Q. Michele, as a designated representative of one of the most recognised peace organisations world-wide how can you propose the idea of eliminating money which is an accepted and quantifiable means of exchange - surely this would create huge crisis world-wide?
Michele: Just because money is utilised now it doesn't mean that it's necessarily the best or only way to for things to function on the planet. The concept of money is relatively new, around two hundred years old, although the concept of a quantifiable means of exchange such as barter has been used for longer. On the other hand there are indigenous groups such as the Australian aboriginal (who are believed to have existed for the last forty thousand years) who did not use any form of implied reciprocity. The thinking was that individuals all played a unique role and that they worked for the benefit of the group. Which way is right?
Dr Mercieca: There are as many approaches to the solution of one problem as there are people since there are no two people who are identically the same. For some doing it THIS way may prove to be right, for others doing it THAT way may equally prove to be right.
Michele: "Right" is probably the "wrong" terminology - pun intended - but really what I think we are both saying is that all ways are valid.
Dr Mercieca: Jesus said: "Judge a tree by the fruit it gives." And that's what really counts!
Michele: Bearing all of the above in mind all I know is this - the only thing constant is change. We currently live in an environment on this planet whereby (to quote Paul Hawken, internationally recognised author and consultant) "if every company on the planet were to adopt the social and environmental practices of the best companies, the world would still be headed for environmental degradation and collapse ... there is an inherent contradiction in the premise that a socially responsible corporation can make the world better, can grow, and can increase profits by meeting environmental and social needs if the primary cause of environmental degradation is over consumption ... you can unintentially create a new rationale to produce, advertise, grow, capitalise, and use up resources". We live in a capitalist society - an economic system in which the means of production, distribution, and exchange are privately owned and operated for private profit. A capitalist is described as someone who has accumulated wealth from business. So the ultimate goal of our society is the accumulation of money.
Dr Mercieca: If by "our society" you mean the USA and those countries which subscribe to the capitalistic system, the the "accumulation of money" by the significantly few and NOT peace progress and prosperity of all people, would be the ultimate objective of life.
Michele: Thank you - yes. In this capitalist society we also experience high levels of unemployment, mass poverty, homelessness and so on. Clearly capitalism does not provide all the solutions so why hang on to it?
Dr Mercieca: Keep in mind the words of Pope Paul II in Mexico several years ago. He said: "Two of the greatest evils of this 20th century have been communism and capitalism because both advance their objective through the exploitation of people." He then added: "World peace is possible only after these two evil systems collapse." Communism had already collapsed and the days for the collapse of capitalism are numbered.
Michele: That doesn't mean that we can't keep certain aspects of it that do work. For example we don't all want to wear the same clothing, drive the same cars, or live the same lifestyle - we still want choice. But I believe that if our values are not constantly being conditioned for making money we will become a more efficient unit. We won't need to develop short term solutions or short life products - we can aim for quality in all things - a state of perfection. Lets be practical and take shower heads for example - don't you think they should all be water conserving? Don't you think it's socially irresponsible for any company to manufacture products that aren't in the best interests of the entire planet? Wouldn't it be great to eliminate this type of ineffiency on the planet? Or better still just plain water - wouldn't it be great for everyone to have access to safe clean drinkable water? The list is endless - there are hundreds of millions of examples and they touch every industry. Perhaps the time has come for all of us to understand that we are all unique - that we all have unique skills & talents and needs - and that they are of equal importance. Eliminating the usage of money and all quantified means of exchange is the only way to acknowledge this understanding and subsequently create the environment which provides for everyone's needs. That doesn't mean that there aren't a number of individuals on the planet who don't have the skills and talents to manage the social engineering required to create this environment. An enlightened advertising agency is the first thing that springs to mind!
Dr Mercieca: We do not advocate the elimination of money. We simply insist that we should not make money as a condition to perform vital and indispensable work for peace. That is what Mother Teresa did and she conquered the whole world as a result. She also got all the money she needed AS A RESULT of her work and NOT "as a condition" of her work.
Michele: When Dr Mecieca says "we" he means the IAEWP as a group - but while I would remind you of what Dr Mercieca said earlier "For some doing it THIS way may prove to be right, for others doing it THAT way may equally prove to be right" I would also have to state that once a Being truly embodies the understanding that we all enable each other to experience Self, and that we all have unique skills, talents and needs that are of equal importance, then it is inappropriate to act in a manner which contradicts this belief. The actions of employers paying one Being more than another - because they "do more" - or are "more valuable" is in direct contradiction. The actions of governments deciding who will gain and who will lose in the next budget is in direct contradiction. Even the bible states that man cannot worship two Gods - money has become our God - and look at the type of world we live in.
Q. What if my unique skills and talents comprise creating war machines - and that's what I really need to do?
Michele: Great go for it - do what you believe is right. But who's going to go to war with anyone else if their needs are being met? Your market has just shrunk - time to develop your skills & talents a bit more - no different from when the industrial revolution hit!
Dr Mercieca: Your answer is not sound. The whole world should view you (the creator of war machines) as a demonic, satanic person who is vicious and evil for all practical purposes. You cannot perform anything which is proved to be harmful even to one person. That would constitute a violation of the Divine Positive Law and the Natural Law.
Michele: I do not subscribe to your belief as I believe that each and every Being is simply living their beliefs - so they must believe they are right - and therefore they are doing the best they can. As we have both said, each Beings beliefs are valid - what is right for one Being is not necessarily right for another. However, I do believe that the more evolved a Being becomes then a natural sense of "right action" is embodied - the thought of war is simply obsolete behaviour to me - as inappropriate as putting profit before needs - as inappropriate as using money.
The fight for national boundaries, cultural rights or whatever is really a fight for your basic human rights - your real needs. As far as it goes for me I'm in a human body. I need food and water. I need shelter - both clothing and housing. I need healthcare. I need to be educated so I can make conscious decisions as to what's best for me and those I inhabit this planet with - my family. I need to be able to use my skills and talents - and I need, whatever I need, to do so! And I need a safe and secure environment which is conducive to enabling these needs to be met. Furthermore, my needs change moment to moment dependent on what I choose to do next. There it is in a nutshell - my needs. Are your needs any different?
Q. You talk of everyone's needs being met - well who's going to do all the work that enables me to go to the supermarket and buy what I need?
A. We all live our beliefs in every moment - we all do what we believe is right. We are where we are in life because of every experience we have had. We needed to experience everything that has happened to us to enable us to do what we do right now. Not only are there a number of individuals who really love what they do - but we all need the knowledge and experience we possess as individuals to work out how it can all function. Like I said earlier we have the necessary skills and talents between all of us. Plus we need to do things. All that's required is to work together as a unit toward a common goal, which will benefit of all of us, to have the answers.
Q. So in effect what you're saying is that we're all where we need to be, so is this simply an exercise of a shift in perception?
A. In some sense yes - but there are practical steps that also need to be taken and issues which must be addressed.
Q. I don't want to harp on it but what about those people who need to take advantage of others. Say the exploitation of children?
A. There will always be Beings not only with the skills and talents but the need to protect the rights of others. Why would we eliminate the work of major groups such as UNICEF for example until the need is is no longer there? Lets face it - eliminating money is just an idea. Maybe someone else has a better idea. And just maybe there's a group of Beings out there right now responsible for the social engineering of the entire planet and you don't know it. In fact, if there is a group on this planet capable of and dedicated to creating the best for humanity I challenge them to come forward and admit it. Let's question them about their values and methodology - and let's find out whenit's going to happen. And let's make sure that they gain no additional benefit over and above anyone else because that's what eliminating money and all quantifiable means of exchange is going to ensure.