The author Waleed Aly, in his book,
"People Like Us," tells us:

"It seems to me that there is an inability
to understand the world from the perspective
of another. It is egocentricity that leads
some of us to assume our own historical
and social experiences are universal; to assume
that the solutions to our problems are the
solutions to everyone else's, even when the
circumstances surrounding them are entirely
different; to assume that the world would be so
much better if only everyone was like us.

There is arrogance here, but it is rarely
conscious. It can be very difficult to spot one's
own egocentricity. We often fail to appreciate
that our views of the world are shaped - even
created by the experiences we have had and the
environment in which we live. It is precisely
this failure that causes us to assume our worldview
is natural and objective. It is very rare indeed
that we recognise the limits of our own horizons.
And when we don't we tend to show no great concern
for the inherited wisdoms and histories of others."

Food for thought!

POIROT

I read enough of the article you posted to comment on a couple of things.

The article states <EVERYWHERE FOOD PRODUCTION IS BECOMING A NEGATIVE ECONOMY, WITH FARMERS SPENDING MORE TO BUY COSTLY INPUTS FOR INDUSTRIAL PRODUCTION THAN THE PRICE THEY RECEIVE FOR THEIR PRODUCE. THE CONSEQUENCE IS RISING DEBTS AND EPIDEMICS OF SUICIDES IN BOTH POOR AND RICH COUNTRIES>

This article does say that rich countries are also affected negatively by global companies (just as well as I was about to point that fact out )
I agree to a large extent with the article’s opinion of global companies.
The suicide rate in Australia rivals the amount of deaths on the roads and a big percentage of these are by males in rural communities.
Global companies are hard to control even by Western governments. The labour government was almost bought down by their attempt to reign in the profits of the huge mining companies recently. They are virtually a law unto themselves.

The article also states<SUSTAINABILITY REQUIRES THE RECOGNITION THAT DIVERSE SPECIES AND DIVERSE PEOPLE PLAY AN ESSENTIAL ROLE IN THE MAINTAINING OF ECOLOGICAL PROCESSES.

That’s why I said in a recent article that races can be made genetically stronger by the intergration (intermarriage) of diverse ethnic groups rather than practising multiculturalism which is about wanting to stay in monocultural tribal groups. That’s not the meaning Mr. Shiva wants me to take from his words but is it? He is really defending the practice of being allowed to split into monocultural tribes under the system of multiculturalism.
Oh the deception and double speak of words.

To POIROT

…….continued from above.

The article also states <The sustainability challenge for the new millenium is whether global economic man can move out of the worldview based on fear and scarcity, monocultural and monopolis, appropiation and dispossession and shift to a view based on abundance and sharing diversity and decentralisation and respect for all beings.>

Considering he was promoting the idea of diverse cultures, that is tribes maintaining their own monocultural identity in the previous paragraphs I wouldn’t hold my breath waiting for mankind to change any time soon. I’m suspicious when he talks of sharing abundance because that sounds like the West should share all their abundance with India. I can’t see what abundance India is going to share with the West.
Maybe they should have thought more about abundance before they produced all those people over there and made their environment unsustainable. The key to abundance and lack of war is of course a sustainable world population. Do I hear any calls for massive contraception aid worldwide.

Reigning in some of the exploitative behaviour by global companies would also help. This would probably need to be done by all countries of the world taking a united stand against them, after all if they are threatened in one country they will just bribe their way into another country by making monetary offers that poor countries in particular may find hard to resist.

Poirot:>> My post was meant to be taken as it was written. I do not recall referring to your views.<<

My apologies if I misjudged the intent.

Dear Poirot,
thanks for the link.

Dear Cherful,
apologies for my outburst, which was offensive and unhelpful.

I am not driven by PC. The whole point of my response to this thread was that there's a big civilising difference between humans in a state of nature and in a state of culture (Hobbes). When we form co-operative groups we have to elaborate codes of conduct to live by that make the whole thing work. The fact that we develop great ethics, often beautifully couched in inspirational texts as universals, but then observe them in strictly parochial fashion, acting viciously or indifferently to 'outsiders', suggests there are no universals and this is part of the modern crisis.
I choose to put my hope in humanity's transcendent ethical-intellect, that is that s/he can continue to cultivate meaning and values to live by and, eventually, respect all humans and all life; not just for the sake of high-sounding ethics, but also for what might redound to us in terms of the security we need and the potential we might achieve.
An unsustainable human presence now afflicts the whole world and we can either develop genuine (rather than tribal) universals or descend again into darkness. It does seem that we're headed for unprecedented misery http://www.google.com.au/search?q=causes+of+african+famine&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-GB:official&client=firefox-a and it's a moot point whether the survivors will have a shred of ethical dignity left to rebuild a decent society, or just begin viciously again, ad nauseam. We live in 'one world' now, there are no convenient borders and no us and them, unless we go back to a state of nature, which is what you seem to advocate?

No worries, Sonofgloin - it's a complex issue (arouses passions)

Cherful,

I don't believe Vandana Shiva was promoting the idea that the West should give its abundance to India.She was lamenting the loss of knowledge of bio-diversity and food production practices that go hand in hand with a globalized takeover of Indian food production.
She says, "Globalization of the food system is destroying the diversity of local food cultures and local food economies....These are not recipes for feeding the world, but stealing livelihoods from the poor to create markets for the powerful."
Citing the patenting of basmati rice - an ancient food source - Shiva continues: "...food is now being pirated and patented. The knowledge of the poor is being converted into the property of global corporations, creating a situation where the poor will have to pay for seeds and medicines they have evolved and have used to meet their own needs for nutrition and health care."

Cherful, Shiva is not asking for the West to hand over its wealth - she is merely asking it to stop plundering her country - asking it to stop being "selfish".