Meet the Minimum Needs of All

Tuesday, June 27, 2006


Meet the Minimum Needs of All (MMNA) 2030:

Opening MMNA statement.

Minimum Needs Are:

• Drinking Water
• Adequate Nutrition per day
• Basic Clothing and Basic Housing
• Primary Health Care
• Primary Education of 5 Years Duration.

Representing the global production of goods and services for the Year 2002 by 10 plums,

• The global First World population of about 1.1 billion (earnings greater thn $8 per day: India 125 million, China 250 million, USA 300 million, all of U.K., Japan, Western Europe, and a small percentage of the population in every nation of the world) , kept 8 plums for themselves.

• Global Lower middle-class of about 2.5 billion were given 1.5 plums, and the

• Global Poor of about 2.4 billion people had to live on 0.5 plums, without access to the seed.

Five out of six people suffer from the current distribution.

The obstacles to meeting the Minimum Needs of All, are SOCIETAL:

• 'Moral Exclusion'-- Justice need be only for those 'within' our group,

• 'Unconnected ness'-- we are not related to 'them'.

'Moral Exclusion' necessitates violence, that comes in different forms: direct, as in wars, and structural, as in economic, political and cultural.

Economic structural violence results in the daily poverty death of several tens of thousands of the global Poor. Why allow the global political economy to indulge in such sacrifice in the 21st century?

'Moral Inclusion' allows consideration of:

. 'fair play' for the other,
. willingness to share and allocate resources, that leads to
. willingness to make sacrifices to foster the welfare of the included, and
. extending the psychological boundary of the 'scope of justice'.

In this manner, 'Moral Inclusion' would lead to economical nurture of effective, enduring , global security.

'Those who received more', under ‘exclusion morality’, are called upon under ‘inclusion morality’ to consider acknowledging that:

'more, at the expense of the unmet minimum needs of many, is not one's to receive from the global political economy', and as inclusion morality is better understood and accepted, to undertake the necessary nonviolent steps to amend the global political economy, leading to global distributive justice on minimum needs.

Personal and institutional Kindness and Charity (outside of 'cash-back') are wonderful outcomes to nurture, even in inclusion morality, but they cannot be relied upon to MMNA.

Global Distributive Justice:

• 'Subject - centered - justice', (measured by that which I would need to quench my thirst, abate my hunger, keep me in primary health, clothing, shelter, and education) , would enable incorporation of all members of the human species, within 'one moral community',
• Basic rights are necessary in society,
• Everyone born has a right to something: life,
• Some 'other things' (personal security, subsistence, political and cultural, Freedoms) are necessary to enjoy the first thing, as a right,
• Everyone has rights to the said 'other things', (minimum needs) , that are necessary to enjoy the first thing as a right,
• 'Necessary' means 'made essential by the very concept of right'; to be brought into existence, administered and defended by global society.

What is necessary, lies outside personal choice, is not charity, and does not depend on kindness.

When engaged with the welfare of others, the concern is spiritual. Can the current distribution of the global political eonomy be justified in the 21st century?

Whether theists, atheists, or agnostics, we are given to belief. Through worshipful contributions of concern on the Web on this theme, how can we arrive at and make 'moral inclusion on minimum needs', the global vanilla of morality flavors by 2030, and MMNA?

In Peace,
MMNA Intention



At 3:17 PM, Blogger Thy Friend John said...


Morality is an expression of the heart, and there is one kind that roots in a heart of stone and another that grows from a heart of tender flesh. The blogger named MMNA Intention has identified two ideal types, “exclusion morality” and “inclusion morality,” which I think correspond closely to the two hearts I speak of. “Inclusion morality” is compassionate to all beings; “exclusion morality” maintains a horizon line of concern beyond which compassion does not extend. As technology increasingly gathers us into one global village, I expect that we’ll increasingly be drawn into inclusion morality, but as war and our ravaging of nature make life on earth ever more dreadful, I expect fear, suffering and desperation to drive us back toward exclusion moralities, unless our Creator intervenes by imparting, on a massive scale, what I shall here call the Great Change of Heart.

The prophet Ezekiel recorded a divine promise to remove our stony hearts and give us fleshly ones (Ezek. 11:19, 36:26), and I witness from my own experience that this is not a simple replacement operation like the changing of a light bulb, but rather a changeover between members of a pair, as when one nostril, opening wider, takes over the breath from the other. The heart of flesh and the heart of stone coexist side by side, and at a certain moment, identifiable with what Paul called “repentance to salvation” (2 Cor. 7:10), the tenderer one assumes more or less permanent dominance. More or less, because we slip; but we recover.

I call this a work of God through Christ, in whom I am reborn a new creature, but I see that God does this to people of any and all faith traditions, including people of none. We each describe it in the words we have at hand. I use and recommend a Christian understanding of it, and Christian language to describe it, but I do not insist on it; other traditions have shed light on it for me. Your Inner Teacher, who is God – or, if you insist, the Unconditioned Light, or the limitless Buddha Mind – will teach you about it in concepts that are right for you.

Because it happens to so many, and seems so necessary to our spiritual growth, I’d be tempted to call this change of heart a natural next step in human evolution, if it were not clearly the result of a divine intervention (and so more rightly called “miraculous” than “natural”). This Great Change of Heart comes from an awakening kiss, or shock, given to the ready soul by the Merciful One, to Whom be all praise. I could not have undergone the change without God’s transforming touch, any more than a corrupt tree can will itself to grow good fruit.

The Great Change of Heart does not, by itself, make a tender heart a great heart. To be a Muhammad, a Francis of Assisi, a Baal Shem Tov, a Sojourner Truth or a Gandhi (peace be on them all!) requires additional gifts. The new creature may forever remain a small, timid, and unimaginative new creature, in accord with its modest natural endowments. But what puts the humblest new creature in company with the greatest of saints is its desire to get through each of life’s challenges with a clean conscience. The tender heart of flesh naturally practices a morality anchored in faithfulness to conscience, not merely a “natural” conscience of internalized social norms but the one that feels the guidance of the living God. Once this link is felt, any weakening of it is experienced as painful. One avoids lying, cheating, and violence not merely because one has been told that they are wicked but also because it makes one spiritually sick even to take the first step toward temptation; one feels one’s light go dim. Perhaps this, more than inclusiveness or exclusiveness, is the most fundamental difference between the morality of the tender heart and the stony. For the stony heart, ends can justify means whether or not one’s light goes dim. The stony heart does not care about the dimming of the light because it does not see or feel it. For the stony heart, “a man’s got to do what a man’s got to do,” and so we have war upon war upon war.

How are we to achieve Meeting the Minimum Needs of All within the short span of twenty-four years – a mere six United States presidencies – when so many stony hearts are so deeply entrenched in their exclusion moralities, evil is so deeply embedded in social structure, and war, privation and disaster threaten to turn souls crueler by the billions? The fortunate thing is that luminous souls, being nourishing to all that are around them, are attractive, and the Great Change of Heart is contagious. Within every breast beat not one heart but two, and in many cases the heart of stone is weary of having the mastery over the heart of flesh. If God wills an epidemic of the Great Change of Heart to save the earth from self-destruction, who can stop it?


Post a Comment

<< Home