| CONSCIENCE
AND CHOICE
Toward a New Culture of Values and Ethics in Our Global Society |
|
 | |
SETTING THE CONTEXT
Every generation faces new challenges. For us it is learning to live together in
the new global society. Today, history requires us to apply shared values and ethics
beyond communities and nations to relations with our global neighbors. We need new
skills to do this, if we are to close the gap between our professed and applied values.
Survival requires us to learn to think in terms of whole systems, to learn to think
in inclusive terms rather than either/or and self/other, to develop compassionate
feelings for all of humanity, and to act for the benefit of the common good while
honoring our diversity. We need to encourage and help each other to learn these
new ways of being in one world
The principles of The United Nations Charter still inspire millions to hope for a
peaceful world. But for others there is profound disappointment in the inability
of the world organization to live up to its ideals. It is the painful and widening
gap between our ideal values and the values we live every day that calls upon us to
go deep inside to examine how our own behavior has shaped the world we live in. Human
beings have become creatures of habits and conditioned responses. Without reflection
and new learning, we will unconsciously repeat old behavior. In rapidly changing
societies the need for reflection increases. Without it we live by unconscious habitual
values from the past rather than choosing the values we live by.
We will need to treat our neighbors ethically if we are to engender the trust necessary
for a global society. What is the role of conscience in our choices? Are we willing
to make choices when we might lose money or status in the outer world, while following
our conscience in the inner world? Choice based solely on self-interest of individuals
and nations tends to divide. Ethical choices tend to lead to trust among people and
nations and to more harmony in their relations.
Conscience and Choice, Toward a New Culture of Values and Ethics in Our Global Society
is an intellectually provocative and spiritually stimulating topic for discussion.
The report which follows aims to capture the dynamic presentations of the participants
and to convey the specific tone and style which were reflected in their individual
expertise, culture and personality.
You are invited to consider your own ideas on the subject as you explore the experiences
and insights of the forum’s innovative speakers.
| |
H.E. Mr. Samuel R. Insanally A s you are all aware, the General Assembly is now in full swing and it is perhaps not the most convenient of times to reflect on these very important issues before us. Yet, they are in my view very essential to the progress of the work we do in our Organization that their consideration must be thought of, not only as timely, but as very urgent. The United Nations, this year, celebrates its 50th year of existence. In two weeks time, the leaders of some 155 nations will gather here in New York to mark the occasion. They will pay tribute, I am sure to the remarkable advances we have made in this Organization in promoting international peace and development. At the same time, they will be looking to the future to see how the United Nations can be strengthened to serve the needs of its members in the 21st century and hopefully beyond. If they are clairvoyant as I think all Heads of State are supposed to be, they will perceive that, what the world requires now for its very survival and future progress, is really a sense of moral responsibility in international affairs. Indeed, we must all realize by now that while mankind has made astonishing strides in many areas of human activity, especially in the scientific and technological fields, peace and prosperity continue to prove elusive for humanity. Clearly, we have gone astray as a people and are yet to find our true path to salvation. In my own mind, I am persuaded that we will only do so when we as peoples are prepared to accept a new culture of values in our global society based on common understanding, equity and justice for all peoples. We are only too well aware that most of our societies of today have moved away or are in the process of moving away from traditional values which have sustained us in the past and were the basis of communal support and cooperation among people. These have been invaribly replaced by increasing competition and a propulsion toward the acquisition of material wealth. It would be put to argue, I think, that enhanced well-being in complete physical, material and spiritual terms, will result directly from material gains. Nor, can the notion of increased competition and economic advancement be said to automatically lead to and improve social conditions and quality of life. However, change, both in our attitudes and in our ways of doing things, is clearly indicated at this stage of history; for all strategies and policies which were largely based on national self-interest have led us nowhere. "Beggar thy neighbor" policies have created dangerous divisions among peoples. So the ethic of self-interest must now be replaced by an ethic of international ooperation. Today’s leaders must be able to transcend the limitations of national interests and look to a more global agenda. The major issues which confront us today, such as drugs, degradation of the environment, disease and poverty are not susceptible to control by any one nation. A collective enterprise is now required to find solutions which escape the individual State. Today, the "buzzwords" of the United Nations are reform and restructure. One of the abilities given to a human being is that of reforming matters under discussion, so as to see them in a new light and then hopefully to act differently. In speaking to the United Nations last week, Pope John Paul 11 asked us to think about this Institution not as an administrative body but rather as a family of nations. The choice to see the United Nations in this light will uplift us all and empower us to resolve difficulties or differences in a more constructive way. We must choose to find a loftier level in our relations. I think it was Albert Einstein who said "we will never solve the problemss of the world at the same level of understanding what created them". Therefore, we have to deliberately choose to operate from a higher level to approach the world’s problems and then to act accordingly, recognizing the common hierarchy which transcends our diversity. And the evident characteristic of the United Nations, as you know, is a diversity of 185 Member States each with its own culture and circumstance. We need first to choose to recognize and accept this diversity and the consequence of differences of views as perfectly legitimate and normal. Then constructively we should choose to look for those values and ideals we all hold dear, and then search together for ways, which given our current circumstances, can be pursued for the benefit of our common humanity. This approach would require us to lower the temperature of international relations; to seek as it were, to deflect the stresses in the international environment by promoting various kinds of confidence-building measures before the crisis arise. The President of Guyana has suggested, for example, the active promotion of A New Global Human Order based on justice and equity for all peoples, as a constructive tool for international relations and as a great confidence-builder for all peoples. No doubt we will hear more in the months ahead about the need to reform of the United Nations. And reform the Institution we must. At the same time, however, we already have much to be thankful for in having this Organization however imperfect it might be, it is a place for peace where the verbage of languages can be simultaneously interpreted in five languages; where our interests can be reviewed and reconciled and where all members of the human family can feel at home and work for the common good. What we all need now is a change of heart in order to perceive the world in a different way. To rise above our existing frames of reference and to see more positive dimensions in ourselves, in others and in our relationships. Williams James said "wisdom is nothing more than seeing things in non-habitual ways. It is the ability to step back from the usual way of seeing and doing things." Conscience as we popularly describe it is that mental faculty which allows human beings to decide between good and bad and between right and wrong. It is that inner discerning eye that allows us to determine the moral quality of one’s decisions and more precisely perhaps, as the root origin of the word suggests, it is the knowing of things together which enables us to make informed choices in all matters that affects human life. This becomes easier when we learn to diminish the stress in our individual lives. Peace begins within, and beyond that, with a culture of values and ethics in our global society, I am sure you will find the theme Conscience and Choice, Toward a New Culture of Values and Ethics in Our Global Society intellectually provocative and spiritually stimulating.
|
|
SPIRITUAL PRINCIPLES
Dadi Prakashmani | |
| T
oday is a day of great joy for me and I am pleased to share some of my ideas on this very
interesting topic of values and ethics. The subject of values is beginning to take on
prominence not only here at the United Nations, but also all over the world. Wherever I
have travelled over the past few weeks, people are becoming increasingly alert to the
importance of values in their lives and in their communities. So I begin with an appeal
for all of us gathered here today to take away a firm determination that we will use
values from the level of our thoughts and that we will think about them with depth and
significance and that we will live them. The book Living Values: A Guidebook which has
been prepared as a dedication to the 50th Anniversary of the United Nations by the Brahma
Kumaris, carries the message that for the upliftment of humanity it is necessary to have
values in our lives. We need to live the values we profess.
The topic for discussion is very intriguing -- Conscience and Choice. It does happen in life’s experiences that our desires dictate our choices in a direction which is normally different from the advice of our inner conscience. This difference in direction results in a conflict between the advice of the conscience and the choices we make. The conscience of the human soul calls for the experience of peace but when adverse situations arise and individuals are forced to make decisions they invariably go against that inner voice and choose a direction that is peaceless and which results in violence. The fundamental principle that governs conscience and choice is a universal one, which states that there are always thoughts which will emerge in the mind first, to give us time to discern, before we decide what action to take. Let us examine this principle at work with a couple of simple examples. You are walking and suddenly you notice a purse lying at the side of the road. The first thought which emerges is let me pick the purse up. Before putting this thought into action the conscience becomes activated with thoughts such as ‘what should I do, should I leave it there, should I take, what should I do?’ Then I choose to pick the purse up and take it away with me. Having made the choice the conscience continues to speak -- ‘what should I do with the purse now, should I make efforts to find the owner, who would come looking for it, or should I keep it?’ This example may be a simple one but the operating principle is the same at all levels of interactions. The thoughts will come in the mind but whether we act upon them or not depends on our power of choice. Our conscience will speak in order to guide us and if we listen and act according to its guidance this will bring the experience of inner happiness. But if we choose to act against the guidance of our inner conscience then there will be guilt in our consciousness. Let us look at relationships. If a relationship is not working well and you do not have enough love but instead ill feelings, then these ill feelings will create thoughts of anger for that person in you and you will not be able to express love. If at the time you recognize that something is not right in the relationship, and you were to sit in silence with stillness and quietness of mind, then your inner conscience will tell you to maintain a peaceful attitude. It will not tell you to have anger for the person. If you listen to your inner conscience beforeusing the power of discrimination then your feelings and thoughts will support you to make the right choices. In this case you will be able to retain feelings of love rather than anger. Love is an innate value of the human soul. Anger cannot be defined as such. Anger causes sorrow. Love brings joy and happiness in life. The true religion of a human being is to give happiness and not to cause sorrow. True religion tells us to have love for the younger ones and respect for senior ones. Even in our relationship to nature when it comes to plants and flowers, if we take care of them with love then they bloom and become very lovely. And if we don’t water them with love, if we dont care for them then they dry up. A bouquet of flowers is shown as a symbol of unity; and scattered petals indicate a flower which has fallen into many pieces. Everything works well collectively when we are together. This world is like a family and family means united, being together in love and harmony. So if we, as human beings. have love and respect for each other then all the wars, conflicts and battles will end. Everyone expresses the desire to have peace in the world but without having values in our personal lives, in our inner selves, how can we have peace in the world? When we are committed to using values in our practical lives then we are able to experience inner peace. And when we live our values, only then is it possible to help each other to grow and progress. True respect is to allow everyone to grow and to aspire for higher goals. But what happens when we don’t live our values is that if someone is moving ahead then we become threatened and instead of encouragement we experience jealousy and competition. Rather than thinking of and appreciating the qualities of the person which are enabling him to progress, we begin to look at his defects. So words which should have the value of strength and sweetness become stones which are used to hurt and cut others down. Let us all create a world of values and ethics. But to do this let us all, each one of us first imbibe inner values in our personal life. Each individual is responsible for the self, then the family and then the society. Collective change in families brings about change in society and collective change in societies brings about change in the world. Let me end with a few questions: Do we all feel ourselves as responsible beings? Does each one of us feel that I am a unit of this global society with the responsiblity of making it a better place? Am I leaving with the determined thought to live my professed values in my practical life? If we can collectively work together then it is certain that we can create a society based on values.
|
|
MORAL CONSENSUS
Dr. Claire Gaudiani | |
|
T
he topic Conscience and Choice toward a new definition of values makes me very hopeful.
Over the last thousands of years of human experience, it has been about this very task.
If we look at human history and realize that in years, decades and millenia past, there
has been a consensus. That in fact, to the victor in a war, belonged not only the land,
but also the lives of men and the bodies of women. When this happened again in Bosnia,
as it has happened in this century, we know about it because of technology, and an uproar
occurred. For many of us an insufficient uproar; yet we have to realize that through the
thousands of years of human history these things have happened and no one knew. That was
why the men fought so hard to win, Because in fact, the loss was the loss of everything.
We have come to a point now in human history where we know and we are startled and alarmed and there is effort to move forward. For years and even up to today torture was widely accepted as a means for getting information, for instance by governments and sadly also by churches. Over a period of decades and centuries and millenia we have come to a point where we call it by its right name evil thing. When it happens, we know about it more often now, because of technology and we rise in horror. One could say the same thing about slavery. I guess I want to say that this is a hopeful moment because we know now not only to call these things by their right names but over the same period of time a moral consensus has arisen around issues of rights. Not only that certain things are wrong and unacceptable but that other things must be part of peoples’ lives. This is the rising moral consensus that is not just located in some places for some people but it is widely understood and widely wanted. And yet I wouldn’t tell you for a moment that it is widely enough experienced. We have a sense as human beings that there are things we want for each other, our children and each other’s children that begin with life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness and these possibilities that are before us now are expressed not only in governments, but increasingly in the way we look at our expectations at the local levels. This rising moral consensus stands for what we won’t tolerate and we will insist that others and ourselves have opportunities; because we can share information across the world in the most unlikely ways, ways unlikely even a decade ago. What makes me hopeful is work in education, the work of religious organizations and the work especially of private foundations, particularly in the United States of America over the last 50 to 60 years for this has given us a feeling that we are citizens of countries, also citizens of the world and we are responsible for what happens. Who could have imagined that the Copenhagen Summit could have occurred, as it did; which called people to recognize that world poverty was not something that we must simply accept. But in fact poverty, like genocide, like torture, like slavery, must be something that we commit ourselves to calling by its right name -- evil thing -- and we would not have it. A rising moral consensus grows around the responsibilities of all of us and each of us, to do something. A moral consensus is in a sense what we believe gives birth to a social cohesion. What we shall do. We could continue to sound as altruistic as sacred texts that have been telling us who is our neighbor over the past three thousand years. In a class I teach in Connecticut College, my students begin the class by reading Maimonides and Mission of Tamlet in which they read the eight stages of Tzedakah which tell us who our neighbor is. Our neighbor is the person to whom we are responsible to assure a secure life and well-being because we live nearby. We must do this because we expect the same care to be given to us and it brings us the kind of safety and security in society that is good for our children and future generations. Similarly, the students read the story of The Good Samaritan and other texts in the Old and New Testament and the story of The Good Samaritan also defines who is my neighbor? Just as we have been struggling to find who is my neighbor in the conclusions we come to, about the wrongs and the rights that we want to keep in front of us as we build a modern moral consensus. The story of The Good Samaritan reminds us that it is not simply my family whom I must take care of should they fall into a difficult situation, but it is also someone whom I have nothing in common -- not my fellow religionist, not someone who shares my spiritual or religious values, not someone who shares my race, not someone who shares my nationality, but someone who shares my humanity. That was the story which was prompted by the question to Christ: Who is my neighbor? To which the answer was: The fellow being who cares for you. Simarly in chapters concerning charity in the Koran. Because of the constraints of time I will not go into detail. You would read the same definitions of who is my neighbor. What I want to share with you is that I believe that technology, both the technology of terror and the technology of communication have begun to illustrate and define an economic pragmatic that comes to the conclusion on the issues of moral consensus about who is my neighbor that the sacred texts have been preaching to us for thousands of years. Social instability in a country and in a region now, is no longer so easy for governments to squash as it was even just a decade ago. Social instability by a minority group could have been quickly squashed, and the uprising would be discovered ten years later by human rights workers. But now, as was proven in Chiapas, those minorities who are not receiving the experience of being treated as neighbors, can rock hard at the political stability of their country. As they rock hard, they begin to get a reaction and when the troops started to enter their area, as the Zappatistas experienced, they were up on the Internet. In Copenhagen the Zappatistas were able to get on CNN and so while the government was saying one thing, they were saying what they were experiencing. As the social instability breeds opportunities to rock at political structures and destabilize political structures, news get up on the global wire. Then what happens? Capital flight results. Capital flight was not the only reason the Mexican peso took a dive. The country experienced the assasination of Colosio and it was experiencing new leadership. But in my talks with bond-traders and people in the financial services industry, they told me that the way the government was handling the Zappatistas, and the threat of further political instability triggered the wire and in just a few days the Mexican market dropped; and in twenty-four hours the Latin American Market dropped 39 points and very quickly the US President sought to stabilize the peso. In thinking he could come up with the full sum, he caught the ire of the Congress and could only come up with half the amount. Suddenly the US President was going to Europe and to Japan to stabilize the peso. When you trace back and ask why, well, a lot of reasons, but one reason was people were not treated as neighbours. In this global neighborhood now we will know more than we have ever known. The message is for those who may not take a values position or a spiritual position or an ethical position that the clear economic pragmatic is: where there is social instability there will be political instability and that is where theere will not be a good opportunity for a capital investment to return on the funds placed in that sight and so capital flight occurs. It seems to me that as we look at the spiritual and ethical side of life today, we can say there is a growing moral consensus but I must say that I am enough of a pragmatist to be pleased that I see what I believe is an economic pragmatic that has arrived in the same place, the same clearing in the forest, that these sacred texts have come to. And that is, if the well-off want to remain well-off, they will have to work to be sure that those who are not well-off have opportunities to become better-off; in the way that they are able to participate in the security and the well-being of their country and their countrymen. I am pleased to see that the ethical dimension is supported by the economic dimension because I think that we are both body and soul and that we are likely to make more progress in the next 50 years because the two strands are coming together and we are seeing the sacred texts as even more prophetic than we would have perhaps have dared to believe even twenty years ago.
|
|
INSTITUTIONAL CHANGE
Dr. Peter Senge | |
|
T
his is a puzzling subject for me, I am not exactly sure why it is puzzling, but I
think it has to do with the context in which we talk about values. I have heard so
much talk about values in my life that I’ve probably heard enough for many lifetimes.
I was never particularly interested in business but now I find myself representing
changes in business in a panel like this. The reason I got interested in business is
because of a few basic beliefs. The first is that we are in quite considerable trouble
in the world. We are living in an era of massive institutional failure because the
thinking in practice which underlies all our institutions simply is not adequate to
the world in which we live today. It is really quite hard to find any institution anywhere
that people can be proud of how it functions. It seemed important to find a practice
field, a domain where we can begin to tackle a different way of being at a scale that
makes a difference.
I think another problem that always beset me when I think about values is that the context we hold is very individual. I believe individual changes matter a great deal and I believe they don’t matter very much. I believe most ills, most of the deep dysfunctionality which we all experience in our world is not just the result of individuals, it is not just the result of how we are operating individually, but rather it is a result of how we are operating collectively. We are the first species in the history of life on this planet that destroys species. It is not individuals that destroy species. It is somehow us collectively. It is actually not individuals who bring about social decay, an enemy we see in this country; the fact that one out of every four black men are in jail. The deterioration of our system of public education, the deterioration of the institution that we call the family, is not brought about by individuals. There is a new type of force at play in the world and it is precisely a by product of our success. Our success at conquering the environment, our phenomenal economic success (I only mean phenomenal in the sense of the gross economic growth we have been able to generate), the success in pushing back mortality rates and extending human lifetimes -- these are all phenomenal successes. Yet the net consequence is that human beings in total threathen life on the planet at a level which has never before been threathened, at least as far as we know. So there is a funny kind of dilemna in the heart of all of this which I don’t really understand very well because I know it is very intimate and very personal territory. It feels very intimate and personal to me and yet it feels something very different also. As I tried to think a little bit in coming here, about the values that seem to underly the work that I and my colleagues are involved with, I came upon sort of strange values. Everything that Dadi Prakashmani and Claire Gaudiani have said I easily resonate with, because those types of commitments also lie very much at the heart of what we attempt to do in the world of business, in the world of education and in the world of institutional change. But we have come to a point where we can’t just talk about this as a human issue. It is not a human issue, it is a global issue. Einstein said that we must somehow break through the illusion that holds each of us as separate and expand our circle of compassion, not only for one another but for all life. Kirshnamurti said it in a very beautiful way when he said that the belief that man was somehow separate from nature evolved into an idea that nature was nothing but "resources" existing for man’s benefit. By the way, the word "resource", if you ever looked it up in the dictionary means "standing in reserve". Once nature became a resource, a "standing in reserve", we lost ourselves because we no longer loved nature. We’ve lost our connection to life. That is a different kind of love, it is not just a love of humans. That love which Krishnamurti talks about is a much different sort of love. Perhaps not different in its essence but different in its articulation and most definitely different in its consciousness. I found myself thinking of people and stories because I guess values are easier to think about in terms of actual people doing actual things. I found myself thinking a lot about Dr. Karl-Henrik Robert, the founder of The Natural Step in Sweden. In our practical, pragmatic world The Natural Step movement is helping Sweden as a country, go through profound changes. The value expressed in this movement to build a truly sustainable, industrial society is, very simply, finding, once again, our place within a larger natural order. The society which have today, our industrial society is fundamentally an outlaw society. It lives outside the laws of nature. Nature generates no waste. Everything which is a by product or an output of one natural system is a nutrient or input to another. Nature is perfectly harmonious in this regard. Our industrial society is an outlaw society. It cannot persist, it will not persist. There is a kind of value there. Lastly, I found myself thinking of something that popped up in front of me, which reminds me of the other value that I hold very central in my heart -- the value of uncertainty. That is probably not the way that I would express it poetically, because it is really the value of mystery. Einstein also once said that the most beautiful experience in the universe is the experience of the mysterious. Not too many months ago a friend gave me something which I found suddenly, miraculously, a few days ago. I had misplaced it. So when that happens then I think I should pay attention. This is a statement made by a young boy shortly before he passed away. He had AIDS and was about 7 years old. His parents wish that his name not be known: "Nobody, not Mom or Dad, Grandmother or Grandfather, big sister or big brother, teachers, doctors, soldiers, reverends, or athletes, or lawyers or TV stars or any people who are working; or any people who are playing, not even the President, nor even the king or queen, not even people who love each other know what a single thing is. It is a great and wonderful mystery to all of us what anything is or what we are. Whether somebody says I don’t know about how anything came to be or God made everything, they are simply pointing to the feeling of the mystery of how everything is, but nobody knows what really is or how it came to be. As long as we go on feeling this mystery we will feel free, full and happy. And we act free and full and happy with others. This is the secret of being happy. From the time you are small to the time you are old, if you remember everyday to feel that mystery and remember to feel that you are more than what you look like and you remember to be the mystery itself then you will be happy everyday and all kinds of wonderful happenings will come up for you. You will feel happy and you will always help and love others, even those who have trouble feeling happy and even try to make you forget the mystery. Someday you may meet someone who has felt the mystery real strong for a long time; so that person feels the mystery all the time and is always happy. Such a person is the best person to learn from about happiness, love and life. I hope you remember to feel the mystery everyday as long as you are awake forever. The best thing to tell anybody is to remember to feel this. I have been doing this for a long time and it is the best and most important feeling of all. I am very happy, I can tell you this. Maybe some day we will meet face to face, maybe. Anyway, at least you and I will always know that at least one other person somewhere is remembering and feeling and loving the mystery right now.
|
|
THE BEST OF HUMAN SPIRIT
Prega Luxmi Govinder | |
|
I
was invited today in my personal capacity and to deal
with the arena of politics.
This is a strange one because politics is an arena which is seldom associated with
values. Despite the baby-kissing and the tree planting campaigns, it is normally
associated with power. An even more cynical view would hold that it is simply a
mouth-piece of where real power lies, of those who control the economy and the world
finance, who make the real decisions at the national and global levels. That view would
explain the numerous wars in the world by pointing to the massive profits of the arms
industry. Wars make the profit margin that peace does not. I would also question the
implication of the much lauded ending of the cold war. In the global village, does it
signify that there are no chiefs behind the old scenario or does it simply mean only
one chief? Who’s goods, in good old consumer style, do we buy on the shelves of products
and ideas?
I arrived in the United States of America for the first time in this life-time, a week ago. On CNN the other day was aired the issue of a senior UN official’s resignation and a US official stating in response -- that UN officials must remember and know who pays them; they dare not and do not have the right to question member states. That anyone would go on international television with such a view-point no matter the issue, reflects the bravado for me of the corner shop-keeper who suddenly owns the supermarket. In the global marketplace with the language which signifies growing nationalism, fundamentalism etc., will politics always be the politics of expedience or are there possibilities for fundamental transformation for the emergence of a new culture of values and ethics in our global society; where economics, politics, the environment and so on are not simply issues, but are about people and the quality of life that people lead. In my country we are learning that you cannot look at poverty, massive unemployment, landlessness, homelessness, violence against women without looking at wealth. Our legacy from an apartheid, capitalist, patriarchial past is that over 80% of the land in our country and over 80% of the assets on the Johannesburg Stock Exchange are in the hands of only 20% of the population. The struggle against Apartheid, the ANC, our President Nelson Mandela, the first democratic elections last year, are all part of the picture most people all over the world are very familiar with. That struggle entailed a range of dynamic and creative strategies by people all over South Africa, in small unrecognised struggles and in large visible campaigns; in small villages, in factories, in streets, in townships and in large cities across the country. People all over South Africa reclaimed power over their own lives. Through the struggle over the years people have not just fought against a system of exploitation and oppression, but for the visions they built, conquering pain and fear. Those visions have been reflected and documented through the Freedom Charter, through the Women’s Charter of the 50’s and in 1994 the Reconstruction Development Program as well as in numerous other often non-literate forms. After the negotiations and elections last year, South Africa is being held as a ‘Miracle Nation’. It is true. It is a country of hope, where people have laughed and sung and danced even as they have faced some of the worst suffering. We have seen the best of the human spirit. We have a President who leads reconciliation and rebuilding by personal example. Today the African National Congress leads a government of national unity. Those responsible for the crime of apartheid retain their jobs at all levels of government in the spirit of reconciliation. Overall that is a good thing, but it means transformation is a slow process. The dangers of coming into existing institutions of political power with all their inherent values are very real. The first step was taken last year but we have a long way to go. Can the best values developed in years of struggle against an unjust system emerge as the guide or will we be swallowed into the operating hierarchies? Who do we value? What do we value? Whose work do we value? Who don’t we value? The defining characteristic of thousands of people who died annonymously in the struggle against apartheid, who sacrificed for what they believed in, who tirelessly built communities in the face of destruction by apartheid; those who gave no thought of being garlanded, it is their spirit that must live on in the new South Africa. It is for those people of whom it is said, and I quote "of the best leaders, when their work is done the people will say, we have done it ourselves." As a country being born, the challenge is whether we will do what is best for the poorest and the powerless, not just representing them, but ensuring that they develop the voice to represent themselves. Can the resources of government be used to facilitate people understanding their own power, freedom and responsibility? To take control over their own lives. To move into constructive and creative action? To live in a way that celebrates the visions and then creates new ones and that simultaneoulsy addresses the basic human needs and eradicates poverty. Can our politics merge reconciliation, love and tolerance with the courage to confront what is wrong, not to pretend that it is all happy families in the global village, but to honestly take on the challenge of transformation that recognises and learns from history; that does not simply adopt the values of the masters nor simply turns the other cheek. We cannot talk global without looking at the smallest components. The micro cannot exist without the macro nor visa versa. The task ahead is huge. I wish each of you well in your efforts however small or large or in whatever area of life to transform the values of our global society. I would like to end with an Indian greeting which symbolises a fundamental respect, that embodies the value of love, peace and courage to see the highest possibilities in the self and in others, beyond race, gender, class and other divides; to see the highest possibilities not just in one country or for one country, but in all countries across all superficial boundaries. The greeting translates, literally and I quote "I greet the god in you" -- Namaste
| |
|
THE FORUM WAS SPONSORED BY:
an affiliate of Harvard Medical School | |
|
©2004 BKWSU |
