members of the association participate in an inner and outer constitution building process in which each exercises the responsibility to determine the principles that will constitute their future integrity by dialogically deliberating and deciding on preferred world constitutional norms.

Participants show commitment to demonstrating these norms by participating in the development of a global economic and political organisation that will be underpinned by and exemplify these norms.

[Richard Mochelle and Paul Wildman, draft 1.1, Aug 01, for future website- PO 74 Nundah Brisbane Aust 4012 mochelle@acenet.net.au, pwildman@optushome.com.au]

Introduction to the Project

The ‘foremost challenge of this generation’ according to the Commission for Global Governance (CGG) is to mobilise the collective power of people ‘to make life in the 21st century more democratic, more secure, and more sustainable’. To this end, the CGG called for a global civic ethic, the adoption by all of a set of globally protective responsibilities, in effect, a new set of world constitutional norms, without which already well-accepted UN rights conventions cannot be fulfilled.

How in a world of cultural diversity are these global responsibilities to be (1) determined, and (2) induced? Given that a universal compulsory program of doctrinaire education would be inadmissible, how are the world’s people to be enticed to sacrifice the substantial time that is needed to consider the global situation and determine the global responsibilities called for?

If the challenge and the call by the CGG are to be successfully met, political and moral educators will need to play a leading role in creating the educational provisions required. Yet provisions alone will not suffice to attract people to undertake the substantial learning journey involved. In view of global crisis tendencies, we need seriously to consider the future possibility and ethics of universal educational intervention.

CIVIDA’s long range meta-constitutional proposition:
for the sake of global protection:
a worldwide obligation on educators and parents to ensure that all undertake integrity development education in their compulsory years of schooling

CIVIDA is an association whose members are voluntarily undertaking that integrity development journey with a view to serving as educational guides, producing support materials, and promoting the idea of integrity development education for teacher training, compulsory schooling and political office.

The understanding is that in order to adequately guide others, teacher educators and trainee teachers should be first to submit to the integrity development imperative and undertake the challenging learning journey it requires

What is the integrity development imperative?

In brief, it is the next step imperative implied by Kant’s categorical imperative: ‘act only on the maxim that you can at the same time will that it becomes universal law’.

Kant viewed this as the supreme principle of ethics. Logically derived from the commonly accepted ‘golden rule’, the imperative serves as a principle of meta-governance, by which the ethical quality of all principles, laws and actions may be determined. It is a crucial governor against the dangers of indoctrination by, and conformity to, dubious authorities and systems.

If one aspires to act with integrity, and one accepts Kant’s imperative, one has little option but to submit to the next step developmental imperative that logically follows. One’s first priority act must be to figure out the set of globally protective principles one wishes were universally complied with, and to decide them autonomously, as a free-thinking agent, without permitting customary authority to dominate one’s thinking. The imperative calls one to proceed, without hesitation, if one has not already done so.

Similar to a mountain-climbing journey (the triangle on CIVIDA’s logo represents the mountain), the imperative entails a rigorous mental strength-building exercise that focuses one’s attention on the global overview, on world constitutional norms, on what is needed to protect global interests. At the same time, its focus is intensely personal, on one’s inner-constitution, on the norms that will constitute one’s integrity in future. It is a reconstitutional imperative. It calls each, for the sake of mutual protection, to reconstitute both inner and outer frameworks.

It would be safe to say that most people, including most of the world’s educators, have not yet done so. Civic culture has not required such practice. Until one does so, one acts on principles decided by others, as custom dictates, on principles one has not chosen, whose validity one may find problematic, even reject, upon independent deliberation. Until one submits to the imperative, one remains ethically adolescent, an acquiescent, without independent responsibility. The integrity development imperative challenges us to shift from being conventional to post-conventional moral agents, to undertake a self-development journey that few have undertaken.

Submission to the imperative implies acceptance of certain presuppositions and urgencies.

1.     We live in an inescapable condition of global ecological and economic interdependency.

2.     This interdependency can give rise to global problems that threaten the interests of all. Such problems can exist and increase in magnitude whether or not all people are aware of them.

3.     Certain universal human interests can be identified – such as economic, political and ecological security – which we can safely assume future generations will share, and which everyone, on reflection, would prefer to be reliably fulfilled, regardless of cultural differences.

4.     These universal interests cannot be reliably protected unless all play a responsible, trustworthy part in their protection. Universal rights cannot be practically fulfilled without the universal exercise of reciprocal responsibility. The priority needs of most people cannot be securely met while they believe that they should be free to pursue life plans without regard for the priority needs of others, while they disregard the priaction principle.

5.     The protection of universal interests is best served when each takes responsibility for deciding and reviewing the overarching all-protective structure of global norms, which depends for its stability on universal compliance.

For example, the prevailing global norms of national sovereignty, segregation, identity branding and allegiance formation, have led to military arms development, armed conflict and massive suffering. Submission to the imperative requires asking whether continuing acquiescence to such norms will best fulfil global economic, political and ecological security interests in future. (to be continued)

A PATHWAY TO ESTABLISHING AGREEMENT ON INTEGRITY DEVELOPMENT GOALS

outline for a workshop introduction to Integrity Development Project, draft 2.1

How to establish commitment from a disparate group of people having different and unclear values, to pursue collaboratively a challenging set of integrity development goals?

Here is a logical step by step approach. It requires beginning with people who voice a concern for world peace, justice, ecological sustainability, etc, who agree with the ‘responsibility to all’ imperative of the Earth Charter, the Universal Declaration of Responsibilities, the Commission for Global Governance call for a global civic ethic, etc.

Our starting point is a motley assembly that has responded to a seminar invitation targeted at people who share the above concerns and responsibility orientations.

PHASE 1:     preliminaries

A     Begin by allowing each to voice their concerns about the global situation and their interests and ideals in respect to peace, justice, ecology interests, etc.

B     Establish hand-up agreement in respect to these interests.

C     Gain acknowledgment for the appreciation that while we share these broad interests, it cannot be assumed that there is agreement at this point as to the global ethics required to realise these interests.

D     To move on, two critical points need to be considered, acknowledged and agreed to by participants:

1     Those interests cannot be realised while people are not fully committed to realising them.

(Discuss integrity issue: if not me, who should be? If others aren’t committed, why ought I be? Note: full commitment doesn’t infer full-time commitment)

2     The commitment to realise those interests entails a willingness to collaborate with disparate others to find agreement on global norms that all could with integrity comply with.

(Cannot assume that all participants are sociologically and politically literate. Discussion may be needed about the relation between current global structures and norms – and the problems they generate)

Clarify that a commitment to fulfilling those interests implies doing so, if not next Monday with everyone in the world, at least by showing an example, with those who declare a similar commitment.

PHASE 2:     Participants are invited to collaborate to realise the interests voiced.

Ask that they move to a nearby setting, a waiting room, pier, airport lounge, chat room, where integrity development goals will be agreed upon. When settled, focus participants on the guide map (next page) indicating proposed goals and pathway linking them. PHASE 2     GUIDE MAP: A logical path of stepping stones, towns, or stations for determining agreement on Integrity Development Goals to enable the formation (phase 3) oft a consortium of learning teams. Each of the steps constitutes a goal or sub-goal. Rehearse the trip, clarify steps as needed. Then proceed together step by step, ensuring that each has an opportunity to express (or deny) agreement to each goal, and to discuss any discomfort or reasons for objection.

Affirm shared interests – ecological, economic and political security > Assume all people share these interests? > Affirm ‘responsibility to all’ preamble statement of Earth Charter.

Affirm ‘The Golden Rule’ in principle. Do unto others... A general starting point ethic for achieving interests above. People of all cultures agree with a version. Read various versions. Address the usual nitpicking objections.

Affirm Golden Rule compliance implications

1     All others, including those on other side > Universality Rule.

2     All the time reliably, consistently, in accord with principle

3     Unconditionally ie, regardless of recipients ability to pay

4     Independently ie, not doing what others do, not tit for tat

Affirm Categorical Imperative: a nice wrapping up by Kant of the 4 above

"Act only in accord with principles which you can at the same time will that they become universal law"

INTEGRITY DEVELOPMENT IMPERATIVE – Point to mountain peak

Having committed to the above, it follows that one should, as the next priority, commit to ‘mountain trek’ to gain overview, decide a set of global ethics to constitute one’s integrity. Do it with minimal procrastination, if not already done.

Implications. Do it:

1     autonomously, unconstrained by status quo norms

2     in view of

a)     global problems,
b)     underpinning structural causes/norms, and
c)     need to protect common interests agreed to above

3     in view of organisation/institutional design implications

4     Dialogically, check validity of self-chosen ethics with fellow travellers, first in team, then across teams.

5     Publicly disclose, easily on an Internet site, eg. Librecom

ORGANISATIONAL DEVELOPMENT IMPERATIVE:

Seek to constitute, develop, full-time join and demonstrate an exemplary global organisation with others whose publicly disclosed global ethics are congruent with one’s own.

PHASE 3:     Travel to ‘MOUNTAIN BASE CAMP’.

FORM TEAMS with those having agreed to the above goals (CIVIDA goals). Agree on tentative learning targets, an action plan, timing and start date. Celebrate commitment.