Candidates, Elections and Citizens

As we approach the fall elections to many positions in our communities and state there arises a little more interest in politics, even as most of us decry the increasing partisanship. My thoughts wander a lot these days as I am simultaneously a candidate, a supporter of other candidates, and a citizen concerned with the decisions made in our name at various levels of governing. As the story below from Bill Moyers.com indicates


Will Americans Set a New Record for Political Apathy in 2014? | Blog | BillMoyers.com

     "The United States is supposed to be a beacon of democracy, yet Americans have one of the lowest levels of electoral participation in the world. In fact, a 2012 study found that the US ranked “120th of the 169 countries for which data exists on voter turnout, falling between the Dominican Republic and Benin.”

While this probably comes as no surprise, what isn't reported here is how even those who do opt to vote, only a very small percentage involve themselves otherwise in election or public policy arenas. Very few donate cash or time to campaigns. Few are willing to publicly endorse candidates whether by bumper sticker, yard sign, or letters to the editor. Yet we know that name recognition and personal contacts from these activities make all the difference in election campaigns. In local, small communities name recognition and face-to-face meet-ups are time consuming but possible. But in larger communities or at the state level one must rely on advertisements and press coverage as substitutes. The former takes cash, the latter is difficult when the news hole shrinks and becomes limited to discussion of the horse race - who's leading, who has momentum, who has made the biggest gaff.

If we want our democracy to work better, we need better information when we shop for candidates to support. Without an even playing field, those that have the resources have the upper hand. The equalizing factor should be citizen involvement. If you don't have time, give money. If you don't have money, give time. Find the candidates you can believe in and support, and then do so. Otherwise our democracy will continue to be run largely by those the system favors - the wealthy and well-connected.

I suspect that many would-be candidates and potentially good elected officials, decline entering the fray because of the barriers and lack of support available. That's why when candidates do receive a check in the mail, or someone volunteers to hand out campaign literature, or write letters, they feel that their wish to serve the public good is not in vain, it is not time wasted. The feeling that someone believes in you, in your ability to improve the community is a powerful tonic. This is the time to find the gumption to dig a little deeper and support the kind of democracy our hearts know is possible.

As the activists of the 1950's chanted, "better active than radioactive". Let's make our democracy live up to its promise. This will not happen by harping at all the flaws of our system from our armchairs. Time to find your voice and align it with candidates you believe in. Time is wastin'!

Gaza, Ukraine and Possibility

Our local Peace Education Center, 

 
distressed by the recent violence in Gaza, we tried to offer something to address the killing, injury, destruction, and chaos that has been going on between Hamas and the Israeli military in recent weeks. We drafted a statement on the siege of Gaza which we put on our website, sent out to local media and supporters. In it we affirm the calls coming from many Israelis,
 

 Nobel Peace Laureates,

American Jews
 
  and others concerned with the escalation of violence in that troubled region, pleading for a cessation.

We fully realize that this little action will not impact the immediate situation on the ground there today. We are not in control of the decision-makers on any side. But can we just stay silent? Friday, while I was attending the weekly peace vigil held at the state capitol, we were joined by a Palestinian mother and her two children. Members of her family in Ramallah (West Bank) had been shot with rubber bullets the day before at a rally protesting the Israeli offensive in Gaza. They were sore but ok she said. But her voice quivered in relating the experience.

I have read in the past few days several potent pieces that offer some glimpse of possibility out of this mayhem in which so many are suffering and so much wasted resources are being expended. These are not the kinds of things you will hear the typical pundits, politicians, or political analysts share. But they are powerful possibilities that should be more widely shared, reflected on, and discussed. Perhaps even attempted with more rigor than has been shown to date. Otherwise, we'll be reviewing this depressing scene over and over in the months and years ahead.

As Einstein noted, the definition of insanity is the repeating of the same action over and over and expecting a different outcome. War and violence only breeds more of the same. Time for something new.

Please check out:


Tom Atlee "Enhancing the Lives of Both Palestinians and Israelis" 

     "The ongoing conflict between Israel and Palestine is reaching another volcanic peak. Perhaps the biggest tragedy is the painfully familiar sense that it is all so unnecessary. Here and there I find commentators who offer insightful new directions and people on the ground working to make a positive difference. I share some of these points of light and then ask about the larger shifts needed if we wish to co-create flourishing lives together instead of collective tragedies..."

Charles Eisenstein  "A Restorative Response to MH 17"

     "Aren’t they awful? Aren’t they appalling? How could they? They must be monstrous, evil, inhuman. The only way to deal with such people is to stand up to them, destroy them, send them a message, take a stand, deter them, show them it isn’t acceptable, hold them to account. Any other response is soft, weak, naïve.
      How many times have we heard this narrative repeated? A horrible event occurs: the downing of a jetliner, the murder of three Israeli teenagers, the destruction of the twin towers, gas attacks in Syria… and immediately the press and political classes pump up the narrative that whoever committed this atrocity did so because they are bad people – bad people who implicate a whole class of bad people that must be overcome with force..."

Citizenship Goes Global

My day was split between talking to a social forum at a local church this morning about sustainability, climate change and divestment; an afternoon around other candidates for office in Michigan from the Green Party; and this evening after dinner I've been catching up on some websites that I used to frequent. One is PelicanWeb edited by Luis Gutierrez. Gutierrez maintains an extensive list of sustainability resources mostly with an eye towards global concerns, but with voices from around the planet visible.


He also publishes a monthly newsletter, Mother Pelican in which I found an article in his June 2014 issue of particular interest. Canadian political scientist emeritus, Robert Paehlke's  Global Citizenship: Plausible Fears and Necessary Dreams originally published in the Great Transitions 



Paehlke does a nice job of exploring the fears around global governance as well as unveiling the global governance of trade pacts that socialize [my word] the costs of that system on to those least able to pay, while funneling huge profits to those whose pockets are already full. Paehlke is seasoned enough to know that true global governance necessary to wrestle with the global problems of climate change and income inequality are not likely through nation states where power is closely held and exercised. Like others he finds hope in civil society.

That interpretation links well with the conversations I was part of this morning and afternoon. The morning group was looking for ideas largely relating to common consumption choices we each make regularly as well as  how to discuss different views civily with those we disagree with. These are folks willing to leave the comfort of their home on a wonderful summer morning to join in discussions with others around important social issues.

Likewise, those attending the afternoon meeting of candidates of the Green Party have little optimistic expectations of winning their races (actually I do think I can win mine)  but they believe that the status quo is not sustainable and that becoming involved in the political system by offering up alternative possibilities is worth their time. Both groups show that hope still lives. What was happening in my immediate world today was being replicated all around the globe by people just like you, folks unwilling to just complain about the state of the world, but willing to come together with others in the hopes that we might collectively forge a better future.

Paehlke offers these relevant insights in his essay:

      "Many doubt that citizens can influence decisions on a global level because they doubt that they can even do so on a local level. We need to respond to cynicism and hopelessness by asserting, based on analysis of historical conditions and emerging possibilities, that there is nothing naïve about believing that citizens, governments, and human institutions can prevent ever-rising inequality and the overheating of the planet...

     A multi-nation poll conducted in 2005 found that “for the first time in history, one citizen in five across the world strongly identifies with being a citizen of the world ahead of being a citizen of a home country. Those who fear global governance may find this alarming, but they are clinging to a fading past...

Many doubt that citizens can influence decisions on a global level because they doubt that they can even do so on a local level. We need to respond to cynicism and hopelessness by asserting, based on analysis of historical conditions and emerging possibilities, that there is nothing naïve about believing that citizens, governments, and human institutions can prevent everrising inequality and the overheating of the planet. - See more at: http://www.greattransition.org/document/global-citizenship-plausible-fears-necessary-dreams#sthash.ulNvBQ9C.dpuf

    

     What can we anticipate about the nature of a global citizens movement itself? A movement committed to expanded democracy, equity, and human rights must itself, in practice, be inclusive, equitable, and scrupulously democratic. Indeed, given that global institutions incorporating citizen participation will not emerge easily or quickly, the movement must be a model of democracy and inclusiveness to demonstrate the possibility of such democracy on a global scale".

 This won't move forward without many more joining with others to help make the impossible, inevitable. As Paehlke reminds us, political efficacy requires a belief that you can make a difference. My day has reinforced that belief. These various citizens both near and far are waiting for us to join them. No use waitin'...

Many doubt that citizens can influence decisions on a global level because they doubt that they can even do so on a local level. We need to respond to cynicism and hopelessness by asserting, based on analysis of historical conditions and emerging possibilities, that there is nothing naïve about believing that citizens, governments, and human institutions can prevent everrising inequality and the overheating of the plane - See more at: http://www.greattransition.org/document/global-citizenship-plausible-fears-necessary-dreams#sthash.ulNvBQ9C.dpuf

Many doubt that citizens can influence decisions on a global level because they doubt that they can even do so on a local level. We need to respond to cynicism and hopelessness by asserting, based on analysis of historical conditions and emerging possibilities, that there is nothing naïve about believing that citizens, governments, and human institutions can prevent everrising inequality and the overheating of the planet. - See more at: http://www.greattransition.org/document/global-citizenship-plausible-fears-necessary-dreams#sthash.ulNvBQ9C.dpuf

Many doubt that citizens can influence decisions on a global level because they doubt that they can even do so on a local level. We need to respond to cynicism and hopelessness by asserting, based on analysis of historical conditions and emerging possibilities, that there is nothing naïve about believing that citizens, governments, and human institutions can prevent everrising inequality and the overheating of the planet. - See more at: http://www.greattransition.org/document/global-citizenship-plausible-fears-necessary-dreams#sthash.ulNvBQ9C.dpuf

Higher Ed Behind Close Doors

The Detroit Free Press has sued the University of Michigan over the closed meetings it holds regularly. Our local paper's coverage of that story indicated that MSU is similarly culpable of this violation, claiming "Michigan State University’s Board of Trustees also regularly meets in what amounts to private sessions."

For democracy to fulfill it's ideal, decisions must be made with full information. Excluding information or the ability to raise critical points or questions during the decision-making process makes attaining that ideal unlikely.

My decision to run for the MSU Board of Trustees is in significant part a response to redirecting higher education to help the human family achieve the ideal of democracy. John Hannah, MSU's longest serving president, spoke to that role for education in 1961 at a Washington conference on education.

Indelibly etched in the monument to him that stands outside of MSU's Administration Building are these words:

         " If there is one thing educators agree on, it is that the fundamental purpose of education is to prepare  good citizens."












Professor Eric Gould has argued in his award winning book The University in a Corporate Culture that a democratic education must do three things:

 

     First, it must be an education for democracy, for the greater good of a just society -- but it      cannot assume that society is, a priori, just. Second, it must argue for its means as well as its ends. It must derive from the history of ideas, from long-standing democratic values and practices which include the ability to argue and critique but also to tolerate ambiguity. And third, it must participate in the democratic social process, displaying not only moral preference for recognizing the rights of others and accepting them, too, but for encouraging argument and cultural critique. In short a university education is a democratic education because it mediates liberal democracy and the cultural contradictions of capitalism. (as cited in Henry Giroux, The University in Chains, 2007, p.201)

On the Cheap

Michael Carolan's Cheaponomics: The High Cost of Low Prices shines some desperately needed sunlight on the current neoliberal hegemony over our economic system. Carolan, who writes with aplomb supported by a lengthy recitation of research unmasks the hidden costs of 21st century capitalism.


.
Carolan unmasks what he frequently refers to as socialism of the costs, whereby the costs of production are socialized while the profits are privatized.

     I have long been struck by how the term "socialist" has been used, particularly in the United States. As far as I can tell, it refers exclusively to someone who promotes redistributive policies that seek to spread the wealth. Under this scenario, the benefits generated by the an economy are spread - are socialized - to various degrees across society. Yet benefits are not the only things that can be socialized. Costs can too. While quick to brand their intellectual adversaries as socialists, proponents of the economic status quo have yet to catch on to the fact that they are also deserving of the "socialist" title. They strive to make society pay for the costs of this economic system while concentrating the benefits with the hands of the few.  They are socialists too, though the type they promote I would argue is far more insidious, unjust, and unsustainable than that advocated by their antagonists.  This brings me to the book's title: Cheaponomics - shorthand for cost-socializing socialism. (p.3)

Carolan through successive chapters paints a clear picture of how the cheapness of food, free plastic bags, automobiles and the overall trends towards retail concentration, low prices, long hours have huge costs for society and the environment that we all pay. While not optimistic, he does close with ten recommendations for the good, affordable and affording. Like all good economists he highlights among many things the need for increasing transparency and and enhancing our democracy.

These are basic elements that all societies can benefit from that have positive ripple effects across the economy, the social fabric, and the environment. It highlights the hypocrisy of those who decry attempts to get labels of origin on their food and other products or whether or not the ingredients are organic, or GMO free, or the chemicals used in fracking, or whether they come from the other side of the planet produced by slave labor. For markets to function well at all, there must be full information for the consumer to make intelligent choices (a principle for which Joseph Stiglitz was rewarded with a Nobel award).

I would extend  transparency to include how profits are used or shared with stakeholders, which would let us know if firm X was compensating its employees well or poorly; giving to the community for public purposes; or lobbying for their private benefit. Until we take the full range of social and environmental costs into account, the market will continue to redistribute wealth to private gain with little concern for the public good. Call it what you will, but the data Carolan shares shows us the costs are real and are mounting.

We can quibble with his recommendations, but we do need to confront the reality he lays bare before us. 

Financing the Green Economy

I must have missed the NPR and local press coverage of the inaugural UN Environment Assembly held last week in Nairobi, Kenya. The five day conference of more than 1,000 attendees representing 163 member states including 113 ministers was blacked out so that we could focus more on the World Cup, baseball, and other more pressing issues.

I want to focus on only one of the 40 events that were held as part of this global meeting. The Symposium on Financing the Green Economy


The report from this symposium painted a picture of possibility if we might heed it's advice. This effort was part of the UNEP Finance Initiative, the same entity I have mentioned in past blogs that focuses on how global responsible finance can help reshape our common destiny when we step away from the race to get more for me attitude that has so overrun our notion of finance. The key findings from this symposium should be reviewed and considered by all of us. Let's ask the candidates running for office at all levels if they understand the possibilities here. The following is from a summary from the Symposium.

Key Insights from the Symposium

The Symposium on Financing a Green Economy examined how private financial capital can be mobilized to deliver long-term sustainable prosperity as a necessary complement to public expenditure. It is important to both channel private finance more effectively towards green and job-creating opportunities, as well as diverting it away from its current focus on natural resource and carbon intensive investments. 

Scale of the Challenge of Financing the Green Economy: At least USD 6 trillion is required per annum to finance a green and inclusive economy, with more than half of this needed in the developing world. 

Need for a systemic approach: This represents a small fraction of the total stock of assets in the global financial system, estimated at over USD225 trillion. As a result, policymakers need to focus on the rules that govern the deployment of capital within the global financial system. To date, post-crisis financial reform measures have not focused on the sustainability imperative. 

A misalignment of signals: Many signals in today’s financial system are not aligned with sustainable development – reflected in prevailing short-termism, perverse incentives, insufficient transparency, ill-defined responsibilities and inadequate flows to key countries and sectors. The result is a continuing misallocation of capital to high carbon and resource intensive assets, with potential risks of stranded assets. 

Recognising market and policy innovation: Positively, there is a growing body of innovation in market practice and policy measures to integrate environmental and social factors within the financial system, ranging from ‘green bond principles’ to country-level ‘green credit guidelines’ as well as sustainability disclosure requirements on stock exchanges around the world. 

Championing action: At this moment in time, the global community has a unique opportunity to build on this emerging policy innovation to place sustainable development at the heart of the financial system. A special focus needs to be placed on strengthening the capacities of developing countries to integrate sustainable development into financial policy and regulation.