28 Aug ’07
Not everything that can be counted counts, and not everything that counts can be counted.
~ Albert Einstein
28 Aug ’07
Not everything that can be counted counts, and not everything that counts can be counted.
~ Albert Einstein
03 Jun ’06 – 13:14
The Euston Manifesto represents an international effort to reduce world conflict by supporting human rights and liberal democratic values. There are 15 points that are fundamental to this statement. I have summarized the points below, but recommend that the full text of the manifesto be read online at http://www.eustonmanifesto.org.
1) Pro-democracy.
Commitment to democratic norms, procedures and structures — freedom of opinion and assembly, free elections, the separation of legislative, executive and judicial powers, and the separation of state and religion.2) Anti-tyranny.
Declining to make excuses for, to indulgently “understand”, reactionary regimes and movements for which democracy is a hated enemy — regimes that oppress their own peoples and movements that aspire to do so. We draw a firm line between ourselves and those left-liberal voices today quick to offer an apologetic explanation for such political forces.3) Human rights.
The fundamental human rights codified in the Universal Declaration are precisely universal, and are binding on all states, all political movements, and on all people everywhere.4) Equality.
Progress in relations between the sexes (until full gender equality is achieved), between different ethnic communities, between those of various religious affiliations and those of none, and between people of diverse sexual orientations — as well as towards broader social and economic equality all round.5) Development for freedom.
Favouring global economic development-as-freedom and against structural economic oppression and environmental degradation.6) Opposing anti-Americanism.
Rejection of the anti-Americanism now infecting so much left-liberal (and some conservative) thinking. This is not a case of seeing the US as a model society. Remaining aware of America’s problems and failings, while remembering that these are shared to some degree with all of the developed world.7) Favouring a two-state solution.
Recognition of the right of both the Israeli and the Palestinian peoples to self-determination within the framework of a two-state solution. There can be no reasonable resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict that subordinates or eliminates the legitimate rights and interests of one of the sides to the dispute.
Against racism.
For liberals and the Left, anti-racism is axiomatic. We oppose every form of racist prejudice and behaviour: the anti-immigrant racism of the far Right; tribal and inter-ethnic racism; racism against people from Muslim countries and those descended from them, particularly under cover of the War on Terror.9) Against terrorism of all types.
The deliberate targeting of civilians is a crime under international law and all recognized codes of warfare, and it cannot be justified by the argument that it is done in a cause that is just.10) Internationalism.
Standing for an internationalist politics and the reform of international law — in the interests of global democratization and global development. Humanitarian intervention, when necessary, is not a matter of disregarding sovereignty, but of lodging this properly within the “common life” of all peoples.11) Critical openness.
Drawing the lesson of the disastrous history of left apologetics over the crimes of Stalinism and Maoism, as well as more recent exercises in the same vein12) Historical truth.
In connecting to the original humanistic impulses of the movement for human progress, we emphasize the duty which genuine democrats must have to respect for the historical truth.13) Freedom of ideas.
We uphold the traditional liberal freedom of ideas.14) Open source.
As part of the free exchange of ideas and in the interests of encouraging joint intellectual endeavour, we support the open development of software and other creative works and oppose the patenting of genes, algorithms and facts of nature.15) A precious heritage.
Rejecting the fear of modernity, the fear of freedom, irrationalism, the subordination of women; and reaffirming the ideas that inspired the great rallying calls of the democratic revolutions of the eighteenth century: liberty, equality and solidarity; human rights; the pursuit of happiness.
Visit http://eustonmanifesto.org/ to read the full text, sign the manifesto, or to make a donation. I have personally done all three!
Thursday, April 13, 2006 3:21 PM
In the article below, I compared the Three Fundamental Needs (TFN) Model with Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs pyramid. While the TFN model is based on Maslow’s model, the TFN model has some advantages over Maslow’s Hierarchy for modeling human behaviour.
While Maslow’s Hierarchy explains most human behaviour much of the time, it does not account very well for common behaviour that does not conform to the pyramid. As an expert on conflict management I encounter people who appear to have met all of the lower level needs in Maslow’s Hiearchy yet behave in ways that do not seem to conform to what “self-actualization” should look like. There needed to be another model to explain high-risk, thrill-seeking, and self-destructive behaviours. The new model also needed to account for people attempting to satisfy their needs non-sequentially.
The TFN Model is designed to capture Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs, and also to explain the needs that individuals are attempting to satisfy when they engage in behaviours that do not conform to Maslow’s model. The TFN model also accounts for boundary blurring that occurs as people attempt to satisfy multiple needs. For example an individual who seems to engage in abnormal anti-social behaviour may be valuing her Stimulation needs much higher than Security or Status needs, while a person who neglects his family and friends in order to work 80 hour weeks may be valuing his Status Needs much more that his Security or Stimulation needs. The TFN Model accounts for these behaviours by redefining Maslow’s needs into three fundamental needs which rather than being stable for all people all the time, are constantly shifting in importance.
In her 1987 report for the United Nations Dr. Brundland summarizes Sustainable Development in one eloquent sentence:
Sustainable development seeks to meet the needs and aspirations of the present without compromising the ability to meet those of the future.
Source: What Matters Most, J. Hollender
Melcrum, a British consulting company, has published an interesting interview with executives from Chiquita Brands, Diageo plc and British Land. While much of what I read on the site seemed to be focused more on reporting rather than doing (ie. appearance vs. substance), I was impressed by the answers given by Michael Mitchell, Director, Corporate Communication for Chiquita Brands International. Inc.
Q: How do you ensure that non-financial reports are focused on stakeholder interests?
Michael Mitchell, Chiquita Brands: The important thing that our stakeholders have told us is that they are interested in learning about our performance against independent third-party standards. So we structure our reports in accordance with the third-party indicators and standards that we have chosen as the most credible and verifiable for us. It’s not formalized research – it’s more going out and asking key stakeholders and NGOs that know our business what would be useful for them to know about our company.
What are the most important non-financial issues for your stakeholders?
MM: The way the industry now talks about things is in the “triple-bottom-line” – environmental, financial and social performance. So we look at critical issues within each of these categories. For example, within the environmental category, worker health and safety is important for us. Within the social area, freedom of association and labor-management relations are the big issues.
The full interview can be read here; http://www.melcrum.com/cgi-bin/melcrum/eu_content.pl?docurl=article%20bc%20cr
Culture and Conflict
16 Nov ’07
Conflicts can arise from many different sources. In complex, multicultural societies, like those common in major urban centres, a sometimes overlooked source of conflict is the cultural diversity itself. Cultural diversity brings numerous benefits to us, but it is easy to forget that part of our diversity is that we see the same things in different ways. In my travels through Europe and Israel I have been fortunate to meet wonderful people with world views that are different than the one that I grew up with in Toronto of the 60s and 70s. A few examples from my own experience can highlight some of the ways in which different world-views, and associated value systems, can lead to very difficult to resolve conflicts.
All three of the above examples are based on my own experiences and anecdotal evidence. They are meant to be illustrative of the pitfalls of cultural naivité, and not lessons in sepcific cultures and cultural traits! As I mentioned in the second story, some of the specific stories are 30 years old and may or may not still be relevant. But the lessons that I learned from these stories still apply today, and will continue to apply anywhere and any time that people from different cultural backgrounds work together. It is not always critical to know everything about, or every difference between, different cultures — but it is vitally important that what might at first seem to be “obvious” dishonesty, bad faith, or bad behaviour may in fact be anything but. Maybe someone is looking at you and wondering what the heck it is that you are thinking!