Category: Social Justice

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

Thoughts on “A Jesus Manifesto”

Posted on

I have to say that I’m disappointed in Frank Viola’s and Len Sweet’s latest internet push “A Magna Carta for Restoring the Supremacy of Jesus Christ, a.k.a. A Jesus Manifesto for the 21st Century Church.” Besides the crazy presumptuous title and slight affront to jesusmanifesto.com (which Mark has addressed nicely), the document really seems to be a step backward for the church. In essence “A Jesus Manifesto” calls Christians back to a Christ-centered faith. Which, in general, is something I heartily support. And, in fact, there is much in the document that I completely agree with. But when they say stuff like “What is Christianity? It is Christ. Nothing more. Nothing less.”, I start to have problems.

Don’t get me wrong, I’m all for a Christ-centered faith. And unfortunately those of us who are uncomfortable with the document are now being accused of wanting to ignore Christ or question his divinity. So let me say upfront, that is not the case. Christ is central. Period. But the assertion that Christianity – the movement of the followers of Christ – is nothing more or less than the person of Christ just really seems to miss the point.

The attack and reason for the document springs from the talk about the Kingdom of God and social justice within emerging missional communities. Viola and Sweet insist that such talk turns Jesus into an abstraction and tempts us to ignore the person of Jesus. They say “Jesus Christ was not a social activist nor a moral philosopher. To pitch him that way is to drain his glory and dilute his excellence. Justice apart from Christ is a dead thing.” I’m sorry guys, but Jesus was both of those things. He can’t be reduced to those things, but that doesn’t mean that he didn’t embody those things as well. To say that is all he was would yes, drain his glory, but to say he wasn’t those things too denies reality. What is going on here is really a discussion of which image of Jesus we want to embrace – a niche Jesus of one extreme or another or the full Jesus.  More on that in a bit.

My main problem with the document lies in their assumption that those of us talking about justice and the kingdom are doing so apart from the person and power of Jesus. That’s just plain and simply not true. But it has become the favorite straw man argument for the opponents of the emerging missional community. I think in many ways it is based on a misunderstanding of us that projects the theology and history of the classic liberal social gospel movement onto the missional movement. Len Sweet even admitted that the document sprung in part from the lessons he’s learned from teaching a class on the history of the Social Gospel movement in early 20th century America. And while that movement was influenced by theological discussions that questioned the divinity of Christ and sought to find the “historical Jesus,” it is unfair and inappropriate to assume the same thing of the emerging missional movement.

I don’t know how many times we have to stand up and say that caring for the Kingdom, seeking justice, and loving others is all about choosing to focus more on Christ. As Christians we believe in him and follow him. He said, if you love me you will obey me. Not “if you love me, you will worship a ethereal, conceptualized version of me that is disembodied from action and the world I came to save.” When following Jesus becomes simply about doing works or simply about standing in awe of a divine person then we’ve got problems – and a Jesus that has nothing to do with the Jesus of the Bible. Those images of Christ are dangerous, but what I see the manifesto doing is attacking a (projected) incomplete image in favor of another incomplete image.

While Viola and Sweet may personally think that following the commands of Jesus is part of what it means to be a Christian (although they say it is just about Christ), to tell others that talking about the commands of Jesus takes the focus off of Jesus is unhelpful in the extreme. I grew up only hearing about the person of Jesus. Jesus is divine, he did miracles, I am to believe and worship (be in awe of) him. Nothing more. Ever. It is naive to believe that just by presenting this Jesus, people will start doing all that he commanded if those commands aren’t allowed to be talked about. For instance, my daughter attended one night of a neighborhood backyard bible club this week. Her lesson was on Jesus serving the poor and healing the sick. The takeaway was that Jesus did miracles so therefore we have to believe in him. No mention at all of the “go and do likewise” aspect of being a follower of Christ. At this same club, the leader presented the Wordless Book, but after doing the Gold (heaven), Dark (sin), Red (Jesus), White (substitutionary atonement) pages she turned to the Green page and couldn’t remember what it was for. (the green page, btw, is the grow in one’s faith page). It was the perfect representation of a faith that focuses on the need to believe in the person of Jesus to the exclusion of following Jesus. This is the faith I grew up with – one that cares a lot about the person of Jesus but which doesn’t even talk about following his commandments. An impotent faith that essentially tells Jesus that we don’t love him enough to obey his commands.

It is because I love Jesus that I talk about and pursue justice and the kingdom. Even Viola and Sweet mention that “the teachings of Jesus cannot be separated from Jesus himself.” I just wish they wouldn’t falsely accuse us of doing that. And I wish they wouldn’t encourage these dichotomized versions of Jesus by criticizing the actual following of his commands. It is a step backward into the faith my daughter witnessed the other night at the Bible club, and truly unhelpful to the church in the long run. I love Jesus, but I want nothing to do with a faith that is disembodied, disconnected, and impotent. I want to believe in, worship, and follow Christ (since those are all technically one and the same). I’m sorry, but a real Jesus Manifesto wouldn’t be about such a one-sided incomplete image of Jesus. No – it would present Jesus in the fullness of the gospels and not be afraid to tell Christians that following Christ involves a heck of a lot more than standing there slack-jawed in awe of him. I’d love that message to get out to the world, but this, “A Jesus Manifesto” was simply a disappointment in that regard.

Read more

Recession and Compassion

Posted on

I recently read an interview with Marc Ian Barasch (author of The Compassionate Life: Walking in the Path of Kindness) in the June/July issue of Ode Magazine and loved his response to the question “can compassion and kindness survive in a recession?” He comments –

“Compassion isn’t just a smiley-face emotion that blooms in giddy times when everything’s coming up roses. The literal meaning of the word comes from the Latin compatior—to suffer with, to feel with. It’s about removing that clanking suit of armor that keeps us from being touched, that blocks our authentic responses. I’m not sure people were more compassionate in the so-called successful economy. All those Darwinian TV shows: You’re fired! Get off the island! Triumph doesn’t necessarily make individuals kinder. But when things go downhill, community becomes less dispensable. If everyone’s feeling vulnerable, it can restore that feeling of ‘We’re in this together.’ Compassion grows out of a willingness to share the human condition, not just the pursuit of happiness.”

I am honestly sick of people making excuses for why justice or charity can’t happen in a recession, so to hear a reminder that compassion is active helps. It is hard work, it does require us to get over ourselves and think as a community. Contrary to popular opinion, I think the recession is the perfect time to jump headfirst into living the compassionate life – the needs are so much more apparent and we are all more aware of struggles. Recession shouldn’t be a time to bitch and hoard, but the chance to re-evaluate our lives and start focusing outward.

Read more

Twitter, Truth, and Revolution

Posted on

I have been doing my best to keep up with the ongoing events in Iran. I don’t know enough to truly understand the nuances of the election or the political science behind it all, but like many others, I’ve been caught up in the human drama of it all. Photos like this one literally brought tears to me eyes. Knowing the plight of women in Iran, and hearing even limited stories in interviews or from the book Reading Lolita in Tehran, connected me on a visceral level with all that this picture symbolized. And those of us following the hundreds of tweets a second with the #iranelection tag can’t help but be overwhelmed at the role social networking is playing in this revolution.

But that of course begs the question of the validity of using Twitter as news source. Just follow the hashtag for a few minutes and anyone can see that there is a lot of confusion about what is really happening. One person can say something and it gets re-tweeted hundreds of times regardless of whether or not it is true. And while we have all witnessed the ability of other open-source projects like Wikipedia to self-regulate, this Twitter revolution is too intense and caught up in the moment to do so well, if at all. So other media outlets are left trying to sort fact from fiction and have found themselves then attacked when they question some of the more emotional aspects of what is going on. Like – Was there really election fraud? How many protesters are actually involved? Were the election results really leaked? For those caught up in the momentum of the moment, those questions challenge the very thing they are fighting for.

So in watching this unfold, I have to wonder how much truth does matter when it comes to something like revolution. If the truth is that Ahmadinejad won fair and square and that there were only a small group of protesters, does that truth matter if the lies that were spread ended up being the catalyst that spark change on a massive scale? It seems to me that in situations like these, the details matter less than the cause. If the viral spread of information on Twitter – albeit unsubstantiated possible misinformation – ends up pushing people beyond the tipping point in the fight for freedom, can we really call that information bad?

These are just the thoughts that run through my head as I watch this whole thing unfold. I don’t know where it will lead, or if it is truly a revolution of any sort. But at the same time I can’t help but wonder how differently other fights for freedom like Tiananmen Square or even the Holocaust would have gone if the passionate yet unsubstantiated spread of information through Twitter had been around then. Would enough people knowing about them and getting angry have stopped them? Or for that matter why isn’t there the same passion and endless Twitter campaigns for other freedom issues like human trafficking?

Read more

Christians, Empire, and the Economy

Posted on

Mike recently brought to my attention a letter written by Pliny the Younger to the Emperor Trajan written around 111 AD concerning persecution of Christians. I found it fascinating for the insight it gave into what Christian communities were like back in the early days of the church. Pliny obviously was trying to figure out what to do with this strange bunch of heretics and was seeking advice from the Emperor as to how he should proceed in the persecutions. I found it interesting, from an egalitarian perspective, that when he wanted to find out more about these Christians Pliny mentions capturing and torturing two slave girls who were deaconesses in the church. But beyond that what I found most fascinating were the impact Christians were having on the local economy.

Pliny mentions that once he ramped up the persecution of Christians and insisted on their following Roman customs (like venerating the emperor), certain changes occurred in the culture. He mentions that the Roman temples, once deserted, were once again being filled, and religious rites practiced. And that the market for sacrificial animals, which had all but dried up, was once again flourishing. He proudly asserts that these Christians had been reformed into dutiful citizens of the Empire.

It intrigues me that Christians simply being who they are could so impact an economic system to the point that suppliers for animals to sacrifice to idols almost died out. It took the Empire persecuting and torturing Christians in order to restore that way of life and for the economic system to revert to the way things had been. I can’t help but notice how the situation is reversed for Christians today. Instead of subverting the unjust economic systems of empire, we have married it to our faith. For many it is our Christian duty to uphold the economic system of our government. In fact those who question the system, or even question small parts of that system, are labeled as unpatriotic and (therefore) unchristian. It is those who stand with the poor and the oppressed, who choose not to give their money to false gods and unjust entities, that face ridicule for their faith these days.

I wonder what it would take for Christians these days to have such a significant economic impact on a part of our culture that it starts freaking the government out. What if we all choose not to buy products made by slave labor? What if we choose not to invest in companies that provide brothel visits with trafficked children as incentives for businessmen? What if we only bought clothing or food for which workers were paid a living wage? Would we maybe then be known for being something other than the lapdogs of Empire? I don’t want to incur persecution, but if you are messing with the powers that be (especially the economic powers that be) then persecution is bound to follow. These Christians lived out their beliefs and seemingly had profound impact until the Romans started pressuring them to abandon their values. Are we even ready to admit that our faith has something to say to economic systems much less live out Christian values in that realm?

Read more

Plurality 2.0

Posted on

Adam Walker Cleaveland has a new blog series going on over at his blog Pomomusings. The theme of the series is Plurality 2.0. He writes –

I think issues of pluralism, ecumenism, the exclusivity/inclusivity of Christ and everything else that could fall under the broad category of plurality are certainly divisive issues today. For many, words like pluralism have very negative connotations – it’s something that only pansy, milquetoast Christians believe in. For others, pluralism is simply the air we breathe and we just need to accept it. But perhaps there are other different ways to (re)think issues like these. I’m hoping that our guest bloggers will be able to help us think about plurality in a new way: Plurality 2.0.

The posts so far have been fascinating, and there is a great line-up of guest bloggers.

My entry on “Plurality and Justice” is up today, so go check it out!

Read more

Lent – Being Aware

Posted on

So we are one week into Lent. I posted on Ash Wednesday about my ambivalence regarding how to observe the season this year. At this point in my life, I feel the need to build up faith instead of eliminate random habits in the name of discipline. But I really didn’t know how to do that. I finally decided to spend the season simply being more aware.

Now of course being aware could just be a euphemism for doing nothing – and it just well might be. It’s easy sometimes to open our eyes to the world around us and then fail to act upon what we see. That’s me most of the time these days. But when I’m at the point that my main goal some days is just to make it to the end of the day without having gone utterly insane from being trapped inside the house with screaming children – to open my eyes and get past my self-absorption seems like a good place to start.

So being aware…

Here’s where I show how really pathetic I am. I’ve been reading through the Lenten Guide provided by Mustard Seed Associates. It is a fantastic resource, full of faith and community building suggestions for the season. I was drawn to the meditation they had on Psalm 51:10 “Create in me a clean heart O God and renew a right spirit within me.” It resonated with my desire to be more aware of my world and get over myself. And it’s a way more spiritual of a prayer than “God help me not be a selfish bitch.”  But part of the Lenten Guide is a suggestion to take the Mutunga $2 Challenge. The idea is for a family to commit for a week to eating on $2 per person per day. Since most of the world only makes $2 a day, this is an exercise to help foster awareness as to how most of the world lives. If anything, it serves to highlight how much we truly do have. I think it’s a great idea, but (and here’s the pathetic part) I’m not doing it. But in a strange way that too has helped me be more aware.

When I first heard about the challenge, I mentally started adding up the cost of what it takes to feed Aidan each day. At 8 months his diet is rather fixed and I quickly realized that there is no way that I could feed him on $2 a day. That shocked me since I already try to be economical with his food. His diet consists of breast milk, formula, oatmeal, and pureed fruits and veggies. So the breast milk is free and if I was a bit more diligent about using the (expensive) breast pump I have then perhaps I wouldn’t need the formula. But the reality is that he gets formula in his oatmeal and generally one bottle a day. I’m already over a dollar there. Granted I use organic formula – the stuff that doesn’t contain hormones, steroids, and melamine. Perhaps I could save a few cents by feeding him those poisons, but really? On top of that I make all of his pureed food. I save a ton of money (and disposable jars) doing that, but even 8-10 oz a day adds up fast (between $1-2 a day). But if I were buying the jar food, that same amount of food would cost between $2-5 a day.

But as I thought through that I was reminded that it is generally the poorer mothers who are forced to buy the more expensive foods. For a lot of women because of job circumstances using expensive formula is the only option. And finding time to make babyfood is hard – it’s a lot easier for busy moms to just buy jars off the shelf. Even ignoring what is healthiest for the baby or what is most environmentally friendly – the bottom line is that it costs more to get by when you’re stressed out trying to make ends meet. So I have to ask – what causes this? Is it culture? All the other moms use formula, so it seems like the only option. Marketing? All those free formula samples supplied to hospitals and doctors making their mark. Lack of education? Do women not know the cost difference and health benefits? Or simply systemic injustices that prevent poor mothers from fully focusing on their family. This is not just about the poor in third world countries struggling on $2 a day – but its about minimum wage single moms here that are caught in a system that holds them back. When those that can least afford it have to spend the most on food there are cultural issues that seriously need addressed.

What am I doing about that? I don’t know. Yet. But I know it helps to be aware.

Read more

The Price of Energy

Posted on

This blog post killed a three year old little boy.

This past week I took the time to research where the energy I use in my house comes from. I don’t know why, but I was shocked to discover that the energy I use is connected to mountaintop removal. Mountaintop removal is a destructive form of coal mining in which entire mountains are literally blown up. This process is devastating hundreds of square miles of Appalachia; polluting the headwaters of rivers that provide drinking water to millions of Americans; and destroying a distinctly American culture that has endured for generations. I knew about the evils of mountaintop removal, but for some reason I though that I wasn’t affected by it in this area of the country. But apparently Austin Energy obtains some of its energy from coal “mined” through mountaintop removal in Black Mountain, VA. The strip mining in this area is responsible for the 2004 death of three-year-old Jeremy Davidson. He was asleep in his bed when a half-ton boulder plummetted off the mountain and flattened a path directly across his bed. He died instantly. So whether I like it or not, creating this blog post on my laptop connects me to the death of this child.

What’s difficult here is that Austin Energy is fairly advanced in its goals for increasing its percentages of clean energy. It is leading the way in resourcing wind energy and provides amazing rebates to homeowners wanting to install solar panels on their homes. We were at Home Depot this past weekend and stopped to chat with the rep at the solar panel info table. Installing solar panels in Austin is probably one of the most cost effective and easy places in the country to do so. That said, we still don’t have a spare $25,000 upfront cash sitting around to do it.

It’s frustrating. I can’t afford to take the major steps to change the system, so I let three-year-olds pay the ultimate price? Okay, it’s more than frustrating – it seriously pisses me off. I hate having no choice but to be complicit in injustice knowing that there is little I can do to change the situation. So at this point I need to see hope in the $20 billion of the stimulus package going to green energy technology. I know it doesn’t solve all the problems – like how some things like mountaintop removal should just be illegal. But if the system is too big for me to effectively take responsibility for my actions, I respect it when the system itself takes steps towards responsibility.

At least it’s a start.

Read more

Hopeful Imagining

Posted on

Contrary to what my husband may think, I really am an optimist – at least in the long term perspective. I think we can bring about good in this world. As one of my favorite lines from Lord of the Rings goes, “there is some good in this world and it’s worth fighting for.” As hard and hopeless as it might sometimes seem, I think it’s worth working towards a positive vision.

That said I understand the reluctance of some to affirm efforts to present such a positive vision of the future. These efforts can come across as insincere – mocking instead of hopeful. We believe another world is possible, but don’t know how to cope when glimpses of that world invade our. We might smile at the ideas, but are wary of utopian visions of the future.

For example when the Yes Men a few years ago marked the 20th anniversary of the Bhopal Diaster by creating an elaborate hoax where posing as a representative of Dow Chemicals on the BBC a Jude Finisterra announced that Dow was finally accepting full responsibility for the incident and offering a multibillion dollar compensation to the hundreds of thousands of people still suffering from the accident. This is what the world had been waiting for for two decades as opposed to the cover-up and denial of responsibility that actually occurred. The name Jude Finisterra – the saint of impossible causes and the ends of the earth. Fitting. The response though? Dow share prices dropped 4.2% in 23 minutes (fully recovered later in the day). The BBC issued an apology to Dow and the Yes Men were chastised for bringing false hope to the Indians. So the harbingers of hope, those who dare to image a better world, are chastised while those that should be taking responsibility are apologized to.

Another great examples of hopeful imagining is the Jim Carrey movie Fun with Dick and Jane. After losing his job in an Enron like company collapse, Carrey’s character pulls a Yes Men like stunt by holding a press conference announcing that the company’s CEO will personally reimburse the retirement funds of the jobless employees who lost it all. Surprised at his house with the news, surrounded by cameras and people thanking him, the CEO has to go along with the scheme. This is the way things should have been after Enron – the fair and positive world we desired but didn’t get.

Same thing with the video to U2’s The Saints are Coming. One sees images of Katrina ravaged New Orleans, but then fake headlines of “US Troops Redeployed from Iraq to New Orleans” flash across the screen. Images of bombers dropping aid packages and rescuing children from the floods along with the mesmerizing lyrics of “the saints are coming” do inspire hope. This is how it should have been (and if you read some of the 20,000+ comments on YouTube, what some people actually think did happen). But then the lyrics remind us that “I say no matter how I try I realize there is no reply” and the video ends with the sign “not as seen on TV.” Is it a hopeful future or simply a reminder of how bad things are?

So what do you do with such hopeful imaginings? Do you laugh at their naivete? Roll your eyes and say “that will never happen”? Or appreciate the encouragement in envisioning a better world? I’ve personally come to enjoy these positive visions. I like the reminders of the way things could be. Having something concrete to grasp onto, albeit fictional, helps with the whole moving forward in the quest for justice thing.

So yes, I’m an optimist in my own quirky way.

Read more