“Parliament of the World’s Religions”

                                                       by David C. Oughton

     My doctoral studies and teaching have focused on the world’s religions, interreligious dialogue, and the role of the religions for promoting world peace.  From December 3-9, 2009, I was very fortunate to further my studies by participating in the Parliament of the World’s Religions in Melbourne, Australia.    This event involved about 6,000 people from all of the major religions of the world.
     The first World Parliament of the Religions took place during the Chicago World’s Fair in 1893.  That was the first time in human history when representatives of the major religions sat together on the same stage as equals.  Delegates there hoped that the world’s religions would make war not on each other but on the giant evils that afflict humanity.  But two world wars and sixty other wars followed.  Many modern philosophers and religious leaders have indicated their belief that there will be no peace among the nations without peace among the religions.  Furthermore, there will be no peace among the religions without dialogue among the religions and an agreement on a global ethic.
     So it was decided to hold international religious parliaments in recent years.  Along with several others from St. Louis, I have previously attended the Parliaments at Chicago in 1993; at Cape Town, South Africa in 1999; and at Barcelona, Spain in 2004.  Since there has been an attempt to move the Parliament to different continents, the 2014 Parliament will probably be held somewhere in Asia or in Latin America.  The modern parliaments are religious conventions that are open to anyone who is committed to learning about and dialoging with people from other religions.  Each day of the Parliament involves meetings, presentations, and panels about different religions of the world or a particular global problem.  Attending religious services is also an option.  I attended services led by representatives of Zoroastrianism, Sikhism, and Orthodox Judaism.
     I was part of a program explaining what is being done in local communities to promote positive relations between people of different religions.  I explained to some people from various countries how St. Louis’ Dialogue Group of the World’s Religions and Philosophies, which I have organized for the last 25 years, and groups such as Interfaith Partnership/Faith Beyond Walls, the Living Insights Center, and the St. Louis Holocaust Museum promote many interreligious programs in the St. Louis area.
     I learned much from attending programs about the religions of indigenous peoples such as the Aborigines of Australia, tribal religions of Africa, and Native American religions.  Representatives of these religions promoted the U.N. Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.  I also attended sessions on conflict resolution in the Middle East, the role of religion in peacemaking, and the religious responses to global problems such as human trafficking.
     Two sessions in particular relate to the goals of Citizens for Global Solutions.  The first concerned the Charter for Compassion, written by Karen Armstrong, a British scholar who has written many books about the relations between the monotheistic religions.  According to Armstrong, one of the most urgent tasks of our generation is to build a global community in which people of all religions and nations can live together in peace.  In our globalized world, everyone is becoming a neighbor.  Promoting the ancient religious and ethical principles of compassion and reciprocity, often expressed as the Golden Rule, has become an urgent necessity.  The charter calls upon all to restore compassion to the center of morality and religion, to reject any interpretation of scripture that breeds hatred or violence, to teach accurate and respectful information about other religions, to appreciate cultural and religious diversity, and to cultivate empathy for the sufferings of others, even those regarded as enemies.
      The other session which relates to our goals concerned “A New Ethical Manifesto for the Global Economy” that has been developed by the ecumenical Swiss theologian Hans Küng and representatives of various religions.  Professor Küng was also the main author of the “Declaration toward a Global Ethic” which he presented at the Parliament in Chicago in 1993.  At the Parliament in Melbourne, Küng applied the principles of the global ethic to business and economics.  He argued that laws are not effective without morality.  He said that the recent global economic crisis was caused by a failure of economic regulations but also by a lack of basic ethical norms such as a lack of truthfulness, corporate greed, and “casino capitalism.”  He emphasized that people from all religions can agree on universal ethical values such as non-violent conflict resolution, honesty, human rights, labor rights, working against corruption in government and economics, working for justice, and protecting the environment.
     I am convinced that the Parliaments of the World’s Religions are important forums for promoting humatriotism, world citizenship, and a global ethic for the global community.  The world’s religions have a responsibility of building a secure foundation for these values so that a democratic system of enforceable world laws can develop the means for outlawing war and solving our global problems.
     (Dr. Oughton is an Associate Professor in the Theology Department at Saint Louis University where he teaches courses on the world’s religions.  He serves as the Treasurer of the St. Louis Chapter of Citizens for Global Solutions.)

HOW TO MAKE THE UN MORE EFFECTIVE

Ron Glossop’s report on this U.N. Day event is based on excerpts from Dorothy Poor’s report in the WILPF newsletter of November, 2009.

   On United Nations Day (October 24, 2009) some 50 members of the five co-sponsoring organizations met to hear a panel discuss ideas on “How to Make the UN More Effective.”

   Judith Smart of the League of Women Voters of St. Louis discussed the status of the U.N.’s eight Millennium Development Goals targeted for 2015:  eradication of extreme poverty, full productive employment, empowerment of women via CEDAW, reduction of child mortality and improvement of maternal health, universal access to reproductive health information, reduction of AIDS and other diseases such as tuberculosis and cholera, climate sustainability, and global participation in development.  The LWV has an official observer at the UN.

   With persisting problems such as incomes less than $1 a day, early marriage of girls, high mortality rate of children under five, clear cutting of forests and lack of clean water, progress remains difficult.

But not impossible, as Rea Kleeman of the LWV noted in recommending the book The End of Poverty by Jeffrey D. Sachs.  He was chosen by former UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan to guide work on the development goals.  Quoting from Sachs’ book, Kleeman said 15,000 Africans die every day of preventable diseases, and an estimated $15 billion would get rid of extreme poverty that contributes to such diseases.  World population increase adds to the problems.

   Speaking for the UNA, Dr. Jean Robert Leguey-Feilleux of St. Louis University said to improve the UN we need to make more use of it with professional diplomats and the new leadership of President Obama.  “He’s turning the page and rebuilding trust in government, but leadership starts with us,” he said.  “We have to convince people that the multilateral approach in foreign policy is best, and we need to keep ourselves informed.”

   Yvonne Logan, WILPF vice president, suggested Americans show more respect for the UN by standing behind treaties and supporting the proposal of a standing UN army.  She pointed out that WILPF works for disarmament and women’s rights as a member of GEAR, the Gender Equality Architecture Reform Coalition which coordinates women’s issues at the UN.  Currently WILPF is working for Senate ratification of the Convention for Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) without the addition of compromising Reservations, Understandings and Declarations (RUDS) detrimental to women’s reproductive rights.  WILPF continues to co-sponsor international protests against the weaponization of space and to call for reducing the U.S. military budget.

  Ron Glossop, Chair of the local chapter of Citizens for Global Solutions, acknowledged that he was “talking to the choir,” but encouraged the audience to bone up by reading A Global Agenda:  Issues Before the UN 2009-10 which is available at <http://www.unausa.org/publications>.  Electing President Obama has been a great help toward changing our foreign policy, he said, and now we need to get the right people into Congress.

   He made these points:

  1.  The UN needs more money.  For the two years 2008-09 the UN regular budget is $4.572 billion, and the U.S. share is only $500 million a year.  The expenditure for the whole UN system (almost 20 different international organizations) is about $13 billion a year while Missouri’s 2009 budget is $22.4 billion.  The UN’s total budget for the two years 2008-09 for 16 peacekeeping operations is $7.08 billion, and the U.S. share is $1.856 billion a year.

   2.  The UN can’t borrow money and consequently regularly faces financial crises.  Glossop suggested it needs to have independent sources of income such as the proposed Tobin Tax on short-term currency exchanges, a tax on each country’s military spending, or a fee on international airplane flights. 

   3.  A better civil service system is needed to get more professionalism in the staff: more emphasis on ability and less on political considerations.

   4.  In addition to the existing General Assembly where each country has one vote regardless of size and all votes are merely recommendations, the UN should have an advisory Parliamentary Assembly where representatives would be members of the national legislature elected by their colleagues and where there would be weighted voting depending on a country’s population.  As it gained more legitimacy, it could be given more real decision-making power.  One of its advantages is that non-democratic countries without national parliaments would not be able participate.

  5.  The UN should have its own individually recruited UN Emergency Peace Service.  This force would consist of some 15,000 specially trained persons able to respond quickly to crisis situations whether natural disasters, genocides, or military actions condemned by the UN.  A critical matter to be decided is determining which UN body would have the authority to direct and control the UNEPS.

   The Ethical Action Committee of the Ethical Society was thanked for co-sponsoring the event and providing the meeting room at the Ethical Society of St. Louis. 

Israel-Palestine Peace a Possibility???

A report written by Dorothy Poor which appeared in the October 2009 newsletter of the St. Louis chapter of the Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom (WILPF), pages 3-4.

   A panel of five with input from the audience of 85 listeners took on the question “Israeli-Palestinian Peace: Possibility or Dream?” and when the evening was over the question mark remained.  But most in attendance seemed to relish the exchange of information and ideas sweetened by an array of delicious cookies.

   WILPF sponsored the program October 7, 2009  at the University City Library auditorium.  Moderator Jane Mendelson introduced the panelists:  Repps Hudson, former Post-Dispatch reporter and Washington U. adjunct professor of “Readings on the Arab-Israeli Conflict;” Mazen Badra, Palestinian peace activist who teaches at Sanford-Brown College and Webster U.; Robert Cohn, former editor of The Jewish Light; Gloria Gordon of Brit Tzedek; and Michael Berg, U.S. Campaign to End the Occupation and St. Louis Instead-of-War.
   The six minutes allotted each speaker in the beginning allowed no time for longwinded exposition, and timekeeper Suzanne Reinhold was promptly acknowledged at her signal.
   Hudson remarked at the start that” the problem probably won’t be settled in the next 20 years.”  The strong alliance between the U.S. and Israel will continue, he said, and the problems don’t lend themselves to simple solutions.
   Badra said we need to stay hopeful for a peaceful solution and look for ways to exist without killing each other.  He decried the growth of Jewish settlements on the West Bank – some 500,000 people – and said that in Jerusalem the Palestinians fear there’s a policy to uproot them.  It’s important to be mindful of the points of view of people in the streets, he said.
   Cohn took us back about 4,000 years to King David, Solomon and the two oldest sons of Abraham to illustrate how long Jews have been around the disputed area.

   Gordon described Brit Tzedek, a Jewish Alliance for Justice and Peace, as a grassroots effort to educate Jews in support of resolving the conflict, and J Street as a new political lobby in Washington to work for a two-state solution.  The effort includes re-defining “pro-Israel” not to mean “Israel right or wrong.”  Gordon said major focus is on an Israeli majority favoring a two-state solution, and support of a government with clout, i.e. supporting President Obama in his effort to help official leaders negotiate a peace treaty.

   Berg emphasized the devastating effects of encroaching settlements, checkpoints, and denial of human rights to Palestinians.  He condemned the U.S. complicity of providing Caterpillar bulldozers used to destroy homes and olive orchards.  As a nonviolent action he suggested boycott, divestment and sanctions.
   Discussion on the next best steps to peace brought these comments:
   Berg: The most important step is to stop military and economic aid until Israel complies with international laws.  It might be reasonable for settlers to stay in the West Bank if they’re willing to live under Palestinian laws.  The U.S. needs to exert real pressure.
   Hudson: Positions on all sides have hardened and middle ground seems to be gone.  But suicide bombings have gone down; there’s not so much killing, and that’s why the Wall exists.

   Badra:  I think Israel has a right to build a Wall, but don’t build it on my land, build it on your land.  This Wall cuts off Palestinians from their land, their mosques, hospitals, and schools.

   Cohn: Sanctions don’t work; they just make people more united against the users.  They won’t work against Iran.

   Gordon: Peace is a clear possibility, but to achieve it strong support will have to be given for Obama’s program. Sign and send the pledge “I’ve Got Your Back” to President Obama, and participate in the J Street conference October 25-28 to lobby for a two-state solution.
   About ten people from the audience then formed a line up front, and each was allowed a minute to ask a question of the panel or make a comment.  The first question referred to the Goldstone Report on possible war crimes committed by the Israelis and Hamas during the assault on Gaza, and asked why the U.S. has so far ignored it.  Hudson said he thought the president had enough to consider without dealing with that report and Cohn concurred, saying that the president is already bogged down with war crimes.  Berg and Badra disagreed, and Badra said Palestinians were furious that their own officials refused to support the follow-up.
  Regarding the future of Jerusalem, Hudson said most Israelis don’t believe the city should be partitioned.  “That’s the reality today.”
  Anna Baltzer, author of Witness in Palestine: a Jewish American Women in the Occupied Territories, said, “The entire state of Palestine is under the control of Israel.  What would happen if you just gave everyone the same rights?  Would that justify denial of rights to Christians and Muslims?”
   Steve Best asked, “What would happen if the settlers on the West Bank were told they could stay where they are, provided they are willing to live under Palestinian laws?”

   Ron Glossop, Citizens for Global Solutions, picked up on Berg’s suggestions and asked, “Why not have the U.S. say to Israel: ‘You have to stop settlements, and if you don’t, we’ll cut down on financial assistance’?”

   Fortunately, answers to the what ifs and why nots weren’t expected.  With only minutes remaining before library closing time the program ended in a round of applause for the panel members, who joined the audience for cookies and conversation.  WILPF hopes the talking continues.
   The WILPF committee included Joan Botwinick, Louise Green, Betsy Hamra, and Mary Jane Schutzius, as well as moderator Jane Mendelson and timekeeper Suzanne Reinhold.

UPCOMING EVENTS IN OCTOBER & NOVEMBER 2009

     Wednesday, October 7 at 7:00 to 8:30 p.m. at the University City Public Library, 6701 Delmar (at Kingsland).  WILPF brings together a panel of local experts to address the topic  “Israeli-Palestinian Peace:  Possibility or Dream?”  Repps Hudson will present a brief history of U.S. policy toward Israel-Palestine.  Mazen Badra will discuss Palestinan government policies toward Israelis and the U.S.  Robert Cohn will discuss Israeli government policies toward the Palestinians and the U.S.  Gloria Gordon will tell about the work of Brit Tzedek and J Street.  Michael Berg will discuss the strategies of boycott, divestment, and sanctions.  Audience participation is encouraged, and there will be refreshments.

     Thursday, October 22 at 12:30 at the Millenium Center of the University of Missouri-St. Louis (UMSL).  This is a U.N Day event sponsored by the UNA of St. Louis.  The speaker will be popular author, TV personality, and photographer Helena Mulkerns from Ireland.  She spent a year and a half living in Central America working for MINUGUA, the United Nations Human Rights Verification Mission in Guatemala and then moved to Africa in 2000, working for UNMEE, the UN Peacekeeping Mission for Ethiopia and Eritrea.  She has written a film script on land mines and their impact on children and will be showing  photos as part of her presentation.

     Saturday, October 24 from 2:00 to 4:00 p.m. in the Hanke Room of the Ethical Society of St. Louis, 9001 Clayton Road, Richmond Heights, MO 63117.   “How to Make the U.N. More Effective” is the theme to be discussed at this 2009 United Nations Day celebration by a panel of speakers from the local co-sponsoring organizations.  Retired psychiatrist Rea Kleeman of the League of Women Voters will tell about what is being done and should be done with regard to the U.N.’s Millennium Development Goals.  Professor Jean Robert Leguey-Feilleux of St. Louis University and the UNA will examine what changes could be made at the U.N. in the short term to make it more effective.  Ron Glossop, Professor Emeritus at SIUE and Chair of Citizens for Global Solutions, will discuss the Responsibility to Protect Principle and how a UN Emergency Peace Force is needed to implement it.  Yvonne Logan, past national President of WILPF and Director of the World Community Center, and also retired high school librarian Judith Smart, Chair of the LWV’s International Relations Committee, will share their views on how the U.N. can be made more effective.  Literature from the co-sponsoring organizations will be available.  Thanks to the co-sponsorship of the Ethical Action Committee of the Ethical Society, there is no charge for this program.

     Saturday, November 14 starting at 10:15 a.m. the Board of Officers and Directors of CGS/STL will meet at the World Community Center, 438 No. Skinker Blvd., St. Louis MO 63130.  At noon the Partners for Global Change will participate in the bi-monthly CGS national conference call to get better informed concerning needed action to get public and Congressional support for the International Criminal Court and ratification of the Law of the Sea Treaty.  Both meetings are open to all, and you should bring a sack lunch to eat while we listen to the Partners for Global Change conference call.

WALTER CRONKITE ON THE NEED FOR DEMOCRATIC WORLD FEDERATION

While we spend much of our time and a great deal of our treasure in preparing for war, we see no comparable effort to establish a lasting peace. Meanwhile, emphasizing the sloth in this regard, those advocates who work for world peace by urging a system of world government are called impractical dreamers. Those impractical dreamers are entitled to ask their critics what is so practical about war.

  It seems to many of us that if we are to avoid the eventual catastrophic world conflict we must strengthen the United Nations as a first step toward a world government patterned after our own government with a legislature, executive and judiciary, and police to enforce its international laws and keep the peace.

  To do that, of course, we Americans will have to yield up some of our sovereignty. That would be a bitter pill. It would take a lot of courage, a lot of faith in the new order.

  But the American colonies did it once and brought forth one of the most nearly perfect unions the world has ever seen.

  The circumstances were vastly different, obviously. While the colonies differed on many questions, at least the people of the colonies were of the same Anglo-Saxon stock. Yet just because the task appears forbiddingly hard, we should not shirk it.

  We cannot defer this responsibility to posterity. Time will not wait. Democracy, civilization itself, is at stake. Within the next few years we must change the basic structure of our global community from the present anarchic system of war and ever more destructive weaponry to a new system governed by a democratic UN federation.
  _    _    _    _    _    _    _    _    _    _    _    _    _    _

     — Excerpt from the October 19, 1999 speech of Walter Cronkite in New York on the occasion of his being given the Norman Cousins Award by the World Federalist Association.  The whole speech as well as Hilary Clinton’s praise of Cronkite can be seen at video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4576126608705279626.

“What Happened to the Idea of World Government?”

   One of the most important developments of the past year with regard to world federalism was the February 16, 2009 Presidential Address of Thomas G. Weiss to the 50th Convention of the prestigious International Studies Association in New York City.  The text of the lecture was also published in INTERNATIONAL STUDIES QUARTERLY, 53: No. 2 (June 2009), 253-271.  The text of the speech is at http://docs.google.com/gview?a=v&q=cache:gss0YvUgz6QJ:isanet.ccit.arizona.ed.

Another article by Weiss titled “Toward a Third Generation of International Institutions:  Obama’s UN Policy” appeared in THE WASHINGTON QUARTERLY for July 2009 and can be downloaded at http://www.twq.com/09july/docs/09jul_Weiss.pdf.

   Here are a few short excerpts from Weiss’s speech which are of special interest to Citizens for Global Solutions and other world federalists.

 

  Will it take a calamity on the scale of World War Two to demonstrate the abject poverty of our current thinking? Is such a disaster required to catalyze a transformation of the current feeble system of what many of us now call “global governance”–the patchwork of formal and informal arrangements among states, international agencies, and public-private partnerships–into something

with at least some of the attributes of a world government?  . . . .  My purpose this evening is to trace what has happened to the idea of a world government . . . .

   When interdependence was less and actors were fewer and states could actually solve or attenuate most international problems, the idea of a world government was not far from the mainstream. Paradoxically, now when states visibly cannot address a growing number of threats from WMDs to climate change, from terrorism to the current financial crisis, world government is unimaginable. 

  Global Governance

   It is most useful to think of global governance at any moment as reflecting the capacity of the international system to provide government-like services in the absence of a world government.

   However, applying the notion of “governance” to the planet is fundamentally misleading. It captures the gamut of interdependent relations in the absence of any overarching political authority and with institutions that exert little or no effective control. Quite a distinction exists, then, between the national and international species of governance. Within a country, we have governance plus

government which, whatever its shortcomings in Mexico or the United States, usually and predictably ensures effective authority and control. At the international level, governance is the whole story. We have governance minus government, which means virtually no capacity to ensure compliance with collective decisions.

  What Happened to the Idea of World Government?

  Amazingly, it once was a staple of informed debate-and as hard as it is to believe, this tendency was especially pronounced in the United States.    Could there really once have been a sizable group of prominent Americans from every walk of life, including politicians who passed resolutions in 30 of 48 state legislatures, who supported pooling American sovereignty with that of other countries?  One now requires unknown powers of imagination to envision a Washington, DC, where the idea of world government was a staple of public policy analysis. Yet 60 years ago, a 1949 sense of Congress resolution argued for “a fundamental objective of the foreign policy of the United States to support and strengthen the United Nations and to seek its development into a world federation.”

  Led by its president Robert M. Hutchins, the University of Chicago from 1945 to 1951 sponsored a prominent group of scholars in the Committee to Frame a World Constitution.  The movement was not a fringe group of the academy. It included not only Nobel laureates and a scientific luminary like Albert Einstein but also from such visible entertainers as Ronald Reagan, E. B. White, and Oscar Hammerstein. Future Senators Alan Cranston and Harris Wofford sought to spread the message of world federalism among university students, and the Student

Federalists became the largest non-partisan political organization in the country. Other prominent individuals associated with the world government idea included, at one time or another, Kurt Vonnegut, Walter Cronkite, H. G. Wells, Peter Ustinov, Supreme Court Justices William Douglas and Owen Roberts, Senator Estes Kefauver and Senator and future Vice-President Hubert Humphrey. And the list goes on.

  This all evaporated by the early 1950s, when the world government idea was hidden by the Iron Curtain, overshadowed by the Cold War, and eclipsed by Senator Joseph McCarthy’s witch hunt. On the right wing, this jump-started the engines of the black helicopters that are still whirling and fostered labeling advocates for world government as communist fellow travelers; and on the left wing, the idea has encountered fears of top-down tyranny in a dystopia.

  The short answer to the question asked in the title to this lecture is: the United States became obsessed with anti-communism; Europe focused on the construction of a regional economic and political federation; the burgeoning number of post-colonial countries shifted their preoccupations toward non-alignment and Third World solidarity; and scholars got out of the business.  This ancient history now seems quaint. ISA members thinking about world government are almost extinct. From time to time an international relations theorist like Alexander Wendt suggests that “a world state is inevitable,” or Dan Deudney wishes that it were because war is so dangerous, or an international lawyer like Richard Falk calls for an irrevocable transfer of sovereignty upwards.  But the idea of world government has been banned in sober discussions and is absent from classrooms.

  Global governance certainly is not the continuation of traditional power politics. But it also certainly does not reflect an evolutionary process leading to constructing institutional structures able to provide global public goods and to address contemporary or future global threats. Scott Barrett’s insightful book, Why Cooperate?, puts it well: global governance is “organized volunteerism.”   In this regard, we have definitely gone overboard in our enthusiasm for non-state actors and  informal processes. Not to put too fine a point on it, NGOs and transnational networks, corporations and activists crossing borders will not eliminate poverty, reverse global warming, or halt murder in Darfur.

    Conclusion

  My Graduate Center colleague, the American historian David Nasaw, reminded me that the weak 13 original colonies during the American Revolution were operating under a contested and awkward Articles of Confederation, but they then sought a “more perfect union” in 1787 in Philadelphia. The world and the weak confederation of 192 UN member states require a “Philadelphia moment.” 

  We need a big international vision from the Obama administration. In nominating his confidante Susan Rice as ambassador to the United Nations and by restoring the post’s cabinet status, Obama not only announced that the United States has rejoined the world and is ready to re-engage with all member states, but also he acknowledged what is evident to most people on the planet who were not in the ideological bubble of the Bush administration, namely “that the global challenges we face demand global institutions that work.”

The Millennium Development Goals: Getting Involved

                                                               by Sandra Lee

     There are many ways that you personally can help in supporting the Millennium Development Goals.  The United Nations sponsors various projects that are accessible via their website at http://www.unorg/milleniumgoals/takeaction.shtml.

   The United Nations Development Programme focuses on providing developing countries with knowledge-based consulting services and on building national, regional and global programs for change.  They would like to recruit a new generation of expert practitioners who want to contribute to those partnerships by offering strategic approaches to long-standing problems.  They are seeking individuals who can communicate advice and new ideas across cultures and different realms of society.  They have a wide range of opportunities available at various levels.  Competitive salaries are offered that are commensurate with experience.

   Another interesting program I researched is called the United Nations Volunteer program.  Their headquarters is located in Bonn, Germany.  The UN Volunteers is administered by the United Nations Development Programme and adheres to UNDP policies and procedures for recruitment and staffing.  They are seeking staff who are committed to the ideals of volunteerism and can contribute to UNV’s mission in three key areas: (1) advocating for volunteerism, (2) integrating volunteerism in development and (3) mobilizing volunteers for peace and development.  They offer a wide range of opportunities at various levels in different practitioner and support areas.  You may also access other volunteer opportunities at the World Volunteer website at www.worldvolunteerweb.org. 

   Volunteering does not stop there.  You can support the Millennium Development goals by becoming a UNV Online Volunteer.  This service is available at www.onlinevolunteering.org.  You can engage in development activities over the Internet.  This program provides online support to the work of grassroot organizations, international non-governmental organizations and United Nations agencies.

    Lastly you can become a part of the Millennium Congregations.  This project works with diverse faith communities in facilitating education, advocacy and outreach for a more sustainable world through advancing the Millennium Development Goals.  The groups approach builds and integrates these three program areas to achieve results from the active engagement of congregations and other faith groups in reducing extreme poverty.  Through their capital campaign Rwanda Promise, Millennium Congregations is supporting the Millennium Villages in Rwanda.

   In order to make the Millennium Development Goals a success, you should contribute in a way that will be fulfilling and will give you a sense of pride knowing that you were able to make a difference in someone’s life.  Whether you contribute full or part time, anything that you do will help to ensure that this goal is met by or before the year 2015.

YOU CAN VOTE FOR WORLD FEDERATION IN A GLOBAL REFERENDUM

To register your vote, all you need to do is to go to the Vote World Government website at <http://www.voteworldgovernment.org> and cast your vote.  There is only one question.  Do you support the creation of a directly-elected, representative and democratic world government?  You can vote “Yes” or “No.”

    This effort to have a global referendum has been initiated by Canadian world federalist Jim Stark.  In order to generate more publicity for the effort, he has enlisted the support of those who have written books about world federalism.  The list of authors with quotations from many of them in support of the global referendum is at <http://www.voteworldgovernment.org/authorscampaign.shtml >.

     Vote World Government is also a member of the new WATUN coalition (World Alliance to Transform the United Nations), which will include the global referendum as one of eight campaigns it supports.

NEW ARRANGEMENTS ON CGS MEMBERSHIP

    New national CGS Development Director Maureen Howard has announced that in the future all CGS memberships will expire October 1.  In all cases membership expiration dates will be extended rather than shortened.  That means that you can somewhat disregard any expiration date printed on your mailing label.  The labels were prepared before we learned about this change.

   Tax-deductible contributions to the CGS Education Fund are encouraged, but making such a contribution does not constitute a renewal of membership.  To be a member of CGS you must send $25 each year for membership.  This is a U.S. government legal requirement for our type of organization.  Anyone who is a member of the national organization is automatically a member of our local chapter.  Contributors to the CGS Education Fund will be put on the list to receive both the national and the local newsletter.

    All membership renewals should be sent to the national CGS office, 418 Seventh Street SE, Washington DC 2003.  Tax-deductible contributions to the CGS Education Fund should be sent to the same Washington address and should be clearly marked “for the Education Fund.”  You can also indicate on your check that you would like your Education Fund contribution to be forwarded back to the St. Louis chapter.

    If you wish, you can make contributions directly to our St. Louis chapter by sending a check for “CGS-St. Louis” to our chapter Treasurer David Oughton, 1130 Big Sky Drive, Fenton MO 63026, but such contributions are not tax-deductible and are not regarded as membership renewals.  Contributions for those purposes must be sent to the national office in Washington.

THE TIDE IS TURNING

     by Joe Schwartzberg, national CGS Board Member from Minneapolis

      (reprinted from the May 2009 newsletter of CGS of Minnesota)

 

   I’m struck by the many changes for the better–some subtle, others obvious– that the past year has brought. The biggest, of course, is the sense of hope generated by the election of President Barack Obama, in regard to international affairs in general and our relationship with the United Nations in particular. It looks as if the United States will, at last, ratify the UN Comprehensive Law of the Sea Treaty (UNCLOS), likely pay up its arrears in UN dues, and try to address the economic chasm separating the global North from the global South.

   Change is also evident in non-governmental circles. Last month I took part in an excellent conference on United Nations reform at the Woodrow Wilson Center in Washington, DC organized by the UN Nations Association, with the co-sponsorship of a number of other prestigious NGOs. Previously, the UNA steered clear of serious discussions of UN reform because (in my view) it had all it could do muster support for the UN in its present highly imperfect form.

   Equally encouraging was Thomas Weiss’ 2009 Presidential address this February before the International Studies Association titled “What Happened to the Idea of World Government?”  Until recently, speaking approvingly of the prospect of world government in the political science and international relations communities of academia was a sure way of getting oneself labeled as “hopelessly naïve;” but Weiss bravely cited much of the literature on the subject that animated the World Federalist movement prior to its being undermined by the likes off Senator Joe McCarthy in the 1950s. Weiss reminded his audience that the worldwide movement until then was led by the United States. He noted that in 1949 111 members of Congress, including future presidents John F. Kennedy and Gerald Ford and a host of other eminent political leaders, put forward a “sense of Congress” resolution that stated that “a fundamental objective of the foreign policy of the United States [is] to support and strengthen the United Nations and to seek its development into a world federation.” Additionally, resolutions were passed in 30 of 48 state legislatures supporting the “pooling of American sovereignty with that of other countries.”

   We have a long way to go before we recapture the exciting spirit of the early World Federalist movement; but we are, at last, moving in the right direction.