Soap-box time
I have this website; it is set as my homepage. I recommend that you all visit it. www.thehungersite.com I'll let you explore it on your own. Anyway, they always have really great quote pertaining to social justice on the first page. Today's was exceptionally excellent and speaks to one of the issues that makes me most hot under the collar - urban sprawl and development (and, more broadly, misuse of the environment).
"We do not inherit the earth from our ancestors. We borrow it from our children." - Native American Proverb.
I shared it with Josh and we had a little discussion about the irony of the fact that the original ambassadors to the "New World" came under the authority and support of the church and part of their task was to bring Christ to the "heathens." Well, in bringing Christ, they brought small-pox in blankets meant to kill the Natives, they brought economic endeavors that were antithetical to caring for the earth, they killed all the buffalo, they fought wars, they destroyed land and pushed the Natives away. Eventually, they cloistered Native Americans in reservations meant to "preserve their culture", but made America such that the whole idea of Native Americans practicing their culture is a complete joke. Now, we continue to be rapers and destroyers of the lands as we expand our ugly houses, build shopping plazas, hotels, and business parks solely designed to breed consumerism, tear down woods and wildernesses, displace animals from their natural habitats and make the cost of living so high that underprivileged families have to live in cars and shelters because they can't afford to pay $200,000 for a 2 bedroom home in "the number one city in America!"
So, not only are we not being good steward of the land in the eyes of generations to come, we aren't even caring to for the weak and poor among us, while we build 5,000 sq.foot homes for 3 person families, build Porsche dealerships next to the Goodwill, and make the market such that small farmers can't withstand the pressures of greedy developers in Western Loudon. That's why we import produce from California, and why tomatoes cost $2.49 a pound . We've forgotten to be stewards of God's earth - and his creatures.
This post is a ramble and I shall end it now.
8 comments:
I'm open to suggestions--should we move to Africa?
I wholeheartedly identify with the frustrations you express, Mair and Charles. Many times I have wondered with my Redhurt husband as to whether or not we should just abandon America and its ridiculousness for another, less frivolous lifestyle. I haven't decided if I agree with his observation, but he says that most people would do the same things America has done if they had the resources and the power. He chalks it up more to human nature than to a "materialistic" gene that's been bred into the American population, and therefore thinks that life anywhere would pretty much be the same. I don't know what I think about that. His point is that when the most pressing need is survival, humans will focus on that. But once that need has been met, they will inevitably begin to create and develop new things - basically the Maslow's hierarchy. So it's not that people are more just outside of America; they simply don't have the opportunity to focus on less pressing things. I would love to answer the question of whether or not that's true - maybe I can get him to take me to Africa by fronting it as a research endeavor. Or maybe we can just make America poor again and then people won't have time to busy themselves being so meaningless
Hello, Ms. Owen. So good to hear from you. I appreciate your input on the topic. I agree with both you and your lion/baby chick/redhurt husband. This is something that Josh and I talk about very very often, and you and I should chat about it sometime, perhaps at the up-coming Grove City wedding. It will be good to see you.
Thanks for reading and commenting. Come back again!
It seems to me that there are myriad reasons why we, as Christian faithful, should abandon America in favor of less-privileged places. American materialism, however, seems to be one of the worst reasons. If we want a solution to materialism, either for ourselves or for others, it isn’t going to be achieved by moving elsewhere. I think that redhurt is absolutely right that, as a result of the human condition, prosperity consistently breeds self-absorbed indulgence. The ironic part, as Charles has often noted, is that prosperity provides the opportunity for individuals to be more selfless and more other-oriented. Prosperity (as well as education, the arts, purposive leisure, etc.) cannot cause anyone to be “a better person,” but they can provide the optimum environment in which becoming a more perfect imitator of Christ is possible. Therefore, my proposal is that those of us who realize the problem of materialism (and the ethics that underpin it, which are largely provided by corporations) we should stay right here and lead lives that are profoundly counter-cultural. I think we should work exclusively in the not-for-profit realm as a lived rejection of the fiscal ethic and corporate vision. I think we should live on $20k/year - no matter how much we make - giving the rest away. I think we should refuse to shop at WalMart or chain grocers, drink Starbucks or eat Applebee’s, drive cars and consume fuel, wear designer clothing or makeup, watch TV or play video games, or take medications that are all but essential for survival. I think we should be the best educated, most cultured, most socially apt, friendly, kind, generous, selfless people around, who obviously reject “American values.” In short, I think we should have available to us everything anyone could imagine, but rejected it all in favor of an alternative, Christian morality. Now that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t move to Africa, it just means that, if we want to combat consumption-as-pleasure-giving or consumption-as-meaning-giving, then I think we need to stay right here and do it in spite of the opportunities and pressures.
Hey everyone. I've been hearing about this little thread, so I just had to come in and post some nonsense.
First, j. morgan, I have to assert that video games are a Christian virtue, and should be played regardless of the surrounding social injustice.
Secondly, I find the flair filled environment and slightly over-priced grade D greasy beef at Applebee's to be both appetizing and delicious.
Third, I think maybe I can stop driving my car, but I absolutely refuse to quit consuming fuel.
More seriously, I'm worried that in the midst of sounding our frustrations against the abuse of our land and its native people, we might be selling our country short. Starbucks has done rotten things to put every mom-and-pop coffee shop in the country out of business, but their also one of the best companies to work for when it comes to treating their employees well. Do they abuse the environment? I've never heard it said, but I could be wrong. What sort of small coffee chain could ever have given its employees the benefits in insurance and tuition reimbursement that the giant chain does?
Getting back to the original post, I have to disagree with the underlying idea that things were "better" in America before the Europeans came. I can't justify wholesale massacre, especially not in the name of Christ, but in our frustrated desire to overcome current problems in our country with the Church and western philosophy I think we tend to sell our ancestors short. I won't disagree that many of the things they did were wrong, but I also won't accept the notion that the natives were the epitome of well-cultured land sharing peacemakers. Some of the tribes extinguished by the conquistadores were as barbaric a people as ever walked the earth, and certainly no better, and possibly quite worse, than the invaders themselves. Misguided fanatical Spaniards might have slaughtered Aztecs in the name of Christ, but I don't see how that's any worse than cutting the heart out of ones children in hopes that it'll coerce the sun into coming up again tomorrow.
I'm all for trying to treat our land and other people better, but I don't think letting our frustration at the situation lead us to blame our country our ancestors furthers that goal much at all. The social injustices we're talking about go far beyond our culture or our country or its corporations and trying to lay blame on any of these things isn't going to get us very far.
Redhurt, thanks for weighing in. Your comments are insightful and I agree with you.
And as a way of ridding myself of the guilt we keep placing on "our ancestors", I'd like to point out that I'm a Slav, which means my ancestors were never conquistadores. :o) And as my husband likes to point out to be when at all possible "The Slavs have never contributed anything of value to the human race - EVER!"
Maybe you can be the first!
redhurt makes an excellent point about Starbucks: They treat their employees well, they are environmentally sound, they have a Fair Trade line of coffees, and they are generally concerned with justice. Further, he is right that all their employees have the opportunity to receive health insurance and tuition reimbursement. The problem is the context in which all of this happens rather than outcome alone. Even if we ignore everything but the most socially beneficial aspects of this or any corporation, the fact remains that they are a legal person-status entity with the express purpose of creating wealth. It blows my mind that the existence of such entities doesn’t rattle anyone who thinks about it. Even if you have no problem accepting that, though, there are still significant trade-offs by the very nature of corporate service or good provision: you give up on the preservation of culture, the fostering of community-provided social support (rather than corporate or government social support), and an aesthetic, humanist perspective (as opposed to a functional, fiscal perspective). It’s not all green grass with the ‘buck.
As for the comparison of native peoples with the Spanish Conquistadores, I completely agree with what you said in terms of the respective moral-ness of cultures. Simply because two immoral groups collided, however, doesn’t mean that we should accept, justify, or rationalize the immorality of those who “knew better.” Not only did the Colonialists systematically massacre Native Americans IN THE NAME OF CHRIST, but they systematically marginalized them in every generation subsequent to the Conquistadores. In America today, we continue to institutionally disadvantage them whereby Native Americans are, from birth because of birth, prevented in a very active and orchestrated way from succeeding, culturally or otherwise. All of this is to say that, in some sense, what happened after 1492 is more significant than before. It is not to say, however, that this represents the full extent of the damage done by European Colonialists. Especially when compared to the habits of native peoples, Europeans massacred the non-human environment that they conquered to a far greater extent.
So let’s not reduce our frustrations to ancestors, country, or corporations, but let’s not defend them either. Also, let’s not just be “all for trying to treat our land and other people better,” let’s make it the defining characteristics of ourselves and our communities.
Post a Comment