 | The text below this notice was generated by a computer, it still needs to be checked for errors and corrected. If you would like to help, view the original document by clicking the PDF scans along the right side of the page. Click the edit button at the top of this page (notepad and pencil icon) or press Alt+Shift+E to begin making changes. When you are done press "Save changes" at the bottom of the page. |
World Watch -
Dr: Ann Boyle: look: at various ways in whirl; individuals seek to (flirt racial change in a :rtkix-n'ddm world.
growing number of people all over the world, believing Athat powerful global forces have ignored the well-being of average citizens in favor of the interests of big businesses, transnational corporations, governmental elites, war machines, ecological destruction. and other evils, are taking to the streets to protest. They see their governments as failing, their livelihoods and ways of life threatened. They see convincing evidence of social injustice. They see the human suffering that results from conflicts around the world. Enraged by their own sense of powerlessness and by their leaders’ lack of will or ability to address these issues, people are voting with their feet. There is no doubt about the sinceriry of their desire to speak out against at least some of the countless ills that plague humanity.
The main flashpoint for the widespread protests has been “global- ization,” a phenomenon with two distinctly opposite effects. On the one hand, it has served to integrate peoples and countries through “the enormous reduction of costs oftransportation and communication, and the breaking down of artificial barriers to the flows of goods. services, capital, knowledge, and (to a lesser extent) people across borders."l
' Joseph E. Stiglitz, Globalization and its Diuanmm (New York: WW. Nor- ton, 2003). p. 9.
I'99
200 THE BAHA’f WORLD 2002—2003
according to former World Bank economist Joseph E. Stiglitz, winner of the Nobel Prize in economics. It has also contributed to the rise in cross—border institutions such as organizations of civil society and intergovernmental institutions. On the other hand, globaliution’s economic aspects have had devastating consequences in some coun- tries, as market deregulations imposed by international institutions such as the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank, and the World Trade Organization have erased “the rules and regulations in many developing countries that are designed to stabilize the flows of volatile money into and out of the country.” The “Mach 3 financial capitalism” or “tornado capitalism" that has resulted From these un— regulated markets has wreaked havoc on entire societies and reforms are needed to protect people from its worst effects, writes Susan George of the Transnational Institute.3
But reforms do not appear to be on the horizon, and the hard— ship is real. The gap between the rich and the poor has become a chasm: In 1996 the combined income of the poorest 45 percent of the world's population, a total of 2.3 billion people. was equal to the net worth of the world’s 358 richest people;" by 2003, 54 countries were poorer than they had been IO years earlier;S and more than half of the world’s largest 100 economies are now corporations, rather than nation—states.6
To counter such trends, governments need to play a strong role in protecring their citizens against the ravages of market liberaliza— tion, writes james Gustave Speth, former head of the United Nations Development Program, warning that the link between growth and human development “must be deliberately forged by governments
11bit!” pt 10.
‘Susan George, “The Fast Castes." in New Perspective: Quarterly (Winter 1997), pp. 10—13.
‘ These figures are taken from the 1996 annual Human Development Report of the United Nations Development Program (UNDP). cited by Jams Gustave Speth, in "Global Equality: 358 Billionaires vs. 1.3 Billion People,” in New Perspectives Quarterly (Fall 1996). p. 35.
‘ United Nations Development Program, 2003 Human Development Report.
° Noreena Hertz, The Silent kawr: Global Capitalixm and the Death of Dmorraq (New York: The Free Press, 2001).
[Page 201]
WORLD WATCH lot
and regularly fortified by skillful and intelligent policies.”7 But to have the desired effect, such a shift in pace and emphasis would have to be orchestrated through international agreement, and significantly. Susan George notes, “[nlo unifying religion or moral principle is on hand to provide a slow—down mechanism, or sanity and support" during such a transformation.” It appears, then, that changes through established routes will be painfully slow, ifthey happen at all.
Naomi Klein, one of the most vocal spokespeople for the anti— globalization movement, sees the failure of governments to take an active role in guarding the welfare of their citizens in this scenario as a “betrayal" of "the fundamental need for democracies that are responsive and participatory.” Noreena Hertz of the Center for International Business at Cambridge University echoes the senti- ment, writing. “The role of nation states has become to a large extent simply that of providing the public goods and infrastructure that business needs at the lowest costs while protecting the world’s Free trade sys:em."”’
It is no wonder, then, whether they are troubled by the hardship resulting from the actions of multinational corporations, worried about the alarming deterioration of the environment. horrified by the worsening plight of the world’s poor, frustrated by the inaction of their governments, or angered by their governments participa- tion or nonparticipation in various military interventions around the world, that a growing number of people are searching for ways to make themselves heard—to protect themselves or others hurt by these global processes. to express their solidarity with people living half a world away, to take action, to make a difference.
There is much debate in the wider community about the best way to move forward, however. While some advocate the slow route of pursuing reforms within existing legal or administrative avenues. others Favor direct action as a faster, more efficient way to remedy
social ills.
7 Speth, "Global Equality" p. 33.
" Susan George, “Fast Castes." p. 13.
" Naomi Klein, me and Window: Dtltparrbtxfiam 1/7: Fran: Lint: fifth: Glabzzlimtion Debut: (Toronto: Vintage Canada, 2002), p. xiv.
“’ Hertz, Silent Talmm'r, p. 8.
202 THE BAHA’f WORLD 2002—2003
Underlying the various paradigms encompassed by this lat— ter approach is a long—standing conviction that attacks on the “other”—whether governments, corporations, or institutions—are the most effective means for accelerating change in society. Michael Karlberg ofWestem Washington University describes this approach
as follows:
Cultural common sense leads many to believe that the best way to organize every social institution is in the Form of a contest. Paxadoxically, it also leads many to believe that the best way to reform those institutions is through protest—and other adversar- ial strategies of social change. Protests, demonstrations, partisan organizing, litigation, strikes, and other oppositional strategies are standard methods for pursuing social change. In more extreme cases, violence and terrorism are also employed.”
The anti-globalization movement adheres to this “contest” paradigm, but it introduces some unconventional features. The movement has no central leadership; rather, the protesters support many different causes, which assemble in shifting constellations at large events, and coalitions form and evaporate on an issue—oriented basis. This structure, or lack of it, seems itself to be a product of our fragmented postmodern world, but it also reflects the movement’s objective of “radical decentralization” and the building of “com— munity—based decision—making potential—whether through unions, neighborhoods, farms, villages, anarchist collectives, or aboriginal self—government”—which it regards as “essential to countering the might of multinational corporations.”12 The “cells” of this grassroots movement are connected through cyberspace, via the Internet—a techno—version of organic networking methods such as painting messages on walls or passing them by word of mouth.13
The global gatherings are not only marches, although direct actiofi is certainly the main purpose; they are also “week—long mar- athons of intense education on global politics, late—night strategy
” Michael Karlberg, nThe Paradox of Protest in a Culture of Contest," Peace and Change, vol. 28, no. 3 (July 2003), p. 339.
‘1 Klein, Fence: and Windows, p. 16.
‘3 Ibid., p. 223.
[Page 203]
WORLD WATCH 203
sessions in six—way simultaneous translation, festivals of music and street theater.”” As for the changes they am seeking, Klein writes, “When protesters shout about the evils of globalization, most are not calling for a return to narrow nationalism but for the borders of globalization to be expanded, for trade to be linked to labor tights, environmental protection and democracy.”"
The effectiveness of the protesters’ efforts to promote knowledge and raise people’s consciousness on these important global issues is evident by the growing numbers of participants in the events. The movement's spokespersons are welI-informed and articulate. and they have attracted like—minded citizens of all ages. However, some problems have arisen. While its objectives are desirable, and while most participants do not call for a return to nationalism nor insti- gate violent acts, this “movement of movements,” with no central coherence based on principle, does encompass radical elements that embrace violence as a useful tool in their struggle. As the numbers of protesters grow and the rhetoric heats up, host governments and police forces feel besieged, so the potential for deadly force is real. And as for the movement's future development, there is no wide- spread agreement on the course it will take. While some protesters claim that violence has moved leaders to consider and act on issues such as debt relief, others think that it weakens their credibility and want to move beyond protests; they are looking For a new strategy.
Naomi Klein argues that the activists, although serious in intent, refuse “to engage in classic power struggles" in that “their goal is not to take power for themselves but to challenge power centraliza— tion on principle.””’ She refers to the protests as “the precise and thrilling moment when the rabble of the real world crashed the experts—only club where our collective fate is determined”'7 and claims that “a new culture of vibrant direct democracy is emerging, one that is fuelled and strengthened by direct participation. not dampened and discouraged by passive spectatorship.”'“
Ibid.. p. xxv.
‘5 1bid.. pp. 4—5. Ibid., p. xxvi.
lbid., p. xvii.
lhid., pp. xxvi-xxvii,
204 THE BAHA’f WORLD 2002—2003
This increasing emphasis on direct democracy reflects both widespread disillusionment with established political systems and the conviction that the “self-actualizing" power of the individual is the strongest means of efl'ecting change and bringing about social justice. According to individualist and anarchist social theories, to which the anti—globalization movement bears some relation, the state and society block the power and “natural energies" of individuals through their perpetual efforts to control them. '9
Whether direct action based on such paradigms can actually bring about meaningful and enduring social change remains unclear, however. Can a movement based on adversarial strategies sustain unity within its own ranks—or engender a society that can meet the needs of all its members? According to Katlberg, such strategies have become “paradoxical and self-limiting”:
If they were viable in the past, they now appear to have reached a point of diminishing returns. Adversarial strategies legitimate the assumptions regarding human nature and social organization that sustain the tripartite system. When social activism engage in partisan political organizing, they legitimate the contest models of governance that keep them at a perpetual disadvantage. Like- wise, when social activists engage in litigation, they legitimate the adversarial systems of jurisprudence that keep them at a perpetual disadvantage. Even street proteSts. demonstrations, and acts of civil disobedience legitimate the underlying assumption that con— test and opposition are necessary forms of social interaction.
Gran ted, social activists do “win" occasional “battles” in these adversarial arenas, but the root causes of their concerns largely remain unaddressed and the larger “wars” arguably are not going well.20
Within this wider context, the Babe“ community, which is also. concerned with addressing the ills that beset society, sees itselfas mak— ing one contribution to the struggle for social ttansformation—but
"’ For a helpful discussion of social theories including individualism and anarchism. see Nicholas Abcrcrombie, Stephen Hill. and Bryan S. Turner, Savmign Individual: afCapita/ixm (London: Allen and Unwin, 1986).
3" Karlbcrg, “Paradox of Protest." p. 339.
WORLD WATCH 205
with a distinctive vision and approach based on its sacred scriptures. A basic tenet of Baha‘i belief is that humanity, standing on the threshold of its collective maturity, must develop appropriate new qualities, attitudes, and skills. ‘Abdu’l—Baha writes,
That which was applicable to human needs during the early his— tory of the race could neither meet nor satisfy the demands ofithis day and period of newness and consummation. Humanity has emerged from its former degrees of limitation and preliminary training. Man must now become imbued with new virtues and powers, new moralities, new capacities.21
Bahi’i’s believe that among the ideas that will not serve humanity well in its age of maturity are the conviction that human beings are aggressive and quarrelsome by nature and the concept of “us” versus “them.”
Humanity is gradually awakening to its essential oneness, but as yet there is no common understanding of the obligations or nature of that unity. The anti-globalization protesters, for example, see themselves as a community that welcomes individuals from differ- ent cultures, backgrounds, and levels of education who ate more or less unified in their struggle against the worst effects ofglobalization; they see the anti—globalization protest gatherings as occasions where true democracy and Freedom flourish—as windows to the possibili- ties of a new, more just world. The globalization boosters also see humanity as one, but as a single, gigantic economic market inhabited by consumers of many different cultures. However, such visions of unity are almost always limited, and ideas of diEerence and conflict are deeply ingrained in both our individual consciousness and our social structure. As the Baha’i International Community writes:
Deceptively simple in popular discourse, the concept that human— ity constitutes a single people presents fundamental challenges to the way that most of the institutions of contemporary society carry out their functions. Whether in the form of the adversarial structure of civil government, the advocaqi principle informing
1’ ‘Abdu‘l—Baha, Foundation: of Wpr/d Unity Wilmette, IL: Bahé’t’ Publishing Trust, 1945), pp. 9.
206 THE BAHA’f WORLD 2002—2003
most of civil law, a glorification of the struggle between classes and other social groups, or the competitive spirit dominating so much of modern life, conflict is accepted as the mainspring of human interaction. It represents yet another expression in social organiza- tion of the materialist interpretation of life that has progressively consolidated itself over the past two centuries.22
As “idealistic materialism”23 play their part in the vast his- torical process destined to lead humanity to the next stage of its development, struggling against “the countless wrongs afl'licting a desperate age,”“ so, too, the Bahé’is are playing their part‘ Their efforts attempt to address what they see as the spiritual root of these problems by promoting the wholehearted adoption of the concept of the oneness of the human race. Again, the Bahé’l’ International Community writes, “Only through the dawning consciousness that they constitute a single people will the inhabitants of the planet be enabled to turn away from the patterns of conflict that have domi— nated social organization in the past and begin to learn the ways of collaboration and conciliation.”25
But if adversarial relationships are taken for granted as the norm of operation in society, how, then, can we move from the current model of “containment,” where institutions are seen as controlling and limiting the freedom of individuals, to a model of empower— ment? Can societal institutions actually be transformed into channels through which individuals can effectively serve society and thus contribute to its healthy growth rather than feeling that they must oppose those institutions in order to force them to make meaningful change? The Bahé’f community asserts that, indeed, societal institu— tions can be so changed, but to establish such an order, the world requires an “educator" whose teachings address material, human,
2’ Bah‘é’I International Community, The Proxperigl cfouman/zina' (1995).
23 Universal House of Justice, letter to a National Spiritual Assembly, I9 November 1974, in Messagesfi‘am the Uniumal H0152 offum'ce (963—1986 (Vanmette, IL: Bahé’f Publishing Trust, 1996), p. 283.
1" Universal House ofjustice, letter to the believers gathered for the events marking the completion of the projects on Mount Carmel, 7.4 May 2001. The text of this letter appears in The 8404’ ’1 World 2001—2002, pp. 69—73.
15 Bahé’f International Community, Prosperity (IfHumankind.
[Page 207]
WORLD WATCH 7.07
and spiritual concerns, and whose authority is universally respected. Such an educator “must teach men i. . to form a social order in order to establish cooperation and mutual aid in living so that material affairs may be organized and regulated for any circumstances that may occur.”26
Bahé’fs believe that Bahé’u’llzih is the “divine educator” for this age and has been sent by an all—loving Creator to move us to the next stage of humanity’s development. Such advancement, however, requires that we change our notions ofwhat is appropriate in societal relationships. In The Lab, #16 Emple, and the Market, Farzam Arbab outlines the challenge that faces humanity in regard to governance:
Conflict between the individual and the institutions of soci- ety—the one clamoring for ever greater freedom and the other demanding ever more complete submission—has been a Feature of political life throughout the ages. The model of democracy vigorously propagated in the world today takes this state of conflict for granted but tries to fix the parameters so that the individuals rights are not transgressed in the process. Beyond any question. the version of democracy so far achieved is preferable to the despotic systems of governance to which humanity has been subjected time and again. But the historical process of de— mocratization does not have to end here, at its current immature stage; the interaction between institutional authority to decide and individual power to accomplish has only begun to realize its possibilities. Better arrangements will emerge, however, only when institutions cease to be seen as instruments for imposing on society the views of a particular faction, whether democratically elected or not. To the extent that institutions become channels through which the talents and energies of the members ofsociety can be expressed in service to humanity, a sense of reciprocity will grow in which the individual supports and nurtures institu— tions and these, in turn, pay sincere attention to the voice of the people whose needs they serve.27
2" ‘Abdu’l—Bahé. Some Amwtred Questinm (\X/ilmette, IL: Bahé'f Publishing
Trust, 1994), p. 9. 27 Farzam Arbah, “Promoting a Discourse on Science, Religion, and (cont’d)
208 THE BAHA’f WORLD 2002—2003
This sense of reciprocity is now noticeably absent from relation- ships between individuals and institutions. [nsritutions—pmicululy governments—axe not seen as “channels" through which citizens' “talents and energies can be expressed in service to humanity." Often they are (justly) seen as ladders by which the ambitious can rise and then impose their will on others, practice corruption, and sacrifice the common good to protect the interests of themselves and those who supported their advance. In turn, individuals do not support or “nurture" their governing institutions, and so the vicious circle is complete.
Arbab writes of the necessity of “the transformation of the pres— ent mode ofgovernance, based on traditional concepts ofpower and authority, into one shaped by a genuine posture of learning.” While acknowledging the difficulty of the process, he goes on to ask, “[115 not the shifi from governing by force to administering by learning one of the distinguishing features of humanity’s passage from child— hood to maturity?”28 The new paradigm advanced by the Bahai'f Faith Focuses on empowering individuals to become agents ofconstructive social change in their communities, or, in the words of one writer, on “cultivating the capacity in individuals and their institutions to participate in their own development?”
Inherent in this paradigm is a balance between the rights of the individual and those of the collective. One problem with protests and acts of civil disobedience, whether peaceful or violent, is that they necessarily involve rejection of the authority of the government. While the cause of the protest may be widely seen as praiseworthy, the question remains: ifit is accepted that one group can deliberately disobey a decree it perceives as unjust, then why not another group disobeying another law that it sees as unjust, and another group another law? The authoritative standards embodied in civil
Development," in The Lab, [be 75mph. and the Market: Reflections at :11:
Interstrrian 12f Srimte, Religian. and Development. ed. Sharon M.I’. Harper (Ottawa, ON: International Development Research Centre. 2000), p. 7.17.. 1" Ibid.. p. 216. 3" Paul Lample, Crmzinga New Mind: Reflection: rm the Individual, the lmtim- tiam, and the Community (Riviera Beach, FL: Palabta Publications, 1999). p. 107.
[Page 209]
WORLD WATCH 209
jurisprudence are thus undermined to a point where they become empty, and the cohesion of the society is threatened.
A challenging but firm foundational principle of the Bahé’l' Faith is obedience to government, stemming from the writings of Bahé'u’lléh Himself, who stated, “To none is given the tight to act in any manner that would run counter to the considered views of them who are in authority.”0 ‘Abdu’l-Bahfi described Bahai'ls as 'Ihe well-wishers of the government, obedient to its laws and beating love towards all peoples,"” and Shoghi Effendi further elaborated that Bahfi’ls “do not exalt their own consciences over the rulings of the authorities, and hold it a religious duty to be loyal and obedi- ent to the State.”“ In a cablegram written in 1938, he called upon the Bahé'fs
[to] resolve, despite [the] pressure [of] fast crystallizing public opinion, [to] abstain individually and collectively, in word [and] action, informally as well as in all official utterances and publica- tions, from assigning blame, taking sides, however indirectly, in recurring political crises now agitating [and] ultimately engulfing human society.”
Bahé’is, then, neither sanction not oppose partisan political viewpoints. nor do they engage in acts of civil disobedience that would undermine government—even in cases where the govern- ment is hostile towards them and their objectives. Two examples serve to illustrate this principle. The first is the Bahzi'f community of Iran, which is not recognized under the constitution 0F the Islamic Republic of that country. In 1983, the community was ordered by the government to disband all administrative structures governing
3
Bahé’u’lléh. Gkaningxfiam the Writing: afBa/ni ’u’fla’h (Wilmette. u; Bahi’f Publishing Trust. 1994), p. 7.41.
‘ ‘Abdu'l-Bahé, Stln‘tiom fiam the Writing: of Hbdu‘l—Ba/Id (Wilmette. IL: Bahai’I Publishing Trust, x997), p. 7.93.
’ Shoghi Effendi. I‘n’na'pk: afBa/ni'lAdmimkmtiamA Campibm'an (London: Bahé’l Publishing Trust. 1973), p. 95.
5’ Shoghi Effendi, cablcgmm written 24 September 1938, in Message: to
Amerira: Selected Letter: and Cablegmm: Addremd :0 tb: Babd 'l: anortly
America 1932—1946 (Wilmette, IL: Bahé'f Publishing Trust, [947), p. 15.
..
v
210 THE BAHA’f WORLD 2002—2003
its affairs. This was done and, in a final act before it disbanded, the National Spiritual Assembly wrote an open letter that was sent to many government officials. announcing “the suspension of the Bahé’l organizations throughout Iran in order to establish its good inten- tions and in conformity with its basic tenets concerning complete obedience to the instructions of the Government until the time when, God willing, the misunderstandings are eliminated and the realities are at last made manifest to the authorities."34
To date, the government’s prohibition against Bahai’i’ administra- tive institutions remains in efl‘ect, and they remain disbanded. The situation is admittedly very diflicult, but nevertheless, the Bahai'is have not become passive “victims" of the regime, in that they and their sister communities around the world continue to pursue all legal means—both within Iran itself and through international chan- nels such as the United Nations—to gain recognition under the constitution and to be granted their basic human and civil rights. Bahé’l's are convinced that their eFforts through these channels have mitigated the suffering of the Iranian community.
The second example is the Babe“ community of South Africa during the apartheid era, which was under constant surveillance by the security police because of its racially integrated member— ship and activities. In its testimony to the Truth and Reconciliation Commission in 1997, the community stated that its obedience to the previous government stemmed from the Bahé’i Faith’s explicit prohibition against involvement in partisan politics and opposition to government. It testified,
During the time when the previous Government prohibited integration within our communities, rather than divide into separate administrative structures for each population group, we opted to limit membership of the Bahé’f administration to the black adherents who were and remain in the majority of our membership and thereby placed the entire Bahé'f community under the stewardship of its black membership. Happily, such
" National Spiritual Assembly of the Bahé‘l's of Iran. open letter, 3 Sep- tember 1983, in Menage: aftb: Universal Hour: afjum'ce [963 to 1986. pp. 599—600.
WORLD WATCH 2n
policies were eased and we were able once again to have racially integrated administrative bodies which were and are democrati— cally elected by and from the entire body of adult adherents of the Baha’i Faith.’6
The statement concluded, “through strict adherence to the principles of our Prophet-Founder we have forged ahead and made a modest beginning toward realizing our vision of unity for South Africa by creating a model which can be studied and scrutinized and from which we believe valuable lessons can be learned."
Individual Bahé’l’s, when drafted for military service, have faced similar ethical dilemmas regarding the law of the land and their re- ligious convictions. While “Bahé‘i’s recognize the right and duty of governments to use force for the maintenance of law and order and to protect their people” and the Bahi’f Faith “draws a very definite distinction between the duty of an individual to forgive and ‘to be killed rather than to kill’ and the duty of society to uphold justice,” at the same time “Bahé’ls try to keep themselves out of the interne- cine conflicts that are raging among their fellow men and to avoid shedding blood in such struggles.”6 Therefore, since they must be obedient to their government, “Bahé’i’s do not on the grounds of religious conviction seek to abandon their obligations as citizens”; rather, they apply For legal noncombatant service, "regardless of the effect which that may have on their personal safety, convenience, the kind of activity they must discharge, or the rank to which they may be assigned.“7
While Baha’ls seek to obtain noncombatant status to avoid shed- ding blood, they are not absolute pacifists, as “[n]on-cooperation
3‘ For the Full text of the statement by the National Spiritual Assembly of the Baha’is of South Africa to the Truth and Reconcilation Commission, see "A Pathway to Pace and Justice," in The Bahd'I World 1997—98. pp. 229—32.
5" Universal House ofjusrice. letter to a National Spiritual Assembly, 9 Febru- ary 1967. in Liglm quuia'ance: A Babd’lkqfimm File, compiled by Helen Hornby. 3rd rev. ed. (New Delhi: Bahé'f Publishing Trust, 1994), no. 1354. p. 407.
’7 National Spiritual Assembly of the Baha’ls of the United States ofAmerica, Dmlaping Dim‘nm‘w Baht! '1 Communities (Evanston, IL: Office ofAssembly Development, 1998), section 19.8.
7.12 THE BAHA’I’ WORLD 2002—2003
is too passive a philosophy to become an effective way for social reconstruction.” The pacifist stance is viewed as “anti—social,” and “its exaltation of the individual conscience leads inevitably to disorder and chaos in society”:
Extreme pacifists are thus very close to the anarchists, in the sense that both of these groups lay an undue emphasis on the rights and merits of the individual. The Bahd’f conception ofsocial life is essentially based on the subordination of the individual will to that ofsociety. It neither suppresses the individual nor does it exalt him to the point of making him an anti—social creature, a menace to society. As in everything, it follows the “golden mean.” The only way that society can function is for the minority to follow the will of the majority.”
Bahé’fs are obedient to their government to the point where such obedience would force them to deny their core spiritual be— liefs. Shoghi Effendi has written that while Bahi’i’s “should obey the government under which they live, even at the risk of sacrificing all their administrative affairs and interests, they should under no circumstances suffer their inner religious beliefs and convictions to be violated and transgressed by any authority whatever.”"° To return to the examples of the two communities mentioned earlier: In South Africa, although operating within the restrictions imposed by the government, the Bahé’i’ community would not and did not aban— don its convictions regarding the unity of humankind; and in Iran, thousands of Bahé’fs have been imprisoned since the 1979 revolution and more than 200 have been executed for refusing to recant their Faith when demanded to do so by the authorities.
The Baha’i view of change as organic in nature provides a per- spective that allows the community to pursue it through established,
3“ Letter written on behalfofShoghi Effendi, 21 November 1935, cited by the Universal House ofjustice in a letter to an National Spiritual Assembly, 9 February 1967, in Light: aquidance, no. 1354, p. 407.
3" Ibid.
‘" Shoghi EFfendi, The Lig/Jt afDiuim’ Guidamt: T/Je Mmage: fiam the Guardian oft/at Bahd’l Faith to the Ba/ui ’{t afGermany and Austria, vol. I (Hofheim—Langenhain: Bahé'l—Verlag, 1982). p. 54.
WORLD WATCH 7.13
lawful channels. Just as a human being must traverse numerous stages from infancy to adulthood, the political world “cannot instantaneously evolve from the nadir of defectiveness to the zenith of tightness and perfection. Rather, qualified individuals must strive by day and by night, using all those means which will conduce to progress, until the government and the people develop along every line from day to day and even from moment to moment.”‘" —
Outside the adversarial “contest” paradigm, the Baha’i com- munity is devoting its energies to building communal patterns to encourage the development of “those means that will conduce to progress.” While still very young, the community is gaining valuable experience in nurturing “learning organizations” at the grassroots level and in empowering both individuals and institutions to walk their own path of development. The maturation of democratically elected Baha’f governing bodies at the local level and the progress ofa worldwide system for training human resources both offer encourag— ing evidence of those patterns within the Baha’i community itself.“2 But Bahé’l’s are also seeking ways to offer the insights and skills inspired by their beliefs to the wider community, notably through social and economic development efforts around the world.
The moral leadership training program initiated by the Baha’i— inspired Nut University in Santa Cruz, Bolivia, provides one such example. Working at the grassroots, Nut has trained schoolteachers in more than 400 rural communities as agents ofsocial change, and the program is now spreading to other countries and continents. Based on the Bahé’l teachings, it focuses on six defining characteristics:
consistent service’otiented leadership focused on the common good; active engagement in the process of individual and col- lective transformation; commitment to fulfilling the twin moral responsibilities of seaIching for the truth and applying truth in all aspects of one’s life; transcendence through vision—that en— tails connecting with eternal values and renewing a commitment
4‘ ‘Abdu’l—Bahé, The Secret ofDiw'ne Civilization (Wilmette, IL: Bahé’l Pub— lishing Trust, 1983), pp. 107—08.
"1 For more on the systematic training of human resources, see uCreating a Culture of Growth: The Institute Process in the Baha’i Community," T In Babd‘l World 2000—2001, pp. 19t—99.
214 THE BAHA'f WORLD 2002—2003
to service and the process of transformation; recognition of the essential nobility of each human being—a nobility that endows the individual with the potential to develop and exercise moral leadership in society; and the exercise of personal, interpersonal and societal leadership mpabilities.U
Once students have analyzed features ofprevailing leadership models. whether authoritarian, paternalistic. manipulative, “know—it—all," or democratic, they move on to explore capabilities essential to moral leadership.
The acquisition of such capabilities will enable individuals to serve effectively as members of institutions that promote social well— being and, in the words of Farzam Arbab,
to develop in decision-making bodies certain abilities required of them by their functions in society.... These include the abilities to maintain a clear perception of social reality and of the forces operating in it; to detect some of the opportunities offered by each historical moment; to properly assess the resources of the community; to consult freely and harmoniously as a body and with one's constituency; to realize that every decision has both a material and a spiritual dimension; to arrive at decisions; to win the confidence, respect, and genuine support of those affected by these decisions; to effectively use the energies and diverse talents of the available human resources; to integrate the diversity of aspirations and of activities of individuals and groups into one forward movement; to build and maintain unity; to uphold stan— dards of justice; and to implement decisions with an openness and flexibility that avoid all trace of dictatorial behavior.“
Nur's training is still relatively small in scope, but as more and more people become empowered with such knowledge, insights, andreapabilities, they become effective agents of social change that is grounded in moral principle. Schoolteachers in particular exert a
‘3 Taken From the description of Nut University on the Mona Foundation’s Web site. at http://www.monafoundation.otg/proiects/nur/profile.shtmL ‘4 Arhab, “Promoting a Discourse.” p. 7.16.
WORLD WATCH 2!;
strong influence on students and parents, and can thus assist in the transformation of their communities.
FUNDAEC. or Fundacién para la Aplicacién y Ensefianza de las Ciencias (Foundation for the Application and Teaching of the Sci- ences), in Colombia, is also concerned with issues surrounding moral education and leadership. It has turned its attention to establishing program in rural areas through which inhabitants—particutaxly youth—mn develop intellectual and spiritual capacities and attitudes in order to become “valuable human resources for social change."45 In its description of its objectives, FUNDAEC clearly states its views con- cerning the most effective way of fostering constructive change:
[R]ather than trying to reform the present social order, or pro mote violence in the name ofjustice and the irresistible march of history. the real task is to sarch for new options that render rural life meaningful in the context of a global human society, a society that would be radically different from what has taken shape during the past decades of material progress and spiritual bankruptcy. This swch, however, cannot be carried out from the planning offices of development agencies and ministries; it has to be part of the effort of rural populations themselves and those who choose to share in their destiny.... [Ht is necessary for each people to have the opportunity to examine its past and present. become aware of the strengths and shortcomings of its culture, and through highly participative processes, search for and walk a viable path of organic change.‘6
It is important. FUNDAEC says, not to romanticize the situation of these populations. Certainly negative enema] forces act upon them. including “agrarian policies of the country, the unjust distribution of land, the shortcomings of the market, the inappropriateness of available technology, the expansion of a harmful system ofedumtion and communication the content of which causes the disintegration of positive values and relationships.” But it is also important to
‘5 CELATER (Latin American Center for Rural Technology and Education). “What is FUNDAEC," sec. 11A 1, at httpzl/www.bcca.otg/services/Iists/noble- crcation/Fundacclhtml.
“’ Ibid.. sec. III A.
216 THE BAH“ WORLD 2002—2003
recognize that these populations also suEer from internal destruc— tive tendencies, whether “the disintegration of basic structures of family, of decision making, and of the socialization of knowledge,” “a rapid deterioration of such traditional values as responsibility, rectitude, and solidarity," or “negative characteristics such as oppres— sive attitudes towards women and certain patterns of Imdetship.” Neither romanticizing nor patronizing these populations, FUNDAEC aims to educate “new generations who rather than simple objects of oppression can become effective actors in an unavoidable process of profound social change.""‘7
In contrast to “idealistic materialism” who see “good" only in terms of material progress,” FUNDAEC seeks to integrate “material and spiritual elements into a knowledge system that would enable individuals and entire populations to contribute to the creation of a new social order." Analyzing the results of its work over almost 30 years, FUNDAEC has become convinced that “substantial and sustained improvement in the material conditions of the majority of human— ity can only be the fruit of a profound spiritual transformation, for it is within the human soul that social and moral disintegration is producing its most devastating effects.”9
This recognition that spiritual transformation needs to be the foundation oflasting material improvements is central to the Bath“ approach to social change. As the Universal House of Justice has expressed it, “Humanity’s crying need will not be met by a struggle among competing ambitions or by protest against one or another of the countless wrongs afflicting a desperate age. It calls, rather, for a fundamental change of consciousness.”W Such a change implies acceptance of the teaching at the heart of the Bahé'l Faith “that the time has come when each human being on earth must learn to accept responsibility for the welfare of the entire human family.“I
4* Ibid.
Universal House of Justice, letter to a National Spiritual Assembly. 19 No- vember 1974. in Message: of £17: Uniuemzl Ham: afjmtia 1963-1986, p. 2.83. CELATER. “What is FUNDAEC." sec. [11 C.
Universal House of Justice, letter to the believers gathered For the events marking the completion of the projects on Mount Carmel. 24 May zoot. “ Ibid.
WORLD WATCH 117
Awareness of that responsibility is also, fundamentally. the driving force behind protests such as those organized by the anti—globalization movement. But will the movement be able to sustain itself, over a long period and with a unified vision and sense of purpose, to address the challenges it has taken on? In one of her articles in Fm“: and Windows, Naomi Klein expresses her concern about the Future of the anti-globalization movement” in a rootless world and asks, "How can a movement be accountable when communities are Fraying?”51 She worries that in the mass demonstrations “the spectacle ofdisplaying a movement is getting confused with the less glamorous business of building one”53 and recognizes that “there are clearly moments to demonstrate, but perhaps more important, there are moments to build the connec- tions that make demonstration something more than theater.”54 This is an important insight, and the kinds of connections that are forged are extremely important. If those connections rely on temporary overlapping of individualistic agendas ot ephemeral political alliances, then they will be weak. If. on the other hand, they arise from a conviction that humanity is one, and that both individuals and institutions play reciprocal roles in serving human— ity. then they will endure. Fatzam Arbab describes the benefits of such reciprocity, writing,
[A] new understanding of power and authority has profound implications for the nature of community life and hence for culture. On the community tests the challenge of providing that environment where individual wills blend, where powers are multiplied and manifest themselves in collective action, where higher expressions of the human spirit can appear.”
Beyond d1e barricades, the matches, the violence, and the culture of contest. rich new possibilities open before humanity.
‘1 Klein. Fame: and Windows, p. 158.
5’ lbid., pl 159.
‘4 lbid., p. 158.
9‘ Atbab, "Promoting a Discourse.” p. 213.
