Category Economic Justtice

CBC

Although this is only a small step in the right direction, it is worth celebrating. At the same time, there is still a shocking level of resistance – within the Ontario Catholic system and in other places, to a move as modest as flying a flag to demonstrate inclusion. For the record, the “faith-based” resistance to full acceptance of our LGBTQ+ members is not new, and it’s not something I am going to use space articulating here (but it is cited in the article, above). I’m sure that we’ve all heard it before, and the focus here is on how to move forward, more positively, not on giving space to outdated and discriminatory ideas.

So, in order to help transform the conversation from negative, to positive, I (along with countless others that are working for more inclusive faith groups), would like to suggest the following as a reframing of how we view our faith and actions, for ourselves, and others:

Instead of the too-often used, traditional, inaccurate and discriminatory stance:

“My faith tells me, based on centuries old (mis)understandings of gender and sexuality, that you – and your basic core identifiers, or what you do with your body – are wrong, and I am right. For me to live true to my faith, I need you to change who you are, in order for me to tolerate you.”

Let’s switch to:

• “My faith tells me to love my neighbour, so I am called to accept and embrace the diversity (including gender, sexuality and many other things) that we all bring, without judgement or prejudice.”
• “My faith tells me to be a good neighbour, so I am called to serve others, instead of demanding that others change their core identity to appease me.”
• “My faith tells me that if I own two coats, and my neighbour has none, I should share – so therefore, I am called to give up my big house and move somewhere smaller, live simply, share my wealth, support a universal basic income and work to end wealth inequality in the world.”
• “My faith tells me to care for creation, so I am called to stop eating animal products, use zero waste instead of single use products, switch away from my gas vehicle as soon as possible, and vote for governments that take the climate crisis seriously.”
• My faith tells me to not kill others, so I am called to actively support peacebuilding instead of militaries, not own a gun, ensure that I am not glorifying war or weapons in any way, and actively vote in governments that show love to our global neighbours instead of engaging in war.”
• “My faith tells me to live at peace with others, so I am called to learn the history of racism and discrimination in the world, locally and globally, and actively work to deconstruct any misperceptions I may have about systemic racism in our world. Likewise, I am called to actively welcome refugees and other newcomers with open arms.”
• and so on…

Or, in the super-simplified form…

“My/our faith calls me/us to be better global citizen(s), and to serve others, without discrimination. One of the worst things we can do is latch on to the misguided idea that all we need to do is force someone else to change who they are (“be straight instead of LQBTQ+”, “don’t get an abortion”, “don’t be a refugee”…) and then that will be our ticket into heaven. Over and over, in countless faith traditions, we are called to change our own actions (giving up our own wealth, serving the poor and refugees, giving up our own power and status) instead of forcing change on others, especially on aspects of core identity, that break modern anti-discrimination laws in many countries. God calls us to give up our own privilege and wealth, (which is very hard to do), instead of demanding that others change who they are to appease us.”

So, with that, let’s get Pride Month going!😀

More info:

Taking a stand for her father and her family, she’s raising the Pride flag at her former Catholic school – CBC

…………………………………..

Looking for zero-waste, plant-based or sustainable items? Check out the MennoAdventures online store! There are always lots of great deals to be found, with our many amazing partners! Happy browsing!

Out of the many tragedies that have emerged from this pandemic, one of the few silver linings is the possibility that, once we have demonstrated the ability to completely shut down and restart our societies, we will, collectively, use that towards restarting in a manner that is safe and sustainable, for people and the planet. The power to do so is in our hands – all we have to do is make the choice, individually and collectively. The data could not be more clear – we know what we need to do, and we know how to do it.

• US urged to cut 50% of emissions by 2030 to spur other countries to action Guardian
• Global lockdown every two years needed to meet Paris CO2 goals – study Guardian
• NYTimes: Volvo Plans to Sell Only Electric Cars by 2030 NYT

Carbon dioxide emissions must fall by the equivalent of a global lockdown roughly every two years for the next decade for the world to keep within safe limits of global heating, research has shown. (Bold mine).

Lockdowns around the world led to an unprecedented fall in emissions of about 7% in 2020, or about 2.6bn tonnes of CO2, but reductions of between 1bn and 2bn tonnes are needed every year of the next decade to have a good chance of holding temperature rises to within 1.5C or 2C of pre-industrial levels, as required by the Paris agreement.

Guardian

Changes of this scale, as with the pandemic, are multi-faceted, including individual actions (eg wearing masks, staying home when needed to protect ourselves and others), governmental (eg clear public health orders, income support as needed), business (eg switching to curbside pickup or work from home, where applicable). Likewise, for the climate crisis, we need all levels and sectors involved, doing everything possible to get us to where we need to be.

So, in the most immediate term, reducing our emissions by 50%+ over the next few years (and then further after that) is not a small task. How are we going to get there, and what actions can we take, starting today, to get us there, in each sector?

• Reducing the size of our home by 50% will reduce our heating/cooling emissions in half (as a rough estimate, simply because we have less space to heat/cool). If, by extension, we also own less stuff, there are emissions reductions (and other gains) to be found there, as well.
• Switching from an animal-based diet to a whole-foods, plant-based diet has a significant impact (exact % depends on what you were eating before, and whether you switch fully or partly to plant-based etc)
• Living in a higher density area helps reduce driving-related emissions, as more day-today trips are within walking distance (as does using public transit or an EV when you aren’t walking or biking)
• Significantly reducing or eliminating flights will take out a significant emissions source, depending on how much you were flying before and how much you reduce. Before flying, consider whether the flight is essential or not.
• Electing governments that are serious about tackling the climate crisis
• Supporting businesses that are working to tackle the climate crisis (zero waste and others) instead of business-as-usual
• Countless others – far too many to list here. 🙂

Naturally, different people will tackle things in their own order – and for someone who already lives in a small home in a high density area, downsizing is obviously not the place to start. However, most of us have room to improve, and places to start. What changes have you already made? Which are you interested in trying next? Which are you most curious about? Which do you think will be easier or more challenging?

We’re all in this together, so let’s help each other out, and build a better future for everyone!

…………………………………….

There are always lots of amazing deals on sustainable, zero-waste items in my online store! Check the website for details!

It is shocking (and quite disturbing) to me, that some faith groups still believe that they are called to a mandate of exclusion, instead of inclusion, on any of a wide number of otherwise protected identifiers, including gender and sexuality. Over and over, to the best of my knowledge, faith group and their major texts call for love of neighbour, welcome of the stranger, living simply and service to others. Nothing in that suggests, or allows, discrimination based on who we are at our core, or an acceptance of destruction of creation. And yet, some faith groups still fight for the right to discriminate, and avoid talking serious action on the climate crisis – and it must end.

Major Evangelical Adoption Agency Will Now Serve Gay Parents Nationwide

NYT

At a time when we are facing multiple global crises (including a pandemic and a climate crisis), faith groups should be leaders, setting an example of how to care for all of creation – including all people, animals, and the environment. Instead, some groups still put their energy into excluding others, and denying women the right to a full range of reproductive health services, as though that is the way to a better world for everyone.

A justification that I sometimes hear from others is that something can be found somewhere in one’s ancient texts to justify discrimination. In response, I would suggest that many people only take texts literally on things that are life-limiting for others, without requiring us to change ourselves. I’m suggesting a different approach (along with countless others).

Want to take the Bible or other ancient texts literally? How about focusing on the countless times that we are told not to accumulate wealth? Living simply requires a lot more from us than telling someone else how we think they should live their lives.

Think swapping out “My faith says that you should be straight” and replacing it with “My faith says that I should be less wealthy, live in a smaller home, eat more lentils, help others more, create less garbage and drive less often.”

Likewise, the admonition to not kill or steal features in many faith texts: how about putting our energy into banning militaries and the theft of natural resources (and extreme wealth discrepancies, locally and globally) that is contributing to climate change? The list could go on and on…

For faith groups to be relevant into the future, we need to, collectively, move beyond this idea that we can live our own lives as we wish, while excluding others, and destroying the planet. We can, and must do better, together. We can do it. 🙂

……………………….

There are lots of amazing, sustainable and zero waste items in the online store! Check out the website for details!

2020 was not the year that any of us were expecting, when the year began. A global pandemic forced a radical reset of how the world operates, in countless ways. Some of those changes were relatively easy – such as office workers switching to more remote meetings, with less travel for in person work. Other changes were much more difficult – in addition to the catastrophic death toll that results from any pandemic or other major crisis. Some of these changes, however, have resulted in a significant – if temporary – reduction in our emissions. Contrary to the frequently asked question – “When will things go back to the way they were?” – we were, globally, on a trajectory that was not sustainable. Therefore, we should, instead, be asking “How can we come out of this pandemic to something better than what we had before?” (as many people are already doing).

• Covid Took a Bite From U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions in 2020: NYT
• BBC News – Climate change: US emissions in 2020 in biggest fall since WWII
• Amid 2020’s gloom, there are reasons to be hopeful about the climate in 2021 Guardian
• InsideClimate News: Many Scientists Now Say Global Warming Could Stop Relatively Quickly After Emissions Go to Zero.
• InsideClimate News: Many Scientists Now Say Global Warming Could Stop Relatively Quickly After Emissions Go to Zero.
• Lloyd’s market to quit fossil fuel insurance by 2030: Guardian

What does coming out of this to a new, better normal look like? What changes do we need to keep? What new changes will we still need to make? There is not the space here to allow for a comprehensive answer, but there are a few key pieces to highlight:

• We must continue with the significant, rapid reduction in emissions that we saw during this pandemic. The rapid pace of change that happened showed that change is possible, where there is a will. Now, we need to maintain the momentum of these changes, without the catastrophic pressure that comes from a global pandemic. Globally, we all need to act fast, without waiting for others who might be further behind in this process.
• A Universal Basic Income is essential, for many reasons, and should be implemented as soon as possible.
• Multi-party systems, with proportional representation, seemed to fair better (based on research that others have done), and also are key to reducing polarization and misinformation campaigns. Countries that still have First-Past-The-Post or other non-proportional systems should put serious effort into switching as soon as possible.
• Food and travel/transportation are big areas of emissions, both of which we have significant control over in our daily lives. Changes are critical – and will need to go beyond what is easy or comfortable at times.

Moving into a better 2021 – and beyond – means living within our planetary boundaries, not taking more than our fair share and living simply, in balance with our global neighbours and with the earth. (Photo Credit)

Here’s to a new year, filled with lots of good things, including (but not limited to…) progress towards the end of this pandemic, strong climate action, electoral reform, peace and justice locally and globally, and civility towards each other.

Stay tuned for more website updates in the coming months. 💻😊

Link

Guardian

Further data here from the Guardian on the massive environmental impact of air travel, particularly among those who take the most flights in an average year. In addition, the failure to demand that the airline industry pay for the pollution it contributes results in a massive subsidy for airlines, while also contributing significantly to environmental degradation.

Frequent-flying “‘super emitters” who represent just 1% of the world’s population caused half of aviation’s carbon emissions in 2018, according to a study.

Airlines produced a billion tonnes of CO2 and benefited from a $100bn (£75bn) subsidy by not paying for the climate damage they caused, the researchers estimated. The analysis draws together data to give the clearest global picture of the impact of frequent fliers.

Only 11% of the world’s population took a flight in 2018 and 4% flew abroad. US air passengers have by far the biggest carbon footprint among rich countries. Its aviation emissions are bigger than the next 10 countries combined, including the UK, Japan, Germany and Australia, the study reports. (Bold mine).

Guardian

With the significant pause in air travel as a result in the pandemic, what will governments and other players do to ensure that, instead of getting back to “normal” (as it was pre-pandemic), that we build back differently, with a true aim to create a sustainable future?

As a start (and this should have been done decades ago), every industry (airlines and others), must be expected to pay for the damages they create. Furthermore, there can absolutely not be any more subsidies (direct or indirect) that contribute to environmental degradation.

The researchers estimated the cost of the climate damage caused by aviation’s emissions at $100bn in 2018. The absence of payments to cover this damage “represents a major subsidy to the most affluent”, the researchers said. “This highlights the need to scrutinize the sector, and in particular the super emitters.”

Guardian

Building back better is possible, if we, collectively, choose to do it, and put the full power of government, non-profits, civil society, industry and others all together. Individually, tackling this issue means looking at giving up non-essential flights and voting in governments that will take strong action on holding polluters accountable. If we don’t do it now, when will we act?

NOTE: The Facebook boycott is still ongoing. Please share widely in your circles, and subscribe to newsletter updates on the website to stay up to date on what is happening at Menno Adventures! 🙂

There are more philanthropists than ever before. Each year they give tens of billions to charitable causes. So how come inequality keeps rising? 

Guardian

A long read, but well worth it. Not saying that I absolutely agree with every detail (specifically around the role of the non-profit world), but the general idea that I want to pull out from here is this:

Regardless of whether the ultra-wealthy occassionally use their wealth for something that happens to benefit the rest of the world, that doesn’t justify the massive wealth imbalance that allows them to be so “generous.” If CEOs and others paid their fair share in taxes, if corporations truly paid the true cost of their operations (including cleaning up pollution), if companies capped CEOs salaries (including benefits) at something reasonable and paid all staff a living wage with good benefits, if we rethink the relationship between how public goods benefit private profit, the ultra-wealthy would have a lot less money to “donate.” Likewise, at that point, we would have a lot less concern that the interests of a handful of individuals are displacing the work of government and civil society.

Here’s a bit of context to help understand what we are up against…

To understand how rich billionaires really are, use this calculator. (Guardian) (See below)

How Long Does It Take Tech CEOs to Earn Your Salary? Here

Extreme wealth inequality has a variety of negative impacts, even when some of that wealth happens to be used for things that some people see value in, as the opposite is also true. Just as someone can buy a policy or change that someone might like, someone else can just as easily buy off a government to get a policy that people strongly oppose

Yet the priorities of plutocracy, rule by the rich, and democracy, rule by the people, often differ. The personal choices of the rich do not closely match the spending choices of democratically elected governments. A major research study from 2013 revealed that the richest 1% of Americans are considerably more rightwing than the public as a whole on issues of taxation, economic regulation and especially welfare programmes for the poor. Many of the richest 0.1% – individuals worth more than $40m – want to cut social security and healthcare. They are less supportive of a minimum wage than the rest of the population. They favour decreased government regulation of big corporations, pharmaceutical companies, Wall Street and the City of London. (Bold mine.)

Here

And also…

The common assumption that philanthropy automatically results in a redistribution of money is wrong. A lot of elite philanthropy is about elite causes. Rather than making the world a better place, it largely reinforces the world as it is. Philanthropy very often favours the rich – and no one holds philanthropists to account for it.

Here

And one more quote…

Philanthropy is always an expression of power. Giving often depends on the personal whims of super-rich individuals. Sometimes these coincide with the priorities of society, but at other times they contradict or undermine them. Increasingly, questions have begun to be raised about the impact these mega-donations are having upon the priorities of society.

There are a number of tensions inherent in the relationship between philanthropy and democracy. For all the huge benefits modern philanthropy can bring, the sheer scale of contemporary giving can skew spending in areas such as education and healthcare, to the extent that it can overwhelm the priorities of democratically elected governments and local authorities.

Here

To be clear, this is not, in any way, suggesting that non-profits, civil society or good governance are futile. Rather, it is the opposite – they are so critically important that they can not be risked to appease the personal whims of the ultra-wealthy. A better system is possible, if everyone truly pays their fair share. 🙂

Freelancers and others frequently get asked to work for free, or for significantly reduced rates. It definitely happens in the non-profit world, and I have heard from others that it is frequently a problem in the creative world as well.

Along with strong support for a Universal Basic Income, and significant caps on CEO/executive and other high earner salaries to close the gap between low and high earners, let’s start from the premise that everybody deserves to be paid fairly for the skills and expertise that the bring to a project. We all deserve to have a living wage, whether freelancer or not.

Happy watching! (And thanks to everyone in the video for testing the theory in the real world, so that I don’t have to do it! :))

Watching from Facebook? Join us on the website for more great resources!

NOTE: During this pandemic, and always, immediate safety, health and other concerns come before discussion on other related issues. Discussion on policies during the pandemic, their implications and choices we make collectively for the future do not, in any way, minimize the impacts of the present crisis.

Also, we have approx 200 new people (and growing rapidly) joining us here via the new Menno Adventures Facebook business page. Welcome here! 🙂

Impacts from this pandemic are being felt in countless ways. I have put things into some rough (but not exhaustive) categories below. Naturally, many resources could be cross-referenced to more than one category, but are listed in only one spot.

Emissions

With the global shutdown, it is true the actual, real-time emissions are down. However, climate change is a result of many decades of emissions. This halt, if followed by a huge surge in emissions when the shutdown ends, will not result in any net positive impacts on climate change. However, if this crisis is used as an opportunity to create better systems, locally and globally, we can increase the changes of turning things around before it’s too late.

Global lockdowns might reduce CO2 emissions but won’t halt climate crisis, scientists say: CBC

Oil Companies Are Collapsing Due to Coronavirus, but Wind and Solar Energy Keep Growing: NYT

Financial help for airlines ‘should come with strict climate conditions’: Guardian

Food

Ban wildlife markets to avert pandemics, says UN biodiversity chief : Guardian.

There has also been a fair bit of coverage around the increase in baking bread and other food-related changes that I have seen in the last few weeks. It will be interesting to see where this leads. Plant-based staples (eg dried beans etc) are, in my opinion, much easier and more cost-effective to stock up on than frozen meat, for example. Will this change how people eat once the crisis is over?

Economy/Universal Basic Income

Ottawa is handing out $2,000 cheques to out-of-work Canadians. Could a basic income be next? Star

Tackle climate crisis and poverty with zeal of Covid-19 fight, scientists urge Guardian

To be very clear, I, and countless others, based on the overwhelming climate science, are calling for an end to fossil fuel use and other significant changes to how we eat, live and go about our days, without the added stress and crisis that a pandemic brings. Also, we are asking that major fossil fuel companies and other not be bailed out, with public funds, to continue to earn private profit at the expense of the climate. Protect workers, not wealthy corporations – especially those that are heavily polluting.

As with any crisis, tackling the climate crisis requires a multi-faceted response. Eating red meat three times/week has a certain carbon footprint, as does one medium-length flight/year. Instead of debating which particular change to recommend or justifying poor emissions choices (ie “Flying is bad, so everyone should be encouraged to eat as much red meat as they want because it’s not as bad…” or “My per capita emissions aren’t as bad as others so I don’t have to change” any other combination), let’s all do our best to be sustainable, given our own individual circumstances, out of desire for a livable world for everyone. 🙂

I am supportive of a universal basic income, free post-secondary education, a Green New Deal and job retraining for anybody who wants to transition to a cleaner job. (There are lots of details on various ways to do a Green New Deal for anybody who wants to read further on this.) The only, possible silver lining that I see to this crisis is if we use it to build a better future for everyone. 🙂

…….

Donations, whether large or small, are gratefully received to help maintain this website. PayPal details are available on the website. Thank you!

Hi all,

I’ve been away for a bit, as other plans have been continually adjusting over the last week or two. I have also debated whether to write about the pandemic, or avoid it/take a break, and focus on something else. So, as a compromise, I’m going to do a bit of both. I’m going to focus on how we can use this pandemic to reset parts of how we operate, to ensure that we come out of this into a local and global community that is better than it was before.

NOTE: We have been at home, as a family, for almost 2 weeks, since school was shut down here. No known exposure to anything at this point, and we are all healthy so far. We are going for walks around the block etc, but not much more than that. We are grateful for our cold room (well stocked with flour, oats and lots of other good things), our bread machine, dehydrator and instant pot, and the fact that we have been able to order things online for delivery.

Pandemic and Climate Crisis:

Without wanting to minimize the very significant impacts of the virus in any way, I think that there is a lot that we can learn from this crisis, in order to avert further climate damage before it’s too late. If there is any silver lining, a massive global Green New Deal, with massive action to avert the worst of the climate crisis, is it.

The Covid-19 crisis is a chance to do capitalism differently: Guardian

Why don’t we treat the climate crisis with the same urgency as coronavirus?: Guardian

What could change look like?

To be clear, I am not proposing that nobody ever leave their house again. However, there is a lot that we can keep from this shutdown that could help deal with the climate crisis.

SUVs second biggest cause of emissions rise, figures reveal: Guardian – If we can leave our big vehicles at home more in the future, and use public transit/drive a smaller EV etc, the impact would be significant. Likewise, if companies have adjusted and found ways to get work done with less driving/flying to meetings, there is to reason to go back to status quo when this is over.

‘Individual actions do add up’: Christiana Figueres on the climate crisis: Guardian

Toronto Star: Did free cash drive people to quit work? Not according to a new study of Ontario’s basic income experiment. (Star) – This pandemic is yet another reason for countries to implement a universal basic income, starting ASAP. 🙂

No putting meat on expenses, says property firm: BBC News – I actually saw this one before the pandemic, and it is an interesting, if somewhat complicated response to impacts of food choices on climate and business. 🙂

And, naturally, it goes without saying that I am not supportive of fossil fuel subsidies, or bailouts of large companies that are making massive profits at the expense of people or creation. I support workers, and retraining for anybody who wants, and a universal basic income. 🙂

Doing nothing will lead to more crises in the future. Let’s use this crisis as an opportunity to build the better world that so many people have been seeking for so long. 🙂