THIS may seem crackpot to some, but a little bit of thought reveals an honest attempt to address major issues in a spiritual and realistic way. It does imply a redistribution of global resources, but this doesn't necessarily mean taking from the rich and giving to the poor. It should make people all around the world, the vast majority of whom claim to follow some sort of religion and/or are spiritual reassess just how much they need to satisfy their needs and be happy, and what they can do without. If people in wealthy nations and the wealthy in the developing world are honest they will decrease consumption of their wants, concentrate on their needs and find the means and motivation to change both their societies and over time their nation's priorities for the benefit for all. The more who actually practice the tenants of their faith, the more people around the world will have the opportunity to live in peace and have access to adequate food, health care, education and their human rights will be protected. A pipe dream? Not if people around the world are as religious and spiritual as they claim to be. FOR those of you who wonder if I practice what I preach, I can tell you I give about 10% of my net income to organizations to feed, house and provide health care and educational assistance to the needy as well as to human rights and environmental organizations. I do my best to conserve water and energy in my apartment and recycle most of my trash. I e mail and call my elected officials on issues and policy and I have voted in every election since I could vote (in 1976). And I pray for our government and for peace. From Waging Nonviolence.....
Bhutan's Prime Minister Jigme Thinley (left) and Costa Rican president Laura Chinchilla at the UN, via AFP.
The monks of South Asia have been chanting on behalf of the happiness
and well-being of all creatures for 2,500 years. Now, the spirit of
those mantras has marched out of the monastery and into the streets,
even into the halls of the United Nations.
Calling for nothing less than nonviolent resistance against the
failed global economic system, the tiny Himalayan nation of Bhutan,
sandwiched between India and China,
took to the world stage last month by leading a “
High Level Meeting on Happiness and Well-Being.”
Its recommendation: Replace the Bretton Woods economic paradigm,
imposed on the world by the United States in the wake of World War II,
with an entirely new and inherently more just system.
The prime minister of Bhutan, Jigme
Thinley, called on the people of the world to demand a change. Scholars,
Nobel laureates, political actors, U.N. officials and staff, and
spiritual and civil society leaders, many from the Global South,
affirmed that the current system serves neither the human community nor
other creatures on the planet.
“The GDP-led development model,” Thinley told the gathering, “compels
boundless growth on a planet with limited resources.” Moreover, “it no
longer makes economic sense. It is the cause of our irresponsible,
immoral and self-destructive actions.” Finally, the prime minister
concluded, “The purpose of development must be to create enabling
conditions through public policy for the pursuit of the ultimate goal of
happiness by all citizens.”
Most of the 600 in attendance shared Bhutan’s vision. Indian activist
Vandana Shiva emphasized the importance of such a basic human need as
food, the source of profit for a few and misery for many. As
she has noted before,
“The poor are not those who have been ‘left behind’; they are the ones
who have been robbed.” The current paradigm creates a flow of financial,
social, human and natural capital to the United States and other rich
nations at the expense of everyone else.
Although Bhutan has faced criticism in the past for its treatment of
Nepalese immigrants and the
jailing of smokers,
it has made considerable progress in recent years by establishing a new
democracy and implementing creative efforts to measure its citizens’
well-being and happiness. The concept of Gross National Happiness was
coined by the former King Jigme Singye Wangchuck, who abdicated in 2006
and set the democratization process in motion. To its credit, Bhutan is
setting high standards for itself that may be difficult to reach, but
the country is not alone in this endeavor.
Costa Rica’s President Laura Chinchilla gave the
keynote address,
sharing the experience of her country, noting, “In 1948 we decided to
consolidate the best of our civic values, and abolished the army. We
chose to solve our disputes through the ballots, not the bullets; we
decided to invest in schools and teachers, not garrisons and soldiers.”
Rather than decreasing the national security, “This uninterrupted path
turned Costa Rica into the most stable and longest living democracy in
Latin America.”
Interfaith spiritual leaders at the meeting, including the moderator
of the Church of Canada and the Buddhist supreme patriarch of Thailand,
as well as representatives from major religious traditions, issued their
own statement calling for a new economic paradigm “based upon
compassion, altruism, balance, and peace, dedicated to the well-being,
happiness, dignity and sacredness of all forms of life.”
Meanwhile, economists John Helliwell, Richard Layard and Jeffrey Sachs distributed copies of the
World Happiness Report.
They argue, “We live in an age of stark contradictions. The world
enjoys technologies of unimaginable sophistication; yet has at least one
billion people without enough to eat each day.”
The official statement that came out of the meeting calls for a new
paradigm with four pillars: ecological sustainability, happiness and
well-being for all, fair distribution, and efficient use of resources.
An unexpected 200 participants remained at the U.N. for two additional
days to clarify what the new paradigm would look like, to propose
new solutions, and
to strategize how to mobilize a global movement in civil society to
resist the current one and implement the change. Relevant civil society,
educational, spiritual and activist organizations worldwide are being
informed about the process, with an eye toward a 2014 convention that
would replace Bretton Woods.
Widespread civil resistance movements would be a vital component in
bringing about a shift toward so radically different a paradigm as this.
Yet the meeting suggests that insufficient use has been made of the
United Nations as a venue by change activists. Despite the U.N.’s
obvious shortcomings — for instance,
OWS recently protested the influence of corporations on environmental proceedings
— it is nonetheless an infrastructure where every nation has a voice,
at least in theory. Paradoxically, Global South elites who are also
victims of the current economic paradigm provide an entrée into the
system for grassroots activists, and this meeting demonstrates that the
U.N. can offer a venue for radical critique. But the U.N. will only work
on behalf of the people if the people insist that it does and begin to
explore the possibilities that it might offer as a space for challenging
injustice at a global level.
Dutch Rabbi Awraham Soetendorp, a long-time veteran of international
meetings, observed that this one had “a different spirit” and that the
time was ripe for unprecedented change. His call for a 0.01 percent
donation of everyone’s income, especially from the rich nations, was
received with enthusiasm by the civil society working group, which is
creating a World Happiness Bank (a tentative name) that would promote
and model the new economic paradigm.
This change will not happen, of course, without the mobilization of a
nonviolent resistance movement.
That’s where we come in; we have a new opportunity to act against a
system that is robbing humanity and its fellow creatures through what
the meeting’s statement calls the “private capture of the common
wealth.” And we can do so by following the lead of the marginalized.
http://wagingnonviolence.org/2012/05/bhutan-calls-for-a-mindful-revolution-at-the-united-nations/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+WagingNonviolence+%28Waging+Nonviolence%29
First World Happiness Report Launched at the United Nations
2012-04-02
The happiest countries in the world are all in Northern Europe
(Denmark, Norway, Finland, Netherlands). Their average life evaluation
score is 7.6 on a 0-to-10 scale. The least happy countries are all poor
countries in Sub-Saharan Africa (Togo, Benin, Central African Republic,
Sierra Leone) with average life evaluation scores of 3.4. But it is
not just wealth that makes people happy: Political freedom, strong
social networks and an absence of corruption are together more
important than income in explaining well-being differences between the
top and bottom countries. At the individual level, good mental and
physical health, someone to count on, job security and stable families
are crucial.
These are among the findings of the first ever
World Happiness Report (
download PDF),
commissioned for the April 2nd United Nations Conference on Happiness
(mandated by the UN General Assembly). The report, published by the
Earth Institute and co-edited by the institute’s director, Jeffrey
Sachs, reflects a new worldwide demand for more attention to happiness
and absence of misery as criteria for government policy. It reviews the
state of happiness in the world today and shows how the new science of
happiness explains personal and national variations in happiness.
The report shows that, where happiness is measured by how happy people are with their lives:
- Happier countries tend to be richer countries. But more
important for happiness than income are social factors like the strength
of social support, the absence of corruption and the degree of personal
freedom.
- Over time as living standards have risen, happiness has
increased in some countries, but not in others (like for example, the
United States). On average, the world has become a little happier in the
last 30 years (by 0.14 times the standard deviation of happiness around
the world).
- Unemployment causes as much unhappiness as bereavement or
separation. At work, job security and good relationships do more for job
satisfaction than high pay and convenient hours.
- Behaving well makes people happier.
- Mental health is the biggest single factor affecting happiness
in any country. Yet only a quarter of mentally ill people get treatment
for their condition in advanced countries and fewer in poorer countries.
- Stable family life and enduring marriages are important for the happiness of parents and children.
- In advanced countries, women are happier than men, while the position in poorer countries is mixed.
- Happiness is lowest in middle age.
As case studies, the report describes in detail how happiness is
measured in Bhutan and the United Kingdom, and it lays out how the
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development plans to promote
standard methods of data collection in different countries. The report
itself proposes two evaluative questions that should be asked by social
surveys of representative populations in all countries:
- Taking all things together, how happy would you say you are? (where 0 means extremely unhappy, and 10 means extremely happy)
- All things considered, how satisfied are you with your life as a
whole nowadays? (where 0 means extremely dissatisfied and 10 means
extremely satisfied.)
If possible, it would also be desirable to ask separate questions about how people experience their day- to-day existence.
CONTACTS:
Richard Layard: +44 (7790) 906 206
John Helliwell:
john.helliwell@ubc.ca
MORE INFORMATION:
Erin Trowbridge, communications director, Earth Institute:
trowbridge@ei.columbia.edu
