10 Truths About American Poverty: the American Church Busted.
In March/April 2014, Mother Jones magazine published an article by Erika Eichelberger entitled "10 Poverty Myths, Busted." The author is referring to erroneous ideas about poverty that most Americans believe are true; this is her list:
1. Absent dads are the problem.
2 Single moms are the problem.
3. Black dads are the problem.
4. Poor people are lazy.
5. If you are not officially poor, you're doing okay.
6. Go to college, get out of poverty.
7. We're winning the war on poverty.
8. The days of old ladies eating cat food are over.
9. The homeless are drunk street people.
10. Handouts are bankrupting us.
In addition, read this March/April article from Mother Jones entitled "What If Everything You Knew About Poverty was Wrong?" by Stephanie Menrimer. Also "More Evidence that half of America is in or near poverty," by Paul Buchheit (March 26, 2014, Nation of Change). After reading the above articles, you will realize why what I am writing about the American church is so tragic, so wrong. Unfortunately, in my opinion, the American church has contributed more to the continuation of poverty (think both sins of omission and commission) than to its end, though it would vehemently deny this. The following 10 items have contributed to creating and maintaining American poverty:
1. The church has far too often been silent about or participated in Indian genocide, enslavement of Africans and the "annexing" of almost half of Mexican territory.
2. The church often has been silent about or participated in the mass incarceration of young black and Latino males and the 20-1 racial wealth gap.
3. The church has been silent about or participated in the American Trinity of hyperindividualism, hypermaterialism and hyperethnocentrism.
4. As the Pharisees did, the American church has much too often neglected justice and the love of God.
5. The church often quotes scriptures such as "You will always have the poor with you" and "Blessed are the poor in spirit" out of context.
6. In the church, there has been a massive failure to teach about the 555 Hebrew references to oppression and its synonyms in the OT.
7. The church has failed to discover and apply the NT teachings on oppression and justice; a massive omission.
8. The church has failed to combine love and justice, spirituality and justice.
9. The church has failed to combine the Holy Spirit, the kingdom of God and justice.
10. The church has failed to practice repentance, restitution and reparations thereby maintaining the enormous damage done by past systems of oppression.
11. The church has relocated away from the oppressed poor into the "spiritual" suburbs; a Lutheran pastor once wrote that over a 40-year period, 40 out of 44 Lutheran churches left Detroit.
Can we change these sad truths into myths in the sense of no longer being factual? Can the church become a doer of Jubilee Justice instead of a doer of injustice?
Friday, March 28, 2014
Monday, March 24, 2014
Chapter 9 Haiti and the U.S.: Systems of Oppression
An unbroken agony caused by an unending oppression---of both blacks in the U.S. and blacks in Haiti. Randall Robinson writes the following about Haiti: "The Haitian economy has never recovered from the financial havoc France (and America) wreaked upon it, during and after slavery." "Slavery had long since ended, but wealth remained concentrated." Much the same could be said about the black economy in the U.S. Still not convinced? Then read the following books/article in this sequence: God So Loved the Third World: The Biblical Vocabulary of Oppression by Thomas Hanks; "The Case for Reparations," by Ta-Nehisi Coates; The New Jim Crow by Michelle Alexander; An Unbroken [Haitian] Agony by Randall Robinson. Then write two papers: Oppression in the New Testament and Justice in the New Testament.
Twice in history, after the 1791-2004 Haiti slave revolution, after the 1986 people's revolution which forced the dictator Baby Doc to leave the country, these United States of America could have and should have joined with poor Haitian blacks and helped them create a just democracy. Instead, however, twice, a U.S. elite joined with an Haitian elite to continue the endless oppression of poor Haitian blacks; plutocracy/dictatorship won, not democracy. If there is a divine judgment for nations as well as individuals (see Mt. 25), the U.S. will be severely condemned because when it could have done justice, instead, it chose and did evil. It neglected justice and the love of God; Jesus chastised the Pharisees for this type of evil.
In both Haiti and the U.S, we create and recreate new systems of oppression which neglect justice and the love of God. The more I study each nation's histories, I see frighteningly similar evil patterns. Michelle Alexander, in her book The New Jim Crow, argues that in the U.S. systems of oppression such as slavery and segregation weren't really eliminated but only redesigned, today as mass incarceration and the expanding racial wealth gap as well as the predatory mortgage housing loans by banks. Sadly, few American Christians understand what is really going on and why. Which means they are doing little to stop this social evil.
For a full history of Haiti written by a professional historian, I recommend Haiti: The Tumultuous History---From the Pearl of the Caribbean to Broken Nation (2010) by Philippe Girard; he regards Aristide as a hypocrite, just another in a long line of dictators. For recent history, I recommend Haiti's New Dictatorship: the coup, the earthquake and the UN occupation by Justin Podur; he is pro-Aristide, seeing him as an authentic leader of the poor. For recent history, I recommend An Unbroken Agony: Haiti, from Revolution to the Kidnapping of a President (2007) by Randall Robinson; he also is pro-Aristide, an eyewitness of his kidnapping. All three authors see Haiti currently as a broken, dysfunctional nation. Podur quotes Girard:
"Although I disagree completely with Philippe Girard's point of view as expressed in his history of Haiti, I do agree with him on some of the prescriptions at the end of his book: "the answer to this oft-mentioned question---what the U.S. should do to help Haiti---is simple: as little as possible. U.S. farmers do not need to donate rice to hungry Haitians---this will undercut the local rice industry. U.S. taxpayers do not need to bankroll the Haitian government---this will make the business of running Haiti too lucrative and desirable. U.S. troops do not need to patrol the streets of Port au Prince---this will give rise to an understandable nationalist outcry. US. ambassadors do not need to select politicians they deem to be best suited for Haiti's future---it is up to Haitians to set up their own governments."
All histories are partial, selective at best; some histories have an ethnic or ideological or gender bias. Presidents, generals and dictators are highlighted whereas the common person is neglected. Was Martin Luther King a good guy or a bad guy? Whites at a bible school cheered when King was assassinated because they saw him as a dangerous radical, a socialist or communist sympathizer; others, including myself, regard King as a good guy, an American hero living out love and justice. The same with Aristide: some see him as a bad guy posing as a good guy (Girard); other see Aristide as a genuine good guy. As history gets written, one will discover strong differences of opinion on many persons and issues. So a person needs to read several different histories of Haiti to gain a variety of perspectives.
Justin Podur writes the following about histories of Haiti:
"Sometimes [historical] narratives are created that cannot be reconciled with all the facts. Which facts are selected, or which facts emphasized, is a matter of ideology. From the facts of Haiti's politics from 2000-2010, or 2004-06 in particular, two different stories have been created, and propagated, in North America. One story is associated with most of the mainstream press, the governments of the U.S., Canada, and France, and a large number of well-funded non-governmental organizations in Haiti and internationally. This is a story of Haiti's President Jean-Bertrand Aristide getting elected, becoming a dictator, and leaving in the face of a popular uprising. The other story is associated with the ousted government of Aristide, its supporters . . . and a small number of independent journalists and researchers. This is a story of Aristide being undermined, overthrown in a coup, kidnapped, and the popular movement that brought him to power being brutalized."
Justin Podur, author of Haiti's New Dictatorship (2012), makes the same argument that Alexander did for the U.S. for Haiti, though not using the same language; dictatorships (systems of political and economic oppression) don't get eliminated, only redesigned, renamed, under new oppressors, the U.S. being one of the latest oppressors. In the Foreword, sociology professor William Robinson states it this way:
"In this world of globalized capitalism and U.S.-led intervention, dictatorship is called 'democracy' and enslavement is named 'freedom'. Nowhere is the cynical duplicity of the twenty-first century world order more apparent than in the travails of the Haitian people. This is a people who rose up in revolution two hundred years ago to throw off the shackles of slavery and who have not stopped struggling since to achieve a better life and defend its dignity, all the while in the face of successive dictatorships and foreign predation."
"Justin Podur now offers us a study on this struggle in its contemporary manifestations, examining the crucial period from 1991 to 2010. He traces the rise of the Lavalas movement of the poor majority under the leadership of Jean-Betrand Aristide and the implacable campaigns waged by the United States and other foreign agents to destroy this movement, overthrow Aristide, and reconstitute the power of a tiny local elite. He unmasks the transnationalization of U.S. intervention under the banner of 'donors', the United Nations, other international agencies, and the global media monopoly."
"The machinations of power and domination include state and paramilitary terrorism against the popular movement, systematic human rights violations, UN occupation, the orchestration of electoral shams, disinformation campaigns, and economic blackmail."
Next, a brief chronology of Haitian history:
* 1825-1947 payment of a huge reparation/idemnity debt to France; debt slavery replaced physical slavery; little money left over to invest in Haiti's economic growth and educational development. "Saddled by these crippling debts, Haiti was hardly able to move forward."
* 1915-34 U.S. Marines occupied Haiti for reasons of political and economic dominance.
* 1957-1986 Ruthless dictators, Papa Doc and Baby Doc, ruled with some U.S. support.
* 1986 Popular revolt overthrew Baby Doc.
* 1987 A good constitution was created.
* 1990 Aristide was elected, but he was opposed and overthrown by the Haitian elite and the U.S.
* 1991-94 The first coup against Aristide
* 1994 Aristide returns to govern, but U.S. undermines him.
* 2004 Aristide overthrown a second time with U.S. help.
* 2006-2010 Preval regime.
Brian Concannon, director of the Institute for Justice and Democracy in Haiti, endorses Haiti's New Dictatorship in this way:
"Podur's book explains how a country that is nominally democratic suffers under the yoke of a 'New Dictatorship' in which international actors [primarily the U.S.] and their Haitian elite partners leave the majority of Haitians with little effective influence over their own economic and political affairs."
If you think the term dictatorship to describe current Haitian affairs is too strong, you might prefer dominance by a wealthy Haitian elite. The wealthy top one percent in any society have a good chance of dominating both the economic and political sectors, sometimes even the religious sector. During NT times, in a theocracy, a religio-politico-economic elite controlled and corrupted the Temple and turned it into a den of robbers. In 2014, in the U.S., in a democracy turned plutocracy, an economic elite controls or influences the political process either through buying elections or creating laws or through lobbying. In Haiti, since independence in 1804, an Haitian elite, usually through dictatorships, but recently through "democracy" in cooperation with foreign powers frustrate the democratic process in order to maintain political and economic control. Here is how Podur describes it:
"Haitians have lived under dictatorships for much of their recent history. As dictatorships do, they terrorized the population, bankrupted the treasury, and caused lasting damage to society. Haiti's best-known twentieth century dictators were the Dulvaliers, 'Papa Doc' and 'Baby Doc'. . . . The nightmare of the Duvalier dictatorships ended in 1986, when a popular movement, which came to be known as Lavalas, threw them out. Among the leaders of this movement was Jean-Bertrand Aristide, twice president of Haiti, twice overthrown in coups. . . . dictatorship has several elements: the use of violence and the centralization of power . . . also impunity . . . the violations of human rights go unpunished. . . . wealth, financial and economic power is concentrated in the interests of the regime. . . . According to these criteria, Haiti is again living under a dictatorship. This is true even though there were elections in 2006 and again in 2010/11, even though there is nominal freedom of press and assembly, and even though there is an extensive international aid effort in the country. As I will show, Haitians have no effective say over their own economic and political affairs. Their right to assemble and organize politically is sharply limited. Human rights violations are routine and go unpunished."
A government of the people, by the people, and for the people is a genuine democracy; a government of the elite, by the elite and for the elite is a plutocracy, not a democracy. Yes, there is pervasive poverty in Haiti; yes, there is crippling corruption in Haiti. But what is behind these social problems. Overwhelming political, economic, racial and gender systems of oppression, primarily the white/mulatto rich oppressing the black poor. And the greatest tragedy of all is that there are few Christians with enough depth of biblical insight into oppression and justice so they can both understand the fundamental problems and then chart the path, create a blueprint toward a biblical solution.
Helping the poor effectively is more difficult than most people realize. Love is not enough; wisdom is also needed to guide love. Charity alone is not good enough; justice is required to replace systems of oppression. Few efforts in Haiti, even by missionaries, church and NGOs, have included wisdom and justice. Two books, When Helping Hurts and Killing with Kindness, document the errors of many well-meaning efforts to do good. One of the best ministries at rebuilding poor communities is the Haiti Christian Development Fund; HCDF's 25 year story can be found in At Home With The Poor.
When governments like the U.S. try to "help" Haiti, national self-interest often gets in the way and such governments often ally themselves with the rich elite of Haiti. Far too often U.S. government oppressors combine with Haitian oppressors and the results are disastrous. I would estimate that 75-90 percent of U.S. government attempts to "help" Haiti have hurt Haiti. Such help frustrates democracy. The result of stupidity sometimes; deliberate oppressive interference much too often.
In reading Haiti's New Dictatorship and An Unbroken Agony, I often felt shame and disgust about what my country was doing and why. Our unjust interference has been so bad, that I even have thought about renouncing my citizenship if that would do any good. Now some nuggets from An Unbroken Agony:
"Such was the staggering global significance of the only successful slave revolt ever mounted in the Americas. As a direct result of what the Haitian revolutionaries did to free themselves, France lost two-thirds of its world trade income. Napolean Bonaparte, with uncharacteristic despair, declared France done with empire, and a financially strapped French government offered to sell the Louisiana Territory to the United States for the bargain price of $15 million."
"Even before France leveraged the weak new state with crushing financial reparations in 1825, the United States and western Europe---including the Vatican---moved . . .in 1804 to cripple the fledgling nation socially, politically, and economically. . . . Unsurprisingly, the black peasant community---impoverished by centuries of French slavery and devastated by the war that ended it---found itself in a state of perilous social disrepair [social death]."
"As late as 1915, 111 years after the successful slave revolt, some 80 percent of the Haitian government's resources were being paid out in debt service [debt slavery] to French and American banks on loans that had been made to enable Haiti to pay reparations to France."
"In 1922, seven years into a nineteen-year American military occupation of Haiti that resulted in 15,000 Haitian deaths, the United States imposed a $16 million loan on the Haitian government to pay off its 'debt' to France. The American loan was finally paid off in 1947. Haiti was left virtually bankrupt, its workforce in desperate straits. The Haitian economy has never recovered from the financial havoc France (and America) wreaked upon it, during and after slavery."
"When President Jean-Bertrand Aristide and his wife disappeared on February 29, 2004, nearly two hundred years and two months after Jean-Jacques Dessalines declared Haiti a free and independent republic, 1 percent of the country's people held 50 percent of the country's wealth. Slavery had long since ended, but the country's wealth concentrated in the closed fists of the very few whose families and descendants had seized and held onto it since the early 1700s. Into this harsh social landscape of intractable economic and political inequity, Jean-Bertrand Aristide was born poor and black in 1953 in the south of Haiti."
Chapter 9 which has no title so I have named it "Race and Class, Rich and Poor", I found the most enlightening chapter of the book. It describes the deep and lasting impact of racism/ethnocentrism and socioeconomic oppression. The author Randall Robinson is Afro American, a lawyer, author and civil rights activist who is willing to take great risks for the cause of human rights and justice. The following quotations are from chapter 9:
"In Haiti today [as in the past], color remains as insuperable a barrier to social progress as ever. . . . Before he [Aristide] was elected for the first time in 1990, Haiti had two categories of citizenship, with one or the other kind indelibly noted at birth on a newborn's birth certificate. . . . The first category . . . was reserved for white, mulattoes and the city-born of means. The second category of citizenship was reserved for [poor black] Haitians born in the countryside."
"Haiti is arguably the Caribbean's most racially segregated and class-riven society. Even elements of the international community who defend the unseemly excesses of Haiti's wealthy were often shocked by the breadth of the divide that separates Haiti's rich from its poor. Paradis said that 'the rich are so rich there. . . . but the poor is unbelievable'.
Tragically, the U.S. has done more to preserve the race/class/culture divide than it has to help provide liberty and justice for all Haitians. The church, not much better, for the most part.
Twice in history, after the 1791-2004 Haiti slave revolution, after the 1986 people's revolution which forced the dictator Baby Doc to leave the country, these United States of America could have and should have joined with poor Haitian blacks and helped them create a just democracy. Instead, however, twice, a U.S. elite joined with an Haitian elite to continue the endless oppression of poor Haitian blacks; plutocracy/dictatorship won, not democracy. If there is a divine judgment for nations as well as individuals (see Mt. 25), the U.S. will be severely condemned because when it could have done justice, instead, it chose and did evil. It neglected justice and the love of God; Jesus chastised the Pharisees for this type of evil.
In both Haiti and the U.S, we create and recreate new systems of oppression which neglect justice and the love of God. The more I study each nation's histories, I see frighteningly similar evil patterns. Michelle Alexander, in her book The New Jim Crow, argues that in the U.S. systems of oppression such as slavery and segregation weren't really eliminated but only redesigned, today as mass incarceration and the expanding racial wealth gap as well as the predatory mortgage housing loans by banks. Sadly, few American Christians understand what is really going on and why. Which means they are doing little to stop this social evil.
For a full history of Haiti written by a professional historian, I recommend Haiti: The Tumultuous History---From the Pearl of the Caribbean to Broken Nation (2010) by Philippe Girard; he regards Aristide as a hypocrite, just another in a long line of dictators. For recent history, I recommend Haiti's New Dictatorship: the coup, the earthquake and the UN occupation by Justin Podur; he is pro-Aristide, seeing him as an authentic leader of the poor. For recent history, I recommend An Unbroken Agony: Haiti, from Revolution to the Kidnapping of a President (2007) by Randall Robinson; he also is pro-Aristide, an eyewitness of his kidnapping. All three authors see Haiti currently as a broken, dysfunctional nation. Podur quotes Girard:
"Although I disagree completely with Philippe Girard's point of view as expressed in his history of Haiti, I do agree with him on some of the prescriptions at the end of his book: "the answer to this oft-mentioned question---what the U.S. should do to help Haiti---is simple: as little as possible. U.S. farmers do not need to donate rice to hungry Haitians---this will undercut the local rice industry. U.S. taxpayers do not need to bankroll the Haitian government---this will make the business of running Haiti too lucrative and desirable. U.S. troops do not need to patrol the streets of Port au Prince---this will give rise to an understandable nationalist outcry. US. ambassadors do not need to select politicians they deem to be best suited for Haiti's future---it is up to Haitians to set up their own governments."
All histories are partial, selective at best; some histories have an ethnic or ideological or gender bias. Presidents, generals and dictators are highlighted whereas the common person is neglected. Was Martin Luther King a good guy or a bad guy? Whites at a bible school cheered when King was assassinated because they saw him as a dangerous radical, a socialist or communist sympathizer; others, including myself, regard King as a good guy, an American hero living out love and justice. The same with Aristide: some see him as a bad guy posing as a good guy (Girard); other see Aristide as a genuine good guy. As history gets written, one will discover strong differences of opinion on many persons and issues. So a person needs to read several different histories of Haiti to gain a variety of perspectives.
Justin Podur writes the following about histories of Haiti:
"Sometimes [historical] narratives are created that cannot be reconciled with all the facts. Which facts are selected, or which facts emphasized, is a matter of ideology. From the facts of Haiti's politics from 2000-2010, or 2004-06 in particular, two different stories have been created, and propagated, in North America. One story is associated with most of the mainstream press, the governments of the U.S., Canada, and France, and a large number of well-funded non-governmental organizations in Haiti and internationally. This is a story of Haiti's President Jean-Bertrand Aristide getting elected, becoming a dictator, and leaving in the face of a popular uprising. The other story is associated with the ousted government of Aristide, its supporters . . . and a small number of independent journalists and researchers. This is a story of Aristide being undermined, overthrown in a coup, kidnapped, and the popular movement that brought him to power being brutalized."
Justin Podur, author of Haiti's New Dictatorship (2012), makes the same argument that Alexander did for the U.S. for Haiti, though not using the same language; dictatorships (systems of political and economic oppression) don't get eliminated, only redesigned, renamed, under new oppressors, the U.S. being one of the latest oppressors. In the Foreword, sociology professor William Robinson states it this way:
"In this world of globalized capitalism and U.S.-led intervention, dictatorship is called 'democracy' and enslavement is named 'freedom'. Nowhere is the cynical duplicity of the twenty-first century world order more apparent than in the travails of the Haitian people. This is a people who rose up in revolution two hundred years ago to throw off the shackles of slavery and who have not stopped struggling since to achieve a better life and defend its dignity, all the while in the face of successive dictatorships and foreign predation."
"Justin Podur now offers us a study on this struggle in its contemporary manifestations, examining the crucial period from 1991 to 2010. He traces the rise of the Lavalas movement of the poor majority under the leadership of Jean-Betrand Aristide and the implacable campaigns waged by the United States and other foreign agents to destroy this movement, overthrow Aristide, and reconstitute the power of a tiny local elite. He unmasks the transnationalization of U.S. intervention under the banner of 'donors', the United Nations, other international agencies, and the global media monopoly."
"The machinations of power and domination include state and paramilitary terrorism against the popular movement, systematic human rights violations, UN occupation, the orchestration of electoral shams, disinformation campaigns, and economic blackmail."
Next, a brief chronology of Haitian history:
* 1825-1947 payment of a huge reparation/idemnity debt to France; debt slavery replaced physical slavery; little money left over to invest in Haiti's economic growth and educational development. "Saddled by these crippling debts, Haiti was hardly able to move forward."
* 1915-34 U.S. Marines occupied Haiti for reasons of political and economic dominance.
* 1957-1986 Ruthless dictators, Papa Doc and Baby Doc, ruled with some U.S. support.
* 1986 Popular revolt overthrew Baby Doc.
* 1987 A good constitution was created.
* 1990 Aristide was elected, but he was opposed and overthrown by the Haitian elite and the U.S.
* 1991-94 The first coup against Aristide
* 1994 Aristide returns to govern, but U.S. undermines him.
* 2004 Aristide overthrown a second time with U.S. help.
* 2006-2010 Preval regime.
Brian Concannon, director of the Institute for Justice and Democracy in Haiti, endorses Haiti's New Dictatorship in this way:
"Podur's book explains how a country that is nominally democratic suffers under the yoke of a 'New Dictatorship' in which international actors [primarily the U.S.] and their Haitian elite partners leave the majority of Haitians with little effective influence over their own economic and political affairs."
If you think the term dictatorship to describe current Haitian affairs is too strong, you might prefer dominance by a wealthy Haitian elite. The wealthy top one percent in any society have a good chance of dominating both the economic and political sectors, sometimes even the religious sector. During NT times, in a theocracy, a religio-politico-economic elite controlled and corrupted the Temple and turned it into a den of robbers. In 2014, in the U.S., in a democracy turned plutocracy, an economic elite controls or influences the political process either through buying elections or creating laws or through lobbying. In Haiti, since independence in 1804, an Haitian elite, usually through dictatorships, but recently through "democracy" in cooperation with foreign powers frustrate the democratic process in order to maintain political and economic control. Here is how Podur describes it:
"Haitians have lived under dictatorships for much of their recent history. As dictatorships do, they terrorized the population, bankrupted the treasury, and caused lasting damage to society. Haiti's best-known twentieth century dictators were the Dulvaliers, 'Papa Doc' and 'Baby Doc'. . . . The nightmare of the Duvalier dictatorships ended in 1986, when a popular movement, which came to be known as Lavalas, threw them out. Among the leaders of this movement was Jean-Bertrand Aristide, twice president of Haiti, twice overthrown in coups. . . . dictatorship has several elements: the use of violence and the centralization of power . . . also impunity . . . the violations of human rights go unpunished. . . . wealth, financial and economic power is concentrated in the interests of the regime. . . . According to these criteria, Haiti is again living under a dictatorship. This is true even though there were elections in 2006 and again in 2010/11, even though there is nominal freedom of press and assembly, and even though there is an extensive international aid effort in the country. As I will show, Haitians have no effective say over their own economic and political affairs. Their right to assemble and organize politically is sharply limited. Human rights violations are routine and go unpunished."
A government of the people, by the people, and for the people is a genuine democracy; a government of the elite, by the elite and for the elite is a plutocracy, not a democracy. Yes, there is pervasive poverty in Haiti; yes, there is crippling corruption in Haiti. But what is behind these social problems. Overwhelming political, economic, racial and gender systems of oppression, primarily the white/mulatto rich oppressing the black poor. And the greatest tragedy of all is that there are few Christians with enough depth of biblical insight into oppression and justice so they can both understand the fundamental problems and then chart the path, create a blueprint toward a biblical solution.
Helping the poor effectively is more difficult than most people realize. Love is not enough; wisdom is also needed to guide love. Charity alone is not good enough; justice is required to replace systems of oppression. Few efforts in Haiti, even by missionaries, church and NGOs, have included wisdom and justice. Two books, When Helping Hurts and Killing with Kindness, document the errors of many well-meaning efforts to do good. One of the best ministries at rebuilding poor communities is the Haiti Christian Development Fund; HCDF's 25 year story can be found in At Home With The Poor.
When governments like the U.S. try to "help" Haiti, national self-interest often gets in the way and such governments often ally themselves with the rich elite of Haiti. Far too often U.S. government oppressors combine with Haitian oppressors and the results are disastrous. I would estimate that 75-90 percent of U.S. government attempts to "help" Haiti have hurt Haiti. Such help frustrates democracy. The result of stupidity sometimes; deliberate oppressive interference much too often.
In reading Haiti's New Dictatorship and An Unbroken Agony, I often felt shame and disgust about what my country was doing and why. Our unjust interference has been so bad, that I even have thought about renouncing my citizenship if that would do any good. Now some nuggets from An Unbroken Agony:
"Such was the staggering global significance of the only successful slave revolt ever mounted in the Americas. As a direct result of what the Haitian revolutionaries did to free themselves, France lost two-thirds of its world trade income. Napolean Bonaparte, with uncharacteristic despair, declared France done with empire, and a financially strapped French government offered to sell the Louisiana Territory to the United States for the bargain price of $15 million."
"Even before France leveraged the weak new state with crushing financial reparations in 1825, the United States and western Europe---including the Vatican---moved . . .in 1804 to cripple the fledgling nation socially, politically, and economically. . . . Unsurprisingly, the black peasant community---impoverished by centuries of French slavery and devastated by the war that ended it---found itself in a state of perilous social disrepair [social death]."
"As late as 1915, 111 years after the successful slave revolt, some 80 percent of the Haitian government's resources were being paid out in debt service [debt slavery] to French and American banks on loans that had been made to enable Haiti to pay reparations to France."
"In 1922, seven years into a nineteen-year American military occupation of Haiti that resulted in 15,000 Haitian deaths, the United States imposed a $16 million loan on the Haitian government to pay off its 'debt' to France. The American loan was finally paid off in 1947. Haiti was left virtually bankrupt, its workforce in desperate straits. The Haitian economy has never recovered from the financial havoc France (and America) wreaked upon it, during and after slavery."
"When President Jean-Bertrand Aristide and his wife disappeared on February 29, 2004, nearly two hundred years and two months after Jean-Jacques Dessalines declared Haiti a free and independent republic, 1 percent of the country's people held 50 percent of the country's wealth. Slavery had long since ended, but the country's wealth concentrated in the closed fists of the very few whose families and descendants had seized and held onto it since the early 1700s. Into this harsh social landscape of intractable economic and political inequity, Jean-Bertrand Aristide was born poor and black in 1953 in the south of Haiti."
Chapter 9 which has no title so I have named it "Race and Class, Rich and Poor", I found the most enlightening chapter of the book. It describes the deep and lasting impact of racism/ethnocentrism and socioeconomic oppression. The author Randall Robinson is Afro American, a lawyer, author and civil rights activist who is willing to take great risks for the cause of human rights and justice. The following quotations are from chapter 9:
"In Haiti today [as in the past], color remains as insuperable a barrier to social progress as ever. . . . Before he [Aristide] was elected for the first time in 1990, Haiti had two categories of citizenship, with one or the other kind indelibly noted at birth on a newborn's birth certificate. . . . The first category . . . was reserved for white, mulattoes and the city-born of means. The second category of citizenship was reserved for [poor black] Haitians born in the countryside."
"Haiti is arguably the Caribbean's most racially segregated and class-riven society. Even elements of the international community who defend the unseemly excesses of Haiti's wealthy were often shocked by the breadth of the divide that separates Haiti's rich from its poor. Paradis said that 'the rich are so rich there. . . . but the poor is unbelievable'.
Tragically, the U.S. has done more to preserve the race/class/culture divide than it has to help provide liberty and justice for all Haitians. The church, not much better, for the most part.
Thursday, March 20, 2014
Biblical Justice: Comprehensive and Radical
Biblical justice is:
* Jubilee justice---Lev. 25
* kingdom of God justice---Mt. 6:33
* love your ethnic neighbor justice---Luke 10:25-37
* generosity justice---Acts 4:32-35
Implementing Jubilee justice releases the oppressed; incarnating kingdom of God justice releases the oppressed.
The following quotation about the Jubilee is from the Poverty and Justice Bible (CEV, page 21 of the Insert section):
Leviticus is often viewed as a book full of obscure rules and ritual, yet it contains one of the most astonishing pieces of social legislation in history: the Sabbath years and the Jubilee. Every seven years, the land had a sabbath, allowing it to recover. During this year slaves were to be freed (Exodus 21:2) and debts were to be cancelled (Deuteronomy 15:1-11). [Noble: Debt economics and slavery could quickly become systems of oppression; Sabbath/Jubilee laws prevented lifelong, even generational, systems of oppression from taking hold.] And every fiftieth year there was to be a Jubilee, . . . where the entire social structure of Israel was to be reset. Every Israelite became once again, a free citizen [Noble: "under God, with liberty and Jubilee justice for all."]
Everyone could wipe the slate clean and start again, and significantly, the Jubilee year began on the Day of Atonement [forgiveness] (Lev. 25:9)---the day of national repentance and reconciliation. So fresh starts spiritually and physically [socially]---a whole life view. . . . The Jubilee idea survives. Today it is being applied to global debt. The Jubilee Campaign recognizes that there are countries who have fallen so far into debt that only drastic action can get them out.
Application to the United States
Very little white evangelical American theology takes the above biblical teaching seriously; as a result American evangelicals are often participants in ethnocentrism and oppression, often neglect justice and the love of God. One of the best American theologians to make this point is James Cone, author of God of the Oppressed, 1975.
In my opinion, James Cone is the most provocative thinker among Afro American theologians. He knows white theology so well he is able to make informed comparisons and contrasts with his version of Black theology. He is bold and incisive in his analysis of White theology, especially it limited and ethnocentric assumptions. Cone is equally bold and insightful as he develops an alternative Black theology which is not only drawn from the Bible, but also from the experience of being an oppressed black person.
As Cone struggled with the insensitive white response to the Detroit riots, he discovered the "theological bankruptcy" of white theology he had learned in graduate school. Out of desperation he began to search the Bible, Black history and culture for some theological answers. Cone writes as an angry person, justifiably so, and often makes a sharp and radical departure from standard theology. He writes as a prophet critiquing the "existing order of injustice." A prophet is concerned about oppression and suffering. Few white theologians are; it doesn't show up in any depth in their theology. The central concern of Black theology is liberation from socioeconomic oppression.
In the midst of oppression, before full liberation, the personal presence of God through Jesus Christ provided the "affirmation that enabled black people to meet the Man on Monday morning and to deal with his dehumanizing presence the remainder of the week, knowing that white folks could not destroy their humanity." Why did white theology fail to address the issues of oppression and justice? Cone asserts:
Unfortunately, American theology from Cotton Mather and Jonathan Edwards to Reinhold Niebuhr and Schubert Ogden, including radical and conservatives, have interpreted the gospel according to the cultural and political interests of white people. They have rarely attempted to transcend the social interests of their group by seeking an analysis of the gospel in the light of the consciousness of black people struggling for liberation. White theologians, because of their identity with the dominant power structure, are largely boxed withing their own cultural history.
During slavery the social limitation of white theology was expressed in three main forms: (1) some white theologians ignored slavery as a theological issue; (2) others justified it; (3) only a few spoke out against it.
First, it was not uncommon for Anglicans, Presbyterians, Congregationalists, Baptist, Methodists, . . . to do theology as if slavery did not exist. For example. Jonathan Edwards, often called America's most outstanding theologian, could preach and write theological treatises on total depravity, unconditional election, limited atonement, irrestible grace, and the perseverance of the saints without the slightest hint of how these issues related to human bondage.
Probably the best chapter in the book is chapter four, "Biblical Revelation and Social Existence," in which Cone shows how central oppression and justice are in both the Old and New Testaments. The kingdom of God concept, central in Jesus' ministry, includes the idea of justice and liberation for the poor and oppressed.
Another fine chapter is chapter 10---"Liberation and Reconciliation." Cone vigorously opposes cheap reconciliation which he defines as superficial reconciliation which ignores the prior need for liberation from oppression. White Christians often want individual reconciliation "without changing the balance of power" in society. They want to preserve the benefits of the status quo and at the same time love the oppressed. Love without liberation, without justice, is a mockery:
Because black liberation is the point of departure of my analysis of the gospel of Jesus, I cannot accept a view of reconciliation based on white values. The Christian view of reconciliation has nothing to do with black people being nice to white people as if the gospel demands that we ignore their insults and their humilating presence. . . . We Black theologians must refuse to accept a view of reconciliation that pretends that slavery never existed, that we were not lynched and shot, and that we are not presently being cut to the core of our physical and mental endurance. [Think mass incarceration and the racial wealth gap]
* Jubilee justice---Lev. 25
* kingdom of God justice---Mt. 6:33
* love your ethnic neighbor justice---Luke 10:25-37
* generosity justice---Acts 4:32-35
Implementing Jubilee justice releases the oppressed; incarnating kingdom of God justice releases the oppressed.
The following quotation about the Jubilee is from the Poverty and Justice Bible (CEV, page 21 of the Insert section):
Leviticus is often viewed as a book full of obscure rules and ritual, yet it contains one of the most astonishing pieces of social legislation in history: the Sabbath years and the Jubilee. Every seven years, the land had a sabbath, allowing it to recover. During this year slaves were to be freed (Exodus 21:2) and debts were to be cancelled (Deuteronomy 15:1-11). [Noble: Debt economics and slavery could quickly become systems of oppression; Sabbath/Jubilee laws prevented lifelong, even generational, systems of oppression from taking hold.] And every fiftieth year there was to be a Jubilee, . . . where the entire social structure of Israel was to be reset. Every Israelite became once again, a free citizen [Noble: "under God, with liberty and Jubilee justice for all."]
Everyone could wipe the slate clean and start again, and significantly, the Jubilee year began on the Day of Atonement [forgiveness] (Lev. 25:9)---the day of national repentance and reconciliation. So fresh starts spiritually and physically [socially]---a whole life view. . . . The Jubilee idea survives. Today it is being applied to global debt. The Jubilee Campaign recognizes that there are countries who have fallen so far into debt that only drastic action can get them out.
Application to the United States
Very little white evangelical American theology takes the above biblical teaching seriously; as a result American evangelicals are often participants in ethnocentrism and oppression, often neglect justice and the love of God. One of the best American theologians to make this point is James Cone, author of God of the Oppressed, 1975.
In my opinion, James Cone is the most provocative thinker among Afro American theologians. He knows white theology so well he is able to make informed comparisons and contrasts with his version of Black theology. He is bold and incisive in his analysis of White theology, especially it limited and ethnocentric assumptions. Cone is equally bold and insightful as he develops an alternative Black theology which is not only drawn from the Bible, but also from the experience of being an oppressed black person.
As Cone struggled with the insensitive white response to the Detroit riots, he discovered the "theological bankruptcy" of white theology he had learned in graduate school. Out of desperation he began to search the Bible, Black history and culture for some theological answers. Cone writes as an angry person, justifiably so, and often makes a sharp and radical departure from standard theology. He writes as a prophet critiquing the "existing order of injustice." A prophet is concerned about oppression and suffering. Few white theologians are; it doesn't show up in any depth in their theology. The central concern of Black theology is liberation from socioeconomic oppression.
In the midst of oppression, before full liberation, the personal presence of God through Jesus Christ provided the "affirmation that enabled black people to meet the Man on Monday morning and to deal with his dehumanizing presence the remainder of the week, knowing that white folks could not destroy their humanity." Why did white theology fail to address the issues of oppression and justice? Cone asserts:
Unfortunately, American theology from Cotton Mather and Jonathan Edwards to Reinhold Niebuhr and Schubert Ogden, including radical and conservatives, have interpreted the gospel according to the cultural and political interests of white people. They have rarely attempted to transcend the social interests of their group by seeking an analysis of the gospel in the light of the consciousness of black people struggling for liberation. White theologians, because of their identity with the dominant power structure, are largely boxed withing their own cultural history.
During slavery the social limitation of white theology was expressed in three main forms: (1) some white theologians ignored slavery as a theological issue; (2) others justified it; (3) only a few spoke out against it.
First, it was not uncommon for Anglicans, Presbyterians, Congregationalists, Baptist, Methodists, . . . to do theology as if slavery did not exist. For example. Jonathan Edwards, often called America's most outstanding theologian, could preach and write theological treatises on total depravity, unconditional election, limited atonement, irrestible grace, and the perseverance of the saints without the slightest hint of how these issues related to human bondage.
Probably the best chapter in the book is chapter four, "Biblical Revelation and Social Existence," in which Cone shows how central oppression and justice are in both the Old and New Testaments. The kingdom of God concept, central in Jesus' ministry, includes the idea of justice and liberation for the poor and oppressed.
Another fine chapter is chapter 10---"Liberation and Reconciliation." Cone vigorously opposes cheap reconciliation which he defines as superficial reconciliation which ignores the prior need for liberation from oppression. White Christians often want individual reconciliation "without changing the balance of power" in society. They want to preserve the benefits of the status quo and at the same time love the oppressed. Love without liberation, without justice, is a mockery:
Because black liberation is the point of departure of my analysis of the gospel of Jesus, I cannot accept a view of reconciliation based on white values. The Christian view of reconciliation has nothing to do with black people being nice to white people as if the gospel demands that we ignore their insults and their humilating presence. . . . We Black theologians must refuse to accept a view of reconciliation that pretends that slavery never existed, that we were not lynched and shot, and that we are not presently being cut to the core of our physical and mental endurance. [Think mass incarceration and the racial wealth gap]
Friday, March 14, 2014
God of the Oppressed
In my last blog, the topic was "Oppression in the New Testament." In this blog, I wish to call attention to two books on oppression that should be read in tandem. Chronologically, James Cone's God of the Oppressed (1975) comes first. Cone is a black liberation theologian who is deeply in touch with oppression/injustice both experientally and theologically/biblically; I know of no white evangelical theologian who seriously grapples with oppression biblically and historically so God of the Oppressed is a rare read.
I have misplaced my notes on God of the Oppressed, but as I recall Cone once wrote that when he was attending Garrett Seminary during the Civil Rights Movement, his theology profs had little to say theologically about the movement. Their existing theology was not relevant. Most current white theology is still (2014) not engaged with oppression/justice issues.
I recommend that you go online and read this 2010 review of God of the Oppressed by J.R. Woodward; he begins his review with this accurate sentence: "If you want to have your mind blown, then read this book." In my opinion all white evangelicals need to have their theology blown, because white theology does not consider, in depth, oppression/justice issues. According to Woodward, Cone combines scripture, systematic theology and the oppression of black people in his approach. For Cone, Jesus identifies with the poor and with blacks.
I would also highly another book by Cone, Martin and Malcolm in America: A Dream or a Nightmare?
Originally written in Spanish in the late 1970s and translated into English in the early 1980s, I recommend that you read the Hebrew scholar, Thomas Hanks' book God So Loved the Third World: The Bibical Vocabulary of Oppression. In Hebrew, Hanks find 555 refernces to Hebrew roots with the meaning of oppression. This book did wonders for me in terms of understanding the importance of the biblical teaching on oppression; don't skip over oppression in your rush to understand the biblical teaching on justice. You will end up with a shallow understanding of justice.
Only after you have read the two books by James Cone and the one by Hanks, are you ready to engage the Spring 2013 issue of Reflections published by Yale Divinity School entitled "The Future of Race." To begin, I would say to Yale Divinity School: Congratulations to you and Shame on you.
Congratulations on spending a year discussing America's unsolved and seemingly unsolvable race/racism/ethnocentrism/oppression problem. You even read the best and most current book on the subject, The New Jim Crow. And you published a booklet on your deliberations entitled The Future of Race.
Shame on you for not doing a better job, for not providing a biblical solution to end the suffering of America's oppressed poor. I recommend that you remove the word "divinity" from your title and replace it with Enlightenment. To be fair, I am not sure that any other seminary in America, even the ones that claim that the Bible is perfectly inspired, would have done any better in providing a comprehensive biblical solution or even a comprehensive analysis of the problem.
After many years of existence, Yale Divinity School should be doing better. As good as The Future of Race was in some ways, in the end it was sounding brass and tinking cymbal. It will do little to end racism, ethnocentrism and oppression and replace it with raconciliation and justice.
How could this happen? 50 years after King, 40 years after Cone, 30 years after the beginning of mass incarceration in America?
Tragic! Unforgiveable!
In my next blog, I will examine Martin Luther King's nonviolent social ethic through the writng of William D. Watley
I have misplaced my notes on God of the Oppressed, but as I recall Cone once wrote that when he was attending Garrett Seminary during the Civil Rights Movement, his theology profs had little to say theologically about the movement. Their existing theology was not relevant. Most current white theology is still (2014) not engaged with oppression/justice issues.
I recommend that you go online and read this 2010 review of God of the Oppressed by J.R. Woodward; he begins his review with this accurate sentence: "If you want to have your mind blown, then read this book." In my opinion all white evangelicals need to have their theology blown, because white theology does not consider, in depth, oppression/justice issues. According to Woodward, Cone combines scripture, systematic theology and the oppression of black people in his approach. For Cone, Jesus identifies with the poor and with blacks.
I would also highly another book by Cone, Martin and Malcolm in America: A Dream or a Nightmare?
Originally written in Spanish in the late 1970s and translated into English in the early 1980s, I recommend that you read the Hebrew scholar, Thomas Hanks' book God So Loved the Third World: The Bibical Vocabulary of Oppression. In Hebrew, Hanks find 555 refernces to Hebrew roots with the meaning of oppression. This book did wonders for me in terms of understanding the importance of the biblical teaching on oppression; don't skip over oppression in your rush to understand the biblical teaching on justice. You will end up with a shallow understanding of justice.
Only after you have read the two books by James Cone and the one by Hanks, are you ready to engage the Spring 2013 issue of Reflections published by Yale Divinity School entitled "The Future of Race." To begin, I would say to Yale Divinity School: Congratulations to you and Shame on you.
Congratulations on spending a year discussing America's unsolved and seemingly unsolvable race/racism/ethnocentrism/oppression problem. You even read the best and most current book on the subject, The New Jim Crow. And you published a booklet on your deliberations entitled The Future of Race.
Shame on you for not doing a better job, for not providing a biblical solution to end the suffering of America's oppressed poor. I recommend that you remove the word "divinity" from your title and replace it with Enlightenment. To be fair, I am not sure that any other seminary in America, even the ones that claim that the Bible is perfectly inspired, would have done any better in providing a comprehensive biblical solution or even a comprehensive analysis of the problem.
After many years of existence, Yale Divinity School should be doing better. As good as The Future of Race was in some ways, in the end it was sounding brass and tinking cymbal. It will do little to end racism, ethnocentrism and oppression and replace it with raconciliation and justice.
How could this happen? 50 years after King, 40 years after Cone, 30 years after the beginning of mass incarceration in America?
Tragic! Unforgiveable!
In my next blog, I will examine Martin Luther King's nonviolent social ethic through the writng of William D. Watley
Thursday, March 13, 2014
Oppression in the New Testament
In the OT, in English translations, one finds the word oppression around 125-135 times depending on the translation. According to the Hebrew scholar, Thomas Hanks (God So Loved the Third World: The Biblical Vocabulary of Oppression), oppression and its synonyms occur 555 times in Hebrew. So it is strange that in English translations of the NT, one finds oppression only 3 or 4 times. Hanks asserts that the number of occurrences would rise somewhat if thilpsis were translated oppression instead of affliction; in James 1:27, the widows and orphans would be oppressed, not just afflicted.
To explain the mystery of the near disappearance of oppression in the NT, I float this hypothesis; the word rich (wealth, money, possessions) replaces and specifically identifies the oppressors (see the gospel of Luke). And the temple is identified by Jesus as THE system of oppression; he called it "a den of robbers". Once a person is sensitized to the concept of oppression in the OT, and once a person brings this understanding into the NT, and once a person sees the different ways that oppression is expressed in the NT, she will see that oppression is as widespread in the NT as it is the OT. And oppression is sometimes expressed as injustice (adikia).
Over the years the religio-politico-economic elite had turned the operation of the Temple into a religiously legitimated system of oppression. In addition to its religious function, the Temple was also an economic institution. A French scholar may have exaggerated somewhat to make his point, but he claimed that the Temple functioned as follows: it played the combined roles of the Federal Reserve System, Wall Street and the U.S. treasury. Enormous amounts of tithes and oferings flowed into the Temple coffers, especially from the over 2,000,000 Jews scattered around the Roman Empire. There was so much gold in the Temple when the Romans sacked and destroyed it in 70 AD that the price of gold dropped 50 percent in nearby Syria as the Romans began to circulate the gold.
Though the oft brutal Romans added to the oppression in Palestine, Jesus never identified Rome as the main enemy of the Jews. The real enemy came from within; it was the corrupt religio-politico-economic elite who controlled Judaism, Jerusalem and the Temple (See Kraybill, The Upside-Down Kingdom). Church and State were not separate in Palestine. The religio-politico folk also controlled the economic system, giving them enormous power and this power corrupted the whole nation. In my judgment, conditions were worse in Jesus' time than during the times of Amos and Isaiah.
After Jesus said (Luke 16:13), "No servant can serve two masters. . . . You cannot serve both God and Money," Luke states, "The Pharisees, who loved money, heard all this and were sneering/scoffing at Jesus." The Pharisees had been serving both God and Money all their lives and made a darn good living. So in Mt. 23 and Luke 11---the Woe to the teachers of the law and Pharisees chapters---Jesus, in the strongest possible language, exposes and condemns the elite and their neglect of justice and the love of God.
James echos Jesus as he also condemns the oppression of the poor in James 1:27; 2:6 and 5:1-5; he identifies the oppressors as the rich, the landlords, and the oppressed as the widows and orphans, the poor, the day laborers.
The whole Bible severely condemns all forms of oppression; the just kingdom of God is the biblical answer.
To explain the mystery of the near disappearance of oppression in the NT, I float this hypothesis; the word rich (wealth, money, possessions) replaces and specifically identifies the oppressors (see the gospel of Luke). And the temple is identified by Jesus as THE system of oppression; he called it "a den of robbers". Once a person is sensitized to the concept of oppression in the OT, and once a person brings this understanding into the NT, and once a person sees the different ways that oppression is expressed in the NT, she will see that oppression is as widespread in the NT as it is the OT. And oppression is sometimes expressed as injustice (adikia).
Over the years the religio-politico-economic elite had turned the operation of the Temple into a religiously legitimated system of oppression. In addition to its religious function, the Temple was also an economic institution. A French scholar may have exaggerated somewhat to make his point, but he claimed that the Temple functioned as follows: it played the combined roles of the Federal Reserve System, Wall Street and the U.S. treasury. Enormous amounts of tithes and oferings flowed into the Temple coffers, especially from the over 2,000,000 Jews scattered around the Roman Empire. There was so much gold in the Temple when the Romans sacked and destroyed it in 70 AD that the price of gold dropped 50 percent in nearby Syria as the Romans began to circulate the gold.
Though the oft brutal Romans added to the oppression in Palestine, Jesus never identified Rome as the main enemy of the Jews. The real enemy came from within; it was the corrupt religio-politico-economic elite who controlled Judaism, Jerusalem and the Temple (See Kraybill, The Upside-Down Kingdom). Church and State were not separate in Palestine. The religio-politico folk also controlled the economic system, giving them enormous power and this power corrupted the whole nation. In my judgment, conditions were worse in Jesus' time than during the times of Amos and Isaiah.
After Jesus said (Luke 16:13), "No servant can serve two masters. . . . You cannot serve both God and Money," Luke states, "The Pharisees, who loved money, heard all this and were sneering/scoffing at Jesus." The Pharisees had been serving both God and Money all their lives and made a darn good living. So in Mt. 23 and Luke 11---the Woe to the teachers of the law and Pharisees chapters---Jesus, in the strongest possible language, exposes and condemns the elite and their neglect of justice and the love of God.
James echos Jesus as he also condemns the oppression of the poor in James 1:27; 2:6 and 5:1-5; he identifies the oppressors as the rich, the landlords, and the oppressed as the widows and orphans, the poor, the day laborers.
The whole Bible severely condemns all forms of oppression; the just kingdom of God is the biblical answer.
Wednesday, March 12, 2014
Understanding Poverty: Haitian and U.S.
In America, poverty is often talked about, but rarely is oppression preached upon. To understand poverty, a person, a church must first understand the biblical teaching on oppression and riches. To understand poverty/the poor, we should begin with Luke 4:18 and 6:20 & 24, not Mt. 5:3. If you begin with Mt. 5:3 "poor in spirit" you will likely over individualize poverty. If you begin with Luke 4 and 6, you will put the poor in their necessary context; social context is crucial to proper understanding. Luke 4:18 ties poverty and oppression together; the OT often makes this connection.
Biblically, oppression is the number one cause of poverty. Isaiah 61:1 can and probably should be translated "the oppressed poor." The NRSV and the CEV translate the Hebrew as "oppressed" not "poor" as do the RSV and NIV. According to Thomas Hanks, the OT teaches that "oppression smashes the body and crushes the human spirit." Systems of oppression can last for generations---think Haitian and American slavery.
Luke 6:20 & 24: "Blessed are the poor. . . . Woe to the rich. . . . " again put poverty in its social context; there is an unhealthy, unjust relationship between the rich and the poor. "Woe" and "blessed" are strong words. Since the rich in the NT are usually described as greedy, idolatrous and oppressive (James 2:6), their end is hell (Luke 16:19-31). Woe in Greek means agonizing groan, great anguish, torment as in hell. The NT does not give the rich a gentle slap on the wrist and a verbal "naughty, naughty." Instead, it hits the rich over the head with a club accompanied with a severe verbal condemnation for being evil-doers, doers of injustice. Such people are doomed, hellbound. But most American preachers soft pedal the hard biblical teaching on oppression and the rich.
What does blessed mean in this context? Spirit empowered release from oppression, from the clutches of the rich; this requires that the church incarnate Jubilee justice in a community/society. Anything less is not comprehensive good news for the poor. Charity is good, but not anywhere good enough.
God is on the side of the oppressed poor; biblically this is a given. The question is, where is the church? In James 2, the church sided with the oppressor rich, not with the oppressed poor. James scolded the church for a pious faith that was not combing love and justice to do generous good works. Only if the church's top social priority is doing Jubilee justice for the oppressed poor, can the poor become blessed. Anything less is just religious talk, pious blabber. Never use the phrase "poor in spirit" to avoid the above hard truth about oppression and the evil rich.
In NT times, the Romans were often brutal oppressors so most Jews focused on Roman oppression. Not Jesus. He saw internal Jewish oppression, the religious temple functioning as a system of oppression, asn the number one problem. In the U>S>, often we have made Communism or terrorism the number one problem, while we largely ignore the huge role that corporate, crony capitalism plays in creating and maintaining oppression. To solve the problem of poverty, we must move beyond the bandaids of charity to the surgery of Jubilee justice; to solve poverty, we must stop oppression and do justice.
Next, I would like to do a condensation and paraphrase of the CEV translation of Isaiah 61:1-8. While this was originally written about Jesus, the coming Messiah, I would like the reader to think of the church, the body of Christ: The Spirit has taken control of me, chosen me, sent me to tell the oppressed poor good news, to announce the freedom that will accompany the year of Jubilee justice. Then joyous praise will replace broken hearts; the oppressed poor will become trees of justice. I, the Lord, realize that the oppressed poor were teribly insulted and horribly ill-treated. I, the Lord, love justice; I, the Lord, hate injustice.
Ask most white American evangelicals about poverty and they will appear quite knowledgeable about who the poor are and why they are poor. Ask these same people what the Bible teaches about oppression, and suddenedly they will seem ignorant and uninformed. Not only lay people, but scholars as well. Well-meaning white evangelicals have written a number of books on poverty, but I have not found more than a light mention of the extensive biblical teaching that oppression causes poverty. Never a chapter on oppression. No American evangelical theologian or bible scholar has ever published a book on the extensive biblical teaching on oppression. The third edition of the IVP Bible Dictionary has no entry on oppression. Most white American evangelicals do not know the poor firsthand; they are not at home with the poor; and they are ignorant of the biblical teaching on oppression and justice. So you cannot believe anything they say beyond charity.
Biblically, oppression is the number one cause of poverty. Isaiah 61:1 can and probably should be translated "the oppressed poor." The NRSV and the CEV translate the Hebrew as "oppressed" not "poor" as do the RSV and NIV. According to Thomas Hanks, the OT teaches that "oppression smashes the body and crushes the human spirit." Systems of oppression can last for generations---think Haitian and American slavery.
Luke 6:20 & 24: "Blessed are the poor. . . . Woe to the rich. . . . " again put poverty in its social context; there is an unhealthy, unjust relationship between the rich and the poor. "Woe" and "blessed" are strong words. Since the rich in the NT are usually described as greedy, idolatrous and oppressive (James 2:6), their end is hell (Luke 16:19-31). Woe in Greek means agonizing groan, great anguish, torment as in hell. The NT does not give the rich a gentle slap on the wrist and a verbal "naughty, naughty." Instead, it hits the rich over the head with a club accompanied with a severe verbal condemnation for being evil-doers, doers of injustice. Such people are doomed, hellbound. But most American preachers soft pedal the hard biblical teaching on oppression and the rich.
What does blessed mean in this context? Spirit empowered release from oppression, from the clutches of the rich; this requires that the church incarnate Jubilee justice in a community/society. Anything less is not comprehensive good news for the poor. Charity is good, but not anywhere good enough.
God is on the side of the oppressed poor; biblically this is a given. The question is, where is the church? In James 2, the church sided with the oppressor rich, not with the oppressed poor. James scolded the church for a pious faith that was not combing love and justice to do generous good works. Only if the church's top social priority is doing Jubilee justice for the oppressed poor, can the poor become blessed. Anything less is just religious talk, pious blabber. Never use the phrase "poor in spirit" to avoid the above hard truth about oppression and the evil rich.
In NT times, the Romans were often brutal oppressors so most Jews focused on Roman oppression. Not Jesus. He saw internal Jewish oppression, the religious temple functioning as a system of oppression, asn the number one problem. In the U>S>, often we have made Communism or terrorism the number one problem, while we largely ignore the huge role that corporate, crony capitalism plays in creating and maintaining oppression. To solve the problem of poverty, we must move beyond the bandaids of charity to the surgery of Jubilee justice; to solve poverty, we must stop oppression and do justice.
Next, I would like to do a condensation and paraphrase of the CEV translation of Isaiah 61:1-8. While this was originally written about Jesus, the coming Messiah, I would like the reader to think of the church, the body of Christ: The Spirit has taken control of me, chosen me, sent me to tell the oppressed poor good news, to announce the freedom that will accompany the year of Jubilee justice. Then joyous praise will replace broken hearts; the oppressed poor will become trees of justice. I, the Lord, realize that the oppressed poor were teribly insulted and horribly ill-treated. I, the Lord, love justice; I, the Lord, hate injustice.
Ask most white American evangelicals about poverty and they will appear quite knowledgeable about who the poor are and why they are poor. Ask these same people what the Bible teaches about oppression, and suddenedly they will seem ignorant and uninformed. Not only lay people, but scholars as well. Well-meaning white evangelicals have written a number of books on poverty, but I have not found more than a light mention of the extensive biblical teaching that oppression causes poverty. Never a chapter on oppression. No American evangelical theologian or bible scholar has ever published a book on the extensive biblical teaching on oppression. The third edition of the IVP Bible Dictionary has no entry on oppression. Most white American evangelicals do not know the poor firsthand; they are not at home with the poor; and they are ignorant of the biblical teaching on oppression and justice. So you cannot believe anything they say beyond charity.
Book review Evangelicalism: an Americanized Christianity
Richard Kyle, professor of history and religion at Mennonite Tabor College, has written Evangelicalism: an Americanized Christianity (2006). Here is how he describes his book in the Introduction:
This volume surveys the relationship of two strong forces---evangelicalism and American popular culture. Currently, evangelicalism may be the most Americanized and dynamic brand of religion in the United States. While its roots can be found in Europe, if evangelicalism were a garment its label would read: "Made in America." But this is not a new development. While it has reached new heights in the last twenty-five years, evangelicalism and American popular culture have interacted extensively since the colonial era. And the relationship has been complex and paradoxical. It has run in both directions. In its attempt to create a Christian America, evangelicals have powerfully shaped the nation's public values. The influence, however, has run more in the other direction. The popular culture has had a tremendous impact on evangelicalism---so much so that many conservative Protestants regard evangelical and American values as one and the same. Evangelicals also have had a hate-love relationship with American culture. While many view America's political and economic systems as divinely inspired, they have hated what they regard as the nation's departure from these perceived biblical principles.
Another book, The Wars of America: Christian Views edited by historian Ronald Wells, makes essentially the same argument as professional evangelical historians examine America's wars, why we fought them and what the evangelical perspective was on each war. I sadly shook my head as I read this profoundly disturbing volume. How could a supposedly bible-believing people be so badly deceived, so allied with the kingdoms of this world? In the chapter on the Revolutionary War, George Marsden describes the development of American civil religion, a shallow version of Christianity which fit well with the widespread deism of the day. Nationalism, deism and American civil religion; in some strange way evangelicalism blended well with this syncretistic mixture.
As I read Evangelicalism, I noted how easily many evangelicals baptized and sanctified Enlightenment secular values, capitalism, nationalism, deism, Anglo-Saxon civilization, democracy, slavery and militarism tied with Manifest Destiny. As I read this book I was reminded of a black friend who was attending an evangelical bible school at the time of Martin Luther King's assassination; white students cheered because they saw King as a threat to their supposedly superior WASP values.
Now some quotations from Evangelicalism:
This marriage [between evangelicalism and capitalism] began well before the Civil War and has continued strong thereafter. . . . As the government was not to interfere in religious matters, it should not regulate the economy. . . . But while they attacked specific [social] problems, they did not seriously critique the [capitalistic] system. . . . Evangelical Protestants may not have caused consumerism, but they contributed to its rise. Their values of free choice and individualism resonated with the new consumer ethic.
As I finished Evangelicalism, I concluded that the typical white American evangelical worships the Christian trinity of Father, Son and Holy Spirit on Sunday between 11:00 and 12:00 but during the week, Monday through Saturday, the American trinity of hyperindividualism, hypermaterialism and hyperethnocentrism takes center stage and pushes the Father, Son and Spirit to the side. This is Americanized Christianity in 2014.
This volume surveys the relationship of two strong forces---evangelicalism and American popular culture. Currently, evangelicalism may be the most Americanized and dynamic brand of religion in the United States. While its roots can be found in Europe, if evangelicalism were a garment its label would read: "Made in America." But this is not a new development. While it has reached new heights in the last twenty-five years, evangelicalism and American popular culture have interacted extensively since the colonial era. And the relationship has been complex and paradoxical. It has run in both directions. In its attempt to create a Christian America, evangelicals have powerfully shaped the nation's public values. The influence, however, has run more in the other direction. The popular culture has had a tremendous impact on evangelicalism---so much so that many conservative Protestants regard evangelical and American values as one and the same. Evangelicals also have had a hate-love relationship with American culture. While many view America's political and economic systems as divinely inspired, they have hated what they regard as the nation's departure from these perceived biblical principles.
Another book, The Wars of America: Christian Views edited by historian Ronald Wells, makes essentially the same argument as professional evangelical historians examine America's wars, why we fought them and what the evangelical perspective was on each war. I sadly shook my head as I read this profoundly disturbing volume. How could a supposedly bible-believing people be so badly deceived, so allied with the kingdoms of this world? In the chapter on the Revolutionary War, George Marsden describes the development of American civil religion, a shallow version of Christianity which fit well with the widespread deism of the day. Nationalism, deism and American civil religion; in some strange way evangelicalism blended well with this syncretistic mixture.
As I read Evangelicalism, I noted how easily many evangelicals baptized and sanctified Enlightenment secular values, capitalism, nationalism, deism, Anglo-Saxon civilization, democracy, slavery and militarism tied with Manifest Destiny. As I read this book I was reminded of a black friend who was attending an evangelical bible school at the time of Martin Luther King's assassination; white students cheered because they saw King as a threat to their supposedly superior WASP values.
Now some quotations from Evangelicalism:
This marriage [between evangelicalism and capitalism] began well before the Civil War and has continued strong thereafter. . . . As the government was not to interfere in religious matters, it should not regulate the economy. . . . But while they attacked specific [social] problems, they did not seriously critique the [capitalistic] system. . . . Evangelical Protestants may not have caused consumerism, but they contributed to its rise. Their values of free choice and individualism resonated with the new consumer ethic.
As I finished Evangelicalism, I concluded that the typical white American evangelical worships the Christian trinity of Father, Son and Holy Spirit on Sunday between 11:00 and 12:00 but during the week, Monday through Saturday, the American trinity of hyperindividualism, hypermaterialism and hyperethnocentrism takes center stage and pushes the Father, Son and Spirit to the side. This is Americanized Christianity in 2014.
Understanding Poverty BIBLICALLY
To understand poverty BIBLICALLY, to minister in poor communities effectively, a ministry should first understand riches BIBLICALLY, and understand oppression BIBLICALLY. But most Christian ministries go directly to the poor and skip the extensive biblical teaching on the rich (wealth, possessions, money), oppression and justice. WRONG APPROACH! Who says so? Jesus said so. Jesus tied the poor and oppression TOGETHER; poverty takes place in a socioeconomic context; poverty is not an isolated phenenomenon (Luke 4:18).
Jesus tied the rich and poor TOGETHER (Luke 6:20 & 24). Jesus identified the rich as the number one social problem, not the poor (see the gospel of Luke). The poor have many problems, but they are not THE problem. There is no white evangelical theological literature on oppression even though there are 555 references to oppression and its synonyms in the OT (see Thomas Hanks). Why have white evangelicals skipped the extensive biblical teaching on oppression? Why does the third edition of the IVP bible dictionary have no entry on oppression? Why do the Christian books on poverty fail to include a chapter on oppression? And what if the rich American oppressors are also ethnocentric against poor black males? Double trouble! American Christians wishing to minister among the poor should first identify who the oppressors are, and who the ethnocentric are; they might live close to home. Why? Not only to identify the real problem---ethnocentrism (Luke 4:25-30) and oppression (Luke 4:18)---but equally important so that the ministry won't make the fatal mistake of looking for the causes of poverty among the flaws of the poor.
The poor have many problems and need help in many ways; one way to help is to stop oppression---"to release the oppressed."
Modern white American evangelical Christians are not the only ones confused about the rich and poor. In the May 15, 2013 issue of the Christian Century, the esteemed OT scholar, Walter Brueggemann, reviews the book Through the Eye of a Needle: Wealth, the Fall of Rome, and the Making of Christianity in the West, 350-550 AD by Peter Brown. According to church historian Brown, it was the wealthy entering the church in large numbers that led to the Constantinianism of the church, not the period of Constantine, with the great theologian Augustine leading and rationalizing the necessary theological accomodations to make the wealthy feel comfortable in the church. Apparently Augustine never read the second chapter of the book of James.
Before Augustine, church fathers Ambrose and Jerome condemned wealth and were lovers of the poor. Ever since Augustine, the Western church, Protestant and Catholic, has watered down the Scriptural teaching on the rich and poor, on oppression, with a few exceptions such as Francis of Assissi and Pope Francis. Augustine tended to see wealth as occasionally problematic, but potentially good; he avoided the fundamental oppression/justice issue. Brueggemann states: "The fourth century was a time of great dispute about money in the church. . . . it was the Age of Gold when extraordinary affluence emerged."
Generosity toward the poor is good, a part of the answer, but it is not the full answer to oppression. Jubilee justice is the required full answer to poverty and oppression. It is more complete than love, compassion and generosity. Generosity alone is dangerous, misleading, making a Christian think that she has done enough, therefore preventing the doing of more radical justice. Ambrose and Jerome stayed closer to the NT message on rich and poor; Augustine focused more on pride than oppression.
While the secular economist Paul Krugman does not write as a biblically informed Christian, I think his ideology is reasonably close to a biblical perspective; his New York Times editorials help me think through current issues. I recommend the following two recent articles: "The Hammock Fallacy,", March 6, 2013 http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/07/opinion/krugman/-the-hammack-fallacy.html?hp&rref=opinion&_r=0 "Liberty, Equality, Efficiency," March 9, 2013 http://nytimes.com/2014/03/09/opinion/krugman-liberty-equality-efficiency.html?emc=eta1&_r=0
Jesus tied the rich and poor TOGETHER (Luke 6:20 & 24). Jesus identified the rich as the number one social problem, not the poor (see the gospel of Luke). The poor have many problems, but they are not THE problem. There is no white evangelical theological literature on oppression even though there are 555 references to oppression and its synonyms in the OT (see Thomas Hanks). Why have white evangelicals skipped the extensive biblical teaching on oppression? Why does the third edition of the IVP bible dictionary have no entry on oppression? Why do the Christian books on poverty fail to include a chapter on oppression? And what if the rich American oppressors are also ethnocentric against poor black males? Double trouble! American Christians wishing to minister among the poor should first identify who the oppressors are, and who the ethnocentric are; they might live close to home. Why? Not only to identify the real problem---ethnocentrism (Luke 4:25-30) and oppression (Luke 4:18)---but equally important so that the ministry won't make the fatal mistake of looking for the causes of poverty among the flaws of the poor.
The poor have many problems and need help in many ways; one way to help is to stop oppression---"to release the oppressed."
Modern white American evangelical Christians are not the only ones confused about the rich and poor. In the May 15, 2013 issue of the Christian Century, the esteemed OT scholar, Walter Brueggemann, reviews the book Through the Eye of a Needle: Wealth, the Fall of Rome, and the Making of Christianity in the West, 350-550 AD by Peter Brown. According to church historian Brown, it was the wealthy entering the church in large numbers that led to the Constantinianism of the church, not the period of Constantine, with the great theologian Augustine leading and rationalizing the necessary theological accomodations to make the wealthy feel comfortable in the church. Apparently Augustine never read the second chapter of the book of James.
Before Augustine, church fathers Ambrose and Jerome condemned wealth and were lovers of the poor. Ever since Augustine, the Western church, Protestant and Catholic, has watered down the Scriptural teaching on the rich and poor, on oppression, with a few exceptions such as Francis of Assissi and Pope Francis. Augustine tended to see wealth as occasionally problematic, but potentially good; he avoided the fundamental oppression/justice issue. Brueggemann states: "The fourth century was a time of great dispute about money in the church. . . . it was the Age of Gold when extraordinary affluence emerged."
Generosity toward the poor is good, a part of the answer, but it is not the full answer to oppression. Jubilee justice is the required full answer to poverty and oppression. It is more complete than love, compassion and generosity. Generosity alone is dangerous, misleading, making a Christian think that she has done enough, therefore preventing the doing of more radical justice. Ambrose and Jerome stayed closer to the NT message on rich and poor; Augustine focused more on pride than oppression.
While the secular economist Paul Krugman does not write as a biblically informed Christian, I think his ideology is reasonably close to a biblical perspective; his New York Times editorials help me think through current issues. I recommend the following two recent articles: "The Hammock Fallacy,", March 6, 2013 http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/07/opinion/krugman/-the-hammack-fallacy.html?hp&rref=opinion&_r=0 "Liberty, Equality, Efficiency," March 9, 2013 http://nytimes.com/2014/03/09/opinion/krugman-liberty-equality-efficiency.html?emc=eta1&_r=0
Tuesday, March 4, 2014
New Systems of Oppression
The Puritans used violence against Native Americans, slaughtering whole villages, men, women and children. This established a PATTERN of violence in American history---near genocide---for three centuries. WASP's used violence against Afro American slaves for centuries. Through violence, we "annexed" half of Mexican territory. We have used military forces to dominate the Caribbean islands and Central American countries many times. And there is the unwarranted use of violence against Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan.
Haiti has a similar violent history beginning with the imperial/colonial Spanish, French and Americans. This set a PATTERN for endless internal violence by Haitian leaders making democratic rule nearly impossible. Most historical accounts of Haiti emphasize the external violence against Haiti---hundreds of years of oppression. But there is also the internal violence highlighted by historian Girard. Both external and internal violence have created what Orlando Patterson calls social death.
Both the U.S. and Haiti have alternated between freedom and oppression, seldom freedom and justice. The British colonists who settled America practiced ruthless brutality against the Irish shortly before they came to the U.S. Along with their Bibles, they brought generous amounts of ethnocentrism and oppression which they soon used against American Indians; they even called them "Irish." The founding fathers violently obtained freedom from British domination, but internally, they did not establish justice for all; they did not "under God" provide "liberty and justice for all," for the poor, women, Native Americans and African Americans.
It took a violent Civil War to free the slaves, but Lincoln/Congress did not follow freedom with justice so soon neoslavery (segregation, sharecropping, incarceration and prison work gangs) became the new system of oppression. Then the civil rights movement regained freedom for oppressed blacks, but the American church did not aggressively pursue justice so in the 1980s mass incarceration and the racial wealth gap replaced segregation as the new system of oppression.
American capitalism was a two-edged sword---marvelously productive, but often oppressive in the process. There was enough respect for the Constitution, for law and order, that a climate of political stability was created; this created an environment for economic growth.
Haiti gained its freedom violently; political and economic violence then became a part of its history. The oppressors changed faces, but the pattern was not one of justice. Haiti has never consistently blended freedom and justice; even Aristide, who had the possibility of blending freedom with justice, soon resorted to abusive political power and the pursuit of money.
Neither the American church nor the Haitian church preaches and practices the gospel of kingdom of God justice. Freedom without justice becomes hollow and shallow, often overcome by corrupt power and economic oppression. There is a desperate need for a NT theology of society, a kingdom of God society, a beloved community built upon reconciliation and justice.
Haiti has a similar violent history beginning with the imperial/colonial Spanish, French and Americans. This set a PATTERN for endless internal violence by Haitian leaders making democratic rule nearly impossible. Most historical accounts of Haiti emphasize the external violence against Haiti---hundreds of years of oppression. But there is also the internal violence highlighted by historian Girard. Both external and internal violence have created what Orlando Patterson calls social death.
Both the U.S. and Haiti have alternated between freedom and oppression, seldom freedom and justice. The British colonists who settled America practiced ruthless brutality against the Irish shortly before they came to the U.S. Along with their Bibles, they brought generous amounts of ethnocentrism and oppression which they soon used against American Indians; they even called them "Irish." The founding fathers violently obtained freedom from British domination, but internally, they did not establish justice for all; they did not "under God" provide "liberty and justice for all," for the poor, women, Native Americans and African Americans.
It took a violent Civil War to free the slaves, but Lincoln/Congress did not follow freedom with justice so soon neoslavery (segregation, sharecropping, incarceration and prison work gangs) became the new system of oppression. Then the civil rights movement regained freedom for oppressed blacks, but the American church did not aggressively pursue justice so in the 1980s mass incarceration and the racial wealth gap replaced segregation as the new system of oppression.
American capitalism was a two-edged sword---marvelously productive, but often oppressive in the process. There was enough respect for the Constitution, for law and order, that a climate of political stability was created; this created an environment for economic growth.
Haiti gained its freedom violently; political and economic violence then became a part of its history. The oppressors changed faces, but the pattern was not one of justice. Haiti has never consistently blended freedom and justice; even Aristide, who had the possibility of blending freedom with justice, soon resorted to abusive political power and the pursuit of money.
Neither the American church nor the Haitian church preaches and practices the gospel of kingdom of God justice. Freedom without justice becomes hollow and shallow, often overcome by corrupt power and economic oppression. There is a desperate need for a NT theology of society, a kingdom of God society, a beloved community built upon reconciliation and justice.
BOOK REVIEW CONT.: Haiti: The Tumultuous History---From Pearl of the Caribbean to Broken Nation by historian Philippe Girard (2005)
This is a continuation of the book review of Haiti by Girard, a historian who specializes in the area of Caribbean history; Some quotations:
"Being a mulatto [yellow] had social and cultural implications going far beyond racial traits, and race became as important to one's identity as one's name. . . . mulattoes monopolized its businesses. . . . Blacks, representing about 90 percent of Haiti's population, stood for everything the mulattoes opposed.
Under Dessalines' leadership (1804-1806), the Haitian countryside thus bore an eerie resemblance to the colonial landscape . . . forced labor, monoculture, and social inequality remained the norm."
Aristitide convinced Bill Clinton to dedicate twenty thousand troops and two billion dollars to an intervention opposed by a majority of his constituents. Aristide's single-minded perservance finally paid off, but it came at a price. Haiti, a country already suffering from extreme poverty, a brain drain, and a notorious reputation abroad, endured three long years of embargo, emigration, and political violence that only added to its existing woes. Cedra's and Aristitde's diplimatic feats were yet another example of Haitian politicians using their political genuis to serve their own career rather than their own people.
At the end of his book, Girard has a section entitled: "Conclusion: Is There Any Hope for Haiti" Girard's answer is a guarded, Yes. Though " writing a book on the history of Haiti can be a depressing experience," and though Haiti's historical past haunts its sociological present, though "poverty begets poverty," though "political violence and poverty tend to be self-perpetuating," though "decades of economic setbacks have convinced many Haitians that their only chance of ever escaping misery is to leave Haiti altogether, thus depriving the country of valuable human capital," though an internal "predatory class" is in charge, "something must be done to stop this cycle of poverty." Girard asserts that foreign aid hasn't worked; more of a grassroots model is needed for lasting growth:
1. Education to correct massive illiteracy and limited education.
2. Agricultural modernization.
3. Labor-intensive light industry.
4. "Heavy industry like ship building."
5. "Service-oriented sectors such as information technology."
6. Tourism
According to Girard, Haiti does have some unique assets: cheap labor, young population, proximity to U.S. mainland, and the possible return of the Haitian Diaspora with their education, expertise and capital.
To be continued
"Being a mulatto [yellow] had social and cultural implications going far beyond racial traits, and race became as important to one's identity as one's name. . . . mulattoes monopolized its businesses. . . . Blacks, representing about 90 percent of Haiti's population, stood for everything the mulattoes opposed.
Under Dessalines' leadership (1804-1806), the Haitian countryside thus bore an eerie resemblance to the colonial landscape . . . forced labor, monoculture, and social inequality remained the norm."
Aristitide convinced Bill Clinton to dedicate twenty thousand troops and two billion dollars to an intervention opposed by a majority of his constituents. Aristide's single-minded perservance finally paid off, but it came at a price. Haiti, a country already suffering from extreme poverty, a brain drain, and a notorious reputation abroad, endured three long years of embargo, emigration, and political violence that only added to its existing woes. Cedra's and Aristitde's diplimatic feats were yet another example of Haitian politicians using their political genuis to serve their own career rather than their own people.
At the end of his book, Girard has a section entitled: "Conclusion: Is There Any Hope for Haiti" Girard's answer is a guarded, Yes. Though " writing a book on the history of Haiti can be a depressing experience," and though Haiti's historical past haunts its sociological present, though "poverty begets poverty," though "political violence and poverty tend to be self-perpetuating," though "decades of economic setbacks have convinced many Haitians that their only chance of ever escaping misery is to leave Haiti altogether, thus depriving the country of valuable human capital," though an internal "predatory class" is in charge, "something must be done to stop this cycle of poverty." Girard asserts that foreign aid hasn't worked; more of a grassroots model is needed for lasting growth:
1. Education to correct massive illiteracy and limited education.
2. Agricultural modernization.
3. Labor-intensive light industry.
4. "Heavy industry like ship building."
5. "Service-oriented sectors such as information technology."
6. Tourism
According to Girard, Haiti does have some unique assets: cheap labor, young population, proximity to U.S. mainland, and the possible return of the Haitian Diaspora with their education, expertise and capital.
To be continued
Monday, March 3, 2014
Neoslavery II and Social Death (Slavery and Social Death, by Orlando Patterson)
12 Years a Slave; 407 years of Slavery.
12 years a slave (1841-1853); 407 years of slavery (1607-2014) [preslavery, slavery, neoslavery I, neoslavery II]. Preslavery---indentured servants who came over on slave ships to Virginia; slavery---1660-1865; neoslavery I [segregation, sharecropping, incarceration, prison work gangs]. roughly (1865-1968); neoslavery II, (1980-2014).
Neoslavery II and Social Death
The term neoslavery was coined by scholars to describe the period of oppression that followed the abolition of legal slavery; this was a period of roughly 100 years sometimes called Jim Crow, the period of segregation, sharecropping, etc.
Neoslavery II (to my knowledge, no scholar has used this term yet) is applied to the period of unjust mass incarceration of young black and Latino males and to the massive racial wealth gap (20-1, white households over black; 17-1, white households over Latino). Michelle Alexander argues in her book, The New Jim Crow, that in America we do not end systems of oppression; we merely redesign them. She does not use the term neoslavery II, but she endorses the concept. Alexander could have subtitled her book The New Jim Crow: Neoslavery II.
Orlando Patterson in his book Slavery and Social Death, a world-wide and cross-cultural study of slavery, uses the term social death to describe the enormous damage that slavery does to a society, a culture. Nothing, including basic social institutions such as marriage and family, is allowed to function normally; cultural and social dysfunction is the norm. When slave are sold, families are broken; when illegals are deported, families are torn apart. Neoslavery II in the form of mass incarceration and the wealth gap also breaks up and impoverishes families on a large scale; in addition, communities and schools are deeply impacted.
A suggestion. Take advantage of 12 Years a Slave winning the Oscar; organize a Sunday School class or a church and go see this movie together. Then come back and discuss the movie as a group, or build a Sunday School class around the biblical teaching on ethnocentrism, oppression and justice [Luke 4:18 on oppression and Luke 4:25-30 on ethnocentrism.] Have half of your class read The New Jim Crow and the other half read The Hidden Cost of Being African American [the racial wealth gap].
12 years a slave (1841-1853); 407 years of slavery (1607-2014) [preslavery, slavery, neoslavery I, neoslavery II]. Preslavery---indentured servants who came over on slave ships to Virginia; slavery---1660-1865; neoslavery I [segregation, sharecropping, incarceration, prison work gangs]. roughly (1865-1968); neoslavery II, (1980-2014).
Neoslavery II and Social Death
The term neoslavery was coined by scholars to describe the period of oppression that followed the abolition of legal slavery; this was a period of roughly 100 years sometimes called Jim Crow, the period of segregation, sharecropping, etc.
Neoslavery II (to my knowledge, no scholar has used this term yet) is applied to the period of unjust mass incarceration of young black and Latino males and to the massive racial wealth gap (20-1, white households over black; 17-1, white households over Latino). Michelle Alexander argues in her book, The New Jim Crow, that in America we do not end systems of oppression; we merely redesign them. She does not use the term neoslavery II, but she endorses the concept. Alexander could have subtitled her book The New Jim Crow: Neoslavery II.
Orlando Patterson in his book Slavery and Social Death, a world-wide and cross-cultural study of slavery, uses the term social death to describe the enormous damage that slavery does to a society, a culture. Nothing, including basic social institutions such as marriage and family, is allowed to function normally; cultural and social dysfunction is the norm. When slave are sold, families are broken; when illegals are deported, families are torn apart. Neoslavery II in the form of mass incarceration and the wealth gap also breaks up and impoverishes families on a large scale; in addition, communities and schools are deeply impacted.
A suggestion. Take advantage of 12 Years a Slave winning the Oscar; organize a Sunday School class or a church and go see this movie together. Then come back and discuss the movie as a group, or build a Sunday School class around the biblical teaching on ethnocentrism, oppression and justice [Luke 4:18 on oppression and Luke 4:25-30 on ethnocentrism.] Have half of your class read The New Jim Crow and the other half read The Hidden Cost of Being African American [the racial wealth gap].
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)