The Earth Charter is not timid. It is bold and confident in its call to shape a world that integrates justice,peace and environmental protection. But it hardly requires stating that we live in a time when many points of view are expressed with boldness. Loud,rancorous arguing has become a fact of daily public life. Nor is it just campaign posturing. Tom Brokaw,in his book Boom,suggests that we’re still fighting out the 1960’s with the same anger over a sharply divided national vision that came to the surface in that time. Maybe so. I confess that I wrestle constantly with this. Like most of us,I have deeply held political,social and spiritual convictions. And being more than a little judgmental,I struggle mightily to understand how to be reconciled with passionate belief that I feel is dangerously wrong – while knowing that those with whom I so fervently disagree hold onto their beliefs as strongly as I do and that they are just as frightened by what I believe. So is it possible to stand unwavering for our deeply held convictions at the same time that we honor contrary belief,or,if that’s impossible,to honor the contrary believer? The shootings that wounded Gabrielle Giffords and killed six others jarred us awake to ask whether the absence of public civility gives rise to extreme violence. Now a year later,as public courtesy continues to suffer,it’s not clear that we’ve learned very much. But the Earth Charter raises civility to a higher level than simple politeness. Civility requires honestly seeking merit in the contrary point of view and believing that the other person also has a contribution to make. From The Way Forward… Life often involves tensions between important values. This can mean difficult choices. However,we must find ways to harmonize diversity with unity,the exercise of freedom with the common good,short-term objectives with long-term goals. Every individual,family,organization,and community has a vital role to play. For our children’s children, Jerry King Last week Governor Daniels signed House Enrolled Act 1001,dubbed “Employee’s Right to Work,” making Indiana the first state in over 10 years,the first “rust belt” state ever and the 23rd state in the nation to enact such legislation. The law prohibits requiring,as a condition of employment,that a person be a member of or pay dues,fees,or other charges to a labor organization. Without question,it was the most contentious legislation in recent memory,dominating two sessions and causing hundreds of opponents to descend on the Statehouse and dozens of legislators to avoid the Statehouse in an effort to prevent passage. This Monday Memo is not about the merits of this legislation,however,but rather considers its name. George Orwell wrote that “Political language is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable.” This cynical quote begins an article entitled “A bill’s name is part of the game,” published in June 2011 in Medill Reports. The author makes the point that a bill’s title is extremely powerful because it affects perception of a bill and thus its chance of passage. Unfortunately,rather than create a title to provide an accurate description of a bill’s purpose or contents,legislators sometimes strategically concoct a title designed to evoke emotion,obfuscate or even deceive the public,often serving the purpose of putting opponents on the defensive,as well. We can think of several examples of this tactic in recent history —how about the “Patriot Act”? Governor Daniels was fairly forthcoming explaining his change of heart in supporting this legislation. This is about unions —and the Governor was persuaded that passage was necessary to attract certain businesses – some that wouldn’t even consider locating in Indiana unless we have this law. Whether you agree or disagree with the Governor’s premise or with his public policy position,at least he was candid (even if only implicitly) in acknowledging the bill’s purpose – weaken unions to attract business. But the same cannot be said for the sponsors of the bill who named it,or other legislators and special interest groups who championed it. In fact,if you didn’t read the bill but only considered its title,many of the TV and radio ads that saturated the airwaves and the rhetoric of those who supported it,you would believe that the sole purpose of the legislation was to protect Indiana workers – a noble goal no reasonable person could oppose. Among other things,Principle 13 of the Earth Charter calls for us to “provide transparency and accountability in governance.” Transparency implies clarity,openness,honesty and accountability. The inherent deception manifested in naming this contentious and divisive legislation “Employee’s Right to Work” is contrary to this principle,an affront to those who have legitimate objections and a slight to the public’s intelligence. We deserve better. For our children’s children, Rosemary Spalding About the time that we were introducing the Earth Charter to Indianapolis,I asked a friend who is well informed about all things environmental if he had heard of the Earth Charter yet. He said,“Yeah,they’re those folks sailing along at 30,000 feet,aren’t they?” Well,true,the Earth Charter is pretty “big picture” and high-minded. In fact,as with any framework of principles,it’s easy to let Charter-talk slip into platitudes,and the adjective that often precedes platitudes is “meaningless.” Those who spend a lot of time with the Charter,however,find it anything but meaningless,although it sometimes takes careful thinking to see how the Charter bears on the important concerns of the day. One might find guidance relevant to the Keystone pipeline,the latitude of redevelopment commissions,fair wages and economic opportunity,for instance. But one might not find anything that speaks directly to “Right to Work,” smoke free air,charter schools – or how to survive Super Bowl weekend. But that doesn’t mean that the Charter is useless for those questions. If I strongly believe that we must. “Promote social and economic justice,enabling all to achieve a secure and meaningful livelihood that is ecologically responsible (principle 3b),or that we must “Empower every human being with the education and resources to secure a sustainable livelihood… (9b),” do those values help me sort out competing arguments about right to work? If I believe that we must “Honor and support the young people of our communities,enabling them to fulfill their essential role in creating sustainable societies (12c).” or that we must “Provide all,especially children and youth,with educational opportunities that empower them to contribute actively to sustainable development (14a),does that in any measure lead me to understand better what I hope about the future of public schools? If I believe that we must “Affirm that with increased freedom,knowledge,and power comes increased responsibility to promote the common good (2b),” does that shed light on the debate about smokefree air? The Charter doesn’t attempt to provide prescriptive solutions for complicated public questions,but it does offer a framework that,with thoughtfulness,can help us see our way through important and knotty issues of our time. For our children’s children, Jerry King Anita’s passing in mid-December brought an outpouring of cards,phone calls,food,e-mails,prayers,and offers of assistance. All these were tributes to her amazing life and an illustration of the web of life (community) in action. I am deeply grateful for your condolences and your notes about how she touched so many lives. Her passing is also a reminder to me of this generation’s responsibility to “Transmit to future generation’s values,traditions,and institutions that support the long-term flourishing of Earth’s human and ecological communities.” (Principle #4b of the Charter) In that regard I found a letter to our grandson,Alex,written around Christmas 2010. I include it in this Monday Memo as one example of how each of us can “transmit.” “The times we live in are both perilous and promising. The promising part is what I hope and dream for you:a world with clean air,good and sufficient water for all,safe streets,nutritious food,healthy minds and bodies,enough money for basics,smiling elders,fulfilling work,mutual respect,life-long learning,quality homes,healthy ecosystems,and strong communities. The perilous part is the reverse of all these things which is quite possible in whole or in part. If the perilous part prevails I hope for you the ability to be resilient,to play the cards you are dealt with the courage of your grandmother,Anita,and to be creative in finding ways to be useful and happy in the midst of hard circumstances. The reason your grandmother and I do what we do in every way we can is to ensure that your generation and those after you will be able to enjoy the promising part.” For our children’s children, John Gibson Given all the campaign rhetoric and with the Indiana General Assembly now in session,there’s plenty of evidence of the deep divisions that separate us over political and economic philosophy and social and moral issues. In fact,if we take media reports at face value,we’d conclude that we’re hopelessly divided,180 degrees and a universe apart. In spite of that,however,I still believe that there are important core values that unify us and that the loud voices on talk radio,from people seeking votes and in ranting letters to the editor do not really speak for most of us. Most of us recognize bombast from the right or left for what it is. Even so,I believe that there’s an important place for language that helps us recognize and express that which we hold in common. In fact,it’s the Earth Charter’s unique place in public life to provide that compass with which we can hope to find common ground. Here are five statements that grow straight out of the Charter. Not every person will necessarily agree with each one,but I believe they are starting points for agreement that most people can come around. Don’t most of us agree that: - Our first responsibility is to respect and protect the earth and life on earth
- Social and economic justice,human dignity,equity and opportunity are necessary components of caring for life on earth
- Full access to the systems and decisions of government is an essential foundation of society. Government is not something outside of ourselves;we are our own government.
- Violence destroys and dehumanizes;a mature society relies on and nurtures peace
- We are fully inter-dependent interpersonally,across cultures,globally and with the natural world.
Those principles won’t solve the complex issues before us,but they might help us discover that we have more in common than we thought. For our children’s children, Jerry King | Join Us!You are invited to become a member of Earth Charter Indiana by endorsing its aim to promote a just,peaceful and sustainable way of living in Indiana. MEMBERSHIP LEVELS:- Guardian $35 - $99
- Earthhealer $100 - $249
- Peacekeeper $250 - $499
- Visionary $500 or more
Donate! Donate online
through PayPal orMail a check to: Earth Charter Indiana
3535 Kessler Boulevard,
North Drive
Indianapolis,IN 46222 Become a SponsorIf you or your organization is interested in sponsoring one of our upcoming events,please contact John Gibson |