Baha'i Perspectives

nadim July 16th, 2008

Picture a soccer game with 22 players and no referee. I’m not talking about the lazy Saturday afternoon kick-about with a bunch of friends and bags in place of goals — I’m talking highly-competitive, international football. How exactly would that work out we may ask ourselves?

Now picture this scenario: we have one young player on the team, going by the name of Zim, who has been committing fouls persistently throughout the game (in full view of everyone). This carries on for a while, everyone sees it but feels powerless to do anything because, well, none of them are referees, nor do they consider it their job to intervene.

Eventually it goes too far, Zim commits one foul too many and everything boils over. Two of the older players, call them Britain and the United States, charge up to Zim and start yelling and gesticulating. “Get your act together and play by the rules!” they shout, to which Zim impetuously shrugs his shoulders and responds: “Who are you to tell me what to do? I’ve seen the two of you committing plenty of fouls yourselves. Besides, it’s no secret that both of you have fouled me in the past.”

Along come two more of the senior players — China and Russia — and they join in the fray: “Leave him alone,” they say, “It’s not our job to sort this situation out, nor has he fouled any of us, so basically we have nothing to gain from intervening!” They argue back and forth on this theme for a while, neither party giving an inch, until eventually they turn to Zim’s best friend hoping that maybe he can do something about it.

And, as if things weren’t divided enough, South Africa has worked out his own strategy: “Don’t worry, I’m talking to him. All he needs is a bit of encouragement. I hope that at some point he will play by the rules, but in the meantime we’ll just have to tolerate him.” So, after wasting the whole afternoon arguing, they carry on playing with nothing resolved.

Doesn’t it seem obvious at this point that a referee is needed?

The question of Zimbabwe is merely the latest in a whole catalog of decision-making failures at the international level, and as people scratch their heads for answers yet again, one wonders when the penny will finally drop. Will it require another major crisis, on the scale of a world war, for leaders to realize that their priorities are worn and outdated? That the days of selfish nationalism, of excessive patriotism, of stubbornly clinging to the perceived good of one’s own nation instead of sincerely caring for the good of the whole, are well and truly over. Well over a century ago, Baha’u'llah stated:

The well-being of mankind, its peace and security, are unattainable unless and until its unity is firmly established.

And with every passing crisis, with the increasing complexity of modern-day issues, the truth of these words becomes more and more evident. What’s more, (and I apologize for using the football analogy again), it becomes increasingly apparent that the game of politics can’t keep being played without, at the very least, a base set of laws that all will adhere to. Nor can it continue to be played without a referee who has everyone’s full backing, not only to make decisions, but more importantly to ACT on those decisions. Although, perhaps “referee” is the wrong term to use here (after all, history has repeatedly demonstrated how excessive centralization has a tendency to promote despotism). Anyone who has watched a game of football knows how frustrating it can be when the ref makes one (unchallengeable) decision and video replays confirm he got it totally wrong! A “refereeing panel”, or world parliament backed by a formidable international force, is more like the answer, according to the Baha’i Writings.

The Baha’i International Community, in a fascinating document entitled “Turning Point For All Nations“, broadly surveys the political landscape in the light of past and present happenings. In addition, the document offers several compelling suggestions on how to advance towards the goal of lasting peace. For example, in addressing the question of which of the myriad political systems to choose as a model for world governance, they write the following:

Furthermore, in devising a specific framework for the future international order, leaders should survey a broad range of approaches to governance. Rather than being modeled after any single one of the recognized systems of government, the solution may embody, reconcile and assimilate within its framework such wholesome elements as are to be found in each one of them.

For example, one of the time-tested models of governance that may accommodate the world’s diversity within a unified framework is the federal system. Federalism has proved effective in decentralizing authority and decision-making in large, complex, and heterogeneous states, while maintaining a degree of overall unity and stability. Another model worth examining is the commonwealth, which at the global level would place the interest of the whole ahead of the interest of any individual nation.

Extraordinary care must be taken in designing the architecture of the international order so that it does not over time degenerate into any form of despotism, of oligarchy, or of demagogy corrupting the life and machinery of the constituent political institutions.

So federalism has proven it’s effectiveness in uniting diverse groups within a flexible framework, and is a possibility, as is the idea of a world commonwealth. Well, what next? The temptation exists to simply file these thoughts away and worry about the future when it happens, playing the role of passive observer. Wrong approach. In the atomic age it is clearly dangerous to ignore such questions for too long. What the world desperately needs right now is a critical mass of people who share the same vision of unity — and who will strive their utmost to promote it.

While we believe this formulation of a world government is at once the ultimate safeguard and the inevitable destiny of humankind, we do recognize that it represents a long-term picture of a global society. Given the pressing nature of the current state of affairs, the world requires bold, practical and actionable strategies that go beyond inspiring visions of the future. Nevertheless, by focusing on a compelling concept, a clear and consistent direction for evolutionary change emerges from the mire of contradictory views and doctrines.

(Baha’i International Community, 1995 Oct, Turning Point For All Nations)

Tags: justice, politics, unity

• Baha'i Concepts , News & Current Affairs
• Comments(2)

geoffrey November 3rd, 2009

Photograph by Nathan Wolfe

There is a softness that often times creeps in when sitting silently. The despondent and yet comforting rain falling outside lends itself to a certain mood. OK. Take a breath. Close your eyes.

The peal of the lightning and thunder somewhere up above me keeps playing on my mind. It settles in. Happiness settles in. And yet this quiet but incessant voice speaks to me – “what do you know of hardship, of persecution, of oppression?” And then a chain reaction is set off and I ask myself — how do I even suppose to know empathy? How do we communicate happiness as an actual remedy for the harshness and brutality that we see in the world? Does a focus on happiness and contentment simply distract us from seeking and attaining justice?

Here are two ideas which help shape my next series of thoughts:

- Baha’is work for the betterment of the world, and
– The pivotal belief in the oneness of all mankind directs our efforts.

The Baha’i Faith is not simply concerned with survival, as any emerging consciousness or force in the world often has to come to terms with. Its purpose is not to generate an enclosed community composed of a core of devoted adherents. It seeks to be in constant motion, ever inviting all to participate in building the unity of the world. This sense of purpose necessarily directs a certain mindset that must not be divided.

I met a Hindu man recently who spoke of how seemingly in the West there exists this dichotomy between the heart and the mind; and that success in this plane of reality is bent upon one thing — the integration of being and doing. Then, perhaps to be content or happy does not negate striving for justice. We are not so limited in our emotional and spiritual capacity to only exist in one state at a time. The challenge is to bring a sense of unity to our efforts that spans across and enfolds all manifestations of the human experience. We must seek a mindset built upon coherence. When the fundamental ideas that act on or shape our identity presuppose each other, so that in isolation they would be meaningless, that is coherence.

When reflecting on the interaction between happiness and justice, understanding that they are interrelated and quite deeply connected is integral to their application. There are, of course, many types of happiness or things that bring us joy in this world. Our appreciation of those things is often related to our present state of orientation, and there is much in this world that makes itself available for personal pleasure. At this point, I think we have to review in what way we are defining happiness. True joy and true happiness (as described in the Baha’i Writings) is what comes from a deep and abiding sense of purpose. In fact, Baha’u’llah has defined true well being in the world as this: “Human life was created for happiness and not for sorrow”.

Happiness is in fact a spiritual concept. Abdu’l-Baha has affirmed this when he wrote that “spiritual happiness is the true basis of the life of man”. It is related to the spiritual transformation of both the individual and the collective society. It acts as a force for attraction. It is a super-sensuous phenomenon, ultimately transcending this physical reality, but nevertheless manifests itself, in its true form, as unity.

Its true aim, by serving as a foundation for a collective consciousness built upon the purpose of individual and collective spiritual development, is for the unification of mankind. Thus, it is an inherent quality in the construction and attainment of human relationships of all kinds, be they interpersonal or institutional.

When considering how one works for the betterment of the world, justice is a fixed component of that effort. Rather than seeking a utilitarian view that happiness, on a grander scale, should only be sought for the greatest number of people, we should understand justice as that which is the strongest foundation for the securing of happiness of all. Baha’u’llah has written that perhaps the primary purpose of government is that, through justice, contentment must be secured for all its citizens. He has also written that “justice is the appearance of unity amongst men.”

In this we can surmise that perhaps through the attainment of spiritual happiness, unity is born. Justice, which in one sense can be described as the application of reward and punishment and also as the power of discernment, is the indomitable tool with which we both continue our spiritual search but also safeguard our unity and happiness.

There is much that clouds our ability to attain happiness in this world — but working to cut through all that, to focus on principle, value, and the spiritual qualities inherent in everything, we can access a force and power which will help direct the rehabilitation of our surroundings.

Tags: coherence, happiness, justice, unity

• Baha'i Concepts , Principles in Action
• Comments(1)

nadim December 7th, 2008

A few months back, in a piece discussing crop-based biofuels, I mentioned the correlation between the increased production of these petroleum alternatives and a spike in global food prices. At the time, some experts said they had solid evidence that a significant percentage of the increase was due to biofuel production. Naturally, biofuel advocates pointed to contrasting statistics and quite a debate ensued.

Well as it turns out, there’s more to the story.

Since the article was written we’ve seen the sub-prime mortgage crisis and feared credit crunch hit the light of day. And while companies are facing foreclosure or downsizing, and workers face the very real prospect of retrenchment, an odd thing has happened. Average food prices have actually gone down instead of up — the price of corn in particular – this without any real policy shifts in major biofuel-producing nations. Confusion reigns. The experts revise their figures and it turns out that while the correlation between the two factors still exists, it isn’t as great as previously estimated. So why have prices dropped?

Surprise surprise, all these factors are interconnected. As major investors and investing firms watched the housing bubble pop — so the explanation goes — they looked for other avenues to make a profit. With higher oil prices and a greater push to convert food crops to biofuels, it seemed a safe bet to assume that food prices would rise as a result (since there would be less of it). The frenzied investments around this assumption led to what is known as a speculative bubble, where the market value of a resource greatly exceeds its intrinsic value. Commodity prices rose dramatically, and kept on rising, until a point where it got ridiculous and the bubble burst, along with all the other speculative bubbles.

Without fail, this “bubble and pop” cycle has caused untold misery for the world’s poor. And while we would like to imagine that the worst is over, this NY times article predicts prices to rise again next year. So the question arises: is it acceptable for a handful of speculators, who are sitting on masses of wealth, to wreak havoc on the lives of millions of people living “downstream”?

Stephen Pearlstein, business columnist for the Washington Post, described the situation as it was happening:

this bubble is causing economic discomfort for households and businesses around the world, and misery for hundreds of millions of hungry people who suddenly cannot afford a bowl of rice or scrap of meat… the global food crisis has provided a grim reminder that the global economic ecosystem has become so interdependent that a drought in Australia, a tax credit in the United States, French farm subsidies and export controls in India can wind up forcing a desperate African farmer to eat his seed corn.

Shad Rowe, a Dallas money manager, remarked that the situation raises the bigger question of “whether people in a complex society ought to be allowed to make bets that affect other people and that have nothing to do with them.“

The insanity of 2008 has forced world leaders to finally sit up and take notice. At last month’s G-20 Summit aimed at combatting the financial situation, world leaders agreed “to a far-reaching action plan that, over the next 4 1/2 months, would begin to reshape international financial institutions and reform worldwide regulatory and accounting rules.” The plan included a joint statement:

We are determined to enhance our cooperation and work together to restore global growth and achieve needed reforms in the world’s financial systems.

Sounds good – and time will tell if the proposed measures lead to meaningful results. But then, given our chequered history with international reform, should there be any cause for optimism? Perhaps, perhaps not.

Let us, for a moment, dust off our magnifying glasses and take a closer look at the phrases “cooperation” and “work together”. Have our past actions always done them justice? What does it really imply when a determined group of previously separate entities work together in unity to fix a problem? Part of the answer lies in this quote. It starts by describing what unity is not, followed by what it is, and what tremendous effects it has had throughout history:

Unity is not… merely a condition resulting from a sense of mutual goodwill and common purpose, however profound and sincerely held such sentiments may be, any more than an organism is a product of some fortuitous and amorphous association of various elements. Unity is a phenomenon of creative power, whose existence becomes apparent through the effects that collective action produces and whose absence is betrayed by the impotence of such efforts. However handicapped it often has been by ignorance and perversity, this force has been the primary influence driving the advancement of civilization, generating legal codes, social and political institutions, artistic works, technological achievements without end, moral breakthroughs, material prosperity, and long periods of public peace whose afterglow lived in the memories of subsequent generations as imagined “golden ages”

(Century of Light, p. 41)

For a creative power which is essential to no less a cause than the advancement of civilization, isn’t it perplexing that the concept of unity receives no real thought or attention at any of these world showcases? Not a mere passing mention or goodwill gesture, but a profound grasp of what it is, what its implications are, and how to set about reconciling the complex misunderstandings and scattered beliefs that presently exist among nations.

For many, I suspect, achieving unity is seen as being incompatible with nationalistic priorities. Or perhaps it is dismissed as a pie-in-the-sky notion, too abstract and loosely-defined. Nothing at all like those big bad economic theories with the graphs and the formulas that make your head spin…right? Well, not really.

How’s this for a concise definition of what unity is all about:

For unity to exist among human beings — at even the simplest level — two fundamental conditions must pertain.
Those involved must first of all be in some agreement about the nature of reality as it affects their relationships with one another and with the phenomenal world.
They must, secondly, give assent to some recognized and authoritative means by which decisions will be taken that affect their association with one another and that determine their collective goals.

(Century of Light, p. 40)

A solid, scientific definition of unity, “at even the simplest level”. For a practical example of what this means, look here.

No guesswork required.

And herein lies the great paradox surrounding our scientific markets: for what is speculation, if nothing more than an educated guess?

Tags: economics, financial crisis, food, fuel, unity

• General Interest , News & Current Affairs , Society
• Comments(2)