Planet Earth is a sentient being – part 4

A Change in Ethics.

Part 1 can be found here.
Part 2 can be found here.
Part 3 can be found here.

Click here to listen to Planet Earth is a sentient being – part 4

I mentioned in part 3 that a new moral imperative is key to a paradigm shift. The shift to happen will either come from one morally sound businessperson(s) or from citizens demonstrating ‘people power’.

Peter Singer asks ‘What ought individuals to do? (Peter Singer, 2010). The obligation of humans is to apply the ‘original position’ without a ‘veil of ignorance’ (John Rawls, 1999) to ensure justice for the whole of the Biosphere including humans. Understanding the realities and all the facts surely would mean ‘knowledge is power’[1] for citizens to then mobilise their respective governments. Morally it is the responsibility of those alive now to leave a world in good shape for those who are yet to come into existence.  The polluter pays principle[2] is a nice touch but any real recompense is almost a gesture of good will. ‘After the horse has bolted’ destruction is ethically wrong, as the potential polluter shouldn’t commit environmental crimes in the first instance. Without sentient status and UN protection the Biosphere will continue to be destroyed until there is one last tree standing and people will say “Well no one told me, it isn’t my fault”.

If there was real justice both financially and morally it follows that Robert Nozick’s ‘time-slice principle’ would mean citizens could look at existing elements now and ask is it just or fair that our/my Biosphere is being treated in this way? (Robert Nozick, 1974). Robert Nozick thinks however, that obligation to assist shouldn’t be an obligation, that changing things is a voluntary matter. Perhaps he is right, but unfortunately for the Biosphere the majority of citizens are happy to exist under the veil of ignorance and the 80/20 rules’ supreme[3].

Changing things for the betterment of mankind is seen as altruism and praiseworthy, prizes are even given out for it e.g. The Nobel Peace Prize, but not helping (omission) isn’t seen as wrong.  Surely this is ethically warped as destroying the Biosphere is a definite evil (Peter Singer, 2010) and Peter Singer argues in his book Practical Ethics that it is the responsibility of citizens to challenge their governments to change systems. I completely agree with this but humans’ propensity to bury our heads in sand is what the commercial sector wants us to do so they go legally unchallenged.

Morally the corporates/governments behaviour or reasons that motivate them to exploit the Biosphere and people is both malicious and sadistic. Perhaps each one morally justifies their actions cause imperceptible harms. Collectively however humans are killing the Biosphere, which I believe, is a sentient entity worthy of rescue.

It is only a bottom-up approach from citizens that will challenge these behaviours. In the United Kingdom of Great Britain it is law that if one hundred thousand people petition the UK government with an issue then it has to be debated in parliament. Citizens therefore have the power if they were shown a moral imperative that would change systems[4]. To not lobby governments would be self-defeating as we all rely on the Biosphere and is completely contrary to pure practical reason.

In conclusion, citizens are the key to ethical/global change to bring about the recognition the Biosphere needs. We are ALL citizens of the planet regardless of ones power status.  The majority of humans have a future stake in their descendants therefore our obligation to assist is a moral must.

Racial, cultural or kinship affinities are what drives our societies.  (Peter Singer, 2010)

To create a new world where all the molecules and atoms in the Biosphere are given equal weighting, we as a species must see a new ethic imbued in our cultures, a bio-affinity. This can only happen on a local deep ecology level as micro-altruism and then disseminated as a new moral imperative that becomes global.

The polluter pays and other principles and laws are failing to make an ethical change in our behaviour towards the Biosphere and massive paradigm shifts are needed in politics, governance, philosophies and laws.  What we owe to each other then (T.M. Scanlon, 2000) is to ask our governments (via governance) to make proposals to the UN, fund research and development into new energies, reduce the livestock industries, address agricultural methods and support Bees.

To launch economic war with a ‘just cause’ is the stick, the carrot is restorative justice. We have all helped to damage the Biosphere but collectively we can restore it.

Simply put I conclude with a four-step plan to do that:

1. Citizens need to force governances on their governments.
2. Governments make a proposal to the UN that Planet Earth is sentient and therefore should be made a Member State.
3. UN makes Earth a Member State.
4. Earth then can fight back against aggressors using jus ad bellum.

Without such actions our Biosphere and humans are doomed. The stones are crying out, the whole of the Biosphere is screaming for help[5]. Earth noise from space – takes you to YouTube.

Ethically speaking unless we develop a universal maxim to benefit the Biosphere first we are all committing the moral equivalent of murder.

40: But He answered and said to them,

 “I tell you that if these should keep silent, the stones would immediately cry out.”

Luke 19:40

New King James Version (NKJV)

It's alright as long as we try!

---

[1] Religious Meditations, Of Heresies, 1597. Sir Frances Bacon was an English author, courtier and philosopher (1561-1626)

[2] Part of the Maastricht Treaty 1992 Title XVI – Environment Article 130r (2) (http://www.eurotreaties.com/maastrichtec.pdf ) Retrieved 28/12/11.

[3] Pareto principle.

[4] The Aarhus Convention 1998, which establishes a number of rights of the public (individuals and their associations) with regard to the environment. It came into force in 2002.
The three main rights the convention offers is:
1. Access to environmental information.
2. Public participation in environmental decision-making.
3. Access to justice.
For a full text of the convention see United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE) http://www.unece.org/env/pp/treatytext.html

[5] Retrieved 14/01/12 sound made by the Earth http://bit.ly/xpvoYA

 

Bibliography for parts 1-4

Andrews, E. L. (2001, April 1). The New York Times. Retrieved January 04/01/12, 2012 from New York Times WORLD: http://www.nytimes.com/2001/04/01/world/bush-angers-europe-by-eroding-pact-on-warming.html?pagewanted=all&src=pm

Bak, P., Tang, C., & Wiesenfeld, K. (1988). Self-organised Criticality. Brookhaven National Laboratory, Physics. New Your, New York: Physical Review.

Higgins, P. (2012, January 11). Eradication Ecocide. Retrieved January 12, 2012 from This is Ecocide: http://www.eradicatingecocide.com/general/blog-search-for-the-next-charles-grant-takes-root/

Kant, Immanuel (1785).

Leopold, A. (1970). A Sand Country Almanac, with Essays on Conservation from Round River. In A. Leopold, A Sand Country Almanac, with Essays on Conservation from Round River. (p. 238). New York New York: New York Press.

Naess, A. (1973). The Shallow and the Deep, Long-Range Ecology Movement. Inquiry , 16, 95-100.

Nozick, R. (1974). Anarchy State and Utopia. New York, New York: Basic Books.

Scanlon, T. M. (2000). What We Owe To Each Other. USA: Harvard University Press.

Singer, P. (2010). Practical Ethics. In P. Singer, Practical Ethics (p. 235). New York New York: Cambridge University Press.

Rawls, J. (1999). A Theory of Justice.

Revkin, A. C. (2007, March 31). The New York Times. Retrieved january 04/01/12, 2012 from The New York Times AMERICA: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/31/world/americas/31iht-web.0331CLIMATE.5097014.html?pagewanted=all

Zizek, S. (2007, March 10). Slavoj Zizek. Ecology without Nature. Retrieved 01 05, 2012 from The European Graduate School. Graduate and Postgraduate Studies: http://www.egs.edu/faculty/slavoj-zizek/videos/ecology-without-nature/

 

Deep verses Shallow Ecology

The problem with current environmental ethics is it asks the question; can an act (even one that benefits man but causes environmental degradation) be justified to the greater general population that cannot be reasonably rejected? (T. M. Scanlon, 2000). Consequently the answer is yes it can be justified within current ethics because the greater number of people benefit but in doing so causes suffering to the Biosphere.  This major flaw in shallow ecology[3] (Anes Naess, 1973) is that human agency puts itself at the centre of the moral universe (Peter Singer, 2010) and that weakens or dilutes effective deep ecology[4] from dominating environmentalism.

‘A thing is right when it tends to preserve the integrity, stability and beauty of the biotic community. It is wrong when it tends otherwise.’  (Aldo Leopold, 1970)

If deep ecology of land ethics as summed up above by Aldo Leopold is to be successful then a paradigm shift in philosophical thinking is needed to preserve nature for its own sake first and foremost thus ensuring a secure future for our descendant’s well-being. I argue that a universal maxim of basic human rights to live in harmony with nature has become so buried beneath utilitarian selfishness when clearly the categorical imperative (Immanuel Kant, 1785) ought to be treating the Biosphere with respect. We depend on it for survival and we ought to support the Biosphere’s needs because it supports ours as a matter of our life and death.

Bees

To defend this claim I shall take Bees as an example. Bees are under attack from human agency that scientists have called Colony Collapse Disorder (CCD). Bees pollenate 70% of the world’s food source but billions of these gentle productive citizens of the biotic community are dying or being killed by human activity and when they have gone from the Biosphere the question will be ‘when will the food wars start?’ To answer this, I reckon we will probably be held to ransom by agricultural biotechnology companies charging exorbitant fees for doing what nature has provided for free. Food will become a luxury item.

Bees are precious

Take this for example. In his lab at Penn, Vijay Kumar and his team build flying quadrotors, small, agile robots that swarm, sense each other, and form ad hoc teams — for construction, surveying disasters and far more. Don’t you think that that ‘far more’ could be to utilize this technology for artificial cross-pollination? Yep! doing the Bees out of a job and making us wholly reliant on technology is a possibly that shouldn’t be ignored. Another very serious possibility of food domination by corporatism came into the public domain recently in the aftermath of a whistleblower who left Monsanto and told about their research to breed a genetically modified Bee who will only pollenate Monsanto GMO crops!

This is serious and happening in the world today. It is not science fiction.

Einstein’s definition of insanity is ‘doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results’, why then are we still committing the moral equivalence of murder (Peter Singer, 2010) to both the Biosphere and humans by causing environmental destruction?

Pure practical reason (Immanuel Kant, 1785) is needed to usher in new governance structures based on goodness and wage war on those in leadership to make them cease putting profits before people or planet [5].

This is the main problem, a big one that needs a big solution.

Humans know the golden rule ‘do unto others’ but under the ‘veil of ignorance’ (Peter Rawls, 1999) the social contract to look after the environment as handed down through millennia has been silenced by the greed of modern consumerism. To make a cake however one has to break a few eggs, and those eggs are establishing Planet Earth as a sentient being, amending current international laws to give Earth member status within the UN community and then using  jus ad bellum to wage war against the aggressors of the Biosphere.

“Uniting the Nations is encouraging young people to fulfil their potential. I am proud that with the help of partners such as UNA-UK, we are delivering our vision to use the power of the Olympic Games and Paralympic Games to boost participation in citizenship education.”

Seb Coe, Chair of the London Organising Committee of the Olympic Games and Paralympic Games

On 10 March 2012 over 200 students from schools across the UK will come together to discuss the Olympic Truce. Uniting the Nations takes place at the prestigious UN International Maritime Organization headquarters in London.

UN International Maritime Organisation - London

Students will step in to the footsteps of world leaders and represent UN ambassadors in simulated Security Council debates on the UN Olympic Truce resolution.

Currently students are busy preparing for their opening speeches and researching their country’s stance on the pressing issues facing the world today, as well as looking for new diplomatic opportunities for conflict resolution and peacebuilding with their fellow delegations.

The delegates can look forward to speeches by Bill Morris, the London 2012 Director of Ceremonies, and Conrad Bailey, Head of the Conflict Department at the Foreign and Commonwealth Office. (Taken from UNA-UK website).

And as for me… I’ll be covering this (in role) as the Press Crew on the day wearing UN colours!

This is an amazing honour and I want to thank Phil Mulligan, Ben Donaldson and Patricia Rodgers from UNA-UK for all their help getting me down to London.

Circus becomes animal-free! | CAPS. Well done CAPS, you inspire me as always.

This is a VICTORY and it makes the fight so worth while.

The anguish and emotional pain animal campaigners go through is staggering, our hearts are mostly broken at the cruelty our fauna brothers and sisters are exposed to and that abuse hurts us to our souls…

… so when the constant Pink-lobbying works our spirits are refreshed and our smiles run deep. Thank The Creator for Paulo’s Circus and their moral decision and seeing the light.

Captive Animals Protection Society are a Manchester, UK based charity and I support them with all my heart. If you feel moved by animals in captivity please consider financially supporting them or coming with us when we next demonstrate.

Marching with CAPS

Ehrmann, born in Terre Haute in 1872, made his living practicing law and business (deputy prosecuting attorney of Terre Haute at one point, credit manager for a family owned overall manufacturing firm for 10 years). But his real love was writing, especially philosophical poems and plays. He composed “Desiderata” in 1927, he wrote in his journal at the time, out of need to remind himself how he wanted to live his life. (taken from http://peterfox.com.au).

Ehrmann’s Desiderata was his manifesto I guess, and what an important body of work it turned out to be. I love this so much and have it in a book next to my bed.

 Desiderata (Latin: “desired things”)

Go placidly amid the noise and haste,
and remember what peace there may be in silence.
As far as possible without surrender
be on good terms with all persons.
Speak your truth quietly and clearly;
and listen to others,
even the dull and the ignorant;
they too have their story.

Avoid loud and aggressive persons,
they are vexations to the spirit.
If you compare yourself with others,
you may become vain and bitter;
for always there will be greater and lesser persons than yourself.
Enjoy your achievements as well as your plans.

Keep interested in your own career, however humble;
it is a real possession in the changing fortunes of time.
Exercise caution in your business affairs;
for the world is full of trickery.
But let this not blind you to what virtue there is;
many persons strive for high ideals;
and everywhere life is full of heroism.

Be yourself.
Especially, do not feign affection.
Neither be cynical about love;
for in the face of all aridity and disenchantment
it is as perennial as the grass.

Take kindly the counsel of the years,
gracefully surrendering the things of youth.
Nurture strength of spirit to shield you in sudden misfortune.
But do not distress yourself with dark imaginings.
Many fears are born of fatigue and loneliness.
Beyond a wholesome discipline,
be gentle with yourself.

You are a child of the universe,
no less than the trees and the stars;
you have a right to be here.
And whether or not it is clear to you,
no doubt the universe is unfolding as it should.

Therefore be at peace with God,
whatever you conceive Him to be,
and whatever your labors and aspirations,
in the noisy confusion of life keep peace with your soul.

With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams,
it is still a beautiful world.
Be cheerful.
Strive to be happy. 

Max Ehrmann 1872-1945

I love the Desiderata, especially the last four lines and it got me thinking, what would happen if I took all my ramblings, ranting, poems, notes, observations from my journal or tweets from my twitter and wrote a Manifesto?

Here’s what I care about, it was compiled in mirror.me and is what I twitter about.

Reflections =:)

Gonna write a Manifesto then, I might as well even though I am no one special or important there’s a manifesto inside of me somewhere that needs to get out into the beautiful world… watch this space.

DRC map

CASE STUDY – MONUSCO
United Nations Organization Stabilization Mission
in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC)

In the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) it appears that some of those involved in trying to make peace and security for the country are standing so close to the elephant all they can see is grey! To really help the DRC it’s time to stand back and change perspective, if you look at the figures below it is clear that a lot of finance is being spent on military efforts as the DRC hold elections but the core cause of the problem is being overlooked and under resourced.

Background and mandate.

A new UN Peacekeeping mission in DRC was initiated in July 2010[i] and authorized to run until 30 June 2012 with an approved budget of $1,419,890,400 (1 July 2011 – 30 June 2012)[ii].

The current strength of the mission and its 54 contributing countries as of the 31 October 2011 are:

• 18,916 total uniformed personnel
• 16,823 military personnel
• 731 military observers
• 1,362 police (including formed units)
• 974 international civilian personnel*
• 2,767 local civilian staff*
• 595 United Nations Volunteers

*Note: Statistics for international and local civilians are as of 31 August 2011 from [iii].

The mission’s mandate is to ‘to use all necessary means to carry out its mandate relating, among other things, to the protection of civilians, humanitarian personnel and human rights defenders under imminent threat of physical violence and to support the Government of the DRC in its stabilization and peace consolidation efforts.’ (MONUSCO, 2011).

But what does this mean?

“If you come only to help me, you can go back home. But if you consider my struggle as part of your struggle for survival, then maybe we can work together.” — An Aboriginal Woman

When looking at peace and conflict in the DRC one has to ponder on the historical context of the violence and fighting. In May 2007 the UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) set in motion a mapping exercise to catalogue the devastation of civil war in DRC[iv], and document the crimes ‘of the most serious violations of human rights and international humanitarian law committed within the territory of the DRC between March 1993 and June 2003’ (OHCHR 1996-2011). Evidently, as you read this report Human Security features as a remit due to the acts of human rights violations being carried out by the Congolese security forces as well as neighboring Rwanda. This leads one to assume that there is a negative peace with both direct and indirect violence (Gultang) happening in the country today. For further reading see The Human Development Report[v] and the Agenda for Peace[vi].

The OHCHR report cites violations of economic and social rights and the illegal exploitation of natural resources are some the major contributors to the reason the UN Peacekeeping force are still trying to broker positive peace. This brings us back to the core cause of the problems and the catalytic reasons for violence in the DRC.

You may wish to watch the UNEP film below on the natural recourses of DRC before you read on:

Conservation from Chaos – Documentary on the Democratic Republic of Congo

Exploitation of natural resources.

Taking this and appraising it from a human security viewpoint it is easy to see that illegal natural resource exploitation has been a catalyst in driving the country’s civil war.  This has been carefully measured and categorized and several reports have been written to document this, for example the violence linked to environmental degradation[vii], citing the illegal exploitation as ‘the perpetration of massive human rights abuses’

But why has this not abated and why are the military still involved in human rights violations and natural resource crimes?

It appears that those running the DRC under President Mobutu’s kleptocratic management, as well as successive governments (President Kabila) completely failed to include any type of human or environmental security. Militarizing the management of resources (e.g. forestry, mining) and taking this away from civilians destabilized the country to such a massive extent that recovery from this to date has been difficult and in all probability why the UN are still intervening. Freedom from fear and want and the destruction of habitat and infrastructure made a lasting and stable peace hard to achieve. ‘Bad habits’ and corruption it seems are imbued in the mindset of its armed forces and leadership, as this is where most crimes are perpetrated. Civil society is still reeling from the conflicts making civil meta governance a challenge.

Transforming the current situation of illicit exploitation of natural resources, the UN are encouraging the DRC government to comply with the the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI) and invest the money back into society for health, education and housing. This transformation is being challenged however as there are still ‘customers’ who want under the table resources from diamonds to minerals[viii]. So next time you buy some jewellery or electronics think about where it was sourced.

Concepts of 3^rd and 4^th generation peace building.

Is the negative peace mainly due to a combination of conflict management and conflict resolution approaches (Richmond, O 2008) driven by a top-down elitism of prescribed official processes as in a 3^rd generation methodology?

Looking in on the DRC from the outside it does indeed appear that there is a multiplicity of issues and attitudes that need to be represented at a local, state and regional level to broker a settled peace thus benefiting all people and the environment, however can this 3^rd generation style be brought about by NGOs, agencies and actors or should this be achieved by a vibrant civil society (Richmond, O 2008) meeting their own objectives and needs and emancipated from hegemony?

In utopian terms it would be nice to think that governance from the Congolese people themselves could resolve and transform the fragile peace into a civilized, fair and sustainable society. Therefore peace building as an approach has to be employed with sensitivity to civil society’s expectations and needs but mainly it has to encapsulate the political, social and economical development of the DRC. Policy makers encouraging top-down system thinking as well as governance usually drive this. In the DRC however the security forces are undermining peace and committing crimes against different groups causing human rights violations. This is generally due to resource exploitation and continued fighting with neighbouring countries e.g. Rwanda. . 60-80 percent of global reserves of coltan (see reference for further reading/film), used in the manufacture of mobile phones, computers and other electronic equipment are found in the DRC[ix].

Therefore in this instance 3rd generation peace building using coercive conditional relationships may not be the best approach.

A 4th generation way of transforming peace or peace-as-governance (Richmond, O 2008) may be the answer. In short due to the unique nature of a resource rich yet poor nation, reflecting on the past and getting to the root cause of the conflict in this case corruption over the resource riches of the DRC, would allow for post-structural reverse engineering of the complex issues faced. Without putting into the mix matters such as Sovereignty and focusing on the ontological elements of peace instead of just the generic methods deployed as a catch-all by the UN, a stable and democratic liberal peace could be established by creating governance structures and asking why has the current peace failed and what can be done.

Answers on a post card please!

‘Do not follow where the path may lead. Go instead where there is no path and leave a trail’.

H McAlindon

Maybe it is time to hand the reins to UNEP (http://www.unep.org/disastersandconflicts/) and utilize their post-conflict greening peace building and environmental diplomacy toolbox as well as ecosystem management and environmental governance to help the DRC build a green economy for all[x]. Another initiative found in Afghanistan is called No Women No Peace. This campaign’s mantra is ‘peace can only be durable when the voices of women are heard.’[xi] It has enjoyed media and government attention. Maybe this could be rolled out to DRC as the UN mission has only 6 months left (June 2012) to find a peace settlement that can be enduring and inclusive. So instead of sticking a plaster over a deep wound, is it finally time to hand operations over to women and environmentalists?

References:

Richmond, O (2008)  “The Contribution of Peace and Conflict Studies” in Peace in International Relations” p104-114

Johan Gultang http://www.transcend.org/
(Accessed on 05/12/11)

Coltan
http://conflictminerals.org/coltan-learning-the-basics/

http://www.iss.co.za/pubs/Books/ScarcitySurfeit/Chapter4.pdf

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3OWj1ZGn4uM

http://www.thecongocause.org/mining.htm
(Accessed 11/12/11)

Human Development Report
(Accessed on 27/11/11)

Agenda for Peace
(Accessed on 27/11/11)

MONACO United Nations Organization Stabilization Mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo
(Accessed on 05/12/11)

UN General Assembly Approved resources for peacekeeping operations for the period from 1 July 2011 to 30 June 2012
(Accessed on 06/12/11)

UN Peacekeeping Operations MONUSCO Facts and Figures
(Accessed on 05/12/11)

United Nations Human Rights DRC: Mapping human rights violations 1993-2003
(Accessed on 23/11/11)

Human Development Report
(Accessed 23/11/11)

United Nations Human Rights Office of the High Commissioner – Info Note 5  Violence linked to natural resource exploitation
(Accessed 24/11/11)

United Nations Environment Programme – Environmental Cooperation for Peacebuilding
(Accessed 20/11/11)

No Women No Peace http://www.nowomennopeace.org/
(Accessed 08/12/11)