yusrob Your text raises important concerns about manipulation, belief, and the psychological mechanisms through which ideas influence human societies. But is not about the ideologies or politics globally speaking. It is important to clarify that the discussion here is not primarily about politics, ideology, or geopolitical systems, but about universal human behavior, cognition, and the recurring patterns through which humans relate to truth, belief, authority, and meaning across cultures and historical periods. The real issue is about the universalism and evolution.
The mechanisms you describe,social conditioning, mass belief, psychological influence, and the transformation of ideas into material forces],are not specific to bourgeois systems, socialism, capitalism, religions, or modern sciences and physics. They are anthropological and psychological constants for me due to human comportments and adaptations in the system. Every civilization, every ideology, and every scientific paradigm has produced its own forms of belief, dogma, and institutional power. This is why the issue must be treated at a universal human level, not reduced to a single political or philosophical framework. It is this the key, the humans and their comportments and they need globally to be reasured . And they can be reasured if these high spheres of power and UN take their responsabilities.
Regarding nature and physics, it is essential to make a clear distinction between science and ideology. A scientific theory is not validated by internal coherence, philosophical alignment, or ideological consistency. It is validated by independent verification, reproducible predictions, experimental testing, peer scrutiny, and falsifiability. That is why at this present, your Theory of Nature has not met these criteria in the global scientific community because you assert assumptions like foundamental truths. Therefore, it cannot be presented as a proven scientific replacement for modern physics, but rather as a personal theoretical framework or philosophical interpretation of nature. It is your choice ,I respect this , I have myself a theory but I don t assert it like a truth because simply it is not proved this theory of spherisation.
Modern physics certainly has limitations, open problems, and conceptual tensions, this is acknowledged by physicists themselves. However, these unresolved questions do not automatically invalidate the entire scientific structure, nor do they justify declaring a new theory as a completed scientific revolution without broad empirical confirmation. It is like this, only the proved laws, axioms, equations are accepted. Claiming the resolution of 40 of fundamental problems or assigning Nobel level value to a theory does not make it so, scientific legitimacy is collective, not self-declared. You must underatand this, you must doubt about your unknowns and be less persuaded.
Finally, the risk you correctly identify,belief replacing critical analysis applies equally to all domains, including materialism, dialectics, religion, and alternative physical theories but you make the same than several other thinkers, you replace the pure determinism with your own theory and framework like if it was an universal postulate, it is not. When any framework claims exclusive access to truth and dismisses all others as lies or ideology, it reproduces the very mechanism of mental domination it seeks to denounce.Don t forget this, and it is dangerous because after all it is not about these ideologies or theories but about our responsability like humans at all levels of the society. True universality requires humility, openness to contradiction, and acceptance of uncertainty and we never assert unknowns not proved.
In this sense, the real issue is not which ideology or theory dominates, but how humans construct meaning, authority, and certainty, and how easily these constructions can become rigid systems of belief rather than evolving tools for understanding reality. It is not about capitalism, communism, socialism......it is about Universalism,evolution and adaptation in respecting the possible harmonisations towards points of equilibrium for all lifes of this earth, animal and vegetal. Regards
