Bene agendo nunquam defessus

Abolishing war is urgently needed, and this is achievable!

Here's the complete text of Gino Strada's acceptance speech at the Right Livelihood Award 2015 (the "Alternative Nobel Prize") ceremony.

 Honourable Members of the Parliament, honourable members of the Swedish Government, members of the RLA Foundation, fellow Laureates, Excellences, friends, ladies and gentlemen.
It is a honour for me to receive this prestigious award, that I consider a sign of appreciation for the outstanding work that the humanitarian organization EMERGENCY has done in the past 21 years in favour of the victims of war and poverty.
I am a surgeon. I have seen the wounded (and the dead) in several conflicts in Asia, in Africa, in the Middle East, in Latin America and in Europe. I have performed surgery on several thousands of people, injured by bullets, by shrapnel from bombs or rockets.
Thank you very much.
In Quetta, the Pakistani city close to the Afghan border, I met victims of antipersonnel mines for the first time. I performed surgery on many children injured by the so-called "toy mines"; small plastic green butterflies the size of a pack of cigarettes. Scattered in the fields, these weapons wait for a curious child to pick them up and play with for a while, until the detonation occurs: one or both hands are blown away, burns over the chest, the face and the eyes. Armless and blind children. I still have vivid memories of those victims, and the view of those atrocities changed my life.
It took me time to accept the idea that a "war strategy" could include practices like deliberately targeting and maiming children in the "enemy's country". Weapons designed not to kill but to inflict horrific suffering upon innocent children and posing a terrible burden to their families and their society.
For me, even today, those children are the living symbol of contemporary wars, a persistent form of terrorism against the civilian populations.
A few years later, in Kabul, I went through the files of about 1,200 patients, and discovered that less than 10 percent of them were likely to be combatants. Ninety percent of the victims were civilians, one third of them children. Are they "the enemy"? Who pays the price of war?
In the past century, the percentage of civilian casualties has dramatically increased from approximately 15% in WWI to more than 60% in WWII. And in the more than 160 "major conflicts" that the planet has experienced after the end of WWII, that took the lives of more than 25 million people, the percentage of civilian victims has consistently been around ninety percent of the total, very much like the data from the afghan conflict.
Working in war torn regions for more than 25 years, I have witnessed this cruel and sad reality, perceived the magnitude of this social tragedy, of this carnage of civilians, mostly occurring in areas with almost non-existent health facilities.
Over the years, EMERGENCY has built and run surgical hospitals for war victims in Rwanda, in Cambodia, in Iraq, in Afghanistan, in Sierra Leone and in many other countries, then expanded its medical activities to include pediatric and maternity centers, rehabilitation centers, clinics and first-aid posts.
The origin and foundation of EMERGENCY back in 1994, did not derive from a set of principles and declarations. Rather, It was conceived on operating tables and in hospital wards. Treating the wounded is neither generous nor merciful, it is only just. It has to be done.
In 21 years of activity, EMERGENCY has provided medical and surgical assistance to more than 6,5 million people. A drop in the ocean - you might say - but that drop has made a difference for many. Somehow it has also changed the lives of those who have shared the experience of EMERGENCY, like me.
Every time, in the different conflicts we have been working in, regardless of who was fighting against whom and for what reason, the result was always the same: war was nothing but killing of civilians, death, destruction . The tragedy of the victims is the only truth of war.
Confronted daily with this dreadful truth, we embraced the idea of a community where human relationships are founded on solidarity and mutual respect.
Indeed, this was the hope shared worldwide in the aftermath of the Second World War. This hope led to the establishment of the United Nations, as stated in the Preamble of the UN Charter: "to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war, which twice in our lifetime has brought untold sorrow to mankind, and to reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person, in the equal rights of men and women and of nations large and small."
The indissoluble link between human rights and peace and the relation of mutual exclusion between war and rights were also stressed in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, signed in 1948. "All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights" and the "recognition of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world."
70 years later that Declaration sounds provocative, offensive and clearly false. So far not one among the signatory States has completely implemented the universal rights they had committed to: the right to a dignified life, to a job and a home, to education and health care. In one word, the right to social justice. At the beginning of the new millennium there are no rights for all, but privileges for a few.
The single and most aberrant, widespread and persistent violation of human rights is the practice of war, in all its forms. By denying the right to stay alive, war denies all human rights.
I would like to stress once again that in most countries ravaged by violence those who pay the price are women and men like us, nine times out of ten.
We shall never forget this.
In the month of November 2015 alone, more than 4000 civilians have been killed in several countries including Afghanistan, Egypt, France, Iraq, Libya, Mali, Nigeria, Syria, Somalia. Many more people have been wounded and maimed, or forced to flee from their homes.
Being a witness to the atrocities of war, I have seen how turning to violence has most of the times only brought in more violence and suffering. War is an act of terrorism, and terrorism is an act of war: they share a common denominator, the use of violence.
Sixty years later, we are still confronted with the dilemma posed in 1955 by leading world scientists in the so called Russell-Einstein Manifesto: "Shall we put an end to the human race; or shall mankind renounce war?." Can we have a world without war to guarantee a future to the human race?
Many would argue that wars have always existed. This is true but it does not prove in any way that the recourse to war is inevitable, nor can we assume that a world without war is unachievable. The fact that war has marked our past does not mean that it has to be part of our future as well. As with illnesses, war should be considered as a problem to solve, not as our destiny.
As a doctor, I could compare war with cancer. Cancer vexes humanity and claims many victims: does this mean that all efforts of medicine are useless? On the contrary, it is exactly the persistence of this devastating disease that prompts us to increase the efforts to prevent and defeat it.
Conceiving a world without war is the most stimulating task that the human race is facing. It is also the most urgent. Atomic scientists, through their Doomsday clock, are warning the human race: "The clock ticks now at just three minutes to midnight because international leaders are failing to perform their most important duty—ensuring and preserving the health and vitality of human civilization."
The biggest challenge for the coming decades is to imagine, design and implement the conditions that will allow us to reduce the recourse to force and to mass violence until they fully disappear. War, just like deadly diseases, has to be prevented and cured. Violence is not the right medicine: it does not cure the disease, it kills the patient."
The abolition of war is the first indispensable step in this direction. We may call it utopia, as it has never occurred before. However, the term utopia does not designate something absurd, but rather a possibility that still has to be explored and accomplished.
Many years ago even the abolition of slavery seemed "utopian". In the XVIII century the "possession of slaves" was deemed as "normal". A massive movement - gathering hundreds of million citizens over the years, decades and centuries - changed the perception of slavery: today we repel the idea of human beings chained and reduced to slavery. That utopia became true. 
A world without war is another utopia we cannot wait any longer to see materialized.
We must convince millions of people that abolishing war is urgently needed and achievable. This must penetrate deeply into our consciousness, until the idea of war becomes a taboo, expelled from human history.
Receiving the Right Livelihood Award encourages me personally, and Emergency as a whole, to multiply our efforts: caring for the victims and promoting a cultural movement for the abolition of war.
I take this opportunity to appeal to you all, to the community of the RLA laureates to join forces and support this initiative. Working together for a world without war is the best we can do for the generations to come. 
Thank you very much.
-- Gino Strada, EMEGRENCY NGO Founder, Stockholm, November 30, 2015

No room for anti-Americanism at Fred & Entendance Beach

If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem. -Sydney J. Harris

"We are, each of us, angels with only one wing, and we can only fly embracing each other."
"The only way on earth to multiply happiness is to divide it."

Men and Women for Others, the struggle never ends.
Are we not each a “being-for-ourselves?” Gifted with intelligence that endows us with power, do we not tend to control the world, making ourselves its center? Is this not our vocation, our history?
Yes; gifted with conscience, intelligence and power each of us is indeed a center. But a center called to go out of ourselves, to give ourself to others in love -- love, which is our definitive and all-embracing dimension, that which gives meaning to all our other dimensions. Only the one who loves fully realizes himself or herself as a person. To the extent that any of us shuts ourselves off from others we do not become more a person; we becomes less.
Anyone who lives only for his or her own interests not only provides nothing for others. He or she does worse. They tend to accumulate in exclusive fashion more and more knowledge, more and more power, more and more wealth; thus denying, inevitably to those weaker then themselves their proper share of the God-given means for human development.
What is it to humanize the world if not to put it at the service of mankind? But the egoist not only does not humanize the material creation, he or she dehumanizes others themselves. They change others into things by dominating them, exploiting them, and taking to themselves the fruit of their labor.
The tragedy of it all is that by doing this, the egoists dehumanize themselves. They surrender themselves with the possessions they covet; they become slaves – no longer persons who are self-possessed but un-persons, things driven by their blind desires and their objects.
But when we dehumanize, de-personalize ourselves in this way, something stirs within us. We feel frustrated. In our heart of hearts we know that what we have is nothing compared with what we are, what we can be, what we would like to be. We would like to be ourselves. But we dare not break the vicious circle. We think we can overcome our frustrations by striving to have more, to have more than others, to have ever more and more. We thus turn our lives into a competitive rat-race without meaning. What is it to humanize the world if not to put it at the service of mankind? But the egoist not only does not humanize the material creation, he or she dehumanizes others themselves. They change others into things by dominating them, exploiting them, and taking to themselves the fruit of their labor.
The tragedy of it all is that by doing this, the egoists dehumanize themselves. They surrender themselves with the possessions they covet; they become slaves – no longer persons who are self-possessed but un-persons, things driven by their blind desires and their objects.
But when we dehumanize, de-personalize ourselves in this way, something stirs within us. We feel frustrated. In our heart of hearts we know that what we have is nothing compared with what we are, what we can be, what we would like to be. We would like to be ourselves. But we dare not break the vicious circle. We think we can overcome our frustrations by striving to have more, to have more than others, to have ever more and more. We thus turn our lives into a competitive rat-race without meaning. The downward spiral of ambition, competition, and self-destruction twists and expands unceasingly, with the result that we are chained ever more securely to a progressive, and progressively frustrating, dehumanization. Dehumanization of ourselves and dehumanization of others. For by thus making egoism a way of life, we translate it, we objectify it, in social structures. Starting from our individual sins of egoism, we become exploiters of others, dehumanizing them and ourselves in the process, and hardening the process into a structure of society which may rightfully be called sin objectified. For it becomes hardened in ideas, institutions, impersonal and depersonalized organisms which now escape our direct control, a tyrannical power of destruction and self-destruction.

How escape from this vicious circle? Clearly, the whole process has its root in egoism – in the denial of love. But to try to live in love and justice in a world whose prevailing climate is egoism and injustice, where egoism and injustice are built into the very structures of society – is this not a suicidal, or at least a fruitless undertaking? Paul put it in a single sentence: “Do not allow yourself to be overcome by evil, but rather, overcome evil with good.” All of us would like to be good to others, and most of us would be relatively good in a good world. What is difficult is to be good in an evil world, where the egoism of others and the egoism built into the institutions of society attack us and threaten to annihilate us.
Under such conditions, the only possible reaction would seem to be to oppose evil with evil, egoism with egoism, hate with hate; in short, to annihilate the aggressor with his own weapons. But is it not precisely thus that evil conquers us most thoroughly? For then, not only does it damage us exteriorly, it perverts our very heart. We allow ourselves, in the words of Paul, to be overcome by evil.
No; evil is overcome only by good, hate by love, egoism by generosity. It is thus that we must sow justice in our world. To be just, it is not enough to refrain from injustice. One must go further and refuse to play its game, substituting love for self-interest as the driving force of society.
All this sounds very nice, you will say, but isn’t it just a little bit up in the air? Very well, let us get down to cases. How do we get this principle of justice through love down to the level of reality, the reality of our daily lives? By cultivating in ourselves three attitudes:
Live more simply
First, a firm determination to live much more simply – as individuals, as families, as social groups – and in this way to stop short, or at least to slow down, the expanding spiral of luxurious living and social competition. Let us have men and women who will resolutely set themselves against the tide of our consumer society. Men and women who, instead of feeling compelled to acquire everything that their friends have will do away with many of the luxuries which in their social set have become necessities, but which the majority of mankind must do without. And if this produces surplus income, well and good; let it be given to those for whom the necessities of life are still luxuries beyond their reach.
No unjust profit
Second, a firm determination to draw no profit whatever from clearly unjust sources. Not only that, but going further, to diminish progressively our share in the benefits of an economic and social system in which the regards of production accrue to those already rich, while the cost of production lies heavily on the poor. Let there be men and women who will bend their energies not to strengthen positions of privilege, but, to the extent possible, reduce privilege in favor of the underprivileged. Please do not conclude too hastily that this does not pertain to you – that you do not belong to the privileged few in your society. It touches everyone of a certain social position, even though only in certain respects, and even if we ourselves may be the victims of unjust discrimination by those who are even better off than ourselves. In this matter, our basic point of reference must be the truly poor, the truly marginalized, in our own countries and in the Third World.
Change unjust structures
Third, and most difficult: a firm resolve to be agents of change in society; not merely resisting unjust structures and arrangements, but actively undertaking to reform them. For, if we set out to reduce income in so far as it is derived from participation in unjust structures, we will find out soon enough that we are faced with an impossible task unless those very structures are changed.
What kind of man or woman is needed today by the world? One who is a “man-or woman-for-others.”
Pedro Arrupe July 31, 1973

The Nobel Peace Prize 1984 Desmond Tutu

"...It doesn’t matter where we worship or what we call God; there is only one, inter-dependent human family. We are born for goodness, to love – free of prejudice. All of us, without exception. There is greater commonality in our belief systems than we tend to credit, a golden thread expressed in the maxim that one should treat others as one would like others to treat oneself. I don’t believe in the notion of “opposing belief systems.” It would be more accurate to say that human beings have a long history of rationalizing acts of inhumanity on the basis of their own interpretations of the will of God..."

If you like this beach, then you can help your friends locate it by letting them know about Fred & EntendanceInvestors Beach.
Let's all make this place a thriving sheltered Club for excellence, education and information