A Detroit picture tells us what the election is about.
In the New York Times of October 31 on the first business page the gleaming towers of the GM headquarters dominate the picture of Bill Pugliano/Getty Images. In the foreground the ugly overhead electricity poles with their top and middle lines stand out. What is less obvious at first sight is the deplorable situation of the side walks which seem to be non-existent. The housing stock in this neighborhood in Detroit near Dubois is poor, though the picture does not show us boarded-up houses. The picture’s caption tells us that “G.M. has sought help from Detroit pension funds for paying half the mortgage on its headquarters.”
This overpowering corporate influence as evidenced in this picture shows what the elections is about. It is growth versus equity, it is increasing the pie versus the sharing the pie. It is about growthism without much thought to equity. It is about economic concentration without a thought about its adverse social, economic and ecological consequences.
Friday, October 31, 2008
Tuesday, October 14, 2008
THE NEXT MAJOR STEP
The following OPED article was about to be submitted to the NY Times when I discovered WonderVoice "Op-Ed Submissions made easy". It has been now been submitted with a couple of clicks to over 500 publications in the USA and abroad: exactly the audience for this type of challenge of integrating both the social and ecological financing accounting systems on the ides of October 08 when the social financial system seems to be improved, particularly in Britain.
Consider this post of a length of about 1000 words one of the PILLAR POSTS of this blog!!!
Tuesday, October 14, 2008
THE NEXT MAJOR STEP
While leaders in both Washington and Paris during the weekend of October 12 were busily engaged to bring some stability into the global financial system, some four dozen New York City residents were busily engaged to fuse the integrated social and ecological values of the Earth Charter into the life of the City and its climate crisis challenge.
While the financial discussions will have led to some success, particularly in Britain where the citizens became in control of their banking system, the New York City discussions resulted in The New York City Earth Charter Declaration on the Climate Crisis and its associated organization The New York City Earth Charter Alliance.
How are these two very different discussions related and how can the NYC one show what next major step is to be taking by the leaders in government, business and civil society in the interest of people and planet or the community of life?
The two discussions are related because the financial system not only deals with issues of social finance—financial relations of humans with humans—but also of ecological finance—relations of humans with Earth. We not only have financial debts between nations, but also ecological debts between nations. We not only have financial creditors, we also have ecological creditors. As a matter of fact, generally speaking, the nations in the global South are financial debtors, and ecological creditors, while nations in the global North are financial creditors and ecological debtors.
In the big scheme of things, i.e. the sustainability of the planet and her community of life upon which all human life and human communities depend, the present and ever deepening climate crisis overshadows all human financial activities and discussions. Thus, in any globally sustainable financial system an integration of both the social and ecological financial systems has to take place.
How can such integrated financial system with a common currency which might be called terra, Latin for Earth, come about? This is the next major step to be taken by humanity to assure a healthy planet, a healthy community of life, a health human community.
The greatest obstacle in taking this major step is humanity’s frame of mind where humans are still placed in the center of things. This anthropocentric worldview is to be transformed into a biocentric worldview where the community of life or life—bios—is placed in the center of things. Once such transformation takes place not only in the leaders of government, business and civil society, but in a critical number of humans, the stage is set to devise such new integrated financial systems.
The good news is that humanity is building a biocentric value system that places great stock on the integration of social and ecological values. In March of 2000 a benchmark a charter was adopted that was the outcome of 5 years intense discussions in all continents, by all social groups. This people’s covenant is called the Earth Charter. (Because many people believe that this charter is environmental charter on account of the term Earth, I prefer to call it the Community of Life Charter.) This process was set in motion by the Earth Council founded by the 1992 Earth Summit Secretary General Maurice Strong, Mikhail Gorbachev and the Dutch premier Ruud Luubers.
It is this Earth or Community of Life Charter that was taken in the NYC discussions above as our guiding principle in dealing with the climate crisis and resulted in The New York City Earth Charter Declaration on the Climate Crisis and its associated The New York City Earth Charter Alliance with its dozen Earth Charter Task Forces.
It is the integrated social and ecological values of this Earth Charter can also remove the greatest obstacle to taking the next step of an integrated financial system. This value system has the same significance for the 21st century, as had the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in the 20th century, the Rights of Man and Citizen in 18th century France and the Magna Carta in 13th century Britain.
It is biocentric value system that is to inform and guide humanity’s progress towards social, economic and ecological sustainability. It is not only the “foresight that science can provide” in humanity’s sustainability revolution which William Ruckelshaus considers the third revolution after the agricultural and industrial revolutions, it is also humanity’s values development over the centuries, which are not necessarily religious values.
Humanity cannot take this “next major step” which is part of that sustainability revolution unless it gives priority to principles over methods. It is to heed the wise words of one of the greatest American thinkers in the 19th century who stated:
“As to methods there may be a million and then some, but principles are few. The man who grasps principles can successfully select his own methods. The man, who tries methods, ignoring principles, is sure to have trouble.”
Ralph Waldo Emerson
------------------------------------------------
Frans C. Verhagen, M.Div., M.I.A., Ph.D. is a sustainability sociologist with Earth and Peace Education Associates International (EPE) who recently organized an Earth Charter summit in New York City about the climate crisis with world famous climatologist James Hansen as one of the two keynoters.
Contact information: www.globalepe.org. gaia1@rcn.com; 718 275-3932(voice and fax); 917 617 6217 (cell)
Consider this post of a length of about 1000 words one of the PILLAR POSTS of this blog!!!
Tuesday, October 14, 2008
THE NEXT MAJOR STEP
While leaders in both Washington and Paris during the weekend of October 12 were busily engaged to bring some stability into the global financial system, some four dozen New York City residents were busily engaged to fuse the integrated social and ecological values of the Earth Charter into the life of the City and its climate crisis challenge.
While the financial discussions will have led to some success, particularly in Britain where the citizens became in control of their banking system, the New York City discussions resulted in The New York City Earth Charter Declaration on the Climate Crisis and its associated organization The New York City Earth Charter Alliance.
How are these two very different discussions related and how can the NYC one show what next major step is to be taking by the leaders in government, business and civil society in the interest of people and planet or the community of life?
The two discussions are related because the financial system not only deals with issues of social finance—financial relations of humans with humans—but also of ecological finance—relations of humans with Earth. We not only have financial debts between nations, but also ecological debts between nations. We not only have financial creditors, we also have ecological creditors. As a matter of fact, generally speaking, the nations in the global South are financial debtors, and ecological creditors, while nations in the global North are financial creditors and ecological debtors.
In the big scheme of things, i.e. the sustainability of the planet and her community of life upon which all human life and human communities depend, the present and ever deepening climate crisis overshadows all human financial activities and discussions. Thus, in any globally sustainable financial system an integration of both the social and ecological financial systems has to take place.
How can such integrated financial system with a common currency which might be called terra, Latin for Earth, come about? This is the next major step to be taken by humanity to assure a healthy planet, a healthy community of life, a health human community.
The greatest obstacle in taking this major step is humanity’s frame of mind where humans are still placed in the center of things. This anthropocentric worldview is to be transformed into a biocentric worldview where the community of life or life—bios—is placed in the center of things. Once such transformation takes place not only in the leaders of government, business and civil society, but in a critical number of humans, the stage is set to devise such new integrated financial systems.
The good news is that humanity is building a biocentric value system that places great stock on the integration of social and ecological values. In March of 2000 a benchmark a charter was adopted that was the outcome of 5 years intense discussions in all continents, by all social groups. This people’s covenant is called the Earth Charter. (Because many people believe that this charter is environmental charter on account of the term Earth, I prefer to call it the Community of Life Charter.) This process was set in motion by the Earth Council founded by the 1992 Earth Summit Secretary General Maurice Strong, Mikhail Gorbachev and the Dutch premier Ruud Luubers.
It is this Earth or Community of Life Charter that was taken in the NYC discussions above as our guiding principle in dealing with the climate crisis and resulted in The New York City Earth Charter Declaration on the Climate Crisis and its associated The New York City Earth Charter Alliance with its dozen Earth Charter Task Forces.
It is the integrated social and ecological values of this Earth Charter can also remove the greatest obstacle to taking the next step of an integrated financial system. This value system has the same significance for the 21st century, as had the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in the 20th century, the Rights of Man and Citizen in 18th century France and the Magna Carta in 13th century Britain.
It is biocentric value system that is to inform and guide humanity’s progress towards social, economic and ecological sustainability. It is not only the “foresight that science can provide” in humanity’s sustainability revolution which William Ruckelshaus considers the third revolution after the agricultural and industrial revolutions, it is also humanity’s values development over the centuries, which are not necessarily religious values.
Humanity cannot take this “next major step” which is part of that sustainability revolution unless it gives priority to principles over methods. It is to heed the wise words of one of the greatest American thinkers in the 19th century who stated:
“As to methods there may be a million and then some, but principles are few. The man who grasps principles can successfully select his own methods. The man, who tries methods, ignoring principles, is sure to have trouble.”
Ralph Waldo Emerson
------------------------------------------------
Frans C. Verhagen, M.Div., M.I.A., Ph.D. is a sustainability sociologist with Earth and Peace Education Associates International (EPE) who recently organized an Earth Charter summit in New York City about the climate crisis with world famous climatologist James Hansen as one of the two keynoters.
Contact information: www.globalepe.org. gaia1@rcn.com; 718 275-3932(voice and fax); 917 617 6217 (cell)
Tuesday, October 7, 2008
Earth Charter Climate Crisis Community Summit of October 11
I reluctantly accepted the challenge to coordinate this Summit as part of the www.earthcharterus.org national campaign. It has taken me several weeks in April to line up two outstanding keynoters: climatologist James Hansen of NASA/GISS and sustainable communities specialist Gwendolyn Hallsmith of Montpelier, Vermont. It is taking me September and these first two weeks of October to organize the Summit, particularly its publicity.
Thus, all TV stations and newspapers in NYC were contacted, mostly by email, four universities had point persons for the Summit’s publicity, business world was contacted particularly the chambers of commerce in the five boroughs and unflinching pressure to participate was put on the Mayor’s Office of Operations which is charged with the implementation of PlaNYC2030. At the last UN Global Affairs meeting at Community Church of New York UU the tally was about 85, about one third of them are students who are attending (at least in the morning) because their professor has given them extra credit.
For the next couple of days still many things to be done, particularly the web streaming part of the Summit where my laptop had to be equipped (with difficulty) with two extra gigs of memory.
Thus, all TV stations and newspapers in NYC were contacted, mostly by email, four universities had point persons for the Summit’s publicity, business world was contacted particularly the chambers of commerce in the five boroughs and unflinching pressure to participate was put on the Mayor’s Office of Operations which is charged with the implementation of PlaNYC2030. At the last UN Global Affairs meeting at Community Church of New York UU the tally was about 85, about one third of them are students who are attending (at least in the morning) because their professor has given them extra credit.
For the next couple of days still many things to be done, particularly the web streaming part of the Summit where my laptop had to be equipped (with difficulty) with two extra gigs of memory.
Growth versus Equity
This post will point to one of the pillar articles or posts that characterizes a good blog. Now I want to set the article up.
After having worked in Ghana during the sixties in religious and economic development I believed that the global structures were stacked against Africa and the Third World in general. I did international affairs at Columbia in the seventies, focusing on the monetary, trade structures and being involved at the UN headquarters in the discussions of the New International Economic Order. These discussions have great relevance now because the international economic system continues to be a system that enriches the few, impoverishes the many and endangers the planet.
The forthcoming pillar post will approach these troubling and testing times on three levels: the analytical, theoretical and strategic one. Though this article has been in the making for about a month, it was after the presidential debate of October 7 in Nashville that I want to come to some final conclusions because it will show how realistic the questions are and how realistic the answers are of the two candidates who, basically, reflect the growth versus equity quandary, dilemma or conundrum.
After having worked in Ghana during the sixties in religious and economic development I believed that the global structures were stacked against Africa and the Third World in general. I did international affairs at Columbia in the seventies, focusing on the monetary, trade structures and being involved at the UN headquarters in the discussions of the New International Economic Order. These discussions have great relevance now because the international economic system continues to be a system that enriches the few, impoverishes the many and endangers the planet.
The forthcoming pillar post will approach these troubling and testing times on three levels: the analytical, theoretical and strategic one. Though this article has been in the making for about a month, it was after the presidential debate of October 7 in Nashville that I want to come to some final conclusions because it will show how realistic the questions are and how realistic the answers are of the two candidates who, basically, reflect the growth versus equity quandary, dilemma or conundrum.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
