Humankind Advancing, Vol.4, No.1 January 1993

CONTENTS

Editorial

Quotes from Martin Luther King and from Jacobson

Quotes from McLaren

Bill of Rights for Future Generations
Quote from Birch & Cobb

Jacques-Yves Cousteau and Causteau Society

In Defense of Common Sense
Quote from Valenti

Taking Charge of our Fate
Watching our World (Brown, Flavin, Postel)
Quotes from Sorokin and from Sperry
The Heidelberg Appeal

Thought in Action
Mark E. Kann -- The Jefferson Project
The Revitalization of Greece

Book reviews
Yoking Science and Religion
Hopes and Fears

Reflections

Acknowledgments

References

* * *
Editorial:

The present issue is dedicated to the defense of compassion.

Compassion is defended against the kind of thinking that advocates pre-human insensitivity to the pain of a victim or unfortunate individual as the best way to remedy present problems. This lesson, it is said, has been taught to us by eons of successful competition during the process of evolution.

Evolution's most relevant lesson for our time, however, is that excess specialization leads to extinction of the most vigorously progressing species whenever conditions change. Conditions on Earth are changing; and we are the changing agents. Unless craving for power -- the motor of progress in evolution and the source of our intellect -- is balanced with simultaneously evolved safety factors, such as empathy, insight, and foresight, the very products of our intellect will become detrimental.

Defended, however, is not thoughtless, short-sighted compassion which is justly accused of making matters worse in the long run. The compassion needed to secure a life worthy of human beings is deep and thoughtful; it includes the future as well as the present.

This issue of our quarterly will concentrate on the problem of accelerating population increase, the following issue on increase of desires, and the next one on the need to constantly monitor changing conditions and to adjust behavioral guidelines to achieve a safe passage into a humane world.

During the last few years I collected a large folder filled with clippings documenting the disastrous consequences of failing to adjust population growth and growth of consumption to the Earth's resource base. None of this material will be used here. All of it is surpassed by present developments reported daily in the media.

* * *
Unlike plagues of the dark ages or contemporary diseases we do not yet understand, the modern plague of overpopulation is soluble by means we have discovered and by resources we possess. What is lacking is not sufficient knowledge of the solution but universal consciousness of the gravity of the problem and education of the billions who are its victims.

Martin Luther King

* * * * *
U.N. surveys show that as many as 300 million women would like to limit their family size.

Jodi Jacobson
Vital Signs: The Trends That Are Shaping Our Future,
(World Watch Institute, 1776 Massachusetts Ave. NW, Washington, D.C. 20036-1904, U.S.A.)

* * *
We are confronted with a moral dilemma that concerns the health of humanity and the health of our planet. We are faced with the paradox that actions we consider ethical and just must adversely affect the ecosphere and thus inevitably cause increased environmental degradation with further destruction of our own life-support system. I refer primarily to population and suggest that the only fully humane action we can take in the face of this dilemma is to attack immediately the horror of bringing babies into the world to die in their first year or to survive for a life dominated by malnutrition, disease, and diminished life expectancy. (1992a)

- - -
A massive political, economic, social and moral assault must be mounted globally, if humankind is to emerge from the ever constricting and worsening cycle of pathological growth in numbers, in technology, in consumption, as well as in misery, poverty and starvation. Somehow, affirmative action must be taken that cuts through normal constraints, even though these might appear reasonable and logical in today's world. Evidently, we are incapable of grasping the fact that we live inside a finite system that includes all life enclosed in the thin envelope of air and water around this planet. This life will not end, but the world as we know it as human beings has but a little time to go before exponential growth dictates the biological collapse of our species. (1992b)

Digby McLaren
Past-President of the Royal Society of Canada
Chairman of Board of UNESCO Vancouver Declaration
and active in UNESCO Belem Declaration.

* * *
BILL OF RIGHTS FOR FUTURE GENERATIONS

Article 1: "Future generations have a right to an uncontaminated and undamaged Earth and to its enjoyment as the ground of human history, of culture and of social bonds that make each generation and individual a member of the human family."

- - -
This article contains the general idea of the declaration. Until now, all decision makers have made -- and continue to make -- short-term decisions by evaluating the immediate benefits and without calculating the consequences for future generations and the future of the planet. It is this shortsightedness of decision makers, politicians and economists that must be denounced and, above all, corrected.

All of society is geared to "innocently" exploit those not yet born. It is the future of the human species that is in danger. I value environmental protection as a good thing, but it is even more essential to take care of the living conditions of the people who will follow us.

Every blow against the rights of future generations, which would outrage us if dealt our generation but seems harmless when projected into the future, must be condemned.

* * *
Article 2: "Each generation, sharing in the estate and heritage of the Earth, has a duty as trustee for future generations to prevent irreversible and irreparable harm to life on Earth and to human freedom and dignity."

- - -
Neither liberty nor dignity are possible for humanity when there is no respect for the surrounding environment. The Earth possesses resources, some renewable, others not, like fossil fuel or uranium. Presently, we are living on resources that took hundreds of millions of years to build up, and we are going to burn them up in one or two centuries. As for renewable resources, they are limited and we have already gone beyond their capacity to regenerate because the human population has reached the near-saturation point for Earth.

The number one priority is to convince the third world to limit its birthrate. Every six months, there is the equivalent of a new France on our planet. Demographic growth must decrease, not through discriminatory measures, but by giving individuals the possibility to have fewer children, to choose. Many do not have that at present.

For this to be so, they must have access to potable water: 1,7 billion in the world do not! Little girls look for water instead of going to school. Yet we know that women who have gone to school have fewer children than those who have not.

On top of the water and education problems, it is also absolutely necessary to provide a pension for old people to ensure their security in old age; they are counting on their children alone and, therefore, are having a lot of them.

The second priority is to curb global warming that results from the increase in greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. Burning fossil fuels and destroying forests all add up to this phenomenon: Wealthy nations raze the forests of poor countries, which are not in a position to refuse the money they are offered in exchange.

The third priority is the defense of living things. It is estimated that in the past 200 years nearly one million species have already disappeared forever! These animals or plants are scarcely known, not identified for the most part. We have probably stumbled blindly past miraculous products!

* * *
Article 3: "It is therefore the paramount responsibility of each generation to maintain a constantly vigilant and prudential assessment of technological disturbances and modifications adversely affecting life on Earth, the balance of nature and the evolution of mankind in order to protect the rights of future generations."

- - -
Here I am referring to the necessity of creating an international environmental police, "green helmets," who would be under the direction of the United Nations. While at present countries consider their national sovereignty to be sacrosanct, they are, in fact, more and more dependent on each other. The protection of the planet cannot be accomplished blow by blow, nation by nation. There is no other solution but to define global laws.

* * *
Article 4: "All appropriate measures, including education, research and legislation, shall be taken to guarantee these rights and to ensure that they not be sacrificed for present expediencies and conveniences."

- - -
Many people are convinced that ecologists favor a return to yesteryear. They are wrong. We think just the opposite: We must develop our knowledge through education and research, giving consideration to good and bad applications of new technologies. Education and research are the only means to guarantee the integration of the other articles of this declaration.

* * *
Article 5: "Governments, non-governmental organizations, and individuals are urged, therefore, imaginatively to implement these principles, as if in the very presence of those future generations whose rights we seek to establish and perpetuate."

* * *
Today we lack solutions to put these principles into operation, but we must save certain options. For the moment, we are taking options away from future generations. We must be intelligent enough, imaginative enough to say to ourselves: "Let's leave to our children, to our grandchildren, the possibility to change society completely. If they should manage to develop a use for this or that, let us manage not to take the means away from them." For example, by throwing nuclear waste into the sea, we risk compromising the use of marine resources for more than one hundred thousand years.

Time is running out for our species to find a way to endure. Our planet needs guardians, independent organizations, free from the constraints of profit or national sovereignty, and responsible for making up an almost daily bill of health of our common habitat, our Earth.

Jacques-Yves Cousteau
Reprinted with permission of the Cousteau Society
(c) 1992.

* * * * *
A society which seeks only justice without regard to its consequences cannot be just. It is unjust to many generations yet unborn.

Birch, C. and Cobb, J.B.

* * *
IN DEFENSE OF COMMON SENSE

The following is the third of four installments of a very critical evaluation of the book Beyond a World Divided by Erdmann and Stover (Shambhala, 1991), and its senior author's response to it.

Criticism: Another theme of your book seems to be that the entire human race is threatened with immediate destruction by over-population, pollution, and nuclear war, and that only the world-wide adoption of a new religion based on scientific values will save us all.

I believe that you exaggerate both the seriousness and the immediacy of the world problems. I predict that man will be around for centuries to come.

Instead of wiping us all out at once, it is possible even to look at pollution and nuclear war as a method of self-control of the overpopulation problem.

If pollution gets worse it will kill some of us (which will in turn lessen the pollution) and I think that if nuclear weapons are used it will only be some kind of limited warfare and it will kill only some of us and that will solve the population problem. At least some of us will go on.

Of course I believe that pollution and nuclear weapons are bad but I don't believe that they are actually the main problem facing mankind today.

Even though we could (and we do) produce more than enough food, some people are starving. The reason for this are not science or religion or values but politics and economics.

Response: First of all, I agree with you that the dangers described are not immediate (though in terms of a geological time scale "a few centuries" is immediate, and my thinking extends far beyond that).

But there is a "point of no return" approaching, beyond which sensible and humane solutions become nearly impossible.

I am quoting from a speech by Dieter Heinrich, from which I had already used excerpts in the first volume of this quarterly (January 1990):

"The human mind is little able to come to grips with change of an exponential order....Remedies must already be well under way before most people see any need to do anything....To illustrate this point, we can imagine a pond on which leaves are falling. On the first day, one leaf falls on the water, the next day two leaves fall, the next day 4, then 8, 16, and so on. Half the pond is covered with leaves after 29 days. When is it completely covered? Answer: the very next day. Just when we start to think a problem is getting serious, it's game over."
Of course, pollution and nuclear warfare might regulate the overpopulation problem, but at what price! -- Perhaps you have no clear conception of the nature of nuclear weapons.

An article by C. James Novak in Newsweek (March 9, 1992, p.16) describes the terrifying results of nuclear explosions in detail. Successive waves of heat, light, and high pressure cause permanent blindness first, then skin burns "so grotesque that a Hiroshima survivor...reported patients with features of their face melted together," and, finally, a wind of such high velocity that the flesh is torn from the body and the inner organs are squashed. Should then any life be left in the victim, nuclear radiation leads to a slow and certain end. Bones, lungs, and intestines are being destroyed, cells mutate (lose their normal functioning) and the body's natural saltwater content is chemically changed to form a dangerous, burning acid.

Hell has become reality.

Are you still able to speak of population reduction through nuclear weapons in such casual terms as before, and of the need to substitute a value-system that would encourage birth control as unnecessary? -- True, some of us would remain alive, but our humanness -- the very core of our being, the very cause for which we are fighting -- would have died.

Regarding the seriousness of global problems, such as the threat of nuclear warfare, it depends entirely on the amount of wisdom available to counterbalance these awesome powers. Novak describes nuclear weapons as successful deterrents, first against Soviet threats, and now against fanatics like Saddam Hussain. He is very probably right; such is the nature of our world. -- Nor is he afraid to say: "My job was to bomb targets, not debate morality," because he is convinced that our escape from the fate he describes and our victory without the actual use of these weapons was due to "the genius of Jefferson and Madison" and their superior wisdom, expressed in our democratic principles.

However, misuse of these principles and of the freedom, initiative, and resulting quality of life they permit, would turn responsible defenders of their nation into criminals. It is therefore necessary that for everyone whose job it is "to bomb targets" there must be others whose job it is to "debate morality." Economy and politics cannot be, and never have been, successful without simultaneous regard for values such as integrity, decency and striving toward humanness. The existence of a nation depends not only on its strength, but also on the nature of its convictions about right and wrong.

Here, too, we face a point of no return: for instance, if money-orientation becomes the highest good, nuclear know-how and weapons parts will be sold to the most fanatical enemies -- or nuclear weapons might be used only, or mainly, to accumulate wealth without regard to irreplaceable other treasures they destroy -- which could not be defended by any responsible person (thus forcing these weapons into unreliable and dangerous hands). The same will happen if tolerance, the key virtue of democracy, is misused to increase the power of criminals.

"To debate morality," however, is far more important for another reason. Wisdom is not stagnant but depending on constant new insights in response to new problems and new situations.

In your last sentence of this installment, you differentiate science, religion, and values from politics and economics, and the entire last part of your letter reinforces this point of view. Yet values profuse and direct everything we do, though they can be implicit and unexpressed.

Because the relation between politics, economics, and values is of such importance, the entire next issue will be dedicated to this topic. Points of view of other persons will be cited in addition to your own and mine.

* * * * *
"What will the military protect if there is nothing worthwhile left?"

Colonel Daniel C. Valenti
United States Air Force(Retired)

* * *
TAKING CHARGE OF OUR FATE

Watching our World

The health of the planet is ultimately about the health of its people, and from this perspective, disturbing trends emerged during the past two decades. Despite soaring economic output, the ranks of the world's poor have increased. Some 1.2 billion people now meet former World Bank President Robert McNamara's 1978 definition of absolute poverty: "a condition of life so limited by malnutrition, illiteracy, disease, squalid surroundings, high infant mortality, and low life expectancy as to be beneath any reasonable definition of human decency." (P.13)

The rising tide of poverty has many roots. Rapid population growth is one; another one is the failure of many governments to reform their economic and political systems. (P.13)

Getting the brakes on population growth requires fundamental changes in social values and services. So far, only a handful of countries have taken such initiatives. (P.12)

Lacking an understanding of the carrying capacity of ecological systems, economic planners are unable to relate demand levels to the health of the natural world. If they regularly read the leading scientific journals, their faith might be shaken. Every major indicator shows deterioration of natural systems. (P.13)

To reverse this process, industries and governments will need to alter their world views -- focus-sing less on the short-term financial bottom line and more on the long-term economies they invest in. (P.14)

The once separate issues of environment and development are now inextricably linked. Environmental degradation is driving a growing number of people into poverty. And poverty itself has become an agent of ecological degradation, as desperate people consume the resource bases on which they depend. Rather than a choice between the alleviation of poverty and the reversal of environmental decline, world leaders now face the reality that neither goal is achievable unless the other is pursued as well. (P.13)

Once the self-reinforcing trends of environmental degradation and deepening poverty are too deeply established, only a superhuman effort could break the cycle and reverse the trend. (p.14)

The effort required to create a sustainable society is more like mobilizing for war than any other human experience. Time itself is the scarcest resource... (p.14)

A sustainable society is one that satisfies its needs without jeopardizing the prospects of future generations. Just as any technology of flight, no matter how primitive or advanced, must abide by the basic principles of aerodynamics, so must a lasting society satisfy basic ecological principles. At least two preconditions are undeniable: If population growth is not slowed and climate stabilized, there may not be an ecosystem on Earth we can save. (P.14)

- - -
From the May-June 1992 Futurist article "A Planet in Jeopardy" by L. R. Brown, C. Flavin and S. Postel of the World Watch Institute, 1776 Massachusetts Ave. N.W., Washington, D.C. 20036.

The article is adapted from the above author's book Saving the Planet: How to Shape an Environmentally Sustainable Global Economy.

* * * * *
If humanity mobilizes all its wisdom, knowledge, beauty, and especially the all-giving and all-forgiving love and reverence for life, and if a strenuous and sustaining effort of this kind is made by everyone, then the crisis will certainly be ended and a most magnificent new era in human history will be ushered in. It is up to mankind to decide what it will do with its future life course.

P. Sorokin

* * * * *
How transcendent and heavenly our planet is depends now on what we and coming generations make of it.

- - -
Just as in the early galaxies there could be no concept of the kind of existence we enjoy today, we also can have no comprehension of the dimensions of existence that may lie ahead. Personal satisfaction and a sense of higher meaning may, for the present, be found to be an immediate part of and contributing to the creative cosmic venture in infinitely different ways.

- - -
The ultimate disaster...would be to lose it all through massive global extinction, thus sinking millennia of hard-won creative advance back into oblivion and cosmic meaninglessness.

Roger Sperry
Neuroscientist and Nobel Laureate

* * * * *
The Heidelberg Appeal

Forty-six prominent scientists and intellectuals in the U.S., including 27 Nobel Prize winners, have joined 218 scientists in other countries in an appeal to the heads of state attending the Earth Summit in Rio. They call their petition the Heidelberg Appeal, after a conference held in Heidelberg, Germany, in April on hazardous substance use. -- The full text is as follows:

The undersigned members of the international scientific and intellectual community share the objectives of the "Earth Summit," to be held at Rio de Janeiro under the auspices of the United Nations, and support the principles of the following declaration.

We want to make our full contribution to the preservation of our common heritage, the Earth.

We are however worried, at the dawn of the twenty-first century, at the emergence of an irrational ideology which is opposed to scientific and industrial progress and impedes economic and social development.

We contend that a Natural State, sometimes idealized by movements with a tendency to look at the past, does not exist and has probably never existed since man's first appearance in the biosphere, insofar as humanity has always progressed by harnessing Nature to its needs and not the reverse.

We fully subscribe to the objectives of a scientific ecology for a universe whose resources must be taken stock of, monitored and preserved.

But we herewith demand that this stock-taking, monitoring and preservation be founded on scientific criteria and not on irrational preconceptions.

We stress that many essential human activities are carried out either by manipulating hazardous substances or in their proximity, and that progress and development have always involved increasing control over hostile forces, to the benefit of mankind.

We therefore consider that scientific ecology is no more than an extension of this continual progress toward the improved life of future generations.

We intend to assert science's responsibility and duties toward society as a whole.

We do however forewarn the authorities in charge of our planet's destiny against decisions which are supported by pseudo-scientific arguments or false and non-relevant data.

We draw everybody's attention to the absolute necessity of helping poor countries attain a level of sustainable development which matches that of the rest of the planet, protecting them from troubles and dangers stemming from developed nations, and avoiding their entanglement in a web of unrealistic obligations which would compromise both their independence and their dignity.

The greatest evils which stalk our Earth are ignorance and oppression, and not Science, Technology and Industry whose instruments, when adequately managed, are indispensable tools of a future shaped by Humanity, by itself and for itself, overcoming major problems like overpopulation, starvation and worldwide diseases.

- - -
Reprinted with permission of the Wall Street Journal
(c) 1992 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All rights reserved, (originally entitled "Beware of False Gods in Rio").

* * *
THOUGHT IN ACTION

Strengthening Self-Reliance

In 1990-91, the Thomas Jefferson Center of Pasadena and the Los Angeles Unified School District piloted a "values education" project aimed at improving students' behavior and performance in 24 elementary schools and eight junior high schools.

The goal was to teach the children the values of responsibility and citizenship skills. An independent survey research firm assessed the project's first-year results.

Remarkably, all categories of discipline problems decreased, especially tardiness (40 percent), minor disciplinary infractions (39 percent), and major discipline problems, such as fighting, drugs, or weapons (25 percent). In the junior high schools alone, major behavior problems were reduced by 66 percent, minor discipline problems went down by 65 percent, suspensions fell by 37 percent, and tardiness by 34 percent. Absences shrank by 82 percent while the number of students on principal's honor rolls showed a modest increase.

What did the Jefferson LAUSD project do to generate dramatic change in so short a time? In elementary schools, teachers spent a few minutes each day teaching responsibility skills.

They gave children the language to think about responsibility and mutual respect and then encouraged them to assume responsibility for their own choices. The curriculum involved simple concepts such as "Be on time" and "Be polite."

The junior high curriculum is called "How to be Successful in Less Than 10 Minutes a Day." During homeroom, LAUSD teachers discussed the language and skills of responsibility as the basis for self-esteem and mutual concern. For instance, they taught refusal skills that young people need to withstand peer pressure and to resist drug abuse, gang recruitments, and other self- and socially destructive behavior.

The reasoning behind the curricula is that most children see themselves as victims of powerful social pressures rather than as agents of their own destinies. They rarely hear that they have choices, or that their choices have consequences for themselves and also for their families, schools and communities.

Ultimately, value education teaches them the skills needed to be responsible decision makers; to stop and think about goals and alternatives, to choose action in the light of likely consequences to themselves and others and to appreciate the contributions of those around them. -- The Jefferson LAUSD pilot project demonstrates that young people can learn to value, practice, and appreciate personal and social responsibility. Unfortunately, we the public usually steer educators away from it.

For example, when values education was considered as a possible means of juvenile crime prevention at a recent LA County hearing, Supervisor Gloria Molina asked "Which values?" Molina was voicing the public fear that values education is really about having teachers incalculate religion and ideology.

Certainly, many conservatives have portrayed values education as an antidote to secular humanism. However, liberals have missed an opportunity here.

In the Jefferson-LAUSD project, values education focused on the virtues of self-understanding, responsibility, thoughtful decision making and community good. It transcended the biblical "Thou shalt not..." message that we regularly give to children and communicated instead the sense of individual choice, self-worth and social concern that lies at the heart of democratic citizenship.

Ultimately, a sound values education supports the public value of intelligent thought and responsible action, not blind obedience to anyone's religious fundamentals or ideology.

We say that public schools are the foundation for equal opportunity in America. How can we salvage them? How can we turn them into hospitable and effective educational environments?

The Jefferson LAUSD pilot suggests that we ought to teach children to value their education, take responsibility for it, choose to work at it and reap rewards of it while contributing to the community.

- - -
The above has been excerpted from an article in the Los Angeles Daily News, written by Mark E. Kann, professor of political science, associate dean of graduate studies, and director of the Center for Excellence in Teaching at the University in Southern California.

* * * * *
The Revitalization of Greece

Greece is aspiring to a "New Golden Age" through the activity of the "New Humanity Group," led by brother Emmanuel Petrakis. -- The undertaking combines simplicity and humility with magnificent aims. A world community village, based on love, peace, cooperation, truth, goodwill, respect of life and nature, and right human relations has been founded with the intent to bring its members closer to the full flowering of inner human potentials, or the ideal expressed through the image of God.

The New Humanity Centre, is located three hours by car from Athens, in a beautiful natural setting on a hill at the foot of a mountain, with a breathtaking view of the sea. It presently contains a Temple and teaching centre as well as a library, and publishes a newsletter encouraging global solidarity. Visitors from all parts of the world are invited to combine explorations of ancient historical monuments with deeply meaningful future-conscious experiences.

For further information please contact: Emmanuel Petrakis, New Humanity Centre, Eleonon Road, Akroyali Avias, Kalamata 24 100, Greece.

* * *
BOOK REVIEWS

Yoking Science and Religion: The Life and Thought of Ralph Wendell Burhoe by David R. Breed (Foreword by Roger W. Sperry). Chicago: Zygon Books, 1992. Paperback, 148 pages.

"In the history of efforts to join religion and science, none appears to have achieved more wide and lasting impact than the venture described by David Breed in his account of the thought and work of Ralph Wendell Burhoe."

This judgment, contained in R.W. Sperry's foreword, is reinforced by the content of the book. From its first sprouting in the heart of the young science student with a devoutly religious background, the thought that science without values would destroy our civilization and our Earth grew and branched out into various successful initiatives.

Among other undertakings, Burhoe founded the Institute on Religion in an Age of Science with its quarterly Zygon and its fascinating Star-Island conferences that introduce -- within an informal and strikingly beautiful setting surrounded by the Atlantic Ocean -- yearly up to 200 scientists and religious leaders from all parts of the world to one another and their points of view.

The success of Burhoe's life and work belongs to the most promising events in human history.

* * * * *
Hopes and Fears: The Human Future. Hanna Newcombe, ed. Toronto:Science for Peace/Samuel Stevens, 1992. Paperback, 195 pages.

The thoughtfulness of the 16 contributions to this anthology is not diminished by the rush of events in history, which has overtaken some of the facts reported; conclusions and recommendations are timeless. Discussed are "Future Scenarios for Europe," "War Prevention," "Global Decision-Making," "Values and Cooperation," and "Ecological Issues."

In addition to the contributions of the editor, the article by Robert Betchow dealing with the domestication of technology and that by Digby McLaren about the three revolutions of homosapiens attracted this reviewers main attention.

Betchow suggests that we take advantage of the immense promises of technology by "domesticating" it, rather than rejecting it in fear of its awesome threats. To achieve this feat, national sovereignty cannot remain limitless. As Einstein already noted in 1945: the atom bomb means we need a World Government.

McLaren describes two major revolutions in the history of homosapiens, the agricultural and the industrial one. The third revolution is one we are entering now; it is a revolution in human thinking about right and wrong. "We have no choice," he says, "but to stop and then reverse the population increase, and to reduce and then reverse the profligate use of fossil fuels if we are to end the current acceleration to disaster."

* * *
REFLECTIONS

A new kind of community is evolving in our human culture, not separated from other communities through national borders, religious dogmas, political expediency, or economic dominance, but through compassion with sentient beings, realistic assessment of our situation, and rejection of the pursuit of immediate gains at the expense of the future quality of life on Earth. This new community embodies all our hope for the future, all our advance toward humane solutions of worldwide problems. But it is fragile, vulnerable, endangered by competition with entrenched thinking habits, and in desperate need of adequate recognition.

* * * ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I am grateful to the Cousteau Society for permission to reprint the "Bill of Rights for Future Generations" with comments by Jacques-Yves Cousteau, to the Wall Street Journal for permission to reprint the Heidelberg Appeal, to The Futurist, the World Watch Institute, and S. Postel for permission to use quotes from "A Planet in Jeopardy," to Colonel C. Valenti for his standing permission to quote from his work and his letters, to Karl E. Erdmann for permission to reprint his criticism of "Beyond a World Divided," and to Mark E. Kann for permission to reprint an excerpt from his article on the Jefferson LAUSD project.

* * *
REFERENCES

Birch, C. and Cobb, J.B. Jr. 1981. The Liberation of Life. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Brown, L.R., Flavin, C. and Postel, S. 1992. A Planet in Jeopardy. The Futurist, May-June 1992, pp. 10-14.

Cousteau, J.-Y. 1992. Bill of Rights for Future Generations. Calypso Log, February 1992,p.5.

Heidelberg Appeal, 1992. Published under the title Beware of False Gods in Rio in the Wall Street Journal, June 1, 1992.

Heinrich, D. 1988. Evolution of World Society: Process and Prospects. In The Name of the Chamber was Peace, J. Alton,

E.Fawcett, L.Terrell Gardner (Eds.) Pp.100-115. Toronto and Fort Myers: Science for Peace in Association with Samuel Stevens and Company.

Jacobson, J. 1992. Vital Signs: The Trends That Are Shaping Our Future. Worldwatch Institute, 1776 Massachusetts Ave., Washington, D.C. 20036-1904, U.S.A.

Kann, M.E. Imparting Public Values to Public-School Students. Los Angeles Daily News, March 8, 1992.

King, Martin Luther, as quoted in Casebolt, C. and Rauh, S. 1986 Toward Organic Security. Special paper of the Peace and Environment Platform Project, World Citizen's Assembly, Suite 506, Sutter St., San Francisco, California 94108, U.S.A.

McLaren, D.J. 1992a. The Three Revolutions of Homo Sapiens. In Hopes and Fears - The Human Future, Hanna Newcombe, (Ed.) Pp.175-182. Toronto: Science for Peace/Samuel Stevens.

McLaren, D.J. 1992b. Aspects of Reality - Survival and the Myth of Sustainability. Modified version of UNESCO presentations at Paris (1991) and Belem, Brazil (1992). Available from D.J.McLaren, Royal Society of Canada, P.O.Box 9734, Ottawa, ON K1G 5J4, Canada.

Sorokin, P. 1957. Social and Cultural Dynamics, Boston: Porter Sargent Publisher, P. 628.

Sperry, R.W. 1992. Paradigms of Belief, Theory and Metatheory. Zygon, 27, 245-259.

Valenti, D.C. 1991. A New Agenda for America. One Person's Impact, Sept/Oct 1991, p.3.