Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Ask Joe: The hope for a new global unity

Ask Joe: The hope for a new global unity

Hey Joe,

I have fun reading your articles, they remind me of how I used to be when I first got involved with activism work. But I’ve gotten older and seen the horrible things that people can do. I don’t see how people can change. There seems to be so much at stake. You always seem so optimistic. How do you do it? Are you really being realistic?


Had it

Hey Had it,

Believe me, I have my moments when I feel this way. How can you not when you see how we are treating one another and how fixated we are on not yielding on anything? I don’t think I’m very optimistic about where we are headed; I don’t see us resolving our issues any time soon. But I am hopeful for what is possible in the long run. I do have faith in the human spirit.

Alongside all the volatility, the breakdown of all the old structures, a deep shameless and pervasive greed and lack of empathy for others, I also see amongst some a deepening of commitment to our highest values and the care and wellbeing of not only ourselves, but other beings and the planet. More of us are beginning to consider our human-spiritual dimensions and transform them into tangible, practical action. Although we don’t often see it on the news, in newspapers, or on social media, we are in a renewed, creative phase of global unity and inclusivity right now that has been emerging for quite a while.

What gives me hope is that, despite what we may believe, we are and always have been globally interconnected and interdependent. Bridging the gap between a conceptual understanding of our global connection to actually taking action requires acknowledging that our beliefs in our separateness is an inaccurate mental construct. I came to this conclusion after having spent many years training and practicing with teachers in various esoteric studies. I had the desire to gain deeper insight into the true nature of reality and cultivate skills for compassion. But I’d like to share with you one of the more significant lessons in understanding the illusory aspects of our mental constructs of separation that happened when I was still a young boy.

I loved many things as a child, but two of my favorites were maps and cartoons. Studying maps kept me occupied for hours. Growing up at the height of TV culture, I spent hours and hours watching cartoons. In one of the episodes (it could have been Bugs Bunny or Road Runner), one of the characters was chasing the other across the state line. I knew they’d crossed into another state because it was graphically indicated by a thick black line drawn across the entire landscape.

Having seen this episode many times, and also studying maps, I assumed in my young mind that whenever crossing a state border, I’d see a thick black line. I remember clearly the first time my family took a trip from my hometown of New York City to another state. For days, I was excited, anticipating seeing for the first time that thick black line dividing the two states. You can imagine my confusion and disappointment when there wasn’t one!

This began a decades-long contemplation of the illusory nature of how we delineate and label things. I finally understood that a border is simply a person-made set of agreements that would not have existed if the parties involved didn’t make the agreement. In other words, a border only exists because we create a mental construct of it; in reality, it is changeable and not fixed, and if we try to look for concrete proof of its existence, we will never find it.

And yet, think about how many people throughout history have died, or have been enslaved or oppressed, by this phenomenon of “border” that isn’t truly real! Consider the current tragedies playing out in Russia/Ukraine, Israel/Palestinian territories, and China/Taiwan, to name just a few places, and the devastation to people, landmarks, nature and creatures—all motivated by disputes over fabricated labels or definitions.

Of course, it's healthy to categorize and even celebrate what makes us unique. We can acknowledge our differences based on party, race, gender, nation, economic status or culture, but these things don’t imply that we are separate.

It is a continuous practice to first catch myself when I create in my mind the false belief that we are separate and then remind myself of the reality of our global interdependence and interconnectedness. I don’t have to like others to acknowledge our interdependence. I don’t have to see the world the same way they do. But I can soften the rigidity of how I label someone and, by doing so, bridge the gap of our so-called separateness.

Someone you label “stranger” today may actually be the person you end up marrying. Did they change? No, your label of them changed. Someone you consider an “adversary” today may never become your friend, but they may become a useful ally to advance your projects and mission.

So, this is what keeps me grounded and hopeful for a better outcome. The fact that nothing is fixed or concrete and everything has the capacity to transform IS the very core of my hope.

There’s so much more I can say about this, Had it. This is an integral part of my new book, Fierce Civility, if you want to explore more. I hope this offers some insights into how to deal with some of the hopelessness we are confronted with on a daily basis.

In the meantime, thanks for keeping it real,

Joe

Learn more about Joe Weston and his work here. Make sure to c heck out Joe’s bestselling book Fierce Civility: Transforming our Global Culture from Polarization to Lasting Peace, published March 2023.

Have a question for Joe? Send an email to AskJoe@fulcrum.us.


Read More

Business meeting, blurred background and people in office for teamwork, collaboration and planning

Another recruitment drive won’t fix a nonprofit board. A practical guide to sharing real decision-making power with diverse members: acknowledge, affirm, act.

Jacob Wackerhausen/Getty Images

Before Recruiting Diverse Board Members, Examine Who Holds Power

Nonprofit leaders keep asking me where they will find the next generation of diverse board talent. My question is what those leaders will be allowed to change once they arrive. In this piece, I outline concrete steps boards can take to ensure diverse members have real opportunities to shape organizational decision-making and to translate good intentions into meaningful progress.

In my board service and consulting work, I hear the concern from executives and grassroots activists alike. They worry about recruiting successors, sustaining funding, and governing organizations whose work increasingly depends on partnerships beyond their own walls. I share those concerns. I also wonder whether another recruitment initiative will solve what troubles them.

Keep ReadingShow less
The Pennsylvania state capitol building.

The Pennsylvania state capitol building.

jimfeng/Getty Images

Pennsylvania’s Bipartisan Exchange Is Rebuilding Trust in Governance

The University of Pittsburgh Institute of Politics has nearly 40 years of experience working with legislators from different political parties, and it is building on this history by drawing on lessons from the successful American Congressional Exchange model, begun in 2018 at the Bipartisan Policy Center, and from state exchanges now underway in Minnesota and Michigan. The University of Pittsburgh Institute of Politics, in collaboration with the Bridge Alliance, has launched the Pennsylvania Legislative Exchange.

This state-based, systematic approach is designed to foster better relationships and build trust across the political aisle with the following guiding principles:

Keep ReadingShow less
Shadow on a wall of Judge hitting gavel in court, concept of justice, law, and legal protection

DOJ lawsuits in Alaska and California preview post-Election Day fights over certification and seating winners. Here’s how officials and voters can prepare.

Aitor Diago / Getty Images

The Lawsuits Will Lose. The Delays Will Still Win.

Less than two weeks before Election Day, President Trump’s Justice Department asked a federal court to stop Alaska from certifying its U.S. Senate race if Republican Sen. Dan Sullivan loses to Democrat Mary Peltola. The lawsuit claims that a second candidate on the ballot, Daniel J. Sullivan, will confuse voters. That argument went nowhere in June, when the Alaska Supreme Court ruled that the state had no legal way to remove him from the ballot. Asked about the suit, the president took credit. “I’m the one that said do it,” he told reporters.

Alongside the Alaska suit, the Trump administration sued California to keep the state from counting mail ballots from 20,000 people it calls “likely” noncitizens. Over the summer, the Department of Homeland Security put that number at 190,000. Legal experts expect both suits to fail, as so many suits like them have. Still, Alaska and California give us an early look at what the weeks after November 3rd could bring: recount demands, calls to review or throw out ballots, and pressure to delay seating winners.

Keep ReadingShow less