HUMAN DEVELOPMENT
IN OUR TIME
IN OUR TIME
21. Paul VI had an articulated vision of development. He understood
the term to indicate the goal of rescuing peoples, first and foremost, from
hunger, deprivation, endemic diseases and illiteracy. From the economic point of
view, this meant their active participation, on equal terms, in the
international economic process; from the social point of view, it meant their
evolution into educated societies marked by solidarity; from the political point
of view, it meant the consolidation of democratic regimes capable of ensuring
freedom and peace. After so many years, as we observe with concern the
developments and perspectives of the succession of crises that afflict the world
today, we ask to what extent Paul VI's expectations have been fulfilled
by the model of development adopted in recent decades. We recognize, therefore,
that the Church had good reason to be concerned about the capacity of a purely
technological society to set realistic goals and to make good use of the
instruments at its disposal. Profit is useful if it serves as a means towards an
end that provides a sense both of how to produce it and how to make good use of
it. Once profit becomes the exclusive goal, if it is produced by improper means
and without the common good as its ultimate end, it risks destroying wealth and
creating poverty. The economic development that Paul VI hoped to see was meant
to produce real growth, of benefit to everyone and genuinely sustainable. It is
true that growth has taken place, and it continues to be a positive factor that
has lifted billions of people out of misery — recently it has given many
countries the possibility of becoming effective players in international
politics. Yet it must be acknowledged that this same economic growth has been
and continues to be weighed down by malfunctions and dramatic problems,
highlighted even further by the current crisis. This presents us with choices
that cannot be postponed concerning nothing less than the destiny of man, who,
moreover, cannot prescind from his nature. The technical forces in play, the
global interrelations, the damaging effects on the real economy of badly managed
and largely speculative financial dealing, large-scale migration of peoples,
often provoked by some particular circumstance and then given insufficient
attention, the unregulated exploitation of the earth's resources: all this leads
us today to reflect on the measures that would be necessary to provide a
solution to problems that are not only new in comparison to those addressed by
Pope Paul VI, but also, and above all, of decisive impact upon the present and
future good of humanity. The different aspects of the crisis, its solutions, and
any new development that the future may bring, are increasingly interconnected,
they imply one another, they require new efforts of holistic understanding and a
new humanistic synthesis. The complexity and gravity of the present economic
situation rightly cause us concern, but we must adopt a realistic attitude as we
take up with confidence and hope the new responsibilities to which we are called
by the prospect of a world in need of profound cultural renewal, a world that
needs to rediscover fundamental values on which to build a better future. The
current crisis obliges us to re-plan our journey, to set ourselves new rules and
to discover new forms of commitment, to build on positive experiences and to
reject negative ones. The crisis thus becomes an opportunity for discernment,
in which to shape a new vision for the future. In this spirit, with
confidence rather than resignation, it is appropriate to address the
difficulties of the present time.
22. Today the picture of development has many overlapping layers. The
actors and the causes in both underdevelopment and development are manifold, the
faults and the merits are differentiated. This fact should prompt us to liberate
ourselves from ideologies, which often oversimplify reality in artificial ways,
and it should lead us to examine objectively the full human dimension of the
problems. As John Paul II has already observed, the demarcation line between
rich and poor countries is no longer as clear as it was at the time of
Populorum Progressio[55]. The world's wealth is growing in
absolute terms, but inequalities are on the increase. In rich countries, new
sectors of society are succumbing to poverty and new forms of poverty are
emerging. In poorer areas some groups enjoy a sort of “superdevelopment” of a
wasteful and consumerist kind which forms an unacceptable contrast with the
ongoing situations of dehumanizing deprivation. “The scandal of glaring
inequalities”[56] continues. Corruption and illegality are
unfortunately evident in the conduct of the economic and political class in rich
countries, both old and new, as well as in poor ones. Among those who sometimes
fail to respect the human rights of workers are large multinational companies as
well as local producers. International aid has often been diverted from its
proper ends, through irresponsible actions both within the chain of donors and
within that of the beneficiaries. Similarly, in the context of immaterial or
cultural causes of development and underdevelopment, we find these same patterns
of responsibility reproduced. On the part of rich countries there is excessive
zeal for protecting knowledge through an unduly rigid assertion of the right to
intellectual property, especially in the field of health care. At the same time,
in some poor countries, cultural models and social norms of behaviour persist
which hinder the process of development.
23. Many areas of the globe today have evolved considerably, albeit in
problematical and disparate ways, thereby taking their place among the great
powers destined to play important roles in the future. Yet it should be stressed
that progress of a merely economic and technological kind is insufficient.
Development needs above all to be true and integral. The mere fact of emerging
from economic backwardness, though positive in itself, does not resolve the
complex issues of human advancement, neither for the countries that are
spearheading such progress, nor for those that are already economically
developed, nor even for those that are still poor, which can suffer not just
through old forms of exploitation, but also from the negative consequences of a
growth that is marked by irregularities and imbalances.
After the collapse of the economic and political systems of the Communist
countries of Eastern Europe and the end of the so-called opposing blocs,
a complete re-examination of development was needed. Pope John Paul II called
for it, when in 1987 he pointed to the existence of these blocs as one of the
principal causes of underdevelopment[57], inasmuch as politics withdrew
resources from the economy and from the culture, and ideology inhibited freedom.
Moreover, in 1991, after the events of 1989, he asked that, in view of the
ending of the blocs, there should be a comprehensive new plan for development,
not only in those countries, but also in the West and in those parts of the
world that were in the process of evolving[58]. This has been achieved
only in part, and it is still a real duty that needs to be discharged, perhaps
by means of the choices that are necessary to overcome current economic problems.
24. The world that Paul VI had before him — even though society had already
evolved to such an extent that he could speak of social issues in global terms —
was still far less integrated than today's world. Economic activity and the
political process were both largely conducted within the same geographical area,
and could therefore feed off one another. Production took place predominantly
within national boundaries, and financial investments had somewhat limited
circulation outside the country, so that the politics of many States could still
determine the priorities of the economy and to some degree govern its
performance using the instruments at their disposal. Hence
Populorum Progressio assigned a central, albeit not exclusive, role to “public
authorities”[59].
In our own day, the State finds itself having to address the limitations to
its sovereignty imposed by the new context of international trade and finance,
which is characterized by increasing mobility both of financial capital and
means of production, material and immaterial. This new context has altered the
political power of States.
Today, as we take to heart the lessons of the current economic crisis, which
sees the State's public authorities directly involved in correcting
errors and malfunctions, it seems more realistic to re-evaluate their role
and their powers, which need to be prudently reviewed and remodelled so as to
enable them, perhaps through new forms of engagement, to address the challenges
of today's world. Once the role of public authorities has been more clearly
defined, one could foresee an increase in the new forms of political
participation, nationally and internationally, that have come about through the
activity of organizations operating in civil society; in this way it is to be
hoped that the citizens' interest and participation in the res publica
will become more deeply rooted.
25. From the social point of view, systems of protection and welfare, already
present in many countries in Paul VI's day, are finding it hard and could find
it even harder in the future to pursue their goals of true social justice in
today's profoundly changed environment. The global market has stimulated first
and foremost, on the part of rich countries, a search for areas in which to
outsource production at low cost with a view to reducing the prices of many
goods, increasing purchasing power and thus accelerating the rate of development
in terms of greater availability of consumer goods for the domestic market.
Consequently, the market has prompted new forms of competition between States as
they seek to attract foreign businesses to set up production centres, by means
of a variety of instruments, including favourable fiscal regimes and
deregulation of the labour market. These processes have led to a downsizing
of social security systems as the price to be paid for seeking greater
competitive advantage in the global market, with consequent grave danger for the
rights of workers, for fundamental human rights and for the solidarity
associated with the traditional forms of the social State. Systems of social
security can lose the capacity to carry out their task, both in emerging
countries and in those that were among the earliest to develop, as well as in
poor countries. Here budgetary policies, with cuts in social spending often made
under pressure from international financial institutions, can leave citizens
powerless in the face of old and new risks; such powerlessness is increased by
the lack of effective protection on the part of workers' associations. Through
the combination of social and economic change, trade union organizations
experience greater difficulty in carrying out their task of representing the
interests of workers, partly because Governments, for reasons of economic
utility, often limit the freedom or the negotiating capacity of labour unions.
Hence traditional networks of solidarity have more and more obstacles to
overcome. The repeated calls issued within the Church's social doctrine,
beginning with
Rerum Novarum[60], for the promotion of workers'
associations that can defend their rights must therefore be honoured today even
more than in the past, as a prompt and far-sighted response to the urgent need
for new forms of cooperation at the international level, as well as the local
level.
The mobility of labour, associated with a climate of deregulation, is
an important phenomenon with certain positive aspects, because it can stimulate
wealth production and cultural exchange. Nevertheless, uncertainty over working
conditions caused by mobility and deregulation, when it becomes endemic, tends
to create new forms of psychological instability, giving rise to difficulty in
forging coherent life-plans, including that of marriage. This leads to
situations of human decline, to say nothing of the waste of social resources. In
comparison with the casualties of industrial society in the past, unemployment
today provokes new forms of economic marginalization, and the current crisis can
only make this situation worse. Being out of work or dependent on public or
private assistance for a prolonged period undermines the freedom and creativity
of the person and his family and social relationships, causing great
psychological and spiritual suffering. I would like to remind everyone,
especially governments engaged in boosting the world's economic and social
assets, that the primary capital to be safeguarded and valued is man, the
human person in his or her integrity: “Man is the source, the focus and the
aim of all economic and social life”[61].
26. On the cultural plane, compared with Paul VI's day, the difference is
even more marked. At that time cultures were relatively well defined and had
greater opportunity to defend themselves against attempts to merge them into
one. Today the possibilities of interaction between cultures have
increased significantly, giving rise to new openings for intercultural dialogue:
a dialogue that, if it is to be effective, has to set out from a deep-seated
knowledge of the specific identity of the various dialogue partners. Let it not
be forgotten that the increased commercialization of cultural exchange today
leads to a twofold danger. First, one may observe a cultural eclecticism
that is often assumed uncritically: cultures are simply placed alongside one
another and viewed as substantially equivalent and interchangeable. This easily
yields to a relativism that does not serve true intercultural dialogue; on the
social plane, cultural relativism has the effect that cultural groups coexist
side by side, but remain separate, with no authentic dialogue and therefore with
no true integration. Secondly, the opposite danger exists, that of cultural
levelling and indiscriminate acceptance of types of conduct and life-styles.
In this way one loses sight of the profound significance of the culture of
different nations, of the traditions of the various peoples, by which the
individual defines himself in relation to life's fundamental questions[62].
What eclecticism and cultural levelling have in common is the separation of
culture from human nature. Thus, cultures can no longer define themselves within
a nature that transcends them[63], and man ends up being reduced to a
mere cultural statistic. When this happens, humanity runs new risks of
enslavement and manipulation.
27. Life in many poor countries is still extremely insecure as a consequence
of food shortages, and the situation could become worse: hunger still
reaps enormous numbers of victims among those who, like Lazarus, are not
permitted to take their place at the rich man's table, contrary to the hopes
expressed by Paul VI[64]. Feed the hungry (cf. Mt 25: 35,
37, 42) is an ethical imperative for the universal Church, as she responds to
the teachings of her Founder, the Lord Jesus, concerning solidarity and the
sharing of goods. Moreover, the elimination of world hunger has also, in the
global era, become a requirement for safeguarding the peace and stability of the
planet. Hunger is not so much dependent on lack of material things as on
shortage of social resources, the most important of which are institutional.
What is missing, in other words, is a network of economic institutions capable
of guaranteeing regular access to sufficient food and water for nutritional
needs, and also capable of addressing the primary needs and necessities ensuing
from genuine food crises, whether due to natural causes or political
irresponsibility, nationally and internationally. The problem of food insecurity
needs to be addressed within a long-term perspective, eliminating the structural
causes that give rise to it and promoting the agricultural development of poorer
countries. This can be done by investing in rural infrastructures, irrigation
systems, transport, organization of markets, and in the development and
dissemination of agricultural technology that can make the best use of the human,
natural and socio-economic resources that are more readily available at the
local level, while guaranteeing their sustainability over the long term as well.
All this needs to be accomplished with the involvement of local communities in
choices and decisions that affect the use of agricultural land. In this
perspective, it could be useful to consider the new possibilities that are
opening up through proper use of traditional as well as innovative farming
techniques, always assuming that these have been judged, after sufficient
testing, to be appropriate, respectful of the environment and attentive to the
needs of the most deprived peoples. At the same time, the question of equitable
agrarian reform in developing countries should not be ignored. The right to
food, like the right to water, has an important place within the pursuit of
other rights, beginning with the fundamental right to life. It is therefore
necessary to cultivate a public conscience that considers food and access to
water as universal rights of all human beings, without distinction or
discrimination[65]. It is important, moreover, to emphasize that
solidarity with poor countries in the process of development can point towards a
solution of the current global crisis, as politicians and directors of
international institutions have begun to sense in recent times. Through support
for economically poor countries by means of financial plans inspired by
solidarity — so that these countries can take steps to satisfy their own
citizens' demand for consumer goods and for development — not only can true
economic growth be generated, but a contribution can be made towards sustaining
the productive capacities of rich countries that risk being compromised by the
crisis.
28. One of the most striking aspects of development in the present day is the
important question of respect for life, which cannot in any way be
detached from questions concerning the development of peoples. It is an aspect
which has acquired increasing prominence in recent times, obliging us to broaden
our concept of poverty[66] and underdevelopment to include questions
connected with the acceptance of life, especially in cases where it is impeded
in a variety of ways.
Not only does the situation of poverty still provoke high rates of infant
mortality in many regions, but some parts of the world still experience
practices of demographic control, on the part of governments that often promote
contraception and even go so far as to impose abortion. In economically
developed countries, legislation contrary to life is very widespread, and it has
already shaped moral attitudes and praxis, contributing to the spread of an
anti-birth mentality; frequent attempts are made to export this mentality to
other States as if it were a form of cultural progress.
Some non-governmental Organizations work actively to spread abortion, at
times promoting the practice of sterilization in poor countries, in some cases
not even informing the women concerned. Moreover, there is reason to suspect
that development aid is sometimes linked to specific health-care policies which
de facto involve the imposition of strong birth control measures. Further
grounds for concern are laws permitting euthanasia as well as pressure from
lobby groups, nationally and internationally, in favour of its juridical
recognition.
Openness to life is at the centre of true development. When a society
moves towards the denial or suppression of life, it ends up no longer finding
the necessary motivation and energy to strive for man's true good. If personal
and social sensitivity towards the acceptance of a new life is lost, then other
forms of acceptance that are valuable for society also wither away[67].
The acceptance of life strengthens moral fibre and makes people capable of
mutual help. By cultivating openness to life, wealthy peoples can better
understand the needs of poor ones, they can avoid employing huge economic and
intellectual resources to satisfy the selfish desires of their own citizens, and
instead, they can promote virtuous action within the perspective of production
that is morally sound and marked by solidarity, respecting the fundamental right
to life of every people and every individual.
29. There is another aspect of modern life that is very closely connected to
development: the denial of the right to religious freedom. I am not
referring simply to the struggles and conflicts that continue to be fought in
the world for religious motives, even if at times the religious motive is merely
a cover for other reasons, such as the desire for domination and wealth. Today,
in fact, people frequently kill in the holy name of God, as both my predecessor
John Paul II and I myself have often publicly acknowledged and lamented[68].
Violence puts the brakes on authentic development and impedes the evolution of
peoples towards greater socio-economic and spiritual well-being. This applies
especially to terrorism motivated by fundamentalism[69], which
generates grief, destruction and death, obstructs dialogue between nations and
diverts extensive resources from their peaceful and civil uses.
Yet it should be added that, as well as religious fanaticism that in some
contexts impedes the exercise of the right to religious freedom, so too the
deliberate promotion of religious indifference or practical atheism on the part
of many countries obstructs the requirements for the development of peoples,
depriving them of spiritual and human resources. God is the guarantor of man's
true development, inasmuch as, having created him in his image, he also
establishes the transcendent dignity of men and women and feeds their innate
yearning to “be more”. Man is not a lost atom in a random universe[70]:
he is God's creature, whom God chose to endow with an immortal soul and whom he
has always loved. If man were merely the fruit of either chance or necessity, or
if he had to lower his aspirations to the limited horizon of the world in which
he lives, if all reality were merely history and culture, and man did not
possess a nature destined to transcend itself in a supernatural life, then one
could speak of growth, or evolution, but not development. When the State
promotes, teaches, or actually imposes forms of practical atheism, it deprives
its citizens of the moral and spiritual strength that is indispensable for
attaining integral human development and it impedes them from moving forward
with renewed dynamism as they strive to offer a more generous human response to
divine love[71]. In the context of cultural, commercial or political
relations, it also sometimes happens that economically developed or emerging
countries export this reductive vision of the person and his destiny to poor
countries. This is the damage that “superdevelopment”[72] causes to
authentic development when it is accompanied by “moral underdevelopment”[73].
30. In this context, the theme of integral human development takes on an even
broader range of meanings: the correlation between its multiple elements
requires a commitment to foster the interaction of the different levels of
human knowledge in order to promote the authentic development of peoples.
Often it is thought that development, or the socio-economic measures that go
with it, merely require to be implemented through joint action. This joint
action, however, needs to be given direction, because “all social action
involves a doctrine”[74]. In view of the complexity of the issues, it
is obvious that the various disciplines have to work together through an orderly
interdisciplinary exchange. Charity does not exclude knowledge, but rather
requires, promotes, and animates it from within. Knowledge is never purely the
work of the intellect. It can certainly be reduced to calculation and experiment,
but if it aspires to be wisdom capable of directing man in the light of his
first beginnings and his final ends, it must be “seasoned” with the “salt” of
charity. Deeds without knowledge are blind, and knowledge without love is
sterile. Indeed, “the individual who is animated by true charity labours
skilfully to discover the causes of misery, to find the means to combat it, to
overcome it resolutely”[75]. Faced with the phenomena that lie before
us, charity in truth requires first of all that we know and understand,
acknowledging and respecting the specific competence of every level of knowledge.
Charity is not an added extra, like an appendix to work already concluded in
each of the various disciplines: it engages them in dialogue from the very
beginning. The demands of love do not contradict those of reason. Human
knowledge is insufficient and the conclusions of science cannot indicate by
themselves the path towards integral human development. There is always a need
to push further ahead: this is what is required by charity in truth[76].
Going beyond, however, never means prescinding from the conclusions of reason,
nor contradicting its results. Intelligence and love are not in separate
compartments: love is rich in intelligence and intelligence is full of love.
31. This means that moral evaluation and scientific research must go hand in
hand, and that charity must animate them in a harmonious interdisciplinary whole,
marked by unity and distinction. The Church's social doctrine, which has “an
important interdisciplinary dimension”[77], can exercise, in this
perspective, a function of extraordinary effectiveness. It allows faith,
theology, metaphysics and science to come together in a collaborative effort in
the service of humanity. It is here above all that the Church's social doctrine
displays its dimension of wisdom. Paul VI had seen clearly that among the causes
of underdevelopment there is a lack of wisdom and reflection, a lack of thinking
capable of formulating a guiding synthesis[78], for which “a clear
vision of all economic, social, cultural and spiritual aspects”[79] is
required. The excessive segmentation of knowledge[80], the rejection of
metaphysics by the human sciences[81], the difficulties encountered by
dialogue between science and theology are damaging not only to the development
of knowledge, but also to the development of peoples, because these things make
it harder to see the integral good of man in its various dimensions. The
“broadening [of] our concept of reason and its application”[82] is
indispensable if we are to succeed in adequately weighing all the elements
involved in the question of development and in the solution of socio-economic
problems.
32. The significant new elements in the picture of the development of peoples
today in many cases demand new solutions. These need to be found together,
respecting the laws proper to each element and in the light of an integral
vision of man, reflecting the different aspects of the human person,
contemplated through a lens purified by charity. Remarkable convergences and
possible solutions will then come to light, without any fundamental component of
human life being obscured.
The dignity of the individual and the demands of justice require,
particularly today, that economic choices do not cause disparities in wealth to
increase in an excessive and morally unacceptable manner[83], and that
we continue to prioritize the goal of access to steady employment for
everyone. All things considered, this is also required by “economic logic”.
Through the systemic increase of social inequality, both within a single country
and between the populations of different countries (i.e. the massive increase in
relative poverty), not only does social cohesion suffer, thereby placing
democracy at risk, but so too does the economy, through the progressive erosion
of “social capital”: the network of relationships of trust, dependability, and
respect for rules, all of which are indispensable for any form of civil
coexistence.
Economic science tells us that structural insecurity generates
anti-productive attitudes wasteful of human resources, inasmuch as workers tend
to adapt passively to automatic mechanisms, rather than to release creativity.
On this point too, there is a convergence between economic science and moral
evaluation.
Human costs always include economic costs, and economic dysfunctions
always involve human costs.
It should be remembered that the reduction of cultures to the technological
dimension, even if it favours short-term profits, in the long term impedes
reciprocal enrichment and the dynamics of cooperation. It is important to
distinguish between short- and long-term economic or sociological considerations.
Lowering the level of protection accorded to the rights of workers, or
abandoning mechanisms of wealth redistribution in order to increase the country's
international competitiveness, hinder the achievement of lasting development.
Moreover, the human consequences of current tendencies towards a short-term
economy — sometimes very short-term — need to be carefully evaluated. This
requires further and deeper reflection on the meaning of the economy and its
goals[84], as well as a profound and far-sighted revision of the
current model of development, so as to correct its dysfunctions and deviations.
This is demanded, in any case, by the earth's state of ecological health; above
all it is required by the cultural and moral crisis of man, the symptoms of
which have been evident for some time all over the world.
33. More than forty years after
Populorum Progressio, its basic theme,
namely progress, remains an open question, made all the more acute and
urgent by the current economic and financial crisis. If some areas of the globe,
with a history of poverty, have experienced remarkable changes in terms of their
economic growth and their share in world production, other zones are still
living in a situation of deprivation comparable to that which existed at the
time of Paul VI, and in some cases one can even speak of a deterioration. It is
significant that some of the causes of this situation were identified in
Populorum Progressio, such as the high tariffs imposed by economically
developed countries, which still make it difficult for the products of poor
countries to gain a foothold in the markets of rich countries. Other causes,
however, mentioned only in passing in the Encyclical, have since emerged with
greater clarity. A case in point would be the evaluation of the process of
decolonization, then at its height. Paul VI hoped to see the journey towards
autonomy unfold freely and in peace. More than forty years later, we must
acknowledge how difficult this journey has been, both because of new forms of
colonialism and continued dependence on old and new foreign powers, and because
of grave irresponsibility within the very countries that have achieved
independence.
The principal new feature has been the explosion of worldwide
interdependence, commonly known as globalization. Paul VI had partially
foreseen it, but the ferocious pace at which it has evolved could not have been
anticipated. Originating within economically developed countries, this process
by its nature has spread to include all economies. It has been the principal
driving force behind the emergence from underdevelopment of whole regions, and
in itself it represents a great opportunity. Nevertheless, without the guidance
of charity in truth, this global force could cause unprecedented damage and
create new divisions within the human family. Hence charity and truth confront
us with an altogether new and creative challenge, one that is certainly vast and
complex. It is about broadening the scope of reason and making it capable of
knowing and directing these powerful new forces, animating them within the
perspective of that “civilization of love” whose seed God has planted in every
people, in every culture.
No comments:
Post a Comment