CHAPTER4 Bui lding Positive Peace I t is important t.docx

CHAPTER4
Bui lding "Positive Peace"
I t is important to be against war. But it is not enough. We also
need to be in favor o f something- something positive and
affirm ing: na mely, peace. Peace studies is u nique not only
because it is multid iscip linary a nd forth-
rightly proclaims its adherence to "values" but also because it
identifies positive visions of
peace as being greater tha n tl1e a bsence of war.
The "pos itive peace" toward whim peace studies strives may
be, if anyth ing, even
more challengi ng than the prevention o f war. It is a variatio n
on what has been called the
"dog-car problem." Imagine a dog that has spent years barking
and run ning after cars.
Then, o ne day, it catmes one. What does it do with it? What
would devotees of peace do
w ith the world if they had the opportunity?
This is not a useless exercise because before any future ca n be
esta blished, it must first
be imagined. And moreover, unl ike our hypothetical car-m
asing dog, the estab lishment
of positive peace is not an ali-or-noth ing p heno meno n. The
movement toward positive
peace is likely to be halting and fragme ntary, w ith substantial
success along certain dimen-
s ions and likely failures along others. O n bala nce, the project
is formidable, nothing less

than a funda mental effort to retl1ink the relatio nship of h
uman beings to earn otl1er and
to their shared planet. If war and its causes are difficult to
define- and this is assu red ly
the case- positive peace is even more elus ive. (It ca n even be
da ngerous, because d isagree-
ments over what constitutes a desirable "peace" ca n lead to
war.)
Earlier, we briefly considered "j ust war" doctrine. The co
nditio ns for a "just peace"
are no less stren uo us or importa nt. The releva nt issues
include-but are not limited to-
aspirations for h uman rights, economic fa irness and
opportunity, democratization, and
environmenta l well-being and sustainabili ty. Nonetheless,
there is no agreement as to
what, specifically, is des ired or how much e mphasis to place
on earn goal.
The pursuit of positive peace nonethe less leads to certain
agreed princip les, one of
which is a minimization of vio lence, not o nly the overt vio
lence of war, but also what
has been called "structural violence," a co ndition that is
typically built into many social
and cultural institutions. A s lavehold ing society may be at
peace in that it is not literally at
1 61
162 Build ing ·rositive Peace•
war, but it is also rife w ith structural vio lence. Structu ral

violence has the effect of deny-
ing people importa nt rights s uch as economic opportunity,
socia l a nd politica l equality,
a sense of fulfillme nt and se lf-worth, and access to a healthy
natural environment. When
people starve to d eath, or even go hungry, a kind of vio lence is
taking place. Simi larly,
when huma n beings s uffe r from diseases that are preventable,
when they are denied a
decent education, hous ing, an opportunity to play, to grow, to
work, to raise a family, to
express themselves freely, to orga nize peacefully, or to
participate in their own governance,
a kind o f vio lence is occurri ng, even if bullets or clubs are not
being used. Society visits
violence on human rights a nd d ignity when it forci bly stunts
the optimum development
of ead1 h uman being, whether because of race, religion, sex,
sexual p reference, age, ide-
ology, and so on. In short, structural vio lence is a nother way
of id entifying oppression,
and positive peace would be a s ituation in wh ich structural vio
lence and oppression are
minim ized .
In ad ditio n, social inj ustice is important not o nly in its co
ntrib ution to structural vio-
lence but also as a ma jor contributo r to war, o fte n in
unexpected ways. For ma ny citizens
of the United States and Europe, as well as privileged people
worldwid e, current lifestyles
are fun damentally acceptable. Hence, peace for them has co me
to mean the continuatio n
of things as they are, w ith the ad ditio nal hope that overt
violence w ill be prevented. Fo r
others- perhaps the majority on our planet- change of one sort

or another is desired.
And for a small m inority, peace is so mething to fight fori A
Centra l America n peasant was
q uoted in the New York Times as saying, • 1 am for peace, b ut
not peace with h unger. •
There is a lo ng traditio n suggesting that in justice is a primary
cause o f war. The French
ph ilosopher Den is Diderot, for exa mple, was co nvinced that a
world o f justice a nd plenty
would mean a world free of tyranny a nd war. Hence, in his
eighteenth-centu ry treatise, the
Encyclopedia, Diderot sought to establish peace by d
isseminating all the world's techni-
cal informatio n, fro m beekeeping to iron forg ing. And, of
course, similar efforts continue
today, altho ugh few advocates of economic and social
development cla im that the prob-
lem of violence can be solved simp ly by spread ing knowledge
or even by keep ing every-
one's belly full.
The troubling relatio nship o f huma n beings to their natural
enviro nment must
also be rewo rked, perhaps in funda mental ways. A world at
peace must be one in wh ich
environmental, h uman rights, a nd economic issues all cohere
to foster maximum well-
being; ecological harmo ny cannot realistica([y be separated fro
m q uestions of h uma n
rights or econo mic justice (or, for that matter, fro m the issues
of democratization and
demilitarizatio n).
In relation to the envi ronment, politica l or econo mic ideo
logy do not appear to be

signi ficant. Environmental degradation is, to be sure,
intimately con nected to poverty:
wealthy states often export their most odious environmental ab
uses, and impoverished
states are often forced by their poverty to accept the s ituation .
Moreover, w ith in a ny given
state, wealthy peop le are able to purchase certain amenities,
whereas the poor fin d them-
selves living in degraded, and often downright dangerous, su
rroundings. But in general,
left-leaning govern ments have not shown themselves to be
more environmentally sensi-
tive than their right-leaning counterparts. In avowedly Socialist
or Co mmunist societies,
Tire Land Ethic
for example, "productio n goals" typically rep laced the
capitalist pursuit o f "profit" as the
"bonom line• to which enviro nmental val ues were all too freq
uently sacrificed.
An important sh ift in h uma n co nscious ness-inti mate ly
related to the agenda of
peace studies- is the realization that "nationa l security" must be
defined in ways that go
far beyond military strength and that as our planet beco mes
increas ingly interconnected
politica lly, economica lly, and socially, and also as o u r global
environment is increasi ngly
endangered, the healtl1, well-being, and security of every
individual become inseparable
from tl1e health, well-being, and security off tl1e earth itself.

Aldo Leopold
THE LAN D ETHIC
An ecological perspective dema nds that we recognize the rea
lity of connected ness, which,
as the poet Fra ncis Thompso n p ut it, "all th ings . . . near a nd
far, hiddenly to each o ther,
connected are, that thou canst not stir a flower without the
troubling o f a star. • Th is is true
not only for biology; b ut also for social, political, a nd econom
ic systems. Thus, not only
do wars ru in the environment, but also environmental
destruction - a nd its threat-ca n
lead to wars. Millions of refugees regularly flee e nvi ronmenta
l disasters such as drought,
floods, fam ine, a nd disease. These refugees, who constitute a
huma nitaria n d isaster in
themselves, can also ra ise international tensions.
The destruction of ra in forests, for exa mple, not only is a
deeply troubling environ-
mental issue w ith worldwide impl ications, but also arises from
particular eco nomic sys-
tems (notably a free-market free-for-all), with no small dose of
racis m (deva luing the
rights of indigenous peop les). The poverty resu lti ng from
deforestation and displacement
leads to land degradation a nd the growing problem of
desertification as h ungry, desperate
peop le dear and cu ltivate regions that should be left
untouched. This in turn leads to yet
more poverty and social unrest. Intensive farming of highly
erod ible la nd permanently
destroys so il; large-scale intrusions into wildlife habitat (wh
ich contri bute to species

extinctio n) are in large part responses to land h unger in rural,
developing countries, where
a small minority o f wealthy people own most of the arable
land, thereby pushing others to
environmenta lly abusive behavior. Worldwide, tl1e burn ing of
fossil fuels produces green-
house gases; the resulting global cl imate warm ing may
increase food insecurity by reduc-
ing agricultural productivity. All of these factors- plus many
otl1ers- are intertwined in
complex ways w ith the expo nential growth of the h uman
population.
There is an enorm ous and growing literature on specific
solutions to environmen-
ta l problems, such as mass tra nsportation; improved energy
efficiency a nd cogeneration;
163
A SAND COUNlY AlMANAC 2ND EDITION by Leopo ld (2
001) 5000w fro m Chp. "The Land Ethic" pp. 201- 226 c 1949,
1977 by Oxfo rd University Press, Inc. By permission of Oxford
University Press, USA.
164 Bu ild ing ·Positive Peace•
"soft" energy paths such as so lar, wind, a nd tidal power;
organic agriculture; e nhanced
recycl ing; eating "lowe r o n the food cha in"; and an
enlightened population po licy that
encourages fa mi ly planning, especially by emp owering
women.

The word "eco logy" derives fro m the Gree!k oikos, meaning
ho use. It refers to the inter-
relatio ns between living things a nd their envi ronment, with
the latter includi ng other
living things (pla nts, an ima ls, microorganisms) as well as
inan imate objects and processes
s ucl1 as cl imate, rock, wate r, and air. Desp ite dreams of
space travel and the colonizatio n of
other planets, the fact rema ins that h uman bei ngs have only
one home, and good planets
are hard to fi nd.
In the fi nal a nalys is, a world at peace m ust be one in wh ich
all living things expe rience
themselves as be ing "at ho me." In recent times, some of the
crucial relationships among
the world's species, and betwee n those species and their enviro
nments, have become
increasingly te nuous, wh ich in turn has begun to th reaten the
quality o f life and even its
continuation. At risk is nothing less tha n the integrity of
various life-support systems: the
air we b reath e, the water we d rink, the foo d we eat, as well
as the diverse fa bric of life that
provides e motio na l and sp iritual s ustena nce.
The fo llowing selection- w ritten by o ne ofth e great figu res
in ecology a nd the fo unde r
of "wild life ma nagement" - attempts to look broadly at the
problem and to suggest the
beginning of a solution : notably, a cod e of e nvironmental
ethics.
W he n god like Odysseus returned from the wars in Troy, h e
hanged all on o ne rope a dozen
slave-girls of h is household whom h e suspected of

misbehavior during his a bsence.
Th is hanging involved no questio n of propriety.
The g irls were property. The d isposal of property was
then, as now, a matter o f exped ience, not o f righ t
a nd wrong.
Concepts o f right and wro ng were n o t lacking
fro m Odysseus' Greece: w itness the fideli ty o f his
w ife through the long years before at last h is b lack-
prowed galleys dove the wi ne-dark seas for home.
The ethica l structure of that day covered w ives,
but had no t yet been extended to hu man chattels.
Du ring the three thousand years w hich have since
elapsed, ethica l criteria have been extended to many
fields of conduct, w ith correspond ing shri nkages in
those judged by exped iency only.
T HE ETH ICAL SEQUENC E
Th is extension o f ethics, so fa r studied only b y
philosophers, is actua lly a process in ecologica l
evolution. Its sequences may be described in eco-
logical as well as in p hi losoph ical terms. An ethic,
ecologica lly, is a limitatio n o n freedom o f action in
the struggle for existence. An ethic, p hilosoph ically,
is a differen tiatio n of social from a ntisocial condu ct.
These are two defini tions o f o ne thi ng. The th ing h as
its origi n in the tendency of interdependent in d i-
viduals o r groups to evolve mod es o f cooperatio n.
The ecologis t ca lls these symbioses. Politics a nd
eco nomics a re a dva nced symbioses in which the
origi nal free-for-a ll competitio n has been replaced,
in part by cooperative mechan isms w ith an ethical
content.

The complexity of coopera tive mecha nisms h as
increased with popu lation d ensity, and with the effi-
ciency o f tools. It was simp ler, fo r example, to define
the anti-social uses of s ticks and ston es in the days
of the mastodons tha n of bullets a nd billboards in
the age of motors.
The firs t eth ics deal t with the relatio n betv;een
ind ivid ua ls; the Mosaic Deca logue is an example.
later accretions dealt w ith the relatio n between the
Tire Land Ethic 165
ind ividual and society. The Golden Rule tries to inte-
grate the individual to society; democracy to inte-
grate social organ ization to the individual.
There is as yet no ethic dealing with man's rela-
tion to land and to the animals and plants wh ich
grow upon it. land, like Odysseus' slave-girls, is still
property. ' Ibe land-relation is stil l strictly economic,
entailing privileges but not obligations.
The extension o f e thics to this third element in
human environment is, if I read the evidence cor-
rectly, an evolutionary possibility and an ecological
necessity. It is the thi rd step in a sequence. The first
two have a lready been taken. Individual th inkers
since the days of Ezekiel and Isaiah have asserted
that the despoliation o f land is not only inexpedient
but wrong. Society, however, has not yet affirmed
their belief. I regard the present conservation move-
ment as the embryo of such an affirm a tion.

An ethic may be regarded as a mode of guidance
for meeting ecological situations so new or intricate,
or involving such deferred reactions, that the path
of social exped iency is not discernible to the aver-
age individual. Animal instincts are modes of gu id-
ance for the individual in meeting such situations.
Ethics are possibly a kind of community instinct
in-the-making.
T HE COMMUNITY CONCEPT
All e thics so fa r evolved rest upon a sing le p remise:
that the individual is a member of a community of
interdependent parts. His instincts prompt him to
compete for his place in that community, but his
ethics prompt him also to cooperate (perhaps in
order that there may be a place to compete for) .
The land eth ic simply enlarges the boundaries
of the community to include soils, waters, plants,
and animals, o r collectively: the land.
This sounds simple: do we not already sing our
love fo r and obligation to the land of the free and
the home of the brave7 Yes, but just what and whom
do we love? Certainly not the soil. which we are
sending helter-skelter downriver. Certain ly not the
waters, which we assume have no function except to
turn turbines, float barges, and carry off sewage. Cer-
ta inly not the p lants, o f which we exterminate whole
communities without batting an eye. Certain ly not
the animals, of which we have already extirpated
many of the largest and most beautiful species. A
land ethic of course cannot prevent the a lteration,

management, and use o f these "resources, • but it
does affirm their right to continued existence, and,
at least in spots, their continued existence in a natu-
ra l state.
In short. a land ethic changes the role of Homo
sapiem from conqueror of the land-commun ity to
p lain member and ci tizen of it. It implies respect for
his fellow-members, and also respect for the com-
munity as such.
In human history, we h ave learned ( I hope)
that the conqueror role is eventually self-defeating.
Why? Because it is implicit in such a role that the
conqueror knows, ex cat/1edra, just what makes the
community clock tick, and just what and who is
va luable, and what and who is worth less, in com-
munity life. It always turns out that he knows nei-
ther, and this is w hy his conquests eventually defeat
themselves.
In the biotic community, a parallel situation
exists. Abraham knew exactly what the land was
for: it was to d rip milk and honey into Abraham's
mouth. At the present moment, the assurance with
which we regard this assumption is inverse to the
degree of our education .
The ord inary citizen today assumes that science
knows what makes the community clock tick; the
scientist is equally sure that he does not. He knows
that the biotic mechanism is so complex that its
workings may never be fully understood .
THE ECOLOGICAL CONSCIENCE

Conservation is a state of harmony between men
and land . Despite nearly a century of propaganda,
conservation still proceeds at a sna il's pace; progress
s till consists largely ofletterhead p ieties and conven-
tion oratory. On the back forty we still slip tvto steps
backward for each forward stride.
The usual answer to this dilemma is "more con-
servation education ." No one will debate this, but is it
certain that only the volume of education needs step-
ping up? Is something lacking in the content as welJ7
It is d ifficul t to give a fair summary of its con-
tent in brief form , but, as I understand it, the content
is substantially this: obey the law, vote right, join
some o rganizations, and practice what conservation
is profi table on your own land; th e government will
do th e rest.
Is not this formula too easy to accomplish
anyth ing worthwhile? It defines no righ t or wrong,
assigns no obligation, calls fo r no sacrifice, implies
no change in the current p hilosophy of values. In
respect of land-use, it urges only enligh tened self-
interest. Just how far will such education take us?
No imponant change in eth ics was ever accom-
plished without an internal change in ou r intellec-
tua l emphasis, loyal ties, affections, and convictions.
The proof that conservation has not yet touched
these fo undations of conduct lies in the fact that

philosophy and religion have not yet heard of it
In our attempt to make conservation easy, we have
made it trivial.
SUBSTilUTES FOR A lAND ETHIC
When the logic o f h istory hungers for bread and we
hand out a stone, we are at pains to explain how
much the s tone resemb les bread. I now describe
some of the stones wh ich serve in lieu of a land e thic.
One basic weakness in a conservation system
based w ho lly on economic motives is that most
members of the land community have no econom ic
value. Wildfl owers and songbi rds a re examples.
Of the 22,000 higher p lants and an ima ls native
to W isconsin, it is doubtful w h ether more than 5
percent can be sold, fed, eaten, o r o th erwise put to
economic use. Yet these creatures are members of
the biotic community, and if (as I believe) its sta-
bility depends on its integrity, they are enti tled to
continuance.
When one of these non-economic categories is
threatened, and if we happen to love it, we invent
s ubterfuges to give it econom ic importance. At the
beginning of the century songbirds were supposed
to be disappearing. Ornithologists jumped to the
rescue wi th some d istinctly shaky evidence to the
effect that insects wou ld eat us up if birds failed to
control them. The evidence had to be economic in
order to be valid.
It is painful to read these circum locutions today.
We h ave no land ethic yet, but we have a t least drawn

nearer the poin t of admitting that bi rds s h ou ld con-
tinue as a matter o f biotic right, regardless of the
p resence or absence of econom ic advantage to us.
A para llel situation exists in respect of preda-
tory mammals, raptorial b irds, and fish-eating
birds. Time was when b io logists somewhat over-
worked the evidence tha t these creatures preserve
th e hea lth of game by kill ing weaklings, o r th at
th ey con trol rodents for the farmer, or that they
p rey on ly on "worth less" species. Here again, the
evidence had to be economic in order to be valid . It
is on ly in recent years that we h ear the more h onest
argumen t th a t p redators a re members o f the com-
munity, and that no specia l interest has the right to
exterminate them for the sake of a benefit, real o r
fancied, to itself. .. .
lack o f economic va lue is sometimes a charac-
ter not on ly of species or groups, but o f enti re biotic
commun ities: marshes, bogs, dunes, and •deserts"
are examples. O ur formula in s uch cases is to rel-
egate th ei r conservation to government as refuges,
monuments, o r parks. The difficu lty is that these
commun ities a re usually interspersed with more
va luable private lands; the governmen t cannot pos-
sibly own o r control such scattered parcels. The net
effect is that we have relegated some of them to ulti-
mate extinction over la rge areas .. ..
Industrial landowners and users, especially
lumbermen and stockmen, are inclined to wa il long
and lo udly about th e extension of government own-
ersh ip and regulation to land, but (with notable
exceptions) they s how little disposition to develop
th e only visible alternative: the voluntary practice o f

conservation on their own lands.
When the private landowner is asked to per-
form some unprofi table act for the good of the
community, he today assents on ly with outstretched
palm. If the act costs h im cash this is fa ir and
proper, but wh en it costs only forethought, open-
mindedness, o r time, the issue is at least debatable.
The overwhelming growth of land-use subsid ies in
recent years must be ascribed, in la rge part, to the
government's own agencies for conservation edu-
cation: the land bureaus, the agricul tural colleges,
and the extension services. As far as I can detect,
no eth ical obligation towa rd land is ta ugh t in these
institutions.
11re Lllnd Ethic 167
To sum up: a system of conservation basro solely
on economic self-interest is hopelessly lopsided. It
tends to ignore, and thus eventually to eliminate,
many elements in the land community that lack
commercial value, but that are (as far as we know)
essential to its healthy functioning. It assumes,
falsely, I think, that the economic parts of the biotic
clock will function w ithou t the uneconomic parts.
It tends to relegate to government many functions
eventually too large, too complex, or too widely dis-
persed to be performed by government.
An ethical obligation on the part of the private
owner is the o nly visible remedy for these situatio ns.
THE lAND PYRAMID

An ethic to supplement and guide the economic
relation to land presupposes the existence of some
ment al image ofland as a biotic mechanism. We ca n
be ethical only in relation to something we ca n see,
feel , understand, love, or otherwise have fa ith in.
'l11e image common ly employed in conserva-
tio n education is "the balance of nature. • For rea-
sons too lengthy to detail here. this figure of speech
fails to describe accurately what little we know
about the land mechanism. A much truer image is
the o ne employed in ecology: the biotic pyramid. I
shall first sketch the pyramid as a symbol of land,
and later develop some of its implications in terms
of land-use.
Plants absorb energy from the sun. This energy
Oows through a ci rcuit called the bio ta, which may
be represented by a pyramid consisting of layers. 'lne
botto m layer is the soil . A plant layer rests o n the
soi l, an insect layer on the p lants, a bird and rodent
layer on the insects, and so on up through various
anima l groups to the apex layer, which consists of
the larger carnivores.
The species of a layer are alike not in where they
came from, o r in what they look like, but rather in
what they eat. Each successive layer depends on
those below it for food and often for other ser-
vices, and each in tum furnishes food and services
to those above. Proceeding upward, each successive
layer decreases in numerical abundance. 1nus, for
every carnivore there are hundreds of his prey, thou-
sands o f their prey, millio ns of insects, uncoun table

plants. The pyramidal form of the system reflects
this numerical progression from apex to base.
Man shares an intermediate layer with the bears,
raccoons, and squirrels which eat both meat and
vegetables.
The lines of dependency for food and other
services are called food chains. Thus soil-oak-deer-
Indian is a chain that has now been largely converted
to so il-corn-cow-farmer. Each species, including
ourselves, is a link in many chains. The deer eats a
hundred p lants other than oak, and the cow a hun-
dred plants other than com. Both, then, are links in
a hundred chains. The pyramid is a tangle of chains
so complex as to seem disorderly, yet the stability of
the system proves it to be a highly organized struc-
ture. Its functioning depends on the cooperation
and competition of its diverse parts.
In the beginning. the pyramid oflife was low and
squat; the food chains short and simple. Evolution
has added layer after layer, link after link. Man is one
of thousa nds of accretions to the height and complex-
ity of the pyramid . Science has given us many doubts,
but it has given us at least one certainty: the trend of
evolution is to elaborate and diversify the biota.
Land, then, is not merely soil; it is a fountain
of energy Howing through a circui t of soils, plants,
and animals. r-ood chai ns are the living channels
which conduct energy upward; death and decay
return it to the soil. The circuit is not dosed; some
energy is dissipated in decay, some is added by
absorption from the a ir, som e is stored in soils,
peats, and long-lived forests; but it is a sustained
circuit, like a slowly augmented revolving fund of

life. There is always a net loss by down hill wash,
but th is is normally s ma ll and offset by th e decay
of rocks. It is de posited in the ocean and, in the
course of geological time, ra ised to form new lands
and new pyramids.
The velocity and character of the upward How of
energy depend o n the complex structure of the plant
and animal community, much as the upward How of
sap in a tree depends on its complex cellular organi-
zation. Without this complexity, normal circulation
would presumably not occu r. Structure means the
characteristic numbers, as well as the characteristic
kinds and function s, of th e co mponent species. This
interdependence between the complex structure of
the land and its smooth function ing as an energy
unit is one of its basic attributes.
When a change occurs in one part of the cir-
cu it, many other parts must adjust themselves to it
Change does not necessarily obstruct o r divert the
flow of energy; evolution is a long series of self-
induced changes, the net result o f which has been to
elaborate the fl ow mechanism and to lengthen the
circui t. Evolutionary changes, however, are usua lly
slow and local. Man's invention of tools h as enabled
h im to make changes of unprecedented vio lence,
rapidity, and scope.
One change is in the composition of fl oras
and faunas. The la rger p redators are lopped off

the apex of th e pyramid; food chains, fo r the fi rst
time in h istory, become shorter rather than longer.
Domesticated species from other lands a re substi-
tuted for wild ones, and wild ones are moved to
new habi ta ts. In th is worldwide pooling o f faunas
and fl oras, some species get ou t o f bounds as pests
and diseases, others are extinguished. Such effects
are seldom intended o r fo reseen; they represent
u npredicted and often untraceable readjustments
in the structure. Agricultural science is largely a race
between the emergence of new pests and the emer-
gence o f new techniques fo r thei r control.
Anoth er change tou ches the fl ow of energy
through p lan ts and an imals and its return to the
soil. Fertil ity is the ability of soil to receive, store,
and release energy. Agriculture, by overdrafts on the
soil, or by too radical a substi tution of domestic for
native species in the s u perstructure, may derange the
channels o f flow o r dep lete storage. Soils depleted of
their s torage, o r o f the organ ic matter which anchors
it, wash away faster than they form. This is erosion.
Waters, like soil, a re part o f the energy circu it
Industry, by polluting waters or obstructing them
with dams, may exclu de the plants and an imals nec-
essary to keep energy in circulation.
Transportation brings about another basic
change: the p lants or an imals grown in one region
are now consumed and returned to the soil in
another. Transportation taps the energy s to red in
rocks, and in the air, and uses it elsewhere; thus we
fert ilize th e garden with nitrogen gleaned by the
guano b irds from the fishes of seas on the other side

of the Equator. Thus the fo rmerly localized and self-
conta ined circui ts a re pooled on a worldwide sca le.
The process of altering the pyram id for human
occupation releases s tored energy, and this often
gives rise, during the p ioneering period, to a decep-
tive exuberance of p lant and an imal life, both w ild
and tame. These releases of biotic capita l tend to
becloud or postpone the pena lties o f violence.
This thu mbnail sketch o f land as an energy cir-
cui t conveys three basic ideas:
1. That land is not merely soi l.
2. That the native plants and animals kept the
energy circuit open; others may or may not.
3 . That man-made changes a re of a different o rder
than evolutionary changes, and have effects more
comprehensive than is intended o r foreseen.
These ideas, collectively, ra ise two basic issues:
Can th e land adjust itself to the new order? Can
th e desi red a lterations be accomplished with less
violence?.
The combined evidence o f history and ecol-
ogy seems to support one general deduction: the
less violent the man-made changes, the greater the
probability of successful readjustment in the pyra-
mid. Violence, in turn, varies w ith human popula-
tion density; a dense population requires a more
violent conversion. In this respect, North America
has a better chance for permanence than Europe, if
s he can contrive to limit her density.

This deduction runs counter to our current
p h ilosophy, which assumes that because a sma ll
increase in density enriched h uman life, that an
indefinite increase will enrich it indefinitely. Ecol-
ogy knows of no density relationsh ip that holds for
indefinitely wide limi ts. All gains from density a re
subject to a law of d iminish ing returns.
Whatever may be the equation for men and
land, it is improbable that we as yet know all its
terms. Recent d iscoveries in mineral and vi tamin
nutrition reveal u nsuspected dependencies in the
up-circui t: incred ibly minute quantities of certain
substances determine the value o f soils to p lants, o f
p lan ts to an imals. Wh at o f the down-circuit? What
of th e vanish ing species, the preservation o f which
we now regard as an esthetic luxury? They helped
Tire Land Ethic 169
b u ild the soil; in what unsuspected ways may they
be essential to its maintenance? (It has been pro-
posed J . .. that we use pra irie fl owers to refloccula te
the wasting soils of the dust bowl; who knows for
what purpose cranes and condors, o tters and griz-
zlies may some day be used?
lAND H EALTH AND TH E A - B CLEAVAGE
A land ethic, then, reflects the existence of an eco-
logica l conscience, and this in tu rn reflects a co nvic-
tion of ind ividual responsib il ity fo r the health of
the land. Hea lth is the capacity of th e land for self-

renewa l. Conservation is our effort to understand
and p reserve this capacity.
Conservationists a re notorious for their d is-
sensions. Superficially these seem to add up to
mere confusion, but a more carefu l scrutiny reveals
a sing le p lane of cleavage common to many spe-
cialized fie lds. In each field one group (A) regards
the land as soil, and its function as commodity-
produ ction; another group (B) regards the land as a
biota, and its function as someth ing broader. How
much broader is admittedly in a state of dou b t and
confusion.
In my own fie ld, fo restry, Group A is quite con-
tent to grow trees like cabbages, w ith cellu lose as
the basic fo rest commod ity. It feels no inh ibition
aga inst violence; its ideology is agronomic. Group B,
on the other hand, sees fo restry as fundamentally
different from agronomy because it employs natural
species, and manages a natural environment rather
than creating an artificial one. Group B prefers natu-
ral reproduction on princip le. It worries on biotic as
well as economic grounds abou t th e loss of species
like chestnu t, and the th reatened loss o f th e whi te
pines. It worries abou t a whole series of secondary
forest funct ions: wildlife, recreation, watersheds,
w ilderness areas. To my mind, Group B feels the stir-
rings of an ecological conscience.
In the wildlife fi e ld, a para llel cleavage exists.
For Group A the basic commodi ties a re sport and
meat; the yardsticks o f production a re ciphers of
ta ke in p heasan ts and trou t. Artificial propagation
is acceptable as a permanen t as well as a tempo-
rary recourse-if its unit costs permit. Group B,

on th e other hand, worries about a whole series
of biotic side-issues. What is the cost in predato rs
of producing a game crop? Shou ld we have further
recou rse to exotics7 How can management resto re
th e shrinking species, like pra irie grouse, already
h opeless as shootable game? How can manage-
ment restore the threa tened rarities, like trumpeter
swan and whoop ing crane? Can management prin-
ciples be extended to wi ldflowers7 Here again it is
clear to me that we have the same A- B cleavage as
in fo restry . .
The ecologica l fu ndamenta ls of agricu lture are
just as poorly known to th e public as in other fields
of land-use. For example, few edu ca ted peop le
rea lize th a t the marvelous advances in techn iq ue
made d u ring recent decades are improvements
in the pump, rather than th e wel l. Acre for acre,
th ey have barely sufficed to o ffset the sinking level
of fert ili ty.
In a ll of these cleavages, we see repeated the
same basic paradoxes: man the conqueror versus
man the biotic citizen; science the sharpener of h is
sword versus science the search light on his u niverse;
land the slave and servant versus land the collective
o rganism. Robinson's in junction to Tristram may
well be applied, at th is ju ncture, to Homo sapiens as a
species in geologica l time:
Whether you will or not
You are a King, Tris tram, for you a re one
Of the time-tested few that leave the world,
When they are gone, not the same place it was.
Mark wha t you leave.

THE OUTLOOK
It is inconceivable to me that an eth ical relation to
land can exist without love, respect, and admiration
for land, and a high rega rd for its va lu e. By va lue,
I of course mean something far broader than mere
economic value; I mean value in the ph ilosophical
sense.
Perhaps th e most serious obstacle impeding
th e evolution of a land ethic is the fact that our edu-
cational and economic system is headed away from ,
ra ther th an toward, an in tense consciousness o f
170 Building "Positive Peace•
land. Your true modern is separated from the land
by many middlemen, and by innumerable physical
gadgets. He has no vital relation to it; to him it is
the space between cities on w hich crops g row. Turn
him loose for a day on the land, and if the spot does
not happen to be a golf links or a "scenic" area, he
is bored stiff. If crops could be raised by hydropon-
ics instead of farm ing, it wou ld suit him very well .
Syn thetic substitutes for wood, leather, wool, and
other natura l land products suit him better than
the originals. In short, land is someth ing he has
"outgrown."
Almost equally serious as an obstacle to a land
ethic is the attitude of the fa rmer for whom the land
is still an adversary, or a taskmaster that keeps h im
in slavery. Theoretically, the mechanization of fa rm-

ing ought to cut the farmer's chains, but whether it
really does is debatable.
One of the requisites for an ecological compre-
hension of land is an understanding of ecology, and
this is by no means co-extensive with "education";
in fact, much h igher education seems deliberately
to avoid ecologica l concepts. An understanding of
ecology does not necessarily origina te in courses
bearing eco logical labels; it is quite as likely to be
labeled geography, botany. agronomy. h is tory, or
econom ics. This is as it should be, but whatever the
label, ecologica l train ing is scarce.
The case for a land ethic would appear hope-
less but for the minority w hich is in obvious revolt
aga inst these "modem" trends.
The "key-log" which must be moved to release
the evolu tionary process for an ethic is simply th is:
quit thinking about decent land-use as solely an
economic problem. Examine each question in terms
of what is ethically and esthetically right, as well
as what is economically expedient. A thing is right
when it tends to preserve the integrity, stab ility, and
beauty of the biotic community. It is wrong when it
tends otherwise.
It of course goes w ithout saying that economic
feas ibility limits the tether of wh at can or cannot be
done for land. It always has and it a lways will. The
fallacy the econom ic determinists have tied around
our collective neck, and which we now need to
cast off, is the belief that econom ics dete rmines all
land-use. This is simply not true. An innumerable
h ost of actions and attitudes, comprising perhaps

the bulk of all land relations, is determined by the
land-user's tastes and predi lections, rather than by
h is purse. The bulk o f all land relations hinges on
investments of t ime, forethought, skill, and faith
rather than on investments of cash. As a land-user
thinketh, so is he.
I have purposely presented the land ethic as
a product of social evolution because nothing so
important as an ethic is ever "written." Only the
most superficial studen t of h istory supposes that
Moses "wrote" the Decalogue; it evolved in the
minds of a thinking community, and Moses wrote a
tentative summary o f it for a "seminar. • I say tenta-
tive because evolution never stops.
The evolution o f a land ethic is an intellectual
as well as emotiona l process. Conservation is paved
with good intentions which prove to be futile, or
even dangerous, because they are devoid of critical
understanding either of the land, or of economic
land-use. I think it is a truism that as the ethical
frontier advances from the individual to the com-
munity, its intellectual content increases.
The mechanism of operation is the same for
any ethic: social approbation for right actions: social
disapproval for wrong actions.
By and large, our present problem is one o f
attitudes and implements. We are remodeling the
Alhambra w ith a s team shovel, and we are proud o f
our yardage. We shall hardly relinquish the s h ovel,
which after a ll has many good points, but we a re
in need of gentler and more objective criteria for its
successful use.

Speecll to Tire United Natiom, 2015
Pope Francis
SPEECH TO THE UNITED NATIONS, 2015
To be sure, global warm ing is not the o nly environmental issue
that must be co nfronted
by advocates of positive peace: the world faces a dra matic and
potentia lly catastrophic
reduction in biodivers ity, the variety and a bunda nce of livi ng
species. Econom ic exploi-
tation of nature is beco ming increasingly unsustainable,
especially given the incontro-
vertible fact that ma ny resources are fi nite and not renewable.
Energy in particular poses
thorny proble ms, especially insofar as use patterns remain
tethered to fossil fu els. Popula-
tion pressure seems unrelenting a nd, paradoxically, is most
concentrated in third world
countries that are least capable o f absorbing its socia l and
econom ic impact, not to men-
tion the enviro nmental costs. And the a fo remen tioned is but a
s mall samp le, beyond the
general perspective advocated by AI do Leopold.
Loomi ng above these issues, however, is the increasingly evid
ent fact that because of
the prod uction of greenhouse gases (nota bly but not limited to
carbon dioxide), h uma n
beings are dramatically and perhaps irreversi bly changing the
climate of pla net Earth,
making it hotter along w ith other comp lex a nd cha llenging cl

imate changes. Christia n-
ity has been accused of colluding in many e nvi ron mental
problems, notably by scripture
interp reted as giving people the impressio n that they have been
•given" the earth and its
creatures to use and abuse as they wish. There has also,
however, been a religio us cou n-
termovement that emphas izes the human responsib ility to be
responsible stewards of
the environment. Notable here is the voice of Pope Francis,
whose speech to the United
Nations in 2015 marks a milestone in this respect.
171
Mr President, Lad ies and Gentlemen, ...
Th is is th e fifth time that a pope h as visited
the United Nations. I follow in the foo ts teps of my
predecessors Paul VI, in 1965, John Pau ll!, in 1979
and 1995, and my most recent p redecessor, now
Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI, in 2008. Al l of them
expressed th eir great esteem for th e o rganization,
which th ey considered th e appropriate jurid ical and
political response to th is p resent moment o f h istory,
marked by ou r technical ability to overcome d is-
tances and frontiers and, apparently, to overcome a ll
natural lim its to the exercise o f power. An essential
response, inasmuch as technologica l power, in the
hands of nationalis tic o r falsely un iversalist ideolo-
gies, is capable o f perpetrating tremendous atroci-
ties. I can on ly re iterate the appreciation expressed
by my predecessors, in reaffi rming th e importance
which th e Catholic Ch u rch attaches to th is insti tu-
tion and the hope wh ich she p laces in its activities.

o libreria Editrice Vaticana. Used by permission.
The Un ited Nations is p resently celebrating
its 70 th ann iversary. The h istory of th is organized
commun ity of states is one of important common
achievements over a period o f u n us ually fas t-paced
changes. Without claiming to be exhaustive, we can
men tion the cod ification and development o f inter-
national law, the establish ment of international
172 Building ·rositive Peace•
norms regarding human rights, advances in human-
itarian law, the resolution of numerous confl icts,
operations of peace-keeping and reconciliation,
and any number of other accomplishments in every
area of international activity and endeavou r. All
these achievements are lights which help to dispel
the darkness of the disorder caused by unrestrained
ambitions and collective fo rms o f selfishness. Cer-
ta inly, many grave problems rema in to be resolved,
yet it is clear that, without all those in terventions
on the internationa l level, mankind would not have
been ab le to survive the unchecked use of its own
possibil ities. Every one o f these political, juridical
and technica l advances is a path towards attaining
the idea l of human fra ternity and a means for its
greater realization.
For this reason I pay homage to all those men
and women whose loyalty and self-sacrifice have
benefitted human ity as a whole in these past 70
years. In particular, I would recall today those wh o

gave their lives for peace and reconciliation among
peoples, from Dag Hammarskjold to the many
United Nations officials a t every level who have
been killed in the course of humanitarian missions,
and missions of peace and reconci liation.
Beyond these ach ievements, the experience of
the past 70 years has made it clear that reform and
adapta tion to the times is always necessary in the
pursui t of the ultimate goal of granting all countries,
without exception, a share in, and a genuine and
equitable influence on, decision-making processes.
The need for greater equ ity is especially true in the
case o f those bodies with effective executive capa-
bility, such as the Security Council, the financial
agencies and the groups o r mechanisms specifically
created to deal with econom ic crises. This will help
limit every kind of abuse or usury, especia lly where
developing countries are concerned. The interna-
tional financial agencies should care fo r the sustain-
ab le development of countries and should ensure
that they a re not subjected to oppressive lend ing
systems which, far from promoting progress, subject
people to mechanisms which generate greater pov-
erty, exclusion and dependence.
The work of the United Nations, according
to the principles set forth in the preamble and the
first articles of its founding charter, can be seen as
the development and promotion of the rule of law,
based on the realization that justice is an essential
condition for ach ieving the idea l of universal frater-
nity. In this context, it is h elpful to recall that the
limitation o f power is an idea implicit in the con-
cept oflaw itself. To g ive to each h is own, to cite the

classic defin ition of justice, means that no human
individual or group can consider itself absolute, per-
mitted to bypass the dign ity and the rights o f o ther
individuals or their social groupings. The effective
distribution of power (political, economic, defense-
related, technological, etc) among a plurality o f
subjects, and the creation o f a jurid ical system for
regulating claims and interests, are one concrete way
of limiting power. Yet today's world presents us with
many false rights and-at the same time-broad
sectors w hich are vulnerable, victims of power badly
exercised: for example, the natural environment
and the vast ranks of the excluded. These sectors a re
closely interconnected and made increasingly fragile
by dominant political and economic relationships.
That is why their rights must be forcefully affirm ed,
by working to protect the environment and by put-
ting an end to exclusion .
First, it must be stated that a true "right o f the
environment" does exist, for two reasons. First,
because we human beings are part of the environ-
ment. We live in communion with it, since the envi-
ronment itself enta ils ethical which human
activity must acknowledge and respect. Man, fo r all
h is remarkable gifts, which "are signs of a unique-
ness which transcends the spheres of physics and
biology" (Laudato Si', 81 ), is at the same t ime a part
of these spheres. He possesses a body s h aped by
physical, chemica l and b io logical elements, and can
only survive and develop if the ecological environ-
ment is favourab le. Any harm done to the environ-
ment, therefore, is harm done to humanity. Second,
because every creature, particularly a living creature,
has an intrinsic value, in its existence, its life, its
beauty and its interdependence with o ther creatures.

We Christians, together with the o ther monothe-
istic religions, believe that the universe is the fruit
of a loving decision by the Creator, who permits
man respectfully to use creation for the good of his
fellow men and for the glory of the Creator; he is
not authorized to abuse it, much less to destroy it.
Speecll to Tire United Natiom, 2015 173
In all religions, the environment is a fundamental
good (cf ibid.) .
The misuse and destruction of the environ-
ment are a lso accompanied by a relentless process
of exclusion. In effect, a selfish and boundless thirst
for power and material prosperity leads both to the
misuse of available natural resources and to the exclu-
sion of the weak and disadvantaged, either because
they are d ifferen tly abled (handicapped), or because
they lack adequate information and technical exper-
tise, or are incapable o f decisive politica l action. Eco-
nomic and social exclusion is a complete denial of
human fraternity and a grave offense aga inst human
rights and the environmen t. The poorest are those
who suffer most from such offenses, for three seri-
ous reasons: they are cast off by society, forced to live
off what is discarded and suffer unjustly from the
abuse o f the environment. They are part o f today's
widespread and qu ietly growing "culture o f waste."
The dramatic reality of this whole situation of
exclusion and inequality, w ith its evident effects, has
led me, in union with the entire Christian people
and many o thers, to take s tock of my grave responsi-

bility in this regard and to speak out, together w ith
all those who are seeking urgently-needed and effec-
tive solutions. The adoption of the 2030 Agenda
for Susta inable Development at the World Summit,
which opens today, is an important sign of hope. I
am similarly confident that the Paris conference on
climatic change will secure fundamental and effec-
tive agreements.
Solemn comm itments, however, are not
enough, even though they are a necessary step
toward solutions. The classic definition of justice
which I mentioned earl ier contains as one of its
essentia l elements a constant and perpetual will:
Justitia est constans et perpetua voluntas ius sum
cuique tribuend i. Our world demands of all govern-
ment leaders a will which is effective, practical and
constant, concrete steps and immediate measures
for preserving and improving the natura l environ-
ment and thus putting an end as quickly as possible
to the phenomenon of socia l and economic exclu-
sion, with its baneful consequences: human traffick-
ing, the marketing o f human organs and tissues, the
sexua l exp loitation of boys and girls, slave labour,
including prostitution, the drug and weapons trade,
te rrorism and internationa l o rganized crime. Such
is the magni tude of these situations and their toll
in innocent lives, that we must avoid every tempta-
tion to fall into a declarationist nominalism which
would assuage our consciences. 'We need to ensure
that our institutions are truly effective in the struggle
against all these scourges.
The number and complexity of the problems
require that we possess technical instruments o f

verification. But this involves two risks. We can rest
content wi th the bureaucratic exercise of drawing up
long lists o f good proposals-goa ls, objectives and
s tatistical indicators-or we can think that a single
theoretica l and aprioris tic solution will provide an
answer to all the challenges. It must never be forgot-
ten that political and econom ic activity is on ly effec-
tive when it is understood as a prudential activity,
guided by a perennial concept of justice and con-
s tantly conscious of the fuct that, above and beyond
our p lans and programmes, we are dealing w ith real
men and women w ho live, struggle and suffer, and
are often forced to live in great poverty, deprived o f
all rights.
To enable these real men and women to escape
from extreme poverty, we must a llow them to be d ig-
nified agents of their own destiny. Integral human
development and the full exercise o f human d ig-
nity cannot be imposed. They must be built up and
allowed to unfold for each individual, for every
family, in communion with others, and in a right
relationsh ip with all those areas in which human
social life develops-friends, communities, towns
and cities, schools, businesses and unions, prov-
inces, nations, e tc. This presupposes and requi res
the righ t to education-also for girls (excluded in
certain p laces )-wh ich is ensured first and foremost
by respecting and reinforcing the primary right o f
the family to educate its children, as well as the right
of churches and social groups to support and assist
families in the education of their child ren. Educa-
tion conceived in this way is the basis for the imple-
men tation of the 2030 Agenda and for reclaiming
the environment.

The preamble and the first article of the Char-
te r of the United Nations set forth the foundations
of the international juridical framework: peace, the
pacific solution o f disputes and the development
174 Building "Positive Peace•
of friend ly relations between th e nations. Strongly
opposed to such statements, and in practice denying
them, is the constant tendency to th e proliferation
of arms, especially weapons o f mass destruction,
such as nuclear weapons. An eth ics and a law based
on th e threat of mutual destruction- and possibly
the destruction of all mankind-are self-contrad ic-
tory and an affront to the entire framework of the
United Nations, wh ich would end up as "nations
united by fear and distrust." There is urgent need
to work for a world free of nuclear weapons, in full
application of the non-proliferation treaty, in letter
and spirit, w ith the goal of a complete proh ibition
of th ese weapons.
The recent agreement reached on the nuclear
question in a sensitive region of Asia and the Middle
East is proof of the potential o f political good w il l
and oflaw, exercised w ith sincerity, patience and con-
stancy. I express my hope that this agreement will be
lasting and efficacious, and bring forth the desi red
fruits with the cooperation of all the parties involved.
In this sense, hard evidence is not lacking of the
negative effects of military and political interven-
tions which are not coordinated between members
of th e internationa l community. For this reason,

while regretting to have to do so, I must renew my
repeated appeals in regard to th e pa inful situation of
the enti re Middle East, North Africa and other Afri-
can countries, where Ch ristians, together with other
cultura l o r ethnic groups, and even members o f the
majority relig ion who have no desire to be caugh t
up in hatred and fo lly, have been forced to witness
the destruction of their p laces of worsh ip, their cul-
tura l and religious heritage, their houses and prop-
erty, and have faced the a lternative either of fl eeing
or of paying for their ad hesion to good and to peace
by thei r own lives, or by enslavement.
These realities should serve as a grave summons
to an exam ination of conscience on the part of th ose
charged with the conduct o f international affairs.
Not only in cases of relig ious o r cultural persecu-
tion, but in every situation of conflict, as in Ukra ine,
Syria, Iraq, Libya, South Sudan and the Great Lakes
region, real human beings take precedence over par-
tisan interests, however legitimate the latter may be.
In wars and confl icts there are ind ividual persons,
our brothers and sisters, men and women, young
and old, boys and gi rls who weep, suffer and die.
Human beings who are easily discarded when our
only response is to draw up lis ts of problems, s trate-
gies and disagreements.
As I wrote in my letter to the secretary general
of the United Nations on 9 August 2014, "the most
basic understanding of human dignity compels the
international community, particularly through the
norms and mechanisms o f international law, to do
all that it can to stop and to p revent further system-
atic violence against ethnic and religious minorities"

and to protect innocent peoples.
Along th e same lines I wou ld mention anoth er
kind of conflict which is not a lways so open, yet is
silently ki lling millions of people. Another kind o f
war experienced by many of ou r societies as a result
of the narcotics trade. A wa r which is taken for
granted and poorly fought. Drug trafficking is by its
very nature accompan ied by trafficking in persons,
money laundering, the a rms trade, child exploita-
tion and other forms of corruption. A corruption
which has penetrated to different levels of social,
polit ical, military, artistic and religio us life, and,
in many cases, has g iven rise to a parallel structure
which threatens the cred ibility of our insti tut ions.
I began this speech recall ing the visits of my pre-
decessors. I would hope tha t my words wi ll be taken
above all as a continuation of the final words of the
address of Pope Paul VI; although spoken a lmost
exactly fifty years ago, they remain ever timely. "The
hour has come when a pause, a moment of recollec-
tion, reflection, even of prayer, is absolutely needed
so that we may think back over ou r common origin,
our history, our common destiny. The appea l to the
moral conscience of man has never been as neces-
sary as it is today . .. For th e danger comes neither
from progress nor from science; if these are used
well, th ey can h elp to solve a great number of the
serious problems besetting mankind (Add ress to
th e United Nations organization, 4 October 1965).
Among o ther things, human gen ius, well applied,
wil l s urely help to meet th e grave challenges of eco-
logical deterioration and o f exclusion. As Pau l VI
said: "The real danger comes from man, who h as
at his d isposal ever more powerful instruments that

are as well fitted to bring abou t ruin as they are to
achieve lofty conquests" (ibid.) .
How to judge Globalism 175
The common home of all men and women
must continue to rise on the foundations of a right
understanding of universal fraternity and respect
for the sacredness of every human life, of every
man and every woman, the poor, the elderly, chil-
dren, the infirm, the unborn, the unemployed, the
abandoned, those considered disposable because
they are only considered as part of a statistic. This
common home of all men and women must also be
bui lt on the understanding of a certain sacredness of
created nature.
Such understanding and respect call for a higher
degree of wisdom, one which accepts transcendence,
rejects the creation of an all-powerful eli te, and recog-
nizes that the full meaning of individual and collec-
tive life is found in selfless service to others and in the
sage and respectfu l use of creation for the common
good . To repeat the words of Paul VI, "the edifice of
modern civilization has to be built on spiritual prin-
ciples, for they are the only ones capable not only
of supporting it, but of shedding light on it" (ibid.).
El Gaucho Martin Fierro, a classic of literature
in my native land, says: "Brothers should stand by
each other, because this is the first law; keep a true
bond between you always, at every time-because if
you fight among yourselves, you' ll be devoured by
those outside. "

The contemporary world, so apparently con-
nected, is experiencing a growing and steady social
fragmentation, which places at risk "the foundations
of social life" and consequently leads to "ba ttles over
conflicting interests" (Laudato Si', 229).
The present time invites us to give priority to
actions which generate new processes in society, so
as to bear frui t in significant and positive histori-
cal events ( cf. Evangelii Gaudium, 223 ). We cannot
permit ourselves to postpone "certain agendas" for
the future. lne future demands of us critical and
global decisions in the face of world-wide confli cts
which increase the number of the excluded and
those in need.
The praiseworthy international juridical frame-
work of the United Nations organization and of all
its activities, like any other human endeavour, can
be improved, yet it remains necessary; at the same
time it can be the pledge of a secure and happy
future for future generations. And so it wil l, if the
representatives of the states can set aside partisan
and ideological interests, and sincerely strive to serve
the common good. I pray to Almighty God that this
will be the case, and I assure you of my support and
my prayers, and the support and prayers of all the
faithful of the Catholic Church, that this institution,
all its member states, and each of its officials, will
always render an effective service to mankind, a ser-
vice respectful of diversity and capable of bringing
out, for sake of the common good, the best in each
people and in every individuaL

Amartya Sen
HOW TO JUDGE GLOBALISM
Poverty persists as an underlying cause as well as effect of
structural violence. It also lurks
behind much of th e world's overt violence and is, in any event,
a constant rebuke to any
conception of human dignity and positive peace. Alth ough the
world as a who le is, in
a sense, wealthy, great disparities exist, and in some places,
those disparities have been
increasing. Many factors contribute to this, including (but not
limited to) population
pressure, environmental degradation, governmental corruption,
traditions of helplessness
Used with the permission of 71Je American Prospect, "Ho w to
Judge Globalism," Amartya Sen, 71Je American Prospect, 2002.
www.prospect.org. All rights reserved.
176 Building ·rositive Peace•
and hopelessness, and exp loitation by loca l socioeconom ic
systems as well as by fore ign
countries and multinational corporations.
The struggle against world poverty and economic injustice is
intimately connected
w ith efforts toward positive peace and has been undertaken not
only by nongovernmental
organizations but also by increasing numbers of prominent
economists. Among them,
one of the most effective and influential is the Indian-born

Nobel Prize-winn ing Harvard
economist Amartya Sen, whose critique of globalism appears
here.
0'27- -------------
G lobalization is often seen as global Westerniza-tion. On th is
point, there is substantial agree-
ment among many proponents and opponents.
Those who take an upbea t view of g lobalization see
it as a marvelous contribution of Western civiliza-
tion to the world . There is a nicely stylized h istory in
wh ich the great developments happened in Europe:
First came the Renaissance, then the Enlightenment
and the Industrial Revolution, and these led to a
massive increase in living standards in the West And
now the great achievements of the West are spread-
ing to the world. In this view, globalization is not
only good, it is also a gift from the West to the world.
The champions o f this reading of history tend to feel
upset not just because this great benefaction is seen
as a curse but also because it is undervalued and cas-
tigated by an ungrateful world.
From the opposite perspective, Western
dominance-sometimes seen as a continuation of
Western imperialism-is the devil of the piece. In
this view, contemporary capitalism, d riven and led
by greedy and grabby Western countries in Europe
and North America, has estab lished rules of trade
and business relations that do not serve the interests
of the poorer people in the world. The celebration
of various non-Western identities-defined by reli-
gion (as in Islamic fundamentalism), region (as in
the championing of Asian values), or culture (as in
the glorification of Confucian ethics )-can add fuel

to the fire of confrontation with the West
Is g lobalization really a new Western curse7 It
is, in fact, neither new nor necessarily Western; and
it is not a curse. Over thousands of years, g loba liza-
tion has contributed to the progress of the world
through travel, trade, m igration, spread of cultural
influences, and dissemination of knowledge and
understanding (including that of science and tech-
nology). These global interrelations have often been
very productive in the advancement of different
countries. They have not necessarily taken the form
of increased Western influ ence. Indeed, the active
agents of globalization have often been located far
from the West.
To illustrate, consider the world a t the begin-
ning of the last millennium rather than a t its end.
Around 1000 A.D., g lobal reach of science, technol-
ogy, and mathematics was changing the nature o f
the o ld world, but the dissemination then was, to
a great extent, in the opposite direction of what we
see today. The h igh technology in the world of 1000
A.D. included paper, the printing press, the cross-
bow, gunpowder, the iron-chain suspension bridge,
the kite, the magnetic compass, the wheelbarrow,
and the rotary fan. A millennium ago, these items
were used extensively in China-and were practi-
cally unknown elsewhere. Globalization spread
them across the world, including Europe.
A sim ilar movement occurred in the Eastern
influence on Western math ematics. The decimal
system emerged and became well developed in
India between the second and sixth cen turies; it was

used by Arab mathematicians soon thereafter. These
math ematical innovations reached Europe mainly
in the last quarter of the tenth century and began
having an impact in the early years of the last mil-
lennium, playing an important part in the scientific
revolution that helped to transform Europe. The
agents of globalization a re neither European nor
exclusively Western, nor are they necessarily linked
to Western dominance. Indeed, Europe wou ld h ave
liow Ill judge Globalism 177
been a lot poorer- economicaHy, culturally, and
scientifically-had it resisted the globalization of
mathematics, science. and technology at that time.
And today, the same principle applies, though in
the reverse direction (from West to East}. To reject
the globalization of science and technology because
it represents Western infl uence and im perialism
would not o nly amo unt to overlooking global
contributions-drawn from many difTerent parts of
the world- that lie solidly behind so-called Western
science and technology. but would also be quite a
daft practical decision, given the extent to which the
whole world can benefit from the process.
A GLOBAL H ERITAGE
In resisting the diagnosis of globalization as a phe-
nomenon o f quintessentiaHy Western origin, we
have 10 be suspicious not on ly of the anti-Wes1ern
rhe1oric but also of the pro-Western chauvinism in
many con1emporary writi ngs. Certainly, th e Renais-
sa nce, 1he Enlightenment, and the Industrial

luti o n were great ach ievements-and they occurred
mainly in Europe and, later, in America. Yet many of
these developments drew on the experience of the
rest of 1he world, rather than being confined within
the boundaries of a discrete Western civiliza1ion .
Our global civilization is a world heri1age-not
just a collection of disparate local cultures. When a
modem mathematician in Boston invokes an algo-
rithm 10 solve a difficult computational problem,
she may no t be aware that she is helping 10 com-
memorate the Arab m athematician Mohammad Ib n
Musa-al-Khwarizmi, who flourished in the first half
of the ninth century. (The word algorithm is derived
from the name ai- Khv.'<lrizmi.) There is a chain of
intellectual relations that link Western mathemat-
ics and science to a colleaion of distinctly non-
Weslem practitioners, of whom al-Khwarizmi was
one. ('!be term algebra is derived from the title of
his famous book Al-Jabr wa-al-Muqabilah.} Indeed,
al-Khwarizmi is one of many non-Western con-
tributors whose works influenced the European
Renaissance and, later, the Enlightenmem and the
lndus!fial Revolution. The West must get full credit
for the remarkab le achievements that occurred in
Europe and Europea nized America, but the idea of
an immaculate Western conception is an imagina-
tive fantasy.
Not only is the progress of global science and
technology not an exclusively West-led phenom-
enon, but there were major global developments in
which the West was no1 even involved. The print-
ing of the world's first book was a marvelo usly glo-
balized event. "Th e technology of printing was, of

course. en tirely an acl1ievement of the Ch inese But
the content came from elsewhere. ' lbe first printed
book was an Indian Sanskrit treatise, translated into
Chinese by a half: rurk. The book, Vajracchedika
Prajnaparamilasutra (sometimes referred to as "The
Diamond Sutra"), is an old treatise o n Buddhism;
it was translated into Chinese from Sanskrit in
the fifth century by Kumarajiva, a half-Indian and
half-Turkish scholar who lived in a part of eastern
Turkistan called Kucl1a but later migrated to China.
It was printed four centuries later, in 868 A.D. Al l
th is involving China, Tu rkey, and India is global iza-
tio n, all right, bu t the Wes1 is not even in sight.
GLOBAL INTERDEPEN D ENCES
AND MOVEMENTS
The misdiagnosis that globalization of ideas and
practices has to be resisted because it entails dreaded
Westernization has played quite a regressive pan in
the colonial and postcolonial world. This assump-
tion incites parochial 1endencies and undermines
the possibility of objectivily in science and knowl-
edge It is not only counterproductive in itself; given
the globa l interactions thro ughout history, it can also
cause no n-Western societies to shoot themselves in
the foot- even in their precious cultural foo t.
Consider the resistance in India to the use of
Western ideas and concepts in science and mathe-
matics. In the nineteenth century, this debate fitted
into a broader controversy about .Vestem education
versus indigenous Indian education. The "Westem-
izers; such as the redoubtable 'lbomas Babington
Macaulay, saw no merit wha1soever in Indian tradi-
tion. "I have never found one among them [advo-

cates of Indian tradition[ who could deny that a
single shelf of a good European library was worth
the whole native litera!Ure o f Ind ia and Arabia,·
he declared. Partly in retaliation, the advocates of
178 Build ing ·Positive Peace•
native education resisted Western imports a lto-
gether. Both sides, however, accepted too readily
the foundational dichotomy between two disparate
civilizations.
European mathematics, w ith its use of such
concepts as sine, was viewed as a purely "Western •
import into India. In fact, the fifth -century Indian
mathematician Aryabhata had discussed the con-
cept o f sine in h is classic work on astronomy and
mathematics in 499 A.D., calling it by its Sanskrit
name, jya-ardha (literally, "h a lf-chord"). Th is word,
first s hortened to jya in Sanskrit, eventually became
the Arabic jiba and, later, jaib, which means •a cove
or a bay." In h is h istory of mathematics, Howard
Eves exp la ins that around 1150 A.D., Ghera rdo of
Cremona, in h is transla tions from the Arab ic, ren-
dered jaib as the Latin sinus, the correspond ing
word for a cove or a bay. And this is the source of
the modem word sine. The concept had traveled fu ll
circle- from India, and then back.
To see globalization as merely Western impe-
rialism of ideas and beliefs (as the rhetoric often
s uggests) would be a serious and costly error, in the
same way that any European resis tance to Eastern
influence wou ld have been at the beginning of the

last millennium. Of course, there a re issues related
to g lobalization that do connect with imperialism
(the h istory of conquests, colon ia lism, and alien
ru le remains relevant today in many ways), and a
postcolonia l understanding o f the world has its
merits. But it wou ld be a great mistake to see glo-
ba lization primarily as a feature of imperialism. It is
much bigger-much greater- than that.
The issue of th e distribution of economic gains
and losses from globalization remains an entirely
separate question, and it must be addressed as a
further-and extremely relevant-issue. There is
extensive evidence that the global economy has
brought prosperity to many different areas of the
g lobe. Pervasive poverty dominated the world a few
centuries ago; there were only a few rare pockets of
affl uence. In overcom ing that penury, extensive eco-
nomic in te rrelations and modern technology have
been and rema in influential. What has happened in
Europe, America, Japan, and East Asia has important
messages fo r all other regions, and we cannot go very
fa r into understanding the nature of globalization
today without first acknowledging the positive fruits
of globa l economic contacts.
Indeed, we cannot reverse the economic pre-
dicament of the poor across th e world by withhold-
ing from them the great advantages of contemporary
techno logy, the well-established efficiency of inter-
national trade a nd exchange, and the social as well
as economic merits of living in an open society.
Rather, th e main issue is how to make good use o f
th e remarkable benefits of economic intercou rse
and technologica l progress in a way that pays ade-

quate attention to th e interests of the deprived and
th e underdog. That is, I wou ld argue, the construc-
tive question that emerges from the so-called anti-
globalization movements.
ARE T HE POOR GETfiNG POORER?
The p rincipal challenge relates to inequality-inter-
national as well as intranational . The troubling
inequalities include disparities in affluence and also
gross asymmetries in political, socia l, and economic
opportun ities and power.
A crucial question concerns the sharing of the
potentia l gains from globalization-between rich
and poor countries and among d ifferent groups
within a country. It is not sufficien t to understand
that the poor of th e world need globalization as
much as the rich do; it is also importan t to make
sure that th ey actually get what th ey need. Th is may
require extensive institutional reform, even as glo-
balization is defended.
There is a lso a need fo r more clarity in formu-
lating the distributional questions. For example, it is
often a rgued that th e rich are getting richer and the
poor poorer. Bu t th is is by no means un iform ly so,
even though there are cases in wh ich th is has hap-
pened. Much depends on the region or th e group
chosen and what indicators of econom ic prosperity
are used. But the attempt to base the castigation o f
economic globalization on this rather thin ice pro-
duces a peculiarly fragi le critique.
On the o ther side, the apologis ts of global-
ization point to their belief that the poor who

participate in trade a nd exchange a re mostly get-
ting richer. Ergo-th e argument runs- globaliza-
tion is not unfair to the poor: they too benefit If the
J-low to judge Globalism 179
central relevance of this question is accepted, then
the whole debate turns on determining which side
is correct in this empirical dispute. But is this the
right battleground in the first place? I would argue
that it is not.
GLOBAL JUSTIC E AND THE
BARGAINING PROBLEM
Even if the poor were to get just a little richer, this
would not necessarily imply that the poor were get-
ting a fair share of the potentially vast benefits of
global economic interrelations. It is not adequate to
ask whether international inequality is getting mar-
ginally larger or smaller. In order to rebel against
the appalling poveny and tl1e staggering inequali-
ties that characterize the contemporary world-or
to protest against the unfair sharing of benefits of
global cooperation- it is not necessary to show that
the massive inequality or distributional unfairness
is also getting marginally larger. "!his is a separate
issue altogether.
When there are gains from cooperation, there
can be many possible arrangements. As the game
theorist and mathematician John Nash discussed
more than half a century ago (in • Jbe Bargaining
Problem, • published in Eco11ometrica in 1950, which

was cited, among other writings, by the Royal Swed-
ish Academy of Sciences when Nash was awarded
the Nobel Prize in economics), the central issue in
general is not whether a panicular arrangement is
better for everyone than no cooperation at all would
be, but whether that is a fair division of the ben-
efits. One cannot rebut the criticism that a distribu-
tional arrangement is unfair simply by noting that
all the panies are better off than they would be in
the absence of cooperation; the real exercise is the
choice between these alternatives.
AN ANALOGY WITH T H E FAMI LY
By analogy, to argue that a particularly unequal and
sexist family arrangement is unfair, o ne does not have
to show that women wou ld have done comparatively
better had there been no fami lies at all, but only that
the sharing of the benefits is seriously unequal in that
particu lar arrangement. Before the issue of ge nder
justice became an expl icitly recogn ized concern (as
it has in recent decades), there were attempts to dis-
miss the issue of unfair arrangements within the
family by suggesting that women did not need to
live in families if they found the arrangements so
unjust. It was also argued that since women as well
as men benefit from living in families, the existing
arrangements could not be unfair. But even when it
is accepted that both men and women may typically
gain from living in a family, the question of distri-
butional fairness remains. Many different family
arrangements- when compared with the absence of
any family system-would satisfy the condition of
being beneficial to both men and women. 1he real
issue concerns how fairly benefits associated with

tllese respective arrangements are distributed.
Likewise, one cannot rebut the charge that the
global system is unfair by showing that even the
poor gai n som ething from global contacts and are
no t necessarily made poorer. That answer may or
may not be wrong. but the q uestion cenai nly is.
"!be critical issue is not whether the poor are getti ng
marginally poorer o r richer. Nor is it whether they
are better off than they would be had they exc:luded
themselves from globa lized interactions.
Again, the real issue is the distribution of glo·
balization's benefits. Indeed, this is why many of
the antiglobalization protesters, who seek a better
deal fo r the underdogs of the world economy, are
not- contrary to their own rhetoric and to the views
attributed to tllem by others-really ·antiglobaliza·
tion. · It is also why there is no real contradiction in
the fact that the so-called antiglobalization protests
have become among the most globalized events in
the contemporary world.
ALTERING GWBAL ARRANGEMENTS
However, can those less-well-off groups get a better
deal from globalized economic and social relations
vithout dispensing vith the market economy itself?
They certain ly can. ·1be use of the market economy
is consistent witll many different ownership pat·
terns, resou rce availabi lities, social opportunities,
and rules of operation (such as patent laws and
antitrust regulations). And depending on these co n·
d itio ns, the market econo my would generate dif.
ferent prices, terms of trade, income distribution,

and, more generally, diverse overall outcomes. The
arrangements for socia l security and o th er public
interventions can make further modifications to the
outcomes of the market processes, and together they
can yield varying levels of inequa lity and poverty.
The centra l question is not whether to use the
market economy. That s ha llow question is easy to
answer, because it is hard to achieve economic pros-
perity without making extensive use of the oppor-
tunities of exchange and specialization that market
relations offer. Even though the operation of a given
market economy can be significantly defective, there
is no way of dispensing with the institution o f mar-
kets in genera l as a powerful engine of economic
progress.
But th is recognition does not end the d is-
cussion about globalized market relations. The
market economy does not work by itself in g lobal
relations-indeed, it cannot operate a lone even
w ithin a given country. It is not on ly the case that
a market-inclusive system can generate very d is tinct
results depending on various enabling conditions
(such as how p hysical resources are d is tributed, how
human resou rces are developed, what rules o f busi-
ness relations p revai l, wha t socia l-security arrange-
ments a re in place, and so on). These enabling
cond itions themselves depend critica lly on eco-
nomic, social, and politica l institutions that operate
nationally and globally.

The crucial role of th e markets does not make
the other institutions insignificant, even in te rms of
the resu lts that the market economy can produce.
As has been amply establis h ed in emp irical s tud ies,
market outcomes a re massively influenced by public
policies in education, epidemiology, land reform,
microcredit facilities, appropriate legal protections,
et cetera; and in each of these fields, th ere is work
to be done through public action that can radically
a lter th e ou tcome of loca l and global economic
relations.
INSTITUTI ONS AND INEQ UALilY
Globalization has much to offer; but even as we
defend it, we must a lso, without any contradic-
tion, see the legitimacy o f many questions tha t the
antiglobalization protesters ask. There may be a
m isdiagnosis abou t where the main problems lie
(they do not lie in globalization, as such), but the
e th ical and human concerns that yield th ese ques-
tions call for serious reassessments of the adequacy
of th e national and globa l insti tutional a rrange-
men ts that characterize the contemporary world and
s hape g lobalized economic and socia l relations.
Global capitalism is much more concerned with
expand ing the domain of market relations than w ith,
say, establishing democracy, expanding elementary
education, o r enhancing the socia l opportunities o f
society's underdogs. Since globalization o f markets
is, on its own, a very inadequate approach to world
prosperity, there is a need to go beyond the priori-
ties that find expression in the chosen focus of global
capita lism. As George Soros has pointed out, inter-

national b usiness concerns often have a strong p ref-
erence for working in o rderly and h igh ly o rganized
a u tocracies rather than in activis t and less-regimented
democracies, and this can be a regressive influ ence on
equitable development. Further, multinational firms
can exert their influence on th e priorities of public
expenditure in less secure third-world countries by
giving p reference to the safety and convenience o f the
managerial classes and of privileged workers over the
removal of w idespread illiteracy, medical deprivation,
and other adversities of the poor. These possibilities
do not, of course, impose any insurmountable barrier
to development, but it is importan t to make sure that
the surmountable barriers a re actually surmounted.
OMISSIONS AND COMMISSIO NS
The injustices that characterize the world a re
closely related to various omissions that need to
be addressed, particularly in institutional a rrange-
ments. I have tried to identify some o f the main
problems in my book Developmellt as Freedom
(Knopf, 1999). Globa l policies have a role here in
help ing the development o f national institutions
(for example, through defending democracy and
supporting schooling and hea lth facilities), but
th ere is a lso a need to re-examine the adequacy o f
global institutional a rrangemen ts themselves. The
distribution of the benefits in the globa l economy
depends, among other th ings, on a variety of global
institutional a rrangements, including those for fa ir
How to judge Globalism 181

trade, medical in itiatives, educational exchanges,
facilities fo r technological d issemination, ecological
and environmenta l restra ints, and fa ir treatment of
accumulated debts that were often incurred by irre-
sponsible military rulers of the past.
In addition to the momentous omissions that
need to be rectified, th ere are a lso serious problems
of commission that must be addressed for even ele-
mentary g loba l ethics. These include not only inef-
ficient and inequitable trade restrictions that repress
exports from poor countries, but also patent laws
that inhibit the use of lifesaving drugs- for d iseases
like AIDS- and that give inadequ ate incentive for
medica l research aimed a t developing nonrepeating
medicines (such as vaccines). These issues have been
much discussed on their own, b u t we must also note
how they fit into a genera l pattern of unh elpful
arrangements that underm ine wh at globalization
could offer.
Anoth er- somewhat less discussed-global
"commission " tha t causes intense misery as well
as lasting deprivation re lates to the involvement of
the world powers in g lobalized a rms trade. This is
a field in which a new globa l initiative is u rgently
go ing beyond th e need-th e very important need-
to cu rb terrorism, on wh ich the focus is so heavily
concentrated right now. Local wars and military
conflicts, which h ave very destructive consequences
(not least on the economic prospects of poor coun-
tries), draw not only on regional tensions but a lso
on g lobal trade in a rms and weapons. The world
estab lishment is firmly entrenched in this b usiness:
the Permanent Members o f the Security Counci l of
the Uni ted Na tions were together responsib le fo r 81

percent of world arms expons from 1996 through
2000. Indeed, the world leaders who express deep
frustration at the • irresponsibil ity" of antig lobaliza-
tion protesters lead the countries that make the most
money in this terrib le trade. The G-8 countries sold
87 percent of th e to ta l supply of arms exported in the
entire world. The U.S. share a lone h as just gone u p
to a lmost 50 percent of the tota l sales in the world.
Furthermore, as much as 68 percent of the American
arms exports went to developing countries.
The arms are used with bloody results- and
w ith devastating effects on the economy, the polity,
and the society. In some ways, this is a continuation
o f the unhelpful role o f world powers in th e genesis
and flowe ring of po litical militarism in Africa from
the 1960s to th e 1980s, when the Cold War was
fough t over Africa. During these decades, when mili-
tary overlords- Mobuto Sese Seko o r jonas Savimbi
o r wh oever-bus ted social a nd political a rrange-
men ts (and, ultimately, econom ic o rder as well) in
Africa, they cou ld rely on s upport either from the
United States and its a ll ies or from the Soviet Union,
depending on their military a lliances. The world
powers bear an awesome responsib il ity for helping
in th e s ubversion o f democracy in Africa and for all
the far-reaching negative consequences of that sub-
version. ' Ibe pursu it of arms "pushing• g ives them a
continuing role in the escala tion of military confli cts
today- in Africa and elsewhere. ' Ibe U.S. refusal to
agree to a joint crackdown even on illicit sa les o f
small a rms (as proposed by UN Secretary-General
Kofi Annan) illustrates the difficu lties involved .
FAIR SHARING O F G LOBAL OPPORTUNIT IES

To conclude, the confounding of g lobalization with
Westernization is not only ahistorical, it a lso dis-
tracts attention from the many potential benefits
o f g lobal integration . Globalization is a h istorical
process that has offered an abundance of opportu-
nities and rewards in the past and continues to do so
today. ' Ibe very existence o f potentially large benefits
makes the q uestion of fairness in sharing the ben-
efi ts o f g lobalization so critically important.
The central issue o f contention is not g lobal-
ization itself, nor is it th e use o f the marke t as an
institutio n, but the inequ ity in th e overa ll balance
o f institutional arrangements wh ich produces very
unequal sharing o f the benefi ts of g lobalization.
The question is not just whether the poor, too, gain
someth ing from globalization, but wheth er they get
a fai r share and a fai r opportunity. ' Ibere is an u rgent
need for reforming insti tutional arrangements-in
addition to national ones-in o rder to overcome
both the errors o f om ission and those of commis-
sion that tend to give the poor across the world such
limited opportunities. Globalization deserves a rea-
soned defense, b u t it a lso needs reform.
David P. Baras h
HUMAN !RIGHTS
·we trave l together," noted Adlai E. Stevenson (the governor o
f Ill inois, Democratic Party

presidential ca ndidate, and UN am bassador), #passengers o n a
little spacesh ip, dependent
on its vulnerable reserves of air and so il; all co mmitted for our
sa fety to its security and
peace; preserved from annihi lation only by the care, the work a
nd the love we give our
fragile craft, and, I may say, each other."
Like Mark Twa in's celebrated remark about tl1e weather, o ne
can say that many people
talk a bout h uman righ ts but relatively few do anythi ng about
it. Yet, too many huma n
beings are denied so me of the most basic hu ma n rights: nearly
o ne-half of the world's
people are denied democratic freedoms a nd political
participation; about one-third face
severe restrictions on their right to own property; more than
one-half of Asians a nd sub-
Saharan Africans do not have access to safe water; jails
worldwide are fi lled w ith politi-
cal prisoners, many of them held without trial and victimized by
torture; ch ild labor is
w idespread; women are o ften deprived of the eco nomic,
social, and political rights that
men take for gra nted; many workers are not only non union
ized b ut prohibited even from
form ing u nions; the righ t of conscientio us objection to mi
litary service is not recogn ized
in most countries; censorship is w idespread; and billions of
people are illiterate, duo ni-
cally sick, without adequate shelter, and h ungry. Even s lavery-
wh ich, in the 21st century
seems a hideous anachronism-not on ly persists but also, by
some accounts, has been
increasing. Human rights advocates have lots o f work to do.

A BRIEF H ISlD RY OF HUMAN RIG HTS
being could not claim entitlemen t to very much, if
anyth ing, simply because he o r she existed. It is tempti ng to
claim that huma n righ ts are as o ld
as the huma n species, bu t the truth is qui te different
Even if human rights are ina lienable and fu ndamen-
tal, the conception o f human rights as such- and
respect for them- is relatively new. Rights and privi-
leges have traditionally been considered a social
benefit, to be bestowed or revoked by the la rger u nit
(band, tribe, monarch, village, city, state) at wil l. In
nearly all societies, fo r nearly all of human history,
collective values have been derived from the social
order, not the ind ividual . Hence, a single human
Some representatives o f trad itional cultu res
support the concept of ind ividual huma n rights as
wide-ra nging a nd u niversa lly derived. Confucius, for
example, a rgued that "withi n the four seas all men
are brothers," and Buddhists believe in "compas-
sion fo r every sentien t being." But, in fact, human
rights as currently understood are largely a Western
trad ition, deriving especially from the works o f the
English p hilosophers joh n locke and Joh n Stuart
Mill. locke maintai ned that a fu ndamental huma n
Mo dified and updated fro m Introduction lo Peace Srudies, by
Dav;d P. Barash. Copyright 1991, Bel mont, Ca: Wadsworth.
Used
by permissio n.
Hunum Rights 183

right was the right to property, primarily the right
to the security of o ne's own body; civil and politi-
cal rights flo wed, in his view, from this. Thus, there
is some truth to the criticism that Westerners advo-
cating human rights may occasionally be gu ilty of
moral arroga nce, seeking to export thei r own rather
culture-bound ideas, especially th eir emphasis on
civil/ politica l freedom.
In addition, Western political thought coexists
w ith respect for-and, occasionally, virtual worsh ip
of- the s tate. Accord ing to such influentia l German
politica l theoris ts as Hegel and Herder, rights are
en larged and even created for ind ividuals only
through the actions of the state. An d fo r orthodox
Marxists, va lue derives on ly from th e socia l order:
there is no meaning to ind ividual rights, according
to doctrina ire Marxist analysis, prio r to them being
granted by society. Al though such nominally com-
munist states as the former Soviet Union were sup-
posedly desig ned to maximize the benefits of every
person, the "rights" of each indiv idual may come to
naught if they run counter to th e p resumed greater
good of society as a whole: ind ividuals can expect
to receive benefits from a commun ity only insofar
as they participate in it a nd further its goals. And,
even today- w ith commu n ism largely a memory
and ever-i ncreasing agreement on the meaning and
desirability of human rights-there continues to be
substantial d isagreement as to priorities.
Human Rights i n Modem Times
There was little worldwide co ncern w ith human
rights until after World War II. Despite the Enligh t-
enment, modern capita lism' s emphasis o n ind i-
vidual property rights, a nd Western democracy's

emph asis on ind ividual political rights, state sover-
eignty has long taken p recedence over human rights.
When the modern state system was established in
the mid-1 7 th cen tury, major European governments
agreed- ostensibly in th e interest of world peace-
not to concern themselves very much with how
other governments treated their citizens. With in its
own boundaries, each s tate was supreme and could
do pretty much as it wished.
Gradually, however, human rights law devel-
oped, initia lly out of concern with protecting
persons during armed conflict. The Geneva Con-
vention of 1864, for example, sought to establish
s tandards fo r treatment of wounded sold iers and
o f prisoners. (It is ironic that war-one of the most
inhumane o f human situations- shou ld have led to
the first o rganized recognition o f shared humanitar-
ian va lues.)
The Internationa l Committee o f the Red Cross
is a nongovernmental organization long concerned
with internationa l human rights; it was organized
by a g roup o f Swiss citizens who h ad attended the
1864 Geneva Convention. The Red Cross remains
active today, as does its Islamic equivalent, the Red
Crescen t, seeking especially to ensure fa ir treatment
o f people during armed confl ict. It has also partici-
pated in several modifications and revisions of the
Geneva Convention, notably in 1977.
Following World War I, th ere was widespread
recogni tion that one cause o f that confl ict was the
denial o f nationa l rights to ethn ic minorities within
such large politica l en tities as the Aus tro-H ungarian

Empire. Hence, human rights received explici t atten-
tion from the league of Nations, wh ich stressed
that minorities must be respected by larger federa l
governments. labor rights- to organize, to obtain
decent working conditions and wages, restrictions
on child labor-were th e focus o f the International
labou r O rganization, wh ich later became part o f
the United Na tions and also won a Nobel Peace
Prize. Opposition to slavery catalyzed numerous
early human rights organizations, such as the Anti-
Slavery League Many people do not realize that in
some countries slavery was on ly fo rmally abolished
during the 1950s, and slavery is still practiced today,
notably in Mau ritania, where a trad ition exists o f
farm laborers being indentured to o ther, local farm
families, and a lso in Haiti, wh ere under the resre avec
( "s tay with") system, young g irls ostensibly receive
food, lodging, and education in return fo r provid ing
baby-sitting and other domestic services for wealthy
urban h ouseh o lds- but in actuality these girls
become enmeshed in years-long enslavemen t. Paki-
s tan is another notorious haven fo r de fac to slavery,
in wh ich debtors find themselves fo rced to labor, for
example, in brick factories, with essentially no hope
o f paying off their debts or ga ining their freedom. It
184 Building •Posi tive Peace"
is estimated that nearly a million Uzbeks are simi-
larly forced to labor in cotton fields. The Global
Slavery Index lists an extensive and shameful catalog
of such abuses, including domestics in Persian Gulf
states, and trafficked women forced into prostitu-
tion in much of the world. Even in the United States

labor trafficking still persists, by which seasonal
workers, often from Mexico or Central America.
who pick fruit or work on ranches in southern states,
are not compensated for their work.
Organized worldwide concern for human rights
did not really coalesce until after World War II, per-
haps in part as a reaction to the devastating denials
of rights that occurred during that conflict. In the
aftermath of the Nazi l-lolocaust, the consciences of
some Western leaders were finally activated-partly
out of regret for those who had suffered and partly
out of enlightened self- interest. ' rhe German Martin
Niemi.iller put it memorably: •First they came for
the Jews and I d id not spea k out-because I was
not a Jew. 'lhen they came for the communists and
I did not speak out-because I was not a commu-
n ist. Then they ca me for the trade unionists and I
did not speak out-because I was not a trade union-
ist. 'rhen they came for me-and there was no one
left to speak out for me. •• (In fact. Pastor Niemi.iller
himself became a victim of the Nazis.)
Liberalism
In traditional liberal political thought, human
rights exiSt not only because of their contribution
to human dignity but also because human beings
naturally possess such rights. · 111e object of any
obligation in the realm of human affairs,· according
to philosopher Simone Weil, "is always the human
being as such. 'lbere exists an obligation toward
every human being for the sole reason that he or
she is a human being. without any other condition
requiring to be fulfilled . • Or, in Thomas Jefferson's
phrase, people have certain "inalienable rights, •

which may not be denied.
States with long traditions of social equity,
including New Zea land and the Scand inavian
nations, are also co nstructed along liberal lines but
with a dose of socio -economic egalitarianism. Thus,
although the classical liberalism of the U.S. stresses
civil and political rights with "freedom • of socioeco-
nomic competition, institutions embedding legal
egalitarianism and social welfare (present to some
degree in Denmark, Iceland, Norway, Finland and
Sweden, and, to a lesser extent, in Canada, New Zea-
land, and the Netherlands), place greater emphasis
on citizens' rights to free or affordable health care
and education as welL
Conservatism
Traditional Anglo-American conservatism has liule
to say today with respect to human rights, because
conservatism is in part a philosophy of u11equa/
rights and privi leges. But the unspoken tenets of
conservatism are nonetheless influential in practice.
C lassical Western conservatism can be said to have
o riginated with Plato, who argued in T/1e Repub·
lie that people are unequal and that the best form
of government is therefore not democracy but ru le
by ph ilosopher-kings. More than two m il lenn ia
later, this belief in unequal rights underpins many
right-wing governments, from the •classica l conser-
vatism" of the military jun tas that ruled Brazil and
Greece to the various U.S.-sponsored Central Ameri-
can governments through most of the late 20th cen-
tury (Guatemala, Honduras, El Sa lvador, Panama).
to the neofascist dictatorships in Chile. Paraguay,
Indonesia, and the Philippines, in which rights were

CHAPTER4 Bui lding Positive Peace I t is important t.docx

CHAPTER4 Bui lding Positive Peace I t is important t.docx

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to CHAPTER4 Bui lding Positive Peace I t is important t.docx

Similar to CHAPTER4 Bui lding Positive Peace I t is important t.docx (13)

More from tiffanyd4

More from tiffanyd4 (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

CHAPTER4 Bui lding Positive Peace I t is important t.docx