Episode X - Final Choices

Francis Schaeffer's last chapter notes that in the scheme of history, this current generation chooses what comes next. So how does that work out? Do we build on the lessons of our varied past? Or do we choose en masse for our personal satisfaction and pleasure?

An African pastor friend described modern choice, "... when you study political science you will understand, man cannot agree on anything if it doesn't favor him."

So what do our choices reveal; what are the goals this current generation has chosen?

Magnificence?
Great goodness?
Nobility, courage, justice, compassion?

Or are the goals just more of the same? Wealth, luxury, leisure, personal pleasure, removal of restraints?

Can you tell? Is it visible in our cultural expression? Consider MTV's 'Jersey Shore' as an example. (OK, it's a really bad example, I know.)

The show is about a group of US youths, and it has record ratings, but it offends some, it seems. Some advertisers have asked that their ads not be aired during the show; Dell, Domino's, and American Family Insurance. UNICO National formally requested that MTV cancel the show.

The series has been exported to dozens of countries worldwide. It's the face we show the world. MTV leads the international media marketplace for such things. Nothing is more bizarre than children on the far side of the world quoting some MTVism to you by way of greeting.  (I can't adequately describe the disappointing realization that that's how they saw me and my country and my culture.)

 

Has this current generation made its choice?
We face personal decisions daily that are often counter to our culture. When we're thinking straight, we hope and intend to choose magnificence of character, but the world we live in seems no longer to honor such a choice. So, we continue as best we are able to so choose.

The most significant
thing you will do today
... is choose. ~ my wife; smart lady.
 

Poverty's Mind

We often think of poverty in simple terms, as my friend pointed out recently; things you need but don't have.  While that's at least part of the truth, those who live in poverty don't necessarily think of it the same way.  When everyone lacks shoes, it's doesn't occur to you as a huge issue, I suppose.

The common thread we do hear from adults in such difficult circumstances, though, is their lack of a voice, of significance, of having options.  An African father who has nothing for his children said he was ashamed at his inability to provide; he had no worth or influence or significance.  No matter how hard he tries, nothing changes.

In the developed countries, so many options exist for work, for assistance, for relocation, for education, ... and of course for food and medical needs.  Poverty is perhaps understood by those who are in it as the lack of any such options.  No choice in the matter.  Powerlessness.

Children, like these here in a shoreline village, run to greet the visitor in their neighborhood.  They and their families are gracious and hospitable.  All work hard, every day.  Survival needs are met, but their parents struggle against difficult obstacles.

Poverty is a weapon of mass destruction - Part I

There is no food shortage. There is enough for everyone, at least for now. The rich and influential never go hungry, not in any country in the world.

No one chooses poverty for their family, but for many, it comes anyway. None choose for their children to be fast-tracked to failure. No parent chooses for their family to go hungry and slowly die from curable illnesses. But such things come despite their attempts at escape.

Pointing at the poor in condescension, as though through some character flaw, poverty came from within them ... we miss, perhaps, an underlying truth: poverty is a class, culture, and political choice; the poor are its victims. Is that true?

There are too many occasions of deprivation where it doesn't have to happen. Equal opportunity is a goal still far in the distance.  Equal education is a dream.

Historically, the localized economy was structured for gain by the 'upper class', the nobility, the landed gentry at the expense of the 'peasants', the politically and economically disenfranchised.  That model has carried forward to today.

Friends on the far side of the world; they

work harder than I, but their opportunities

are limited by the choices wealthy

nations have made.

About half of the world’s people live in economic distress.  Is it enough to blame poor people for their own predicament? Have they been lazy, made poor decisions, and been solely responsible for their plight? What about their governments? Have they pursued policies that actually harm successful development? Such causes for poverty and inequality are real,  but deeper and more global causes of poverty are often less discussed.

Behind the increasing interconnectedness promised by globalization, we find government decisions, policies, and practices, all of which are formulated by developed countries in favor of their own success.  Of course.  The result is a continuation of the gap, a burgeoning economy that leaves much of the world behind.

"Why is it that corporations give millions of dollars to elected officials? Do you think it's simply public-spirited behavior?"  ~Walter E. Williams

The primary influence on government actions regarding the marketplace are national and multinational corporations, many of which are economically larger than countries.

In the face of such enormous external influence, the governments of poor nations and their people are often powerless. As a result, in the global context, the gap between rich and poor continues to increase.  We've seen such inequity before, and it has not been easily resolved.

As individuals, we perhaps cannot solve the dilemma, but we can make a difference for others.