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.
Thursday, March 13, 2014
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)