •way of life that is going to contradict its own interests; countries are not an exception. So, any system of life that could be selected as the basis for a New World Order is prone to serve the interest of only the people who propose and sponsor it.
This quote below from Gergen (1993) provides evidence for the great care for maintaining self-interest by dominant countries in today's world:
-------------------------------------------------
Opportunities Foreign Affairs (P.I).
9
The American public told pollsters from the Chicago Council on Foreign Relations that the most important priorities ofD.S. foreign policy should be, first, protecting jobs of American workers; second, protecting the interest of American workers abroad; and third, securing adequate supplies of energy. Defending allies, preventing the spread of nuclear weapons and advancing human rights were seen as less important.
 15
Helping to spread democracy to other nations was 15th on list of priorities.3
Therefore, they are deemed to be unfair towards other nations. Huntington (1993) refers to the standards the western nations apply to their interest in the world by saying:
The West in effect is using international institutions, military
power and economic resources to
---------------------------------------
3 Gergen. 1993.
10
run the world in ways that will maintain Western predominance, protect Western interests and promote Western political and economical values.
Accepting these New Order premises as a way of life means full submission to the teachings and rules that such a system puts forward.
Naturally, what would result from such acceptance would be a materialistic and secular view of life. So, it would be impossible for all people to submit willingly and freely to such a man-made way of life, since such perception of man in relation to the world which he inhabits will be neither fair nor complete, because of the incompleteness of man. The probability for the application and the acceptability of such a New World Order is extremely remote and unproductive, exactly as it was with such Old World Orders as Colonialism, Communism, Dark Ages Theology, and modern Capitalism.
Indeed there is a dire need among the majority of the world popUlation for a way of life that can solve their problems and answer their unanswered questions about their existence and destiny.
11
With the escalating rate of immorality and violence in the world, people have been restlessly searching for a way out. Many have found that suicide is one of the easiest and probably fastest solutions. No wonder our world is living in a state of chaos. It has tried all forms of ideologies and applied so many socioeconomic theories, but neither one has proven to be quite right. That which has been tried has failed, and that which has failed has been tried again . . . and again. Is not there another way, one might ask? Isn't there an alternative system that would work as a guide for the universe? These two questions make the theme of this research.
12
II. Conditions for Universality:
When thinking of a system that could bind the people of all nations into one Ummah (nation) while guarding their freedom of choice, it is imperative that their beliefs and concerns be treated equally. When searching for any universal doctrine, law, system or way of life, one should take into consideration the natural components of man.

It should have the following attributes:
1. Such a system should emphasize equality and reject all types of racism and discrimination. Basic teachings and values of such a way of life should be stable and equally and justly applied to all people, not bound to any specific space or time.
2. It should tolerate differences in belief and cultural diversity among people of the world.
3. It should not be contradictory to man's advancement in science and technology, but rather provide universal ethics to maintain positive consequences of such advancements.
13
4. It should provide solutions to humanity's grave and new problems such as; alcoholism, drug addiction, the breaking down of familial and social systems, unrestrained sexuality, rape, woman and child abuse and molestation, etc. These principles will be examined against a number of existing systems of life and belief. Thereafter, conclusions may be drawn as to which system could be nominated as a candidate for universal application.
14