Bernie Sanders - Workers Rights - Workplace Justice

CEOs vs Workers - Bernie Sanders Town Hall Event - July 16th, 2018

Injustice in the workplace in the USA.

The USA purports to be a Christian country

but major corporations do not support Christian or Jewish values.

Then there are the values of Islam.

They are ignored too.

But there is a biblical concept:

The worship of Mammon.

From the Old Testament - Sacred to Jews and to Christians

Isaiah 1:17 English Standard Version (ESV)

    learn to do good;

seek justice,

    correct oppression;

bring justice to the fatherless,

    plead the widow's cause.

From the Quran 5:8

O YOU who have attained to faith! Be ever steadfast in upholding equity, bearing witness to the truth for the sake of God, even though it be against your own selves or your parents and kinsfolk. Whether the person concerned be rich or poor, God's claim takes precedence over [the claims of] either of them. Do not, then, follow your own desires, lest you swerve from justice: for if you distort [the truth], behold, God is indeed aware of all that you do!

LARK, Yom Kippur, and paying it forward

From The Editor:

Through my interfaith activities, I have a dear Jewish friend - Av.  This morning, I have received this message and flyer from him through a mutual interfaith friend who is a Sikh, Aunty Jessiee Kaur Singh.

+++++++++++++++++

Shalom to all, especially Rosa,

I felt it might be good if I sent out this reminder that Rosa's 3-days of LARK begin today, Friday, 20 July. the flier is again attached...

A Very Little LARK... G-d works in mysterious ways

I would like to share my LARK moment of yesterday... thought I would start a day early (but still share it today!)

• I found myself in a little family-owned cafe that I rarely frequent (2 staff, 3 when busy)... and the shop was having a busy moment.
• I ordered 2 coffees and a pastry for me and a friend, handing them a $20 note.
• I wasn't sure - but guessed the total bill would be maybe $14-16 - so I expected about $5 change
• The shop assistant handed me all 3 items, and some $12 change, which whilst carrying my shopping, I didn't count!
• I had already walked out the shop, when I looked at the change, and thought to myself
  • There seems to be too much change
  • I recalculated what I'd ordered - and was sure I'd received too much change!
  • I will be honest -  for a moment I tried to rationalise & tell myself "this is my lucky day!" & should I keep going down the street...?
  • Funds continue to be lacking in my life - I could buy 2 more coffees later...
  • At that moment, I remembered Rosa's LARK project...
• I went back into the shop and politely pointed out the situation
• Yes, they'd forgotten to charge me for the pastry, thanked me for being honest, and corrected the change
• I felt strongly the LARK message all around...
• Later on... I told this story at my usual cafe... and there the staff and I got immersed in a conversation about ethics... which got us discussing all manner of ways to be honest... debating scenarios like what if it happened in bigger shops like Coles... what if a vending machine overpaid... etc.
• I believe these other people will now spend their next few days thinking about honesty, ethics... and passing the conversation forward...

All because Rosa reminded us to be kind (and honest) especially on these days... Thank you!

The moral perhaps - We can "Pay It Forward"...  Even When We "Pay It Back"!

Shabbat Shalom, 

Tsom Kal (Fast Effectively - to those that fast this Saturday night/Sunday)

Avraham

¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬

Postscript from The Editor:

Our Jewish friends have been  in the midst of Yom Kippur 

which explains the fasting reference in Av's greeting.

Peacebuilding Role of Religious Civil Society Initiatives in the Korean Peninsula

The Victorian Regional Meeting of the Religious Society of Friends (Quakers) has joint Clerks each with a distinguished record of involvement in peace issues.  Each week on a Monday morning, Dale Hess - one of the Clerks - sends out an email relating to peace issues and events. The material below comes from Dale. The other Clerk is Lorel Thomas.






From the Post Science Digest

The Peacebuilding Role of Religious Civil Society Initiatives in the Korean Peninsula

This article examines whether civil society has played a role in peacebuilding efforts beyond traditional government-driven peace negotiations in the Korean Peninsula. Despite the government-imposed restrictions on cross-border movement and communication between North and South Korean groups and individuals, civil society efforts to build sustainable peace exist. More specifically, the author examines how a religious civil society organization, the ecumenical National Council of Churches in Korea (NCCK), has navigated the Peace and Unification Movement.

To begin, the author notes the importance of peacebuilding as opposed to peacekeeping. The former aims to transform conflict toward more sustainable, peaceful relationships, whereas the latter aims to prevent or contain physical violence and thereby potentially impedes interaction and defers addressing root causes of conflict. Civil society actors are uniquely situated, in that they can coordinate and foster vertical and horizontal relationships for sustainable peacebuilding. In other words, civil society leaders have access to (political) top-level leadership as well as to their grassroots constituents (vertical capacity), and they can use their professional or religious associations to cut across the lines of conflict (horizontal capacity).

The author conducted in-depth interviews with South Korean civil society leaders and former staff members of international organizations to describe their roles in the Peace and Unification Movement of NCCK in the 1980s and 1990s. Former South Korean government officials, who were leaders in negotiations with North Korea during the same time periods, were asked to reflect on the role civil society played in the peace process.

After the 1953 Armistice Agreement—the Korean War never officially ended—both North and South Korea justified dictatorial rule, initiated an arms race, and strengthened their respective militaries. Even though South Korea’s authoritarian regime ended in the late 1980s, the overall context of negotiations and peace talks by the governments was used to strengthen domestic political power in both countries. In South Korea that meant that civil society leaders needed to create a space where they would not be portrayed as “communist sympathizers” by opposing the government’s hard line and that they needed to shift away from government-driven peace processes that strengthened the respective regimes. In this context, the NCCK asked that the World Council of Churches (WCC) act as a mediator between North and South Korean Christians. The WCC asked both governments for cooperation for a meeting between members from both sides. The result was a Christian-themed conference­—not a conference officially about peace and unification—in 1988, leading to the activation of a peace and unification discourse and a church declaration on national unification and peace. This was the time when the official South Korean position changed toward new engagement with North Korea, which ultimately led to high-level talks between North and South Korea and the 1991 Basic Agreement. In this agreement the governments pledged reconciliation, non-aggression, exchanges, and cooperation.

Civil society leaders interviewed for this study considered the NCCK movement to have made a significant contribution to the progress of the peace process in the 1990s. They stressed their role in creating public opinion allowing the government to justify its engagement in productive peace talks. In sum, civil society leaders saw themselves in between the government and public opinion. Former government interviewees recognized some impact of civil society on the peace process but considered the changing international context—more specifically the end of the Cold War—more important. As concluded by another researcher cited in this study, the changes in the international environment drove how the policies were conceptualized, whereas public opinion drove the implementation strategy.

The author also found that the NCCK built horizontal relationships with counterparts in North Korea and, at the same time, engaged with high-level South Korean intelligence officials to secure permissions for their initial gathering. In doing so, they leveraged what peace researcher and practitioner Lederach calls their “middle-level leadership.” The religious leaders were not directly dependent on or affiliated with the top-level power-holders. They were respected by and connected to the grassroots level and had direct access to the upper levels of political hierarchy.

The author concludes that the role of civil society in peacebuilding in the 1980s and 1990s can contribute toward reviving the current peace process. First, the previously established horizontal relationships with North Korean counterparts can be re-activated. Second, the same creativity and flexibility used by civil society groups prior to the 1991 Basic Agreement can be used to assist governments in reducing tensions. And, finally, while hardline policy-makers dominate the agenda, government interviewees did confirm that the vertical relationship with civil society had an impact—albeit limited—on government negotiations.

Contemporary Relevance:

This article shows how dangerous negative peace—the mere absence of violence—can be in a volatile conflict such as the one on the Korean Peninsula. The 1953 Armistice Agreement left the root causes unresolved, leading to a conflict where currently the U.S.—a steadfast supporter of South Korea—and North Korea are escalating tensions and threats than can lead to a disastrous nuclear war. The prevention of violence should be the top priority, but one must not confuse this “negative peace” with the development of a clear peacebuilding approach.

In situations like these, when the leadership on different sides of a conflict is moving countries closer to war than toward peace, examining and understanding all viable options is of utmost importance. Religious civil society actors, as explored in this study, and others have a unique opening to change the existing trajectory by using their role outside of the political realm. However minuscule, flawed, and imperfect civil society approaches may seem, they must not be seen as isolated initiatives but as part of systemic approaches aimed at transforming a conflict context constructively. Moreover, they need to be seen in direct comparison to the military options and the known human, social, and economic costs of violence.

As this study has shown, the conflict context for civil society peacebuilding initiatives is a major factor determining the likelihood of success. Limited space to openly advance unification efforts was used creatively by the NCCK by adopting a religious frame. Current tensions and political impasse between the U.S. and North Korea, primarily driven by extremely hostile rhetoric coming from both leaders, show that civil society engagement is not only an option but a necessity to prevent a potentially catastrophic war. What was not discussed in this research—but something that applies across all civil society peacebuilding efforts—is their unique ability to humanize “the other” in situations where “otherness” and fear of “the other” are major drivers of conflict and war rhetoric.

Talking Points:

    Religious civil society leaders contributed to the Korean peace process in the 1990s.

    Civil society leaders have access to top-level (political) leadership as well as their grassroots constituents (vertical capacity).

    Civil society can use professional or religious associations to cut across the lines of conflict (horizontal capacity).

    Religious civil society actors can re-frame issues outside of the common conflict narrative.

Practical Implications:

The practical implications of this research are multifold. In international conflicts the focus is usually on “Track One” diplomacy, the official negotiations between high government officials or military leaders. By examining who civil society actors are, we can broaden our understanding of diplomacy to include those efforts that take place at multiple levels and thereby address the conflict more comprehensively. The so-called “multi-track diplomacy” framework includes official and unofficial conflict resolution efforts, citizen and scientific exchanges, international business negotiations, international cultural and athletic activities, and other international contacts and cooperative efforts. The nine specific tracks, which produce a synergy in peacebuilding, are: public opinion and communication; government; professional conflict resolution; business; private citizens; activism; religion; funding; and research, training, and education.

We need to identify and encourage civil society organizations that have the capacity to build vertical and horizontal relationships for sustainable peacebuilding. This study has shown how religious actors used their beliefs about how we should behave toward each other in the context of Korean peace and unification efforts. As the author notes, this is an already existing opening for the present-day situation. When considering the multi-track diplomacy framework, we can identify civil society organizations like Rotary International, whose commitment to peace, goodwill, and understanding is in their institutional DNA. Many Rotarians worldwide are dedicated to peace and have the capacity for horizontal and vertical engagement as discussed in this research. Civil society service organizations like Rotary International and its individual members can cooperate with professional peacebuilding organizations, such as the ones found in the Alliance for Peacebuilding, to achieve synergy.

Lastly, civil society expert Thania Paffenholz outlines some functions for civil society actors in peacebuilding. These are: protection; monitoring; advocacy and public communication; in-group socialization; social cohesion; intermediation and facilitation; and service delivery.

Continued Reading:

    Civil Society & Peacebuilding: A Critical Assessment By Thania Paffenholz. Boulder: Lynne Rienner Publishers, 2010.

    Engaging Rotarians in Global Violence Prevention Lecture by Joseph Bock. Portland, 2014  (Video:https://youtu.be/baF1bAMsRfc )

    Civil Society Engagement in the ‘New Deal’ By Rachel Fairhurst and Kristen Wall. Peace Policy, 2014:https://peacepolicy.nd.edu/2014/03/24/civil-society-engagement-in-the-new-deal/

    Korean Women Take on Trump By Christine Ahn. Foreign Policy in Focus, 2017: http://fpif.org/korean-women-take-trump 

Citation:

Kim, D. J. (2017). Building relationships across the boundaries: the peacebuilding role of civil society in the Korean Peninsula. International Peacekeeping, 24(4), 515–537.

     Source from Peace Science Digest: https://peacesciencedigest.org/peacebuilding-role-religious-civil-society-initiatives-korean-peninsula/

Religion is the new frontier in workplace discrimination - Cambridge University's Interfaith Initiative

Finding Christ on an Indian Road

Michael Wakelin, a consultant to UK businesses and associate at Cambridge University’s Interfaith Initiative – and speaker at the recent G20 Interfaith – says some people are “really hostile” to religion in the workplace. “Religion is now the biggest butt of jokes in the office. It’s replaced gender and race,” he says.

David Brent, the antihero of the classic British satire The Office, had a crude line in jokes about race, disability, sex and sexuality. When he quipped about “Oliver, the office black guy” or "the disableds” or his gay colleagues — “one in 10, apparently, that seems a bit high” — he never thought he was being anything but liberal-minded and funny. Brent’s humour was, even then, out of bounds, and properly so. No one should be mocked for how they are or how they were born.

Yet some people still believe it’s OK to joke about an element intrinsic to many people’s character — their religious faith.   Michael Wakelin, a consultant to UK businesses and associate at Cambridge University’s Interfaith Initiative, says some people are “really hostile” to religion in the workplace. “Religion is now the biggest butt of jokes in the office. It’s replaced gender and race,” he says.

Mr Wakelin spent 23 years at the BBC, most of them as head of the Religion and Ethics Department, overseeing its television, radio and online content. He was a keynote speaker at the recent G20 Interfaith Summit in Potsdam, Germany, where he discussed the new “religious literacy” program he is running with the international management consulting firm Ernst & Young.

The program does not aim to make people more or less religious — only to be aware of faith’s importance to co-workers and clients. “If you’re the sort of person that thinks religious people don’t have any friends, don’t blink very often and don’t go out much, that’s not a good place to start your religious literacy training,” Mr Wakelin quips. “But religion’s not going anywhere, so let’s deal with it.”

Mr Wakelin’s project deals with big UK-based companies that want advice about working in societies that take religion very seriously, such as the Middle East and South Asia. It follows Harvard University’s esteemed Divinity School, which has long had its own religious literacy program aimed at diplomats and public policy wonks who need to understand the non-Anglo and non-European world, where religious sentiment is rising.

Australia and the United States, meanwhile, are gradually forsaking their historic faith. Australians reporting “no religion” in our 2016 census are now 30 per cent of the population, the biggest single faith — or, more appositely, non-faith — group. In the US, according to Pew research in 2015, that figure is almost 23 per cent. But that is not the trajectory across most of the world. In April, Pew released data projecting that over the next 40 years the world’s population with no religion would actually fall from 16 per cent to 13 per cent. The pattern is due mainly to believers having larger families.

For countries built proudly on immigration, such as Australia — and for a liberal class that embraces cultural diversity, often as a mantra, while spurning faith — this makes religious literacy even more important. New immigrant communities are the most intensely religious, and usually remain so for two to three generations. Religion is a major element in their identity — think not only of Australian Muslims and Hindus but also Orthodox Christian and Jewish communities — and is also seen as a part of national culture throughout the diaspora.

So the chances are you’re likely to have more, not fewer, religious co-workers in the future. As Mr Wakelin observes, “Organisations and businesses that have better religious literacy within their workforces are better at attracting and retaining staff.

“There are [still] a very large number of religious people who are working in the public and private sectors who need to be accommodated well at work.”

This does not mean an office full of zealots trying to proselytise their colleagues or street-corner preachers invading the tea room. In practice, it might just mean flexible hours to allow employees to observe occasional religious holidays, and a quiet place for a few minutes of prayer or contemplation. “If you are able to bring your whole self to work,” Mr Wakelin says, “you are going to be happier in that workplace.

People of the Cambridge Inter-faith Programme

Ethics in our daily doings

Compass is Australia's only religion, ethics and social values TV program.

It has reflected and explored belief, faith, values and the search for meaning through personal stories, documentaries and debate since 1988.

Compass airs for 30 minutes on Saturday nights at 6.00 pm and is repeated on Sundays at 11am, with a third screening on Fridays at 10:30am. You can also choose to watch the program on ABC iview. The Compass website offers an archive of programs and transcripts. You can also take part in our dynamic social media community, by following us on Facebook or Twitter.

This week on Compass they are talking ethics.  An Australian family, the Easthopes, attempt to redefine the way they live, making ethical choices about how they travel and what they eat.  

Part of the show is a visit from Costa Georgiadis of ABC's Gardening Australia -

because growing our own is part of an ethical lifestyle.

Compass on Facebook

From Transcend Media Service - Fundamentalism-Extremism-Violence

Fundamentalism-Extremism-Violence

EDITORIAL, 8 February 2016

Johan Galtung, 8 Feb 2016 - TRANSCEND Media Service

To navigate these difficult conceptual waters we need some rules. Here are three suggestions (the violence can be direct–as sometimes prescribed by the Abrahamic religions–or structural as by Hinduism):

1. Anchor “religious fundamentalism” in religious scriptures taken literally according to the fundamentalists, not as “interpreted”;
2. Anchor “extremism” in violent action, verbal or physical;
3. Anchor “religious extremism” in violent action justified-legitimized by religious scriptures, by fundamentalists or not.

Fundamentalism has to do with inner faith, belief. Extremism has to do with outer violence against Other, and against Self (like flagellation for being a sinner). Keep them separate. And be careful.

We can have fundamentalism without extremism. The fundamentalist may believe much, beyond the beliefs of others, yet not cross the border to violence. We may say: let him-her do so; it is not obvious that fundamentalists are more violent than non-fundamentalists.

We can have extremism without fundamentalism. Most people exercising violence believe in nothing, beyond “doing their job”.

There are two criteria for “religious extremism”: violence and religious legitimation. That legitimation may be fundamentalist or not; could also be well-know quotes from the Scriptures. We might even speculate that for the fundamentalist faith may be sufficient.

The combination in “religious extremism” is vicious if it implies that violence will be supported by divine forces and/or that failure to be violent will incur their wrath. Probably a declining category.

Today’s secularizing, “enlightened” world brought us statism, nationalism, and their combination; secular fundamentalists and extremists, and their combination. They have given the world more violence for victory for whatever cause they design than religions. But with a rationality that may open for solving underlying conflicts.

How about the traditional “world religions” in this perspective?

The three Abrahamic and Hinduism with divine forces; and Buddhism, Daoism-Confucianism and Shinto without? Where do we find religious extremism as defined above; and where not? Obviously, some of it everywhere, nothing somewhere, but generally speaking?

Judaismn has religious extremism as right and duty to conquer and defend the Promised Holy Land (Genesis 15:18, wrath of divine forces in Deuteronomy, for structural violence Isaiah 2:1-4).

Christianity has religious extremism built as violence against non-believers (Luke 19:26)–hence also to spread Christianity–but has rules against retribution (turning the other cheek).

Islam has norms against spreading Islam by the sword, but uses violence against infidels, particularly against apostates, and uses violence for “retribution with moderation”.

Summary: Judaic religious extremism is territorial, Christian is missionary, Islamic is punitive. SUM: ex occidente bellum.

Hinduism has internal structural violence built into the caste system, with a history of direct violence to establish it and keep it. Nonviolence to cows serves as an opening to nonviolence in general.

Buddhism has violence in obscure texts but generally prescribes nonviolence. If Buddhists are violent (Sri Lanka, Myanmar, Thailand) it is not qua Buddhists, but as defenders of a state with Buddhism.

Daoism is ambiguous: every human holon has forces-counterforces, not necessarily violent; but a rising yin or yang may be “helped”.

Confucianism deplores “bad emperor” violence, but is feudal structural violence, with rights and duties both high up and low down.     Shinto is peaceful, but state Shinto was a construction inspired by Christian state religions justifying warfare external violence under Sun Goddess Amaterasu-o-mikami and Her offsprings, the Emperors.

Conclusion: not good enough to declare ex oriente pax.

How about the secular counterparts to religions, the ideologies, the isms? Backed by human forces of rationality and compassion, and by social forces across the domestic and global faultlines nature-gender-generation-race-class-nation-territory. Religions see them as parts of the divine order; secularism sees them as changeable, for worse (slavery, colonialism, war), for better (human rights, Art 28).

Enlightenment came with capitalist growth against nature and the working classes; with the rule of Men, Old/middle-aged, White; class with competitive mobility; nationalism and statism. Isms emerged, as dualist-manichean as God vs Satan, promising Paradise vs Hell, pitting Self- good vs Other-evil, with mechanisms for picking winners-losers.

Nature fights back, now possibly winning. Women, young and old, non-whites struggle nonviolently for parity. Afterlife Paradise and Hell no longer available, political parties fight for paradise=upper class rewards from capitalist growth against hell=poverty-misery; meaningful only if inequality prevails over distribution. Nationalism and statism struggle for parity and dominance, even globally; the mechanisms being war by the military and negotiation by the diplomats.

Secular fundamentalism means strong attachment to one side in the one faultline seen as fundamental: with this issue (gender, race, class, nation, state) solved, the others will follow automatically!

Secular extremism, fundamentalist or not, uses violence against the Other in gender, race, class, nation, state; if fundamentalist for the salvation of humanity, with paradise on earth around the corner.

Secularism is Western. It is rejected by Islam and Hinduism. Buddhism focuses on means: nonviolence; China on process: yin-yang. Only Japan under Abe follows US war logic. Western secularism may actually turn out to be an episode, yielding to religious revivalism.

Rather work nonviolently on very many conflicts and traumas than on one giant step toward salvation-paradise, even with violence.

____________________________________

Johan Galtung, a professor of peace studies, dr hc mult, is founder of the TRANSCEND Network for Peace, Development and Environment and rector of the TRANSCEND Peace University-TPU. He has published 164 books on peace and related issues, of which 41 have been translated into 35 languages, for a total of 135 book translations, including ‘50 Years-100 Peace and Conflict Perspectives,’ published by the TRANSCEND University Press-TUP.

This article originally appeared on Transcend Media Service (TMS) on 8 February 2016.

Anticopyright: Editorials and articles originated on TMS may be freely reprinted, disseminated, translated and used as background material, provided an acknowledgement and link to the source,TRANSCEND Media Service - TMS: Religious Fundamentalism-Extremism-Violence, is included. Thank you.

The Wheeler Centre, Melbourne : Steve Cannane in conversation with Tony Ortega re Scientology

Scientology: Fair Game?

Sunday 25 October 2015, 3.00pm-4.00pm

at The Wheeler Centre

Book your tickets

Scientology’s founder, L. Ron Hubbard, once defined the religion as being in service of ‘a civilisation without insanity, without criminals and without war, where the able can prosper and honest beings can have rights, and where man is free to rise to greater heights’.

Almost 60 years since its foundation, though, Scientology has become a uniquely contentious phenomenon – with many questioning its status as a religion, cult or business, and with a reputation for fiercely defensive, litigious and coercive reactions to criticism. One of the first to feel the Church’s wrath was Paulette Cooper – whose 1971 book, The Scandal of Scientology, saw her become the target of an elaborate plot which set out to destroy her credibility, frame her and land her with a 15 year prison sentence. Codenamed ‘Miss Lovely’ by Church operatives, Cooper is now the subject of investigative journalist Tony Ortega’s book, The Unbreakable Miss Lovely.

Ortega is a long-time chronicler of Scientology, and one of its leading scrutineers. Featured in Alex Gibney’s HBO documentary Going Clear, he’s the executive editor of TheLipTV and former editor-in-chief of The Village Voice. He visits Melbourne – where the world’s first inquiry into Scientology was held in1963, and Scientology was first banned in 1965 – for a chat with SteveCannane, who’s currently writing a book on Scientology’s history in Australia.

Religions for Peace New Faiths for Earth Campaign --- Good stewards of the Earth

Religions for Peace is the world's largest and most representative multi-religious coalition dedicated to advancing common action among the world religious communities for peace. Religions for Peace works to transform violent conflict, advance human development, promote just and harmonious societies, and protect the earth. The global Religions for Peace network comprises a World Council of senior religious leaders from all regions of the world; six regional inter-religious bodies and more than ninety national ones; and the Global Women of Faith Network and Global Interfaith Youth Network.

Religions for Peace Australia

Commonweal, the magazine edited by Catholic lay people

on the interaction of faith with 

contemporary politics and culture

has just published

"Seeing as God Sees".

This is a collection of essays on

Terrence Malick's 2011 movie

The Tree of Life.

Watch Religion & Ethic's web-only video piece on

"The Tree of Life:"

It features an interview with 

Calviin College English Professor Ray Anker.