new title--old issues

Hey--If you've read much of this, you'll notice I changed the title to something a bit less show-offy academic. I'd like to continue with this, but with a more focused goal--to look at the fundamental ways in which we think about relationship, human worth, possessions, emotion, identity, etc. etc. If you have any suggestions, fire them my way.

One fundamental premise that I try to keep in mind is that in all issues of virtue and evil, there are individual and structural elements intertwined. So poverty is not just about how much money I give to poor people, or charitable organizations, but about how I spend my money, what companies I support, how much I am willing to support publicly funded efforts to help people, etc. So far, pretty basic--this is 'structural sin 101'. I am also interested in looking at how our fundamental values and beliefs actually perpetuate and uphold these structures, even if I oppose them at the 'structural level'. For example, I might not like certain oil companies because of how they treat the environment, or their labor in other countries, so I don't buy their particular gas. But do I still assume that I should be able to buy the cheapest gas possible? It is the notion that we should get the most product for the least amount of expenditure on my part, that creates a cost-minimizing system in the first place? Can I look at my gas dollars as something I'm willing to spend more of in order to fund better care for workers and better environmental care? Am I willing to look at fossil-fuel transportation as a privilege that should be used sparingly, rather than as an inherent 'right', that I deserve to have as cheaply as possible?

I know--critiques of capitalism are pretty old, as well. And I actually agree with those who say that 'captialism is the worst system, except for all the other ones'. The reason that econimc liberalization is able to do better, on balance, at producing relatively comfortable societies is that it harnesses our greed and our drive for convenience and uses that as the engine for production, rather than trying to keep it in check, and limit greed for the sake of others. However, since there are inevitably big winners and big losers in this game, we simply shift massive, practically authoritarian levels of power from 'big government' to 'big corporations', with very little real difference for those on the bottom in terms of their poverty and relative powerlessness.

Capitalism is absolutely dependent on self-interest as the primary engine. Jesus teaches us to lay down our lives for others. Communism tries to make people do that on a society-wide level, with problematic results because 1) it must seriously curtail freedoms in order to do so, and 2) the system still needs to be organized by people with power, who eventually enjoy their power and become extremely oppressive themselves.

This is mostly personal mental spew, so I apologize. The point is: the real problem is our greed. The real problem is our desire for power and security on our own terms--our willingness to push others down to get it, or our willingness to turn a blind eye to the suffering of others when we have it, and are used to it. the real problem is the assumption that we should get the best deal we can for ourselves, rather than asking how our resources can best be poured out in service to others. the real problem is that in this area of economics, it is structurally and paradigmatically near-impossible to emobody the ethic of honoring others above ourselves.

How to change our hearts? How to really trust God for our power and security, and accept gladly what he gives and not crave more?

To start, we have to take seriously what Jesus teaches about wealth. I'd like to start out by suggesting that Jesus really does condemn wealth--not just say that we can have as much wealth as we want as long as 'our hearts are not attached to it'. Too strong a claim? Maybe. Next time I'll try and take a look at the evidence.