Justice and World Society
1. Unequal Distribution of the World's Resources:
Excerpted Text from JW:
“… the influence of the new industrial and technological order favors the concentration of wealth, power and decision-making in the hands of a small public or private controlling group. Economic injustice and lack of social participation keep people from attaining their basic human and civil rights.” (no.9)
Comments:(1) Industrial and technological orders are necessary for the development of a nation towards economic growth and human progress. But facts show that highly industrialized countries are rich, while agricultural countries are poor, limited to the production of raw agricultural or raw mineral products. The Philippines is agricultural, therefore it is poor. To become rich, the Philippines has to industrialize. But the Philippines cannot industrialize because the rich industrial countries do not allow it. In 1898 industrial United States came to the Philippines and, after several years of battle, conquered the Islands. The United States then imposed upon it the economic policy that condemned the Philippines to remain perpetually agricultural – free trade. Nowadays, the United States continues to impose free trade on the Philippines through such policies as foreign investment incentives and import liberalization.
(2) Wealth is concentrated in the hands of the few while the broad of masses of people own little. Distribution becomes more compelling in present times when technological advances have made possible the ever increasing production of wealth. Wealth cannot be left piling up in the hands of a few. It has to be divided equitably among the people, for the stability of society itself. Actually, it is not that difficult to re-distribute wealth, if there be the political will to do it. The best of plans, however, flounder before a government that favors with the rich. And this, unfortunately, is the case of the Philippines. All the powers of government, from the Barangay Captain to the President of the Philippines, are in the hands of landlords and capitalists, local as well as foreign, who naturally make use of such power to protect and promote their interests, thereby becoming richer and richer. (3) Industry today is technologically advanced, producing goods of all kinds with great efficiency. One needs to be perceptive, however, regarding modernization in the countryside. We have to be sure as to what kind of industrialization to follow. For not all kinds of modernization help the peasants. There is an industrialization that, instead of increasing the income of peasants, robs them of their money. Of this is the industrialization imposed on the peasants by monopoly capital. (4) Inequalities exist in the Philippines. One region is to an extent developed, while other regions are depressed. The most developed region in the Philippines is the National Capital Region, Metro Manila namely, while the least developed are Bicol, Cagayan Valley, Eastern Visayas and Mindanao. (Ibon: Facts and Figures, November 15, 1989, p.1) (5) Industrial nations control the wealth of the former colonies |
|
2. Structural Injustice:
Excerpted Texts from JW:
“In the face of international systems of domination, the bringing about of justice depends more and more on the determined will for development.” (no.13)
“… that determined will asserts itself … in a struggle for … one’s rights and self-expression…” (no.14)
“… objective obstacles which social structures place in the way of conversion of hearts… colonial domination may evolve into a new form of colonialism in which the developing nations will be the victims of the interplay of international economic forces.” (no. 16)
“… that determined will asserts itself … in a struggle for … one’s rights and self-expression…” (no.14)
“… objective obstacles which social structures place in the way of conversion of hearts… colonial domination may evolve into a new form of colonialism in which the developing nations will be the victims of the interplay of international economic forces.” (no. 16)
Comments:(1.) The document does not oppose personal conversion to structural reform, not does it merely juxtapose the two. Instead it indicates how the former is conditioned by the latter, for it speaks of ‘the objective obstacles which social structures place in the way of conversion of hearts.’ (2.) Many bishops at the Synod spoke out strongly about structural injustice at the international level (Option For The Poor by Donal Dorr, p. 178)
(3.) The present Structural injustice in the International Economic Order is linked to the Colonial Domination of the past (Imperialism). (4.) Colonialism is direct foreign rule while neocolonialism is indirect. In colonialism the foreigners themselves are the supreme rules, holding the positions of President, Governor general, Supreme Court Justices, etc. In neocolonialism the natives are the Presidents, Governors, or Justices, but they are more so in name than in reality, for they are held in tow by foreign master, and do the foreign masters’ bidding in all the things that really count. In neocolonialism the rulers rule through native surrogates. (5.) The rich industrial nations did not want to lose the wealth they got from the colonies. Unable now to hold on the colonies because of the determined opposition and rebellion of the natives, they instituted a system of government wherein, without ruling directly the country, they got nonetheless the wealth. They saw to it that the new officials in government be their puppets. (6.) Today imperialism rules the world. The foreign multinational corporations, based in and owned by the rich industrial nations, have their tentacles all over the world, owning wholly or in part businesses all over the world. (7.) The danger of Imperialism can be avoided only by LIBERATION. JW speaks of attaining LIBERATION through DEVELOPMENT. |
|
3. Right to Development:
Excerpted Texts from JW:
“… In the last twenty-five years a hope has spread through the human race that economic growth would bring about such a quantity of goods that it would be possible to feed the hungry… but this has proved a vain hope in underdeveloped areas…” (no. 10)
“… The right to development must be seen as a dynamic interpenetration of all those fundamental human rights upon which the aspirations of individuals and nations are based.” (no. 15)
“… colonial domination may evolve into a new form of colonialism in which the developing nations will be the victims of the interplay of international economic forces… To respond to such a hope (right to development), the concept of evolution must be purified of those myths and false convictions which have up to now gone with a thought-pattern subject to a kind of deterministic and automatic notion of progress.” (no.16)
“… true progress… composed both of economic growth and participation… increase in wealth implies … social progress by the entire community … Participation constitutes a right which is to be applied both in the economic and in the social and political field.” (no. 18)
“… The right to development must be seen as a dynamic interpenetration of all those fundamental human rights upon which the aspirations of individuals and nations are based.” (no. 15)
“… colonial domination may evolve into a new form of colonialism in which the developing nations will be the victims of the interplay of international economic forces… To respond to such a hope (right to development), the concept of evolution must be purified of those myths and false convictions which have up to now gone with a thought-pattern subject to a kind of deterministic and automatic notion of progress.” (no.16)
“… true progress… composed both of economic growth and participation… increase in wealth implies … social progress by the entire community … Participation constitutes a right which is to be applied both in the economic and in the social and political field.” (no. 18)
Comments:(1) One of the most striking parts of the document is where the bishops point out that the HOPE has been IN VAIN that POVERTY WOULD BE OVERCOME THROUGH DEVELOPMENT. Paragraph no. 10 provides that Development is a failure to overcome poverty. The document listed several interrelated reasons for this failure: rapid growth of population, rapid growth of labor force, rural stagnation, lack of agrarian reform, massive migratory flow to the cities, and costly industry or technology that does not give sufficient employment.
(2) The overall tone or tenor of no. 10 indicates support for the view that things have gone wrong in spite of DEVELOPMENT but more because of it. This impression is confirmed with a deeply moving concluding sentence found on the same paragraph: “these stifling oppressions constantly give rise to great numbers of marginal persons, ill-fed, inhumanly housed, illiterate and deprived of political poser as well as of the suitable means of acquiring responsibility and moral dignity.” This paragraph amounts to a very radical criticism of “development” process that has actually taken place. DEVELOPMENT failed to meet the needs of the poor, it has actually increased the numbers of the poor. (3) The kind DEVELOPMENT that has occurred in the wealthy countries is not possible for all parts of the World to have. To recognize that DEVELOPMENT is available only to a limited number of countries is in effect to accept that IT IS NOT TRUE DEVELOPMENT at all, but rather a kind of EXPLOITATION. The EXPLOITATION is less obvious. What is being directly exploited in this case is not other people but the resources of the earth; what is being indirectly exploited is the people. (4) Today, there is no limit to growth – like new technologies, inventions and discoveries. This will impose shortage of energy or raw materials, while toxic waste could be dumped and disperses in the sea or the air. This is a destructive type of growth. The document takes seriously the issue of the LIMITS to growth (regulation). (5) A major element in the real development of the poor is that the rich should be stopped from imposing misdevelopment on the world. The notion of LIBERATION THROUGH DEVELOPMENT needs to be complemented by DEVELOPMENT THROUGH LIBERATION (‘The influence … civil rights” – No. 9) (6) Right to Development is not possible unless social structures which serve as systematic barriers are removed. To remove, action in behalf of justice must take place in very sector of society. Unfortunately, JW fails to spell-out what an action or an option would be; instead, it merely lists various victims of injustice. (7) Material things are necessary for development. The evil is in the possession of more and more wealth, irrespective of other considerations. Mere money does not generate true happiness. The human person is not mere animal that is satisfied with merely material wants; he is also a spiritual being, with wants that go beyond the material. Without noble ideals, the human person’s life becomes jaded, ending up prostrate, with his nobler instincts unsatisfied. True human development does not consist, in other words, in having, but in being. The human being may have, but in order that he may be. (8) JW was aware of the myths and illusions associated with the concept of development. They insisted on the need to get rid of “those myths … progress.” (No. 16) (9) One of the most striking parts of the document is where the bishops point out that the hope has been in vain that poverty would be overcome through development ( “… In the last … 25 years … wealthier areas …” – No. 10) (10) Development is a failure to overcome poverty. |
|
Applicable Cases or Situations:
Situations on unequal distribution of resources ... more