Francois Houtart

GHA Highest Honorary Title: 
WORLD HARMONY CREATOR
(http://www.peacefromharmony.org/?cat=en_c&key=513)

Founder and President of the Centre Tricontinental,

Professor Emeritus of Sociology at the Université Catholique de Louvain,

Special Representative of the UN General Assembly President
Coathor of "The ABC of Harmony":
http://peacefromharmony.org/?cat=en_c&key=478
and "Global Peace Science":
http://peacefromharmony.org/docs/global-peace-science-2016.pdf

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

With Adolfo Perez Esquivel
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
General Assembly of the United Nations

Panel o­n the Financial Crisis

by

Francois Houtart

Founder and President of the Centre Tricontinental and Professor Emeritus of Sociology at the Université Catholique de Louvain

30 October 2008

Ladies and Gentlemen, Delegates, and Dear Friends:

The world needs alternatives and not merely regulation. It is not enough to rearrange the system; we need to transform it. This is a moral duty. In order to understand why, we must adopt the point of view of the victims of this system. Adopting this point of view will allow us to confront reality and to express a conviction, the reality that the whole ensemble of crises which currently afflict us –finances, food supply, water, energy, climate, social— are the result of a common cause, and the conviction that we can change the course of history.

Confronting Reality

When 850 million human beings live below poverty level, and their number increases, when every twenty-four hours tens of thousands of human being die of hunger, when day after day entire peoples, whole cultures and ways of life simply disappear, putting in peril humanity’s patrimony, when the climate deteriorates to the point that o­ne wonders whether or not it is worth the trouble to live in New Orleans, the Sahel, the islands of the Pacific, Central Asia, or along the coasts of our continents, we cannot content ourselves with speaking about the financial crisis.

Already this latter crisis has had consequences which are more than merely financial: unemployment, rising prices, exclusion of the poor, vulnerability of the middle classes. The list of victims grows ever longer. Let us be clear. This crisis is not the product of some bad turn taken by o­ne economic actor of another, nor is it just the result of an abuse which must be punished. We are witnessing the result of a logic which defines the economic history of the past two centuries. From crisis to regulation and from regulation to crisis, the unfolding of the facts always reflects the dynamics of the rate of profit. When it rises we deregulate; when it falls we regulate, but always in service to the accumulation of capital, which is understood as the engine of growth. What we are seeing today is, therefore, far from new. It is not the first crisis of the financial system and it will not be the last.

Nevertheless, the financial bubble, created over the course of the past few decades, thanks, among other things, to the development of new information and communication technologies, has added fundamentally new dimensions to the problem. The economy has become more and more virtual and differences in income have exploded. To accelerate growth in the rate of profit, a whole new architecture of derivatives was put in place and speculation became the modus operandi of the economic system. The result has been a convergence in the logic governing the disorders which characterize the current situation.

The food crisis is an example. The increase in food prices was not the result of declining production, but rather of a combination of reduced stocks, speculation, and the increased production of agro fuels. Human lives were, in other words, subordinated to profit taking.The behavior of the Chicago Commodity Exchange demonstrates this.

The energy crisis, meanwhile, goes well beyond a conjunctural explosion in the price of petroleum. It marks the end of cheap fossil fuels, which encouraged profligate use of energy, making possible accelerated economic growth and the rapid accumulation of capital in the middle term. The superexploitation of natural resources and the liberalization of trade, especially since the 1970s, expanded the transport of commodities around the world and encouraged the use of automobiles rather than public transportation, without consideration of either the climatic or the social consequences. The use of petroleum derivatives as fertilizers became widespread in a productivist agriculture. The lifestyle of the upper and middle classes was built o­n this squandering of energy resources. In this domain as well exchange value took precedence over use value.

Today, with this crisis threatening gravely the accumulation of capital, there is a sudden urgency about finding solutions. They will, however, respect the underlying logic of the system: to maintain the rate of profit, without taking into account externalities –that is to say what does not enter into the accounting of capital and the cost of which must be born by individuals and communities. That is the case with agrofuels and their ecological and social consequences: destruction by monoculture of biodiversity, of the soil and of underground water and the expulsion of millions of small peasants who then go o­n to populate the shantytowns and aggravate the pressures to emigrate.

The climate crisis, the gravity of which global public opinion has yet to take the full measure, is, according to the International Group of Climate Experts, the result of human activity. Nicolas Stern, formerly of the World Bank, does not hesitate to say that “climate change is the biggest setback in the history of the market economy.” In effect, here as before, the logic of capital does not taken into account “externalities” except when it reduces the rate of profit.

The neoliberal era, which led to the increase of the later, coincided as well with growing emissions of greenhouse gases and accelerated global warming. The growth in the utilization of raw materials and in transportation, as well as deregulation in the ecological sphere, augmented the devastation of our climate and diminished the regenerative capacity of nature. If nothing is done in the near future, 20%-30% of all living species could disappear in the next quarter century. The acidity of the oceans is rising and we can expect between 150 and 200 million climate refugees by the middle of this century.

It is in this context that we must understand the social crisis. Developing spectacularly the 20% of the world’s population capable of consuming high value added goods and services, is more interesting from the standpoint of private accumulation in the short and middle term than responding to the basic needs ofthose whose purchasing power has been reduced to nothing. Indeed, incapable of producing value added and having o­nly a feeble capacity to consume, they are nothing but a useless mob, or at best the of object welfare policies. This phenomenon is accentuated with the predominance of finance capital. Once more the logic of accumulation has prevailed over the needs of human beings.

This whole ensemble of malfunctions opens up the possibility of a crisis of civilization and the risk that the planet itself will be purged of living things, something which also signifies a real crisis of meaning. Regulation, then? Yes, if they constitute steps towards a radical and permanent transformation and point towards an exit from the crisis other than war. No, if they merely prolong a logic which is destructive of life. A humanity which renounces reason and abandons ethics loses the right to exist.

A conviction

To be sure, apocalyptic language is by itself a sufficient catalyst for action. o­n the contrary, a radical confrontation with reality like that suggested above can lead to reaction. Finding and acting o­n alternatives is possible, but not without conditions. It presupposes a long term vision, a necessary utopia, concrete measures spaced out over time, and social actors who can carry these projects and who are capable of carrying o­n a struggle the violence of which will be proportional to the resistance to change.

This long term vision can be articulated along several major axes. In the first place, a rational and renewable use of natural resources, which presupposes a new understanding of our relationship with nature: no longer an exploitation without limits of matter, with the aim of unlimited profits, but rather a respect for what forms the very source of life. “Actually existing” socialist societies made no real innovations in this domain.

Second, we will privilege use value over exchange value, something which implies a new understanding of economics, no longer as the science of producing value added as a way of encouraging private accumulation but rather as an activity which assures the basis for human life, material, cultural, and spiritual, for everyone everywhere. The logical consequences of this change are considerable. From this moment forward, the market must serve as a regulator between supply and demand instead of increasing the rate of profit for a minority. The squandering of raw materials and of energy, the destruction of biodiversity and of the atmosphere, are combated by taking into account ecological and social “externalities.”The logic governing the production of goods and services must change.

Finally, the principle of multiculturalism must complement these others. It is a question of permitting all forms of knowledge, including traditional forms, all philosophies and cultures, all moral and spiritual forces capable of promoting the necessary ethic, to participate in the construction of alternatives, in breaking the monopoly of westernization. Among the religions, the wisdom of Hinduism in relationship to nature, the compassion of Buddhism in human relations, the permanent quest for utopia in Judaism, the thirst for justice which defines the prophetic current in Islam, the emancipatory power of the theology of liberation in Christianity, the respect for the sources of life in the concept of the land itself among the indigenous peoples of the Americas, the sense of solidarity expressed in the religions of Africa, can all make important contributions in the context of mutual tolerance guaranteed by the impartiality of political society.

All of this is utopian, to be sure. But the world needs utopias, o­n the condition that they have concrete, practical results. Each of the principles evoked above is susceptible to concrete applications which have already been the object of propositions o­n the part of numerous social movements and political organizations.A new relationship with nature means, among other things, the recovery by states of their sovereignty over their natural resources and an end to their private appropriation, the end of monocultures and a revaluation of peasant agriculture, and the ratification and deepening of the measures called for by the Kyoto and Bali protocols o­n climate change.

Privileging use value requires the decommodification of the indispensible elements of life: seeds, water, health, and education, the re-establishment of public services, the abolition of tax havens, the suppression of banking secrecy, the cancelation of the odious debts of the States of the global South, the establishment of regional alliances o­n the basis not of competition by of complementarity and solidarity, the creation or regional currencies, the establishment of multipolarity, and many other measures as well. The financial crisis simply gives us a unique opportunity to apply these measures.

Democratizing societies begins with fostering local participation, includes the democratic management of the economy, and extends to the reform of the United Nations.Multiculturalism means the abolition of patents o­n knowledge, the liberation of science from the stranglehold of economic power, the suppression of monopolies o­n information and the establishment of religious liberty.

But who will carry this project? The genius of capitalism is to transform its own contradictions into opportunities. How global warming can make you wealthy! reads an ad in US Today from the beginning of 2007. Can capitalism renounce its own principles? Obviously not.Only a new set of power relations can get us where we need to be, something which does not exclude the engagement of some contemporary economic actors. But o­ne thing is clear: the new historic actor which will carry the alternative projects outlined above is plural. There are the workers, the landless peasants, the indigenous peoples, women (who are always the first victims of privatization) the urban poor, environmentalists, migrants, and intellectuals linked to social movements. Their consciousness of being a collective actor is beginning to emerge. The convergence of their organizations is o­nly in its early stages. Real political relationships are often lacking. Some states, notably in Latin America, have already created the conditions for these alternative projects to see the light of day. The duration and intensity of the struggles to come depends o­n the rigidity of the system in place and the intransigence of the protagonists.

Offer them, therefore, a platform in the General Assembly of the United Nations, where they can express themselves and present their alternatives. This will be your contribution to changing the course of history –something which is must happen if humanity is to recover the space to live and o­nce again find reason to hope in the future.

(It is underlined by Leo Semashko)

---------------------------------------------------

Dear Dr. Semashko,

Thank you for your letter and the very interesting documents: two the GHA alternative projects: Anti-nuke and Reserve Currency.

Of course I partake the objectives proposed. I will send you the intervention I made in the UN General assembly last October and also a project of a Universal Declaration of Mankind's Common Good.

Very best regards.

François Houtart

Avenue Sainte Gertrude 5,

1348 Louvain-la-Neuve

Tél : 32.476 31 50 53

Fax : 010/48.95.68

email : francoishoutart@yahoo.fr

web : www.cetri.be

May 31, 2009

------------------------------------------------------------

UNITED NATIONS CONFERENCE o­n THE FINANCIAL CRISIS AND ITS IMPACT o­n DEVELOPMENT 
NEW YORK, JUNE 24 -26, 2009

PRESENT AND FUTURE IMPACT OF THE CRISIS

PROPOSAL FOR A

UNIVERSAL DECLARATION o­n THE

COMMON WELL-BEING OF HUMANITY

By François Houtart4 May, 2009

Confronted as we are by a financial crisis which is affecting the world economy and which combines with a food, energy and climate crisis that is leading to a social and humanitarian catastrophe, various reactions are being expressed.Some suggest that the actors be changed and punished (the “chicken stealers”, as Michel Camdessus, former IMF director, calls them) in order to continue as before.Others, like George Soros, stress the need to regulate the system, but without changing the parameters.And then there are those who believe that it is the logic of the contemporary economic system itself that is in question and alternative solutions have to be found.

The urgency of solutions is the greatest challenge.There is not much time left to act effectively o­n climate change.According to FAO, during the last two years, 100 million people have fallen below the poverty threshold and the necessity to change the energy cycle has become imperative.There are a multitude of alternative solutions in every field but they need to be coherent with each other if they are to be effective: they require, not a new dogma, but an articulation between them.

In the same way that the Universal Declaration o­n Human Rights was proclaimed by the United Nations, a Universal Declaration o­n the Common Well-being of Humanity could play this role.It is true that human rights had a long way to go between the French and American revolutions and their adoption by the international community.The process was also gradual before the third generation of rights, including a social dimension, was proclaimed. It was very Western in its perspective andthe document was completed by an African Declaration, while a similar initiative was taken in the Arab world.Of course the Declaration has often been manipulated for political interests, particularly by the Western powers.But it is still a basic reference that is indispensable for all political legitimacy and the protection of persons.

The time has come for the process to be completed because the survival of humanity and of the planet is at stake.Four founding principles could give coherence to new initiatives that seek to construct alternatives and guide all new practices.

1.A sustainable and responsible use of natural resources.This means another approach to the relationships between human beings and nature, moving from exploitation to respect for nature, the source of all life.

2. To give priority to the use value rather than to exchange value.Thus, the economy as an activity should create, while respecting social and ecological norms, the bases of the physical, cultural and spiritual life of all human beings o­n the planet.

3. To generalize democracy in all social relationships and in all institutions. It should not o­nly be applied and strengthened in the political field, together with a new definition of the State and international organizations, but extended to include the economy, culture and men-women relationships.

4. Multiculturalism, in order to make it possible for all knowledge, all cultures, all philosophical and religious traditions to participate in the definition of the common good of humanity and in the elaboration of its ethics.

The adoption of these principles would make it possible to start up a genuine alternative process as opposed to the rules that currently dominate the capitalist economy, the world political organization and the Western cultural hegemony which have brought about the social and natural consequences that we know today.The above principles could lead to general orientations that can be sketched out.

Clearly, respect for nature requires the collective control of resources.It also requires the essential constituents of human life, such as water and seeds, to be considered as the heritage of humanity, with all the juridical consequences that this entails.It also means taking into account the ecological ‘externalities’ in economic calculations.

Preference must be given to use value which means a transformation of the production system, at present based mainly o­n exchange value to contribute to the accumulation of capital considered as the engine of the economy.This means restoring public services, including health and education – that is, they would not be treated as merchandise.

The generalization of democracy, particularly in the organization of the economy, mean the end of the monopoly over decision-making linked to the ownership of capital, but also the starting up of new forms of participation in which citizens becomes their own subjects.

Accepting multiculturalism in the building of these principles means not reducing culture to o­ne of its components but allowing the wealth of the human cultural heritage to express itself, putting an end to the patents that monopolize knowledge

and enabling a social ethic to be expressed in different languages.

Utopia?Yes, because it does not exist today, but it could tomorrow.It is a necessary Utopia, because it is a synonym of inspiration and the creator of coherence between collective and personal efforts.But it is also of very practical application, recognizing that changing a development model does not happen in a day and that it is constructed by an ensemble of actions which require different periods of time to come to fruition.How, then, to propose measures that form part of this logic and could be the objective of popular mobilizations and political decisions?Many proposals have already been made, but others could be added.

At the level of natural resources, an international pact o­n water that envisages its collective management (not exclusively by the State) would reflect an existing consciousness of the problem.Some other orientations could be proposed:the sovereignty of nations over their energy resources; the prohibition of speculation o­n food products; the regulation of agro-fuels so that they respect biodiversity, the conservation of soil and water quality and the principle of peasant agriculture; the adoption of measures necessary to limit the increase of the earth’s temperature to 1ºC during the 21^st century; public control over oil and minerals through an international code of exploitation, verified and authorized, concerning the ecological and social effects (including, inter alia the rights of indigenous peoples).

As for use value, some practical examples would include re-establishing the common good of water, electricity, the post, telephones, internet, public transport, health, education, in function of the specifics of each sector.It will be necessary to demand a guarantee of five years o­n all manufactured goods, which would prolong the life of products and diminish the use of raw materials and energy.A tax should be levied o­n manufactured goods that travel over 1,000 kms between their place of production and the consumer (to be adapted according to the products), the proceeds of which would be used for the local development of the most fragile countries.The norms for working conditions established by the ILO should be reinforced, with a reduction of working hours and an improvement in their quality.The parameters of the GNP should be changed, with the introduction of qualitative elements that express the idea of “living well”.

The application of generalized democracy are without number and could concern all institutions that require a publicly recognized status, both for their internal function and for the equality in gender relationships:businesses, unions, religious, cultural and sports organizations.At the level of the United Nations, a rule could be proposed of two-thirds agreement for major decisions and absolute majority for measures that are to apply them.

As for multiculturalism, it would include, among other things, the prohibition of patenting traditional knowledge, putting discoveries linked to human life (medical and pharmaceutical) at the disposal of the public and establishing the material bases necessary for the survival of specific cultures (territoriality).

This is an appeal for concrete proposals that can be put together to form a coherent ensemble of alternatives and which would constitute the collective objective of humanity and the applications of a Universal Declaration of the Common Well-Being of Humanity by the General Assembly of the United Nations.

A collection of proposals is being organized o­n the web site of the World Forum of Alternatives.Theycanbecommunicatedto:Houtart@hotmail.com

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------