We the Peoples

[Peter Venton]

I had suggested back in November that in this google group we should discuss in some detail Chapter II in the Common Agenda which is entitled "We the People: a renewed social contract anchored in human rights".  This chapter I suggested is primarily about the nature of national economies and social contracts.  The idea of social contracts is not well understood by many who are involved in economic policy.  The social contracts in almost all of democratic member nations of the UN and particularly the high income G20 nations are not anchored in the UN human rights.  Their economies are consequently destroying the environment and fostering huge inequality of income and wealth.  With respect to the latter the economies are oligarchic in nature rather than  democratic as We the Peoples clearly lays out.  The proposed renewed social contract is revolutionary.  The chapter is revolutionary because the UN is defining the goals of the common good for all nations, specifically in terms of eleven sustainable goals.  The attached annotated guide to file is intended to create a specific understanding of the implications of the revolution in economies of the world for discussion.      

Peter 

If fact is is mostly about a social economy that is democratic.  

It is very much related to the Chapter IV which is about global public goods and the global economy.  That is another topic that the group should discuss.  

[john.cowan74]

This is heavy stuff. Highlights I could catch and want to discuss:

1. What should WFMC be saying to the Canadian, provincial and indigenous governments regarding the world's expectations for Canada's achievement of the SDGs? I think if WFMC starts talking about those "down home" matters, Canadians will start to recognize that we are part of a world and need to do our part. Such awareness can only help focus Canadians on the need for better global governance.
2. Inclusive measures of national progress have been discussed for a long time, with no result. But if we hope to progress, we need to have a way to measure progress. A healthy debate within Canada on this matter might come together with similar debates in other countries, some day. But if we don't start discussing it locally, we will never be ready for global discussion. Is there a global debate going on about progress indicators? If so, it would make sense for WFMC to connect Canadians with it. If not, I am unsure that a purely Canadian discussion is the stuff of WFMC.  

I am sure there are more points to discuss, but can we consider WFMC's potential role in the above 2 areas, for starters?