for a good example of the way that capitalism avoids critical scrutiny try reading here: “Don’t throw away your capitalism just yet”
The argument is a collection of lame metaphors (about eggs needing to be broken to make an omelette) and weak anecdotes. Keep reading down the comments below the article for some good repsonses concerning the real felt effects of the capitalist system.
The essence of the argument is that no better system has yet been invented.
Two responses to that:
- it’s way past time to invent a better system (if you really do think that capitalism needs to be superceded by a better system…)
- ultimately, the reality is that no better system has yet been invented to legitimate the flow of capital (i.e. resources) from the poor into the hands of the powerful. While the powerful benefit from the system why on earth would they support any efforts to change the system.
in the words of Jack Johnson:
it’s always more fun, to share with everyone…
if you have 2, share one with your friend…
if you have one, there is something you can learn,
you can still share just by taking turns!
the problem is not the absence of a “better system” but rather the conviction that human beings need to share the earth’s resources in a manner that affirms human dignity, and the basic rights to things like life, food and shelter.
Our current world view allows for US$ 780 billion to be spent globally on Arms and the Military (in one year, 1998) while in the same year just US$ 40 would have paid for Basic education for all (US$ 6 billion), Water and sanitation for all (US$ 9 billion), Reproductive health for all women (US$ 12 billion) and Basic health and nutrition (US$ 13 billion). [Source]
Who is benefiting from this expenditure on military and arms? Who is being protected? Whose interests are at stake? And whose security is being ensured? Who is so afraid?
And why is it not possible to allocate a proportion of funds to basic human needs, like water and food?
what if the world’s currency were based on “a loaf of bread”.
There’d be no inflation. A loaf of bread is a loaf bread.
economists and bankers may argue with me with fantastic arguments about how i don’t understand the macro economic dynamics. but all that complicated talk is a well-developed screen to deflect the growing realisation that the current dominant economic system that our world has given itself to is fundamentally flawed. not only is it doomed to collapse (and recollapse) - but it is also a complicated system of ensuring that powerless people stay subservient to the most powerful. it is fundamentally enethical.
I first began to reflect on the nature of the economic system we are all subservient to as the crisis in Zimbabwe deepened. As the economy of Zimbabwe dipped and inflation worsened, the signs were there (according to all the fundamentals of economic speak) that there would be a melt-down and that the economy would bring everything to a halt. But things carry on. The government prints money. not recommended by economists who need the integrity of “currency” to be upheld. But Bob prints money all the time. And things carry on. Inflation has reached the hundreds of millions percentile. It’s beyond sense. everything should be grinding to a halt. But things carry on.
well trained in the religion of market capitalism (as i am) I assumed there must be a point at which all these factors cause everything to come to a halt, and Bob would have to bow to the forces of the market. But he hasn’t. And that’s because Bob knows something that few of us have realised.
That a loaf of bread is still a loaf of bread. The market can use it’s language to “tell” us that the “value” of a loaf of bread has gone “up” (inflation), but in reality we know that the $1 loaf of bread we ate yesterday and the $2 loaf of bread we ate today is exactly the same. it’s real value remains the same.
so i ask, what if the world’s currency were based on “a loaf of bread”?
It’s sad that the dominant economic system is so all-prevailing and has it’s tentacles so deeply in our lives - that we are so deeply invested in this system that any attempt to think sensibly about economics - and the value of things - will be dismissed as the talk of crazy wierdo liberal “communist ” extremisits. “They probably don’t even believe in GOD!!!!” …and side-lined along with talk of aliens and the illuminati.
And so the system carries on… well protected by it’s self-supporting principles of greed, aquisition, money-for-nothing, quick profits and world economic crises leaving the poorest of the poor without a pension…
i can’t win an argument. but i can ask the question. when your “investments” lost a third of their value last month (in the period of about 3 weeks) who said? who says your “investment” is suddenly worth less? and who is benefiting from that “loss”?
economists will blame “the market”. but just press pause on that simplistic answer and interrogate the system for just a moment: if the market crashes and everyone loses, why would everyone support that system with such faithfulness??? think about it…
simple, everyday, ordinary, (often poor) people are being raped by a system that allows 3 single individuals to acquire more wealth than the GDP of 45 (25%) of the world’s poorest countries. 
The chart to the left shows the balance of consumption: that 20% of the worlds people consume more than a quarter (76.6%) ofd the share, leaving just 1.5% for another 20% of the world’s population.
Let’s not buy into simple lies. “The market” is not deciding who gets what and how much. Powerful people are able to use the market to their advantage, leaving other human beings to starve and rot. It’s way past time to take stock and reconsider…
a friend emailed me today asking me about my thoughts on being a person of faith and relating to other religions.
her question went like this…
“…I have always thought that there is a lot of insight and a lot to be learned from people of other religions - and that our practices and ways of worshipping God may well not be the only way. However, if we truly believe that salvation is for everyone and that Jesus will one day return to judge the living and the dead - do we not then have an obligation to try and introduce people of other religions to our Jesus? Or is it really true the idea that there are many angles from which to look at a mountain - but ultimately it is the same mountain?…” (i think the questions is expertly stated - by the way)
i thought i’d post my response to her here: (comments are welcome.) - don’t you think it’s interesting to listen in on a conversation…
Regarding your question about other religions…
you seem to give 2 options: 1. Jesus is the only way. 2. all religions are different ways that lead up the same mountain.
what if there are other options? i.e. other ways of thinking about this difficult debate.
Let me first take note of what (i think) you are saying:
1. you are a kind and generous person who wants to respect other people and their sincere convictions. That is not a bad thing. in fact, i would say it is the sign that you are a true Jesus follower - that even in the face of quite harsh criticism, you want to “come up for” people of other faiths - arguing that they also have goodness in them. and they do!. so that’s important. we need to be asking, is our position true to our christian faith? a faith that encourages acceptance, compassion and a non-judgemental attitude to people - esp those who are different or rejected.
2. You are also saying that if Jesus is “the only way” it would be unkind and wrong to not want to share that knowledge with those people who are not Christians. good. i think that the motivation behind this position is also compassion. you aren’t judging them. just wanting to share something valuable.
the problem is that usually these two things seem to contradict. being accepting, tolerant and evanglising people to follow Jesus are seen as mutually exclusive. like you can’t be true to Jesus AND live in a tolerant way of people who differ.
So, the problem with position 1 (Jesus is the only way) is that on it’s own it quickly becomes a judgmental position that makes people act in ways and say things that don’t actually sound very christian! BUT the problem with option 2 is that it doesn’t really properly honour the vast differences in the different religions.
I don’t think you can say that Islam and Christianity and Buddhism are just different paths up the same mountain… with the same end point. I think that is too simplistic. Buddhism doesn’t believe in a personal deity. islam and Xty do. Xty stresses grace and forgiveness. Islam is very strong on discipline and obedience. These aren’t just minor differences. they are huge differences that mean that if we begin to talk to each other, our concepts of God are not all just going to merge into one view of God. I think there are irreconcilable differences.
BUT there are lots of common points of agreement. There is a lot we CAN talk about. We see that murder is on the rise… and crime. Interesting that Islam, Xty and Buddhism all support a non-violent way of life and believe in the sanctity of life. Thou shalt not kill… So we can get together and work towards a safer society.
Same with violence against women and abuse of children. Religions are together in their rejection of these actions.
SO, to reject another religion based on the idea that “everything that is not Christian is evil” is not helpful. it’s just plain judgemental. and arrogant. There is a lot that we (as human beings, all made “in the image of God”) can do together to honour our creator and work towards a society that in some way reflects the values we believe in.
I propose option 3: which is basically the “respect” option. it basically takes a form as outlined below…
- all religions (incl. Xty) reflect the human search for God and truth.
- as a Christ follower, i believe that Jesus is the only way to know God (in the unique way that Jesus shows us) - [afterthought - could “only” be replaced by best? or most complete?]
- i am called by Jesus to a life of respect, compassion and the ministry of care and listening.
- i therefore treat people as people (not as potential converts) and try to love people as God has loved me - no matter what their position or religion is. (that means i can work with them, eat with them, socialise, children can go to school together etc. it’s a repectful tolerance)
- i also live out my faith and values in such a way (without fear or being ashamed - Rom 1:16) that anyone and everyone will see that I am a person of faith and if they every inquire, i will be proud (and able) to speak about my faith, and by doing so, (by implication) invite them into that faith.
- in the mean-time, there is a lot that we can talk about, and agree on, and work together on… care of creation, repsect of human life, safer society, education. etc etc etc…