Justice

Nourishing a Global Ethic of Justice

By Talking Cents / 22 June 2007

Much of the heat and smoke generated in the recent religious diversity debate focussed on whether New Zealand should be named as a Christian nation. But that discussion, based on a rather limited view of our history, is less important than other issues linked to religious diversity – issues arising from the effects of market-led globalisation and the role of religion in seeking peace and prosperity for the global community.

Over the last few years, I have followed the contributions of Malaysian Muslim scholar and human rights activist, Chandra Muzaffar. A 2006 paper drawing together his ideas “in order to construct an interfaith vision of the unity of humanity” is pertinent to the current debate. (“Chandra Muzaffar’s Islamic Critique of Globalisation” by David L Johnson; Centre for Dialogue Working Papers Series 2006, No 3).

A consensus of Muslim thinking on current trends in global economic and political systems, to which Chandra would largely subscribe, finds that “the international system is heavily inclined to favour the industrialised West [which] imposes severe strains on the developing world”, in particular on Muslims. They represent a fifth of the world’s population but “account for less than 5% of the world’s gross domestic product, despite owning 54% of the world’s oil revenues. More than 600 million of the world’s Muslim population live below the poverty line.”

Chandra confronts issues arising from this situation as activist, academic and founder of the International Movement for a Just World (JUST), “ an agency seeking to promote human dignity and social justice in the global arena.” His writings itemise several negative impacts of the New World Order, proclaimed by US President George H.W. Bush following the Gulf War of 1991, on:
• The Global Economy: from 1969 to 1989 the richest 20% increased their share of GNP from 70.2% to 82.7% while the poorest 20%’s share decreased from 2.3 to 1.4%, resulting in 1 billion living in absolute poverty, 1 billion in illiteracy and one and a half billion without primary health care. External debt leads to the death of 650,000 children per year.
• Global Politics: the UN general assembly, set up to give a voice to poorer countries, is dominated by the Security Council, empowered by the veto of permanent members from the rich North and particularly, the interests of the world’s only superpower. Little freedom of choice remains for lesser UN members in the post Cold-War world.
• Global Military Power: the 1991 Iraq war was intended to be a “dramatic demonstration of military hardware and muscle” to those who might oppose the US-proclaimed “New World Order”.
• Global Media Power: 90% of foreign news on the world’s print media is controlled by four North-based agencies, which, together with the dominance of television networks like CNN, gives little space for serious criticism of US and Western policies of dominance.
• Global Culture: “through the mass media, especially the electronic media, Western foods, Western fashions, Western music and Western movies have been popularised to such an extent that they have … displaced indigenous cultural forms and practices.” (Former US General Ramsay Clark, in “War Crimes: a Report on US War Crimes Against the Iraqi People” 1992).
• Communication and humanity: …“by focussing on civil and political human rights violations exclusively, the mainstream media keeps hidden multiple violations of economic and social violations by the North.”

In seeking to counterbalance this western dominance, Chandra proposes more South-South cooperation, citing the collaboration among NGOs and Southern governments which surmounted US “foot-dragging” on environmental issues and delivered the Kyoto Agreement. There is also promise in the close cooperation among progressive NGOs in North and South exhibited at gatherings like the annual World Social Forums. Citizens’ groups, acting on a global scale, says Chandra, have shown a clear capacity for bringing about fairer global and economic policies through pressure on governments and dominant world agencies such as the World Trade Organisation.

Among specific issues raised by Chandra in his writings are “white racism” (“The yawning chasm between haves and have-nots is also between white-skinned people and dark-skinned people”) and “human rights and dignity”. In relation to the latter, he makes seven points relative to human rights and Western predominance in his essay, “Towards Human Dignity”:
• Has creative individuality degenerated into a vulgar individualism threatening the very fabric of community?
• Has individual freedom become the be-all and end-all? What of the common good?
• In the West, freedom is linked to rights and de-linked from responsibility.
• Western human rights emphasises civil and political rights and down-plays economic, social and cultural rights.
• Human rights norms are applied only to the nation-state and thus overlook the violations committed by global actors such as the International Monetary Fund (IMF), World Bank, Security Council and transnational corporations.

• Without a spiritual and moral framework, endowing human endeavour with meaning and purpose, coherence and unity, emphasis on human rights per se leads to moral chaos and confusion.
• Human rights, if divorced from questions about the nature of the human person, its dignity and purpose, risks being an incoherent discourse.

At the core of all Chandra’s work is a “spiritual-moral vision of the universe and of human kind as God’s trustees on earth”, founded on his perception of themes borrowed from various religions. He names this an “ethic of solidarity for our globalised world.” Major challenges to this ethic come from: the growing gap between rich and poor, political and religious repression, ethnic conflict, environmental degradation and drug trading and abuse. These can be overcome only by a renewed spiritual vision of a human being accountable “to universal spiritual values such as love, compassion, justice, freedom, integrity, dignity and so on.” Such values must be recovered from within the religious traditions of all peoples if we are to achieve a more humane, caring and just international society.

Chandra’s commentaries are a clear indication of the very real contribution interfaith dialogue can make to righting “the state of disunity and decadence” created by Western global domination on the one hand and an often violent reaction from its victims (especially Muslim) on the other. All religious communities would do well to engage in what he calls “honest self-introspection”, a process of seeking those commonalities within all our faiths which call us all to the most lofty values and the common good.

Interfaith dialogue can expose us to the clear analysis and practical solutions needed if the Christian goal of the fullness of life for all is to be more than a remote hope. It would be a great pity if we become distracted by trivial argument over “who is the greatest” or who was here first.

Kevin McBride