news – Wissam Charafeddine

From Universal Declaration of Human Values – Article 7 – Rules of Order

January 15, 2026 WLeave a comment

Robert Rules of Order should be the governing rules for all governing bodies in governments and their institutions, as well as non-governmental institutions.

Democratic governance quickly decays into confusion and domination by the loudest voices when there are no shared rules for how we meet, debate, and decide. In any city in the world, public institutions—such as city councils, school boards, public committees, and community councils—should conduct their work under a clear, consistent, and fair system of parliamentary procedure. Robert’s Rules of Order offers such a framework: a well-tested method that structures meetings, clarifies motions, regulates debate, and ensures that both majority and minority viewpoints are heard. When public bodies adopt Robert’s Rules, they reduce arbitrariness, prevent abuse of power by whoever holds the chair, and make decisions through a transparent, step-by-step process that the public can follow and trust.

Alongside formal parliamentary procedure, many communities are inspired by alternative decision-making methodologies such as consensus, sociocracy, and “dynamic governance.” These approaches focus on the style and spirit of decision-making—seeking deeper agreement, inclusion, and shared ownership of outcomes. However, they are not, by themselves, complete mechanics for running meetings: they typically do not specify how to introduce motions, recognize speakers, handle amendments, resolve procedural disputes, or record decisions in a consistent way. For this reason, they are best understood as decision styles that can be integrated into a robust procedural framework. Robert’s Rules of Order can serve as the backbone for meeting mechanics, while a city, organization, or assembly explicitly adopts consensus-seeking or sociocratic principles to guide how options are developed, how concerns are addressed, and how strongly the group aims for agreement before resorting to a vote.

The purpose of adopting Rules of Order is not empty formality; it is the protection of people and the integrity of decisions. Robert’s Rules safeguard the right of members to speak, propose, amend, and object; they protect minority voices from being steamrolled, and they protect the validity of votes by ensuring that every decision is properly introduced, debated, and recorded. When all public bodies in a city follow the same procedural standard, residents can understand how decisions are made, trace how an issue moved from proposal to vote, and hold their institutions accountable. A city that combines clear parliamentary mechanics with humane, consensus-oriented decision styles affirms a simple principle: power must be exercised openly, fairly, and according to rules that apply equally to all, while always striving for the broadest possible agreement among its people.

Answers of Wissam Charafeddine, MI Delegate, Candidate to the Steering Committee of Green Party

September 28, 2025 WLeave a comment

Answers of Wissam Charafeddine, MI Delegate, Candidate to the Steering Committee. (Thank you Shannel for putting the forum and questions together!)

1. If elected, how do you intend for the Steering Committee to engage better with Caucuses and caucus members to ensure those who represent oppressed communities are recognized by the GPUS?

Since the bylaws give the Steering Committee the responsibility to coordinate with committees and caucuses (Article IV, Section 4-2.7f), then it is the duty of the Steering Committee to institutionalize periodic (perhaps monthly) caucus briefings—short, focused check-ins with at least one SC liaison per caucus to track needs, priorities, and collaboration opportunities. I also support creating a Caucus Relations Working Group to enhance collaboration among caucuses and streamline communication and ensure oppressed communities are not just recognized—but integrated into platform revision, candidate recruitment, and messaging.

2. If elected, what actions or policies would you implement to ensure all Greens, regardless of disability, work and family obligations, or economic circumstances, have equitable access to participate in Green Party activities and decision-making processes?

Accessibility is a core Green value, and the bylaws expect the SC to facilitate internal participation. I will propose three actions or the enhancement of them:

1. Implement multilingual participation tools for proposals and debates and emphasize the asynchronous tools that we have.
2. Offer automatic hardship-based fee waivers for national meetings and create a solidarity travel fund.
3. Push for a “Green Flex” policy within committees—rotating meeting times and offering recorded summaries to accommodate working-class, disabled, and caregiving Greens.

3. What is your position on cross-ideological coalitions and partnerships? Are there any types of groups that the party should prioritize collaborating with? Are there any types of groups that the party should avoid working with?

I support principled coalitions rooted in shared actions, not diluted platforms. We should prioritize collaborating with:

Anti-imperialist and climate justice groups

Youth-led direct action networks

Global Greens and anti-austerity movements

We must avoid working with groups that promote genocide, racism, authoritarianism, or eco-fascism. Any coalition must be values-aligned and transparently debated by the NC.

4. “The Green Congressional Campaign Committee (GCCC) engaged in fundraising behavior that resulted in violations of donors’ rights. GPUS Fiscal Policy requires that donors be notified and given the choice to have their contributions returned. The current SteeringCommittee has been asked to remediate impacted donors and has been provided with multiple ways to do so. At this time, they have chosen not to pursue any of these options, arguing that because the GCCC is a legally separate entity for FEC filing purposes, it is not subject to GPUS Fiscal Policy, including the Donors Bill of Rights.

This position directly contradicts the Fiscal Policy’s stated purview, which covers all GPUS committees, including those registered as independent political committees.

If elected as Steering Committee co-chair, what specific actions would you pursue to correct past violations of the GPUS Donors Bill of Rights and to ensure that all GPUS committees engaged in fundraising, including those with separate legal statuses, remain compliant with GPUS Fiscal Policy and established ethical fundraising standards?”

Fiscal Policy (as referenced in Article IV) clearly applies to all GPUS committees. A minimalist, ethical Steering Committee should:

Immediately propose to issue donor notices offering refunds, in accordance with the Donors Bill of Rights.

Establish a Fiscal Compliance Review Task Force to audit all active fundraising efforts.

Propose an amendment reaffirming that no legal structure exempts any GPUS body from ethical standards.

Transparency builds trust—and we must restore it.

5. Understanding that as a member of the steering committee of the National Committee of the Green Party you will not be able to enact governmental policies or legislation,

What is your game plan to deal with a militarized immigration system? How do we protect Hispanic, Caribbean, and other affected communities?We need to play a part of raising awareness. I will:

Support nationwide Green-led sanctuary campaigns and platform visibility for immigrant rights groups.

Collaborate with Caucuses that represent targeted communities to craft anti-militarization talking points.

Push GPUS to become a moral voice on immigration, particularly in exposing the links between climate collapse, war, and forced migration.

6. What past or present LGBTQIA+ related events, activities, or organizations have you participated in?

As an ally and organizer, I’ve co-hosted inclusive open mic nights, supported queer Muslim visibility through community safe spaces, and I am working on a book in Arabic highlighting the plurality of sexual and gender identities in Arab and Muslim communities and the misinformation associated with homophobia. I also engage in educational programming that challenges both Western stereotyping and internalized homophobia.

7. What do you think are the biggest issues facing LGBTQIA+ People of color? What do you think are the biggest issues facing LGBTQIA+ people with disabilities?

For LGBTQIA+ People of Color: systemic invisibility, violence, and the lack of culturally competent support networks.
For LGBTQIA+ people with disabilities: compounded marginalization, healthcare discrimination, and exclusion from both queer and disability movements.
The Green Party must address these through platform reform, disabled and queer caucus elevation, and intersectional candidate recruitment.

8. Would you be in favor of the GPUS hiring a political director?

Yes—with clarity. A political director, if rooted in democratic values, can help streamline our national messaging, engage strategically with movements, and ensure consistency. But this role must be transparent, accountable to the SC, and subject to NC review to avoid centralization of power. There is a difference between a Political Director and a Spokesperson. I think Spokesperson should always rotate as not to personify the Party.

9. What are your thoughts on national visibility in the halls of Congress on off election years where Greens are lobbying for public funding of elections and other causes?

Absolutely. We need a Green Lobby Week annually—where Greens flood congressional offices with demands for public financing, ballot access reform, and climate legislation. Off-year action shows we are a political force—not just a ballot label. We must be visible, organized, and unafraid. When I used to be a member of Amnesty International, I used to be on a delegation that visited the congressional offices in Detroit on a monthly basis. We need to implement something similar.

10. What are your top 2-3 priorities for the operation of the Green Party of the US?

1. Triple Membership & Contributions through local engagement, tech automation, and targeted youth campaigns.
2. Form a task force to study the European Green digital platforms, and write a proposal for upgrading the GPUS digital platforms accordingly.
3. Platform Reform to build the most youth-connected, anti-colonial, climate-centered platform in U.S. politics.

Capitalism Reimagined for Human Rights and Community Benefit.

September 13, 2025 WLeave a comment

“I’m not a socialist in the sense of rejecting private ownership. I’m a social entrepreneur: I use capitalism’s tools — innovation, investment, private enterprise — to serve communities and advance human rights rather than private profit. My values align with democratic and eco-socialist ideals of justice and sustainability, but I stay pragmatic, building people-driven, independent, and sustainable structures through non-violent capitalist methods.”

I believe that private ownership, markets, and innovation are powerful tools — not inherently evil. They’ve lifted many out of poverty, generated wondrous technologies, and accelerated human potential. But left unchecked, they often produce inequity, environmental damage, and injustice. So reimagined capitalism means:

Using markets & private enterprise not just for profit, but intentionally for human rights, social equity, community wellbeing, and environmental sustainability.
Structuring capitalism so that the externalities (pollution, displacement, exploitation, etc.) are minimized, internalized, or prevented.
Ensuring that communities have power: governance, ownership, voice. Not just as consumers, but as stakeholders.
Embedding accountability: companies, investors, governments must be answerable for social & human outcomes, not purely financial ones.
Hybrid models: combining public, private, cooperative, nonprofit, social enterprise, or commons-based forms.

In practice, this looks like: fair wages, safe working conditions, environmental stewardship, supporting marginalized communities, redistributing returns in some way, aligning investment with human rights, etc.

How It Might Look: Key Features

To bring this into concrete vision, here are features I think are essential in a “capitalism reimagined”:

Feature	What It Means in Practice
Democratized ownership & control	Worker cooperatives; shared ownership; community land trusts; governance that includes those affected.
Purpose over profit (or profit + purpose)	Business models where profit is a tool, not the end; reinvestment of surpluses into community; mission-driven impact.
Regulatory frameworks & institutions	Laws/policies that enforce labor rights, protect the environment, support public goods like health, education; tax regimes that distribute wealth more fairly.
Social entrepreneurship and impact investing	Investors who care about both returns and social outcomes; enterprises that solve social problems while being financially sustainable.
Commons, cooperation, solidarity	Community-led initiatives; shared infrastructure; local decision-making; the idea that not everything should be commodified.
Transparency, accountability & measurement	Metrics beyond GDP: human development, inequality, ecological impact. Workers’ rights, diversity, social inclusion.

Case Studies: Where Things Are Shaping Up

These are real-world examples (warts and all) of pieces of reimagined capitalism already happening. They show it’s possible — though always a mix of progress + struggle.

1. China — Leping Group

The Leping Group is social enterprise in China that works in eco-agriculture, microfinance, early childhood education, and domestic service training. IADB Publications
What’s promising: it blends market operations (services people pay for) with social goals (serving underserved populations). There’s innovation, scale, local embedding. But barriers exist in regulation, bureaucracy, and balancing profitability vs mission. IADB Publications

2. Africa — Social Enterprises Creating Jobs

A study of several social enterprises across African countries (Rwanda, Ghana, Kenya, Ethiopia) shows that these ventures are creating employment, especially in neglected sectors. Examples: WASH (water, sanitation, hygiene) businesses; waste-management (“TakaTaka Solutions” in Kenya) which turns trash into jobs; ambulance services where public provision is weak. Siemens Stiftung
These show how private initiative + local innovation + community need combine.

3. South Africa — Social Enterprise Sector

There’s a “vibrant sector” of social enterprises in South Africa (surveyed in 2018) doing diverse work: delivering services, reducing inequality, reinvesting surpluses into social mission. Gibs Website Storage
Challenges include: legal framework (many are not formalized), accessing capital, balancing mission vs financial viability. But it’s a live example of capitalism bent toward community benefit.

4. Bangladesh — Friendship NGO (Runa Khan)

Friendship works in remote, climate-affected communities: combining health, education, disaster management, economic development, cultural preservation. Wikipedia
What’s impressive is the integrated approach: instead of just one silo (say, health), they combine multiple spheres (climate + livelihoods + migration + culture), recognizing that human rights are interlinked. They serve millions, often where state capacity is hard to reach.

5. India — eSamudaay (Rural Towns, Digital Commons)

Recently, eSamudaay in small towns in India is building digital-ecosystems for local entrepreneurs: enabling vegetable vendors, pharmacies, general stores, etc., to join platforms that respect data sovereignty and local governance. It uses open-source tools, a “business in a box” model. The idea isn’t building a gigantic corporate platform that captures all value, but keeping value / decision-making local. Financial Times

What’s Hard About It (Because Reality Bites)

Trade-offs: financial return vs mission. Many social enterprises struggle financially if forced to be fully self-sustaining while also paying fair wages, caring for environment etc.
Regulatory / legal obstacles: Many countries don’t have law that supports social enterprise, or tax treatment, or simplified regulations.
Access to capital: Mission-oriented businesses are often seen as higher risk; fewer investors willing to trade off profit for impact.
Scaling without losing mission: When expanding, pressures (market, investor, competition) push mission creep.
Measuring outcomes: Hard to quantify human rights, social inclusion, environmental impact in ways that investors, public and stakeholders accept.
Global externalities & power imbalances: Multinational corporations, global supply chains can undermine local well-being (e.g. extractive industries, environmental damage), even when domestic policies are good.

How I See It Looking If It Were More Fully Realized

If we built more of our economic systems in this reimagined way, we might see:

Cooperative zones: Worker-owned businesses and community-governed enterprises making up a significant portion of local economies.
Mandatory social and environmental audits: Not just financial audits. Companies measure their human rights impact, environmental footprints, equity & inclusion.
Impact investment mainstreaming: Investors (banks, pension funds) expect social returns as part of their mandate. Instruments like green bonds, social bonds, impact bonds, community investment funds proliferate.
Regulated market failures fixed: Pollution, climate change, monopoly power, resource depletion are priced in (carbon taxes, regulation, strong antitrust).
Universal basic services: Health, education, housing, digital infrastructure are guaranteed; private enterprise complements but doesn’t replace public goods.
Local economic resilience: Local supply chains, local ownership of infrastructure (energy, water etc.), community resources.
Strong safety nets & redistribution: Tax systems that ensure wealth doesn’t concentrate; social protections for marginalized groups.

Why This Matters

Human rights are not optional; economic systems must serve people, not the other way around.
Environmental crises + inequality threaten the viability of economies built on destruction and exclusion.
Communities left out of markets or harmed by them suffer — morally, socially, and ultimately economically (because instability, unrest, poor health etc. cost all of us).
Innovation thrives when the needs of many are considered, not just markets that serve the wealthy.

Conclusion

Reimagined capitalism doesn’t reject private ownership or markets; it reorients them. It says: yes, entrepreneurship, investment, innovation have tremendous value — but they should be harnessed so that private profit and community benefit, human rights, environmental sustainability are not enemies, but partners.

What this looks like in practice is messy and varied. It is already budding in places: in South Africa, India, Bangladesh, parts of China, and Africa more broadly. Scaling it up will require changes in policy, attitude, governance, and investment.

Article 3 – Freedom of Expression and Assembly

August 18, 2025 WLeave a comment

“Every human being has the right for freedom of expression without transgression on the rights of others. Everyone has the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association.”
From the Universal Declaration of Human Values by Wissam Charafeddine

These freedoms have deep historical roots. From Enlightenment thinkers like John Locke and Voltaire to the American and French revolutions, the right to express ideas and organize peacefully has been seen as essential to justice and social progress. After the horrors of World War II, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948) formally recognized these rights as fundamental to global peace and human dignity. Thinkers like John Stuart Mill, Hannah Arendt, and Amartya Sen have all argued that expression and association are necessary for truth, civic engagement, and human development. Freedom of expression and peaceful assembly are the cornerstones of any society that seeks truth, justice, and progress. Article 3 of the Universal Declaration of Human Values declares that every individual has the right to express themselves and to gather peacefully with others—so long as this expression does not infringe on the rights of others. But in today’s world, the boundaries of this right are increasingly contested.

We are witnessing a dangerous inflation in what is considered “hate speech.” While true hate— such as antisemitism, islamophobia, or transphobia that has incited real-world violence—is sometimes tolerated in the halls of government and media, legitimate political speech—such as saying Free Palestine which is a cry for liberation, justice, and the dignity of a displaced people – is often smeared, suppressed, or even criminalized. This distortion of the term “harm” threatens the very foundation of democratic discourse. We must recognize that the right to speak freely must outweigh the discomfort it may cause, especially when that discomfort comes from challenging injustice, power, or the political status quo.

It is critical to distinguish between criticizing ideas and demeaning people. Ideas are not people. Critique—even ridicule—of ideologies, philosophies, or religions must remain protected speech. What should never be tolerated, however, is the dehumanization or violation of individuals’ dignity based on who they are. I was able to publish my latest Arabic book, A Discussion – Universe from Void, which critiques classical arguments for the existence of God and proposes a new alternative arguments. It is a bold exploration of a sensitive subject—one that could not be published freely in many countries around the world. My ability to write it, and your ability to read it, are freedoms we must fiercely protect. Not just for ourselves—but for future generations who must be allowed to think, question, and speak without fear.

Speech should not be censored merely because it offends or challenges dominant power structures. While we must condemn real and substantial incitement to violence, we should err on the side of freedom—not fear. The moment we begin outlawing words for making others “uncomfortable,” we open the door to authoritarianism cloaked in the language of safety. We should not mask “suppressed speech zones” as “safe zones”. Dialogue happens to remove discomfort by communicating perspectives. History, from Voltaire to Dr. King to Edward Said, teaches us that truth is often uncomfortable. And justice often begins with a voice that refuses to be silenced.

Introducing a Journey Through the Foundations of Universal Human Values: Article 1: Freedom

June 6, 2025 WLeave a comment

Written and shared with Musings readers by Livonia resident and author Wissam Charafeddine
As an Arab American activist, author, and educator dedicated to the values of human dignity, justice, and enlightenment, I have long been fascinated by the evolution of human rights across civilizations. Our modern understanding of freedom, equality, and human dignity did not arise overnight; it is the result of centuries of thought, struggle, and legal progress from various cultures, traditions, and revolutions.

A declaration is not merely a set of words on paper; when embraced by people, it becomes a powerful force that shapes societies and defines the course of history. Foundational documents—such as the Magna Carta, the Bill of Rights, and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights—have laid the groundwork for the freedoms and protections we enjoy today. Yet no state can endure in justice without being rooted in enduring values and principles—values that uphold human dignity, peace, freedom, security, and equality, rather than mere power or prosperity.

Drawing from this vast human heritage, and integrating modern concerns such as environmental protection, animal rights, and sexual freedom, I have authored the Universal Declaration of Human Values—a contemporary framework for a just and humane society. This book serves as both a guide for modern governance and a call to safeguard the progress humanity has painstakingly achieved.
In the coming months, I am delighted to accept the invitation of a Livonia champion of Human Rights, Bill Joyner, to launch a special series exploring twenty foundational values that have shaped our global quest for an ideal, just society. Each month, I will present one of these milestones—tracing its history, philosophy, and relevance for us today.

Article 1: Freedom—the core principle upon which all other rights are built:
“All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights, private ownership, security, and pursuit of a better life.”

This simple yet profound statement distills the essence of what it means to live in a society that respects human dignity. Let us examine its components:

“All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.” This declares that every person—regardless of race, gender, origin, or belief—is inherently entitled to rights and respect. No person should be considered superior or inferior by virtue of birth.

“Private ownership.” The right to own and control property is a vital pillar of individual liberty, empowering people to manage their resources and make independent choices

“Security.” Security is the guarantee that one’s rights, body, and well-being are protected—both by law and society—against violence, oppression, and discrimination.

“Pursuit of a better life.” Every human being deserves the opportunity to seek personal fulfillment, improvement, and happiness, free from unjust obstacles.

The ideals expressed in this article are not new—they are deeply rooted in humanity’s intellectual and political evolution:

Enlightenment (17th-18th centuries): Philosophers like John Locke and Jean-Jacques Rousseau articulated concepts of natural rights, liberty, and the social contract, establishing the modern idea of equal human dignity and freedom.

American Revolution (1776): The U.S. Declaration of Independence proclaimed that “all men are created equal” with inalienable rights to “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.”

French Revolution (1789): The Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen enshrined the principles of equality, property rights, freedom of expression, and legal protections for all citizens.

Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948): In response to the horrors of World War II, the global community affirmed these timeless ideals, declaring that every human is entitled to “life, liberty, and security of person.”

Modern International Law: Covenants such as the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights further refine these principles on a global scale.

I invite you to join me on this journey over the next several months as we explore, one by one, the milestones that continue to guide the global conscience toward freedom, dignity, and justice for all.

https://myemail.constantcontact.com/FridayMusings-June-6–2025.html?soid=1102315379807&aid=QEmj_fyST8o&fbclid=IwY2xjawKv8WtleHRuA2FlbQIxMQBicmlkETFrcjBPNmE5U1BWeVdDMzd3AR7H-ySqayV0Z0Kmc2m9f2rGi1uCwmtB6TG4fZB5jQLVBO-OvhQEmuidSe8cow_aem_-atMErQrW0E6aXmkBjrDcw

Top 30 Films for Wissam Charafeddine

December 15, 2024December 15, 2024 WLeave a comment

Welcome to Wissam Charafeddine’s curated list of top 30 films! This selection features a diverse range of cinematic masterpieces from around the globe, spanning different genres, themes, and eras. Each entry includes an IMDb rating, a brief overview, the country of origin, the year it was made, and a YouTube trailer link.

1. The Hunt (2012)

Country: Denmark
IMDb Rating: 8.3
Overview: A gripping psychological drama about a man whose life is shattered when he’s falsely accused of misconduct in his small community.
YouTube Trailer:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ieLIOBkMgAQ

Continue reading →