Can we move beyond nationalism, beyond patriotism, beyond the traditional religions to a more universal implementation of our global obligations, -           without becoming hopelessly idealistic or offering bandaid solutions? Can we create global institutions that are real instruments of progressive social change?

Conclusions on Global Obligations:                                                                  (Statement 41)

We need significant non-government global organizations (NGOs) to address global problems such as human rights, inequality and environment protection in a global way.  This is based on:

●           Our values such as truth, compassion, freedom, democracy, and egalitarianism;  more (later)

●           The scientific analyses and predictions of dire consequences if global action is not taken;  more (later)

●           The historical failure of many nation states to deliver to the “best practice level” human rights, prosperity, and environmental protection;  more (later)

●           The belief that civil and political rights should not be at the whim of undemocratic local area governments;  more (later)

●           The failure of traditional, supernatural religions to rationally address the reality in this world of human suffering (poverty, oppression, inequality etc) and environmental sustainability;  more (later)

●           The failure of the media to provide authentic news and information that would empower individuals and organizations to advocate for nation states and large corporations to act responsibly in many areas;  more (later)

●           The powerlessness felt by many individuals, who cannot act alone;  more (later)

●           The failure of the United Nations to authoritively resolve issues such as interstate and civil wars, massive human rights breaches, tyranny, global poverty, global inequity and global environmental issues.  more (later)

Our political action must move beyond the local, parochial, traditional tribalism, national patriotism, ethnic chauvinism and religious introversion to global organizations.

Many excellent NGOs already exist which have adopted specialist roles in humanitarian charity and advocacy or “witness”, such as

●           The Society of the Red Cross and Red Crescent more (later)

●           Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch more (later)

●           Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and Warren Buffet’s ‘Open Society’ more (later)

●           Religiously based aid organizations such as World Vision;  more (later)

●           Environment organizations such as the World Wildlife Fund;  more (later)

●           We need more global organizations involved in research and education, to promote teaching and learning from a global rather than a nation, state or religious perspective.  more (later)

Various other agencies more or less tied to the United Nations provide some benefit in specialist areas, but many of these are in need of substantial reform and many states exclude themselves and their citizens from their activities:

●           World Health Organisation (WHO), the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF), United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), etc;  more (later)

●           World Bank (WB), International Monetary Fund (IMF), World Trade Organisation (WTO), etc;  more (later)

●           World Court and International Criminal Court.  more (later)

All global NGOs should support protection of the environment by

●           adopting environment friendly policies related to their own activities, and

●           advocating for area governments to use their authority to protect the environment;

●           advocating for the United Nations to be fully responsible for and have the authority and means to protect the global environment.  more (later)

We need to supplement the current plurality of governance structures to better align the global power structure to address global issues, by promoting more effective global non-government organizations (NGOs). 

●           These must be independent of the area governments, with their parochial self interests, the tyranny of the majority or just tyranny, and their right to coerce.

●           These must also be independent of the United Nations, which is an ineffectual collection of nations promoting their selfish or populist interests.  more (later)

None of these organizations provide rights to the recipients of their aid, the recipients may have input but they have no effective control on the aid given, and they certainly have no legal entitlement to aid.  These organizations also do not impose obligations on the recipients.  There is no fundamental link between donors and recipients.  There are no enforceable civil or political rights.  Mostly we need a robust global support organization to provide a global safety net and protection against state or corporate abuse, that is:

●        rights based, rather than charity based,

●        focused on action rather than restricted to advocacy,

●        financially viable,

●        democratic, with an open, transparent structure,

●        transnational;

●        supportive of those in affluent countries as well as the poor and dispossessed;

●        based on reciprocal obligations (enforced through proper legal processes);

●        evidence based in its decision making.

Such an organisation provides a viable and rational mechanism for those of us who, as an outcome of these global beliefs, accept we need to move beyond supernatural religion and parochial patriotism to fulfill our  Global Obligations. 

more (later)