ROW Episode 32

In this episode we delve into some less explored and often overlooked practical requirements for operationalizing the principle of justice in our lives.

Episode Transcript

Sovaida (00:08):
Hello and welcome to Reimagining Our World, a podcast
dedicated to envisioning abetter world and to infusing
hope that we can make theprincipled choices to build that
world.
In this episode, we delve intosome less explored and often
overlooked practicalrequirements for

(00:28):
operationalizing the principleof justice in our lives.
I'm delighted to be with you allagain.
We took a little bit of a breakduring the last two summer
months, but we're back again infull swing.
World events have continued toescalate.
We are buffeted by a cascade ofcrises.

(00:50):
While our natural inclination isto respond with fear, agitation,
despondency, we simply can'tafford that luxury as all of
these negative emotions lead toparalysis.
And now is the time to act asnever before to lay the
foundations for a new way ofbeing.

(01:10):
Both at the individual level, inour personal and private lives,
and in the life of society ingeneral, and the two are
entirely and intimatelyinterconnected.
Interestingly, when it comes totrying to solve our many
societal challenges, we have ahabit of trying to tackle each
of the myriad problemsseparately, in isolation.

(01:33):
But perhaps a more sensible andeffective approach, one that
we've continued to advocateduring this series of
Reimagining Our World andbuilding a better world, a more
effective approach would be toidentify the principles involved
and then apply them methodicallyto solving the problem at hand.
One of the benefits of thisapproach is that it provides the

(01:56):
glue that holds togethersolutions in many different
areas of life and makes themcongruent with each other as
opposed to having the effect ofa solution in one area
undermining a solution in adifferent area.
Now one of the foundationalprinciples that one finds as you

(02:17):
reflect that is a prerequisiteto creating this foundation for
a better world and to create ashift in the reality we're
experiencing is the principle ofjustice.
And this is the principle we'regoing to focus on a little bit
today.
Whenever the topic of justicecomes up, we all know, I know

(02:38):
this is my first reaction,"Oh mygosh! It's such a broad
concept." It's a concept that'smuch bandied about.
And for most of us, it seemsvery amorphous and unwieldy.
So it's easier, frankly, to putoff thinking about it, say,
"Yeah, we'll talk about thatwhen we have time.
That's a complicated topic." Yetthe good news is that there are

(02:59):
some overlooked, rarelyexamined, concrete, practicable,
and effective implications ofthis foundational concept of
justice that I wanted to sharewith you today.
Because we can start as soon aswe leave this time we have
together, we can start applyingthese in our daily lives and

(03:20):
start reshaping the socialfabric of our world.
Now as a broad proposition, whenwe talk about justice here, I'm
going to cast a wide net and saythat the fundamental meaning is
acting in a way that gives eachindividual their just due, their
fair due.

(03:41):
So let's see as we unpack thisidea what we come up with.
Justice implies as a preliminarymatter that we should see with
our own eyes and not through theeyes of others.
That's actually a very deepconcept and bears some further

(04:01):
and deeper reflection.
In other words, we have toassess and render judgments of
people, of situations, problems,ideas in way that's independent,
without letting the judgment ofothers, whether they're other
groups, or political parties, orreligious denominations, or

(04:25):
family, or anybody influence us.
This idea of seeing with our owneyes immediately to my mind
triggered two very practicalhabits that we can begin to
adopt as a means of implementingjustice, because I'm a firm
believer in breaking things downso you can figure out,"Okay.
So what can I start doing todayto get me from where I am to the

(04:48):
vision of where I want to be andbridging this gap?" So the first
thing I wanted to talk about wasgossip and backbiting and the
importance of refraining fromthese two habits that we all
have in spades, unfortunately.
Let's quickly define our termsfor purposes of this
conversation.

(05:09):
Backbiting is malicious talkabout someone who's absent.
Whereas gossip is casual andunconstrained talk that reports
the details of life withoutregard to whether it's true or
not.
We don't bother to actuallydiscover whether what we're
passing along, something weheard from someone else or

(05:30):
picked up from some articlesomewhere is actually true or
not.
The problem with both gossip andbackbiting is that they blind us
to reality.
They act as veils that stop usfrom seeing people's situations,
people's cultures, races, groupswith a clear eye.

(05:51):
And they unwittingly influenceus and cause us to judge others,
even those we've never metbefore.
So a wonderful way, an analogythat helps me because I can
bring it to mind whenever I findmyself in these situations, is
to think about backbiting andgossip as a drop of poison that
one puts into a reservoir ofpure, clear water.

(06:16):
As soon as you introduce thatdrop of poison, all of the
water, even though all of it waspure, is now tainted and cannot
be drunk because it will causeillness.
Unpacking this further, have younoticed, I know I have, that if
you're around people who aregossiping about someone who's
absent, when you eventually meetthat person, however much you

(06:38):
might try to put out of yourmind what they said, the very
fact that you're sitting there,standing there, trying to put it
out of your mind means thatyou're actually focused and very
much aware of what was saidabout this person and it's now
tainted your interactions withthem and the way you perceive
them and your emotions towardsthem.
Besides, by engaging in gossipand backbiting, or just allowing

(07:02):
ourselves to be exposed to it,even if we're not actively
engaged, we deprive a person ofthe opportunity and the freedom
to grow and change.
Because we're trapping them inthe past.
So even if what we're talkingabout is true, let's say they
said or did something that theymay now regret, they're going to

(07:23):
find it very hard to break outof that and make changes in
their lives if people areconstantly going to harp on what
they had said or done in thepast.
So it actually retards theprogress of that individual or a
group and then of the rest ofus, because we live in an

(07:45):
interconnected world.
That is a theme that we havebeen hammering home in all of
our episodes.
Interestingly this is also whyin a court of law and common law
jurisdictions, a jury can't hearevidence of prior bad acts or
bad behaviors by a defendant ifthe evidence is excessively

(08:05):
prejudicial.
In other words, if the jury maythink,"Gosh.
They did this bad thing before,so they're more likely than not
to be guilty here, right?" Soeven the law recognizes it.
And if such evidence isintroduced it can be a grounds
for a mistrial.
I find that very interesting.
Then the question becomes whatcan I do to avoid the trap of

(08:27):
gossip and backbiting?
What if I'm standing around witha group of friends or with my
family and one of them startsgossiping or backbiting about
somebody?
Is it enough for me simply torefrain from participating and
to be passive?
Honestly, the short answer isno, because we're allowing the

(08:49):
character assassination ofanother human being to continue,
and by not intervening to try tostop it, we could be viewed, and
I think we ought to be viewed asimplicitly condoning that
behavior.
What if instead, we chose tospeak up and ask a question.

(09:10):
In what way is this conversationhelping to advance the interests
of our community?
That's a really powerfulquestion.
And when inserted in the midstof gossiping and backbiting, it
steps in, and you interrupt thepattern, while also giving the
participants the opportunity toreflect on what they're doing

(09:33):
and to change course.
Now sometimes it'll beeffective, they'll change course
or change subject, and othertimes it won't.
But regardless, it is worthdoing, because we will have
discharged our personalresponsibility to do something.
And by courageously taking thisstep, we will have demonstrated

(09:56):
that there are alternative waysof responding.
And over time, as we do thisover and over again, such a
response may actually empowerothers to do the same and
eventually contribute tochanging the culture of a
community.
So it's a very powerful thing todo.
Now, the second implication ofseeing with our own eyes is that

(10:20):
we need to develop and cultivatea new habit of seeing with our
own eyes, free from the veils ofpreconceived biases and
prejudices, which we all have bydefinition.
What we've been exposed to inour cultures, through media,
through family, through culturalhistory, through our national

(10:42):
history, through our ethnichistory, all of these act as
filters that actually createveils of prejudice.
And we think we're seeing andassessing things clearly,
whereas we're not.
This is another practicalexpression of justice.
If we want to learn how topractically implement justice,
it is by doing this.
We've already talked aboutjudging a person.

(11:03):
One of the ways we can helpourselves not to have
preconceived biases is byabsolutely refraining and
refusing to participate ingossip and backbiting.
And by the way, it's not justconversations.
What are we letting into oursystems?
What social media are weexposing ourselves to?
What books or material are wereading?

(11:26):
Is it all based on gossip andinnuendo and passing along
tidbits of juicy informationabout somebody else's life?
Or is it uplifting andempowering?
What about our politicalmessaging?
We live in a country in theUnited States where we're
extremely polarized, and a lotof this polarization has come
because of the messaging thatpeople have been exposed to on

(11:48):
both sides over and over againthat makes them see themselves
as superior to, understandingbetter, getting it right, and
the other as the other, theignorant, and that's to put it
mildly.
Judging people and then judginggroups You know, this whole

(12:10):
notion of racism of genderbiases, these are all based on
judgments that we make based onperceptions that we have adopted
about entire groups of people atthis point.
When it comes to women that's,almost 50 percent of the world's
population or more than 50%,just over.
These are pretty egregiousbiases and we need to finally

(12:34):
get a handle on them.
So we need to free ourselvesfrom these insidious group
prejudices and get rid of thesenarratives that we have without
thought just imbibed and arepart of our DNA and part of the
operating system that runs us.

(12:54):
We need to raise these to thelevel of consciousness and then
recognize the baneful effectsthey're having and take active
choices about getting rid ofsome of them and developing new
narratives that are really morefitting for us as humanity
approaches its stage ofmaturity.

(13:15):
Now, when we are investigatingnew ideas, new philosophies, or
even new beliefs, it's anotherarea where we can bring this
principle to bear, investigatingtruth without preconceived
notions to explore an idea withan open heart and an open mind,
allowing our inmost spirit tosee whether it resonates with

(13:36):
this idea.
We can't rely on what otherstell us to believe or what ideas
they tell us to adopt, even ifthey're dear family and friends.
The same holds true for ourreligious leaders or priests.
We have been each given the giftof understanding.
And no person's faith can evenbe conditioned by that of

(13:58):
another.
We each have to take personalresponsibility and engage with
ideas, trust ourselves, andlisten to the voice of our
conscience and our hearts andour soul and our minds to see
what resonates with us.
Because otherwise we stand todeprive ourselves of a truth
that may come, may be present inour lives, and may pass us by

(14:21):
simply because we have so manyveils interposed between us and
it that we fail to recognize it.
We need to stop abdicatingresponsibility to other mere
mortals to tell us what ideasare worthy and which ones are
not.
Another area in which we canvery usefully exercise these

(14:43):
muscles of justice is in judgingcandidates for leadership.
Again, seeing with our own eyes.
We have this habit, and we fallinto it mindlessly, of relying
on their promises made, theirplatforms, the words that come
from their ads, biased media,vested interests.

(15:04):
And we're constantly surprisedthat we tend to elect leaders
that just don't seem to becompletely up to the task of
resolving the challenges of ourday.
What if we were to change thisand instead of relying on all of
this information, that weourselves looked at the
character and the virtues andqualities of the person who's

(15:27):
proposing to run for office.
How are they dealing in theirpersonal lives?
What their marriages look like?
Are they faithful?
Are they loving?
What about in business?
Are they honest?
Do they have integrity?
Are they known for being humble,being self sacrificial, for
wanting the good of the whole,whether it's their companies or

(15:49):
their employees or their familyor their communities.
What is their record of service?
Are they corrupt or not?
All of these are the kinds ofquestions that once we start
exercising this muscle of seeingwith our own eyes and dispensing
with preconceived biases, westart to see for ourselves.

(16:11):
And once we see for ourselvesthen we can act on it, then we
make better decisions.
And the same, finally, is trueabout the media.
We know that in today'senvironment, it's very hard to
assess where the truth lies,because honestly, all the media
seems to be biased to greater orlesser extent.
Sure, there is a question ofdegree, but biased nonetheless.

(16:34):
And we develop the habit ofseeking different sources of
media to listen to or read andfigure out that the truth
probably lies somewhere inbetween.
Sure, it's more time consuming,but in order to be a citizen
who's capable of making gooddecisions, I think it's worth
the effort.

(16:56):
This leads us to the next tworelated ideas to justice, the
implications of justice.
Justice demands universalparticipation.
This is a really powerfulprinciple.
Both experience and researchhave shown that the more diverse
and inclusive decision makingis, the better the outcomes.

(17:17):
This is true in both businessand in government.
In business, the evidenceclearly points to the fact that
decisions are made faster.
You wouldn't think so, but theyare, and lead to better business
performance and financial gain.
So businesses, you're interestedin the bottom line, this is the
way to go.
Ensuring that people in decisionmaking positions reflect a

(17:38):
diverse range of values,interests, perspectives and
experiences dilutes theinevitable, inherent biases of
individuals and thereforecreates a more fertile ground
for innovative solutions.
The same holds true forgovernmental institutions, where
drawing on different types ofknowledge and a broad array of

(18:00):
opinions makes room forassumptions in the decision
making process to be challenged.
Because we always seem to startwith underlying assumptions that
we often don't examine.
And so when you've got a groupof people with diverse values
and experiences, they can say,"Hey, wait a minute! You said
that, but that rests on thisassumption, and how true is it?

(18:24):
Let's explore this together."Our takeaway is that we should
affirmatively seek and welcomediversity of input at all levels
of decision making, as it is anact of justice and fairness,
which also has the benefit ofredounding to our collective
highest benefit.
Now, intimately linked to thisidea that universal

(18:46):
participation is a hallmark ofjustice is that consultation is
a tangible expression ofjustice.
When you have a diverse group ofpeople, especially, the benefits
of consultation get even more.
Just as we said of justice beinga multifaceted gem with

(19:07):
different sides to it, and therewe were talking about the
various implications of justice,consultation is also a
multifaceted gem.
And it is literally, if you lookat a ruby or a diamond and you
hold it up and say a few of usstand in different corners, I
may look at it from the angleI'm looking at it and the way
the light is hitting it, I maysee blue.

(19:28):
Somebody else may see red.
Someone else may see it asyellow, and so on.
Now, if we could either allenhance our collective
understanding by stepping intoeach other's shoes and saying,
"Wow! Okay, I can see thingsfrom your vantage point.
How interesting.
All of these things are true, orcan be true." Or we could start

(19:50):
fighting amongst ourselves,which is our normal habit, and
all of us would be wrong, andall of us would have deprived
ourselves of the opportunity toraise our understanding and our
consciousness.
Getting out of this habit that"Ihave an exclusive lock on truth"
can be done most easily by usingthe tool of consultation, which

(20:12):
is a tangible expression ofjustice.
Now, when we talk aboutconsultation, people ask me
Sovaida, when you sayconsultation, what is it you
mean by this term that you loveto use?
When I talk about consultation,I think about it as having
certain necessary ingredients.
First of all, that the groupgathered has the intention of

(20:32):
discovering the truth or findingthe solution that is to the
benefit of the collective.
In other words, the person's notthere to push their own agenda
or their own ego.
The next thing is that opinionsare offered frankly.
In other words, no walking oneggshells.
We can speak frankly and openlyabout what our opinions are, so

(20:54):
long as that frank opinion isalso clothed in respect and love
for all participants.
Recognizing that all of us arebasically one and equals, and
we're all of children of thesame creator.
None of us is better than theother.
The next thing is that the ideagiven by any person becomes that

(21:15):
of the group, meaning that wedetach our egos from the idea.
If you've been in debates orconsultations, really more in
the nature of debates, wheresomebody offers an opinion and
then sees that people aren'trunning with it and then keeps
saying like I said before, andthen repeats themselves over and
over literally trying to forcepeople to adopt their position.

(21:37):
That won't work.
One doesn't get to the kinds ofresults.
However, if we get all thesediverse opinions offered in a
spirit of frankness and love andrespect, and you get the clash
of various opinions, where egosare detached--so it's not the
clash of egos, but the clash ofthe opinions-- then from that
clash, the spark of truth can bediscerned.

(22:00):
And very often, and this is thebeauty, if you ever have the
privilege of being in aconsultation where these
ingredients exist, one of theamazing things that can happen
is that the spark of truth thatemerges is something that nobody
else actually thought of inadvance or during the course of

(22:21):
the meeting.
And in fact, even when theyvoted on this decision, none of
them even saw the potentialoutcome of it.
So there are two things.
First of all, a truth emergesthat nobody thought of.
And then once that truthemerges, the wisdom of that
truth often becomes apparentsometime in the future.

(22:42):
When other circumstances come topass that nobody could have
envisioned going in, andeverybody's left marveling that,
"Wow! We made a great decision.
Not for any of the reasons thatwe made it, because none of us
could envision how life and theworld was actually going to
unfold." Think that's a reallypowerful idea.

(23:03):
The fifth implication of justiceis that justice, this is another
really interesting thing.
We don't tend to think ofjustice in these terms, but
that's why I want to offer it.
Justice demands the exercise ofmoderation in our behavior.
Think about, for instance, ourbehavior as consumers.
We have been mindlesslyextracting and consuming the

(23:25):
resources of this planet.
And along the way, we havecreated this massive problem of
climate change that is nowthreatening our very lives and
so many species and destroyingour environment.
This mindless consumption hasalso led us to a place where we

(23:47):
have increasing extremes ofthose who have and those who do
not have.
And of some countries benefitingexcessively from resources and
other countries being deprivedof resources that they need.
So go back to the idea ofclimate change.
Wouldn't it be wonderful if westarted thinking about"What does

(24:10):
it mean for me to live amoderate life so that I leave
some of the resources of theplanet untouched and definitely
leave the fossil fuels in theearth because we simply have to
stop burning fossil fuels if wewant to arrest the process of
climate change and not have itbe ultra catastrophic.

(24:31):
I was struck by an article Iread recently about Salt Lake
City in Utah.
There's a lake there called SaltLake, which has been drying up
very rapidly.
And the salt concentrations init are going up and are killing
the algae.
Consequently, the shrimp aredying.

(24:53):
And the migratory birds whorelied on the shrimp for their
food are also dying.
There's also very little waterleft for farms and homes.
And the results they'repredicting, because it's
happened before in other placesand around Los Angeles, is that
the dust left after the waterdries up is laced with arsenic

(25:15):
and other poisonous metals andwill kill large numbers of
people.
They call it a nuclearenvironmental bomb.
And yet, talk about mindlesslydoing things.
It is crazy to me that thehomeowners association in that
part of the world, where theyhave all these problems, can
require people to water theirlawns and fine them if they fail

(25:39):
to do.
So the story was about this onegentleman who had thought for
himself and said, Wow! Itdoesn't make any sense for me to
be wasting water, preciouswater, to have a pretty lawn,
when we need it for our farmsand for our food and for this
lake not to dry up and for thebirds and the species.
The homeowners association cameafter him and started fining him

(26:02):
excessive amounts.
To me, justice demands theexercise of moderation, so our
institutions, our communities,and us as individuals, we all
need to start reflecting on waysin which we can implement this
principle of moderation as apractical expression of justice.

(26:23):
Now, justice means givingsomeone their fair due, what
they deserve.
But it's not an easy thing to doand actually requires a great
deal of thoughtfulness.
Here's an example.
You have two hungry boys andthey each come to you and you
have a loaf of bread.

(26:44):
And they say,"Oh, we haven't hadbreakfast.
It's now lunchtime.
We're starving.
Could you please give us somebread?" And you're thinking,
What is the fair way todistribute this bread?" Now,
most of us would immediately goto,"Why, it's obvious.
I take the loaf.
I cut it in half.
Half to one, half to the other."Ah, but what if one of these
boys comes from a very poorfamily?

(27:05):
And in fact, he hasn't had adecent or square meal in two
weeks and is really starving.
Whereas the other boy comes froma very well to do family.
They generally have sumptuousmeals and desserts and snacks
and whatever, and he has pocketmoney.
He got up late that morning, sohe missed breakfast, and now

(27:26):
he's hungry because it'slunchtime.
Is it actually fair to give eachof these boys half a loaf?
Maybe fairness dictates that theentire loaf should go to the boy
who needs it the most.
I give this extreme example as away of highlighting a point here
that giving people their justdue is not a simple matter.

(27:49):
So for instance, giving men andwomen equal pay for equal work,
not allowing prejudice,preconceived notions of the
value of a woman's work tointervene or old social
constructs.
We have to actually bethoughtful about these things.
What about women who do unpaidbut very valuable work in the

(28:11):
home?
The cooking, the cleaning, thewashing, the raising children.
It's a very interesting exercisefor each family to do.
I know we did it in our familyto actually sit down and
calculate how much it would costif one were to hire somebody to
do each of those jobs and howmuch it would cost the family.
And here, is it fair to ask thewoman to provide all this free

(28:33):
labor and not be acknowledgedand appreciated somehow?
So should they be compensated insome way?
What if you run a business andtwo people do similar work?
Is it actually fair to give themthe same salary if one works
extra hard on a regular basis,is diligent, always goes the

(28:53):
extra mile, stays late, staysweekends, and takes pride in
producing good work while theother is the opposite?
Do, the minimum work requiredand get out of there when you
can and never go the extra mile.
Justice is not sameness, butfair treatment taking all
relevant factors into account.
And yes, it's hard work.

(29:15):
Nobody said it was going to beeasy.
But, we can envision a world inwhich, if we were to implement
this and all start to be morethoughtful in how we treat
everybody, starting at home, bemore appreciative of the work
that, say, the home makers do orat work, acknowledging what

(29:35):
employees do and encouragingthem and all the way up, then
the world would be a betterplace.
Now, another topic that isreally interesting is, What is
the relationship betweenjustice, vengeance, and actually
forgiveness?
Vengeance is not justice.
I just want to start with that.

(29:56):
Let's talk about what we mean byrevenge or vengeance.
It's that inner gratification,that feeling that results from
returning like for like:"Gotcha.
You did this to me.
Out to get you" and it justfeels so good.
It's that inner feeling ofgratification.
So if we want this better worldthat's built on a foundation of
justice, what if we adopted thefollowing principle?

(30:18):
When someone wrongs me as anindividual, I should practice
the muscles of forgiveness,virtue of forgiveness.
However, if somebody wrongs myfriend or my neighbor, I should
be the first to stand up forthem.
That's at the individual level.
So forgiveness when it's me,standing up for someone else

(30:40):
when they're being wronged orunjustly treated.
And by the way, that was whatthe gossip and backbiting
analogy was, stepping in andtrying to interrupt that
pattern.
On the other hand, when someonecommits a crime, society has the
responsibility to mete outjustice, including punishment,

(31:01):
as a deterrence, not in thespirit of vengeance of"Hah! We
got you.
It feels so good to give you ataste of your own medicine," but
as a deterrence and as a messageto prevent aggression and as a
protection of the community.
Society has certain obligationsand responsibilities, and we as
individuals have an entirelydifferent set of obligations and

(31:23):
responsibilities.
I find it very useful to try todistinguish between the personal
responsibility and societalresponsibility in this area.
Now there is a linked idea here,and it's come up recently for me
in working with someorganizations where we've been
grappling with this issue,"Whatdo you do when someone's trying

(31:43):
to take unfair advantage ofyou?" I firmly believe and would
propose that it is absolutelymistaken and wrong to allow
people to take unfair advantageof you.
If one wants to be generous, ifwe want to give of our own
volition, that's fine.
But I think to yield even assentto a person who wants to take it

(32:06):
wrongfully is bad for societyand bad for that individual.
Why?
Because it encourages thatperson to repeat that behavior
again, and that behavior isactually not good for their own
growth as a human being.
It also encourages them torepeat the behavior again.
So you are setting up otherpeople to be victimized by their

(32:28):
behavior and it disrupts orderin the world to allow this
behavior.
So I think we have to be veryclear minded.
Sometimes we feel sorry forpeople or we feel uncomfortable
about saying,"No.
You can't do that.
You simply can't try to extortmoney," for instance, and bring
some trumped up claims and thensay, and now you owe me money

(32:52):
and that's just not appropriate.
Taking this now to a globallevel, I just wanted to say that
this principle of justiceapplies obviously in spades at

all levels of society: individual, community, and (33:02):
undefined
institutions.
But one of the areas where ourglobal society absolutely has
got to get its act together isthat we have to recognize that
it's so unfair and unjust thatworld affairs are currently
structured that it is possiblefor so many innocent people

(33:24):
around the world to be impactedby the actions of a few in
power.
I think about the conflict inUkraine, the devastation that's
wrought.
I think about all the conflictsin the world.
I think about what is happeningin the Congo.
I think about what's happeningin Tigray.
I think about what's beenhappening for years in Syria and

(33:44):
Yemen and in Myanmar, so manyparts of the world, where we
have created a structure thatallows a handful of people to
turn the lives of millions ofhuman beings into absolute
misery and to trigger a globalfood crisis, as the Ukraine
conflict has done, where the UNsays 300 million are going to

(34:09):
bed hungry every night and 50million stand close to
starvation.
This is untenable.
How can we stand for this?
It's triggered a global energycrisis and a global economic
recession, and it's putting theworld in danger of a larger war,
God forbid, another world war,and a potential nuclear
catastrophe, a war with all theconsequences that flow from it.

(34:33):
The last topic that I'm justgoing to raise, but we're not
going to unpack today, becauseI'm going to save this for the
next session, I have a lot ofinteresting material to share
with you, is this.
Justice requires the eliminationof corruption.
Justice is a flower that simplycannot flourish in the soil of

(34:53):
corruption to put it that way.
And it is one of the greatestfactors contributing to
injustice in the world today,and we have got to come to grips
with it.
This subject is so importantthat I am going to, address it
fully hopefully in our nextepisode and take it from there.

(35:14):
I hope you've enjoyed thissession.
And if you like us, please dofollow us on our YouTube channel
for free.
It's the CPGG, Center for Peaceand Global Governance, dot org.
And Feel free to comment, I hopeyou will, on the YouTube
channel, on Facebook, whereveryou're listening to this, and I

(35:34):
look forward to seeing you nexttime.
I'm just going to quickly checkand see if there are any
questions or comments.
There are not, so with that I'mgoing to close, and I look
forward to seeing you nextmonth.
Take care.
Bye bye.
That's all for this episode ofReimagining Our World.
I'll see you back here nextmonth.

(35:56):
If you liked this episode,please help us to get the word
out by rating us and subscribingto the program on your favorite
podcast platform.
This series is also available invideo on the YouTube channel of
the Center for Peace and GlobalGovernance, CPGG.