“Journey to Earthland” is a recently released book by the Great Transition Initiative (GTI), a worldwide network of activist scholars with a unique purpose—to advance “a vision and praxis for global transformation”. Few civil society organisations have such a broad focus on transformational strategies towards a new global social-ecological system, as condensed and overviewed in this latest publication by GTI’s director, Paul Raskin. The short and accessible book presents a majestic overview of our historic juncture and expounds the urgent need for systemic change, with a hopeful vision of a flourishing civilisation that has long inspired Share The World’s Resources (STWR) in our complementary proposals for peaceful mass civic engagement.

The phrase ‘Earthland’ adopted by Raskin relates to the Planetary Phase of civilisation that GTI conceptualise as the coming era, in which humanity embraces its increasing interdependence through a new ethos of global solidarity and a transformed political community of cooperative nations. With the first part of the book summarising the evolving phases in human history since the earliest dawn of man, the Planetary Phase is finally “born of systemic crisis”, requiring a corresponding systemic response that can shape an inclusive and sustainable future for all.

Earthland is the idealised outcome of this great transition, brought to life in the final part of the book where three archetypal regions are explored: Agoria (with its market emphasis and socialised economy, or ‘Sweden Supreme’), Ecodemia (distinguished by its economic democracy and collectivist ethos), and Arcadia (accentuating self-reliant economies and a ‘small-is-beautiful’ enthusiasm). Raskin argues that such a compelling vision of “One World, Many Places” may seem remote, but should not be dismissed out-of-hand—just as the idea of sovereign nations may have once seemed an implausible dream.

Central to the book’s thesis is the question of collective action, and the need for a “vast cultural and political arising” that can bring this new world into being. The rationale for a new form of global citizens movement is made throughout the book, drawing upon much of the analysis and propositions in GTI’s canon. It is the missing actor on the world stage, an overarching systemic movement that includes all the many struggles for peace, justice and sustainability, yet remains united under a broad umbrella of common concerns and universal values. Raskin and the GTI make a convincing case that such a movement may be our only hope of avoiding a “Fortress World” or “Barberisation” future, as long as a movement for a great transition can fill the vacuum in political leadership and lay the foundations for a “post-growth material era”, and a true “global demos” or “planetary democracy”.

From STWR’s perspective, the book hits all the right notes in sketching out a more equal and vibrant civilisation that exists within planetary boundaries. It envisages a new paradigm in which economies are a means for attaining social and environmental ends, not an end in themselves; in which economic equity is the prerequisite in a shift towards post-consumerist societies, while poverty elimination is “a galvanising priority”; and in which continued economic growth is equally shared both within and between regions, until Global North-South disparities have vanished.

In the imagined social dimensions of Earthland, we also find a more leisured society where everyone is guaranteed a basic income, and where the pursuit of money has given way to non-market endeavours that enable genuine “sharing economies” and the art of living to flourish. Raskin even outlines the new modes of trade and global governance for a Commonwealth of Earthland, including world bodies that marshal “solidarity funds” to needy areas, thus ensuring a truly communitarian and interdependent economy.

What’s most interesting about ‘Journey to Earthland’ is its almost spiritual exhortations for a shared planetary civilisation, often expressed in eloquent passages that variously define the need for an enlarged sense of human identity that extends beyond national boundaries. “Interdependence in the objective realm of political economy cultivates, in the subjective realm of human consciousness, an understanding of people and planet as a single community,” the author writes. Similarly, he states: “This augmented solidarity is the correlative in consciousness of the interdependence in the external world.”

The author also depicts the “three-fold way of transition” in diagrammatic form, illuminating the need for a fundamental change in human consciousness (the “ontological” and “normative” realms), as well as in the social model (or “institutional” realm). Stressing the “longing for wholeness” that distinguishes the values of a Great Transition, he also cites the origin of these universal values that remain the sine qua non of human life: “All along, the tangible political and cultural expressions of the Great Transition were rooted in a parallel transition underway in the intangible realm of the human heart.”

The real question, however, is how a global citizens movement can actually emerge in these socially polarised times, when even the prospect of uniting Western societies to welcome refugees is a forlorn challenge. Raskin provides a cogent theoretical perspective on how a mass movement can be galvanized, built on cultural or “normative solidarity” and a sense of “emotive unity”. Emphasis is placed on the need for proactive organising strategies, as well as an “integrated strategic and intellectual framework” that can connect the full spectrum of global issues. The times cry out, writes Raskin, for large-scale campaigns with the explicit purpose of catalysing a transformative social movement along these lines. But still we await a truly international effort of this nature to emerge, while most single-issue movements are increasingly entrenched in local or regional struggles as the trends of inequality, conflict and environmental degradation generally worsen.

This is where STWR’s advocacy position departs from the GTI, despite fundamentally agreeing with their broad analysis and vision for a consciousness shift towards a Planetary Phase of civilisation. To be sure, the greatest hope for the future rests with new solidarities being forged on the global stage, with the welfare of the collective whole being prioritised above the welfare of any one particular group, class or nation. But what does this actually mean in the present moment, when discrepancies in global living standards are so extreme that millions of people are currently at risk from dying of hunger or other poverty-related causes, while 8 billionaires own more wealth than the poorest half of the world? Furthermore, is it realistic to expect the 4.3 billion people who subsist on less than $5-a-day to join a global citizens movement, if their basic socioeconomic rights are not at the forefront of any such planetary endeavour?

From this immediate perspective of a starkly divided world, the answer for how to catalyse a united voice of ordinary people may be unexpected in the end. For perhaps what’s missing from most Western-led campaigning initiatives and protest actions is not the right intellectual strategy, but a sufficient focus on the hardships and suffering experienced by the very poorest citizens within the world population. Perhaps the spark that will initiate an unprecedented demonstration of global unity is not to be found in the human mind at all, but in the simple attributes of the human heart—as Raskin himself appears to intuitively recognise. He writes: “As connectivity globalizes in the external world, so might empathy globalise in the human heart.” The question that remains is: how can that collective empathy be initially catalysed, and on what basis—given the fact that tens of thousands of people are needlessly dying each day without sufficient help from governments or the public-at-large?

This is the starting point for STWR’s understanding of how to unify citizens of the richest and poorest nations on a common platform, based on the awareness of an international humanitarian emergency that our mainstream Western culture tends to largely ignore. Hence our proposal for enormous, continuous and truly global demonstrations that call upon the United Nations to guarantee Article 25 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights—for adequate food, housing, healthcare and social security for all—until governments finally commit to an emergency redistribution programme in line with the Brandt Commission proposals in 1980.

As STWR’s founder Mohammed Mesbahi has explicated in a different kind of political treatise titled ‘Heralding Article 25: A people’s strategy for world transformation’, such unprecedented protests across the world may be the last chance we have of influencing governments to redistribute resources and restructure the global economy. It may also be the only hope for initiating a global citizens movement, bringing together millions of people for a shared planetary cause—and ultimately paving the way for all the social, economic and political transformations that are inspiringly promoted by the GTI.

Further resources:

• www.greattransition.org
• Journey to Earthland: The Great Transition to Planetary Civilization, by Paul Raskin
• Reflections on Journey to Earthland by diverse global thinkers, November 2016
• The Widening Circle: Campaign for Advancing a Global Citizens Movement
• Great Transition: The Promise and Lure of the Times Ahead, by Paul Raskin et al, April 2002

Photo by amydykstra

The post Initiating a Global Citizens Movement for the Great Transition appeared first on P2P Foundation.

The world is now facing an unprecedented emergency of hunger and famine, with a record number of people requiring life-saving food and medical assistance in 2017. Since the start of this year, the largest humanitarian crisis since the end of the second world war has continued to unfold, while the international community has failed to take urgent commensurate action. The extent of human suffering is overwhelming: more than 20 million people are on the brink of starvation, including 1.4 million children – a conservative estimate that is rising by the day. Famine has already been declared in parts of South Sudan, and could soon follow in Somalia, north-east Nigeria and Yemen.

In February, the UN launched its biggest ever appeal for humanitarian funding, calling for $4.4 billion by July to avert looming famines in these four conflict-ridden regions. Yet not even $1 billion has been raised so far, leaving little hope that these vital minimum funds will be raised on time. Last week the UN also sought to raise $2.1 billion for the funding shortfall in Yemen alone – described as the single largest hunger crisis in the world, where two thirds of the population are food insecure. But even this appeal remains barely half funded, which will almost certainly leave millions of neglected Yemeni’s facing the prospect of dying from starvation or disease.

How is it possible that so many people still die from severe malnutrition and lack of access to basic resources, in a 21st century world that is wealthier and more technologically advanced than ever before? It was only six years ago that East Africa suffered a devastating drought and food crisis, with over a quarter of a million people dying from famine in Somalia (including 133,000 children), and millions more left with a legacy of chronic poverty, hardship and loss of livelihoods.

In the wake of this appalling human catastrophe, the Charter to End Extreme Hunger was drafted by NGOs from across the world, calling on governments and aid agencies to prevent hunger on such a scale ever happening again. But the underlying principle of the Charter to take early and large-scale preventative action has essentially remained unheeded. Early warning signs for the latest crisis were visible months ago, yet the international community again failed to respond in time to avert an entirely predictable and avoidable famine. So much for the “Grand Bargain” struck at the World Humanitarian Summit last year, which agreed a package of reforms to the complex international emergency system under the empty slogan: ‘One Humanity, Shared Responsibility’.

This fact should be emphasised, as we always have the power to avert and end famines, which are largely man-made and preventable if sufficient resources are redistributed to all people in need. To be sure, the challenge is now historic with increasing “mega-crises” becoming the norm, mostly caused by conflict and civil war rather than natural disasters. Far from stepping up to meet urgent funding appeals, however, donor governments have not even met half of requirements in recent years, leaving many crises and nations pitted against each other for resources. Meanwhile, wealthy nations are recycling old aid pledges as new money, and the purported annual increase in overseas aid is failing to reach the least developed countries. The Trump administration has pledged no new funding to the emergency famine relief appeals this year, instead announcing plans to dramatically cut foreign aid expenditures and voluntary contributions to UN programmes like the World Food Programme (WFP).

The tragic consequences on the ground are inevitable, as demonstrated in Somaliland where the WFP is providing emergency food aid for a few thousand people at a time, when the need is upwards of 300,000. In South Sudan, nearly one out of every two people are in urgent need of food assistance, yet only $423 million has been received out of a requested $1.6bn. Across North-East Nigeria, where 5.1 million people are food insecure out of a population of 5.8 million in the three affected states, the response plan still remains only 20% funded.

Of course, aid alone is not the solution to extreme poverty and hunger. In the long term, the answers for avoiding hunger crises lie within developing countries themselves, including supporting local food production, enhancing community resilience, and guaranteeing social services and protection for the poorest – all measures that rely on effective national governance. Beyond the need for material resources and financial assistance, there is also a need for long-term approaches towards conflict prevention and peace-building, placing the politics of famine at the heart of any international efforts. A huge part of the battle is not only raising vital funds, but also devising the correct response strategy and securing necessary access in complex, fragmented war zones.

At the same time, addressing the root causes of today’s escalating food crises depends on a turnaround in the foreign policy agendas of competing nations, which are either directly or indirectly responsible for many of the wars across the Middle East and Africa that have led to a record high of global forced displacement. The deadly conflict that is ripping apart Yemen continues to be facilitated by the UK and US governments, who are propping up the Saudi-led bombing campaigns through extensive political and military support, including billions of dollars’ worth of weapons sales that dwarf the amounts pledged in aid.

This is clearly the opposite of policies that can make countries like Britain and America “great” again. The world cries out for a new strategy of peace and generosity to replace the self-destructive policies of “national security through domination”, which urgently calls for a modern global Marshall Plan for investment in education, health, water, sanitation, agriculture and infrastructure across the world’s most impoverished regions. Fully-funded aid shipments in place of arms shipments; an end to drone attacks and military “special operations” within countries like Yemen; the spearheading of much needed diplomacy in all war-torn regions; massive transfers of essential resources from North to South – such is the only way to show true political leadership in the face of entrenched global divisions and escalating human suffering.

As STWR has long advocated, an intergovernmental emergency programme to end life-threatening poverty is the very first step towards achieving a more equal and sustainable world. It must be remembered that the four countries grouped together by the UN as a food security emergency are, in fact, only the worst instances of a wider crisis of hunger and impoverishment. Millions of other marginalised citizens are also suffering from soaring food insecurity worldwide, not only across Africa but also Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Haiti, the Oceania, and so many other regions. According to the UN’s official statistics, there are more hungry people in the world than the combined populations of North America and the European Union. Every day, around 46,000 people needlessly die as a consequence of life-threatening deprivation, the vast majority in low-income countries.

The reversal of government priorities that is needed to ameliorate this immense crisis may never be achieved, unless world public opinion focuses on the worsening reality of poverty in the midst of plenty. Never before has it been so important for an enormous outpouring of public support in favour of sharing the world’s resources, thus to guarantee the long-agreed socioeconomic rights of every citizen, no matter where they live. Against a backdrop of rising nationalist sentiment, anti-immigrant rhetoric and huge funding gaps for humanitarian causes, it is up to ordinary people of goodwill to stand in solidarity with the world’s suffering poor majority.

The time has come for a huge resurgence of the spirit that animated Occupy protests from 2011, but now concentrated on one simple and unifying cause: for the rapid implementation of Article 25 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Nowhere in the world are these long-agreed rights guaranteed for everyone – concerning adequate food, housing, healthcare, social services and social security for all. But there can be no greater example of the lack of these basic entitlements for a dignified life, than the fact of millions of people dying from hunger across vast neglected and conflict-ridden regions. Hence the need for endless global protests to begin with a united call for wealthy countries to redistribute all necessary resources to those at risk of starving to death, above and beyond the UN’s modest appeals for humanitarian funding.

The situation today is potentially even more catastrophic than in the 1980s, when Bob Geldof and Live Aid were at the forefront of a public funding campaign for victims of the Ethiopian famine – eventually resulting in the loss of almost one million lives. To stop a repeat of this tragedy occurring on a potentially even greater scale, it will require much more than one-off public donations to national charity appeals. It will also require countless people on the streets worldwide in constant, peaceful demonstrations that call on governments to massively scale up their efforts through the UN and its relevant agencies. Is it not possible to organise a huge show of public empathy and outrage with the plight of more than 100 million people facing acute malnutrition worldwide? For only a grassroots response of this exceptional nature may be enough to awaken the world’s conscience – calling for food and medicines, not bombs; standing for economic sharing as the only way to justice. Surely there can be no greater cause and priority at this critical hour.

Adam Parsons is the editor at Share The World’s Resources (STWR).

Photo credit: timeslive.co.za

Cross-posted from Sharing.org

The post It’s time to reawaken the spirit of Occupy for the starving millions appeared first on P2P Foundation.

The following article is an edited version of a talk given at the World Basic Income conference held in Salford, UK, in February 2017.

At STWR, we’ve long advocated the importance of sharing in relation to the world’s most pressing problems, from spiralling inequality and global conflict to the sustainability crisis. Yet of all the many groups today that reflect this growing ‘call for sharing’[1] – including the commons movement, the degrowth movement, the social and solidarity economy movement, and the global justice movement in all its diversity – it is the basic income movement that seems to be making the most simple and direct case for collectively sharing the Earth’s wealth. If the land, natural resources, and even our ideas that become ‘intellectual property’ are, in fact, all part of society’s collective treasure, then it is reasonable to argue that every person, merely by being born, is entitled to a share of it. Indeed some of the most compelling arguments for a universal basic income guarantee are about freedom and solidarity: the sense that another world is possible in which our economic system is based on trust and mutual aid, enabling everyone to share in the rewards of technology.[2]

Unfortunately, there is little hope that the full implementation of a basic income – sufficiently high enough to meet all people’s needs without the obligation to work – is going to be achieved in the present context of financial austerity and so-called neoliberal capitalism. As long as present trends continue with the marketisation and gradual deterioration of public services in most countries, any successes achieved in introducing a nation-wide basic income scheme are likely to come at the cost of comprehensive social programs that benefit the majority.[3] This means that any strategy to achieve a UBI has to be part of a transformative project, one that aims to delink work from income and redirect productive capacity towards creating real value for society, while at the same time “switching off the neoliberal privatisation machine” and bringing about a “controlled dissolution of market forces”, as the journalist Paul Mason has argued.[4]

So the question is how to build the huge broad-base of popular support that will be needed to influence public policy in this direction, and there are a number of interesting proposals that suggest a way forward.[5] However, where STWR begins is not with the question of how we, in modern consumerist societies, can ultimately enjoy the freedom and leisure of a post-growth society that equitably shares its machine-produced wealth. Rather, the first question is how the very poorest people in the world, those who lack the basic necessities for a dignified life, can immediately benefit from such redistributive policies.

This is a perspective that STWR has in common with the World Basic Income organisation, who propose to give all citizens $10 a month alongside any existing public services, which could at least provide a survival-level income to ensure no-one dies from poverty.[6] There’s a common-sense appeal to this idea, as it’s obvious that a continued reliance on GDP growth within the existing global economic framework, coupled with insufficient donations of international aid, is not a viable route to ending poverty in every country by 2030, or at any other date.[7]

But is it a viable prospect to create a direct mechanism for transferring a social dividend of some variety to all the world’s people in the immediate term? There are certainly many innovative proposals for how to fund such a global scheme, from global taxes on currency transactions, CO2 emissions and other common resources, to the idea of a fair worldwide distribution of tradeable pollution rights.[8] Theoretically, there’s no reason why governments could not create an international model of economic sharing that distributes a proportion of global resource rents to all citizens, providing a truly universal basic income as well as an indispensable source of finance for underfunded global governance bodies, such as the United Nations and its affiliated agencies.[9]

The problem, of course, is that we’re still nowhere near to achieving the level of international consensus and intergovernmental cooperation that would be needed to actuate these ideas. We’ve now seen the difficulty involved in implementing even a European-wide Financial Transaction Tax, let alone the prospect of building some kind of global welfare state, or a world public revenue based on sharing the value of co-owned resources.[10] The state of Alaska is still the only political unit to have introduced a genuine basic income scheme across an entire society, and even if a worldwide basic income could one day be achieved, it is more likely to come as a supplement to a basic income already funded at a national or regional level. And even then, it will only come if a large number of more localised projects first prove that a universal scheme is politically feasible, and implementation difficulties can be overcome.[11]

The various pilot projects in developing countries like Namibia and India have shown the transformative potential of such schemes[12] – but still millions of people are left out and fail to receive adequate government assistance for their essential needs. The UN’s International Labour Organisation estimates that the majority of people in the world continue to lack a comprehensive set of social protection guarantees – more than 70 percent of the global population.[13] Indeed contrary to the ‘good news’ narrative that is propagated by the World Bank, there are in fact more than 4 billion people who live in conditions of poverty today, if we use a more realistic international poverty line of around $5 a day.[14] Global hunger figures are also inaccurate and probably vastly underestimated, and could include upwards of 2 billion people.[15] Unbelievably, around 17 million people continue to die each year as a consequence of extreme poverty and inadequate welfare provision, equivalent to around 46,000 people each day.[16]

Suffice to say that most of these people cannot wait in the vain hope that a universal basic income will deliver them from destitution any time soon. The dire reality of life-threatening poverty can only be described as a global emergency, and it is high time that governments and civil society treated it accordingly. Yet not since the Brandt Report in 1980 has there been a high-level intergovernmental proposal for an emergency programme of humanitarian relief to prevent extreme deprivation and avoidable poverty-related deaths, regardless of where it occurs in the world.[17] As Willy Brandt envisioned, such a programme needs to be agreed through the United Nations and implemented in the shortest possible timeframe, requiring an unprecedented mobilisation of international agencies and massive transfers of resources to the world’s poorest regions, over and above existing aid budgets.[18]

This is clearly not about to happen in the midst of a global economic downturn and refugee crisis that is polarising our societies, and it may never happen unless there is an extraordinary show of public support that can persuade governments to reorder their priorities on behalf of the marginalised poor. For this reason, at STWR we believe that our foremost concern should not only be to promote the necessary pro-poor and redistributive policy changes that are urgently needed in the world. More importantly, we also need to bring about a compassionate awareness among the wider public of the dire reality of extreme poverty, as well as a huge level of civic engagement around this critical issue.

Our flagship publication titled Heralding Article 25 by STWR’s founder, Mohammed Mesbahi, examines this dilemma from many angles, and proposes a simple strategy for transforming the world through a unified call for sharing global resources.[19] The book makes an impassioned case for huge, continuous and worldwide demonstrations that mobilise around the long-agreed human rights of Article 25 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights – for adequate food, housing, healthcare and social security for all – until governments are impelled to organise an emergency programme of resource redistribution through the United Nations.

It requires a careful reading of the book’s rationale to appreciate the remarkable possibilities of heralding Article 25, although it’s important to state that the case it makes is not only a moral one, but also strategic. Because if we can envision enormous, endless protests in every country that peacefully amass for the cause of ending absolute poverty wherever it exists, then it’s possible to foresee the kind of changes that would ensue in international relations. Over time, it is through the necessary reforms to the global economic architecture that many other causes long upheld by progressive campaigners may finally become viable: closing down tax havens, diverting military expenditures, abolishing the unjust debts owed by developing countries, rolling back the tide of secretive free trade agreements, putting an end to structural adjustment programmes across the Global South… and so on. In other words, only after an immense release of empathic concern towards the plight of the world’s forgotten and impoverished millions, can we anticipate the declaration of human solidarity that is necessary to roll out universal basic income schemes across the world, and so much more.

Many questions remain as to how we can realise such a persistent expression of mass goodwill through global demonstrations, and the above perspective only provides a brief overview of our advocacy position at STWR. None of this is to suggest that the idea of a universal basic income does not hold potential to build a ‘counter-hegemonic strategy’ based on a new vision of a world that shares its wealth more equitably, enabling everyone to live freer and more creative lives. However, what many of these inspiring visions fail to account for is the importance of a crucial and yet absent actor on the world stage – namely a united voice of ordinary people, fused and directed towards the suffering of the very poorest members of the human family. This is what Mohammed Mesbahi describes as the “missing part” in global activism and new economic thinking, and without an overarching populist demand for a fairer sharing of resources on the global level, it will arguably be impossible to bring about the large-scale transformations of society that progressives movements are everywhere fighting for.

Put simply, the vision of granting every human being an equal right to share in the benefits of technological progress is noble and extremely encouraging. But we’re putting the cart before the horse if we expect that vision to be fulfilled in every country, before we have yet realised a massive global outpouring of goodwill towards the urgent cause of abolishing hunger and malnutrition through the elimination of absolute poverty.

Image credit: stevendepolo, flickr creative commons

– See more at: http://www.sharing.org/information-centre/articles/path-achieving-truly-universal-basic-income?dm_i=M4P,4R7BE,IM0884,HUSGH,1#sthash.5qfenhZJ.dpuf

The post The path to achieving a truly universal basic income appeared first on P2P Foundation.

Following the first ever United Nations Summit on Refugees and Migrants last week, many civil society organisations and concerned citizens are taking stock of our government’s collective response to this unprecedented global crisis. The UN Summit was two years in the making, and gave a rare opportunity for world leaders to step up their commitments to help refugees, as well as draw up a blueprint for a more effective international plan of action. Central to these negotiations was the need to share responsibility for dealing with the crisis more equitably among member states, which was one of the key principles reaffirmed in the outcome document. Yet there is little promise for the world’s 21 million refugees that wealthy nations will be genuinely sharing—and not further shirking—their responsibilities to fulfil these vulnerable people’s basic rights.

Before the summit convened, it was already clear that rich governments would not be placing the needs of refugees and migrants above their narrow national self-interest. Rights groups widely criticised the watered-down agreement adopted by the UN General Assembly, particularly a commitment to resettle 10 percent of the global refugee population annually (itself inadequate) that was later dropped from the negotiation text. Another omission was the hoped-for Global Compact on Responsibility Sharing for Refugees, which was intended to be one of the summit’s main outcomes. Instead, any chance of a global solution is deferred for another 2 years of negotiations. What remains is a long list of general and vague commitments, without any kind of binding mechanism or targets decided for responsibility sharing between nations. More concrete pledges were made at a separate Leaders’ Summit on Refugees, convened by President Obama with 50 other nations, who together promised to take in significantly more refugees this year and increase funding by $4.5bn. But even these promises lack a guarantee, and may be reneged upon by the United States in its next administration.

So where is the hope that the situation can improve while 34,000 people are forced to flee their homes each day due to conflict and persecution, many of them continuing to die in an attempt to reach safety? The shocking trends show no sign of abating, largely driven by violent conflicts in the Middle East and North Africa that Western powers have had a substantial role in causing or exacerbating. Yet the responses we are seeing from governments are often far from the fundamental principles set down in international refugee law, as reaffirmed at the UN Summit. Europe is currently building more walls than during the height of the Cold War; billions of euros are being spent on deterrence measures and reactionary cooperation agreements that are having limited impact on the number of overall arrivals. Our own country, the UK, is admitting only a tiny proportion of Syrian refugees, while shamefully diverting part of the aid budget to control immigration from Africa. The new UK government’s position is that those fleeing war zones should remain in the first safe country they reach—effectively arguing that the refugee crisis is somebody else’s problem.

It is not enough to question where is the hope, for where is the morality, the kindness, the basic compassion? In this era of growing polarisation, fear and prejudice, there are many ordinary citizens who stand in solidarity with refugees as they are forced from their homelands, stepping in with volunteering and rescue efforts where governments have failed. STWR joined 30,000 others as part of the “refugees welcome” march in London on the weekend prior to the UN Summit, calling on the British government to settle more refugees and provide safe, legal routes to asylum. The numbers of people gathered were considerably less than last year when 100,000 marched, thought to be the biggest national show of support for refugees in living memory. But among a population of 64 million, such a one-off event was never going to be enough to compel the UK government to accept its fair share of refugees, and play its part in forging strong multilateral action.

The same situation pertains in other wealthy nations, where the majority of citizens turn a blind eye to the senseless suffering of those less fortunate than themselves. It has to be remembered that while 65 million people have been displaced by war or persecution, there are millions of others living in extreme poverty who do not have the economic means to seek refuge abroad, which may cost thousands of dollars to pay the fees of illegal human smugglers. What about the many millions of people who do not have enough food to eat on a daily basis, or the 22,000 children who die each day due to conditions of poverty? The global refugee crisis is the tip of the iceberg, compared to this wider tragedy of inequality and injustice that is seldom mentioned in news reports across the Western media. Yet even the problem of internally displaced persons—those who flee their homes but do not cross national borders, totalling around 45 million people—was ignored by the UN Summit. We are left to wonder at the fate of the billions of other people who live without adequate means for survival worldwide, so long as the lack of compassion in global policymaking is sustained by a generalised public indifference.

Much has been made of the basic unfairness in how responsibility is shared between nations for ameliorating the refugee crisis, whereby only 14% of refugees are being hosted in the wealthiest parts of the world. According to analysis from Oxfam, more than half of refugees have been hosted by just 6 countries and territories that account for less than 2 percent of the global economy. But is this a surprise when we consider the lack of sharing that defines the planet as a whole, and the longstanding inequalities in living standards that divide the richest countries from the majority poor overseas? As Oxfam comment in their report “I Ask the World to Empathise”, the men and woman seeking a safer future have faced intense hardship, and will invariably have relied on the kindness and solidarity of strangers along their journeys, who may have shared their scarce resources with them. In contrast, most of the governments of affluent nations are failing to share their resources in the same spirit of common humanity.

The real question is the kind of sharing that is needed to deal with the root causes of this unmitigated crisis, when the international response continues to be woefully inadequate. A coordinated multilateral plan of action based on the concept of responsibility sharing is the barest minimum that should be expected, in accordance with the capacity and wealth of each country. A massive upscaling of support is also required for the low- and middle-income countries who are hosting the most displaced people, so that response efforts can go beyond humanitarian aid to include help for livelihoods and education. All of these demands are entirely possible and realistic, if the right resources are directed at the problem.

However, addressing the root causes of an economic order that constantly produces the drivers of mass human displacement—entrenched poverty, endless wars and worsening climate change—will demand a level of global economic sharing that is unlike anything we have seen since the foundation of the United Nations, before we can realistically envisage a better world without borders, xenophobia or racism. The fact that our governments have even failed to agree a new refugee protection system based on genuine sharing in any form, only serves to underline the obvious reality: that the true burden of responsibility lies ever more heavily on the shoulders of ordinary people of goodwill.

Adam Parsons is the editor at Share The World’s Resources.

Photo credit: streets.life

The post Standing in solidarity for a humanity without borders appeared first on P2P Foundation.

Arguably, one of the most pressing challenges facing humanity today is the need to reverse ever-widening inequalities, especially as this injustice is now a central theme across a wide range of social, economic and environmental issues – from securing basic human rights to addressing the climate crisis. Equally as challenging is the need to mobilise sufficient public support to oppose the neoliberal polices that cause inequality and demand that governments share wealth and other resources more equally across society and the world as a whole.

It’s therefore promising to see an ‘inequality alliance’ of influential civil society organisations emerge this year just as the super-rich Davos cabal assembled once again for their exclusive mountain retreat. Notably, the organisations that form the new alliance are a heterogeneous group that normally pursue different agendas, which suggests that this is a potentially significant collaboration that could pave the way for similar cross-sectoral coalitions in the future, and engage a much larger and more diverse group of supporters. As well as the usual development NGOs like Oxfam and Action aid, the group includes Amnesty International, Greenpeace, the women’s rights group AWID, as well as a number of sizable network organisations such as the International Trade Union Confederation, CIVICUS and CIDSE.

In a  joint statement released in January, the alliance outlines the various ways inequality expresses itself and highlights how this crisis adversely impacts a majority of the world’s population:

“Workers across the world are seeing their wages and conditions eroded as inequality increases. The rights of women are systematically worse in situations of greater economic inequality. The vast majority of the world’s richest people are men; those in the most precarious and poorly paid work are women. Young people are facing a crisis of unemployment. Other groups such as migrants, ethnic minorities, LGBTQI people, people with disability and indigenous people continue to be pushed to the margins, suffering systematic discrimination.

The struggle to realise the human rights of the majority are continually undercut in the face of such disparities of wealth and power. Extreme inequality is also frequently linked to rising restrictions on civic space and democratic rights as political and economic elites collude to protect their interests. The right to peaceful protest and the ability of citizens to challenge the prevailing economic discourse is being curtailed almost everywhere, for elites know that extreme inequality and participatory democracy cannot co-exist for long.”

Drawing attention to the direct relationship between inequality and the ecological “future of our planet”, the statement also refers to recent research which demonstrates that someone from the richest 1% of the global population consumes 175 times as much carbon as someone as the poorest 10%. As many campaign organisations recognise, this stark illustration of the extent to which governments are failing to share the planet’s finite resources fairly (including the remaining global carbon budget) has major implications for the radical reforms needed to establish an environmentally sustainable global economy in the 21^st century.

A common agenda to #FightInequality

The joint statement also makes the crucial point that the crisis of inequality is not an incidental aberration, but a systemic problem that is entirely the consequence of political choices and an overreliance on market forces. The alliance rightly acknowledges that this is “the result of our leaders listening to the 1% instead of the majority”, which explains why today’s socio-economic policy decisions mainly serve the interests of a privileged minority at the expense of the global common good. Reflecting the need to challenge vested interests more effectively, a substantial section of the coalition’s statement reads as an affirmation of their commitment to combine efforts, and they list a series of measures that they intend to pursue together:

“We will press governments to meet their obligations to ensure people can enjoy their rights to health, education and other essential public services through tackling tax dodging and ensuring progressive tax and spend policies. We will support workers’ rights to freedom of association and collective bargaining, and narrow the gap between rich and poor. We will fight for the redistribution of women’s unequal share of unpaid care work, and the tackling of violence against women brought on by state repression and rising fundamentalism. We will advocate for universal social protection floors. We will fight for land reform.

We will work together to challenge the disproportionate power and practices of the corporate sector that is undermining so many struggles, contributing to human rights violations and increasing inequality across the globe. We will work together with others to secure climate justice. We will take on the power of corporations, including fossil fuel companies who are undermining efforts which respond to science and protect people and planet. We will together champion international cooperation so every country plays its part and we avoid a race to the bottom.”

This statement of intent may not be a complete list of actions needed to tackle inequality, but it is clearly an important attempt among disparate campaign organisations to define common ground and pave the way for advocacy initiatives that could bring together concerned citizens in larger numbers and innovative ways. Moreover, there is an explicit acknowledgement that establishing a more sustainable and equitable economic system requires fundamental change on a “scale never seen before”, and a collaborative approach from people across the world including “governments, trade unions, civil society and companies who share a commitment to the common good.”

Here the alliance touches on a central issue for activists that echoes a core theme explored in publications by Share The World’s Resources (STWR): that radical change on a global scale –however essential and increasingly urgent – will be impossible to achieve unless many millions more ordinary people call on governments to reorder their distorted priorities. The policy reforms needed to fight inequality are well known to progressives, but as STWR’s Mohammed Mesbahi reasons in an upcoming book, any campaign for system change will never succeed “unless the people of the world gather in their millions on the streets in peaceful protest, and together embrace that vision and work for its fulfilment.”

Reframing the inequality debate

As yet, however, there is no indication of how the new inequality alliance will gather the support and momentum needed to achieve their stated objective of tackling the systemic causes of inequality. There has been little mention of the #FightInequality hashtag on Twitter since the coalition first released their statement, and it’s unclear whether we will witness the emergence of new campaign initiatives, innovative direct actions, radical public policy proposals, or a new peoples’ movement to end inequality in the coming months.

Whichever combination of strategies the alliance members pursue, let’s hope that they are also able to shift away from their outmoded tactic of ‘fighting against inequality’ and embrace a more positive frame that promotes and advocates for sharing, as this constitutes a solutions-based approach that goes beyond simply analysing, critiquing and opposing the problems of the world. STWR has set out a simple case for taking this approach in their report Sharing as our common cause, which also highlights how the call for sharing is being expressed across diverse movements for social justice, environmental stewardship, global peace and participative democracy:

“As more and more people begin to raise their voices for governments to put human needs and ecological preservation before corporate greed and profit, the call for sharing is consistently at the heart of civil society demands for a better world … a call for sharing holds the potential to engage a much broader swathe of the public in campaign initiatives and popular movements that aim towards systemic transformation.

Many people feel disconnected from political issues owing to their technical complexity, or else they feel overwhelmed by the enormity of the challenges that face us and ill equipped to take action. But everyone understands the human value of sharing, and by upholding this universal principle in a political context we can point the way towards an entirely new approach to economics – one that is integrally based on a fair and sustainable distribution of resources.”

In other words, there is every possibility that the alliance could attract far higher levels of public support if their campaign (and any agenda for reform they formulate) incorporates the emerging call for sharing – especially since sharing wealth, power and resources more equally is undoubtedly the most effective route to reversing burgeoning inequalities and creating a more sustainable future. At the very least, this more positive and inclusive framing has the potential to instigate a much needed public debate on why policy decisions taken at the local, national and global level should be explicitly guided by the principle of sharing.

– See more at: http://www.sharing.org/information-centre/blogs/making-case-sharing-global-alliance-fightinequality#sthash.ICC0F9kf.dpuf

Photo by SEDACMaps

The post Making the case for sharing: the global alliance to #FightInequality appeared first on P2P Foundation.

The post A last stand for the Davos ‘gods’? appeared first on P2P Foundation.

During an interview and discussion with the audience at the annual World Goodwill seminar in London, STWR highlighted the increasingly urgent need for concerned citizens to demand that governments enact the pressing structural reforms needed to address interconnected social, political and environmental crises.

On 14th November 2015, World Goodwill – a global network of citizens that seeks to stimulate awareness of major world problems and foster a universal spiritual perspective about humanity’s future – convened their annual seminar, which took place simultaneously in London, Geneva and New York. Separately at each venue, contributions were provided by a range of speakers from spiritual and business backgrounds as well as representatives from civil society organisations, including Share The World’s Resources (STWR) who participated at the London event.

A recurring point of discussion at all three venues was the ethic and practice of sharing, which was referred to by a number of speakers in relation to pressing social and economic concerns (such as sustainable development and the climate crisis), and also in terms of how embracing the principle of sharing is pivotal to our continued evolution and progress on Planet Earth.

Speaking in French during the Geneva seminar, Daniel Hersann argued that diametrically opposing world views are confronting each other at this critical moment in history: an emerging understanding based on group collaboration and sharing is challenging the predominant view that human beings are naturally exploitative, com­petitive and individualistic. He went on to suggest that the inequitable distribution of planetary resources cannot be resolved unless our willingness to share overpowers the pervasive desire for material accumulation that characterises the modern world.

Also speaking in Geneva, Thomas Bohrn noted that sharing is fundamental to physiological processes, particularly in relation to the distribution of oxygen and other nutrients that takes place at a cellular and atomic level. Bohrn questioned whether such elemental systems of sharing have been sufficiently recreated in the world around us, and concluded that economic systems are largely incompatible with the principle of sharing at present as they fail to freely distribute resources in the same way that nature always has.

At the seminar in London, STWR’s Rajesh Makwana (who’s contribution was in the form of an interview and discussion with the audience) responded to questions about the commons movement, the sharing economy and the role that not-for-profit enterprises can play in the ‘great transition’ that lies ahead. He also explained that systemic forms of sharing must be implemented on an international basis if governments are to finally end extreme poverty, noting that around 46,000 preventable deaths occur each day mainly because millions of people still cannot access to the essentials of life: nutritious food, clean water and basic healthcare.

Makwana also asserted that we are in the midst of what can only be described as a global emergency, adding that many millions more concerned citizens must therefore demand that governments enact the pressing structural reforms needed to address interconnected social, political and environmental crises. He also stressed the vital importance of heralding Article 25 of the Universal Declaration of Human rights, which is a proposition that is explored in detail in a study by STWR’s founder Mohammed Mesbahi.

The theme of sharing was further examined in a presentation by representatives of WYSE International, a voluntary organisation providing training opportunities for young people seeking to make a positive impact on world problems. Highlighting the urgent need to address pressing global crises such as the overconsumption of natural resources, WYSE’s Hilary Harvey emphasised the crucial role that education can play in this regard, especially at a time when half the world’s population is under the age of 35. Clarence Harvey drew attention to how people of goodwill are increasingly embracing core human values such as sharing and nobility, which he suggested are embodied in the idea of the Bodhisattva – the one whose heart is opened and whose mind is illumined.

Alluding to the confluence of global crises during the seminar in New York, Jimena Leiva Roesch of the International Peace Institute explained that the Sus­tainable Development Goals hold the potential to establish a new paradigm in international relations by integrating the social, economic and environmental aspects of development. According to Roesch, 2016 will be a pivotal year when the United Nations will have a historic opportunity to combine the sustainability and climate agendas and create a unified vision of human progress and environmental regeneration.

The seminars, which also included a number of meditations and presentations from other insightful speakers, provided an important contribution to the emerging discourse on the need for wealth, power and resources to be shared more equitably at across all levels of society – locally, nationally and globally. In particular, the combination of spiritual and civil society perspectives on this central issue was notable at a time when people everywhere are recognising the need to move beyond intellectual silos and unite on common platforms for transformative change.

STWR would like to thank World Goodwill for their kind invitation to participate in the London seminar. 

Photo credit: Esparta, flickr creative commons 

The post STWR at the World Goodwill seminar 2015: Rebuilding the shrine of human living appeared first on P2P Foundation.

The terrorist attacks in Paris compels us to acknowledge the deeper causes of the resentment that gave rise to ISIS, and to unite behind a far-reaching demand for sharing the world’s resources.

A week after the brutal terrorist attacks in Paris, the Western world is still coming to terms with the horrific violence that was perpetrated on large numbers of innocent civilians. Understandably, there is much fear among the people of Europe and other Western states that further atrocities will be committed in the near future – not least within the United States in light of the Obama administration’s air war against ISIS in Iraq and Syria since 2014. Endless news reports and articles continue to debate how the community of nations should further respond to this urgent threat of Islamic extremism. But what should be the collective response of ordinary people of goodwill in the face of these atrocities, and how can we truly affirm our common humanity in the immediate time ahead?

While France and other Western states clamour for a “pitiless” war against terrorism, only the relatively few progressive voices are calling for an alternative to increased military intervention. Among these anti-war and peace activists, one of the most radical propositions comes from Rabbi Michael Lerner who advocates for an entirely new approach to “homeland security” – one that firmly integrates the principle of sharing into world affairs through a “strategy of generosity” and massive redistribution of resources led by the popular will of America.

In his latest editorial for Tikkun Magazine, Rabbi Lerner reiterates the need for us to embrace a new worldview that understands “our mutual interdependence and oneness”. This calls for an informed understanding that militaristic solutions can never bring lasting peace and security, and that you can’t simply bomb an extremist ideology out of existence. It also means acknowledging the deeper causes of the resentment that gave rise to ISIS, which would include the past 14 years of failed Western interventions across the Middle East and north Africa – where close to 300,000 people have been killed, hundreds of thousands injured, and millions forced from their homes.

More than this, however, it means acknowledging the unequal distribution of global wealth and resulting extremes of poverty that inevitably fuels resentment against the West. Rabbi Lerner cites the official UN estimates that up to 9,000 children under five die each day from preventable poverty-related causes, while at least 2.8 billion people live on less than $2 a day. Such is the “structural violence” that everyone in advanced industrial societies is morally implicated in, caused in large part by the unjust structural arrangements of the global economy that benefit big corporations and a privileged minority of the world population, at the expense of the majority of the Global South.

Embracing this broader awareness of our divided world does not remotely vindicate the reactionary force of ISIS and similar groups, who represent a level of murderous brutality unparalleled in the twenty-first century. But the horror witnessed in Paris calls on us to reflect anew on the “cumulative effects of a world lacking generosity of spirit and generosity of action”, which – as Rabbi Lerner articulates – “plays an important role in shaping the psychological underpinning that leads people to act out in various ways, of which ISIS is only one manifestation”. Now more than ever, we are called upon to shift our sympathies and solidarity from solely “We are all France”, to “We are the whole world”.

So what can we do to translate our global empathy with the suffering of humanity as a whole into practical, constructive action? First of all, we can follow Rabbi Lerner’s instruction to play a role in resisting the dominant discourse that pushes for increased military interventions on the basis of fear and revenge, and we can try and convince others to adopt this “new consciousness”. This may compel us to support the campaigns and activism of the many progressive groups who oppose an escalation of the destructive bombing in Syria and Iraq, which will only intensify the chaos and suffering in these war-torn regions, leading to an even greater influx of refugees to Europe and increased bitterness against the West. The many alternative options for curtailing the threat of ISIS remain largely outside of mainstream public debate, such as an international arms embargo or the empowerment of the United Nations in negotiating real political and diplomatic solutions.

But if we wholly embrace the emerging new consciousness that Rabbi Lerner speaks of, then we may also see the necessity of uniting behind a demand for sharing global resources rather than “simply focusing on resisting the policies of the right”. In a newsletter accompanying the Tikkun editorial, Rabbi Lerner questions whether the events in Paris represent a wake-up call to help us see that the only real response is to build a massive, peaceful social movement that can “take back our country and our world”. He writes:

“Perhaps this moment is a call to action – not to create a false sense of safety or security or to turn more inward – for ordinary people to rise-up and lead because our leaders are failing us. They continue to promote and use the same strategies of violence, weapons and war to try to bomb the world to peace and impose global capitalism around the globe. And yet we know this strategy and approach has not worked for thousands of years and it will not work now.

… It is time for a sea change and it is we, the people, who are the only ones who can create it.

… We will not be safe until everyone on the planet is safe. Until all lives are valued. Until everyone has the resources they need to live peacefully, securely, eat healthy food, have drinking water, education, functioning communities, healthcare, etc. We need to stand-up in a loving, compassionate, powerful and nonviolent collective way and demand that our leaders do what is needed to build a safer world for ourselves and everyone else on the planet and to make it clear that more weapons and more violence is not the path.

… [We need to] mobilize people to take to the streets in massive nonviolent civil disobedience demanding that those who support continued wars and those who support weapons industries either withdraw their support or we will vote them out of office. To demand that we move from a homeland security policy of power over, domination and submission to a strategy of generosity and kindness. To demand that our leaders are actually beholden to the people they represent, not the wealthiest individuals and corporations. To demand that corporations be socially and environmentally responsible.

This is a crucial moment in history. Let’s capitalize on it ourselves rather than leave it to the warmongers to do so because we know what will happen if they do. With a massive movement, we can turn to the light and away from the darkness but to do so will require each and every one of us to get out of our offices, our houses, our schools, our communities and even our comfort zones and take to the streets.

What do you say?”

The post After the Paris attacks: affirming our common humanity through a global call for sharing appeared first on P2P Foundation.

– See more at: http://www.sharing.org/information-centre/articles/wheres-missing-part-naomi-klein-ask-pope-francis-and-mohammed-mesbahi#sthash.hgDvTzln.dpuf

The post Where’s the missing part, Naomi Klein? Ask Pope Francis and Mohammed Mesbahi appeared first on P2P Foundation.