At the geography class in Ashimov school of Tuyp region. Photo: Aigul Eshtaeva / World Bank
Fountain House 11th Annual Symposium & Luncheon
Fountain House 11th Annual Symposium & Luncheon
May 5, 2014 at The Pierre
“Mental Illness & Substance Abuse”
Fountain House 11th Annual Symposium & Luncheon (May 5, 2014)
Video: Interview with Jim Luce – Origins of the Foundation and Orphans International
1,206 views • Jan. 28, 2014
INTERVIEW with Jim Luce on the origins of both his family Foundation (www.lucefoundation.org, 2008) and Orphans International Worldwide (www.orphansinternational.org, 1999), the first Supporting Young Global Leadership and the second Raising Global Citizens. Video produced by Joey Vaughan for Stewardship TV. Music: Jingle Punks.
“This is Shanghai” by Rob Whitworth
Highly recommended – fascinating and enjoyable! – Jim Luce
[draft]
#Shanghai #China #PRC #Tourism #Video #Vimeo
Video: “This is Shanghai” by Rob Whitworth (June 20, 2013)
Our Stand with Martin Scorsese’s Last Temptation of Christ
The film delves into the psychological and emotional struggles of Jesus, portraying his temptations and doubts with a level of intimacy that is rarely seen in religious narratives. This humanization of Jesus made his ultimate sacrifice even more poignant and relatable. For us, this portrayal did not diminish his divinity but rather enhanced our appreciation of his humanity.
New York, N.Y. I first met Martin Scorsese when his publicist Josh Baran asked Fundamentalists Anonymous which I had co-founded to take a stand on Marty’s film, The Last Temptation of Christ with Willem Dafoe. At the private opening, at a theater on 23rd Street in Manhattan, Marty jotted me a thank you note/autograph. The film was not offensive at all, and my partner Richard Yao and I spoke widely on how, as Christians, we found the film to be sensitive and important.
Meeting Marty and engaging with his work on The Last Temptation of Christ was a significant moment for me, both personally and professionally. The film, based on the novel by Nikos Kazantzakis, explores the human aspects of Jesus Christ’s life and the struggles he faced.
For many, this portrayal was controversial, but for me, it was a profound exploration of faith and humanity. Marty’s depiction of Jesus as a man grappling with his divine mission resonated deeply with my Episcopal understanding of Christian faith, which acknowledges the complexities and trials of the human experience.
The uproar surrounding The Last Temptation of Christ largely stemmed from a misunderstanding of its intent. Fundamentalist groups protested the film, viewing it as blasphemous and offensive.
However, my partner Richard Yao and I recognized it as a respectful and thought-provoking piece that invited viewers to contemplate the duality of Jesus Christ as both human and divine. This perspective aligned with our mission at Fundamentalists Anonymous, which aimed to promote a more nuanced and compassionate understanding of faith, moving away from rigid dogmatism.
Our advocacy for the film involved speaking at various forums and engaging with the media to articulate why we, as Mainline Christians, did not find the film offensive. Instead, we emphasized how The Last Temptation of Christ opened a dialogue about the nature of Jesus’ sacrifice and the essence of Christian faith. Scorsese’s work encouraged believers to reflect on their own spiritual journeys and the personal challenges they face in living out their faith.
Meeting Marty Scorsese in person was an enlightening experience. His genuine gratitude for our support and his passion for the project were evident. The thank-you note and autograph he gave me at the film’s opening symbolized more than just a memento; it was a testament to our shared belief in the importance of honest and heartfelt storytelling. Marty’s approach to filmmaking, characterized by its depth and authenticity, mirrored our approach to faith—open, inquisitive, and deeply personal.
The Last Temptation of Christ was not just a film; it was a cultural touchstone that sparked important conversations about religion, art, and interpretation.
By defending the film, Richard and I positioned ourselves as advocates for a more inclusive and empathetic Christianity. We argued that faith should not be threatened by artistic exploration but should instead embrace it as an opportunity for growth and understanding.
Scorsese’s work has always been marked by its exploration of complex themes and characters, and The Last Temptation of Christ is no exception.
The film delves into the psychological and emotional struggles of Jesus, portraying his temptations and doubts with a level of intimacy that is rarely seen in religious narratives.
This humanization of Jesus made his ultimate sacrifice even more poignant and relatable. For us, this portrayal did not diminish his divinity but rather enhanced our appreciation of his humanity.
The collaboration with Marty and the support for his film were pivotal in challenging the monolithic interpretations of Christianity that often dominate public discourse.
We believed that faith could withstand scrutiny and that questioning and exploring one’s beliefs were vital to a vibrant spiritual life. The Last Temptation of Christ provided a platform for such exploration, encouraging believers to engage with their faith on a deeper level.
My experience with Martin Scorsese and The Last Temptation of Christ was profoundly impactful. It reaffirmed my belief in the power of art to challenge, inspire, and deepen our understanding of complex subjects like faith.
By standing up for the film, Richard Yao and I championed a vision of Christianity that is open, compassionate, and willing to engage with difficult questions. Scorsese’s film remains a testament to the enduring power of thoughtful storytelling and its ability to illuminate the human condition.
Our Stand with Martin Scorsese’s Last Temptation of Christ (May 24, 2013)
#MartinScorsese #LastTemptationOfChrist #FilmAndFaith #Christianity #ArtAndReligion #FaithExploration #CinematicArt #ReligiousDialogue #WillemDafoe #FilmAdvocacy #CulturalTouchstone #SpiritualJourney #InclusiveFaith
Tags: Martin Scorsese, Last Temptation of Christ, Film And Faith, Christianity, Art And Religion, Faith Exploration, Cinematic Art, Religious Dialogue, Willem Dafoe, Film Advocacy, Cultural Touchstone, Spiritual Journey, Inclusive Faith
Micro-Finance Meets Multi-Nationals at Clinton Global Initiative
Nobel-prize winner Professor Muhammad Yunus, founder of the microfinance pioneer Grameen Bank of Bangladesh, addressed our breakfast at the Clinton Global Initiative (CGI) kick-off.
New York, N.Y. Nobel-prize winner Professor Muhammad Yunus, founder of the microfinance pioneer Grameen Bank of Bangladesh, addressed our breakfast at the Clinton Global Initiative (CGI) kick-off. Introduced by Hikmet Ersek, the C.E.O. of Western Union – the corporation that hosted this event – Muhammad was as inspiring as ever.
Western Union, “Moving Money for Better,” is the leader in corporate social responsibility (CSR) that I wrote about last year (HuffPo). Today was the first time I had ever met either of these iconic thought leaders.
Panelists joined Professor Muhammad Yunus at the Western Union breakfast at CGI.
Credit: CGI.
Grameen, founded in 1976, has set the standard for microfinance. During the breakfast I chatted with Anne Hastings, director of Haiti’s premier microfinance institution Fonkoze. Anne sat on our Orphans International Worldwide Haiti (OIWW) board over a decade ago. Fonkoze, like most micro-financial institutions around the world, is based on Muhammad’s work.
Muhammad’s general concept was to empower women in local communities, usually in groups, to lift themselves and their families out of poverty. I have seen it work all over the world. The professor spoke of microfinance as being the banking system of the world’s poor, and stated that big banks are ill-prepared to enter the field without becoming loan sharks. He feels strongly that microfinance should be a social enterprise, not a profit-making venture of more than 10% profit.
U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton addressed the Clinton Global Initiative 2012.
Credit: CGI (Barbara Kinney).
I congratulated Muhammad after the breakfast panel, commenting to him on my own post-Wall Street appreciation of financial institutions for the poor and not the rich. My own epiphany that led to leaving finance was in a garbage dump in Denpasar, Indonesia in 2004. I realized in that moment that many of the dirty children living there had as much if not more dignity than any of the high-net worth individuals my investment firm served.
Western Union’s C.E.O. Hikmet spoke at the breakfast of the need of multi-nationals to make a profit providing goods and services even to the world’s poorest. I agree that multi-nationals must profit to sustain their efforts and please shareholders but encourage them to remain vigilant in their efforts to better humanity. I also agree with Muhammad that micro-financial institutions should not strive to be highly profitable multi-national corporation, keeping profits over expenses under 10%.
The best multi-nationals, like most microfinance institutions, are focused on social responsibility.
Hikmet Ersek is of Turkish origin who migrated to Austria and has relocated to the U.S. He learned of the need of transferring funds to his father decades ago. Deeply sensitive to the needs of the world’s poor, he is also aware of corporate shareholder’s desire for profit. Balancing both, Western Union and its foundation provide a bridge between haves and have-nots.
I was particularly impressed to learn of Western Union’s 2012 GCI commitment: Global Pay. This new financial product will help NGOs overcome the ‘last mile’ and bridge the gap between funds that need to be disbursed and the people who need them in the field. Having run orphan care projects post-Tsunami in Indonesia and Sri Lanka, and post-earthquake in Haiti, I understand how critical this is. Western Union’s end-to-end platform will help NGOs manage and deliver funds into the field safely and securely, leveraging the company’s 510,000 physical locations to help connect NGOs to the people they serve in over 200 countries and territories around the world. Incredible.
President Bill Clinton, 42nd President of the U.S and founder of the Clinton Global Initiative,
at the CGI Annual Meeting 2012 Opening Plenary. Credit: CGI.
Western Union is working with NGO partners, including the International Children’s Fund and Peace International, to design financial products that will promote efficient and transparent payments. Current partners include Architecture for Humanity, Islamic Relief Worldwide, Save the Children International, and the World Children’s Fund.
Muhammad is a purist and despairs of both the multi-nationals taking advantage of the poor and micro financial institutions earning more than 10% over expenses from the same population. Multi-nationals and micro financial institutions are both highly involved with remittances, but as Muhammad stated, “finance is like football.” An American football referee cannot oversee a British football (soccer) match, he explained. Regulations for the two loan models need to differ.
Her Majesty Queen Rania Al Abdullah of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan at the Opening Plenary. Credit: CGI.
It was fabulous to re-connect at the breakfast with the head of the Western Union Foundation, Luella Chavez D’Angelo. I had met Luella several years ago and we made plans to meet this fall to discuss my own foundation’s efforts on supporting young global leadership (link).
Western Union, as well as multi-national corporations such as BASF, Adidas, Dannon, and UniQlo, are all involved in “social business” – investing funds to impact social change over making a personal profit. Adidas’ efforts to provide shoes to barefoot children in the Developing World at-cost – ‘social goods’ – is but one example. Yunus, active in Bangladesh as well as Haiti and many other countries, says multi-nationals should use corporate social responsibility and/or corporate foundation funds to finance their social enterprise approaches – including microcredit programs.
Virtually every sector of society from every corner of the world meet under Bill Clinton’s big tent.
Credit: CGI.
Muhammad stressed that in all solutions, culture needed to be the foundation of social change. “Culture is the running shoes,” he explained. “The shoes need to support me in running, not be so rigid as to prevent me from running. There needs to be a counter-culture to guard against rigidity. Staid culture belongs in a museum. Dynamic culture is needed to help us move forward.”
At the end of the day, the goal of both micro financial institutions and multi-national financial corporations should be full financial inclusion. As Western Union’s C.E.O. Hikmet Ersek said, and professor Muhammad Yunus has dedicated his life to, it is a matter of financial dignity. In short, the goal of the Clinton Global Initiative, meeting here in New York for the seventh year, is to award all human beings anywhere in the world their inherent human dignity.
The author with one of his heroes, Professor Muhammad Yunus, founder of the Grameen Bank.
Credit: Rahim B. Kanani (www.rahimkanani.com).
Micro-Finance Meets Multi-Nationals at Clinton Global Initiative (Sept. 25, 2012)
My First Gay Wedding in New York was Lesbian
[draft]
John and I attended a fabulous wedding in New York City Sept. 8, 2012 for Emily & Elizabeth McLintock-Perea! What a beautiful couple in so many ways. Our congratulations to them – and wishes for decades of love!
Same-sex marriage became legal in New York State on June 24, 2011, when Governor Andrew Cuomo signed the Marriage Equality Act into law. The law went into effect on July 24, 2011, making New York the sixth state in the United States to legalize same-sex marriage.
The Gay Prince: Manvendra Singh Gohil of India
Manvendra’s homosexuality was revealed to his family by doctors in 2002 following his hospitalization for a nervous breakdown. However, it was when he talked publicly about his sexual orientation in 2006 that his family took action and accused him of bringing dishonor to the clan.
Delhi, India — Manvendra was born at Ajmer, 23 September 1965, as the son of Maharana Shri Raghubir Singhji Rajendrasinghji Sahib, who inherited the title of Maharana of Rajpipla in 1963.
The princes were derecognized by the Republic of India in 1971. Therefore their residence Rajvant Palace has been converted into a resort (Several Royal Palaces have been converted into Resorts, Universities and Government buildings after the derecognition by the Republic of India).
Manvendra had a traditional and conservative upbringing. He was educated at Bombay Scottish School and at Amrutben Jivanlal College of Commerce and Economics, Vile Parle, Bombay.
In January 1991, he married Chandrika Kumari from Jhabua, Madhya Pradesh, because, he claims, “I thought after marriage I would be alright because I never knew and nobody told me that I was gay and this is normal. Homosexuality is not a disease. I tremendously regret for ruining her life. I feel guilty.” The marriage ended in divorce when Manvendra revealed his homosexuality to his wife.
“It was a total disaster. A total failure. The marriage never got consummated. I realized I had done something very wrong”.
Several years after his divorce in 1992, he became involved in a social network to help gays in Gujarat.
“It was difficult to be gay in my family. The villagers worship us and we are role models for them. My family didn’t allow us to mix with ordinary or low-caste people. Our exposure to the liberal world was minimal. Only when I was hospitalized after my nervous breakdown in 2002, my doctor informed my parents about my sexuality.
“All these years I was hiding my sexuality from my parents, family and people. I never liked it, neither wanted to face the reality. When I came out in the open and gave an interview to a friendly journalist, my life was transformed. Now, people accept me.”
Manvendra’s homosexuality was revealed to his family by doctors in 2002 following his hospitalization for a nervous breakdown. However, it was when he talked publicly about his sexual orientation in 2006 that his family took action and accused him of bringing dishonor to the clan.
The disowning, however, is likely to remain a symbolic act rather than legally enforceable disinheritance, given India’s modern inheritance laws. He has since been reunited with his father.
in March 2006, the story of Manvendra’s coming out made headlines in India and around the world. His effigies were burnt in Rajpipla, where the traditional society was shocked.
Manavendra appeared as a guest on the Oprah Winfrey Show on October 24, 2007. He was one of three persons featured in the show entitled ‘Gay Around the World.’
He expressed that he has no regrets about coming out, and that he believes the people of his state respect him for his leadership in preventing and educating on HIV/AIDS.
“I knew that they would never accept me for who I truly am, but I also knew that I could no longer live a lie. I wanted to come out because I had gotten involved with activism and I felt it was no longer right to live in the closet.”
“I came out as gay to a Gujarati daily because I wanted people to openly discuss homosexuality since it’s a hidden affair with a lot of stigma attached.” – Manvendra
He inaugurated the Euro Pride gay festival in Stockholm, Sweden, on 25 July 2008 and featured in a BBC Television series, Undercover Princes, screened on BBC Three in the UK in January 2009 which documented his search for a British boyfriend in Brighton.
In June of 2009, invited by Douglas Drumond, President of Casarão Brasil, a GLS Association, Manvendra went to one of the world’s biggest parties: São Paulo gay pride parade. He was one of the main speakers along with ministers and other officials of various governments around the world.
The prince used his presence at the largest gay pride parade to advocate safe sex and create awareness about HIV and AIDS. He was also interested in the programs being implemented in Brazil to fight diseases like AIDS. He also participated in a group discussion on making homosexuality legal in India by studying the norms that helped in making homosexuality legal in Brazil.
In 2000, Manvendra started the Lakshya Trust, which he is the chairman, a group dedicated to HIV/AIDS education and prevention. A registered public charitable trust, Lakshya is a community-based organization working for HIV/AIDS prevention among men who have sex with men (MSMs). It provides counseling services, clinics for treatment of sexually transmitted infections, libraries, and condom-use promotion. Lakshya won the Civil Society Award 2006 for its contribution in preventing HIV/AIDS among homosexual men.
The trust also creates employment opportunities for gay men and support for other organizations for MSMs, and plans to open a hospice/old age home for gay men.
Lakshya is a member of the India Network For Sexual Minorities (INFOSEM) and a founding member of the Sexual Health Action Network (SHAN). He serves as India Community Representative on behalf of INFOSEM, the India MSM and HIV network. APCOM is one of the best mediums to bring together different nationalities and develop linkages with others working for HIV and MSM/TG.
“In India, it will be an important tool to influence authorities to change thinking and broaden outlooks for the betterment of society. APCOM demonstrates the essence of unity and solidarity within diversity.” – Manvendra
In 2007, Manvendra joined the Interim Governing Board of the Asia Pacific Coalition on Male Sexual Health, known as APCOM, a regional coalition of MSM and HIV community-based organizations, the government sector, donors, technical experts and the U.N. system.
The Gay Prince: Manvendra Singh Gohil of India (Aug. 26, 2011)
Roger Williams of Rhode Island; Religious Freedom – with Slavery?
An English-born New England Puritan minister, theologian, and author who founded Providence Plantations, which became the Colony of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations and later the State of Rhode Island. He was a staunch advocate for religious freedom, separation of church and state, and fair dealings with the Native Americans. With slavery, not so much.
New York, N.Y. Rev. Roger Williams was expelled by the Puritan leaders from the Massachusetts Bay Colony for heresy, and he established Providence Plantations in 1636 as a refuge offering what he termed “liberty of conscience.” In 1638, he founded the First Baptist Church in America in Providence. Williams studied the language of the New England Native Americans and published the first book-length study of it in English.
He did not object to the enslavement of captured
enemy combatants for a fixed duration, a practice
that was the normal course of warfare in that time
Roger Williams was born in London, probably in 1603; his birth records were destroyed during the Great Fire of London. From an early age, Williams had a spiritual conversion of which his father disapproved. Williams later attended Pembroke College, Cambridge, where he received a B.A. in 1627. He demonstrated a facility with languages, acquiring familiarity with Latin, Hebrew, Greek, Dutch, and French at an early age. Years later, he tutored John Milton in Dutch and Native American languages in exchange for refresher lessons in Hebrew and Greek.
Williams took holy orders in the Church of England in connection with his studies, but he became a Puritan at Cambridge and thus ruined his chance for preferment in the Anglican church. Williams knew that Puritan leaders planned to immigrate to the New World. He did not join the first wave of settlers but later decided that he could not remain in England under the administration of Archbishop William Laud. Williams regarded the Church of England as corrupt and false, and he had arrived at the Separatist position by 1630. He and his wife boarded the Boston-bound Lyon in Bristol shortly thereafter.
On February 5, 1631, the Lyon anchored in Nantasket outside of Boston. The church of Boston offered him the opportunity to serve, but he declined the position on grounds that it was “an unseparated church.” As a Separatist, Williams considered the Church of England irredeemably corrupt and believed that one must completely separate from it to establish a new church for the true and pure worship of God.
The Salem church was also inclined to Separatism, and they invited him to become their teacher.
In response, leaders in Boston vigorously protested, leading Salem to withdraw its offer. As the summer of 1631 ended, Williams moved to Plymouth Colony, where he was welcomed and informally assisted the minister. At Plymouth, he regularly preached. Plymouth Governor William Bradford wrote that “his teachings were well approved.”
After a time, Williams decided that the Plymouth church was not sufficiently separated from the Church of England. Furthermore, his contact with the Narragansett Native Americans had caused him to question the validity of colonial charters that did not include legitimate purchase of Native American land. Governor Bradford later wrote that Williams fell “into some strange opinions which caused some controversy between the church and him.”
In 1632, Williams wrote a lengthy tract that openly condemned the King’s charters and questioned the right of Plymouth to the land without first buying it from the Native Americans. He even charged that King James had uttered a “solemn lie” in claiming that he was the first Christian monarch to have discovered the land. Williams moved back to Salem by the fall of 1633 and was welcomed as an unofficial assistant.
The Massachusetts Bay authorities were not pleased at Williams’s return.
In 1633, they summoned him to appear before the General Court in Boston to defend his tract attacking the King and the charter. The issue was smoothed out, and the tract disappeared forever, probably burned. In 1634, Williams became acting pastor of the Salem church, the minister there having died. In March 1635, he was again ordered to appear before the General Court, and he was summoned yet again for the Court’s July term to answer for “erroneous” and “dangerous opinions.” The Court finally ordered that he be removed from his church position.
Finally, the General Court tried Williams in October 1635 and convicted him of sedition and heresy.
They declared that he was spreading “diverse, new, and dangerous opinions” and ordered that he be banished. The execution of the order was delayed because Williams was ill and winter was approaching, so he was allowed to stay temporarily if he ceased publicly teaching his opinions.
He did not comply with this demand, and the sheriff came in January 1636, only to discover that he had slipped away three days earlier during a blizzard. He traveled over fifty miles on foot through deep snow, from Salem to Raynham, Massachusetts, where the local Wampanoags offered him shelter at their winter camp. Sachem Massasoit hosted Williams there for the three months until spring.
Williams crossed the Seekonk River in search of a new location suitable for settlement. Upon reaching the shore, Williams was met by Narragansett people who greeted them with the words “What cheer, Netop” (transl. Hello, friend).
The settlers then continued eastward along the Providence River, where they encountered a cove and freshwater spring. Finding the area suitable for settlement, Williams acquired the tract from the Native Americans.
Here, Williams and his followers established a new, permanent settlement, convinced that divine providence had brought them there. They named it Providence Plantations.
Williams wanted his settlement to be a haven for those “distressed of conscience,” and it soon attracted a growing number of families who did not see eye-to-eye with the leaders in Massachusetts Bay. From the beginning, a majority vote of the heads of households governed the new settlement, but only in civil things. Newcomers could also be admitted to full citizenship by a majority vote. In August 1637, a new town agreement again restricted the government to civil things.
In 1640, 39 freemen (men who had full citizenship and voting rights) signed another agreement that declared their determination “still to hold forth liberty of conscience.” Thus, Williams founded the first place in modern history where citizenship and religion were separate, providing religious liberty and separation of church and state. This was combined with the principle of majoritarian democracy.
In November 1637, the General Court of Massachusetts exiled a number of families during the Antinomian Controversy, including Anne Hutchinson and her followers.
In the meantime, the Pequot War had broken out. Massachusetts Bay asked for Williams’s help, which he gave despite his exile, and he became the Bay colony’s eyes and ears, and dissuaded the Narragansetts from joining with the Pequots. Instead, the Narragansetts allied themselves with the colonists and helped to defeat the Pequots in 1637–38.
Williams formed firm friendships and developed deep trust among the Native American tribes, especially the Narragansetts. He was able to keep the peace between the Native Americans and the Colony of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations for nearly forty years by his constant mediation and negotiation. He twice surrendered himself as a hostage to the Native Americans to guarantee the safe return of a great sachem from a summons to a court. The Native Americans trusted Williams more than any other Colonist, and he proved trustworthy.
Williams returned to London in the midst of the English Civil War.
Puritans held power in London, and he was able to obtain a charter through the offices of Sir Henry Vane the Younger despite strenuous opposition from Massachusetts’ agents. His book A Key into the Language of America proved crucial to the success of his charter, albeit indirectly. It was published in 1643 in London and combined a phrasebook with observations about life and culture as an aid to communicate with the Native Americans of New England. It covered everything from salutations to death and burial. Williams also sought to correct the attitudes of superiority displayed by the colonists towards Native Americans:
“Boast not proud English, of thy birth & blood; Thy brother Indian is by birth as Good. Of one blood God made Him, and Thee and All, As wise, as fair, as strong, as personal.”
Williams soon returned to the New World.
It took him several years to unify the settlements of Narragansett Bay under a single government. The settlements of Providence, Portsmouth, Newport, and Warwick finally united in 1647 into the Colony of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations.
Freedom of conscience was again proclaimed, and the colony became a haven for people who were persecuted for their beliefs, including Baptists, Quakers, and Jews.
Williams did not write extensively about slavery.
He consistently expressed disapproval of it, though generally he did not object to the enslavement of captured enemy combatants for a fixed duration, a practice that was the normal course of warfare in that time. Williams struggled with the morality of slavery and raised his concerns in letters to Massachusetts Bay Governor John Winthrop concerning the treatment of the Pequots during the Pequot War.
In these letters, he requested Winthrop to prevent the enslavement of Pequot women and children, as well as to direct the colonial militia to spare them during the fighting. In another letter to Winthrop written on July 31, 1637, Williams conceded that the capture and indenture of remaining Pequot women and children would “lawfully” ensure that remaining enemy combatants were “weakned and despoild,” but pleaded that their indenture not be permanent.
Despite his reservations, Williams formed part of the colonial delegation sent to conduct negotiations at the end of the Pequot War, where the fates of the captured Pequots were decided upon between the colonists of New England and their Native American allies the Narragansetts, Mohegans, and Niantics.
In 1637, Winthrop gave Williams a Pequot boy as an indentured servant.
The child had been captured by Israel Stoughton in Connecticut. Williams renamed the child “Will.”
Some of the Native American allies aided in the export of enslaved Pequots to the West Indies, while others disagreed with the practice, believing that they should have been given land and provisions to contribute to the well being of colonial settlements. Many enslaved Pequots frequently ran away, where they were taken in by surrounding Native American settlements.
Williams aided colonists in distributing and selling Pequot captives and fielded requests from colonists to track down and return runaways, using his connections with Native leaders to find escapees. Williams recorded experiences of abuse and rape recounted by the Natives he apprehended, it is speculated that Williams’s letters encouraging Winthrop to limit terms of servitude were informed by his acquaintance with escapees.
As the demand for labor in the West Indies grew with the cultivation of sugarcane, Europeans exported enslaved Native Americans to the “sugar islands.” Historian Alan Gallay estimates that between 1670 and 1715, 24,000 to 51,000 captive Native Americans were exported through Carolina ports, of which more than half, 15,000-30,000, were brought from then-Spanish Florida. These numbers were more than the number of Africans imported to the Carolinas during the same period. Gallay also says that “the trade in Indian slaves was at the center of the English empire’s development in the American South. The trade in Indian slaves was the most important factor affecting the South in the period 1670 to 1715;” intertribal wars to capture slaves destabilized English colonies, Florida and Louisiana. Additional enslaved Native Americans were exported from South Carolina to Virginia, Pennsylvania, New York, Rhode Island and Massachusetts. Starting in 1698, Parliament allowed competition among importers of enslaved Africans, raising purchase prices for slaves in Africa, so they cost more than enslaved Native Americans.
In 1641, the Massachusetts Bay Colony passed laws sanctioning slavery.
In response, under Williams’s leadership, Providence Plantations passed a law in 1652 restricting the amount of time for which an individual could be held in servitude and tried to prevent the importation of slaves from Africa. The law established terms for slavery that mirrored that of indentured servitude; enslavement was to be limited in duration and not passed down to children.
Tensions escalated with the Narragansetts during King Philip’s War, despite Williams’s efforts to maintain peace, during which his home was burned to the ground. During the war, Williams led the committee responsible for processing and selling Rhode Island’s Native American captives into slavery. Williams’s committee recommended that Providence allow residents to keep Native American slaves despite earlier municipal statutes.
The committee appraised the prices of various Native American captives and brokered their sale to residents. Williams’s son transported additional captives to be sold in Newport. Williams also organized the trial and execution of a captured Native American man who had been a ringleader in the war.
King Philip’s War (1675–1676) pitted the colonists against the Wampanoags, along with some of the Narragansetts with whom Williams had previously maintained good relations. Williams was elected captain of Providence’s militia, even though he was in his 70s. On March 29, 1676, Narragansetts burned Providence; nearly the entire town was destroyed, including Williams’s home.
Williams died sometime between January 16 and March 16, 1683 and was buried on his own property. Fifty years later, his house collapsed into the cellar and the location of his grave was forgotten.
Roger Williams of Rhode Island; Religious Freedom – with Slavery? (July 14, 2012_
#RogerWilliams #ReligiousFreedom #RhodeIslandHistory #SlaveryDebate #AmericanHistory
The Night that Ignited a Revolution: Revisiting the Boston Massacre
The Boston Massacre serves as a poignant reminder of the fragility of peace and the potential for violence when tensions run high. It underscores the importance of open dialogue, understanding, and diplomacy in resolving conflicts. As global citizens, we see parallels in modern-day protests and confrontations between authorities and civilians worldwide.
Boston, MA. The Boston Massacre of 1770 stands as a pivotal moment in American history, igniting the flames of revolution and shaping the course of a nation yet to be born. As we delve into this significant event, we’re struck by the complexity of emotions and tensions that led to that fateful night on March 5, 1770.
On a cold winter evening in Boston, a confrontation between British soldiers and colonial civilians escalated into a deadly clash that would forever change the relationship between the American colonies and Great Britain. The streets of Boston, already simmering with resentment towards British rule, became the stage for a tragedy that would galvanize the revolutionary spirit.
The incident began innocuously enough, with a group of colonists taunting British soldiers stationed in the city. However, the situation quickly spiraled out of control.
As tensions rose, the crowd grew larger and more hostile. Snowballs and sticks were hurled at the soldiers, who found themselves increasingly cornered and outnumbered.
In the chaos that ensued, shots were fired. When the smoke cleared, five colonists lay dead or mortally wounded: Crispus Attucks, Samuel Gray, James Caldwell, Samuel Maverick, and Patrick Carr.
One of the musket balls that hit Attucks apparently didn’t do too much damage, but the other, which tore an inch-wide hole in his chest, inflicted lethal injuries, according to the transcript of the British soldiers’ trial; the shot “goring the right side of his lungs, and a great part of the liver most horribly.”
Crispus Attucks, a sailor of African and Native American descent, is often remembered as the first casualty of the American Revolution.
The aftermath of the Boston Massacre was as dramatic as the event itself.
The colonial response was swift and passionate. Paul Revere, the famed silversmith and revolutionary, produced an engraving of the event that spread like wildfire throughout the colonies. This powerful piece of propaganda depicted the British soldiers as cold-blooded murderers, firing into a peaceful crowd.
What fascinates us most about this event is the role of John Adams, future president of the United States, who chose to defend the British soldiers in court. Despite the intense public anger, Adams believed in the principle of justice and the right to a fair trial. His defense resulted in the acquittal of six of the eight soldiers, with two found guilty of manslaughter.
The Boston Massacre served as a rallying cry for the revolutionary cause, intensifying colonial resentment towards British rule. It became a symbol of British oppression and tyranny, fueling the growing desire for independence. The event was skillfully used by colonial leaders to stir up anti-British sentiment and unite the colonies in their struggle for freedom.
As we reflect on this watershed moment, we’re struck by how a single incident can have such far-reaching consequences. The Boston Massacre didn’t just change the lives of those directly involved; it altered the course of history. It reminds us of the power of public perception and the role of media in shaping narratives.
The event also highlights the complexities of leadership in times of crisis.
The British soldiers, led by Captain Thomas Preston, found themselves in an impossible situation. Their actions, whether justified or not, had consequences that reverberated far beyond that night in Boston.
The Boston Massacre serves as a poignant reminder of the fragility of peace and the potential for violence when tensions run high. It underscores the importance of open dialogue, understanding, and diplomacy in resolving conflicts. As global citizens, we see parallels in modern-day protests and confrontations between authorities and civilians worldwide.
This historical event also prompts us to reflect on the nature of revolution and the price of freedom. The colonists who lost their lives that night became martyrs for a cause larger than themselves. Their sacrifice, whether intentional or not, became a catalyst for change.
As we continue to grapple with issues of justice, freedom, and governance in our modern world, the lessons of the Boston Massacre remain relevant. It reminds us of the power of public opinion, the importance of fair trials, and the potential for single events to spark monumental change.
The Boston Massacre stands as a testament to the complex tapestry of human emotions, political tensions, and societal changes that shape our history. It serves as a powerful reminder that the path to freedom and justice is often paved with sacrifice and struggle.
#BostonMassacre #AmericanRevolution #HistoryMatters
TAGS: American History, Colonial America, British Empire, Revolution, Justice, Freedom, Paul Revere, John Adams
The Night that Ignited a Revolution: Revisiting the Boston Massacre (July 12, 2012)
Richard Nixon
[draft]
WASP Cowboy: Remembering President George Walker Bush
[draft]
New York, N.Y. xxx
Remembering President George Walker Bush, WASP Cowboy (July 4, 2012)
Germany’s Fortified Rothenburg ob der Tauber Village
Rothenburg ob der Tauber, Germany. I visited this fortified hilltop city known as Rothenburg ob der Tauber in high school and the sense of awe walking its cobbled streets has never left me. It is not just a beautiful place to visit but one of Germany’s most significant historical centers.
Ringed by a huge defensive wall punctuated by towering city gates, the enclosed warren of narrow streets, lanes and alleyways are a delight to wander.
Lush parks and gardens are to be stumbled across among the quintessentially German medieval architecture of half-timbered and brightly painted and decorated buildings.
Cafes, restaurants and beer halls abound, as do museums, not least the glittery Christmas Museum, the Medieval Crime and Justice Museum and the Imperial City Museum, celebrating the town’s long and prestigious history.
Germany’s Fortified Rothenburg ob der Tauber Village (June 26, 2012)
1994: Adopting Our Infant Son 20 Years Before Gay Marriage
Mathew arrived with Jeff at JFK in Sept. 1995.
[draft]
Electing Barack Obama President
[draft]
In 2008 I endorsed Barack Obama [Luce Index™ Score: 92] nine months before the election. In 2012 I could not endorse our president any stronger.
Electing Barack Obama President (June 19, 2016)
Pope Francis
[draft]
Grand Central Station
[draft]
Anne Frank
[draft]
Style Guide | The Stewardship Report
- Actor, not actress. Retiring the use of “actress” promotes equality, signifying that men, women, and gender nonconforming individuals can all pursue the same art without stigma or stereotype.
- Asian American. As of 2021, The New York Times, Associated Press, Chicago Manual of Style, and other style guides no longer hyphenate Asian American or any of its derivatives, such as Chinese American, Japanese American, or Pakistani American.
- U.S.A., not USA; U.N., not UN. Call us old-fashioned.
निबंध |पहले एक अनाथ, फिर कई और
जिम लूस 2004 की सुनामी से अनाथ बच्चों के साथ।
श्रेय: अनाथ इंटरनेशनल
जिम लूस द्वारा
12 नवम्बर, 2007
संयुक्त राज्य अमेरिका में कई धनी नेक लोग हैं जो यह सोचते हैं कि अपने अनुभव और रचनात्मकता के साथ वे विशेषज्ञता और धन का उपयोग करके विकासशील देशों में लोगों के जीवन को बेहतर बना सकते हैं।
अपना वैश्विक परोपकारी संगठन स्थापित करने के सात साल बाद, मुझे अब पता है कि यह संभव है, हालांकि अक्सर समस्याग्रस्त होता है। आपको बहुत जुनून, ऊर्जा और समझदारी की जरूरत होती है, और विदेशों में आपकी मदद करने वाले लोगों को भी ऐसा ही करना चाहिए।
वर्षों पहले वॉल स्ट्रीट पर काम करते हुए, मैंने विभिन्न जातियों और व्यक्तित्वों के लोगों का एक मोज़ेक देखा, जो सभी खुशी से पैसे के पीछे दौड़ रहे थे। मैंने महसूस किया कि एक समान उद्देश्य के साथ, सभी मतभेदों को दूर किया जा सकता है।
उस समय, मैं न्यूयॉर्क की सड़कों से कुत्तों और बिल्लियों को बचाने में सप्ताहांत बिताता था। लेकिन मैं दुनिया की मदद करने के लिए कुछ करना चाहता था। जब एक इंडोनेशियाई दोस्त ने मुझसे अपने गृहनगर सेलिब्स द्वीप समूह की यात्रा करने के लिए कहा, तो मैंने तुरंत मौके पर छलांग लगा दी। मेरी जिंदगी नाटकीय रूप से बदलने वाली थी।
संयोगवश, हम एक अनाथालय के पास से गुजरे, और मुझे वहां जाने की तीव्र इच्छा हुई। मैं उत्सुक था। वर्षों से, संयुक्त राज्य अमेरिका में अनाथालयों को चरणबद्ध तरीके से समाप्त कर दिया गया है और उनकी जगह पालक देखभाल प्रणाली ने ले ली है। इस मंद प्रकाश वाले स्थान में कदम रखते ही, मुझे वहां की अत्यंत खराब स्थिति देखकर झटका लगा। देखभाल करने का बहुत प्यार था, लेकिन सुविधा खुद जर्जर थी। अगर इन बच्चों के पास केवल भोजन और आश्रय के लिए अधिक पैसा होता – लगभग $600 प्रति वर्ष – तो वे फल-फूल सकते थे। मैं व्यक्तिगत रूप से इसे संभव बनाने के लिए क्या कर सकता था?
एक शिशु बाकी बच्चों से अलग नजर आ रहा था, और उसकी मिन्नत करती लेकिन दृढ़ आंखें मुझसे कह रही थीं कि मैं उसे अपने साथ ले जाऊं। उसका नाम मैथ्यू था। वह 10 महीने का था।
श्री लूस अपने बेटे मैथ्यू के साथ, जिसे उन्होंने बच्चे के रूप में गोद लिया था।
श्रेय: अनाथ इंटरनेशनल
हमारे बीच संबंध तत्काल था, और अपनी मंगेतर से बात करने के बाद, मैंने उसे गोद लेने के लिए सहमति दे दी। स्टाफ ने कहा कि उसकी छेदों से भरी बनियान अगले बच्चे के लिए छोड़ दें।
एक साल के भीतर मैथ्यू ने इंडोनेशियाई और अमेरिकी नौकरशाही को पार कर लिया और कैनेडी हवाई अड्डे पर मेरी बाहों में था।
मैट के आने से पहले, मैंने जो देखा था, उसके बारे में बोस्टन में एक तेज-तर्रार बाल मनोवैज्ञानिक – फ्रांसिस डडली अल्लेमन-लूस, मेरी माँ और दोस्त – से चर्चा की थी। मैं अनाथालय में मौजूद अन्य शिशुओं के बारे में सोचना बंद नहीं कर सका, जो न्यूयॉर्क के पशु आश्रयों से भी बदतर हालात में थे। वे सभी गोद नहीं लिए जा सकते थे, लेकिन उनकी मदद की जा सकती थी। मेरी माँ और मैंने इस बारे में बात की कि हम ऐसा कैसे कर सकते हैं।
फिर समाधान आया: “माँ, पता है क्या?” मैंने कहा। “मैंने उस छोटे लड़के को गोद लिया है – अब आप उसकी दादी हैं!” उसे यह महसूस करने में केवल कुछ सेकंड लगे कि सैद्धांतिक अब गहराई से व्यक्तिगत हो गया था – और हमारे पारिवारिक इतिहास में एक नया पृष्ठ जुड़ गया था। हमारे परिवार की मट्रिआर्क, जिनकी जड़ें प्यूरीटन और एंग्लिकन न्यू इंग्लैंड में गहरी थीं, को एक चीनी-इंडोनेशियाई पोता मिल गया था।
मैट के आने पर, उन्होंने उसे तुरंत अपने बेटे की तरह गले लगाया और उसे हार्वर्ड यार्ड का वही दौरा दिया जो उन्होंने बचपन में मुझे दिया था, हमारे परिवार की जड़ों को वहां इंगित किया। आज वह आपका औसत न्यूयॉर्क सिटी किशोर है।
सेलेबस द्वीप समूह में मैंने जिन समग्र समस्याओं का सामना किया था, उनके समाधान मौजूद होने चाहिए थे। मेरी मां ने जरूरतमंदों को प्यार और स्नेह देने की मेरी प्रवृत्ति का अध्ययन किया और मुझे अनाथों के जीवन को बेहतर बनाने के उद्देश्य को अवधारणात्मक बनाने की चुनौती दी।
तो विकासशील देशों में एक सरोगेट फोस्टर केयर सिस्टम का विचार पैदा हुआ। मेरी अवधारणा छोटे घरों पर आधारित थी जिनमें केवल चार बच्चे और प्रत्येक घर में एक गृहिणी होती है। मेरा दृष्टिकोण अनाथ बच्चों को छोटे बच्चों से लेकर वयस्कता तक उसी तरह पालने का था जैसे मैं अपने बेटे को पालता। यह सरल धारणा अब “मैथ्यू का नियम” के रूप में संहिताबद्ध है। क्या मैथ्यू यहां फल-फूल सकता है? यह हमारा सख्त और प्राथमिक मापदंड है।
2001 में मेरी मां की मृत्यु हो गई, और अपनी वसीयत में उन्होंने आशा व्यक्त की कि मैं अनाथ इंटरनेशनल शुरू करूंगा। मेरी विरासत को देखते हुए – हार्वर्ड के सह-संस्थापक (थॉमस डडली) से लेकर नेवल वॉर कॉलेज के संस्थापक (स्टीफन ब्लेकर लूस) तक – शायद उन्हें विश्वास था कि संस्थान निर्माण मेरे जीन में है।
हमने उसी साल बाद में इंडोनेशिया में अनाथ इंटरनेशनल को शामिल किया, और सुलावेसी में अपना पहला घर खोला। 2002 में, हमने न्यूयॉर्क में शामिल होकर यहां पैसा जुटाना शुरू किया। हमने 2003 में हैती में काम शुरू किया, अंततः गोनाइव्स में एक घर खोला।
फिर, सुनामी ने इंडोनेशिया से श्रीलंका तक हिंद महासागर में तबाही मचाई। योगदान आने लगे, मेरे अपने रूजवेल्ट द्वीप समुदाय से और दुनिया भर के प्रमुख परिवारों से जिन्होंने हमारे बारे में सुनकर मुंह से मुंह प्रचार किया। हमने कर्मचारियों को जमीन पर – वास्तव में कीचड़ में – दिन के भीतर आचेह, इंडोनेशिया में रखा, जल्दी से एक घर स्थापित किया और हमारे पहले सुनामी अनाथों को प्यार और करुणा के साथ गले लगाया। मुझे अपनी माँ की याद आई।
जब लहर ने श्रीलंका को तबाह किया, तो एक युवा श्रीलंकाई-अमेरिकी जोड़ा गाले के पास एक समुद्र तट पर इसकी घातक पकड़ में आ गया। पति बह गया। उसकी अमेरिकी पत्नी बच गई। उसकी याद में, उसके पिता ने श्रीलंका में एक अनाथ गांव बनाने का वचन दिया।
हमारे बोर्ड के समर्थन से, हमने एक संयुक्त राष्ट्र-संबद्ध गैर सरकारी संगठन का निर्माण किया। हमारा छाता संगठन अनाथ इंटरनेशनल वर्ल्डवाइड है, जिसमें पेरू के लीमा में हमारे प्रशासनिक कार्यालय में स्वयंसेवकों द्वारा कार्य किया जाता है, और हमारे स्वयंसेवक इंटर्नशिप कार्यक्रम न्यूयॉर्क में है। यह संरचना हमें कम ओवरहेड बनाए रखने में सक्षम बनाती है; हमारे नवीनतम ऑडिट में प्रशासन पर 8 प्रतिशत से भी कम खर्च दिखाया गया है।
इन प्रयासों को समर्थन देने के लिए, हमने सामान्य संस्थापक सर्कल, राष्ट्रपति सर्कल और सलाहकार बोर्ड का निर्माण किया – प्रत्येक समूह के लिए विशिष्ट वित्तीय प्रतिबद्धताओं के साथ। संयुक्त राष्ट्र जन सूचना विभाग से जुड़ने के बाद से, मैट का नियम विस्तृत हो गया है और विकासशील देशों में अनाथालयों के लिए एक मानक बन गया है।
सुनामी के बाद, मैंने अपनी वॉल स्ट्रीट की नौकरी छोड़ दी ताकि मैं वित्तपोषण बढ़ाने, प्रोग्रामिंग बनाने और हमारे वैश्विक मानकों के अनुपालन को सुनिश्चित करने के लिए खुद को समर्पित कर सकूं। ईमानदार, सहायक और देखभाल करने वाले स्थानीय पेशेवरों के साथ जबरदस्त प्रगति हासिल की गई है। हमें उम्मीद थी कि वे हमें उन झटकों से बचने में मदद करेंगे – जिसमें भाई-भतीजावाद और भ्रष्टाचार के अनगिनत मामले शामिल हैं – जिनका हमने सामना किया है। उन्होंने कुछ हद तक ऐसा किया है, लेकिन चुनौतियां फिर भी आईं।
उदाहरण के लिए, हमारे कार्यक्रमों में से एक के एक बोर्ड सदस्य ने हम पर अपनी प्रेमिका को हमारे निदेशक के रूप में नियुक्त करने और अपने भाई की हवेली को हमारे अनाथालय के रूप में किराए पर लेने का दबाव डाला। नहीं। एक कर्मचारी ने सुनामी के बाद डॉलर के संकेत देखे और इसके बाद बहने वाली लाखों की सहायता राशि देखी, और घोषणा की कि वह संगठन पर कब्जा कर रहा है। नहीं। एक अन्य अधिकारी, जो दो वर्षों तक मेरे साथ था, वह धन का हिसाब नहीं दे सका। फिर नहीं। कोई भी अपने बच्चों से कैसे विश्वासघात कर सकता है?
इन पर्दे के पीछे की लड़ाइयों
निबंध |पहले एक अनाथ, फिर कई और
ENSAYO | Primero un huérfano, luego muchos más: Orphans International
Jim Luce con huérfanos del tsunami de 2004. Crédito: Orphans International.
Por Jim Luce
12 de noviembre de 2007
Nueve York. Estados Unidos tiene muchos benefactores adinerados que creen que con su experiencia y creatividad podrían aprovechar su pericia y dinero para mejorar la vida de las personas en los países en desarrollo.
Ahora sé, siete años después de fundar mi propia organización benéfica global, que esto es posible, aunque a menudo problemático. Se necesita mucha pasión, energía e ingenio, pero también deben tenerlos las personas en el extranjero que te ayudan.
Trabajando en Wall Street hace años, encontré un mosaico de personas de diversas etnias y personalidades, todas persiguiendo felizmente el todopoderoso dólar. Me di cuenta de que, con una causa común, todas las diferencias son superables.
En ese momento, pasaba los fines de semana rescatando perros y gatos de las calles de Nueva York con gran satisfacción. Pero estaba interesado en hacer algo para ayudar al mundo. Cuando un amigo indonesio me pidió que viajara con él a su ciudad natal en las Islas Célebes, aproveché la oportunidad y nos fuimos. Mi vida estaba a punto de cambiar dramáticamente.
Por casualidad, pasamos por un orfanato y sentí la necesidad de visitarlo. Me intrigaba. A lo largo de los años, los orfanatos han sido eliminados en Estados Unidos y reemplazados por el sistema de cuidado temporal. Al entrar en la instalación, débilmente iluminada, me sobrecogieron las extraordinarias condiciones de pobreza. Había mucho cariño, pero la instalación en sí estaba en ruinas. Si estos niños solo tuvieran más dinero para comida y refugio —alrededor de $600 al año, calculé— podrían prosperar. ¿Qué podría hacer yo personalmente para que esto sucediera?
Un bebé se destacó literalmente de los demás, y sus ojos suplicantes pero decididos parecían exigir que lo llevara a casa conmigo. Su nombre era Mathew. Tenía 10 meses.
La conexión entre nosotros fue inmediata y, después de hablar con mi prometida, acepté adoptarlo. El personal pidió que su camiseta, llena de agujeros, se quedara para el próximo niño.
En menos de un año, Mathew había pasado por las burocracias indonesias y americanas y estaba en mis brazos en el aeropuerto Kennedy.
Antes de que llegara Matt, había discutido lo que había presenciado con una psicóloga infantil de Boston con una mente aguda —Frances Dudley Alleman-Luce, mi madre y amiga. No podía dejar de pensar en los otros bebés del orfanato, viviendo en condiciones tan dickensianas, peores que los refugios para animales de Nueva York. No todos podían ser adoptados, pero podían ser ayudados. Mi madre y yo hablamos sobre formas en las que podríamos hacerlo.
Luego vino el desenlace: “Mamá, ¿adivina qué?” le dije. “Adopté a ese pequeño, ¡ahora eres su abuela!” Le tomó solo segundos darse cuenta de que lo teórico ahora era profundamente personal, y se había escrito una nueva página en la historia de nuestra familia. La matriarca de nuestra familia, con profundas raíces en la Nueva Inglaterra puritana y anglicana, había recibido a un nieto chino-indonesio.
Cuando llegó Matt, lo acogió inmediatamente como suyo y le dio el mismo recorrido por Harvard Yard que me había dado a mí de niño, señalándole nuestras raíces familiares allí. Hoy es un adolescente promedio de la ciudad de Nueva York.
Tenían que existir soluciones a los problemas generales que había encontrado en las Islas Célebes. Mi madre estudió mi inclinación por dar amor y afecto a los necesitados y me desafió a conceptualizar mi objetivo de mejorar la vida de los huérfanos.
Así nació la idea de un sistema de cuidado temporal sustituto en los países en desarrollo. Mi concepto se basaba en pequeños hogares con solo cuatro niños y un padre de familia en cada vivienda. Mi visión era criar a los niños huérfanos desde la infancia hasta la edad adulta de la misma manera en que criaría a mi hijo. Esta simple noción ahora está codificada como la “Regla de Mathew”. ¿Podría Mathew prosperar aquí? Este es nuestro criterio estricto y principal.
Mi madre murió en 2001 y en su testamento designó dinero con la esperanza de que comenzara Orphans International. Dada mi herencia, desde un cofundador de Harvard (Thomas Dudley) hasta el fundador del Colegio de Guerra Naval (Stephen Bleecker Luce), tal vez ella creía que la construcción de instituciones estaba en mis genes.
Incorporamos Orphans International en Indonesia ese mismo año y abrimos nuestro primer hogar en Sulawesi. En 2002, nos incorporamos en Nueva York y comenzamos a recaudar dinero aquí. Comenzamos a trabajar en Haití en 2003, eventualmente abriendo un hogar en Gonaïves.
Luego, el tsunami azotó el Océano Índico desde Indonesia hasta Sri Lanka. Las contribuciones llegaron, desde mi propia comunidad en Roosevelt Island y de familias prominentes de todo el mundo que habían oído hablar de nosotros de boca en boca. Colocamos personal en el terreno, literalmente en el barro, en cuestión de días en Aceh, Indonesia, rápidamente establecimos un hogar y acogimos a nuestros primeros huérfanos del tsunami con amor y compasión. Pensé en mi madre.
Cuando la ola golpeó Sri Lanka, una joven pareja de Sri Lanka y Estados Unidos fue atrapada en su mortal abrazo en una playa cerca de Galle. El esposo fue arrastrado por el agua. Su esposa estadounidense sobrevivió. En su memoria, el padre de ella prometió construir una aldea de huérfanos en Sri Lanka.
Con el apoyo de nuestra junta, construimos una organización no gubernamental asociada a las Naciones Unidas. Nuestra organización paraguas es Orphans International Worldwide, con nuestra oficina administrativa atendida por voluntarios en Lima, Perú, y nuestro programa de pasantías voluntarias en Nueva York. Esta estructura nos permite mantener bajos costos generales; nuestra última auditoría muestra menos del 8 por ciento gastado en administración.
Para financiar estos esfuerzos, creamos el Círculo de Fundadores, el Círculo del Presidente y la Junta Asesora, cada grupo con compromisos financieros específicos. Desde que nos asociamos con el Departamento de Información Pública de las Naciones Unidas, la Regla de Mathew se ha desarrollado y se ha convertido en un estándar para los orfanatos en los países en desarrollo.
Después del tsunami, renuncié a mi trabajo en Wall Street para dedicarme a aumentar la financiación, construir programas y asegurar el cumplimiento de nuestros estándares globales. Se ha logrado un tremendo progreso con profesionales locales honestos, solidarios y cariñosos. Esperábamos que nos ayudaran a evitar los contratiempos, incluidos innumerables casos de nepotismo y corrupción, que hemos encontrado. En cierta medida, lo han hecho, pero los desafíos aún ocurrieron.
Por ejemplo, un miembro de la junta de uno de nuestros programas nos presionó para que contratáramos a su amante como directora y alquiláramos la mansión de su hermano como nuestro orfanato. No. Un miembro del personal vio signos de dólar después del tsunami y los millones de ayuda que fluían después, y anunció que se hacía cargo de la organización. No. Otro funcionario, conmigo durante dos años, no pudo justificar los fondos. De nuevo, no. ¿Cómo puede alguien traicionar a sus propios hijos?
A pesar de estas batallas tras bambalinas, estamos en el terreno en 12 países y tenemos un presupuesto anual de medio millón de dólares, con proyectos en Haití, Indonesia y Perú y abriendo en Sri Lanka. Curiosamente, Sri Lanka es el único país en el que nunca nos han engañado. Allí no hemos enfrentado corrupción, sino la lenta tortura de una burocracia. Creo que nuestro proyecto allí, que está a punto de aceptar a sus primeros niños, puede convertirse en el modelo para nuestros esfuerzos globales.
Orphans International se ha convertido en mi vocación, y puede ser una peligrosa. El verano pasado en Haití, durante un baño con nuestro director local y dos de nuestros niños, fuimos atacados por una multitud de personas que pensaban que estábamos secuestrando a sus hijos. La policía haitiana vio el peligro y nos rescató, pero ellos mismos fueron superados por la violenta multitud. Finalmente, fuimos salvados por soldados de mantenimiento de la paz de las Naciones Unidas.
Finalmente, creo que la paciencia, la confianza, la buena voluntad y el Internet hacen posibles nuestros esfuerzos. Nos comunicamos con nuestros 218 voluntarios a través de zonas horarias por correo electrónico, mensajería instantánea y Skype. Plaxo, Facebook y LinkedIn también juegan un papel en nuestra divulgación. Los planes son que nuestros patrocinadores de niños puedan saludar directamente a sus niños a través de Skype.
Como en Wall Street, las semanas de 100 horas continúan, solo que ahora ya no recibo un salario ni un bono anual. En 2006, liquidé mis ahorros del plan de jubilación para mantener a flote nuestros esfuerzos. Mi enfoque sigue siendo perseguir el todopoderoso dólar, solo que ahora para otros.
ENSAYO | Primero un huérfano, luego muchos más: Orphans International (Nov. 12, 2007)
ESSAY| First One Orphan, Then Many Others: Orphans International (New York Times, 12 de noviembre de 2007)