Counting On … – Page 13

Counting on … 162

10th October 2025

Nonviolent Direct Action (NVDA)

Amnesty defines nonviolent direct action as actions that do not make use of physical force against an individual, do not cause others to fear the immediate use of violence, nor advocate violence of discrimination. NVDA is an umbrella term that includes civil disobedience as well as activities… [such as] letter writing and collecting petition signatures, to rallies, demonstrations and media stunts, and extending to higher risk activities such as banner drops [&] sit-ins…” (1)

People typically turn to NVDA when they feel that they are not being listened to, that the response being taken is too slow, or to raise awareness about an issue. This is particularly true of the climate crisis where activists feel that the actions being taken by businesses, organisations and governments are not sufficient in response to the scale of the threat. In the past NVDA has been used by the suffragettes and the suffragists, by civil rights groups, by anti nuclear protesters and by the anti apartheid movement, to name but a few.

https://www.amnesty.org/en/wp-content/uploads/2024/02/ACT1074712024ENGLISH.pdf

Counting on … 161

9th October 2025

What does ‘woke’ mean and how does it impact free speech?

“Woke is an adjective derived from African-American English used since the 1930s or earlier to refer to awareness of racial prejudice and discrimination, often in the construction stay woke. The term acquired political connotations by the 1970s and gained further popularity in the 2010s with the hashtag #staywoke. Over time, woke came to be used to refer to a broader awareness of social inequalities such as sexism and denial of LGBTQ rights.”(1)

‘Woke’ is also used as a synonym for political correctness. It is often used as a term of abuse by someone who rejects or doesn’t want to accept new ways of understanding or new ways of doing things. As it often comes with a refusal to engage in discussion, it can be used to curtail free speech.

The following extract from an article from the Conversation, urges us to challenge anti-woke ideas and the careless use of language where it perpetuates social inequalities and prejudice.

“Real effort is required to learn to see injustices that are embedded in our ordinary language and everyday practices. Social psychological work on implicit biases suggests that good intentions and heartfelt commitments are not enough. It takes integrity and courage to critically examine our own behaviour and engage in honest conversations with people who claim we have hurt them. However, once we recognise what’s at stake, to dismiss something as woke is a refusal to even consider the possibility that the targeted practice might be offensive, premised on false or inaccurate claims or discriminatory or harmful.” (2)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Woke

(2) https://theconversation.com/heres-what-woke-means-and-how-to-respond-to-it-219588

Counting on … 160

8th October 2025

Freedom of speech and the right to protest are key parts of maintaining a democracy. The following is from the Joseph Rowntree Reform Trust.

“A healthy society contains a diversity of views, lifestyles, and beliefs. Individuals need to be able to freely discuss political issues, criticise their government, and express dissenting views – including assembling to challenge the government of the day – without censorship or reprisal. Both of these rights are enshrined in the Human Rights Act, which gives statutory force to the European Convention on Human Rights.” (1)

Yet these important rights are being eroded. Whilst in terms of policing this erosion comes through increasing amounts of legislation, the political will that sees such legislation being introduced comes from changes in our society – and these are changes we as Christians should counter, bringing to the fore the Gospel message that there is a better way of living together.

Again from the JRRT:-

“In the UK, as in other democracies, freedom of expression is under threat in new and complex ways, caught up in the battleground between different conceptions of offence and harm, debates around cancel culture, no platforming, ‘safe space’, online harms and academic freedom. Suppressing free speech is a core part of the authoritarian playbook, while at the same time invoked by populists in order to tap into resentment against elites, ‘wokeness’, and vulnerable communities such as migrants.” (1)

https://www.jrrt.org.uk/what-we-do/our-priorities/freedom-of-expression-protest-rights/

And also this article article I rewrote earlier in the year about protest – https://www.jcfj.ie/article/the-importance-of-a-healthy-ecology-of-protest/

Counting on … 159

7th October 2025

Do we have a right to protest? Is protest an extension of the right to our freedom of expression?

The charity Liberty puts it thus:

“Everyone has the right to protest and to organise protests. This right is protected by the European Convention on Human Rights (the ECHR).

Your right to freedom of expression is protected under Article 10 of the ECHR. Your right to freedom of assembly is protected under Article 11.

These Articles have been brought into UK law by the Human Rights Act 1998. It

Requires public authorities, like the police, to act in a way that is compatible with your rights. The police also have the legal obligation to help protests take place. A legal obligation is something that the law requires you to do. It’s not optional.
Allows you to bring a claim in UK courts when your rights are not respected.” (1)

Liberty goes on to explain that the right to protest is not without some limitations, principally that the police can curtail or limit the right to protest if there are other legal laws to be considered (eg the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act 2022) or to prevent crime and disorder, to protect public health or to protect the rights of others. Nevertheless these limits must be proportionate. What police may do – rather than banning a protest – is impose restrictions on that protest.

So for example when I am part of CCA’s regular vigil outside Parliament, the police many ask what are plans are, how many people we expect and how long we intend staying. Or for example a march such as the Palestinian Solidarity March, will be required to follow a specific route and start and finish at specified times. (Protests that involve moving as opposed to stationary protests typically need to be pre-arranged with the police).

Liberty’s webpage has more information about rights and legal restrictions around protest.

https://www.libertyhumanrights.org.uk/advice_information/right-to-protest/

Counting on … 158

6th October 2025

A phrase much used at the moment is ‘freedom of speech’. But what does it mean? And does it guarantee that what we here is the truth?

“Freedom of speech is a principle that supports the freedom of an individual or a community to articulate their opinions and ideas without fear of retaliation, censorship, or legal sanction. The right to freedom of expression has been recognised as a human right in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) and international human rights law.…” However this is not an absolute right and a clause includes that these rights carries “”special duties and responsibilities” and may “therefore be subject to certain restrictions” when necessary “[f]or respect of the rights or reputation of others” or “[f]or the protection of national security or public order or of public health or morals“….Common limitations or boundaries to freedom of speech relate to libel, slander, obscenity, pornography, sedition, incitement, fighting words, hate speech, classified information, copyright violation, trade secrets, food labeling, …” (1)

Freedom of speech certainly,y ensures we do hear what other people are thinking and what they believe to be true. However of itself, freedom of speech doesn’t guarantee that what is said is truthful (even if it is a genuinely held belief). I don’t think you can have truth without freedom of speech, but truth requires more – researching the facts and in particular researching the facts you don’t know. And that itself will depend upon knowing which questions to ask. It could be that listening to a variety of views will help clarify what questions should be asked – and hearing that diversity of views does bring us back to freedom of speech.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_speech

Counting on … 157

3rd October 2025

“Growing wealth inequality in the UK could be a “major driver of societal collapse” within the next decade, according to a new report by the Fairness Foundation and the Policy Institute and Department of War Studies at King’s College London…

“The participants identified a negative feedback loop, whereby the government’s failure to tax wealth effectively means it lacks sufficient revenue to uphold the social contract by which strong public services, an effective social safety net and a healthy economy provide people with decent living standards.

“Trust in politics then declines further, politicians avoid honest discussions of the underlying problems and what to do about them, and the system’s legitimacy is increasingly questioned as the social contract collapses.” (1)

Looking at public attitudes, the report that “two-thirds (63%) of Britons now think the very rich have too much influence on politics in the UK – far higher than the share who say the same about businesses (40%), religious organisation (40%) or international organisations like the EU and UN (38%).

Improving incomes levels for the poorest, and taxing the richest clearly has multiple benefits.

https://www.kcl.ac.uk/news/wealth-inequality-risks-triggering-societal-collapse-within-next-decade-report-finds

Counting on … 156

2nd October 2025

How do we ensure that work is used to do good things and not bad things?

As individuals and as households, we can make within the limits of our own domain – although we nevertheless be impacted by the decisions of others. The moral choices we make will be affected by our culture, our upbringing and our faith.

Outside our domain, what work happens and how it is encouraged or not, will depend more on the aims of businesses and corporate organisations, governments and legislation. Traditional economic theory tells us that businesses make their decisions solely on the basis of profit. Governments on the other hand may be seen as ‘systems responsible for governing an organised community, established to serve the collective needs and interests of their populations’ (1) or ‘to serve the interests of its rulers, be they monarchs, dictators, aristocracies, or ruling classes.’ (2)

Taking the former definition, there is also an onus on governments to control or organise businesses so that their pursuit of profit is not at the expense of others. Nevertheless pursuit of profit does seem to be the biggest determinant of what work is undertaken because it is the pursuit of profit that determines how much people are paid for each job, and the ‘profit’ value may differ from what is of value for the welling being of the society. Looking at pay levels, CEOs and senior officials are earning an average of £104,000 (and up to several million for the CEOs of banks, fossil fuel and water companies) but are there jobs really more valuable to society than the work of farm workers, cleaners and and nursery nurses who earn between £17,000 and £27,000? (3)

Could the CEOs do their work if it wasn’t for the large number of low paid workers who ensure that food is grown – and transported to the shops and stacked on shelves and dispatched to homes via delivery vans? Could the CEOs do their work if no one cleaned their offices, mended the electrics, or maintained their IT? Could the CEOs do their jobs if there weren’t nurseries and schools for their children, if there weren’t taxi drivers and traffic wardens and car mechanics getting them safely to work?

Having a UBI would at the very least give more equal value to the the work people. If it was financed through higher taxes for those with higher pay packets, then that too would redress the balance of the social value of work.

(3) https://www.unionlearn.org.uk/compare-average-pay-job

https://www.unionlearn.org.uk/compare-average-pay-job

Counting on … 155

1st October 2025

What is the purpose of work?

Yesterday’s Counting On highlighted some of the diversity around work – and principally that no all work is paid, and indeed nor is all paid work remunerated at the same rate.

According to Ecosia, work, as a noun, is activity involving mental or physical effort done in order to achieve a purpose or result, and as a verb, is to be engaged in physical or mental activity in order to achieve a result. Work might be contrasted with play if play js seen as an activity that has no purpose or result. But play does have a purpose: it enables people (especially children) to learn; it helps people relax; it enables people to explore alternative worlds. Work might be contrasted with being lazy if lazy is seen as not being bothered, or not caring, or being selfish. This brings in a moral dimension and asks the question is not working always bad? Is all work inherently good? Which comes to the question, what is the purpose of work?

We work to stay alive – eg gathering, growing, and preparing food to eat; building, maintaining, cleaning a safe place of shelter – ie a home; looking after our mental and physical health which might include making medicines, or listening to people’s troubles, taking exercise – and making that exercise fun; through education to ensure that what we learn that makes life better is shared and passed on; through exploring and researching and just being curious so as to understand better the intricate ways by which this world exists and flourishes; making clothes and tools, making things that keep our homes warm (or cool) and making things that make our homes homely; making shoes and bicycles and other means of transport (including roads and bridges etc) so that we can meet other people and exchange ideas and goods; protecting the ecosystems in which we live – keeping them safe and in good health, ensuring the safety and well being of each other and all other living beings with whom we share this planet; and finally praying for as St Benedict said, to,work is to pray and pray is to work.

All this is about ensuring a flourishing life for all and is morally good. But what if work is used to harm people, to harm other living beings? What is work is used to exploit the planet, to denude it of resources and to pollute it? What is work is used to benefit and small minority at the expense of everyone – and everything – else?

How do we ensure that work is used to do good things and not bad things?

Counting on … 154

30th September 2025

What is a ‘universal basic income’? What are its benefits?

A universal basic income is a social welfare payment paid to all citizens with either a means test or a requirement to complete any sort of work. As a full basic income, it should be sufficient to cover basic needs. (That said, some people with specific needs might need a higher rate to cover their living costs – eg if they were disabled and needed additional support or equipment).

The idea behind the UBI is that everyone in that society will have enough to live on – is that lower limited of the economic doughnut will have been secured. It allows some people to pursue voluntary work – caring for the young or the elderly, working on conservation projects etc. It allows people to take jobs with low pay – such as artists and cleaners – but might there be an argument here to say such jobs should be better paid even if that means higher prices or higher rates. It allows people with stressful jobs to work shorter hours and spend more time relaxing. It ensures security of income for people whose work is seasonal – fruit picking, local tourism etc.

There are clear benefits to society as a whole – the population will be healthier both physically and mentally. This is good in itself. It means people can work better. It reduces costs for health care. It can increase sales of non luxury goods as more people have the money to spend on essentials. Evidence from small scale trials suggests that with the UBI safety net people spend time finding a job they like and are suited to and then become more reliable committed workers.

Perhaps more importantly it allows people to feel valued and be happy and fulfilled.

“Humans need to do work that feels valuable, psychologically,” says Cleo Goodman, a UBI expert at the thinktank Autonomy. “It’s baked into us. It is complete nonsense to suggest that there’s a faction of society that just wants to sit around on the sofa all day, drinking beer and watching TV. We want to spend a fair amount of our time doing something that makes us proud.” (1)

Some people do argue that UBI would lead to people avoiding work, or not working as hard, big I wonder if that would be so? When we are children, everyone asks what do you want to be when you grow up? Getting a job or a role that you want, a job that you will enjoy, is seen as a sensible and worthwhile objective and one which motivates us. For many of us, the jobs we choose are vocational: we choose them not because of the financial reward but because we would not be happy doing anything else.

https://www.theguardian.com/society/article/2024/jul/14/money-for-nothing-is-universal-basic-income-about-to-transform-society

Counting on … 153

29th September 2025

Another way – or rather a parallel way – of reducing the inequality between rich and poor (so enabling us to live within the inner and outer limits of the doughnut) is to ensure minimum pay rates that are sufficiently generous to enable a good level of wellbeing. In this regard the ‘real living wage’(1) should be a minimum. The current real living wage is £12.60 per hour (outside London) which for a 35 hour week equates to £22,050 per annum.

But how generous is that – is it just a necessary minimum?

According to the calculations of Raisin (2) a comfortable salary for a single person would be £28,018. But add in a young child, and that income would need to increase to £51,363 – or for a couple and one young child, a joint income of £65,810.

And equally what if you earn the real living wage but are only able to get 20 hours a week?

An alternative would be to pay everyone a basic income, paid for from taxation, to ensure that no one falls through the safety net of not having enough income to sustain a reasonable standard of living.