You Can't Turn Back the Dawn

Value Oriented Pragmatism and the Issue of Globalization

The age of nations has passed. Now, unless we wish to perish we must shake off our old prejudices and build the earth.

                                      De Chardin

A Vision Of Globalization

The most significant historical event taking place at the present moment is globalization. We are becoming one world. The process is fraught with great dangers. We face the risk of untreatable world wide epidemics, increasingly violent wars and acts of terrorism, genocide, ecological collapse, the entrenchment of tyrannies that are more efficient than the world has ever known, and possibly, even, of the end of the earth as a planet that is inhabitable by human beings.

Progress is always accompanied by both gain and loss, but the stakes are so high in the present situation that many thoughtful people are tempted to recommend that we return to more manageable times. Yet, as it was stated in a sermon I once heard, “you can’t turn back the dawn.” Globalization is a fact, and it will continue. So it is well to point out that the risks and dangers cited above are only half the story. This is also a time of unprecedented opportunity for the creation of a world that is free from war, healthier than ever before, and ruled democratically. It could be a world in which all people have access to the necessary resources for health, education, and material security that would enable them to pursue their happiness in unique, exciting and mutually sustaining and enriching ways.

Indeed, globalization is upon us. We cannot turn back the dawn. But we can have some influence on whether the new day that is dawning is one full of hope and possibility or one that is already clouded over with hopeless conflicts, disintegration, and entanglements. The question before us is not whether globalization will occur, but what kind of globalization we will have.

If we are going to take charge of our future the first question we need to ask is what kind of future do we want? We is everybody. We are all in this lifeboat together. Therefore we must seek to bridge the ideological gaps that tend to keep us separate, and engage in an honest dialog. We must seek out our common needs, wants, and values, and on the basis of these commonalities, forge a unifying vision of a future that leaves no one out – a future that we will be proud to pass on toour children. This will be the dream that energizes us and motives us to work in a particular direction. It is hard to overestimate the power of a shared dream. This was why, for example, Martin Luther King Jr. was able to have such a huge impact on this country. He had a dream and was able to communicate this dream in a vivid way to America.

Much earlier in our history another American had a dream about what the future might be like. This was Black Elk. He had a dream or a vision when he was still a child of about eleven. It seemed to be in connection with a disease and a near death experience. This was a time when the Americans of European decent were invading his territory. During his life-time Black Elk was to see the destruction of his way of life. It was a time of great suffering for him and his people. But Black Elk had not yet seen any of these white people, or “Wasichus” as his people called them, when he had his vision. Black Elk’s dream was long and complex, but in a part of it we find a vision of a globalized world:

While I stood there I saw more than I can tell and I understood more than I saw; for I was seeing in a sacred manner the shapes of all things in the spirit, and the shape of all shapes as they must live together like one being. And I saw that the sacred hoop of my people was one of many hoops that made one circle, wide as daylight and as starlight, and in the center grew one mighty flowering tree to shelter all the children of one mother and one father. And I saw that it was holy.

In poetic form that’s what globalization is all about – or at least what it should be about. Of course before this vision can become a political agenda it needs to be spelled out in much more specific terms. What would be the nuts and bolts of a globalized world that was like a “mighty flowering tree” that sheltered “all the children of one mother and one father.” What would it actually look like in the cultural, political, and physical dimensions of our common life?

Finding Common Values

It might be argued that it is futile to try to find a common dream that will serve as a guide for our working together. We value different things, and therefore have very different dreams. It is certainly true that people vary in what they value. There are also many different ways in which people attempt to argue for the rightness of what they deem to be most important.

We are diverse in our hopes, aspirations, values and dreams . But this diversity need not be an insurmountable barrier to our forming a common vision of a desirable future world. The fact is that most thinking and reasonably sensitive people would agree to a similar core of fundamental social values.

Nobody really thinks it’s OK for men, women and children to be starving to death, or dying of exposure to the elements, in a world that has the capacity to provide food, shelter and clothing to everybody. Nobody likes the fact that children die from preventable diseases in a world that could guarantee the protection of primary health care to everybody. Nobody likes repressive governments that do not respect the civil liberties of their people, and that do not provide for the free and open exchange of ideas. At best repressive arrangements are justified as necessary evils. Nobody believes that individual initiative and creativity should be squelched. Nobody is pursuing evil for it’s own sake. By and large, governments and individuals act in accordance with their understanding of what is good and desirable.

Our dreams may be very different in many ways, and this is as it should be. But when we try to visualize the emerging globalized world, our dreams overlap, and there are enough common elements to make it possible for us to form a shared vision of what should happen. I hear a lot of talk about what is needed, and would suggest that the following list might contain most of those elements that most people think are universally important:

Democracy: People must be able to participate meaningfully in a democratic process that defines the political reality within which they live. Ideally all social structures, not just governments, should be based on participatory democratic processes. Also, in a world in which corporate clout have been globalized, a democratic globalized governmental body must govern the corporations so that they do not become the de-facto government of the world.

Health: The World Health Organization defines health as “a state of complete physical, mental and social well-being and not merely the absence of disease or infirmity.” While this is certainly a good starting point, in a globalized world we will also need to focus on the health of social groups, nations, the ecology, and the earth itself as a living being.

Material welfare: All people on the earth must have access to adequate food, water, shelter, health care, education, and material security. This is the necessary baseline that must be in place before people are able to pursue those larger values associated with friendship, creativity, learning, crafts, art, service, and adventure that make life for most people worthwhile.

Freedom of choice and action: A globalized world that would be a place of opportunity for all it’s citizens would have to affirm the principle that all people should be able to pursue their own happiness and fulfillment as they see fit so long as they do not infringe on the rights of others. In this context, it would have to be understood that “overgrazing, or taking too much from the common resource base is a form of infringement on the rights of others.

Freedom of speech and the press: For democracy to thrive people must have the ability to know the facts, and to hear open debate about how best to interpret those facts. Freedom of speech also means that the socially weak and/or despised are able to tell their stories, as they experience them, just as the powerful do.

Creativity. Wherever it is possible to encourage creativity, the global community should do so. Minimally, governments can and should stand out of the way. Censorship of creative works or acts must be avoided if individuals and societies are to achieve their potential.

Justice: Achieving the kind of political stability required to reduce violence on all levels and assure peace will entail meeting a high standard of social justice. This would suggest the need for a world court that is able to resolve conflicts between nations in a fair and thoughtful manner. On the economic level the demands of justice would suggest the need for a global regulatory system that makes sure international trade and policies work for the long-term common good. An enlightened system of justice would provide optimal opportunities for those who have broken society’s laws to live socially constructive lives. It would uphold the need for alternatives to prisons, with friendlier, safer more respectful conditions for those who must be incarcerated. Finally, a real concern for justice would lead to the creation of a legal system that puts more emphasis on prevention of crime though reducing social injustice, than on the punishment of criminals

Equity: The principle of equity points to the need for a fair distribution of wealth and resources, within and between nations, including:

• Checks and balances to assure that wealth and power do not concentrate so much they undermine democratic process or cause deprivation for others.

• National and international mechanisms such as progressive taxation, to insure a relatively equitable distribution of resources.

Knowledge: Understanding and information are not only a delight in themselves, but are the foundation for all forms of individual and cultural achievements and development. A enlightened globalized world will not only assure that the opportunity for an adequate education is available to everybody, but will avoid setting up barriers to the free dispersal of information and opinions.

Peace: A healthy globalized world must achieve a reliable, permanent state of peace. The threat of nuclear weapons and their ability to make the earth uninhabitable for human life makes their elimination a top priority. Nuclear weapons are only likely to be eliminated in a world in which peace prevails. The attainment of a reliable peace will require political stability which in turn requires social equity and social justice. To realize the conditions necessary for a secure peace is a daunting task, yet if this task cannot be accomplished relatively quickly, the chances for human survival appear bleak.

Diversity: A globalized world need not be a homogenized world. A healthy globalized world would emphasize the need to respect and appreciate diversity, and would encourage freedom of thought, expression and action at all levels and by all people – regardless of age, race, belief system, or orientation.

Sustainability: If we are going to bequeath a livable world to our children and grandchildren we must find a sustainable ecological balance between humankind and the natural environment, with the necessary protection of resources. This will necessarily mean limits to economic and population growth – ideally not by coercion but through collective awareness. A key measure for reducing population growth rates would be to provide social guarantees for an adequate standard of living that would not be based on having a large number of children.

Strategies for change

Different people might organize this list in different ways. Also there would be differences in emphasis and wording. But I think that, in general, most people, if they were to make a list of those elements that must be in place if we are to have a healthy globalized world would come up with something quite similar.

The Place of Ideologies

Becoming clear on what we want is the first step. Then we must ask, by what means will we get there? One important tool for making things happen in the world is thinking. We have ideas about cause and effect, about what makes things happen, and about what makes people and groups do what they do. At times these ideas become organized into theories.

Ideas can be powerful tools. Without them we would still be cowering in caves for comfort and protection, and be at the mercy of the elements. But ideas can also be problems when they become organized into rigid ideologies that pretend to explain more than they do. Whether these ideologies are religious or secular, liberal or conservative, scientific or philosophical, if they are adhered to in a mindless manner they create serious problems. They make communication between us and those who do not share our ideology difficult. They prevent growth by encouraging us to resist new ideas and evidence. And they lead to one sided, narrow and rigid interpretations of our situation.

Our assessment of ideas needs to be similar to our assessment of any other tool. To the extent they work, that’s good. But when they don’t we need to be ready to discard them or change them. This suggests a pragmatic approach to ideology. Does it work? Does it show us some aspect of the situation we might otherwise miss? Does it give us a clue as to some action that might further our aims?

Probably most ideologies have some elements of truth in them, and are worth learning about. But one of the great stumbling blocks to progress in today’s world is that many people are trapped in rigid ideologies that do not let them hear what others have to say. The philosophy of pragmatism would argue for a more flexible and careful use of theories and ideologies.

Organizations and the work they do constitute another set of tools for getting to where we want to go. One of the debates that centers around this set of tools has to do with whether those institutions that organize human efforts toward our common goals should be in the private sector or in the public domain. Arguments between people with strong ideological commitments tend not to be productive in this regard. A pragmatic approach that asks what works would seem more likely to move us forward. When we build a house, we need a variety of tools. The same thing is true if we are to build a world. When we approach the matter from this perspective we are directed to productive questions. The question, for example, is not whether the market is good or bad. The questions with regard to the market that need to be addressed are, what does it do well, and what does it do poorly? And we need to ask what kind of market will best move us toward the goals we share? When we look at the need for a public sector of the economy, we will ask the same kinds of pragmatic questions. What is most effectively done in the public sphere? What kind of public sector will best work to maximize the values we share? And precisely the same kinds of questions need to guide our deliberations as to what balance between the public and the private sectors will be most effective. Obviously in a globalized world we will have to have some governmental and judicial structures and procedures for regulating the system for the common good and for resolving conflicts in a non-violent manner. Again the questions we must ask must pertain to what kind of governmental and judicial arrangements are most likely to move us toward the kind of globalized world we all want.

Political Action

Political action is another type of tool for creating the kind of world that we want. Significant political action occurs on all levels. When a teen-ager demands greater independence from his or her parents, that is a political act. It is also a political act when a worker asks for an increased say in the policies of his or her organization, or when a stigmatized member of society insists on telling his or her own story as he or she experiences it. Assessing various candidates for office and deciding which one to vote for is important, but this is only a part of what it means to be political. When anybody makes a concerted effort to change or influence the ideas and structures that determine how we conduct our affairs together as a community, that is political action.

There are many different kinds of political action. When a group or a person feels unusually frustrated, humiliated or despairing, there is always a strong temptation to resort to a violent kind of political action. That is one of the reasons why it is so important that legitimate and effective avenues for effecting change in a social group must always be available to everybody. Violent outbursts may be understandable when one looks at the life stories of repressed and exploited people, yet violence is seldom effective in producing the desired changes. Generally speaking violence reflects a failure of the imagination. If we wish for a healthy globalized world we must give a great deal of thought to developing political strategies that are both non-violent and effective.

Measuring Rods for Change

Another important set of tools for social change are the measuring rods which tell us whether we are in fact moving toward our goals. In the various debates about social policy we hear people citing various statistics derived from these measuring rods in order to support their proposals or their reading of the situation. There is no denying the importance of such measurements. But we must ask ourselves, what measuring rods are the most useful for our purposes. It would seem clear that we need a variety of them for assessing different aspects of the situation. It takes only a moment’s thought to realize that if we are wanting a world with certain characteristics, as listed above, we must pick instruments that measure exactly those characteristics.

WHO and UNICEF already have a number of measuring rods that they have been using for some years. In the UNICEF annual report on the state of the world’s children they provide a number of very good indicators of health, such as under 5 infant mortality rates in various countries. The measure of the percent of households in various income brackets is also very useful in that it gives us a rough measure of equity.

In some cases it is less clear what a particular measuring rod really is measuring. We hear a great deal about economic growth, for example, and the World Bank is ready to supply statistics on this dimension of the situation. In some circumstances economic growth is very much needed. But if economic growth is not accompanied by a growth in equity, then it is not a reliable indicator that we are making headway against poverty.

It seems clear that a growing chasm between an extremely rich elite and a mass of people living in abject poverty will increase violence and war, and will probably lead to a lessening of justice as the wealthy elites are forced to use ever more draconian laws to keep the poor under control. Also, when growth threatens to outstrip the resources of a finite planet, one has to stand back and ask some hard pragmatic and value- oriented questions based on the issue of sustainability. We must give careful thought to the measuring rods we use, and try to be clear on just what their significance is for the various criteria of a healthy world.

Some of the criteria for a healthy world that we have listed have no measuring rods that I am aware of. Where are the measures, for example, of sustainability, or freedom of the press, or diversity? How do we measure our progress toward a more peaceful world? Clearly, if we are to know whether we are making progress in these areas we need measuring rods of some sort that provide us with at least a plausible indication of progress.

Creating a World Worth Living In

We are advocating a pragmatic approach to globalization – an approach that is constantly looking at what works. But the concept of value oriented pragmatism cautions us that when we limit ourselves to pragmatic considerations alone, we are apt to go astray. We must ask on a continuing basis, what do we mean by “works?” Slavery in the United States “worked.” It produced great wealth and a comfortable life for the whites. In much the same way, colonial rule “worked” for the Europeans. Of course these arrangements did not “work” so well for the blacks, or for the majority of people in the southern hemisphere. It is for this reason that we are concerned to emphasize the need for a clear link between pragmatism and values.

Most of us feel some anxiety about what sort of future we might be leaving our children and grandchildren. We appear to be on collision course with several catastrophic possibilities, and the forces that are determining the course of history at the present moment seem to be out of any body’s control. It is, therefore, easy to be swallowed up in bleak and incapacitating visions of where we are headed. But a healthier alternative is possible.

Advancing toward the goal of “sustainable health for all” will require a mass movement, involving awareness raising, popular education, and mobilization of concerned persons at every level of society. For this, a far-reaching awakening process is necessary, through alternative media, story telling, and mind-altering works of art. We can begin with Black Elk’s understanding: the “hoop” of our people is one of many hoops that will need to take its place in “one circle, wide as daylight and as starlight.” We must then visualize what the “mighty flowering tree” that will “shelter all the children of one mother and one father” will look like in tomorrow’s world, so that we can begin working toward it today.

At the personal level, our challenge is to foster and encourage human relationships and experiences that encourage this larger, more loving vision. There is a joy in working for the common good. We can all contribute to this process in different ways. We all share the hope that in tomorrow’s world there will be a physical, social and ecological environments that will support a full and worthwhile life for tomorrow’s children. To make this possible we need to make a commitment, become knowledgeable, and take solid action.

Globalization is upon us. We cannot turn back the dawn, but what the new day will look like depends largely on us. To the extent that we are able to set aside some of our old prejudices, and talk across the barricades that divide us, we can begin to build the earth with hope and confidence.