To increase the effectiveness of international institutions and to create new institutions at the international and national levels will require committed action by individuals and civil society organizations. We all need to realize that with rights come responsibilities. Change does not occur magically. It occurs because individuals engage with societal problems and take actions to create a better world. Often, change occurs person to person. Each of us can be an agent for change in the world. We are each as powerful as we choose to be.

 We can each start by choosing peace and making a firm commitment to peace with justice. This means that we make peace a central issue and priority in our lives and demonstrate peace in all we do. We can live peace, educate for peace, speak out for peace and support and vote for candidates who call for peace. In choosing peace, we also choose hope rather than ignorance, complacency or despair. Hope gives rise to action, and action in turn gives rise to increased possibility for change and to further hope. It is a spiral in which action deepens commitment, which leads to more action.  Like others who have chosen the path of peace—Mahatma Gandhi, Mother Teresa, Martin Luther King, Jr., Archbishop Desmond Tutu and the Dalai Lama—we must realize that it will not be a quick or easy journey.  The path will require of you courage, compassion and commitment. The rewards may be few, except your own understanding of the necessity of the journey. The path to peace will require persistence. You may be tempted to leave the path, but what you do for peace you do for humanity. In the struggle for a better world and more decent future, we are not allowed to give up. Our efforts to create a culture of peace are a gift to humanity and the future. What better gift could we give to our fellow citizens of the planet and to future generations than our courage, compassion and commitment in the cause of peace?

(Excerpted from Voices for a Culture of Peace Vol.1 and reprinted with permission from Culture of Peace Press.)

Sensitivity is a personality trait. In and of itself, it is neither good nor bad. But if you have that trait, you can choose to turn it into a plus.

For example, should a friend criticize you, you could turn it into a positive by thinking deeply about what has been said so you can correct a possible fault. Whatever has been said, however, is certainly not something you need to worry over. If you feel stung, take a moment to congratulate yourself on having the capacity for humility and self-reflection. People who are indifferent often lack any perspective for self improvement.

My mentor, Josei Toda, taight me about this, showing me that the best way to avoid losing confidence or falling into needless despair over criticism is to learn to be a good listener. Instead of becoming defensive or thinking immediately that you are hopeless, choose to allow yourself to be stimulated toward further personal growth. Actively listen to what is being said in order to find the positive nugget.

That having been said, after sifting through the criticism for whatever value there might be, it is very important that you are determined not to brood over it or withdraw into your shell.

(Excerpted from The Way of Youth and reprinted with permission from Middleway Press.)

ANSWER: People who are critical of themselves aften worry about this - it's a sign of sincere, praiseworthy character.

It's difficult to see ourselves objectively. But, remember, no one has only faults or only merits. We all have a mixture of both. Therefore, we should  strive to develop and polish our positive attributes. As we do, our shortcomings will fade  until they are no longer apparent.

Perhaps you could ask someone who knows you well, a friend, parent or sibling, what strong points he or she thinks you have or can develop. I'm sure they'll name many admirable qualities. Also, if someone close to you points out your faults, rather than becoming offended or upset, it is to your benefit to listen calmly and objectively to what he or she has to say and make an effort to take it  as constructive criticism. Once you take your place in society, there won't be many people who will be so honest with you.

(Excerpted from The Way of Youth and reprinted with permission from Middleway Press.)

ANSWER: We have to have dreams, and we must have the capacity to make the dream a reality. When people told me in Ireland, “You can never do this,” I used to say, “Watch my smoke!” Don’t tell me I can’t do this, because I know that every single human being is capable of doing magnificent stuff, and there are no ordinary people. All people are extraordinary. God or Buddha or Allah or whatever we want to call that powerful force of love, powerful force of humanity and powerful force of goodness, made no ordinary people in the world. Everybody is different and extraordinary. Have you ever met an ordinary housewife? How many men here can multitask?

Not a lot. To each and every one of you, if you are not already involved in helping to change our world and make it a little bit better, from today make a solemn vow to yourself that you will become involved in changing the future that our world faces. Make that promise to yourself and remember that you are not ordinary. There is nobody in this room who has the same fingerprints. There is nobody in this room who has the same eyes. There is nobody in this room who has the same thought process. You are all absolutely individual. As Jody Williams, my coworker and fellow Peace Prize laureate says, “Violence is a choice; reject it no matter where it comes from.”

 

(Excerpted from Voices for a Culture of Peace Vol.1 and reprinted with permission from Culture of Peace Press.)

ANSWER: I know Augusto Boal was greatly influenced by Paulo Freire and used Freire’s Pedagogy of the Oppressed to develop the Theatre of the Oppressed. I have had students who have taken theater workshops with Augusto Boal. I have not taken them with Boal. I believe, still, every year for a few months, he comes to the University of Oklahoma, but I know he has theater groups all over the world. We spoke together only on one occasion, the three of us, Augusto, myself and Paulo. Some people call Boal’s work guerilla theatre, but any way you name it, it’s a wonderful way of re-conceptualizing, reconfi guring human relationships in the guise of participatory theater, where people come up and assume roles and are open to the possibility of self and social transformation. Peter Sellars, not the comedian from the sixties and seventies, but Peter Sellars, the brilliant and innovative theater director, has done some marvelous work along the lines of Boal. He continues to be an inspiration for me. Peter Sellars is located here in Los Angeles. He is one of the great opera directors and theater directors of our time. I would like to be more closely connected to that in my own work. This is absolutely fundamental.

ANSWER: I imagine it's a little of both. And, of course, many studies have been conducted on this subject. Essentially, however, we are the architects of our own lives. More important is to know that we are the architects of the rest of our lives.

The word character derives from the Greek charakter. menaing to engrave or make an impression upon. From a scientific standpoint, personality and physical constitution may be determined to some extent by our genes. But knowing that alone won't change anything. What matters is what we do  to improve ourselves.

That is why what we do right now is so important.

Personality is also viewed a number of ways by psychologists. One view looks at personality in terms of concentric circles. At our core lies our most basic nature. Around that is the basic personality shaped during childhood by habit and custom. Surrounding that circle is the part we form to cope with various circumstances.

Though our core personality may remain unchanged, other aspects can sometimes change so much that people around us may comment that we seem like a completely different person. In any event, we have to be true to ourselves. We have to follow our path and do our best to contribute to society. Education equips us with what we need to do that.

(Excerpted from The Way of Youth and reprinted with permission from Middleway Press.)

ANSWER: This has become my major project now, partly because I am one of the old people, whom I prefer to call the elders, because it is an anthropological term that signifies experience and perhaps wisdom that comes with experience. I do have a chapter coming out in a book (in 2008). The book is titled Deliberation and the Work of Higher Education (Kettering Foundation, 2008). My chapter is called “From Youth Ghettos to Intergenerational Civic Engagement.” In my many years of teaching and community work, what I have discovered is the age segregation that is occurring. Ghetto is the word for it, and some of it is unintended. It is a passionate subject of mine. I will give you three examples. Parents, especially high school parents, are more invested in trying to help their kids and paying huge amounts of money to get them tutors for college and so on. Even in college now, my college and others have set up a division to deal with parents. It used to be that colleges didn’t want to have anything to do with parents. To an excess, they wouldn’t even give the grades or anything about the students, but The Chronicle of Higher Education did an article last year that said now colleges have helicopter parents. Any of you who have children who went to middle school from elementary school, the phrase helicopter parents described parents who, like helicopters, were hovering over the school. The reason for this was that now the kids were going to go to different classrooms, and they had anxiety about it. Helicopter parents have expanded to the high schools and even to the colleges. However, what my study and others have shown is that high school and college students almost never speak with their parents about matters of substance, about what is going on in the country and the world. We did our surveys with residential students, all of whom have cell phones. I still don’t have a cell phone, but someday I will. Almost all of them spoke to one parent every day, sometimes for a minute just to be in touch, sometimes for an hour or two, and in a way it is lovely that children keep in touch with the parents. When we asked them what they talked about, they almost never talked about what it means to be a citizen, what is happening in our country, what is happening in the world, where they read newspapers and so on. That’s been true for a lot of youth, because they are doing other things, so they aren’t engaged, so that’s part of the challenge of engagement. But what about their parents? Where are the parents modeling this stuff? There is a book called The Other Parent. It is already outmoded because it is about television. The point of The Other Parent is that with the husband and wife working, the more professional they are, the more exhausting it is. It’s easier to put the kids in front of a TV because the parents are exhausted. That book was very disturbing. Now, of course, we are way beyond TV. We are into MySpace and YouTube. The study showed in a disturbing fashion how many people have their own TVs, how many young people have computers where their parents aren’t monitoring it, not talking with them, and not even eating together. I don’t blame the parents so much, because they are experiencing what sociologists now call “time poverty.” Arlie Russell Hochschild referred to it as the “time bind.” How many things can you do? I think the cost is trying to get the kids to succeed but without paying attention to their character. I blame the grandparents. I always blame the grandparents. Hey, the parents are too busy; it is up to you—the elders—to model these kids. Grandparents have been doing more of it. Then, when the children go to college, of course, they are really in a youth ghetto. The only adults they encounter are their professors, and that is not reality for a lot of them. What we found in our study is that most colleges give students access to something like a hundred TV channels free. I can’t tell you how many hours that college students spend watching television. Where is the discipline to stop doing that? We are making efforts to bring people together. It is sad to say our best success has been in bringing very old people together with high school students and college students, primarily because old people are in fact more available to do it. People in their fifties, forties and thirties are so busy. The public library is one of the great public spaces in our society that has trouble attracting people in their thirties, forties and fifties. The last thing I want to say about that is that I have made efforts to bring together young people and the elders. I write about that. What happens is when I bring young people together, the elders outnumber them, because I bring a class of thirty and there are maybe seventy or a hundred or a hundred and fifty elders, and we have a discussion on current events and perspective. After it is over, I take the young people aside and ask for their responses. The responses go like this, “Wow! I never saw so many old people in one place.” That is the first response. Then they all sit separately. They don’t mingle. I let them do that at first so we can have a debriefing. Then they say: “Those old people know a lot, but they don’t have anything to do. It’s not as if they are going to school or working as we are. Later on, we will be able to know stuff. They do care, you know, but they have got a lot more time to do it.” Then they get shamed. I don’t shame them, but eventually they say, “Well, gee, maybe we should be doing some more of this.” I was asked a question earlier about whether students go through changes. This experience has literally transformed many young people, who say: “Wow, I think I better register to vote. I think I should become better informed, because there are people who are doing it and I am not being responsible.” Those are encouraging signs. (Excerpted from Voices for a Culture of Peace Vol. 1 and reprinted with permission from Culture of Peace Press.)  

ANSWER: Many people believe personality is determined by fate or heredity and there's nothing we can do about it. The fact is, almost everyone agonizes over some aspect of his or her personality. But you have to realize that just worrying about your problems won't change anything. When you become aware of your shortcomings, you are in a position to begin to control them and change your behavior. People's personalities are truly diverse. There is a vast vocabulary to describe personalities and character traits. The English language is said to have as many as eighteen thousand nouns and adjectives that describe character. No one's personality is flawless. We all, without exception, have qualities that render us less than perfect. Inevitably, you won't like aspects of your personality. But it is foolish to become obsessed by such things and succumb to feelings of self-hatred and unworthiness. You will only hinder your growth. Being introverted doesn't make someone incapable, just as being quick-tempered doesn't make a person useless. For example, a person's shyness can be transformed into valuable qualities such as prudence and discretion, while someone's impatience might be transformed into a knack for getting things done quickly and efficiently. We should live in a way that is true to ourselves. So even though our basic personality may be difficult to change, we can bring out its positive traits. Your personality is like a river. At certain points, the river's banks are pretty much fixed. In the same way, the identity of a person doesn't change much. But the quality of the water in the river can vary. It may be deep or shallow, polluted or clean, have lots of fish or none at all. While our river can't become a completely different kind of river, we can, through our hard work, purify it so that many kinds of fish will be happy to swim in it. Our personality doesn't determine our happiness or unhappiness. Rather it is the substance of our lives and how we've lived that decide our happiness. A river meanders but never stops. This is the natural way of things. Similarly, if you make continual efforts, your peronality will improve slowly , steadily. The key is to keep moving forward and never stop. All rivers, irrespective of their differences, flow unceasingly and unflaggingly to the sea. If we, too, continue to make persistent efforts, we will eventually reach the great ocean of happiness for ourselves and others. We will savor boundless freedom and realize our own potential as we celebrate and encourage others' individuality. The important thing is to do everything you possibly can. You'll be more surprised than anyone at how much you can achieve. You possess such unlimited potential! (Excerpted from The Way of Youth and reprinted with permission from Middleway Press.) 

ANSWER: We have 300 million people, a democratic system and, depending on definitions, probably around 5 percent of the population is politically engaged. Essentially 95 percent of the population sits back and complains. They say: "I do not care. I do not like the situation in Iraq, but I am not going to do anything. I am going to sit here and watch TV.” I worked in Washington, D.C., for four years. Congress responds to the people who are there lobbying them. Our eighteen- to twenty-five-year-olds, they do not vote, and they do not become involved politically. They have the capacity to reshape this country dramatically. Politics has become unattractive. People do not want to participate in it. People do not want to campaign. They do not want to force or bring up new issues. They sit back, and they are passively fed by television. We are a democracy. A democracy requires that we become engaged politically. It requires that we attend meetings, that we make that extra effort, that we send letters, that we do things. If we don’t, of course, nothing is going to change. 

 

 

 

You are right. Many, many people in this country disagree with the government on Iraq, on terrorism, on stem cell research, on Cuba, on all of these issues. Gay marriage, they disagree with the government’s position, but they don’t do anything. I think that one thing we have to do is get involved. That is the beauty of a democracy—we can say what we want; we can do what we want. 

 

 

Today there are some real signs of light. America’s youth are experimenting with information technology, and politics will respond to this. Everyone here can support Internet politics, join discussions, make donations, send email to our people in Congress. We are tired of war, we disagree with torture, we want alternative energy, we want to help alleviate poverty here and abroad, we want to expand the zone of dignity and peace. That is what our country is all about, and we should keep reminding our politicians of this. We are a long way from exhausting all the opportunities our democracy affords for progress and change, for doing what is right instead of what is easy.

 

 

(Excerpted from Voices for a Culture of Peace Vol.1 and reprinted with permission from Culture of Peace Press.)

ANSWER: You can run away, of course. That freedom exists. But it is a very small, petty freedom. It only leads to a life of great hardship, a life in which you will be powerless, weak and completely frustrated. 

Alongside this small freedom, however, exists a much greater freedom. The Japanese novelist Eiji Yoshikawa writes, "Great character is forged through hardship." Only by polishing yourself through repeated difficulties can you build a self that sparkles as brightly as a gem. When you have developed such a state of being, nothing will faze you. You will be free. You will be victorious. Hardships will even become enjoyable. Daring to take on tough challenges - that in itself is immense freedom. 

Freedom is relative. You may run away from hard work and effort, declaring yourself a free spirit, but you cannot run away from yourself - from your own weaknesses, personality and destiny. It is like trying to run from your own shadow. It is even more impossible to escape from the sufferings of aging, sickness and death inherent in the human condition. The more you try to avoid hardships, the more doggedly they pursue you, like so many relentless hounds chasing at your heels. That's why it's important that you turn and face your troubles head-on. It is impossible to have absolutely everything go your way all the time. In fact, if it weren't for the various obstacles life presents us with, we probably wouldn't appreciate what it is to be free.

The springtime of our youth is meant to be lived with our faces turned toward the sun. As a season of growth, youth is a time of both great joy and great suffering. It is filled with problems and worries of all kinds. But rather than run away from them, the key is to keep seeking the sun, to keep moving in the direction of the sunlight, to challenge the pain and agony that are a part of growing up. 

Never give in to defeat. For a seed to sprout, it must exert tremendous effort to break out of its hard outer covering. That sprout must then valiantly push its way up through a thick layer of soil to reach the blue sky above. The hardships you experience now will all contribute to your growth. Therefore, the important thing is to keep  pressing forward no matter how tough or painful the going may get. 

Youth is the time to develop a spirit of persistence. And those who keep striving for improvement remain youthful no matter what there age. Conversely, those who fail to do so, even if they are young in years, will be old and weak in spirit. 

Life is a battle to win ultimate and unlimited freedom. 

(Excerpted from The Way of Youth and reprinted with permission from Middleway Press.)

 

ANSWER: I will answer in a general way, because it is probably most meaningful that way. Let’s say there are two groups in the city. The city leadership has to be cognizant and aware that there are distinct group identity needs for a majority in control and a minority that has been subordinated. Through the delivery of urban services, through the governance of an urban system, those identity needs and aspirations have to be accommodated. In these cities of division, you cannot impose an assimilative model on all citizens where everyone will be treated the same. The majority in control has to think through a new lens of coexistent viability. It is important for this minority group to feel they are viable, respected and productive members of that urban society for the city and the society to blossom and to be healthy. Anything short of that or any messages that the minority feels that their identity is threatened or not respected is going to exacerbate the problem. It is not necessarily going to lead to violence, but it is certainly going to add to the social and psychological separation of those two groups in the city and then we are in a situation where we are getting into a downward slope. I answered your question generally, but there is a whole set of implications this has for how a majority city government would view a minority with respect and viability. Group identity is an important attribute to acknowledge in cities of multiple cultures; its preservation is connected to the UN Programme of Action on a Culture of Peace(#6): Advancing understanding, tolerance and solidarity.

(Excerpted from Voices for a Culture of Peace Vol.1 and reprinted with permission from Culture of Peace Press.)

ANSWER: Yes, young people often fall into this habit. But I cannot say this too strongly: Do not allow yourself to compare yourself to others! Be true to who you are and continue to learn with all your might. Even if you are ridiculed, even if you suffer disappointments and setbacks, continue to advance and do not be defeated. When you muster this strong determination in your heart, you are already halfway to victory. Rather than comparing your every joy and sorrow to that of others, aim to surpass your limits in your current situation. Those who can accomplish this throughout life are the true victors, the true geniuses.When you hold fast to your beliefs and live true to yourself, your real value as a human being shines through.

(Excerpted from The Way of Youth and reprinted with permission from Middleway Press.)

ANSWER: "As I keep saying, the critical mass is the individual. It is the most important thing. Peace within can only bring peace outside. That is very relevent. Empower yourself first with the message of peace that you believe. When you are empowered like that, you will never feel disappointed, you will never feel discouraged. But you have a point because I believe that the most important thing cannot be simply stated that  the critical mass is the important part.

I have seen that many people have started on an individual basis in a very low-key way. These days, in this technological age, you can share many things without individually reaching out. The computers are there, the Internet is there. You can not only read, you can share, you can develop many things without the physical connection that we needed in earlier days. The physical connection, however, I never undervalue, because that has its own significance.

It is valuable to start at the low-key level, if you feel there are no people with you. I can tell you that, very soon, you will find many, because in each of us that human quest for peace is there. It is manifested in a different way in each individual. You have to strike the right chord to persuade a person to join you in your endeavor for peace. I think that is very natural, but start by talking with  your colleagues, talking with your friends, talking with your family members. I think that is the best way to start. I have seen that. If I can get one additional fellow traveler with me, I believe I have contributed in a big way. That is what we need to do. With that simple thinking, you will get results that you could never dream of.

Don't get discouraged. Keep focused. Start with the people you can reach out to first, and then you will find that needed critical mass growing."

(Excerpted from Voices for a Culture of Peace Vol.1 and reprinted with permission from Culture of Peace Press.)

 

ANSWER: "First, please understand, life is long! The way things are now will not last forever. Even if you have problems, even if you have made mistakes or have done things you regret, your whole future still lies ahead of you. Don't worry endlessly over every obstacle or problem. Above all, do not despair or be defeated by your impatience.

Nothing is hopeless. The worst mistake you can make when young is to give up on a dream, to not challenge yourself for fear of failure. The past is the past and the future is the future. Keep moving forward with a steady eye on what is ahead, telling yourself: "I'll start from today!" "I'll start fresh from this moment!"

Happiness in life does not depend on how well things go in your youth. No matter how many mistakes you make, you always have another chance. Be ambitious and keep striving toward the future. If you're not happy with your achievements in high school, then give it your all in college. If that's not to your satisfaction, there's still hope after graduation as you challenge yourself as an active member of society. True success in life does not reveal itself until we reach our forties or fifties. If you experience setbacks along the way, continue with a fighting spirit into your forties, fifties, sixties and seventies.

My experience after more than seventy years of life has taught me to clearly recognize the human patterns that determine victory or defeat.

Many of the most famous people in our history appeared far from outstanding in their youth. Winston Churchill was well known for his many failures at school. Mahatma Gandhi wasn't a remarkable student, either; he was shy, timid and a poor speaker.

So don't be too hard on yourself. You are still young - a work in progress and still developing. To be growing and improving are wonderful things. Just continue to press on tenaciously to find your way forward despite the suffering and pain that are a part of youth and growing up. Indeed, that's the only way to grow.

It is important not to lose hope. Losing hope is, in a way, like living in  a winter of the spirit The English Romantic poet Shelley said, "If Winter comes, can Spring be far behind?" No matter how long and bitter the winter may be, spring always follows. This is the law of the universe, the law of life.

The same applies to us. If we seem to be weathering an endless winter, we musn't abandon hope. As long as we have hope, spring is near. It will come without fail.

Spring is a time of blossoming. Every person has a singular mission, his or her individuality and way of living. It's important to recognize that truth and respect it. That is the natural order of things. That is how it works in the world of flowers - and in the world of human beings, different kinds of flowers bloom harmoniously in beautiful profusion."

(Excerpted from The Way of Youth and reprinted with permission from Middleway Press.)

Miami, Florida, November 20, 2003: Trade negotiators from Canada to Argentina had gathered to put the finishing touches--or so they hoped--on the Free Trade Area of the Americas agreement. A huge crowd of ordinary citizens from the affected countries, including me, had also gathered, to oppose the corporate style of globalization that the proposed treaty represented. And keeping the two groups apart, an enormous and heavily armed police force had completely closed downtown Miami.

By legal permit, our large march and rally could go on until 4:00 p.m. At 4:15 the police decided that enough was enough, and began a sweep to force thousands of peaceful protesters off the streets. Firing tear gas and pellets, they advanced on the colorful, jubilant crowd of trade unionists, environmentalists, immigrant rights activists, students and religious leaders. A few protesters tried to slow the police advance by hauling improvised barricades into their path, but the large crowd generally fell back, fearful of the black-suited, shielded, gun-wielding army that had been commanding our movements all day long. Some protesters began to shout and run. It was an unnecessary and dangerous confrontation.

A group of people who obviously knew each other linked hands and walked slowly away from the police. They chanted in a low, soothing tone. Fanning out across the street, they made a stately moving barricade of their bodies, so that protesters who feared the police could get in front of them. They calmed people around them, and others (including me) joined their procession and their chant.

Practicing for Conflict
I suspect that the chanters belonged to an affinity group, and that they had been through some kind of nonviolence training. Nonviolence training has been used for at least 60 years to prepare people to stand up for their beliefs with courage, dignity, humor and creativity. Mahatma Gandhi originated nonviolence training for his most disciplined core of followers. A Methodist missionary to India, James Lawson, observed this and returned to the U.S. to develop workshops in nonviolence for his fellow African-Americans who were challenging legal segregation. Since that time, training has become a requirement before many nonviolent direct actions.

In Miami I helped provide that training. This is something I've been doing for upwards of 20 years. On that occasion my workshops ran for about three hours--a short amount of time, really, for such a huge subject--and concentrated on the most practical and immediate concerns.

We began with a guided meditation that left us feeling centered, calm and determined, knowing that we stood firmly on the side of justice and ecological balance. I encouraged protesters to use the same visualization during the action, if they needed to. We then went on to explore our reactions to common conflicts in demonstrations--hecklers, opponents and undercover police agents (who might try to provoke us into rash or violent actions). I asked some participants to role-play the attackers or hasslers, and other participants to play themselves. After a short exchange we "unpacked" the exercise, to see what behaviors threw the opponents off balance and de-escalated the conflict. Then we reversed roles, so that everyone had a chance to experience both sides. The simple act of role-playing someone we disagree with for five minutes often builds our empathy for those people--and that certainly comes in handy when we meet an opponent in the flesh.

We practiced specific moves to resist police pressure and crowd dispersal tactics, and I explained the trade-offs between being arrested and trying to avoid arrest. Many direct actions rely on civil disobedience for their effectiveness, but in the global justice movement people often decide that they can better advance the cause if they are not caught up in the legal system.

Finally, we explored the importance of affinity groups in nonviolent direct action. These small groups (usually 10 or fewer people) gather because they have something in common--an affinity--and stay together during the action. They may plan an activity such as street theater, or blockading a street intersection, or attempting to deliver a petition to a person in authority. They may simply look out for one another in a very large crowd. If any member of the group is arrested--by accident or by design--the others make sure that person has legal advice and medical attention, and reassure that person's family and friends at home.

Understanding the Issues
In preparing for other demonstrations, I might explore issues around property destruction (Is it violent or not? Is it effective or not?). In Miami this debate didn't figure prominently, because everyone agreed that property destruction would only play into the hands of our opponents, who were already trying to discredit us as terrorists and anarchists.

Before and after the big public march were days of workshops and discussions about global trade. This has been the case at all the globalization actions I've attended, and in some ways I believe these discussions are the most important part of the "globalization mobilizations." Farmers from the global North and global South compare notes. Unemployed auto workers from the U.S. talk with workers who now make autos in maquiladoras. Women form networks against the sex trade. People gather for the public protests, and the dialogues around them shape and inform the movement for years.

In Miami, for the first time, trade representatives who had been working on the draft agreement came out from their heavily guarded hotel to report to the protesters in a nearby church. They represented Argentina, Brazil and Venezuela, and were opposing provisions that favored wealthy and powerful U.S.-based corporations in favor of provisions that benefited the majority of their own people. We listened in amazement as they told us that essentially we are winning, and that they had successfully blocked and watered down many of the proposals put forward. "Your pressure in the streets makes a difference," they said. "Keep it up!"

Nonviolence training is the little piece I contribute, and I feel both proud and humble to be able to offerit.
 

Sir Joseph Rotblat (1908-2005) was one of the scientists recruited to work on the U.S. project to construct the atomic bomb during World War II. He left the project when it became clear to him that Nazi Germany would not succeed in developing their own atomic bomb. He subsequently became a tireless campaigner for the abolition of nuclear weapons, co-founding the Pugwash Conferences on Science and World Affairs in 1957. He was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1995. Daisaku Ikeda is president of the Soka Gakkai International and has spearheaded the organization's nuclear abolition and peace activities since the 1960s. This dialogue is taken from the book A Quest for Global Peace: Rotblat and Ikeda on War, Ethics and the Nuclear Threat (I.B. Tauris, 2007).

Ikeda: Professor Rotblat, you participated in the U.S. project for the development of nuclear weapons, the Manhattan Project, at first, but you resolutely quit the project. I would like to ask you, where were you on August 6, 1945, when Hiroshima was struck by the atomic bomb? Also, how did you find out about it?

Rotblat: At that time, I was living in Liverpool, England. I had already left the Manhattan Project and departed from the U.S. When it became clear that I could not be prevented from returning to England, I was presented with a condition that I must not contact any of my former colleagues who worked at the Los Alamos Laboratory [in New Mexico].

All letters were screened and recorded, so I did not send any letters to my former colleagues. I was afraid that it would put them in danger. As a result, after leaving Los Alamos in December 1944 and returning to Liverpool, I had no idea of what was happening there. This was the context in which I heard the news of the atomic blast. It was August 6, 1945. I heard about it on a BBC news broadcast.

Ikeda: How did you feel when you heard the news?

Rotblat: I was numbed by the shock because, at that time, I still had hope. It was a faint hope, but I had hope that the Americans would be unsuccessful at building the bomb. I thought that since the research had been conducted completely on the basis of theoretical calculations, perhaps at the actual bomb-making stage it might not work. I also harbored hope that even if they were successful at making a bomb, they would not use it, especially against civilian populations.

In other words, even if a bomb were successfully created, it would first of all have to be tested in a remote location such as an uninhabited island. And so I still hoped that the Americans would tell the Japanese, "Look! We have this super weapon," and then the war would be over.

But sadly, reality unfolded quite differently. Man's first atomic bomb was dropped on a civilian population.

Joseph Rotblat and Daisaku Ikeda meet in Okinawa, February 2000 [©Seikyo Shimbun]
Ikeda: The news of the dropping of the atomic bomb was broadcast through the public-address system at Los Alamos. [We are told that] at that moment, the entire Los Alamos Laboratory erupted in victorious jubilation. However, later that evening a gloomy mood enveloped the celebration party. After the elation and sense of accomplishment wore off, they were left with a sense of regret and foreboding.

Rotblat: I was completely overcome with hopelessness. It was an indescribable sense of shock from which it took a long time to recover. This is because I knew that the dropping of the bomb on Hiroshima was just the first step in an extended program of nuclear weapons development.

At that time, I knew that the hydrogen bomb existed, but it was highly classified. I knew that a weapon possessing a thousand times more destructive power would be developed next.

Ikeda: If I were to categorize human history into parts, I would draw the line between the pre-nuclear and post-nuclear periods. This is because, with the introduction of nuclear weapons, for the first time, the extinction of the human race became a conceivable reality. We must never lose sight of the fact, however, that human beings created nuclear weapons.

Urgent Efforts
Rotblat: I became obsessed with the need to discover a way to prevent human extinction. Let me illustrate how driven I was by this goal. When I look back now, I wonder how I ever came up with such a crazy idea. Thinking as a scientist, I looked for a way to halt research in nuclear physics. I wanted to do whatever it took to stop the development of the hydrogen bomb. I thought that this could happen if all the scientists agreed to temporarily halt their research. So I proceeded to contact scientists, primarily physicists at English universities, to convince them that something needed to be done to prevent the extermination of the human race.

Ikeda: What kind of response did you receive from the scientists?

Rotblat: Many of them did not realize the nature of the problem, and so there was not much reaction. Some of the physicists were sympathetic to my position, but others were completely opposed. I realized that it would be impossible to halt all research and, realistically speaking, all indications pointed to the inevitable progression of worldwide nuclear research.

Ikeda: Professor Rotblat, I empathize completely with your sense of urgency and concern. In any case, you were moved to action. A person's worth must be determined, not by thoughts, but by actions. Many of the people involved in nuclear weapons research at Los Alamos were very emotionally conflicted about their role. And after the atomic blast, some people were filled with regret. But Professor Rotblat, you were the only one who acted upon your convictions and quit the Manhattan Project before the bomb was dropped.

Betrayed by the Bomb
Rotblat: Personally speaking, the atomic bomb did not only fill me with dread, it made me wonder about the survival of the human race. It also made me determined to devote the rest of my life to making sure that nuclear weapons would never again be used.

To begin with, in 1946 I established the Atomic Scientists' Association in England in order to organize scientists to fight against any effort to use nuclear weapons. Next, I felt impelled to share the reality of nuclear weapons with the public at large, because the average person had no idea about the dangers and threat of nuclear arms.

I poured much of my energy into exhibitions that explained the beneficial uses of nuclear energy as well as its abuse in destructive military campaigns.

I helped sponsor a mobile exhibition that was carried in a train of two carriages. We called it the Atom Train. This was our first attempt to convey information and educate the public. This train exhibition traveled through the British Isles and then throughout Europe, and even went as far as the Middle East.

The participants in the first Pugwash conference, 1957; Joseph Rotblat, seventh from the right [Pugwash Conference on Science and World Affairs]
Ikeda: What an amazing venture!

Rotblat: I felt that I was betrayed by the atomic bomb. I consider myself a scientist who strives for the benefit of humankind, not for its destruction. I felt that if my scientific research was going to be used, I would want to decide how it could be used and to see with my own eyes it being used in beneficial ways. Nuclear physics was being used in numerous ways in the field of medicine, so I decided to abandon my ambitions in the field of nuclear physics and specialize in the medical application of physics.

Ikeda: You have visited both Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Did you experience a shift in your perceptions after visiting Hiroshima?

Rotblat: Absolutely. After seeing with my own eyes the devastation wreaked upon Hiroshima, I was able to convey more clearly to others the magnitude of misery inflicted by nuclear weapons.

When I viewed the photographs in the Peace Memorial Museum, I could barely contain my tears. Ever since, I have been urging the museum to establish permanent exhibits in many other places outside Hiroshima. Every town and city should have an atomic bomb exhibit to remind people constantly of the horrors of the atomic bomb.

Ikeda: At this point, what lessons do you think humanity should learn from Hiroshima and Nagasaki?

Rotblat: I have a rather broad view of their potential contribution that includes but also goes beyond the effort to abolish nuclear weapons. In other words, I believe that we must strive to create a world without war itself. I have set myself two goals in my life--one short-term and one long-term. My short-term goal is to abolish nuclear weapons, and the long-term goal is to eliminate war entirely. I do not believe that I will live to see either of my objectives achieved within my lifetime, but I believe that ultimately they will be realized.

The Bigger Agenda
Ikeda: Our duty as citizens of the twenty-first century is to work toward a world without war. First of all, we have a responsibility to the past. We live with the knowledge that over one hundred million people have been sacrificed to war in the twentieth century. We have a responsibility to these people. Second, we must consider our responsibility in the present. In today's world, hundreds of millions of people live in abject poverty and are on the verge of starvation. War only aggravates those problems, and moreover, war gives rise to further wars. Humanity must interrupt this vicious circle.

Third, I would like to point out our responsibility to the future. In today's world, wars and the buildup of armaments are not only likely to lead to nuclear war but will surely threaten humanity with their massive power to devastate life systems and the environment on a global scale. If a nuclear war were triggered, humanity's continued existence would be in question.

Rotblat: What concerns me is the thought that nuclear weapons will not be the final weapon invented by scientists. With the advance of research, new types of weapons that inflict even greater massive destruction will be developed. Therefore, until humankind learns to coexist without resorting to war, we are not safe.

Ikeda: The development of nuclear weapons began initially in response to the threat from the Nazis. The reasoning then became "to contain the Soviet Union," and next, it shifted to a deterrent role that held the threat of "massive retaliation" and maintained an understanding of "mutual assured destruction" or MAD.

The ending of the Cold War provided a golden opportunity to end the nuclear age once and for all, but nuclear weapons were retained and now are being considered for use in conventional warfare. In other words, nuclear weapons do not continue to exist out of necessity. Rather, you could say that there are those who need to justify the existence of nuclear weapons by finding a convincing argument.

So, against this illogical backdrop is, as you often say, a persistent "culture of war" in which military might begets even more powerful military force.

Rotblat: Victory will never be achieved by opposing evil with the power of evil. It does not make sense to try to avoid war by using the threat of war. We must learn to resolve our conflicts without resorting to military means. We must not bring human civilization, a miraculous product of millions of years of evolution, to an untimely and tragic end.

Ikeda: When we look at the harsh reality of the international situation, some say that it will be impossible to abolish nuclear weapons. These people are committing the error of predicting the future based on the conditions of our present reality.

As you often mention, during the period before World War II, France and Germany were bitter enemies. Today, however, both countries form the nucleus of the European Union. Examples such as these abound throughout history. A major human weakness is assuming that the reality before our eyes will continue unchanged into the future. We must not forget that the success of the movement to abolish nuclear weapons will be determined by human will.
 

As we strive to envision the direction the UN should take in the 21st century, I believe there is much we can learn from the life and example of Dag Hammarskjold, the second Secretary-General of the organization. His achievements shine in the annals of UN history, and his moral force and integrity as the "conscience of the United Nations" command wide respect to this day.

Dag Hammarskjold was a statesman and economist born in Sweden just over a century ago. In the midst of the mounting tensions of the Cold War, Hammarskjold took the lead in expanding the UN's responsibilities beyond a passive role of merely responding to crises, to a more proactive role in the promotion of peace in the world.

His talents were particularly visible in his efforts to resolve the Suez Crisis, as well as conflicts in Lebanon, Laos and elsewhere. His active pursuit of "quiet diplomacy," as he personally led missions to different regions in order to mediate conflicts, remains as his enduring legacy.

There were voices critical of this style of proactive diplomacy on the part of the UN and its Secretary-General. Hammarskjöld's actions were denounced, for example, by Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev, who demanded his resignation. Hammarskjöld refused to succumb to this pressure and continued to promote UN leadership for the resolution of international crises.

Hammarskjold expressed his unwavering resolve in his book Markings published after his death: "'The Uncarved Block'--remain at the Center, which is yours and that of all humanity. For those goals which it gives to your life, do the utmost which, at each moment, is possible for you. Also, act without thinking of the consequences, or seeking anything for yourself."

Driven by a sense of moral, even religious, mission, he continued to strive until the last moment of his life to empower the UN to respond to the world's expectations.

In September 1961, en route to a meeting with President Moise Tshombe of Katanga in an effort to resolve the Congo Crisis, Hammarskjöld's plane crashed in Northern Rhodesia (now Zambia), causing his death. He was 56. For his outstanding achievements, Hammarskjold was posthumously awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for 1961.

At the time of his death, Hammarskjold was engaged not only in attempting to resolve the conflict in the Congo, but in another important task. Hammarskjold had profound respect for the "philosopher of dialogue," Martin Buber (1878-1965), and was planning to translate his classic work I and Thou into Swedish.

Their friendship began in 1952, a year before Hammarskjold became Secretary-General. As their exchanges and mutual respect deepened, a strong desire arose in Hammarskjold to translate Buber's works. When he shared that wish with the philosopher, Buber suggested he translate I and Thou. This exchange took place just a few weeks before Hammarskjold's fatal mission to the Congo.

Hammarskjold immediately contacted a publisher in Sweden and wrote a letter to Buber telling him agreement had been obtained. As he left New York for the Congo, he had with him the German-language edition of I and Thou personally given to him by the author. He found the time amidst his demanding schedule, in flight and during his short stay in Leopoldville (now Kinshasa), to work on the translation of Buber's book. Later, after the plane crash, the first 12 pages of the Secretary-General's manuscript translation were found among his personal effects.

Buber received Hammarskjold's final letter just one hour after he heard the news of the plane crash on the radio. Buber deeply lamented the death of this man of passion and goodwill who had given everything, including his life, for his mission.

Heart-to-Heart

Hammarskjold shared a deep conviction with Buber, which he fervently wished to convey through the translation of Buber's work. This was the firm belief that no matter how dire and challenging the situation may be, humans must engage in sincere dialogue with others; that through this kind of genuine and sincere dialogue it is always possible to bridge the gaps of distrust that divide the world.

One well-known episode illustrates how Hammarskjold put this conviction into practice.

In 1955, in an attempt to secure the release of American prisoners of war captured during the Korean War, Hammarskjöld flew to China--then without a seat at the UN--and tried to meet with Premier Zhou Enlai.

People around him strongly advised him against the visit. Face-to-face with Zhou, without an official entourage and unable to use his own interpreter, Hammarskjöld stated the following during one of their private sessions:

". . .[I]t does not mean that I appeal to you or that I ask you for their release. It means that-inspired also by my faith in your wisdom and in your wish to promote peace--I have considered it my duty as forcefully as I can, and with deep conviction, to draw attention to the vital importance of their fate to the cause of peace. . . . Their fate may well decide the direction in which we will all be moving in the near future--towards peace, or away from peace. . . . [A]gainst all odds, [this case] has brought me around the world in order to put before you, in great frankness and trusting that we see eye to eye on the desperate need to avoid adding to existing frictions, my deep concern both as Secretary-General and as a man."

I recall my own encounter with Premier Zhou Enlai in December 1974, a year before his death. Several years earlier, in September 1968, at a time when there were no official diplomatic relations between China and Japan as no formal peace had been concluded between them, I had called for the normalization of relations and urged that China be represented in the UN. Zhou Enlai was aware of my efforts, and despite ill health, insisted on meeting with me at his hospital in Beijing. With intense passion, Premier Zhou shared his thoughts with me. "In this critical period in the history of the world, all nations must stand as equals and help each other." He expressed his strong desire for enduring friendship between China and Japan.

Based on this personal experience, I can easily imagine the kind of intent dialogue, the earnest soul-to-soul exchange, that unfolded between Zhou and Hammarskjöld. The meeting created a bond of trust between the two men which later led to the release of the 11 American airmen.

Whether it be intergovernmental relations or relations between the UN and member states, the most essential element is always encounter and dialogue between individual human beings.

No matter how impossible a deadlock may seem, a breakthrough can always be found if we meet face-to-face and engage in genuine dialogue: I believe this was the conviction that motivated Hammarskjöld throughout his extensive travels as Secretary-General, meeting with and mediating between the parties to conflicts.

Hammarskjöld's passionate and relentless efforts to advance the peace process in the world embody the principles that should guide the UN in fulfilling its mission to build a new human civilization imbued with the spirit of dialogue. His legacy is one that must be passed on to the people of the 21st century.

Chile is a narrow country that stretches for 4,300 km from north to south, and is an average of 180 km from its eastern to its western border. This unique geography and the diversified climate and culture encompassed between its northern and southern extremes make Chile a distinctive country.

Chileans are proud of their cultural heritage, having given the world two of its great Nobel Prize-winning poets, Gabriela Mistral and Pablo Neruda. Furthermore, in this age of women's empowerment, Chile was, in March 2006, the first South American country to elect a female president.

The first SGI district was formed in March 1974, one year after the country's military coup. It was during the 14 years of this brutal military regime that our organization was forged. For most of this time, we could not freely hold meetings and, under martial law and regulation of the Ministry of Defense, could gather only at the house of our general director. In 1981, however, we opened a center where, although still under various restrictions, members of SGI-Chile began promoting an understanding of the SGI movement in our society.

Peace Through Culture

In 1990, the people's power movement restored democracy in Chile. Three years later, in 1993, SGI President Ikeda paid his first visit to Chile and met with then President Patricio Aylwin, a key figure in the transformation from military rule. During his visit, President Ikeda was presented with an honorary citizenship of Santiago, Chile's capital.

In the new climate of freedom, SGI-Chile was able to promote its activities more openly. Even though we are a small organization, with just 900 members, people in Chile are often attracted to the SGI because they see that our members are bright, vibrant and energetic. They are also impressed that our members believe that they themselves are responsible for their own happiness and have the power to open up and develop their lives.

Cultural activities have been an important means for our organization to reach out to the broader public and communicate our ideals. In 1994 we held the "Dialogue with Nature" photographic exhibition, which attracted some 20,000 guests, and in May 1996 the "SGI-Chile Culture Festival" was held, in which youth members took the lead in staging dance, group gymnastics, music and chorus performances. The famous contemporary Chilean poet, Ra√∫l Zurita, offered a poignant and memorable reading of one of his poems.

The following year, the Tokyo Fuji Art Museum, founded by SGI President Ikeda, collaborated with the National Museum of Chile to present the "Eternal Treasures of Japan" exhibition in Chile. This exhibition, which was a considerable success, was a part of an event commemorating the 100th anniversary of relations between Chile and Japan. Subsequent public exhibitions include "Dialogue of Humanism: A Network of Hope" held at the University of Santiago in 1999, and the "World Boys and Girls Art Exhibition" in 2000, which was viewed by over 30,000 people.

On a smaller scale, we have also held cultural evenings in the garden of our center, at which guests have enjoyed musical and choral performances.

On their own initiative, the young members of SGI-Chile's New Century Band have been using their skills as a means of encouraging other young people, arranging performances at orphanages and hospitals.

Promoting Nonviolence

Our most recent large-scale activity has been the hosting of the "Gandhi, King, Ikeda: A Legacy of Building Peace" exhibition commissioned by the MLK International Chapel of Morehouse College, the alma mater of Martin Luther King, Jr. The topic of nonviolence promoted by the exhibition holds particular significance in light of Chile's modern history, and after the exhibition's initial opening at the National Library in Santiago in 2005, we quickly received requests from several people to hold this exhibit in other venues. As a result, in March 2006, it was held first at Santiago's Central University, and then at the University of the Pacific, where former President Aylwin attended the opening ceremony.

The exhibition was also held at the City Hall of Rancagua city, south of Santiago, and in July, it was hosted by the University of Talca where, as a result of interest by local schools, the exhibition dates were extended considerably.

Currently, violence and drug abuse are problems of increasing concern in Chile, affecting both youth and adults who should be providing a role model for children. It is in light of such social problems and suffering, however, that the existence of the SGI becomes most significant. This is the conviction and responsibility that guide the practice and activities of the members of SGI-Chile.

On February 26, SGI-Canada representatives led a "Victory Over Violence" (VOV) workshop at a teachers' conference held in Winnipeg. They also brought the VOV exhibition to the event. The Associated Schools Project Network (ASPnet), linked to the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), organized the conference. Some 80 principals, teachers and national and provincial government representatives attended. Participants reported that the workshop enabled them to better understand the effects of passive violence, and many expressed interest in bringing the VOV exhibition to their local schools.

On April 2, the Hon. Douglas Roche, O.C., delivered the inaugural lecture of SGI-Canada's Distinguished Speakers Series at the SGI-Canada Toronto Culture Centre. Mr. Roche, a Canadian parliamentarian and diplomat, spoke about the importance of shifting from a culture of war to a culture of peace and of "believing that we can make a difference," basing his remarks on two of his recent books, The Human Right to Peace and Global Conscience.

Mr. Roche served as the Canadian Ambassador for Disarmament and as chair of the United Nations Disarmament Committee. From 1998 to 2008, he headed the Middle Powers Initiative, an international network of eight nongovernmental organizations specializing in nuclear disarmament issues.

Italian food writer Carlo Petrini's efforts to encourage people to rethink our relationship with food have inspired a global popular movement that is redefining the relationship between what we eat, the people who grow it, the systems that distribute it and the Earth that produces it. A key activity of this Slow Food movement is the Terra Madre (Mother Earth) gatherings that bring together thousands of food producers from around the world to discuss problems and find possible solutions. Petrini has also founded the University of Gastronomic Sciences in Pollenzo and Colorno, Italy, that offers an interdisciplinary approach to food studies.

SGI Quarterly: How has our attitude to food and eating changed since the time of our grandparents, and what effects has this had?

Carlo Petrini: In recent decades we have witnessed a gradual impoverishment of the senses--our ability to feel, taste and smell. The increasing speed of our lives deprives us of the ability to experience the genuine diversity and authenticity in the world around us. Humankind has lost touch with the land, with time, traditions, knowledge, culture and cuisine. The moments of encounter rooted in the ancient rituals of daily life and the cycle of the seasons are no longer part of our experience. The uniform flavor of industrial foods, which are the same all over the world, has impoverished our ability to recognize food.

SGIQ: What is good quality food, and why should such quality be important?

CP: According to the UN Millennium Ecosystem Assessment published in 2005, food production and transportation is now the main cause of the pollution and gradual destruction of our planet. This should make us reflect. If it is true, as Wendell Berry says, that eating is also an "agricultural act," then good quality foods that are produced in ways that respect the natural environment and local traditions can encourage biodiversity, equity and sustainability.

If you are concerned about the fate of the planet, the definition of good food goes beyond gourmet considerations; it must be eco-gastronomic, that is, we must be aware of the potential impact of our choices. For eco-gastronomes, quality is defined by three adjectives: good, clean and fair. Good refers to the pleasure derived from the qualities of the food, but also the complex realm of feelings, memories and sense of identity that arise from our emotional associations with food. Clean products are those that do not stress the land, that are produced with respect for the natural environment. Fair means it conforms to the concepts of social justice with regard to its production and marketing.

Beyond Consumption

SGIQ: What are the aims of the Slow Food movement, and what is it in practice?

CP: There is a lot that needs to be done to spread a conscious perception of food. We begin by focusing on taste: promoting school gardens, taste workshops, theater, our Master of Food courses and other initiatives that help retrain and revive the senses, especially among the younger generation.

Food is not only food but also pleasure, culture and conviviality--the mediator of values and attitudes, a vehicle for realization and a catalyst of our emotions. With this awareness we become coproducers, rather than merely consumers. The "consumer" has to feel part of the production process, with an awareness of the influence of their preferences, either supporting degradation or rejecting injustice and unsustainability.

This doesn't mean that we must all go back to living in the countryside or produce our own food, but our connection to Earth--the severed umbilical cord--can be restored through a search for information, through producers communicating their processes, through large retailers rethinking their systems and supporting local production. It can be restored by our desire to return to being coproducers, by creating new "food communities" in which the gastronome is simply the final link in a whole functional chain.

SGIQ: Choosing conscientiously produced food might simply be considered a luxury that many can't afford. What is the movement's relevance in developing countries?

CP: In Italy after World War II until the early '70s, most of the family budget was allocated to food purchases. In Europe today statistics show much lower figures of between 16 and 17 percent. The importance of food has declined in relation to other products. In the global South and developing countries the figures are much higher, but entire nations are losing their food sovereignty, the direct relationship between production and consumption at the local level.

Our Terra Madre network brings together farmers and fishermen, artisans and agri-food producers, chefs and academics. This is the positive face of globalization. It gives a voice to those who do not approve of inhumane models of production and of attaching market values to the living world. It is precisely from the global South--from those at daily risk of being crushed by overwhelming market dynamics--that the cry for solidarity arises.

SGIQ: How do you see the future relationship between local food producers and the international trade networks?

CP: Terra Madre was born out of the need to embrace a new concept of the economy, beginning with agriculture, which is at the center of local communities, to the food of the local community, its culture and the local region. We're seeing now the enormous limitations of the market economy.

The Terra Madre food communities establish a "short chain," or at least a chain based on mutual understanding between those involved. A simple example is the farmers' markets that are found globally. We are not talking about closed economies, or about not being able to enjoy products and dishes we love. The term "local" should be understood as an economic system that is well integrated with the region; not a forced expression of the law of supply and demand but a recognition of the historical heritage of a community. The dignity of the local economy is the only thing that will allow us to realize what is becoming an oxymoron: sustainable development.

Preserving Knowledge

SGIQ: In our rapidly changing world, what do you see as the value of traditional knowledge and wisdom?

CP: Food is tied up with the traditional culture of peasant communities, not only in the culinary sense, but also with its crafts, poetry, music and local history. The disappearance of traditional knowledge, already experienced in communities in the West, is now occurring in the rural societies of the poorest countries. Dignity and value have been discarded in the name of scientific progress to make room for a "modernity" that knows only about the culture of the market. This is why at Terra Madre in Turin we started a "dialogue between different fields of knowledge," bringing representatives of the scientific and academic world into dialogue with representatives of food communities.

In addition, in the 2008 meeting of the food communities, we launched a new initiative, Sounds of Terra Madre, in which 49 nonprofessional music groups from 30 countries shared the culture of their traditional feasts and celebrations. We plan to do a similar thing in coming years with languages that are at risk of dying out.

SGIQ: Why do you believe the Slow Food movement has grown so quickly?

CP: Humanity has almost reached a point of no return. Our way of life, the speed with which we "consume" each moment of our existence, is beginning to pose serious questions. Many feel the need to reappropriate their time, to go deeper, to recover their roots. In developing countries, there is a need to preserve culture, cultivation techniques and recipes.

In helping to build the Terra Madre network, what has impressed me most has been the incredible humanity expressed by these farmers, fishermen, gatherers of wild fruit and artisans from around the world. Their stories, their daily struggles, are the true expression of the farming community and a sign of hope. It is a heritage that the world cannot afford to lose.