Spiritual poverty

"But there is another form of poverty! It is the spiritual poverty of our time, which afflicts the so-called richer countries particularly seriously" (Pope Francis).

“The spiritual poverty of the West is greater than ours… You, in the West, have millions of people who suffer such terrible loneliness and emptiness…They feel unloved and unwanted. These people are not hungry in the physical sense, but they are in another way. They know they need something more than money, yet they don’t know what it is. What they are missing, really, is a living relationship with God” (Mother Teresa).

Dellen Millard, the alleged killer of Tim Bosma

The abduction and killing of Tim Bosma and the video of Toronto Mayor Rob Ford allegedly smoking crack cocaine has shocked people not only in the Toronto area but throughout Canada, and indeed all over the world. Add to this, the drama in the Canadian Senate, where some senators have been accused of making false claims on their expense accounts, and one is left wondering why this has happened, all in the space of  a single week.

In the Bosma case, Dellen Millard, a 27 year-old, has been charged with first-degree murder as well as forcible confinement and theft over $5,000. What would motivate a millionaire like Millard allegedly to kill this young father and burn his body beyond recognition? The media has surmised that it could have been simply for the thrill. Two other men are implicated, one of whom was just arrested and charged.

Ford has not yet officially responded to the accusations made against him, in spite of repeated calls for his resignation. This is the latest in a long series of embarrassing episodes, which includes public drunkenness. There are at least 42 items on that list. Thus far Ford has not denied these allegations, except to say that it is "ridiculous."

The Senate of late has witnessed a series of resignations from the Conservative caucus, but so far not from the Senate. The issue is questionable expense claims, and in the case of Mike Duffy, a possibly illegal payment from the Chief of Staff in the Office of the Prime Minister, so that Duffy could repay the expenses he had improperly claimed and thus avoid further investigation by a Senate committee.

Senator Mike Duffy, a former journalist

What is happening in the Senate is highly politicized, but the story boils down to greed by people who were appointed to their august positions as a reward for services to the governing party at the time. This scandal has now led to renewed calls for its abolition.

The thread that connects Millard, Ford and Duffy is what I like to call "spiritual poverty." Admittedly, this term is ambiguous, but what I mean by it manifests itself as pride, selfishness and addictive behavior, and is the result ultimately of a lack of a living relationship with God, as Mother Teresa puts it. This is a common illness in our society. It is not found in any medical diagnostic manual, but it exists nevertheless.

Like Millard, one can be materially well off, but spiritually poor. How else can one explain someone, who it is alleged, killed Bosma for his truck. The killing, it seems, occurred on the evening that Bosma disappeared. Millard, perhaps with the help of accomplices, then disposed of the body by burning it in an incinerator.

As the media repeatedly reported, Bosma was a "church-going" young man. Bosma's family and friends later thanked the media for their reporting, something which apparently had never happened before. My sister and her husband have very close connections with the Bosma family. And I share their denominational affiliation. Hence I have followed the case closely. I was shocked that this murder took place in our church community.

Tim and Sharlene Bosma on their wedding day

In 1978 Rabbi Harold Kushner wrote the bestseller, When Bad Things Happen to Good People, in response to the death of his son at the age of 14. It deals with the problem of evil. How can a good and loving God permit so much suffering? This is indeed one of the most difficult problems in theology.

Why did God permit Tim Bosma to die? As humans, there is no answer to that question. I am not suggesting that attributing "spiritual poverty" to Millard and his accomplices will provide the answer either. It will not. God only knows why this tragic event occurred, and why a family and community had to suffer such grief. Yet even in their grief, their faith gives them hope. This hope was expressed again several times during Bosma's memorial service.

Millard too has family. Whether they have any hope, I do not know. What I see is a very sick young man, who was apparently spoiled rotten as a kid. At age 14, he set a record for being the youngest person to fly a helicopter and a fixed-wing plane solo on the same day. He inherited the family airline business, and owns various properties in Ontario. Such a person does not have to steal a truck, unless he is very, very sick.

Rob Ford is also very sick. He is seriously flawed man, who may not even be aware of his problems, since every week he provides another example of his egregious behavior. His problems are so serious that he should resign, but he may not do that as long as he is unable or unwilling to address his illness. Unfortunately, he is not very smart.

Rob Ford, Mayor of Toronto

Mike Duffy and his associates in the Senate are smart people, but they are equally sick. Their greed drives them to do things that their intelligence tells them are inappropriate. Their behavior borders on the illegal, and in some cases may have crossed that boundary, but that is ultimately for the courts to determine.

The Senate story has since then become even more political. So much so that the moral failings of several senators has drifted into the background. The focus is now on the controlling personality of Prime Minister Stephen Harper. But that is another issue for another time.

All these people are, in my opinion, "spiritually poor." Nature, as we know, abhors a vacuum. In the spiritual world the same truth applies. When one is spiritually poor, then a vacuum arises and one's behavior becomes inappropriate. This affliction can affect everyone. These people are only a few examples of a more general problem that pervades our society. Many people today have a sense of entitlement -- the world owes them a living -- with all the accompaniments, a mansion, several cars, and so on. 

Everyone needs to become spiritually richer. One does not have to become a member of any particular faith in order to do so. The resources for spiritual growth can be found in any faith, and even among humanists who claim to have no faith at all. One needs only to stop being self-centered and focus instead on others.

This is what Jesus taught when he said, "Blessed are the poor in spirit" (Matthew 5:3). The poor in spirit are those whose pride and sense of independence has been broken so that they are open to God, or at least something or someone outside of themselves. Then they no longer are as selfish as they were before. As we all realize, this is part of a long process that does not happen overnight, but happen it does.

Jesus does not promise that the poor in spirit will become materially rich, enjoy endless pleasure and constant laughter. But he does promise hope and joy that does not depend on outward circumstances. "For theirs is the kingdom of heaven," he promises. This is an upside-down kingdom because it is diametrically opposed to what this world values and praises. 

God's blessing rests on those who humble themselves and come to him with broken and contrite hearts. As were reminded at the memorial service for Tim Bosma, he was not a "plaster saint." He was not perfect, anymore than anyone of us is perfect. But we can all experience communion with God. 

Sadly, that communion seems to be lacking in the lives of people such as Millard, Ford, and Duffy. I have selected these three, which all occurred in the same week, merely as examples, but I could have chosen many others. There is more than enough evil in the world to cite, but that should not be necessary.

Being poor is spirit is not the same as being spiritually poor. The latter is widespread today. It can be found everywhere. While it does not explain evil, recognition of this poverty is a prerequisite to providing a cure. People like those I have mentioned need to look into their hearts and repent of their behavior. Yet that is something that I suspect not one of them will do. All that we can do for them is pray for a change of heart.

Whether you are Jewish, Christian or Muslim, pray that those who are spiritually poor may become poor in spirit and live as God wants them to live. Many other religions agree. I invite them to pray as well. And even if you do not profess any religion, you too can live this way. Many atheists and humanists already do.

     

The Prosperity Gospel: a new heresy

   This is the fourth in a series on the influence of capitalism on our daily lives and that of others

While Chrapitalism is a product illicit union of the Christianity with capitalism, the prosperity gospel is the result of the unbiblical marriage of Christian theology with capitalism. The prosperity gospel is a heresy because it is a distortion of the gospel. It uses bad theology and a faulty interpretation of the Bible.

The prosperity gospel is known under a variety of names: Word of Faith, Health and Wealth, Name It and Claim It, Prosperity Theology. It emphasizes that believers do not have to wait until they get to heaven, but that God's promised generosity is already available in this life, and they can claim it for themselves. The core teaching is simply that "God wants all Christians to be very rich in this life, stay healthy, and the key is giving through tithes and offerings."

Although the prosperity gospel  uses many biblical texts to support its theology, its signature text is probably John 10: 10: "I have come that they may have life, and that they may have it more abundantly." There  are many more texts, such as Malachi 3:10, Matthew 25: 14-30, Philippians 4: 9, and 3 John 2 that are used -- or more accurately misused -- by the prosperity gospel.

In a poll sponsored by TIME magazine, 17% of Christians said they consider themselves part of such a movement, while 61% believe that God wants people to be prosperous. And 31% agree that if you give your money to God, God will bless you with more money.

The prosperity gospel movement is centered on faith, which is conceived of as an "activator," a power given to believers that binds and looses spiritual forces and turns the spoken word into reality.

It depicts faith as visibly demonstrated in wealth and health. This can be measured both in the wallet -- one's personal wealth -- and in the body -- one's personal health -- and makes material reality the measure of the success of immaterial faith. It expects that faith is marked by victory which no political, social, or economic circumstance can stop. 

The origins of prosperity gospel can be found in the Pentecostal deliverance and healing ministries in the 40s and 50s. The power of positive thinking of Norman Vincent Peale also played a role. It reached maturity by the late 70s as a robust pan-denominational movement that has since then spread to many parts of the world.

Three evangelists are commonly viewed as founders of the prosperity gospel movement: Kenneth Hagin, Kenneth Copeland and Frederick K.C. Price. One of the oldest and best-known proponents of prosperity theology was Oral Roberts. Other names associated with the movement include Benny Hinn, Frederick Price, T.D. Jakes, Robert Tilton, and the appropriately named Creflo Dollar. Joel Osteen is often included, although he dissociates himself from it somewhat.

In the 60s, prosperity gospel teachers turned to televangelism and came to dominate religious programming in the US.  Trinity Broadcasting Network later became very prominent. Schools, such as Hagin's RHEMA Bible Training Center, also helped to spread the message, as did many books, such as Bruce Wilkersons' The Prayer of Jabez.

Nigeria became a breeding ground that helped to spread this unbiblical teaching, based on money, greed, lust, deception and materialism, all over Africa. This false gospel targets especially the poorest, weakest, most hopeless, helpless and desperate members of African society. The primary beneficiaries are the prosperity teachers who have become super-rich, while millions of their followers and givers live in abject poverty and lack the basic necessities of life.

In Nigeria, the prosperity gospel is preached not only in Pentecostal and Charismatic churches but can be heard today in many mainline churches as well, including the Anglican Church. I guess that these mainline pastors figured it was better to jump on the prosperity bandwagon than lose all their flock to other churches. It doesn't help that, even in the mainline churches, Nigerian pastors tend to be poorly educated.

The prosperity gospel is built upon a number of erroneous theological arguments, of which I can provide only a summary (adapted from "The Bankruptcy of the Prosperity Gospel" by David Jones):

• A faulty understanding of the covenant with Abraham. Christians share in this covenant, but for the prosperity gospel this includes not just spiritual blessings, but also includes material ones. Moreover, these blessings are unconditional.
• A faulty understanding of the atonement based on a misinterpretation of 2 Cor. 8:9, where Paul in no way teaches that Christ died on the cross for the purpose of increasing anyone’s net material worth.
• A faulty understanding of the biblical teachings on giving. This is built upon faulty motives. One ought give in order to get a great return. Edward Pousson observes those who espouse this message are held captive by the American dream.
• A faulty understanding of the biblical teachings on faith. Faith is not simply trust in God, but a spiritual force that is directed at God so that he will bless people.
• A faulty view of the relationship between God and man. If the prosperity gospel is correct, grace becomes obsolete. Then God becomes irrelevant, since man is the measure of all things.
• All of this is the result of a faulty hermeneutic. Biblical texts are repeatedly  misinterpreted. 3 John 2 is an example. This text is a greeting, and should not be used to derive doctrines. Also, the Greek word here, which is used only four times in Scripture, does not mean to prosper in the sense of “gaining material possessions,” as the prosperity gospel teaches, but rather means “to grant a prosperous expedition and expeditious journey,” or “to lead by a direct and easy way.”

For me, the issue is not just an idiosyncratic misreading of the Bible, with the faulty theology that results, but something more serious. TIME magazine describes the prosperity gospel as the latest lurch in Protestantism's ongoing descent into full-blown American materialism. After the eclipse of Calvinist Puritanism, whose respect for money was counterbalanced by a horror of worldliness, much of Protestantism quietly adopted the idea that "you don't have to give up the American Dream. You just see it as a sign of God's blessing,"

The prosperity gospel is a baptized form of capitalism. Capitalism has been brought into the church and given a position of honor. Unfortunately, God has been shunted aside. Instead Mammom is being worshiped as if he were the true God. This is idolatry. It is a perversion of the gospel. 

Jesus was born poor and he died poor. If a person's faith could merit material blessings, then he would been the richest man in the world. Instead, at his incarnation, "he made himself nothing, by taking the very nature of a servant" (Philippians 2:7). Only later did God exalt him and restore him to his former glory. This is the true gospel of Jesus, not the materialistic version the prosperity gospel presents. 

Jesus died on a cross, not in a huge mansion. The prosperity gospel is also not the gospel that the twelve apostles preached. Nearly every last one of them was martyred for his faith. Contrast the life of Jesus and the apostles with the lifestyle of those who espouse the prosperity gospel. 

This is why the prosperity gospel is a heresy. People are being led astray --  not only believers, who are taught a perverted form of the gospel but also unbelievers who get a very distorted picture of the Christian faith and of the Jesus whom these preachers represent. 

While I commend them for their zeal for evangelism, all too often this is motivated by an even greater zeal for wealth on their part as well as that of the people they are preaching to. Greed seems to be the primary motivation behind the prosperity gospel movement. For that reason it must be condemned. 

Blaise Pascal famously said that God can even use the lesser motives of men. God can use these prosperity preachers, and he does. Thus we should be careful how we judge them. Our judgment is not of them but of their theology. We must leave any further judgment to God.

    

Chrapitalism

   This is the third in a series on the influence of capitalism on our daily lives and that of others

Chrapitalism is a neologism that expresses the union of Christianity and capitalism. When I first saw this word, I mentally confused it with "crapitalism," which is defined as "the innate tendency of capitalism to subvert democratic and idealistic tendencies in a government, profession or organization." 

Chrapitalism is indeed a form of crapitalism, in the sense that capitalism has subverted Christianity by turning it into something that is foreign to the essence of what Christ intended.

In a book review in Books & Culture, Eugne McCarraher describes Chrapitalism as "the lucrative merger of Christianity and capitalism, Americas most enduring covenant theology. It's the core of 'American exceptionalism,' the sanctimonious and blood-spattered myth of providential anointment for global dominion."

"In the Chrapitalist gospel, the rich young man goes away richer, for God and Mommon have pooled their capital, forming a bi-theistic investment group, and laundered the money in baptismal fonts before parking it in off-shore accounts."

"Chrapitalism has been America's distinctive and gilded contribution to religion and theology, a delusion that beloved community can be built on the foundations of capitalist property. As the American Empire wanes, so will its established religion; the erosion of Chrapitalism will generate a moral and spiritual maelstrom."

McCarraher does not mince words in his description of Chrapitalism. I want to thank him for introducing me to this term that more than any other I have have ever met best describes the illicit union of Christianity and capitalism. Unfortunately, too many Americans are oblivious of their incompatibility.

Many of them think that they are synonymous. In a recent poll, 36 percent of Americans thinks so, while 44 percent do not. This holds regardless of religious affiliation. But Republicans and Tea Party members, college graduates, and members of high-income households view these two systems as more compatible than others, such as women, Democrats, and those of low income, who are more likely to believe they are incompatible.

With the American Empire beginning to disintegrate, and the demise of the American Dream becoming more real everyday, as we noticed in my latest post, as the middle class slowly disappears, some Americans are waking up to the idolatrous nature of Chrapitalism.

But their Casandra-like warnings are largely dismissed, even by many fellow Christians who prefer to remain oblivious to this idolatry and dismiss their objections as treasonous.

The harsh realities of the current recession may finally push many disadvantaged groups to question even more the compatibility of Christianity and capitalism. The followers of the cult of capitalism, however, may be harder to persuade.

Some are still unable to recognize the incongruity of preaching about Jesus while chasing the almighty dollar. They have been brainwashed to believe in a "trickle down" economy by the plutocrats of this world. They do not realize how they are used by scheming politicians who have been bought to promote the interests of the very rich.

In this respect, Barack Obama is little better than George W, Bush, who cynically used evangelical voters while pursuing the interests of rich individuals and corporations who had showered him with election funds. Every president has largely catered to the interests of the plutocracy. Presidents too are politicians.

The plutocrats of this world control the reins of power. Their chief concern is to make as much money as possible, even if that involves trampling on people's human rights, as happened recently in Bangladesh, where more than 1000 people died after the building in which they worked collapsed.

In Canada the federal government has already ravaged welfare and unemployment insurance and is now intent on gutting pensions in the unionized public sector,. All this is happening under a prime minister who is an evangelical Christian and whose party has in past elections received a lot of support from many Christians.

Social welfare programs are being undermined in many countries, while the rich receive subsidies. Moreover, the rich stash much of their loot in overseas accounts where it is safe from the taxman. In Canada, individuals and corporations have hidden about $8 billion a year overseas.

When this was reported recently, the response of the government was that it would ferret out those who did this, while at the same time it was laying off staff from the Canada Revenue Agency, who are responsible to do that. This lost revenue will need to be made up by middle class tax payers who cannot hide their wealth that way, for elementary two reasons: they don't have it, and they don't have the resources to hide it.

Are there alternatives to capitalism? Of course, there are, but I am not promoting any particular alternative in this post, since each one has both strengths and weaknesses.

What I am affirming it this: capitalism is a seriously flawed system that privatizes profits and socializes risk. It hurts the weakest members of society, while the benefits accrue to the wealthiest.

Would Jesus approve this system? Hardly! Would the man who drove the money changers out of the temple not treat the denizens of Wall Street the same way, if he were to return today?

The system is so broken and seriously flawed that it will be exceedingly difficult to repair. Therefore, while some Christians remain blind to Chrapitalism, the urgently needed changes that will make it possible for everyone in society to benefit equitably, and not just plutocrats, cannot transpire.

These Christians are unwilling or unable to help the poor and disadvantaged, and one day there will be no one left to defend them. By then it will be too late. The 1000 plus workers who were killed in Bangladesh are a symptom of what will happen to the rest of us sooner or later.

Capitalism is killing us! One way to stop it is to end Chrapitalism. Stop it, or Jesus will condemn us too!

Read the following poster. Except for some offensive language, it has a powerful but disturbing message. I expect it will disturb you as much as it does me. 

I hope that this post inspires you to engage in a meaningful dialogue on this topic both with me and others.

     

The disappearing middle class and the changing nature of work

This is the second of a series on the influence of capitalism on our daily lives and that of others

The disappearing middle class has become a widely accepted axiom today. A few dissenting voices can be heard, but the majority continue to speak about a disappearing or vanishing middle class. What is clear is that the disparity between the very rich and the very poor is steadily increasing, while the middle class is being squeezed out of existence.

These few illustrative facts are from the US, although other countries can produce similar figures showing the increasing disparity between the rich and the poor and the growing disappearance of the middle class:

--In the US during 2010, 37 percent of all income gains went to the top 0.01 percent of all income earners, 56 percent of all income gains went to the rest of the top 1 percent, while only 7 percent of all income gains went to the bottom 99 percent.

--The wealthiest 1 percent of all Americans own more wealth than the bottom 95 percent combined owns. According to Forbes, the 400 wealthiest Americans have more wealth than the bottom 150 million together. The poorest 50 percent of all Americans collectively own just 2.5 % of all the wealth in the US.

--According to the Economic Policy Institute, between 1979 and 2007 income growth for the top 1 percent of all US income earners was an astounding 390 percent. For the bottom 90 percent, income growth was only 5 percent over that same time period.

--In 2010, 2.6 million more Americans descended into poverty. That was the largest increase that was seen since the US government began keeping statistics on this in 1959. In the year 2000, 11.3% of all Americans were living in poverty. Today, 15.1 % of all Americans are living in poverty.

--In November 2008, 30.8 million Americans were on food stamps. Today, more than 46 million Americans are on food stamps. One out of every six Americans is now enrolled in at least one government anti-poverty program. And federal housing assistance increased by a whopping 42 percent between 2006 and 2010.

--According to Heidi Shierholz, an economist with the Economic Policy Institute, about 53 percent of all income went to the middle class in the 1970s, but today only about 46 percent of all income does.

--In 1970, 65 percent of all Americans lived in “middle class neighborhoods”. By 2007, only 44 percent of all Americans lived in “middle class neighborhoods.” Yet, according to a CBS poll in 2007, 90 percent of all Americans consider themselves middle class.

--According to a recent report produced by Pew Charitable Trusts, approximately one out of every three Americans that grew up in a middle class household has slipped down the income ladder.

Where are the middle class going? These figures suggest that many are becoming poorer and thus dropping into the poor class. A few, however, are moving up into the rich class, a fact that is often cited by some who question the disappearance of the middle class.

There are many definitions of precisely who is middle class, which is probably the main reason why there is so much disagreement about the disappearance of the middle class. 

The simplest definition is to include those who fall in the middle third of the income distribution. In Canada, that is a broad category, with incomes ranging from $35,000 to $90,000. In the US, which uses a different standard, a household making between $24,376 to $73,129 per year would be considered middle class.

Still another way to define the middle class is in terms of household income within 50 percent of the median, as is illustrated in the following chart. But notice how this group is steadily getting smaller every decade.

Why is middle class being systematically wiped out in the US and other countries?  There are many answers. Some are political, some are economic, and some are technological.

In the US today, big businesses and wealthy individuals fund the campaigns of politicians, and in turn these politicians pass laws which rig the game in their favor. It is a symbiotic relationship which is bad for America. The same situation prevails in other countries.

Many jobs are disappearing today. Some for economic reasons, because it is cheaper to produce goods overseas than it is in the US or Canada, as was evident in the previous post dealing with garments made by workers in Bangladesh who are operating in substandard working conditions. Outsourcing is commonplace today in nearly every industry, including the service industries. We call this globalization.

Technology plays perhaps the most significant role in the disappearance of jobs. Many jobs are no longer as important as they once were or can be performed more cheaply through outsourcing or by robots. The car industry uses robots extensively in the manufacturing process.

The middle class is disappearing in part because many traditional middle-class skills are becoming obsolete. Routine clerical work and many other kinds of work can now be done by computers and robots. Algorithms and machines are replacing customer service agents and even grocery checkout clerks.

At the low end of the spectrum, the jobs that are left are those that computers and robots cannot do yet, such as janitorial work. While at the high end of the spectrum, the jobs that are left are again those that computers cannot do yet, such as law, medicine and management.  But the jobs of those in between are threatened. The list is almost endless, and it is growing by the day.

Paralegals, who do routine research for lawyers, are already being replaced by computers. This is just one example. And as technology advances, even more people in the middle of the spectrum are going to be elbowed out of the workforce.

Not only are jobs disappearing, those who do have jobs have to work harder for what they get. Families have to work long hours to maintain a middle-class existence.

An article in Macleans, a Canadian news magazine, the number of two-income families has soared to well over 70 per cent, from just 30 per cent in the 1970s. That means in most households, both parents need a job to pay the mortgage. The result is that they are logging twice the work hours to maintain a standard of living that was easily affordable on a single income a few decades ago.

In addition, having two working parents often necessitates extra costs like child care, which can run upwards of $10,000 a year per child, and a second car to commute to two jobs. At the end of the day, even double incomes are not the panacea they once were.

The article continues by pointing out that the middle-class squeeze has been happening for decades, but it was hidden from view and papered over by a buoyant economy. As long as unemployment was low and credit was easy, middle income earners could fool themselves into thinking that they were making progress.

But now the economy is in a recession that continues to persist. Economists say the middle class might not rebound when the recession is over. In the early ’80s and ’90s, both the real incomes of the middle class declined and the share of middle-class incomes declined. But when those recessions ended, the job losses were largely recouped. This time around, however, not only are the jobs disappearing, but the plants that supported them are closing too.

Even education is no longer the panacea that it once was. It has become unaffordable for many students. Twenty years ago, according to Macleans, going to university for a year would have cost roughly $5,000 (with tuition and living expenses). Today, it is upwards of $12,000. Meanwhile, financial aid for students is getting increasingly scarce. The cut-off level for university loans and bursaries is now well below what people would consider to be a middle-income income.

For those unlucky enough to fall from the comfort of the middle class, getting back in is now harder than ever. Troubling signs are beginning to emerge that there is less mobility between the working poor and the middle class than there used to be, so once you are out, it could be for life.

If the slogan of the Occupy movement, "We are the 99 %," is ever to be more than just that, the growing disparity between the very rich and the very poor needs to be addressed meaningfully. If more and more people, for whatever reason, are driven into poverty, then this must become a concern for all of us, and not only for those who are directly affected. Because sooner or later, nearly everyone will be affected.

As a society, we are going to have to rethink the nature of work. The disappearing middle class provides us with not only the chance but also the moral obligation to do so. In an era when jobs are disappearing every day, we must ask ourselves, are jobs a right and not just a privilege?

I am only raising this issue. I certainly don't have the answers, but I do hope that together we can begin this discussion. It is important.

This series deals with the influence of capitalism, thus at some point we must include a discussion of possible alternatives. That is quite an agenda, but that should not deter us. Our future is at stake.

     

The tragic cost of capitalism

This is the first part of a new series on the influence of capitalism on our daily lives and that of others

The collapse of Rana Plaza, a building in Bangladesh containing five garment-making factories, is only the latest in a long series of such tragedies. This industry, which contributes $20 billion every year to the economy of that country, is notorious for its hazardous workplaces and subsistence-level wages.

Since November, when 122 garment workers died in a fire, there have been 40 other fires in Bangladeshi factories, killing nine more workers, and injuring 400. The number of bodies recovered from this building collapse now stands at 382, with many more seriously injured. Many workers are still unaccounted for.

It is alleged that the first four floors of the building were built without a permit; later four more floors were added and finally, as the last straw, a ninth floor. A lack of proper regulation has led to this and many other tragedies.

The day before the collapse, deep cracks in the concrete outer walls of the building became visible and the police ordered it evacuated. But the factory owners ignored these orders, and forced more than 2,000 people to keep working. Then the building caved in.

There is more than enough blame to go around for these tragedies: the Bangladeshi government; the owners of the buildings, factories, and brands; then there are also the retailers and even consumers, like you and me.

Thus far two owners of the factories, two government engineers, and the building owner, who had been on the run, have been arrested. His wife was arrested first, apparently, to force her husband to turn himself in. People in Bangladesh are now asking for the death penalty for the building owner.

Yet such tragedies are preventable. These tragedies represent part of what I call the tragic cost of capitalism. There are many more costs, as I intend to show in future posts. What is happening in Bangladesh is only the tip of the iceberg, and is not the most egregious example of the damage that capitalism has done.

According to reports, the garment workers are paid as little as $38 a month. Even China cannot compete with such wages, and is shifting work to Bangladesh.

The problem is greed at every level. It illustrates one of the most serious shortcomings of capitalism. This economic system pervades just about aspect of daily life around the globe. It is more than just an economic theory, it determines and shapes much of everyone's life in every country of the world.

Add Bangladesh to the list of countries racing to the bottom

The desire of shoppers to buy affordable clothes has driven retailers further and further afield to find factories to make products at lower and lower prices. Whereas for many years clothes had a "Made in China" label, today "Made in Bangladesh" is increasingly common. China is increasingly losing business to countries that can make goods even cheaper than they can.

In Bangladesh not only are the wages rock bottom, safety standards are ignored, all in the name of greater profits for everyone along the supply chain. Factory owners lease space in substandard buildings so that they can make more money. The owners of the buildings, of course, profit enormously. The owners of the brands outsource their orders to these factories, so that they too can increase their profits. And finally the retailers stock these cheap brands because of consumer demand. The consumers benefit from the low prices.

Greed drives the entire process, from the consumer to the huge multinationals that own the brands and the retailers. The victims are the workers who are desperate for work even at abysmal wages and are willing to endure terrible working conditions in buildings that are firetraps and in danger of imminent collapse.

Cost determines everything. Everyone one wants the lowest price. But the greatest cost, which is ignored by many, is borne by the workers whose lives are threatened and whose families may lose their breadwinners.

Slowly consumers are waking up to this tragic reality. Some are boycotting products manufactured in such factories in Bangladesh, but that does solve the problem, since the workers are the ones who will suffer the most from such a boycott.

A group of Bangladeshi and international unions have recently drawn a nine-page safety proposal that would ditch government inspections. because they can easily be corrupted. Instead, the report has proposed an independent inspectorate to oversee all the 4000 garment factories in Bangladesh. The major retailers, not surprisingly, objected that this proposal would be legally binding and too costly.

Walmart's representative said about this proposal that it was "not financially feasible ... to make such investments." Walmart's only concern seems to be its bottom line: it wants to make money and lots of it.

The problem at its deepest level is money, or better the love of money, as the Bible teaches. The Bible does not condemn wealth as such. Abraham, for example, was a very wealthy man by the standards of his day. Instead, the Bible condemns greed, by which it means people who love money, more than people, in fact, and who will do almost anything for the sake of money.

Greedy people are not hard to find. They are not found only on Wall Street, or in the corner offices of major corporations. They are found on every street, in every city, in every country; in other words, everywhere. Some of us are greedy as well.

Many people shop regularly at Walmart. By doing so, they are complicit in the greed of this company and at the same time display their own greed. They may excuse their shopping there as stewardship, but how many are aware of the enormous cost in term of human misery of the products that Walmart sells?

Walmart is only one example, but it is certainly the most well-known. For many retailers such products are a small part of the merchandise they sell, and they may not even be fully conscious of the conditions in the factories where each of them are made.

Consumer boycotting is not the answer, since poor workers will suffer the most. Yet consumers will need to find ways to put pressure on governments everywhere to better regulate these garment factories. Stricter enforcement of existing regulations is necessary so that the workers in the garment factories can be properly protected. Also they need better wages.

There is a human rights issue here, as well as an ethical one. We cannot eradicate greed, but we can alleviate the situation of those who are suffering the most as a result of the greed of others. There have already been many calls for justice from both inside Bangladesh and outside the country. Riots have occurred daily in Dhaka after the building collapsed and supporters of these workers are springing up everywhere.

If you live in Canada, you will probably be aware by now that many of the workers inside the collapsed building were making clothes for Joe Fresh, a Canadian brand that is owned by Loblaw Companies Ltd. This company sells the clothing at their grocery stores and other retail outlets across the country under many different names -- Loblaws, Real Canadian Superstore, No Frills, Valu-Mart, Independent, and Zehrs Markets.

You can help by signing this petition to tell Joe Fresh and Loblaws that all the factory workers deserve safe workplaces: http://www.publicresponse.ca/blog/lets-tell-joe-fresh-and-loblaws-that-we-demand-better.

Naming and shaming is more effective than a boycott. These companies need to become more responsible for the products they sell, not only by becoming better informed about the working conditions but also by pressuring their suppliers to improve these conditions.

Loblaws has just announced a plan to compensate garment workers' families, as has Primark, a British firm. Both companies are largely owned by the Weston family of Canada. But such compensation does not go far enough; it does not yet address the safety issue.

If you live elsewhere, there are maybe other petitions circulating in your country. All retailers and companies involved in the garment industry should be sent a clear message that such substandard workplaces are not acceptable any longer and that the workers deserve better conditions.

Safe working conditions are an important human rights issue. They are also an ethical issue that no believer of whatever faith must lose sight of. These garment workers are human beings. They are also our neighbors and they deserve our love. The least we can do is promote safer working conditions for them and, while we are at it, help to increase their pitiful wages.

       

Some thoughts in response to the Boston bombings

Barely a week after the Boston bombings is too early to respond to the Boston bombings in detail. Only time will provide the necessary perspective. There is still much indeed that we need to learn about what happened there, where three people died and more than 250 were injured, yet some things are already becoming clear.

Much has been written about the resilience of the people of Boston. They handled themselves very well not only in the hours immediately after the bombings but also during the lock-down, when the entire city was told to stay at home so the the remaining brother of the two who were suspected of placing the bombs could be captured, after a killing rampage that left the older brother and an MIT policeman dead.

The police also acquitted themselves professionally. After first clearing the bomb site, they surveyed hours of surveillance tapes to find picture of the suspects. These cameras proved very useful this time, thus no one in Boston asked any questions about invasion of privacy. Only now are people beginning to raise such issues.

But the media, especially the cable channels, did not do a very good job in reporting this developing story. In order to fill up airtime, networks found what they thought were the real suspects and broadcast this as hard news, only to be upstaged when the police produced photos of the two brothers. The final drama, which could have come from a TV series, led to the death of the older brother and the capture of the younger one.

There are still many unanswered questions about the two suspects. We know very little about their motives, except that the older brother, Tamerlan Tsarnaev, visited Dagestan, where he apparently became radicalized. Later, at the prompting of the Russians, the FBI  investigated him, but then let him go. There are numerous questions now about how thorough that investigation was and what the FBI did discover.

According to reports, the younger brother, Dzhokhar, admitted his role in the bombings even before he was read his Miranda rights. He was also, apparently, unarmed when he was captured. Thus further questions arise: How did he get his injuries? And were the police in any way responsible?

That these brothers are Muslims only feeds the equation of terrorism and Islam that prevails widely in the US and the Islamophobia that is found not only in the US but in many other Western countries as well. Most Muslims emphatically deny any connection between their faith and such terrorism, as they should.


We do Muslims a great disservice when we blame all Muslims for the wrongdoings of a handful who display a distorted understanding of their faith. If you are a Christian, would you want others to blame your faith for what a few so-called Christians have done in the past? No religion is without extremists.

How have many Americans reacted? With patriotic fervor and song, mixed with disbelief that this could have happened in their country. As The Economist philosophizes, "Bad things can happen even to a good country."  Americans also find it very difficult to accept that the Boston bombings were an act of terrorism perpetrated by home-grown people who are residents or even citizens of the US.

Prosecutors at first contemplated not reading his Miranda rights to the younger brother who is a citizen. He has now been read his rights and indicted for many crimes, but the fact that they even thought that they could deny him the rights that every citizen has speaks volumes about the perceived threat that the bombings posed to most Americans. They value liberty above all, yet they seem willing to sacrifice some of these liberties, at least temporarily, for the sake of security. Yet liberty remains their fundamental and paramount value.

This attitude is evident as well in their acceptance of surveillance cameras. In times of crisis, Americans can accept what they ordinarily would not. They might excuse their behavior by explaining that security cameras and the denial of basic rights are intended for other people, and not for them. Their love of freedom, which they understand as personal or individual freedom, remains central.

That love of freedom helps to explain why the American public, which according to polls, supported the new gun-control legislation, allowed the Senate to block the measure. This was due not only to the deceitful role played by the NRA but even more to the desire of Americans to protect a basic freedom that they regard as constitutional instead of opting for the greater security offered through gun-control.

The right of every person to bear arms is indeed enshrined in the Constitution. The US Supreme Court has confirmed that, although mistakenly in my opinion, since that is not what the Founding Fathers intended. They ascribed this right to a militia, not to individuals. But who am I to argue with the Supreme Court justices? Such deeply entrenched individualism is hard to uproot.

Canada faces similar problems, as the revelation of a plot, supposedly engineered by al-Qaeda, to derail a train bound from Toronto to New York City. Yet this similarity should not be exaggerated. There is a basic difference between the US and Canada. The latter does not have the same history of playing policeman for the entire world, which has been widely perceived as arrogance, and not only by Islamist extremists. Many people all over the world agree with this sentiment, but they just won't resort to violence to make their point.

What many Americans often overlook is that violence breeds violence. America is a violent society. This is evident on American streets and, just as important, on TV, where violence is idolized. Martin Luther King Jr. has written sagely: "The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy, instead of diminishing evil, it multiplies it."

American foreign policy is oppressive and tends to generate a negative response. Canadian foreign policy, under the Harper government, largely echoes the American one, but without the same oppressiveness, since that is not part of the Canadian nature. Yet Canada too has in the past declared war on other countries, as happened in Iraq and Afghanistan, where Canada had no business being, except in response to US urging.

I may seem to have digressed from the Boston bombings to gun-control, violence, and US foreign policy, but  they are all connected. There are already indications that the Boston bombers, as I already suspected, were motivated by American foreign policy, specifically the wars the US has waged against Muslim countries. This is home-bred terrorism, since it was caused by men who lived in the US for many years. That makes it even more difficult for the US to protect itself. These were not foreign terrorists who had somehow slipped into the country, but they were boys who had attended American high schools.

In fact, the best way for the US to protect itself is to introduce a new foreign policy that accents peace rather than war and conveys strength in a non-violent way. The US must change its attitude to violence in every aspect of its society. The US has many strengths, but also some significant weaknesses. Both strengths and weaknesses were revealed by the Boston bombings and its aftermath.

Here I offer only a few thoughts that were prompted by the bombings for your perusal and response. Please feel free to comment. I want to conclude by again praising the resilience of the people of Boston and the hope that they express in the name of all Americans.

       

The "terrorization" of life

Life has become "terrorized," or so it seems. By that I mean that our lives today are increasingly shaped by fear. The Boston bombings completed a circle that began with 9/11, when we became afraid to go to work; intensified with Newtown, when we became afraid to send our children to school; and increased even more in Aurora, Colorado, which made us afraid for a while to go to movie theaters.

All this has now culminated in Boston, where sporting events, which are the ultimate form of relaxation and entertainment, became fearful places. Terror now seemingly reigns everywhere. Yet we should not let that disturb us unduly. We must not let those fears dominate us and rob us of the pleasures of life.

The world changed on 9/11. Perhaps not as dramatically as some pundits claim, but the effects now affect each of us every day, and not only when we fly. I have noticed this change, as you have too, no doubt. Many years ago I enjoyed flying, even with three small children in tow, but no longer. Today flying is a pain in the you know where, and not only because of the smaller seats (I am still about the same size as I was then).

Recently, on my return from Istanbul, I was subjected to four security checks before I was allowed to board the plane. Everyone who has flown since 9/11 is familiar with the routine, but it doesn't get any easier, except that the US now permits knives of a certain maximum length, which to me is a backward step.

Security checks are found everywhere, not only at airports. In the US, government buildings now have metal detectors. In Nigeria, hand wands are increasingly common in many churches. In Istanbul, a church that meets in the Dutch Consulate has the walk-through kind, and requires inspection of all bags and purses. Some businesses in that city now have the complete set-up, including x-ray machines, as at an airport.

The good news at Canadian airports is that the government is changing the software of the machines that do a full body scan. Now only a stick image will appear, instead of the revealing images that many people found to be an invasion of privacy, and even pornographic. Similarly, the American government has ordered new machines that are less intrusive.

Now, after Boston, security checks have been instituted at sporting events. According to reports, it seems that most people accept this new requirement, but I find it troublesome. Where will this stop? If churches, stadiums and arenas have mandated such checks, will that bring about peace of mind? Hardly.

Fear is rampant everywhere. Boston completed the circle by adding an element of fear to even the most relaxing and entertaining events. These would seem to be the last places where people might expect to be attacked. Some people are now increasingly reluctant to get out of bed for fear of what may happen that day. That should not be.

Remnants of pressure cooker bomb in Boston

These security measures may help to reduce our anxiety somewhat, but they do not address fully the fears that all of us have not only when we fly but even when we want to be entertained or to worship God. If hiding is a common reaction to fear, where can we hide today? Nowhere it seems. Even people's beds are no longer safe, as the residents of the town of West, Texas, discovered after a fertilizer plant there exploded.

While I am not suggesting that all these security measures be eliminated entirely, they should be reduced. Additional security measures would not have prevented the Boston bombings. The police had checked the area where the bombs exploded only a few hours before. Security checks alone are not the answer.

We need to eliminate many of the fears we have. Some are incapacitating; others are real and help to protect us. Thus we need to differentiate between different kinds of fear. In Nigeria. I felt that the security measures were perhaps overdone, even if the Islamist threat is constant.

Better than machines is the security that comes from knowing the people around us. Churches by their very nature are communities where people know each other. It should be relatively easy to identify strangers who may have hostile intentions. That would be more useful than metal detectors.

Security was tight at Boston-Buffalo game soon after the bombings

At sporting events that is, admittedly, much more difficult. Yet, as the Boston bombings illustrate, security measures can only go so far. They are always incomplete, unless we want to turn every sporting site into a secure fortress, which is impossible because of the massive numbers of people involved.

We need to learn to live with a certain measure of fear, otherwise we will be unable to get out of bed at all. But the fearfulness created by all the security apparatus that we experience almost daily could be alleviated by reducing the pervasiveness of these machines. However, such apparatus once installed is difficult to remove.

Unfortunately, those who even breathe the word removal are dismissed as being soft on terrorism. Yet I seriously question the ubiquity of these machines. They do not make me, and I suspect others would agree, feel any safer. On the contrary, they tend to raise my blood pressure, especially whenever I walk through the machine and the buzzer still goes off, even though I have removed every metal object I could find.

The two suspects revealed by a video camera

As I am writing this, the revelations about the death of one suspect and a massive manhunt for the other may help reduce the anxiety of the citizens of Boston, although they will all feel much safer when he is captured -- alive, everyone hopes, so that he can explain their motivation. The suspects are reportedly two brothers from Chechnya, who are both legal residents in the US. But it is difficult, if not impossible, for the government to protect everyone from such home-grown terrorists who are intent on creating mayhem.

The two suspects went on a crime spree, which began with a robbery at a convenience store, and quickly snowballed into a deadly rampage that took the life of an MIT campus police officer and left one suspect dead after a Wild West-like shootout in the streets of Watertown, a suburb of Boston. The remaining suspect is apparently on foot; thus the governor ordered all public transportation shut down and taxis off the streets.

Other than such immediate measures, what more can the government do? Additional security apparatus will not help in such cases. Too often such additional measures suggest closing the proverbial barn door after the horse has escaped. That may make people feel safer for a short while, but in the long run it does not provide protection from terrorists such as those allegedly responsible for the Boston bombings.

We should not let these bombings unhinge us and keep us from enjoying life. We must not permit our lives to become terrorized. Thus we must not give in to the fears that others have induced in us. If that happens, the terrorists who plant bombs and attack us in other ways will have won. Then they will have achieved their goal. We must never allow that to happen.

The Bible teaches an important lesson in 1 John 4:18: "There is no fear in love. But perfect love drives out fear."  Let us love one another and cast out those fears.