Gatherings | Seminars & Other Special Projects | NGO/UN Activities
Activities - NGO/UN Activities
Statement of the Triglav Circle by Barbara Baudot, Coordinator
February 13, 2002
Mme
Chairman, distinguished delegates and colleagues
[Note:
These remarks are indicative of the type of discourse that takes
place at a gathering and do not necessarily reflect the views of
all the members of the Circle.]
Thank you for
this opportunity to make a statement on behalf of the Triglav
Circle. This association was created after the World Summit in
Copenhagen by some of the participants in the Seminar on Ethical
and Spiritual Dimensions of Social Progress, organized by the
United Nations Secretariat and which took place in Bled
Slovenia, October 1994.
The
purpose of the Circle is to explore the implications of the
statement included in the Copenhagen Declaration that “
societies must respond more effectively to the material and
spiritual needs of individuals, their families and the
communities in which they live.
The
Circle is a groupe de reflexion, bringing together individuals
from different parts of the world and different walks of life,
who share a sense of the urgent need for a wider and deeper
consciousness of moral and spiritual values as they apply to the
functioning of societies. Our discussions are aimed to enrich
the public discourse on economic growth, the environment, and
sustainable social progress and in so doing to foster a core
message of the Copenhagen Declaration on Social Development. We
gather 2 to 3 times a year and disseminate our discussions in
printed reports and on our web site, www.triglavcircleonline.org.
In
addressing the question of the integration of the economic and
social aspects of development I will illustrate the type of
discourse we undertake. My remarks in this instance reflect deep
concern for the type of model, which is conveyed in the post
modern industrial society.
That the
liberal foundation of the free market theory is Adam Smith’s
famous metaphor of the invisible hand is well known to the
educated public. Less readily acknowledged is that Smith
intended the invisible hand to be a tool with a service to
perform --that is to bring about the common good.
Today in
the post-industrial society, the would-be paradigm for the
global village, that hand has a logic and a meaning of its own.
Divorced from its social project, it has reached out to
virtually absorb its purpose, the common good of mankind.
Thus to
ask the question should the economic and social sectors be
integrated is like asking whether one should reinforce the
stable door after the horses have run out and are far gone.
This is certainly true in developed societies where there is
increasing, unattended poverty.
While the
question of integration may be relevant to developing countries
seeking the strengthening of their social sectors, for example
education and health, one should be forewarned that where
multinationals are firm in the saddle, the social is absorbed in
the economic.
There are many reasons why a corporate or economic lead approach to
progress can create a great deal of malaise in society.
Fundamental is the fact that the individual’s non-material
resources, such as the capacity to attain meaning, love and
wisdom essential to coping well with life’s hardships --
including grief, fear and pain -- cannot characteristically be
nurtured by economic progress predicated on profit seeking, even
though the later contributes to a materially comfortable
existence.
A careful
reading of the Wealth of Nations would certainly give pause to
consider whether “the invisible hand” of the market was all that
Adam Smith considered necessary for the well being of humanity.
Although he railed against an economy under state control and
governed according to mercantile beliefs, he suggested there was
great cause for governments to protect individuals and societies
from the negative effects of modern economic forces.
Smith
considered the market place -- the dynamics of which were the
antithesis of moral sentiments -- incapable of overcoming the
impoverishment of the human intellect and spirit resulting from
uncontrolled technological advance.
For Adam
Smith, the most serious implications of the modern market would
be the erosion of imagination, courage, and control over one’s
environment. Thus, he argued that governments must protect
society from the inevitable decline in the art of living and the
widespread degeneracy, vacuity, and ignorance to which these
advances would otherwise lead.
Today, the dominance of unleashed capitalism in the
globalization process poses an even greater threat to the nobler
ends of life, --the Good, the beautiful, and the noble--than in
Smith’s time. It is the relentless pursuit of economic
progress, in an endless spiral of increasing material needs that
is spreading to many parts of the world. These cannot meet
social needs.
There are growing misgivings about this form of
globalization and the quality of life it generates.
Thus, intellectual and other non material factors although
not amenable to quantifiable measurement must figure in a
comprehensive assessment of society’s progress in its search for
higher and more humane living standards.
Even the very well being of democracy and the achievement of
political and economic rights depend on maintaining a high level
of mental and spiritual life.
So far, however, few governments appear in a position to
adopt countervailing policies giving priority to the art of
living over economic interests. The revitalization of the
intellect and the spirit of humanity rarely if ever appear on
their agendas.
The demonstrations now regularly surrounding the meetings of
the World Trade Organization, the Bretton Woods institutions,
and the Group of Seven, together with evidence of a widespread
decline of the civic interest in normal political life are
symptomatic of this failing in public policy.
It seems that society has not taken seriously Smith’s
message concerning the need for protecting humanity from the
mental impoverishment exacerbated by the increasing inroads of
economic rationality in all spheres of life and society.
This phenomenon is reflected in losses in the variety and
nature of social institutions and communities that traditionally
recognized the importance of the human spirit and the rights of
individuals to live with security and to die in dignity. In
cadence with the spread of global capitalism the naturally
authoritarian institutions embracing production, trade, and
money have all but taken over the other major social
institutions including governments, religious centers, schools,
health care organizations, and the military.
If not harnessed, the political imposition or contagiousness
of market values, including self-interest and profit, will
ultimately render these nurturing and protecting institutions
either subservient to the market or obsolete. The paradigm of
the some future mono-institutionalized society is the “market
society” wherein all human relations are reified in cold,
commercial transactions.
To protect or to restore a grander and noble sense of “the
human spirit” to modern societies without attempting to push
back the clock or to hold back the tides of change is a
challenge for individuals and societies in the 21st century. “To do so material progress must be balanced by
attention to humanity’s moral and spiritual condition. This
equilibrium requires considerable humility.
The challenge is to generate an acceptable and sustainable
vision of economic, social and scientific progress, shepherded
by beliefs that may defy rational calculation, but able to
generate an inexorable advance toward a higher status of
knowledge, culture, and moral estate. Some guidance for meeting
this challenge can be derived from confronting the economic,
political and technological forces that have worked against a
holistic vision of progress because of general failure to keep
part of social and cultural life insulated from the demands of
technology and the exigencies of the market.
Thank you, Madame Chairman
|
