Neo-fascism: a world-wide wave

Fascism is an extreme derivative of fundamentalism, with a long tradition in almost every culture. In his 1996 controversial work, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of the World Order, Samuel P. Huntington denounces the West as home to the most virulent fundamentalists. They imagine that their culture is the best in the world, that their religion is the best, the one and only true religion, that theirs is the best form of government, democracy, with the best techno-science, that has changed the face of the planet, and with its lethal weapons, it has given humans the ability to destroy humanity and much of the biosphere.
We know of Islamic and other forms of fundamentalism; also of the fundamentalism of sectors of the official Roman Catholic Church that still believe that she is the one and only and exclusive Church of Jesus Christ, outside of which there is no salvation. This erroneous vision allows for the satanizing and even the persecution of other Christian and non-Christian denominations. Thank God for the present Pope, a man of rationality and common sense that invalidates such distortions.

Those who pretend to be the exclusive carrier of truth are condemned to be fundamentalists and to close in on themselves without dialogue with the other.

Here we remember the words of the great Spanish poet Antonio Machado, who wrote: “The truth. Not your truth. Come with me to search for the truth. Your truth? Keep it to yourself. ” If together we search for the truth, it will be the full truth.

Fascism was born, and is born, within the context of the breakdown of social norms, social disorder and generalized crisis. Security disappears and the established orders are weakened. Society and individuals have difficulty living in such a situation. Social scientists and historians, such as Eric Vögelin (Order and History, 1956), L. Götz, (Entstehung der Ordnung, 1954), Peter Berger,(A Rumor of Angels: Modern Society and the Rediscovery of the Supernatural, 1973), have shown that humans possess a natural tendency towards order.

Wherever they arrive, they soon create an order and their habitat. When order disappears, violence is commonly used to impose a kind of order which does not lead to the social cohesion of coexistence.

Fascism’s niche finds its origin in this disorder. Thus, at the end of the First World War, social chaos ensued, especially in Germany and Italy. The way out was to establish an authoritarian system of domination that monopolized political representation, through a single, hierarchically organized political party of the masses, forcing everything; politics, economy and culture in a single direction. This was only possible through a chief (Fürher in Germany and the Duce, in Italy) who organized an authoritarian corporate State of terror.

National myths were created for symbolic legitimacy, the heroes of the past and old traditions, usually in a framework of great political liturgies inculcating the idea of a national regeneration. Especially in Germany, Hitler’s followers were filled with the conviction that the white German race was “superior” to the others, and had the right to subjugate and even to exterminate inferior races.

The word fascism was used for the first time by Benito Mussolini in 1915 when the group “Fasci d’Azione Revolucionaria” was created. Fascism derives from the term “fasci,” a bundle of leafless branches, strongly fastened, with an ax on one side. A single branch can be broken, breaking a bundle is much more difficult. In 1922-23, Mussolini founded the National Fascist Party (Partito Nacionale Fascista) that lasted until his overthrow in 1945. In Germany, it was established in 1933 by Adolf Hitler, who upon being appointed Chancellor created National Socialism, the Nazi party, that imposed on the country a hard discipline, total vigilance, and a state of terror.

Fascism was sold as anti-communist, anti-capitalist, as a corporation that is above class, and creates a socially closed unity. Vigilance, direct violence, terror and the extermination of the opposition are characteristics of the historic fascism of Mussolini and Hitler. Violence is also present in neo-fascism.

Fascism has never totally disappeared, because there always are groups that, moved by a fundamentalist archetype, seek order at any price. This is what the present neo-fascism is about. There is in Brazil today a figure more hilarious than ideological, that proposes fascism, in whose name violence is justified, and which defends torture and torturers, homophobia and other social deviations. It is always in the name of an order to be forged, using violence against the current disorder.

Fascism has always been criminal. It created the shoa (the Holocaust, which eliminated millions of Jews). It used violence as a way of relating to society, which is why it never could and never will be consolidated for long periods of time. It is the greatest perversion of human sociability. It will not be different in Brazil, where this perversion has no possibility of success.

Leonardo Boff  Eco-Theologian-Philosophe and of theEarthcharter Commission

Free translation from the Spanish sent by
Melina Alfaro, alfaro_melina@yahoo.com.ar.
Done at REFUGIO DEL RIO GRANDE, Texas, EE.UU.

The current demise of ethics

Between July 10 and 13, 2018, an international congress organized by the Society of Theology and Sciences of Religion, (Sociedad de Teología y Ciencias de la Religión, SOTER) on the subjects, Religion, Ethics and Politics was celebrated in Belo Horizonte, Brazil,. The expositions were very timely, and of superior quality. I will only deal with the debate on the Demise of Ethics, that I introduced.

In my understanding two factors have touched the heart of ethics: the process of globalization and the commercialiization of society.

Globalization has revealed the different types of ethics, based on cultural differences. Western ethics, one of many, has been relativized. The great Oriental cultures and the cultures of the original Nations have shown that we can be ethical in very different forms.

For example, the Maya culture centers everything in the heart, because everything was born from the love of the two great hearts: those of the Heavens and of the Earth. The ethical ideal is to create in all persons hearts that are sensible, just, transparent and true: the ethics of “good living and coexisting” of the nations of the Andes, centered in the equilibrium of all things, among human beings, with Nature and with the Universe.
A consequence of this variety of ethical paths has been generalized relativity. We know that law and order, values of basic practical ethics, are prerequisites for any civilization anywhere in the world. The ethical disaster that we now foresee is because humanity is yielding ground to barbarity, towards a true worldwide age of darkness.

Shortly before his death in 2017, thinker Sigmund Bauman warned: “either humanity joins hands to save all of us together; or together we will swell the funeral procession of those who walk towards the abyss”. What kind of ethics could guide us as humanity living in the same

Common Home? The second great obstacle to ethics is the commercialization of society, that already in 1944, Karl Polanyi called “The Great Transformation”. That is the phenomenon of transitioning from a market economy to a society of pure commerce. Everything is transformed into merchandise, which Karl Marx already foresaw in his 1848 text The Poverty of Philosophy, where he noted that the most sacred things, such as truth and consciousness, would be commercialized; and this would be the “time of great corruption and universal venality”. We are now living in that time. The economy, especially the speculative sector, dictates the path of politics and of society as a whole. Competition is its trademark and solidarity has practically disappeared.

Which is the ideal ethics of this type of society? The capacity for unlimited accumulation and limitless consumption, that creates a great gap between a very small group that controls most of the world economy and the great majorities, who are excluded and drowning in hunger and misery. Here are revealed traits of barbarity and cruelty as rarely have been seen in history.
We must go back to create an ethics rooted in that which is specifically ours as human beings and which, for that reason, is universal and can be adopted by all.

I believe that in the very first place, is the ethics of caring. According to the fable 220 of the slave Higinio, well interpreted by Martin Heidegger in Being and Time, it consists of the ontological substratum of the human being, that group of factors without which the human being and other living beings never could have arisen. Because caring pertains to the human essence, we all can live and give in concrete ways, according to our cultures. Caring presupposes a friendly and loving relationship with reality, an extended hand for solidarity and not a clenched fist for domination. Life is at the center of caring. The civilization must be bio-centered.

Another part of our human essence is solidarity and the ethics that derives from solidarity. We now know from bio-anthropology that it was solidarity among our anthropoid ancestors that allowed them to hone their animal state into humanity. They searched for food and consumed it together, in solidarity. We all live because there existed, and still exists, a minimum of solidarity, starting with the family. What was foundational yesterday, continues to be so today..
Another aspect closely tied to our humanity is the ethics of universal responsibility. Either we together undertake responsibility for the destiny of our Common Home, or together we will walk a path of no return. We are responsible for the sustainability of Gaia and the ability of her ecosystems to flourish within the whole community of life.

Philosopher Hans Jonas, who first elaborated “The Principle of Responsibility”, added the importance of collective fear. When collective fear arises and humans start to realize that they may come to a tragic end and even disappear as a species, a primordial fear erupts that puts them into survival mode ethics. The unconscious presupposition is that the value of life is greater than any other value: cultural, religious or economic.

Finally, it is important to resurrect the ethics of justice for all. Justice is the minimum right that we must guarantee the other to be able to continue coexisting and receiving what we as people deserve. In particular, the institutions must be just and equitable, to avoid class privilege and the social exclusions that produce so many victims, particularly in our country, which is one of the most unequal and most unjust in the world. This explains the hatred and discrimination that tear society apart. They come not from the people but from the moneyed elites that have always lived a privileged life, and who do not allow the poor to move even one rung up on the social ladder.

We presently live under an exceptional regime in, where the Constitution and the laws of the country are trampled by the Lawfare (the distorted interpretation of the law practiced by a judge, so as to hurt the accused).

Justice has value not only among humans but also with nature and the Earth, which are.the carriers of rights and for that reason they must be included in our concept of socio-ecological democracy.

These are some minimum parameters for an ethics to be valid for each individual, and for all of humanity, gathered in our Common Home. We must incorporate an ethics of a shared sobriety to accomplish what Xi Jinping, supreme leader of China, used to call “a moderately supplied society”. This is a minimum and reachable ideal. Otherwise, we may experience a socio-ecological Armagedon.

Leonardo Boff Eco-Theologian-Philosopher and of  TheEarthcharter Commission

Free translation from the Spanish sent by
Melina Alfaro, alfaro_melina@yahoo.com.ar.
Done at REFUGIO DEL RIO GRANDE, Texas, EE.UU.

Pope Francis is not afraid of the truth

We are presently suffering an enormous vacuum of leadership, both in the Church and in society. But there is one who stands out from this mediocrity. That is Pope Francis, precisely because he is not afraid to speak the truth.

A Pope who speaks the truth in the Church

The institutional Church, as all power holders, normally does a tightrope-walker’s discourse, pretending to be above all conflict and tension. The result is anodyne statements, lacking prophetic power, which, in the end, do not move society. Francis, who prefers to call himself Bishop of Rome rather than Pope, does not come from the crepuscular European Christianity (with only 25% Catholics), but from the new Churches, no longer colonial, but with their own indigenous roots. The great majority of Catholics (more than 62%) live in those Churches, to the point that it now can be said that Catholicism is a religion of the peripheral world.

One of the most notable characteristics of this Pope is that he is not afraid to speak the truth. He denounces the pedophiles in the Church, the financial scandals of the Vatican Bank (IOR) and the Church as a fortress, closed within herself and apart from contemporary society. He wants a Church that is open to everyone, better yet, he wants a Church like a field hospital, that welcomes everyone with no questions. Pope Francis levies harsh criticisms on the Bishops and priests who do not proclaim the beauty of the Gospels and the joy of the good news. Francis says that they seem to have a sour face, that they are people of Good Friday, who are as sad as if they were going to their own funerals.

My book, The Church: Charisma and Power, was condemned in 1984 by then Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, who became Pope Benedict XVI, because, according to him, in that book I criticized, as the Protestants did, how power, that carries arrogance and exclusion, predominates over Charisma in the Church. Listening to Pope Francis’ words and comparing them to what I wrote, my criticisms now sound like a pious text.

But, to me, what he said about hell to the faces of the new Cardinals was his most courageous. It is what great many theologians have thought but never could say without risking immediate censure. The Pope says, addressing the fear of hell the Church has used to torment the faithful: God does not know eternal damnation. His mercy is infinite and goes beyond justice. There surely will be a judgment because not everything is right with this world. But the world is not the last act of God, Father and Mother of infinite goodness and mercy. God always brings home everything He created with love, because they were born from the Father’s heart. When the time is right, they will return to what was prepared for them from the beginning of time: the communion in the Kingdom of the Trinity. They certainly would have passed through God’s purifying clinic, but that is the threshold of heaven, and not hell.

This is how we understand the transposition in the terminology of his announcement: Pope Francis speaks of the revolution of tenderness, of the joyfulness of conjugal love, of the beauty of the gospels that fascinates people.

More important than the Church is the creation that is threatened with destruction — the reason for his Encyclical letter about ecology that is addressed to all of humanity — and the commitment to safeguard the conditions that allow for life on Earth. Pope Francis strengthens a new type of ecumenism, putting aside the claim of exclusivity the Roman Catholic Church had that it was the only Church of Christ. It is important that the Churches mutually recognize each other and that together they be at the service of the world, especially of the most vulnerable.

Pope Francis has a clear option for the poor and suffering of this world. He seeks reconciliation with the Theology of Liberation, meeting with the father of this theology, Gustavo Gutierrez, and later on, with Jon Sobrino. As Pope Francis was writing his extraordinary Encyclical letter “on caring for our Common Home”, he was not afraid of asking for suggestions from the writer of these lines. According to well known ecologists, such as Edgar Morin and others, that Encyclical letter puts Pope Francis at the vanguard of the ecological world debate.

In a word, Francis, Bishop of Rome and Pope of the Catholic Church, has brought Spring to the Church, with the enchantment this season represents, after a rigorous winter under the severe doctrines and disciplines of previous Popes. Francis put aside all the titles of power, abandoned the pontifical palace to live in a guests-house and to serve himself as any other, because, as he humorously comments, “this way makes poisoning more difficult.”

The structural core of his preaching is the Tradition of Jesus. It is a theological concept recently used to identify the original intent of Jesus of Nazareth, prior to the elaboration of the four gospels. Jesus did not intend to found a new religion, but to teach us to live the goodness of his great utopia, the Kingdom of God, accomplished by total openness to God, unconditional love, unlimited mercy and the centrality of the poor and the invisible.

The message of Jesus is summarized in the Our Father, which affirms God as our Father and no just mine, signifying our upwards dimension; and Our Bread, not my bread, representing the human being taking root in the concrete life. Amen can only be pronounced by those who have united these two poles: the Our Father in heaven and our bread on Earth; Father of all and bread for all.

Because of the Tradition of Jesus, Pope Francis emphasizes that love must come before dogma and doctrine, and the poor before discipline. The obsession with abortion must be overcome by the use of contraceptives and the communion of couples in renewed nuptials. The gospel must not be reduced only to these question, because if this happens, the gospel looses its fragrance and its beauty. Pope Francis forcefully said: “it is better to be a non-believer than to be a hypocritical believer”. And to the lay and the young, Francis said: “A Christian who is not a revolutionary is not a Christian; we must be the revolutionaries of grace”. Francis once again challenged them this way: “Do not be more papist than the Pope, do not be more restrictive than the Catholic Church”.

Pope Benedict XVI wanted a pure Church. Francis prefers a Church that is troubled because she walks in the world, Francis wants the Church to be inclusive, with open doors, and without an office of prosecutors of the faith. The Pope wants a Church always seeking an encounter with the other, a Church for the world… A Church for the poor.

In sum, Pope Francis is not Euro-centric but open to universality. He is not eclesio-centric, because the Church is not an auto-referent, he is not Vatican-centric, because he prefers to guide the Church in a collegiate manner with love, not in a monarchical form with canon laws. Pope Francis lives in a boarding house, not in the Pontifical Palace; he is not pope-centric because he puts the People of God above all and feels like one of its members, clearly with a mission for all the Church. Being the Pope does not keep him from carrying his own briefcase, going to buy his own ticket from Alitalia to fly to the Island of Lampedusa, and to use his own cell phone to call someone who wrote him a letter. And he does not forget his friends, such as the shoemaker and the laborer from Buenos Aires, calling them on the phone once in a while, as he does with his old friends.

Faced with so many Christians who had abandoned the institution, such a Pope returns confidence, morality and respectability to the Church. With Pope Francis the Church regains relevance vis a vis the secular world.

The Pope who speaks the truth in Politics

The first that must be acknowledged with respect to the public and political dimensions of Pope Francis is his own person: charismatic, unaffected, in solidarity with the pain of the world and a friend of the poor. Francis is more than a name. Is a new way to exercise power, as real service and not as a privilege and an instrument of control.

This becomes clear in his total rejection of the titles and privileges that historically were added to the figure of the Popes. In the first pages of the Pontifical Yearbook are often found all the honorific titles that belonged to the Popes. Pope Francis renounced all of that, and simply put his name Fransiscus, with no qualifications.

Heads of State have a powerful security apparatus. Pope Francis foregoes that and travels to even the most dangerous places, such as Egypt and South Sudan. with no protection.

Francis argues: “I did not want to be Pope. It was God who wanted it; so God must defend me. If I am killed, it will be a sign that God has called me and then I will go joyfully to meet Him”. Who can talk in such a free and liberating, I would say, mystical, form, of life and death? Only one who feels himself in the palm of the hand of God. So he has nothing to fear.

Moreover, few Popes were truthful regarding the ills of our culture that directly affect the most vulnerable. Francis is a Pope who has taken sides: he is with the least and the invisible, and against those who disgrace humanity and Mother Earth.

He strongly attacks the system of accumulation an idolatry of money. Francis does not use the word Capitalism, so as not to create difficulties for millions of Catholics who live within this system. But he describes the system in such a way that we are inevitably led to identify the capitalist system and its culture of unlimited consumption, individualism, and lack of solidarity, as the cause of misery and of the profound wounds to the body of Mother Earth.

His speech in the Island of Lampedusa where refugees from Africa arrive and many drown in the journey was very harsh. Francis said: “This culture of the well-off leads to indifference regarding the others; it is the globalization of indifference… We are the society that forgot the experience of crying, of being compassionate; the globalization of indifference has robbed us of the ability to cry”.

A society that no longer cries with the one who is crying has lost its sense of humanity and is effectively on a path of self-destruction and barbarism.

Curiously, returning from his visit to Poland, Pope Francis spoke sharply when journalists in the plane mentioned the issue of terrorism as being of Moslem roots. Courageously, Francis said that which analysts do not want to hear. Religions, including Islam, do not want war, but peace. The refugees are in Europe now, because for centuries we had been in their countries, stealing their wealth and imposing our ways on the organization of their societies. True terrorism is the economic-financial system that is against life. “We must say no to an economy of exclusion and social inequality, that type of economy kills”.

As can be seen, he speaks directly, without obscuring metaphors, like the tightrope-walker type of speeches of previous Pontiffs, who put more emphasis on security and distance than on truth and clarity in their own Papal position. Francis’ position is very clear: he talks and acts evangelically, from the perspective of the poor and wretched of this world and especially for the poor. “About this”, he emphasizes, “there should be neither doubts nor explanations that debilitate such an option, because an indissoluble link exists between our faith and the poor”.

In his Encyclical letter about How to Care for the Common Home he repeats 35 times the need to change our relationship with nature; to change and change if we want to subsist. It is important to feel not that we are outside of nature, as if we were her owners, but that we are part of her and responsible for her sustainability. We must change our form of production, our mode of consumption and distribute well the natural goods and services. In this search for alternatives, Francis will not rely on the Social Doctrine of the Church, even though he respects it. But he notes: “We cannot avoid being concrete so that the great social principles do not remain mere generalities that do not move anyone”. For Francis, we cannot wait for anything to come from above, the logic of which is always more of the same: that of ever increasing income, with no other consideration.

Francis believes in those who are outside of the system and are totally forgotten, because they produce little and consume less. Pope Francis trusts in those on the bottom. Therefore, he has met four times with popular social movements all over the world, three times in Rome and once in Santa Cruz de la Sierra, Bolivia. In that meeting he was unquestionably clear: we must demand the three “Ts”: Tierra, techo y trabajo; (Land, Home, and Work). No one without land for survival, no one without a home or anywhere to live, no one without work to earn life’s essentials.

That is one part. The other was a challenge to popular social movements to be protagonists of the new, new solidarian forms of production, agro-ecological cooperatives, forms of consumption characterized by shared sobriety and by a special care for Mother Earth, who offers us everything and is the basis of all we can project in this life. Pope Francis emphasized three points: that the economy not be at the service of the market, but at the service of life; that of building social justice, the basis of peace, and of caring for the Earth, our Common Home.

His travels have been noteworthy for his invitations to dialogue between peoples and religions. Francis proposes a culture of peace in the face of the more than 40 conflicts that exist now around the world that cost so many people their lives, and destroy so much cultural heritage. He has often noted that the level of conflicts and tensions in the world puts us in danger of a Third World War, whose consequences are unimaginable for the human species and the future of life.

He sounds like a prophet who proclaims in the desert, with extreme gravity and simultaneously, with a sense of hope that we can avoid the tragedy because we have technology, human genius, and above all, because we believe in a God who is “the sovereign lover of life ” (Sabiduria 11,26).

Perhaps his most important political contribution was his 2015 Encyclical letter Laudato Si: About caring for the Common Home. It was addressed not only to Catholics, but to all of humanity. Pope Francis is aware of the threats to life and the Earth systems. And he makes a general call to care for our Common Home.

Francis uses the best scientific data, and from there, he develops a rigorous critique of the causes of the present situation: principally anthropocentrism, because of which humans believe they are the lord and master of nature and can use it at their pleasure. Humanity has developed a culture, now globalized, of total exploiting all natural goods and services for individual accumulation, without considering the destruction of entire ecosystems. This voracity has produced a double injustice: a social injustice, creating immeasurable poverty in a large part of humanity, and an ecological injustice, with the slow erosion of the physical and chemical basis that sustains life.

It is not about a green ecology, as many have called it. The vision of Francis is wider. It is about an integral ecology that includes the environment, society, the human mind (its projects, values and prejudices), politics, and, finally, its spirituality. The document incorporates cordial and sensible reason, that enable us to feel the suffering of nature as our own, that hears both the cry of the poor and the screams of the Earth. If we want to save the Earth we must nourish “a passion for caring for the world… a mysticism that moves us, encourages us, motivates us, and gives us courage” to love Mother Earth and to respect her inhereht limits.

In spite of the grave calls he makes to all, the Pope also elicits hope, be it in the capacity of humans to awaken to their responsibilities, or by using science, done with consciousness, to save life, and finally, by trusting in the Spirit, that according to Judeo-Christian Scriptures is the “Spirit of Life” and “sovereign lover of life”. In the end, he expresses confidence, writing, “Let us walk singing, that our struggles and our concerns for this planet do not take from us the joys of hope” (n.244).

In effect, he has given political content to hope and tenderness. “Tenderness is not weakness but courage; it is the path of solidarity and humility”. Hope is the capacity to say, “We”. And if together we say “we… there starts a revolution”… The revolution of the future starts from the moment when people see themselves as part of a “we”. That is where the social revolution lies, when the “we” opposes the “I alone” and all the other “I’s”, the typical attitude of the current capitalist system.

Bruno Giussani, the European director of TED (Technology, Entertainment, Design), a media organization that puts on conferences and exchanges at the world level, put it well: “Francis has become the only moral voice capable of reaching people beyond our borders, to create clarity and propose a convincing message of hope”.

In a world filled with words of hate and prejudice among religions and cultures, the words of Pope Francis ring like a bell of peace, with an authority that radiates from his kindness, from his profound humanism and from hope against all hope; valuing the beauty, the joy of life and an intimate caring for Mother Earth.

Leonardo Boff pilosopher, theologian an writter

Free translation from the Spanish sent by
Leonardo Boff, lboff@leonardoboff.eco.br,
Done at REFUGIO DEL RIO GRANDE, Texas, EE.UU.

 

It is confusing, but I dream

“It is dark, but I sing because tomorrow will come”, poet Thiago de Mello proclaimed in the somber epoch of the 1964 civil-military dictatorship.

“It is confusing but I dream”, I say in these, no less somber, times. No one can take our dreams away. Dreams anticipate the future and announce the tomorrow.

No one can tell what will happen to this country after the 2016 parliamentary-judicial-mass media coup. It is dark and confusing, but I dream. This dream has been running around in my head for a long time, and I have decided to express it, so as to nourish our undying hope.

I dream of seeing a Brazil built from the bottom up, and from the inside out, forging a popular, participatory and socio-ecological democracy that recognizes nature and Mother Earth as new citizens with rights.

I dream of seeing the people organized in movement networks, a citizenry with the social competence to create their own opportunities and mold their own destiny, free from dependence on the powerful, regaining their self respect.

I dream of seeing the full realization of the minimum utopia: that of eating at least three times a day, of living with decency, of attending eight years of school, of receiving for one’s work a salary that can satisfy the essential needs of the whole family, of having access to basic health care and after having worked all one’s life, of receiving a dignified retirement, so as to calmly meet the challenges of old age.

I dream of seeing a celebration of the marriage of popular knowledge, born of practical experiences, with academic knowledge, the fruit of study, of building between the two a country for everyone, with neither excesses nor scarcities.

I dream of watching the people celebrating their holidays with plenty of food and joy, dancing their San Juan, their Bumba-meu-Boi, their samba, their frevo and their splendid carnaval, the expressions of a long-suffering society, but one that finds itself with fraternity and the joyful celebration of life.

I dream of seeing those who have been always condemned to lose, now feeling victorious because their suffering was not in vain, but helped them to mature and to be able to build, together, a different Brazil, both unified and diverse, hospitable and happy.

I dream of having politicians who are willing to come down to earth, to see the other eye to eye, divested of arrogance, aware that they represent the popular demands, making of politics the diligent pursuit of public affairs.

I dream of being able to walk anywhere at night without the fear of being assaulted or falling victim to stray shots, of being able to enjoy the freedom of talking and criticizing on the social networks without being immediately offended or defamed.

I dream of contemplating our green jungles, our immense rivers, regenerated, our amazing landscapes and biodiversity preserved, renewing the natural pact with Mother Earth who has given us all, recognizing her rights and consequently treating her with veneration and caring.

I dream of seeing the mystical and religious people venerating God as God wishes, feeling the companionship of good spirits, of the forces that carry the cosmic energy of the axé, giving reality a magical character, with the conviction that at the end, because of God, Father-and-Mother of infinite goodness and mercy, everything will be alright.

I dream that this dream is not just a dream, but a joyful and feasible reality, the mature fruit of so many centuries of resistance, struggle, tears, sweat and blood.
Then, and only then, we will be able to laugh and sing, to sing and dance, to dance and celebrate a new Brazil, the largest Latin country, one of the richest and most beautiful provinces of the Earth that either evolution or God has given to us.

This is what the Brazilian wants and may God help us.

Leonardo Boff Eco-Theologian-Philosopher.Earthcharter Commission

Free translation from the Spanish sent by
Melina Alfaro, alfaro_melina@yahoo.com.ar.
Done at REFUGIO DEL RIO GRANDE, Texas, EE.UU.