Forgiving ourselves and each other: the path to global justice
|
When we protest against corporations, politicians and global institutions - against those we regard as exacerbating global warming, pollution or the widening gap between rich and poor - we inevitably blame them. Sometimes we even blame individuals who shop at supermarkets, or who fail to buy fair trade foods.
In protesting, or in decrying their behaviour, we point our fingers at them. In fact, you could say that the global justice movement’s principal mode of action is protest. This inescapably implies the blaming of one section of society or another, or one institution or another, for our global ills. To be fair, without protest these vital issues would never come to public attention. But are we not, in some sense, all to blame for our present predicament, NGOs and global justice activists included?
Who can honestly claim not to be contributing to present problems, be it by driving when we might walk, by buying the products of transnational corporations, or by flying to holiday or conference destinations, thus contributing disproportionately to global warming? To pretend we are blameless is not only untrue. It leads logically to a kind of “eco-fascism” whereby self-styled “eco-warriors” castigate the rest of us who apparently fail to live up to their criteria for “saving the planet”. Indeed, through our individual and collective lifestyles and socioeconomic system, we all contribute to the worsening global predicament. To pretend otherwise ultimately only diverts us from what should be a common effort to find solutions. Corporations limited by aggregate behaviour Perhaps we should also ask whether the corporate executives we commonly blame are really in any position to significantly alter their irresponsible behaviour. In a competitive global market, any corporation taking on a greater social or environmental responsibility - thus increasing its costs - would lose out to competitors, causing a loss of its profits, a consequent loss of jobs and ultimately the prospect of becoming the target of a hostile takeover. Corporations can generally only afford to behave as responsibly as the aggregate behaviour of their major competitors permits. So while corporations could take some important steps towards more responsible behaviour - and should be encouraged to do so - we shouldn’t fool ourselves into thinking they have the power to make the substantive changes needed to solve global problems.
That’s not to say that some corporations or chief executives aren’t greedy or careless, or that we should become apologists for poor corporate behaviour. Neither should it imply any lessening of individual responsibility. However, it is usually competition and the fear of losing out - not pure greed for profit - which drive the detrimental decisions of business executives. So why blame them when they’re caught in a system which so often prevents them from behaving otherwise? Were global justice activists in their shoes and subject to the same competitive demands, would we behave much differently? Are governments better placed? With capital and employment moving instantly to any country where costs are lower and profits higher, how should governments impose increased regulations or taxes on business when that only invites employment and investment to move elsewhere? Again, that’s not to say that governments are powerless, or that we should stop pressuring them. But it does mean that governments of whatever party are now forced to pursue only market-friendly policies. This pathetically narrow range of options reduces democracy to pseudo-democracy - an electoral charade in which, whatever party we elect, the policies delivered inevitably conform to the need to maintain “international competitiveness”. So, at the root of the problem lies a vicious circle of destructive competition which no one is really in control of. Furthermore, the WTO, IMF and World Bank whom we expect to be in control are, in fact, under the delusion that competition is always a beneficial phenomenon. In having no control over the free movement of capital or corporations, and thus in accepting that state as a “natural given”, the international financial institutions are led to prescribe yet more competition as the cure for our global ills, and not less. Not recognising that economic competition becomes destructive without the framework of adequate global regulations to protect society and the environment, the WTO, IMF and Bank serve only to exacerbate the problems they think they’re solving. Towards a global community So, by blaming governments, corporations or institutions, we accord them far more credit than they deserve. But this does not mean our protests should stop. It simply means we should not fool ourselves that protest or conventional forms of NGO action can ever be adequate to bring about lasting solutions. It means each of us must seek another way. While we continue to blame, we perpetuate division and resentment. We build adversarial barriers and make impossible the atmosphere of cooperation, understanding and forgiveness needed to foster global community - an atmosphere in which the negotiation necessary to finding appropriate solutions could evolve. By recognising this, we can create the preconditions for a genuine global community: the conditions of forgiveness and non-judgemental acceptance; the inclusiveness necessary to begin our collaborative search for global solutions.
Fortunately, this most essential of humanity’s evolutionary journeys has already begun through the work of a number of organisations. One is the International Simultaneous Policy Organisation, which offers a way, first, to take back control of our hollowed-out pseudo-democratic processes and, second, to co-create the policies necessary to achieving environmental sustainability and global justice. The “simultaneous policy” offers the crucial means for citizens the world over to bring politicians to implement the policies we need without anyone losing out. It turns the destructive, competition-led politics of globalisation on their head by offering citizens a practical way to take back the world with a new politics of citizen-led, international cooperation for our emergent - but yet-to-be-born - sustainable global society. John Bunzl is Founder of the International Simultaneous Policy Organisation. --- OneWorld Guest Editorials represent the viewpoint of the authors and not necessarily that of the OneWorld Network. Read and comment on previous Guest Editorials. If you would like to write or suggest a future OneWorld Guest Editorial, please contact miles.litvinoff@oneworld.net or josie.kirby@oneworld.net. |
Printable version
Back to top
