Toma nota.../Take note...

Only China is a worse polluter, ahead of the US. China emits about 6,018 million tons of greenhouse gases per year. The US follows with 5,903 tons. The Political Economy Research Institute at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst has released a new list of the worse US polluters. The top three polluters are American Electric Power, Duke Energy and Southern Company. AEP emits the equivalent of 130 million metric tons of carbon dioxide per year, accounting for about 2% of the annual total, with Duke at 127 million tons and Southern Co. at 118 million. It’s abundantly clear from looking at this list that coal-burning power plants are the biggest single-point carbon emitters in the country. To put this into terms we can more closely identify with — the average human, at least according to this calculation, emits roughly 200 kilograms of carbon dioxide per year from breathing. That implies that AEP is emitting about as much carbon dioxide as the breathing of 650 million people.

Ending Corporate hits-and-runs in the United States 

An Earthjustice win brings us a big step closer to ensuring that the dirtiest polluters in the country pay for their own toxic messes, instead of skipping town and leaving taxpayers with the bill.

Apr.7.─ Time and time again, we’ve seen big industrial polluters emit toxic pollution that poisons the people and ecosystems nearby. And time and time again, we’ve seen these polluters walk away from the bill, leaving taxpayers to fund the cleanup and communities to live with the contamination.

That’s not right.

But there’s good news. In a groundbreaking Earthjustice victory following nearly eight years of litigation, the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals ordered the EPA to get moving on rules that will break this cycle. 

Two outstanding personalities, G. K. Chesterton and Hilaire Belloc, were the most prominent disseminators of the ideas of Distributism. They were the main advocates of the Catholic’s Social Doctrine of Subsidiarity as expounded by Pope Leo XIII in Rerum novarum (1891), a doctrine that would be re-stated, re-confirmed and reinforced by Pope Pius XI in Quadragesimo anno (1931) and by Pope John Paul II in Centesimus annus (1991). As such, it is important, first and foremost to see Distributism as a derivative of the Principle of Subsidiarity. This principle is clearly described in the Church's Social Doctrine Compendium (186-187) according to which "a community of a higher order should not interfere in the internal life of a community of a lower order, depriving the latter of its functions, but rather should support it in case of need and help to co-ordinate its activity with the activities of the rest of society, always with a view to the common good.” In other words, it states that the rights of small communities should not be violated or usurped by the intervention of larger communities or the state. This principle applies to Distributism on account that property ownership is a fundamental right and the means of production should be spread as widely as possible, including the idea of cooperativism. In a way, distributism seeks to subordinate economic activity to the well being of human life as a whole. The Video that follows took place at the Acton Institute on february 18th with an interesting debate for and against this principle and this doctrine.

A Gentleman’s Debate – Distributism vs. Free Markets with Jay Richards and Joseph Pearce

For us, the publishers and staff of this magazine, Participatory democracy is a process emphasizing the broad participation (decision making) of constituents in the direction and operation of political systems. While etymological roots imply that any democracy would rely on the participation of its citizens (the Greek demos and kratos combine to suggest that "the people rule"), traditional representative democracies tend to limit citizen participation to voting, leaving actual governance to politicians. Participatory democracy strives to create opportunities for all members of a political group to make meaningful contributions to decision-making, and seeks to broaden the range of people who have access to such opportunities.

Representative democracy is not generally considered participatory but it tends to evolve by adopting participatory mechanisms and tools.

Participatory vs representative democracy

by Tina Trumbach

The recent focus on District Councils has raised for us the central difference between two forms of democracy – participatory and representative.

District Councils can be seen as a form of participatory, or direct, democracy that brings greater decision making power directly to the people themselves.

Participatory democracy can be defined as a form of government which emphasises the broad participation of constituents in political systems and which creates opportunities for all members of a population to make contributions to decision-making.

Participatory democracy tends to advocate more direct forms of citizen participation and greater political representation than traditional representative democracy.

Representative democracy is the predominant form of democracy, and is founded on the principle of elected officials representing a group of people. All modern Western-style democracies are types of representative democracies – including the USA and the United Kingdom.

Los abajo firmantes, latinoamericanos y diversos en nuestras adhesiones, profesiones e intereses, pero unidos por una aspiración común de libertad, democracia, equidad y bienestar en todo el hemisferio, nos dirigimos a nuestros conciudadanos y gobiernos, especialmente a los de Cuba, para expresar lo siguiente:

Celebramos el creciente proceso de normalización en las relaciones cubano-estadounidense y la disposición de otros estados democráticos para incrementar su interacción con las autoridades de La Habana.  Vemos en este proceso una oportunidad para estimular una mayor inserción de Cuba en el mundo y mejorar las condiciones de vida de sus ciudadanos.

A la vez, condenamos la sistemática y continuada violación de los derechos humanos en la isla; la persistencia de un modelo político centrado en el control de un partido único; la represión abierta contra quienes se aparten de las líneas oficiales, y la persistente discriminación de los cubanos frente a los extranjeros, en ámbitos que van desde los derechos económicos hasta el acceso libre a las comunicaciones y la información.

Ha llegado la hora de un acto de reciprocidad ante el mundo democrático, pero, sobre todo, como deber ineludible ante su propio pueblo, el régimen encabezado por el Presidente Raúl Castro emprenda un verdadero proceso de apertura política y social y escuche las iniciativas de cambio de sus ciudadanos, mientras reactiva los tímidos cambios económicos anunciados con entusiasmo, pero paralizados en medio de la rigidez, el temor y la burocracia.

Ha llegado la hora de que Cuba se abra a su propio pueblo.