Human Rights, duty of word

The full exercise of human rights will not be achieved until human beings can express themselves freely, until their voices are heard and heeded by those who exercise power in their names and on their behalf. It’s not by chance that in the UNESCO Constitution the “free flow of ideas by word and image” appears in the same article (Article I) in which education is defined as the means for achieving the supreme gift of the human species, freedom, together with its essential companion, responsibility. “Free and responsible”.

Centuries ago, a few people who were ahead of their age underscored the need to express opinions in order to live “humanly”. Quevedo’s poem is famous in that regard: “I shall not remain silent, despite your advising silence or threatening fear / with a finger touching lips or brow. / Can’t there be at least one valiant spirit? / Must we always feel what we say? / Are we never to say what we feel?”

But the majority of citizens continued to be silent subjects, passive spectators, mute and terrified witnesses of the events around them. And gave up their lives without a word.

I have been impressed by the capacity of several leaders to attempt to interpret unspoken and repressed voices and cries: “Let me listen to that deafening silence”, said President François Mitterrand.

In 1969, Professor José Luis Aranguren wrote “Intellectuals give voices to some as their spokesmen, and with their own voices they attempt to awaken the voices of others, those who are alienated and manipulated, those who in the words of Ortega aren’t conscious of their own existence which, as I have said, isn’t only their own, but rather is always entwined with the existence of all others”.

“We still have words”… repeated Fernando Buesa in the plenary sessions of the General Assembly of Alava (1983-1989). A victim of ETA, the Foundation that bears his name perpetuates his shining memory under the title “The Value of Words”. The assassins put an end to his physical existence, but we certainly have, and will always have words, his words.

Duty o word, of speakin up, to give full effect to human rights. For the transition from a culture of imposition, violence and domination to a culture of dialogue, conciliation, alliance and peace. In inspired verses, Luis García Montero has reflected the dawning of a new era of understanding and conflict resolution through dialogue: “Come to me, / in the eyes of that child who raises his hand / and asks to be heard, / and who simply places his trust in words…”.

As we grow older we tend to remain silent instead of learning to be less inhibited and to openly express what we think.

Years ago I read that “parents teach their little children to speak; and once they have grown, children teach their parents to remain silent”.

The silence of the peoples strengthens absolute power, the arbitrary acts of government leaders, and the obedient behavior of parliamentary representatives who ignore the meaning of “parlare”, who tow the party line and follow orders without any objection.

“In the times in which we live,” wrote Manuel Cruz recently in “El País”, “no one should remain silent concerning matters that affect us all”.

Today, luckily, (and I like to repeat this because it’s a basic element of the hope for change) the time for silence is over. “The crime of silence”!... because thanks to modern communications and information technologies the historical turning point from force to words is near.

Human rights, duty of word.

Essential: Education in Democracy and Human Rights

From subjects to full citizens. “Educated” citizens, that is, citizens who act upon their own reflections. “Free and responsible”, as defined in Article 1 of the UNESCO Constitution. People capable of fully using the distinctive creative capacity of the human beings, able of inventing their own future, which should never be accepted as inevitable. Fatalism and dogmatisms must be eradicated, enabling them to shake the weights off their wings and to fly high in the infinite space of the spirit.

Citizens who are dedicated and committed, who don’t allow themselves to be intimidated, who know how to overcome the fear that thwarts the free will of so many.

For centuries we have been subjected to the absolute power of men. We have been passive spectators rather than actors; mere recipients of often biased information; witness afraid to act. Silenced, silent.

For that reason “free and responsible” education for citizenship is essential, education that in the words of the first paragraph of the preamble of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights can “free us from fear”.

Convinced of the essential importance of education in human rights and democracy, as Director General of UNESCO I organized a world congress with thousands of educators to address the best way to implement it, taking advantage of the experience of all of them. It was held in Montreal, Canada in March, 1993. The result was the “Action Plan for Education in Human Rights and Democracy”, and I recommend that it be read by those who for partisan or religious motives support another type of civic education that logically lacks the conceptual and practical rigor of this document, which was prepared taking into account the multiple aspects that it must include.

The Action Plan was so well received at the Universal Conference on Human Rights held in Vienna in 1993 that it was included in its final text.

I was perplexed by an article published in ABC’s March 8th Alfa-Omega supplement entitled “Thanks Mom and Dad for encouraging me to reject Education for Citizenship!” Until children reach the age of majority it is the task of their parents and tutors to choose the religious and ideological framework that they consider most appropriate. But prompting them to “reject” education for citizenship, as in the case just described, is exposing them to growing up fearful and dependent.

Read the 1993 World Plan that is intended for all people, families, educators, students, leaders… of the World. And perhaps they will recognize that there are areas that were duly clarified years ago, and with all types of full guarantees…

THE INSATIABLE MARKETS

Will they also take over “alternative” sources of financing, such as the “Tobin tax,” intended for the fight against hunger and poverty?

We must not allow it.

That would be the last straw. With the present balance of power, particularly in the West, we have been forced to reluctantly accept that our weakened States have yielded to the “great domain”, to prevent serious insolvencies that objectively shouldn’t have been allowed, using funds for social projects to pay the debt, deficit reduction… to, in short, satisfy the demands in quantity and time of a system that has lost its course and is in its final death throes.

But now, in addition to the present ones, what we can’t allow is for new “actors” to take the stage to sacrifice themselves in the mob of speculative trading prices, incited thoughtlessly by rating agencies that obey their master’s voice. No: alternative sources of financing must be used as soon as possible to fulfill the duties of international solidarity that the States have neglected, and to be applied to the Millennium Goals. This is a matter of international justice. As long as we continue to be absorbed with stock market fluctuations… while we continue to spend astronomical amounts of money on out-dated war materiel… while we are still at the mercy of the great oil producers without adopting urgent measures concerning the renewable energy sources that our responsibility to future generations demands… while we continue to blindly follow the biased and partial information offered us by the immense stifling and standardizing powers of the media… we will fail to exercise the influence that democratic citizens should, so that our representatives may counteract the hounding from the markets and make policies based on justice and human rights.

Somalia is dying

This distressing photography was published on the first page of “El País” on August 14:

Safia Adem, a refugee in the Cathedral of Mogadishu, mourns the death of her three-year old son. This is the image that we should all bear constantly in mind. These are the real needs that frenetic stock market fluctuations cannot hide.

If these funds are devoted to helping so many people who currently live below the poverty level all over the world, including in the United States, there would be more potential “clients”, there would be a true mobilization of resources to transcend from an economy of speculation, exploitation and war to an economy of global sustainable development.

Not long ago, Marco Schwartz quoted President Franklin D. Roosevelt when he defended his New Deal social program in October of 1936: “We had to struggle with the old enemies of peace –business and financial monopoly, speculation, reckless banking, class antagonism, sectionism, war profiteering. They had begun to consider the Government of the United States as a mere appendage to their own affairs. We know that Government by organized money is just as dangerous as Government by organized mob.”

It’s time to make some key decisions

One of the results of the recent French-German Summit was the proposal of a tax on financial transactions to resolve the depletion of the European countries’ treasuries and, thus, to be able to address the enormous deficit and resulting debt that has lead us to this current crisis and, especially, the rescue of the international financial system initiated in 2008 at the irresponsible prompting of the G-20.

Faced with this situation it is extremely urgent to remember that the proposal of this type of taxes has been a central issue of discussion in civil society and in academia over the last few decades and with a very clear goal: the fight against poverty and in favor of sustainable development for the less fortunate, as well as contributing toward achieving the Millennium Development Goals.

This was originally a proposal that the American professor and Nobel Prize in Economics James Tobin made in 1972 after having developed a series of mechanisms to levy a minimum tax at the international level (between 0.05% and 0.3%) on all transactions involving currencies and financial instruments (shares, bonds, derivatives)… Thus, on the one hand a significant amount of funds would be generated to be devoted to the fight against hunger, poverty and the great pandemics (AIDS, tuberculosis, malaria, etc.). On the other hand, that tax would in part help reduce the speculative nature that currently characterizes the majority of these operations.

We have tirelessly defended the adequate implementation of this type of alternative financing for years and from different institutions, but particularly from civil society: the Ubuntu Forum , the ATTAC movement or the recent "Robin Hood Tax"…

It is important to underscore that since 2004 these ideas have been echoed by a considerable number of associate States in the Pilot Group on Innovative Financing for Development. This group is lead by France, but enjoys the direct participation of other countries such as Japan, Brazil or Chile, and is presently presided by Spain. It also works in designing other proposals for innovative financing, and has conducted studies by groups of independent international experts that demonstrate their viability from a technical standpoint.

In addition to the foregoing we might mention the support received this March from the European Parliament and the letter published this April signed by over 1,000 economists from prestigious institutions such as the Universities of Harvard, Columbia, Oxford, Cambridge o MIT, among others.

Thus, this is a matter of political will and, above all, justice.

For the reasons indicated, it is indispensable and urgent to take measures to address the debt crisis, not only on the part of France and Germany, but on the European level as well. But we absolutely cannot allow this initiative to be implemented, once again, at the cost of continually breaking our promises of aid and solidarity.

A tax on currency transactions and other financial products is an imperious and just necessity, as the previously-mentioned terrible images arriving from the Horn of Africa remind us.

Thus, let’s undertake to work to ensure that the decisions and measures taken in Europe in the short and medium term are not guided by the same instincts of greed and short-sighted vision that has led us to the brink. For once and for all, let us act sensibly and firmly.

This must be stopped, resolutely and with the strength that the conviction of the great majority of citizens affords (and to certain political leaders: please ignore for now your partisan and electoral interests), because as Irene Lozano wrote, “the greatest threat to individual autonomy resides in the weakness of democracy vis-à-vis financial power”.

Don’t trust the G-20 or the WTO… whose “rounds,” such as the one recently held in Doha, have proven to be totally ineffective. They are another bitter fruit of globalization. Let’s return urgently to a strong, democratic, non-plutocratic and united United Nations!

It was already in the news in September, 2010 that the European Union was considering the possibility of levying a tax on transactions to improve its tax collecting capabilities. A European Commission document proposed two types of taxes: a financial transaction tax (FTT) and a financial activity tax (FAT) levied on business volume. A more restrictive version (FTT2) would only tax trading in stocks and bonds.

Now, in October, the European Commission will present a legislative proposal prior to the G-20 Summit, applying a 0.05% to transactions, together with a new Community VAT “to finance the EU budget for 2014-2020, with a view to reducing direct contributions from Member States”.

The Netherlands and Ireland have asked that it be applied not only in Europe, but globally, to avoid “the enormous distortion that this would produce”.

Not long ago, Antonio Valdecantos warned that “adjustments made in the crisis are going to constitute a permanent state of siege. The crucial decisions are no longer made by the citizens or their governments, but by those transnational economic agents known as “the markets”.

We can’t attempt to promote growth when the major objective is to reduce the deficit, urgently and at all cost.

The 255 greatest fortunes of the planet are equivalent to 40% of the most disadvantaged of the world’s population (2,500 million people) . It’s clear that we can’t allow this new action on the part of the insatiable markets.

Civil society must raise its voice through institutions such as ATTAC, which have been created precisely to promote this new type of alternative financing mechanisms, and especially the tax on financial transactions…

We won’t allow this. It would be other dream that they’ve taken from us… and since 15-M we all know that “if they won’t let us dream, we won’t let them sleep”.
------

1 Schwartz, Marco, in “Público”, 20/08/2011.
2 Forum created by the Culture of Peace foundation in 2000. I wish to express my appreciation to its director, Manuel Manonelles, for his collaboration in the preparation of this blog.
3 Missé, Andre in “El País”, September 7, 2010
4 News from “El País”, August 19, 2011.
5 Valdecantos, Antonio in “El País”, June 2, 2011
6 Población, Félix in “Público”, August 19, 2011.

Universal Declaration of Human Rights

All of us should read and reread the Universal Declaration of Human Rights that it is worth the effort to continue fighting for the great ethical principles our daily behavior. In order to realize that we "are endowed with reason and conscience" to remedy the temptation to resort to force.

All of us, in solidarity without our fellow men, living together and devoted to each other “in a spirit of brotherhood”, in the words of Article 1.

All equal in dignity: regardless of the color of our skin, gender, beliefs or ideologies… All of us –as the Declaration indicates in its Preamble- studying and remembering both the letter and the spirit of Human Rights, at all levels and in all types of educational institutions, in the communications media, in parliaments, in municipal councils, at all levels of government, in NGOs, in international agencies… “without distinction based on the political status of countries and territories”.

This “active reading” is urgent, since our present errors are not being remedied. We are not decidedly replacing plutocracy with multilateralism. We are not finally closing tax havens that facilitate trafficking (in drugs, weapons and people!...). We are not regulating speculation or irresponsible economics. We are not off-setting the power of the media. We are not taking steps toward a new productive model of sustainable global development. As was the case before the crisis, the important thing is to barter, sell… to manufacture at the lowest possible cost by delocalizing to the East, where no one cares about the living conditions of the “manufacturers” in those countries, nor whether their human rights are protected… More of the same… while society continues to remain silent, looking the other way.

Although they were incapable of foreseeing or preventing the crisis, public institutions such as the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank, as well as hardly impartial private institutions, are now acting in the interests of those who caused the present serious situation.

And what are the scientific, academic and artistic communities doing? They are generally distracted, subjugated spectators, controlled from afar by the media that prevent them from reflecting on our serious problems and acting in consequence.