Month: July 2009

Remembering History’s Evils

Posted on

Sorry for the long silence here. I spent the last week and a half at my parent’s place in Taos, New Mexico with a bunch of friends from our old church in Illinois. It was a great time, but I didn’t have two seconds together to attempt to even open my computer. Since we had friends visiting, we did touristy things all week and I couldn’t help but encounter stories of the history of the place that truly made me think.

It is strange being at places in America where our own sordid history has not been completely hushed up. In most of the country it is easy to forget who we stole the land from, who we enslaved to build initial infrastructure, and who we oppressed on our path to becoming a “great” nation. If those reminders aren’t there before our eyes, we tend to forget they ever happened (and then get accused of being unpatriotic or of outright lying if you even mention the history). But its hard to hide from that history in New Mexico – at least once you make even a vague attempt to open your eyes.

For instance – I attended the Emergent Gathering in Glorieta, NM a couple of times in the past. While I had heard that Glorieta was the site of a major Civil War battle, often called the Gettysburg of the West, I knew little else of its history or culture except for the fact that the Southern Baptists had built a camp there that did its best to pretend New Mexican culture didn’t exist. But this trip, I discovered that it was at the opening of the Glorieta Pass on the Santa Fe trail that the Mexican army made its last stand against the invading U.S. army in 1846. You see, for years U.S. citizens had been settling in Texas (often for the freedom to trade slaves). In 1836, these U.S. Texans declared Texas an independent country and went to war with the current ruler – Mexico. After remembering the Alamo and all that, the Republic of Texas formed. When the U.S. then annexed Texas in 1846 (which at that point included most of New Mexico), Mexico chose not to simply give up the land and leave. This was seen as cause for war and the U.S. invaded to secure the land we stole. General opinion saw it as our right to take the land, with some citing it “Our manifest destiny to overspread the continent allotted by Providence for the free development of our yearly multiplying millions.” A small group of dissenters called this invasion robbery and murder, and Abraham Lincoln asserted “Let us put a check upon this lust of dominion.” But their protest was to no avail. And so the U.S. army met and massacred the Mexican army at Glorieta – claiming the territory for ourselves. It puts things in perspective to know the history of the place – knowing who died so we could use a spiffy retreat center.

july09-221Same thing in Taos. One of the oldest continuously lived in pueblos in America is the Taos Pueblo. In 1847, after the U.S. took New Mexico, local Indians and Hispanics were fearful that the U.S. wouldn’t honor their ownership of the land and so staged a rebellion against the U.S. governor in Taos. The governor ended up dead and the U.S. Army moved quickly to quash the revolt. (the Indians actually claim that they had nothing to do with the murder, that the Mexicans set them up). As the U.S. army attacked, many of the pueblo’s residents (the women and children) as well as some of the insurgents took refugee in the Catholic church on the pueblo seeking its protection and sanctuary. The U.S. army burned them alive inside the church. The picture is of the remains of the church that has simply been left in ruins since that day.

I hear those stories and know that even though I am enjoying the benefits of past oppression, I have to at least acknowledge that great evil has been done. But there were others touring the Taos Pueblo I overheard who were offended that the Indians dare tell the story of how the U.S. army massacred their people. They thought it was rude and uncalled for to even bring up such stories. I found it interesting that here I was having no choice but to confront the sins of our collective past, and others around me were trying to silence history. But then I thought, at least they were hearing the stories whether they choose to believe them or not. That’s why I am a huge fan of going to places where that history is in your face. No, its not fun to visit the site of a massacre, or of a firebombing, or the Holocaust Museum, but unless we make that effort we too soon forget that they exist. And from there we quickly start pretending that the evils they remind us of never happened. We need those reminders.

Read more

Olympic Injustice

Posted on

I’ve been following the news story of New Zealand Olympic hopeful Logan Campbell. If you haven’t heard, he’s the taekwondo athlete who said he was forced to open a brothel to cover his training expenses for the 2012 London Olympics. Prostitution is legal in New Zealand, but this has caused some to question if he should be barred from the sport. On one hand, I see how it would be difficult to uphold the taekwondo mandate that one always display high moral standards and respect others at all times if one is a pimp. But I also think this incident hints at some of the deeper injustices prevalent in the Olympic games.

When a follower of a discipline that stresses the respect of others finds the need to oppress other in order to pay to continue in that discipline there are issues with the system. The exorbitant costs of training athletes these days effectively leads to injustice of some sort. Either only the wealthy are able to use their talents and compete in what is far from being an equal opportunity world competition. Or athletes must sell their soul to their government to be trained, or they must oppress others to acquire the money they need. This isn’t about sports – or good sportsmanship – its about letting the privileged few succeed.

To make the economic disparity worse, just the occasion of hosting the Olympics itself results in the oppression of the poor. As cities create huge stadiums and hotels to accommodate the event, they generally raze lower-income housing developments in the process. The poor get displaced in the name of the event. In 1988, some 720,000 people were forcibly displaced in Seoul, South Korea, in preparation for the Summer Olympic Games. And some 1.5 million Chinese were forced from their homes during preparations for the 2008 Beijing Olympic Games. And even though Mayor Daley has said no one will be displaced if Chicago wins its 2016 Olympic bid, it is obvious that the property value increase will effectively force lower-income renters out of areas surrounding the Olympic village. But that still might be better than having Rio de Janeiro win the bid (one of the other 4 finalist cities). It is common knowledge that local businesses in Rio fund “death squads” to clean up their streets. They want the poor street kids to disappear and pay the squads to make it happen – especially before big events like the World Cup. A recent congressional study revealed that in Rio de Janeiro alone at least 180 different death squads operate. Fifteen of these groups target children exclusively and work “under the protection of the police and justice system,” according to Congresswoman Rita Camata. The investigation named 103 people–including lawyers, police and former police officers–involved in death squads that murder children.

In truth I love the Olympics. The Olympics are one of the few times I ever watch sports. I support the idea – letting the world come together to share their gifts and talents through the common language of sport. But not when it is just a guise for injustice. When it encourages the disparity between rich and poor. When it has a man selling women as chattel to fund his training. When it has cities hiding away their poor – displacing or worse, slaughtering them – in order to present a “clean” face to the world. The official goal of the Olympic movement is stated as – “to contribute to building a peaceful and better world by educating youth through sport practised without discrimination of any kind and in the Olympic spirit, which requires mutual understanding with a spirit of friendship, solidarity and fair play.” But the question must be asked – are they really building a better world or just helping injustice flourish?

Read more

All the Lonely People

Posted on

“All the lonely people
Where do they all come from?
All the lonely people
Where do they all belong?”
– The Beatles, Eleanor Rigby

I didn’t really follow the media circus surrounding Michael Jackson’s death. I grew up as a conservative evangelical during the time when he was really popular, so I was never allowed to listen to his music and then never had any interest later on. I understand the idea of celebrity obsession, and there are a handful of celebrities whose passing I would mourn, but Michael Jackson wasn’t one of them. That said, I was struck by the news stories reporting on the fans who committed suicide upon hearing of his death. At last count some 12 fans have taken their life in response to his death. And that breaks my heart.

My initial response to hearing of these suicides was, “how could the church let that happen?” Now I fully admit the reasons for why people take their life are complicated, and that the church itself isn’t responsible for policing its members in that way. But at the same time, it saddens me that the inclusive community that should be the church failed to reach out to these people. That they could be so obsessed with a pretend relationship with a celebrity they had never met that they would end their life over it. Why isn’t the church offering a compelling, accessible, and understanding enough community that obsession over a distant idol is necessary for some people? And why aren’t we as the church doing our best to offer that community to those on the margins who may have slipped through the cracks and lost touch with reality?

Of course, I can give a dozen answers to my own questions. Raising the issues of what defines community itself, to people’s right to privacy, to the church’s own celebrity worship issues. There are all sorts of excuses and reasons why this has nothing to do with the church. And I even believe most of them. But at the same time I wish things could be different. I wish the church wasn’t an place where a few people show up with masks firmly in place. I wish people didn’t have reason to fear stepping into a church or of removing that mask and being themselves. I wish the church wasn’t more often than not just the facade of community instead of the real thing. Because if we were the real thing then maybe we could be serving all the lonely people in the world.

Read more

Good Southern Girls

Posted on

I’m a Texas girl – born and raised here. And although I spent 12 years living on the OTHER side of both the Mississippi and the Mason-Dixon line, it’s hard to escape that upbringing.

The unfortunate part of being a Southerner living in the Midwest is that most Midwesterners liked to pretend they have no regional dialect or accent and so can therefore make fun of those of us that did. I endured 12 years of being made fun of for saying “y’all” and for merging my vowels in “pin/pen.” The worst was my supervising teacher for my ESL teaching practicum. She would stop my lessons to make fun of me in front of my students and failed me for my incompetency in speaking the English language. Thankfully my professor didn’t think having a Southern as opposed to a Chicago accent was sufficient reason to fail me actually, she thought it was really dumb and said no students would ever be assigned to that particular teacher again…). But in all truth there are aspects of Southern speech patterns that I struggle with. Not that I’m some grammarnazi who thinks regional dialects are somehow substandard forms of English, but that these language constructions are rooted in a cultural ethos, or way of being, that I don’t know if I want to affirm.

Some might call it cultural politeness or tentativeness. Others an ingrained attitude of submission, subservience, and deference. In short, it is constructions of language that seek to lessen any offense or imperative and that keeps the needs and feelings of the other in mind. For example – using y’all to refer to one person. Saying to the friend entering your house “y’all might want to wipe your feet,” isn’t a grammatical mistake, but a way to soften the request. Making the request plural makes it less of a direct order and puts less pressure on the person.

Same thing with the double modal, which is probably the most ridiculed part of Southern English. Saying something like “you might should bring your apple pie to the potluck” ensures that anyone could politely refuse since it isn’t a direct imperative. Or to say “I might could go out with you this weekend,” is a polite response without having to offer a commitment or direct (hurtful) refusal. The double modal lessens the severity of the request or refusal, always keeping in mind the feelings, preferences, and social position of the other.

Now on one hand, choosing to care about other’s needs is a good thing. Basic humility, loving others, all that. Knowing how one’s words affect others is a beneficial thing to be aware of that can do great kindness to others. The issue arises in that the people who make use of these aspects of Southern English are African Americans and women. It is cultural habit to even within patterns of speech place themselves below others. That’s what I have a problem with. Even if we are unaware of doing it, the habits reinforce the degrading and demeaning aspects of racism and sexism.

So its a strange dilemma. I want to respect others, and consider others better than myself in light of biblical humility. But, I don’t want to do so because I am a woman and therefore must place the needs of others, especially men, before mine. It’s hard and something I struggle with. I’ve been indoctrinated that good Christian Southern girls DO NOT assert their preferences on anything – they always wait to hear what others want first. I know it’s stupid, but it’s hard to get past cultural conditioning. And its hard to fight something as pervasive as language.

So I wonder what others do. Are any readers here from Southern, or Germanic, or Asian cultures where this deference, or “one-down” sort of language is common? Does it fall along similar race or gender lines? How do you navigate the issues?

Read more

Movie Review: Food, Inc.

Posted on

food-inc“The industry doesn’t want you to know the truth about what you are eating, because if you knew you might not want to eat it ” – Food, Inc.

I recently headed out to a sold-out showing of the documentary Food, Inc. at Austin’s own Alamo Drafthouse. Generally, getting dinner and drinks along with my movie is my favorite “night out” activity, but in watching a film which critically examines our industrial food system, it was a bit strange. Granted, all around me I heard orders for veggie burgers and the local organic veggie platter and there wasn’t a high fructose corn syrup soda to be seen, but I was glad to have finished my (veggie) burger by the time the previews ended. Although I have sought to inform myself about the injustices in our modern food system, Food, Inc., presents the most comprehensive and disturbing summary of that system I have seen yet. It is a necessary film for basically anyone who eats food.

A film which took three years to make with a large part of its budget going to pay the legal fees defending itself against lawsuits from the industrial food companies, Food, Inc. takes a hard look at how corporations now control the production of our food, resulting in generally unhealthy, environmentally hazardous, and completely unsustainable food that in truth threatens the very well-being of our country. From the animals that are confined in inhumane cages, left to stand in their own mire, fed unnatural diets and cocktails of drugs and hormones to the impoverished workers who are treated with the same disrespect this system has sacrificed the respect and well-being of living creatures and people for the sake of profit. But Food Inc. doesn’t just stop with detailing those atrocities, it delves into the problems with government subsidies and the ways the fearmongering enforcement of genetically modified food copyrights are destroying the small farmer. People are being hurt by this industrial food system that dumps chemicals into our environment with reckless abandon and produces unnatural and unhealthy food for our consumption.

I appreciated though how Food, Inc. didn’t simply present the issues with industrial food as a clear cut, good vs. evil scenario. It acknowledged that poor workers have no choice but to take jobs on the factory farms, and that farmers have no choice but to give into the pressure to work with the huge industries. Those industries have so altered our nation’s laws and have so many lawyers working for them, that any farmer who resists joining their ranks finds themselves out of work at best, and sued penniless for simply encouraging people to not buy the big company’s products. The farmers and workers are desperate for a better system where real freedom and healthy standards exist, but for now they have to work with what they’ve got.

Food, Inc. also explores why for the average working class family in America, buying healthy food isn’t an option. It is far cheaper to buy the cheeseburger from the drive-thru dollar menu than it is to buy fruit or vegetables. That is because everything in that cheeseburger comes from corn which our government subsidizes so much that farmers can sell it below the cost of production. So the poor American eats the extremely unhealthy food because it is cheaper. But the rising epidemic of type 2 diabetes shows the hidden cost of that value meal. The poor in our country – those with no health or job insurance – are getting sick at alarming rates due to the unhealthy cheap food they eat. This is injustice of the highest extreme – but it’s all part of our industrial food system. It’s a complicated system that gives us unhealthy, unsustainable food that disrespects the earth, animals, and people all in the name of making the greatest profit for a handful of corporations. This is the story of the food we eat every day.

But in truth, I have a lot of friends who don’t want to know anything about their food. They shelter their kids from knowing the whole “circle of life” stuff, but also tell me point blank that they don’t want to know the story behind their food. In their mind, what they don’t know won’t hurt them. Unfortunately, as Food Inc. shows, that isn’t always the case. I wasn’t expecting this film to be a tear-jerker, but hearing a mom talk about how her toddler son ate a hamburger and was dead in 12 days had me weeping. This mom, was the typical middle-American Republican mom on vacation, but the hamburger they bought their son on the way home was tainted with e. coli 0157:H7, a deadly antibiotic resistant bacteria common in factory farmed cows. These cows, fed unnatural diets of corn develop diseases (like e.coli) and are treated regularly with antibiotics, which leads to drug-resistant strains like this one. This mom has become the unlikely activist for food safety. The meat company who sent out the tainted meat knew it was tainted and didn’t issue a recall until two weeks after her son was dead. As she puts it, all she wants is an apology from the company and a guarantee that they are doing everything possible to prevent it from ever happening again. Instead she finds the companies fighting for more lax food safety laws and herself under threat of a lawsuit under the “veggie libel” laws for discouraging people to buy meat products. Yeah, look up these laws – express fears about the safety of your food and you could be sued for causing these companies loss of revenue. So much for free speech, much less safe food. It’s hard to know the truth if you are not allowed to talk about it.

But for all the doom and gloom that Food, Inc. rightly covers, I was grateful that it didn’t end the story there. Instead of throwing up it’s arms and admitting defeat or even insisting that we all go join some intentional community/ hippie commune immediately, Food, Inc. details the practical ways we can start changing the system from within. It profiles the organic dairy farmers who although they had boycotted Wal-Mart all their lives, were now selling their product to the them. Some may call them sell outs, and they are under no illusion that Wal-Mart jumped on the organic bandwagon out of the goodness of their hearts, but to get a store with a distribution as huge as Wal-Marts means significant amounts of pesticides, fertilizers, and antibiotics are kept from polluting our ecosystem. That’s a really big deal, and one of the main reason to buy organic to anyway. Working within the system, even if it is with Wal-Mart, makes progress happen faster and on a much larger scale. Similarly, the movie concludes with the reminder that we can each make a difference every time we go to the store. The point isn’t to abandon the food system, or stop buying food, but to simply demand healthier, sustainable food. We can choose to vote with our pocketbooks for the type of food we want to support. Do we want to support the food that oppresses animals, workers, and the environment or the food that does its best to care for all those things? We have that choice, we just have to be willing to make it.

Food, Inc. opens across the US during Summer 2009. Check the Food, Inc. website to see if it is playing near you.

Read more

Independence Day Heroes

Posted on

It’s been said that July 4, 1776 was an Independence Day only if you were a white, property-owning male. For the women, the black slaves, and the Native Americans all that changed was who controlled them. So while we spend a day blowing things up to commemorate white men (sorry, couldn’t resist the picture) who brought freedom to other white men (not that they don’t deserve freedom too), I thought I might highlight a few unsung freedom fighters. No, they didn’t kill anyone, blow things up, or wear a uniform – but they helped bring significant freedoms to the most oppressed in our country. These are my Independence Day heroes.

Sarah and Angelina Grimke – sisters born to an “aristocratic” Southern slaveholding family, who after converting to the Quaker faith became abolitionists and women’s rights advocates. They were among the first women to take a public stand against the oppression of women and slaves. Angelina lectured to legislative groups and Sarah wrote An Epistle to the Clergy of the Southern States (1836), urging abolition, and Letters on the Equality of the Sexes and the Condition of Woman (1838). Theirs was faith in action, bringing freedom to those denied a voice.

INTEGRATION RUBY BRIDGESRuby Bridges – for the sake of a better education for all this six year old became one of the first black kids to attend an all-white school. Even though she received threats, her father lost his job, U.S. Marshalls had to escort her to school, and she ended up being the only student in her class with the help of her family, her teacher, and psychiatrist Dr. Robert Coles, she stuck it out. And started our country down the path of freedom of (good) education for all.

Romeo Ramirez – the first American to be awarded (in 2003) the Robert F. Kennedy Human Right Award. Ramirez moved to Florida from Guatemala at age 15 in search of work. What he saw in the citrus groves and tomato farms — forced labor, armed guards in the fields, economic servitude — turned the slight, soft-spoken farmworker into an organizer and activist. He joined a group called the Coalition for Immokalee Workers, went undercover, testified in federal court, and helped put three labor crew bosses behind bars for the next decade. He is the face of those seeking freedom for the modern day slaves in our midst.

Who are your heroes? Who do you look up to in the fight to free others from oppression?

Read more

Me Culture

Posted on

So last weekend I went to go see Food Inc. (I’ll get a review posted about it one of these days…). It was an amazing, and disturbing film, but part of the experience was seeing it at the Alamo Drafthouse here in Austin (which imho, is the ONLY place to see movies in town). Before the films they show, the Drafthouse people show clips from other related movies. So, for instance, before Twilight we saw clips from really cheezy old vampire movies or before Star Trek there were clips of trekkies and SNL sketches about Star Trek. For the most part, those clips are always the epitome of the strange manifestations of that genre or theme. So at a movie about the industrial food system, we were treated to some pretty scary propaganda pieces and commercials put out by that very food system.

But watching these commercials from 20-50 years ago was disturbing. They were so far fetched, it is hard to believe that anyone ever thought that they might be persuasive in any way. There was one about fortified white bread that was presented as a documentary – explaining for fortified bread has improved nutrition so that children who eat white bread are smarter and better athletes. Or the McDonald’s commercials presenting a parade of uniformed, pretty, white women singing about how much they love serving a stereotypical small town. It was all about these companies providing helpful services that will improve our lives. Well, I don’t think anyone is stupid enough to believe that processed junk food has improved anyone’s life. And as the film shows, that sort of food is actually destroying our health, our environment, and our country.

So it was amusing to then pay attention to the junk food commercials for the next few days (which, btw, are all food commercials. natural, healthy foods don’t have advertising budgets). Every single commercial was about treating ourselves – giving ourselves the break we deserve. No veiled lies to get us to believe that processed junk helps people, but simply the appeal to self-centered “it’s all about me” mentality. And I know how stupid it is to complain about commercials, but they have big money going into determining what people want to hear. Forget building community, or improving lives – that’s so 1978. Now its all about self-centeredness.

It’s hard not to get cynical when confronted with that attitude. There are people I start discussing my upcoming book on justice with, and I get a blank look in reply. I’ve even had people ask, “why should caring about the needs of others be my concern.” Or I stumbled across this book recently, which decries the evils of environmentalist who are “demanding that you turn down your thermostat, stop driving your car, or engage in some other senseless act of self-denial.” Apparently trying to save the earth must be fought because it threatens “the entire American way of life” and envisions for us “a grim future marked by endless privation.” Well, duh, of course it does. But apparently for some it is far better to be selfish jerks than to have to give up anything to help others. I know this isn’t widespread, but some days it sure feels that way.

But maybe 20-30 years from now people will watch our commercials and ask “how could people be so selfish and stupid.”

Read more