Should The G8 Be In Charge Of Education, Sustainable Development And Humanitarian Services

Should the G8 be in charge of education, sustainable development and humanitarian services in the Developing world?

Lessons in life come via formal and informal education, while formal education by most is valued as a human right it can also be utilized to train and develop partakers into self-sufficient contributors and participants towards the development of sustainable societies. Many others take education for granted and use it to spread general and even useless knowledge. Education must be taken seriously to protect Human Rights and enhance peace and sustainable environments in developing societies. Since there are immediate troublesome conditions throughout the world, and especially in developing states in Africa, one must deeply consider what role formal education can play to hasten holistic development of the people towards bringing solutions to conflicts. Many of the G8 nations have been the caretakers of the developing world for at least the last century. Although this time has proven to be quite successful for most of the developing nations, has there really been any measurable success for African people? Has there been measurable success for poor people? And not to unfairly place blame, has anyone besides the G8 even taken the interest or responsibility to find solutions to help educate and assist development in poor countries otherwise?

These strong European and American alliances are the foremost leaders in education and development across the globe. They are creators of most of the religious, social, economic and political organizations that provide programs and services that assist developing nations and they work together to provide humanitarian support to developing peoples throughout the world. Yet, ironically, these European partners are also among those since the beginning of the slave trade in the 1600s, 1885 and beyond that have combined resources to trigger colonialism and neo-colonialism, and setting up bureaucracy that has played a very significant role in the under-development of African states as well. For centuries, this leadership has gathered valuable resources from especially Africa and from other developing nations in South America and had utilized both human and natural resources to service their own national interest and drive their economic and technological development. If in truth this is a historical fact about the history of our leaders, then have our leaders evolved to be good stewards since the active practice of enslavement, apartheid and colonialism? Have they become willing and able enough to create educational services, and social welfare systems that can empower those they once sought to dominate?

A brief 'stroll down memory lane' will allow us to remember the roles that our leaders have played in crimes against humanity. Hate, racism, greed, and having little regard for the human life of poor peoples are some of the human dis-eases recognizable as the causes of both the exploitation and genocide of African related and other peoples. Certain systems of domination were implemented by most of the G8 governments that severely exploited human rights. One such exploitation existed in slavery. Slavery is a system noted by the United Nations Human Rights Charter, to be a severe violation of human rights. Although many of the G8 nations have offered formal apologies for enslavement of humans there had been no reparations or solutions to the poverty that slavery and apartheid and colonialism created, given to most of the people that have suffered and chiefly those of African descent.

These African related people are themselves not respected by other nations and thought to be abusers of themselves and indifferent, and are among the same populations that present in large numbers as the impoverished and needy. On the other hand, since there has been no formal display of remorse to show respect for life in their behalf and no sentiments that seek to replace or rejoin families that were separated. And are there any sincere activities by leading governments to make amends for land, possessions or lives lost for those enslaved or exploited? Has there been a real effort to provide reparations for the lost of life, dignity and human rights? Additionally with no formal activities to address the trauma that these certain groups experienced for generations, is there any wonder how serious social problems including poverty might prevail among those with former slave, apartheid or colonial experiences?

And finally, some ask, how can the same Leaders who appear not to support the reparation of crimes against humanity perpetrated on specific peoples seek to bring other leaders of countries to justice for similar atrocities, RE-SURFACE as the teachers and healers of those same societies and the world? It is possible that governments do have remorse and seek healing from somewhere to learn how to show respect for people they once hated or abused. But let's ask the Afrikaners, if they have healed from the system of Apartheid in the last 20 years, where suddenly in the last 20 years almost 70 percent of the cases of HIV are in Africa, with the most cases in South Africa. Why are these Black African populations suddenly the most infected with HIV, and they appear not to thrive specifically? Could there really be a plan of genocide targeting specific people to gain their resources? I pray genocide in 2007 is not a reality, but if this is the case, human-kind and particularly those who stand up as global leaders are still terrible offenders of Human rights and need serious support in their recovery.

But maybe the same religions that were used to enslave Africans and others are working towards the healing of man-kind and can mend the dis-respect for life that caused exploitation and crimes against humanity such as slavery and genocide? Maybe the government and leadership of yesterday active in committing crimes against humanity did eventually want to rectify human dis-eases that caused exploitation and so they produced a document that would eventually manifest justice as created in the Declaration of Independence of 1776,

When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation. We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. -- That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, -- That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness....But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. --

When the initial colonies wanted freedom from Britain their aim was to create a government that would protect human rights and they themselves were champions of liberty. Today have Americans lost sight of the initial purpose of America---to protect Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness for all men? Since most of us really have faith in life and Liberty it is certain that many would like to support the protection of the quality of life that our constitution as human, as opposed to animal stands for. We do not want to believe that there are leaders operating in 2007 who no longer care about protecting this quality of life. It appears that something has gone astray from the initial declaration of Independence that greatly supported the protection of Human rights and the happiness of mankind?

Consequently, some are not very confident that leading governments want to be successful in providing human services or champions of peace. Certainly, the last 50 years had not hosted a global environment of peace and security to warrant success. Even less than 40 years ago, numerous martyrs were assassinated and imprisoned in the name of human rights and development or peace: remember, Martin Luther King, Malcolm X, Marcus Garvey, Gandhi, Nelson Mandela, Patrice Lumumba and Kwame Nkrumah just to name a few. In more recent history Leaders in the African-American community are still arrested or detained for unifying their communities to enhance the quality of life of economic development: remember Yahweh Ben Yahweh who was arrested and detained from 1990-2007. It is thought, he was arrested just because his community became economically sustainable. This happened in America. It would appear that government leaders in today are not in the business of supporting education systems or services that support the development of leaders that seek to protect human rights, at least this proven to be the case for African related or poor people specifically.

If this is so, can the G8 or other super powers be supported in their lead especially in sustainable development programs and global peace for Africa or elsewhere? Can they continue to take charge of programs and services that are established to protect human rights if their evaluation is not good?

The European alliances through religious missions or programs are the foremost providers and pioneers of services to humanity and continually raise money to serve and protect the needs and wants of developing peoples especially. Consequently, they have had the most potential to champion human development and the peace process. They have been the Global leaders in developing systems in Education, Health, Economics, Social Welfare, Business and Commerce and the pioneers in implementing related programs, services and activities across the globe. Certainly they have been successful in protecting the human rights of some, but it is also evident that they have not supported the sustainable development of Africa. Maybe they need guidance to direct their Human development and Education to insure a better progress for African-related and poor people in the future.

A look at recent history reflects that they need support in providing effective programs or services to Africa specifically. The protection of Human Rights in the last 50 years in Africa shows little progress in peace and sustainable economic development. A 2005 UN Human Development magazine about Africa reported 70 percent of the worlds HIV cases were in Africa alone and 27 percent of the worlds Refugees came from Africa, while Africa only contributed to being 10 percent of the world population. If the G8 have been in charge of Education programs in Health; Peace building and conflict management, then the amount of Refugees and bad health alone reflect little progress with government programs to support peace or human development and education in Africa.

Maybe Government leaders need others to help them with their health education and global peace and conflict management programs because something has gone astray from the intention of American Founding Fathers. We as consumers have a right to direct our support to programs and services that can better relate to the Life, Liberty and pursuit of happiness for all people it intends to serve. There are other leading agencies that can lay the foundation that will protect and service the rights of all humans in the future, which are usually non-governmental and have a genuine interest with no strings attached for human service. Governments in the business of Human Rights and protection should carefully review the Declaration of Independence and restructure to effectively champion Life; Liberty and pursuit of happiness for the good of all humanity. The specific target of groups of human beings for genocide or exploitation is a crime against humanity.

For those whose rights are continually and maybe even unintentionally disrespected, a Champion must arise to help open the door for non-governmental agencies to save innocent people and provide some immediate relief. Many will benefit and many more warrant the protection of their human rights, but targeting those in the most distress in a beginning. Every life is precious even though it appears that poor or people in developing countries are taken for granted. This makes it obvious that Governing bodies need assistance with their global peace and development objectives, especially when they try to serve the poor. The wars that exists today in Africa and the Middle East do demonstrate the lack of progress of super powers in protecting human rights and being real champions of peace.

While there is respect for our powerful leaders some guidance is needed in education and social affairs so that meaningful servicing of Human rights can progress. Non-governmental agencies can better support developing peoples with no strings attached.

My name is Dawnis Ba, I have worked within the field of Human Services for over 25 years. I have worked with both Government and non-governmental agencies towards the alleviation of poverty and addressing social service and human rights concerns. I am currently a private resettlement consultant, trainer and specialist: a problem solver for migration and poverty concerns. The World is calling on a real champion. Blood is a terrible thing to Waste and it cries from the ground. Visit http://www.globalhandincorporated.org

Setting Proper Priorities For Humanitarian Aid

Lets say somebody forced you to give 500 dollars away but gave you the option to choose who to give it to. Lets say they also gave you the option of giving same amount in the form of a gift or labor. Would you give it to your loved ones and/or friends, or would you give it to total strangers? It might seem like a no-brainer since you can help your family out with something they need, brighten the day of somebody you know, see tangible results and improvements right away, and even get a bit of that money back through improved relations and reciprocity. The benefit of improving a stranger's life, pales in comparison from the perspective of self interest.

We all know how people shriek when other people force them to give away their resources through the muscleman of the government. We are familiar how many Americans would rather give the same resources to somebody close to them (themselves or their families) than other fellow citizens. This is not an article about that. Neither is it about the philosophical debate on possibility of unselfish action. All human action is done to expand influence within the world in a variety of creative ways. Even something like suicide, that seems blatantly against the person's self interest, expands that person's influence after death since it is such a powerful act.

This article is about proper prioritizing of private humanitarian aid. This type of aid is considered non-coerced and voluntary giving of personal resources to others. Many individuals around the world, particularly Westerners, seem to have their prioritizes of this type of resource giving mixed up.

Let's start with describing 3 of these primarily Western humanitarians (although non-Westerners have been making inroads recently when it comes to giving):

1) Religious people - In United States in particular, they are a large number since poorer education in large swaths of the country allows such demographic to be numerous. They point to how much Americans contribute to private charity compared to other countries. They are these Americans. They say since Americans are so generous on average, compared to Europeans, government shouldn't get involved in humanitarian aid. A point is made that people who already give a lot would give more if it wasn't redistributed under the barrel of the gun and if citizens could personally decide on the target of the aid. They say that they don't want government to take fruits of their labor and spend it on practices that their internalized moral dogma prohibits. This point is as valid (and powerless) as a Green party member not wanting his tax dollars going to the military. The religious humanitarians don't see that funding for contraception and abortion for poorer American citizens produces Christian results. Government funding, that they are against, reduces poverty, disease, death, suffering, crime, and "ungodly" behavior that economically disadvantaged are more at risk for such as earlier teen sex.

Christians, if they are predisposed to giving, would rather give the money to their local church or religiously based humanitarian organization. These in turn can spend it on local or third world missionary work that uses food and medicine as an incentive to show up to church. Third world is often more of a focus for large churches than local humanitarian work since they can convert more desperate people abroad. A lot of the money does find its way to feed, clothe, and provide medicine when it's not used on stamping out fairy tale literature and mega church expansion. Let's leave alone for now the perpetuating cycle of poverty and misery that just feeding and clothing the poor creates.

2) Secular middle class humanitarians - These are a lot more numerous in Europe but are also prevalent in all Western urban areas. These people acquired just enough education about the international situation to be able to adequately compare their middle class lifestyles to the rest of the world. Many of these people have sufficient neural emotionality to feel above average levels of empathy for others. They get involved in raising awareness about the suffering but are less inclined to give actual money since that money does not strengthen the power of the church internationally as is the case with the religious people. Their contribution in food and medicine, does not come with additional benefits of imposing a moral worldview on the third world poor, and as such, has less influence. Secular humanists are strategically more predisposed to lobbying government to increase its aid through tax revenue although many undoubtedly give personally as well. The "bleeding hearts" as the rural religious like to call them, often have to pick and choose their humanitarian aid considering the amount of suffering in the world. They don't have a church to do the thinking for them so fads are created in terms which society to give to. Many also like to get involved in actually traveling to the third world and helping the needy themselves. That has the benefit of showing the target of resources spent. It also provides more self growth through an exciting well rounded foreign trip that is lacking with study abroad to safer societies.

3) Oligarchic philanthropists - We know about how charity can help with tax write offs and company image, but many philanthropists are genuinely helping third world peoples with tangible large scale schemes. They are the ones who start the organizations that the urban activists get involved in. Although the reasons, for starting the organizations, are often fad based or economically self serving to better public image, the end result is that billions of dollars flow to other countries.

All these humanitarians have their priorities seriously mixed up. It's not even the fact that they are just increasing poverty and corresponding suffering from generation to generation by disproportionate expenditure on food and medicine. 99% of the money does not go to actual utilitarian reduction of long term suffering such as hiring expensive Western teachers, bringing condoms, textbooks, and sterilization procedures.

The true outrage is that these people's only publicly stated humanitarian focus, is not their own families, communities, and countrymen. A middle class woman who writes a 200 dollar check to be spent on some tsunami relief does not use that money to buy a nice present for her mother, father, uncle, sister, brother, husband, and child. Sure, she might be wealthy enough to give all of them even nicer gifts but the fact remains that she could give to people actually close to her even more if she didn't write that check. Some things, are zero sum games, and a personal income is one of those things. Are all American families so smoothly functioning and so happy together that even a dollar can be spent to be sent abroad? Over 50% divorce rates seem to indicate the opposite. Does giving $3000 worth of personal labor to work for some humanitarian organization bring more joy than spending $3000 worth of personal labor to help out one's own flesh and blood? If it truly does, then logically, the foreign strangers are the real family who should be lived with.

One might argue that a person is single and hates his or her distant relatives. In that case, is there no suffering in one's own community? Why travel to a distant land when many American children can use a boost in contraceptive education or funds to get to college? Surely one's neighborhood and community can be well off and its members roughly co-equal. Then why not give to a domestic humanitarian organization that will bring needed resources to fellow tax payers, fellow language speakers, fellow contributors in one's country's competition with other states abroad? The suffering in the richest countries is of course materially different than suffering in the poorest but that doesn't mean vast differences in contentness levels.

A poor rural American, in Appalachia or New Orleans, might be 20 times better off materially than a rural man in a poor African province, but it doesn't mean the African is 20 times as psychologically distressed. Individual psychology is remarkably adaptive. Studies in psychology have shown that peoples' physiologies and their conscious appraisals of how content they are, are remarkably stable. A man who wins a lottery and a man who losses a leg return to roughly the same level of self reported contentness level after a few years. A man born in Africa , raised illiterate, and who did hard labor to survive can be just as psychologically content as a person who was born into poverty in New Orleans, worked hard to survive for many years, and then lost his wife in a divorce. An illiterate person who never left his region also does not have the self consciousness to really assess the hole he is in compared to those in wealthier countries to be too distressed about it. Yes there are actual famines, wars, and disease in Africa. However, unless 99% of aid is contraceptive and educational, the situation is just worsened since only that type of aid can decrease fertility rates and improve economic methods.

When millions of Americans are uninsured, borderline illiterate, have access to inadequate nutrition, are poor, and burdened with excessive birthrates, the sheer outflow of money to the third world is borderline treasonous. Richest countries becoming socially and economically destabilized can have drastic effects on the poorer societies. Large developing nations, like China, Brazil, India, and Russia, understand this and know that there are plenty of their own citizens who need aid even though many Africans and Central Americans are dirt poor as well.

There is a slogan that is very appropriate. "Think globally. Act locally." Lets start adhering to that. If one has to give, it is better to give to family and loved ones and then his countrymen. World government does not yet exist and as the economic crisis has shown there is plenty of rot within our own society that has to be addressed. Private outflow of money abroad for charity purposes has to be banned. Too much has left the country instead of being invested into infrastructure, economy, and country's citizens. Only national governments should be in control of giving proper developmental aid to other societies. The government should encourage humanitarian aid organizations to provide domestically and can create a list of targets for them. Maybe Bill Gates should be appointed as the economic developmental officer of Appalachian schools rather than be allowed to waste his wealth on bettering foreigners. Maybe the international community should finally pressure the Vatican on the condom policy so millions don't die from AIDS and don't leave many children to suffer as well. If it takes Iran level marginalizing and alienating of the Vatican, as well as refusal to meet with Vatican's leadership, so be it.

That's not to say that aid to other societies should stop completely but it should go through national leadership. Government has the power to attach proper strings to make sure fertility of third world poor is decreased and proper investments into schooling provided. Sometimes aiding poorer societies can help prevent destabilization on the richer country's borders. Treason is a very crude word and often misused. But when a grown man, who believes in ghosts, ignores the poor in his own neighborhood and gives money to help foreign poor through some third world church, treason is the only word that springs to mind. When an educated urban woman spends energy and her money to help foreigners and not her own family or fellow citizens, treason is the only word that springs to mind. Such sensibilities obviously have intention of betterment and help, but the priorities are disastrously misplaced.

How To Create an Environment of Investment - Or How Humanitarian Projects Could Save The Day

Sometimes, when surviving through an economic depression, especially like the last one, which had world-wide coverage and effect, the only way to get going at full speed again is by applying a massive kick-start.

Create an Environment of Investment.

Most noble comment. But which Government has the will, or the financial clout (especially after a series of such dramatic natural disasters) to start or jerk this fragile recovery into action?

Perhaps no 'standard' government has the financial clout any more. But what about an association of First Nations people?

More about that later; let's look at what is happening in the world, and issues that need addressing as rapidly as possible.

Those that spring most readily to mind are Global Warming, and our seemingly unswerving dependence on rapidly-dwindling fossil fuels, followed by a world-wide concern over poverty and health issues.

Let's take a closer look at some of these issues:

Our continuing desire to burn massive amounts of fossil fuels (petrol and diesel), as well as even bigger amounts of coal, oil, and natural gas on generating most of our electrical power.

We create monstrous, unsightly, and highly inefficient wind farms, using out-dated technology that in itself takes up to 20 years to replace the carbon footprint created to install them

Our continuing desire to throw away our waste in the most selfish manner, and then let our local councils either burn or bury it (or export it to some other country - who usually bury or burn it for us).

Our very fickle desire to build houses in a manner that takes such a high carbon footprint to achieve it, and causes so much waste by-products, and then, we insist in spending even more fossil fuels in an attempt to keep these houses hot in winter and cold in summer.

Then, do we make any attempt to conserve water. No, we regularly flush our toilets, public urinals waste Olympic Swimming pools of water every year; rainwater and waste water is just literally poured down our sewers.

How do we try to control diseases? We just get through millions of gallons of bleach, and other products that 'kill all known germs DEAD'. We treat fats oils and grease in the same manner, and just move the problems 'further down-stream', creating a superb playing field for all sorts of nasty pathogenic bacteria.

Let's look at each of the above points in more detail

Burning masses of fossil fuels to run our power stations, or run our cars and other transport. Until the recent Japanese nuclear disaster, Britain was on track to build 4 new nuclear plants. What an environmental and potentially disastrous choice. Electric cars? Not with the current battery issues and recharging times. But how about hydrogen produced from a simple cell, with a few gallons of water? Want to see a MAC truck or a Hummer running on one of these devices, with very little modification? Email me and I will send you a number of videos.

Wind farms. Have you recently been concerned about a collection of these prehistoric monsters getting planning permission to damage your view and your environment, as well as a danger to wildlife? We have the latest technology vortex wind turbines, that are unobtrusive, and far more efficient than the gargantuan dinosaur wind turbines.

Waste handled in the only proper manner. We have systems that can automatically sort all household waste (no more need to have selective bins); that can also take in dangerous hospital waste, green waste, oily sludge, tyres and plastics, and even human and animal sewage, and convert it very efficiently into green electricity - with No Incineration, and No Toxic ash. Efficient, maximised recyclables, reduced landfill needs, and reduced pollution. Perfect solution to our energy, resources, disease containment, and stops locking up scant fossil fuel based products on land fill sites for ever.

Sustainable Living. Why continue to build houses that need such a large carbon footprint to build, create so much waste, and then cost so much to run. Our houses are already built to the UK Government's Code 4 standards - probably 10 years ahead of anyone else.

Water -that scant resource that in some areas may cause a new World War. How about a collection of systems that can conserve water in toilets, recycle rainwater and other waste water, purify water, computerise crop watering, and how about this - a machine that can extract gallons of water every day from the air - even in a desert?

Using Nature to help fight disease. Rather than using chemicals that are toxic to our very environment, why not resort to Nature to fight natural illnesses. Using products such as EcoBug that uses 'good' bacteria to remove smells, fats etc, by outperforming pathogenic germs, alongside other natural products, we start to undo much of the destruction to our natural environment by this subtle move.

Eco-Tourism. Living with Nature. No point continuing what mankind has done increasingly over the last few centuries - destroying Rain Forests, hunting to extinction so many forms of wild life. Each Peace City will have an EcoPark area allocated to it, where the local natural flora and fauna, and indigenous animals and bids, are protected, encouraged, and enjoyed.

Fine. So we have many technological breakthroughs, that if they were to be adopted universally, what a great overall benefit they would have for all mankind.

Taking that process one stage further, and, following the lines of the United Nations 8 Millennium Goals, that also includes eradicating poverty and homelessness, reducing infant mortality, better education, better sports health, better employment which would lead to a much higher standard of living for so many millions of people across the world. If we could combine technological advances with these humanitarian goals, what a better place the whole world would be!

Now, going back to my earlier comment about a coming together of a number of First Nations people, who were able to combine their Sovereign Wealth into a suitable financial instrument of power, here we are looking at levels of resources that at this present moment in time, no 'conventional ' government could access.

What better way to utilise these resources to create a number of new 'Peace Cities' in a number of locations around the world, that combined all of the above benefits, including plans for education, employment, medical health, hospitals, shopping malls, sports awareness, agriculture, animal husbandry, with all the civic structure of a new City fully in place.

If these First Nations fully funded these projects, imagine the amount of local investment that this would attract - creating the climate for investment and humanity - and here you have the perfect kick-start to a far better, caring, humanitarian, peaceful world.

Far-fetched? It can never happen? Then I suggest you see what the Matua Karanga Foundation Trust is up to - under the control of His Excellency Chief Charles Hohepa - Sovereign Mandate of the Maori Nation.

Geoff Morris is working with a number of companies facilitating the humanitarian projects being implemented by the Matua Karanga Foundation. If you would like to understand more about His Excellency Chief Charles Hohepa, The Foundation, and the collaboration between First Nations, their Cultures, and the planned Humanitarian projects for around the world, please visit http://www.matuakarangaglobal.org