Graeme, I find it hard to recognize clergy today.  We don't wear our collars backwards. We dress pretty much like everyone else.  Some of us aren't ordained, and those who are don't usually wear their academic credentials on our sleeves.   But I'll take your word for it.  Perhaps there were no clergy in the area where you were. 

But back to the suffering woman tied to the fence.  I think that the Christian response should be two-fold.  First I would seek to ease her immediate circumstances.  I would speak to her, let her know that I saw and cared.  I don't think I would have the tools or the ability to cut her chains or break down the fence, but I could reach through and give her a drink of water and perhaps wash her wounds (Its unlikely that I would have ointment with me).   Then I could use my cell phone to call the police, or shout to a bystander to call them, or ask somebody to stay with her while I ran (or drove) to the police station.  

But suppose the police either cannot or will not do something about it?

I notify the Social Justice people in my church about it.  They get on the property owner's case - find out as much as they can about him - pressure the legal system to enforce the law - pressure the government to change or strengthen the law.  Notify the newspapers - try to find a sympathetic reporter - give him whatever facts we've been able to dig up.  Ask other churches to join us.  Boycott his business.  

Or perhaps right from the beginning, I should have asked that poor woman what she wanted?   Perhaps right now he is holding her children hostage with threats to kill her and them if anything happens.   Perhaps she actually prefers a different approach. Perhaps all she wants from me is to know that I see and that I care, while she tries to work something out.  

And I have to walk somewhere in the middle - respecting her wishes - trying to help.  Looking for balance.  

Graeme, I would really appreciate hearing what you would do and what you would like the church to do?    What would you like the church to do in the situation you have set up?

exactly.

i think that far too often, people rush in and do what THEY THINK is the right thing to do, without taking the time to talk to the victims and hear what their experience is first, and what they actually need.

I think we can all agree. We would take action on the root of the problem. There's not much point in washing her wounds if we're going to stand by while she is going to be whipped again at dawn.

Of course, we should give at least palliative aid at once. But that really doesn't solve anything.

As Christians, we should be making each other aware of the problem - and aware of its cause. Then we decide to look for a real cure.

That, it seems to me, is the only way to be effective.

In the case of Haiti, it is nice to send little packages. We've done it for a century. And still, every morning, the woman gets whipped again.

Haiti is poor and ignorant and sick because factory owners and factory farmers want it that way to give them a supply of cheap labour. We accept and encourage that because we want cheap levis and underwear and Chiquita bananas.

Once we are aware of that, we can start looking for cures instead of tidbit palliatives.

This is, at root, a religious and a moral issue. And the churches aren't doing much about it.

Would we accept a minister who's a part-time pimp? If not,why do we accept those who want cheap levis and underwear and chiquita bananas?

The church should be leading the way in what the Occupy movement is trying to do. But it rarely does. Check out the churches in the French revolution.

Graeme - the UCC doesn't often send little packages (although individual members might).  We try to work with the local organizations in the country affected, and while some might go towards immediate aid, most of it is usually earmarked for long term projects.  And yes, we ask them what they want and need, and we work with them and through them.   Yes, I drink coffee (Just Us) to support the small farmers and local cooperatives and not the multi-nationals, and I eat bananas.  I haven't looked into different sources of bananas but simply buy them from my local coop store.   It seems to me that since we can't grow bananas at home, it is reasonable that we should trade for them with countries where they can be grown.   If I knew of a farmers coop in Haiti or any other third world country that by-passed the multinationals I would certainly buy from them, and willing pay more for bananas (as I do for coffee).

The best quote I have seen about "aid", is as follows

If you have come here to help me, you are wasting your time.

But if you have come because your liberation is bound up with mine, then let us work together.

The quote is usually attributed to Lila Watson, an Australian aboriginal activist, who as a woman who practices what she preaches stated she was "not comfortable being credited for something that had been born of a collective process" and prefers that it be credited to "Aboriginal activists group, Queensland, 1970s."

And that addendum to the quote just adds to its significance in my opinion.

So often the people providing "aid" project their own perceptions of "need" onto their target and sometimes the perceptions and needs are contradictory to what the target perceives as their need.  Some benefactors are also seeking their own glorification in the process and again lose sight of the real need; as well as losing the purpose of the process.

There are many needs in this world of ours probably as many as there are creatures in need.  What should remain the central focus is not the specific but the broad collective of working together toward the individual liberation of want.

LB

-----------------------------------

For, brethren, ye have been called unto liberty; only use not liberty for an occasion to the flesh, but by love serve one another. For all the law is fulfilled in one word, even in this; Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.  

     Galations 5:13-14, KJV

Very good, thought-provoking observation. I am thinking....

This brings to mind Operation ShoeBox. Are churches sending to children ( in the form of aid in a shoebox,)  and are projecting their ideas of what children need in other countries,

It is very hard to stop this Samaritan Purse initiative because people in schools, churches, and communiyies feel good sending toys that need batteries, toothpaste, and candy where money for a well with clean drinking water would help the communities of children so much more.

How do we stop ourselves from feeling good about US?

The problem is not that people need aid. the problem is that people need our cooperation to change their societies so they don't need aid.

Haiti is poor, but not because it needs aid. It's poor because it has been deliberately made poor and kept there to make other people rich. That's the problem we should be addressing - not the present situation but the cause of it.

That is what the churches are not doing.

Sometimes, you have to decide which side you're on.

Graeme - we can't change history.  We can study it and try to learn from it, but we can't change it.   But we can help.  It just seems to me that the best way to help is what the UCC are doing right now - asking the local people what they want or need and trying to provide it - helping them to set up co-ops to market their produce directly without going through the middleman - and buying their produce at a fair price that may be twice as high as Walmart or Costco can supply it.  Providing seed money to drill a well, buy fertilizer and farm equipment, establish a school, equip a hospital.   We probably could be doing a lot more than we do - but we do something.   After I've read a UCC magazine or attended a study group, or sometimes from the sermon, or the moment for mission that most churches I know have each Sunday, I'm often surprised at how little some of the people I know in my sports league, or my neighbourhood, or attending other denominations know about these things.   Which side am I on - I hope that I am on the side of humanity.   

Exactly.  And because not everyone is on the same 'side'...to try to help all of humanity doesn't work.  So one has to choose who to help and how.

Which means that some of humanity 'isn't going to be helped'.

Triage for humanity.

Some of us have to decide where our talents and interests lie.   For myself - I fully support those in my church that keep us appraised of the suffering in various countries around the world - but my interests are more in helping the poor and unfortunate here at home.  Sleeping in a cardboard shelter under a bridge or in a back alleyway can't be very comfortable anywhere - but in Canada our homeless also have to cope with cold and snow.  Warm clothing, boots, and a sleeping bag are a must.  So is support for the emergency shelters, for the food banks, the community kitchen, the clinic.  And once these basic survival needs are met we also have to look at things like giving them a bit of dignity, a place to gather and socialize, a place to clean-up, shave, shower, a change of clothing.  We have to provide school lunches, books, clothing, playground equipment, libraries - job training - decent housing - opportunities - hope.   I think this is where my congregation is responding to real needs in its immediate neighbourhood.  And not just bandaid - we pressure our governments to right injustices that perpetuate the problems the poor face.  

The side of humanity? Oh. that's a nice side to be on. For myself, I'm in favour of people.

For Seeler, nobody has asked you to change history. I know it can't be changed. I'm a historian, remember?

The church should me making people aware of the relationship between their faith and what is happening in the world. To do that, they have to be aware of what is happening in the world.

The church should be placing its work in the context of faith and daily life. Why we are killing people in Libya is a moral question. Why we were killing them in Afghanistan is a moral question. Why so many Canadians go hungry is a moral question. Sending the starving the occasional sandwich or inviting them to a social tea does nothing to deal with the cause of the problem.

For Christ's sake, help your people to understand what their faith means today.

Graeme

Is this not then the point at which you should be working to form an organized group of like-minded people (be they Christians, atheists or whatever)?   You see no such group already in Canada that appeals to you?

You need an organized group to try to force political changes.

I have spent my life in organized groups. I still do. I dearly wish one of them could be the United Church of Canada.

I think is it unrealistic to expect a church to get involved in politics at that level.   Of course, I have not been at UCC for decades so I don't know how they operate, I suppose they are a lot more active than the Orthodox churches (who carefully avoid all political issues).   Do you feel it is realistic but they are just not interested?

But on this site, you can certainly raise awareness.   I have put together a detailed post on child labour in Uzbekistan (no response so far, sad to say).  I did take me half an hour or so to put it together (of course I am on vacation and have the time).

A similar post on Haiti would be a big help.  (I know a lot about Central Asia as I have read a lot about it, I developed an interest in the area for some unknown reason) but I do not know enough about Haiti to be able to create such a post.  I have read many books on the Caucasus and Central Asia and followed the news from there for years.

It would take me a long time to build up that knowledge base for Haiti.  Do you have time to put up such a post?  OK, the problem with the inability to post links is a bummer.  I think it is something about your browser settings.   I will have to get involved in web-based programming in the near future (at my age!) so eventually I might be able to help.  You could try your local shop, if you can afford it.

The funny thing is, Graeme, that I see the UCC involved in the very things that you are ranting about.  Perhaps not to the degree that you think they should be, but it seems to me a lot more than you seem to think.  

Perhaps if you were not so negative, you would see that we are both on the same side.  

He is concerned about problems in foreign countries that are being aggravated by the wealthier countries.   I am just asking for some better documentation to raise people's awareness.

Seeler:  I mean no criticism of you.  You sound like a kind, caring Christian but everyone may not feel the call of Christianity in the same way.   Graeme's is not the same as yours, but I see no reason to criticize either of you.

Thank you, EasternOrthodox.   I realize that Graeme's zeal is not the same as mine - perhaps he is more focused.  But believe me, I am concerned about the same things Graeme is.   It is just that he attacks my church, accusing it of not doing anything about these very important matters, while I see the church doing a great deal.  And every thing I suggest, he claims is ineffective, worthless, not worth the effort.  I see us on the same side.  He doesn't.  And he insults every effort we make.  

Seeler - I know very well what the church is doing. And I know what it is NOT doing. The world is well into the greatest moral crisis in history.

I am not asking the church to take a stand. God forbid it should take a stand.

I am asking it to educate its people to see worldly events from a Christian perspective, and to act in what they then see to be a Christian way. Apparently, that is too much to ask. I note, Seeler, that you have the distinction to be one of the very few clergy even to respond to my posts.

Look. Canadian bombers are now killing civilians in Libya. It is not possible to bomb cities without killing civilians. This is our air force, committed by us, under orders from our government that we voted for. And we pay for the bombs. we are all killing people.

Are you seriously going to suggest that the church is somehow apart from all this?

I still think of that twit of a UC chaplain who told the press our soldiers in AFghanistan were doing an important job. What job? For whom? Afghanistan didn't attack us. It didn't attack the US, either. We attacked it. Why? And if the people of Afghanistan really want us there, how come this war didn't end ten years ago? Exactly what is this "important job" we have been doing?

The western economies are dying because of corrupt governments and greedy corporations. In the US alone, tens of millions have no hope of employment.

Does it not occur to you that there is a moral and spiritual dimension to this?  Here in New Brunswick, dozens of poverty stricken seniors have just been kicked out of retirement homes so that Irving oil won't have to pay taxes. You want to read a Psalm to them?

Frankly, at times like this, I have no interest in sitting in a pew to listen to somebody babble about the precise meaning of murder in the year 5000 BC.

EO - I understand that you don't think we can do anything about it. So, if you're not going to do anything, wouldn't it be a good idea to get out of the way?

I think the odds against us doing anything are enormous. But whatever happens, I don't plan to sit around doing nothing but clapping hands for Jesus.

Okay, Graeme, I understand your zeal but  would you tell us what you are doing and not what others aren't doing?

There are two ways of looking at helping someone:  

1) giving them immediate, direct aid for the time being (such as helping Haiti after the earthquake)

2) trying to help them at a higher level, which can perhaps be broken down further

2a) correcting obvious injustices are being perpetrated by the wealthy world

2b) helping them change their society to make it more equitable.

I think we can all agree on 1).

2b) Is this even feasible?   Well, that is a controversial topic.  After WW II, Germany and Japan went from being militaristic and aggressive to peaceful and productive.  But I would argue that most of the help (like the Marshall plan) was more type 1).   

The countries lay in ruins.  The institutions were destroyed.   But these countries could also be viewed as basically sound, but they went off on the wrong tack.   It took the Allies years to dislodge Germany and the Japanese were equally determined.  

So these were societies that already knew how to pull together as a group, how to industrialize, modernize; they were dynamic and wanted to get ahead.  It was just a question of applying enough help so that no one starved, and the countries did the rest themselves.

With Afghanistan, the society is totally different.  It has a very mountainous geography is broken up into groups, some of whom speak different languages, some of whom may be Shiite rather than Sunni.  The country has never had a strong central government.  People tend owe their allegiance to their group first of all.

So here we are, telling this society that is very, very different from us, "well, you should be just like us."   And it is not working.   And I don't think we should be telling them that at all.   

Then there is 2a).  

I think this Graeme's focus (correct me if I am wrong).

My example was the child labour in Uzbekistan.  We, the members of the wealthy world, can say, we won't buy clothes made of your cotton. This requires an organized movement to spread awareness and get the clothing companies on board.

So how much sort of thing can we do?   There are so many issues, so little time.   ​I put up a post on it on this site, there is not much more I can do (follow the link to find the companies pledging not to use Uzbek cotton).

I suppose a person could put a poster at their church about it.  What else can we do?

Over to you, Graeme.

GRAEME

I typed out a long response to you on "Wall St" thread but the system is acting up and it is not showing up,

I have cut and pasted into a document,  I will try again later.  Perhaps best to wait till they do their maintenance.

I will read over the Democracy Now site.

Woman up against the Wahl ... she could stand some crumbs of thought to help get her around the situation ... sort of like that one with pups under the table. Christ who saw that while the powerful were taking everything away for the benefit of the manipulators of the shackles?

And from Romans 14:13 ...

... make up your mind not to put any stumbling block, or obstacle in your brother's way. 

Is this stumbling block or a foundation stone of a physical empire? No state of heaven ... functioning state of mind that is aware and thinking? Heh, mon do as your directed ...

Yes my Lord! Isn't that a devil of a statement to make in the Eire of business as idealism? Enough to warp space ... change an Ares thought!

Enough to make the powers giggle on both sides of the competition ... which will win ... the emotions or the secondary power ... following thought when the whole table collapses with what was bred without thought ... des Mos unusual creatures contained on clockwork orange ... mechanical thought that can't get outside the box? Some desire for the other required ... reverential relevance? That's intercourse ... of the verbal sort ... action of the ghosty kind ... flying words without effect on a people that hears nothing sees nothing say's little ... silent majority about to burst? They darsent breathe a word amongst the powers ... they'll be cut down ... look at the poor juice in Europe and the Kennedy brothers standing up against the American Mafiosa ... He, man you must hide your love away ... in ridiculous poesy? Thats' de Black Lil'eth ... pollination of the word? ß'Ithchy to Jeza B'elle ... the overly busy mind that missed ID all ... didn't see IT coming ... mire Egos?

H'anna'h reflection on how not to do it from a future perspective we can't see ... no visionaries ... not a scrap of dream? Just living in the pre sence mon ...

Where are you Graeme?. What are you personally doing?

But Graeme I see the church doing exactly what you say it should be doing.  I remember the church protesting the war in Afghanstan before it started.  I don't think it has changed its mind.   Nor do I need to say over and over again that the church is concerned about the elderly and the poor and the disadvantaged in this country as well.  And we know that when you bomb cities you bomb civilians.    And I, for one (and a member of the UCC) don't approve.  

As for whether prayer helps - I don't know.  I am quite certain that prayer helps the one doing the praying.  And it seems to me that it helps individuals who know that they are being prayed for.  Beyond that - I don't know.  I don't think this is something that can be proven one way or another.   But I don't see it hurting either.  But my experience is that usually when you pray for something, you also work for it.  Praying for peace doesn't mean that we are not working for peace.

Seeler, I am not interested in the CHURCH taking stands.  I am interested in a church that educates its people to understand what is going on and on how to deal with it in a Christian context.

 What people decide is up to them. It's up to the church to open the issues to them, and to lead discussion of the spiritual implications.

And I don't mean just to give sermons about how evil Moslems are. I mean to discuss why we are killing Libyans, why Haiti is poor, why millions of Americans have lost their homes, why senior are kicked out of retirement homes in New Brunswick....

Perhaps people will decide it's okay for Christians to kill Libyan civilians, keep Haiti in poverty, kick people out of their homes....  But I would like to see people discussing the killing and the greed - the real, everday stuff - and satisfy themselves that this is the Christian thing to do.

Crazy heart, I think I have answered your irrelevant question before. I have spent a good half of my life in volunteer work, some of it quite strenuous. Have you ever had a mob looking for you? Have you ever been in a prison room with no guard, discussing stuff with 25 murderers? I did that at the request of National Black Coalition.

Now, retired, I have a daily blog which explains to readers how journalists often act as propagandists. It takes a good hour to write the blog - and two hours at least every day to research it. You can see it if you google Graeme Decarie Moncton. It should be the first site that pops up. It's called The Moncton Times and Transcript - good and bad.

I spent all day Saturday at Occupy Moncton. I was also there for several hours on Sunday. Today, I gave a tent, and a camp stove, to kids who are staying overnight at the site. (They are not hippies or carefree college kids. They are unemployed, broke, and without hope.)

I teach a writing class to seniors. I run a current events group. (I had one in Montreal for fifteen years that drew 200 to 300 every month. Over the years, I have given volunteer time to work with motorcycle gangs and street gangs. In Montreal, I was asked to (and did) speak to an average of 60 groups a year. I have been a Sunday School teacher. I have often led a service, sometimes doubling as organist. I have run a very active church outreach programme in a church in Montreal. I have served on regional church boards..

I have been chairman of a province-wide rights group, and some fifteen years on its executive. I have been several  years on the board of a national, academic group.

So, crazy heart, what do you do?
 

I applaud your activism.  

All I am asking for is a post about Haiti like the one I did about Uzbekistan.   Just one issue, just one country.   You have to start somewhere.

Or am I missing something here?  Are you calling for revolution?

Not enough, obviously.

If I may be so bold to suggest that I understand what Graeme is saying and offer a suggestion.  Graeme, I know will correct me if I am wrong.

The issue of aid is so big that the placement of that burden can no longer be on the individual whether that be a person or group.  There are incredible individuals out there doing good work - one woman raised 12 million dollars for African women.  There are good organizations working to help a myriad of those in need.

But the need is bigger than individuals.  It requires a grander concentrated effort of governments, business and organizations working to see the big picture - the entire planet.  It requires every one to see how their actions impact on others.  It needs a return to a sense of community, both local and global.

The continued criticism about OWS is that there are too many groups but that is in fact its beauty.  All those different groups have joined together.  They created a community; one that is both local and global.

The UCC is a broad collection of individual churches, some of those churches do good work but some do not.  Graeme has seen those latter churches.  I have seen those churches.  Others should not deny their existence.  What is being suggested is that there be a stronger - united - statement made against the people and practices that destroy communities, in particular war and poverty, that go against the teachings of Christ. 

The practices are carried out by governments and businesses.  Those entities are populated by individuals, individuals who have a voice, who have authority and influence and some of those individuals go to church so in turn those churches are promoting or condoning the practices.

Sadly I have to dash and I may not explained this as clearly as I would have liked but consider the following....

Imagine if every Christian on this planet followed the two commandments of Christ.  Imagine if every "Christian" politician and corporate executive followed those two.  What would our world look like, then.

LB

-------------------

The Christian ideal has not been tried and found wanting. It has been found difficult and left untried.

     G. K. Chesterton

Good post, Muskoka.  

Is there a flaw in all-that-is? That would be God as Love ...

As the book says love would drive a wedge between mother, father siblings and all else ... is there another side to this wisdom? Must be out there... it's a stretch folks ... X'Pan sieve ...

AID (n.):

1. the art of expiating a troubled conscience without diminishing one’s advantage over another person or group. An example is the widespread practice in the West of supporting the careers of professional fundraisers by giving them money, particularly at times of intensified consumerism, like Christmas. [see also: charity].
2. “International aid” is a special case, a term referring to the extension of national hegemony by providing a weaker, poorer power with goods or services in ways that increase their dependence on the stronger nation. Common examples would be through the extension of de facto monopolies: a) the provision of crop varieties subject to genetic patents held by the donor country or its corporate citizens and for which the donor country has market dominance; b) assistance rendered a poorer country to develop resources in low cost ways that would conflict with environmental and employee protection legislation and statutes relating to human rights in the wealthier country; c) the provision of armaments for which the donor country is the sole source of spare parts and engineering expertise, and embroiling the recipient country in wars that provide a test-bed for the weaponry and ensure an ongoing demand. [see also: imperialism]

Mike - how would you classify providing equipment to dig a well for fresh clean water that can be pumped by hand, or by a simple plump powered by an oxen, or a dog, or by children pushing a 'merry-go-round' on a school playground.

Or medical people volunteering to spend three months at a time in a third world hospital,

Or optometrists donating time to sort donated eye-glasses and take them to countries where people line up to get a pair of glasses that will help them see, 

Or experts in search and rescue who go immediately to areas of disasters and assist in digging people out from collapsed building, transporting them to hospitals, where other volunteers provide medical aid,

Or asking the local people what they need to educate their children and then working with them to build schools out of local materials that meet local needs.  

I agree that too much of what we donate in good faith as aid goes to other purposes, like:

supporting the agency that is doing the collecting

pushing a particular religion with no respect for the religion or cultural values of the recipients

having an agenda to build trade for the benefit of the country giving the aid

providing arms and people to provide security and protection for the 'powers that be', rather than food, shelter and opportunities for the people

protecting our own interests.

But surely we must be able to do something right.   If not, we might as well sit back and do nothing - and then be condemned for our indifference to the suffering of others.

If "aid" really means "aid" how come there's still so much poverty, misery, war and powerlessness in the world. There are some wonderful stories of one-offs and many dedicated people working selflessly for peace, justice and and end to poverty but bigger power games seem too often to put fences around the range of possible outcomes.

I'm not a complete cynic, but I do believe credulity often rules... and credulity helps clear paths for exploitation.

We should not always condescend and assume people cannot help themselves.   Here is an encouraging article about how in Senegal, woman are just rebelling against female genital cutting.  There was some initial out-of-the-box thinking a few people (2 from the West, but one a local imam), but it seems to be spreading through the country on its own.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/16/world/africa/movement-to-end-genital-c...

The change is happening without the billions of dollars that have poured into other global health priorities throughout the developing world in recent years...

...

​An improbable collection of characters shaped Tostan’s methods: Molly Melching, a friendly, irrepressible educator from Illinois; Demba Diawara, a revered imam from a Senegalese village; and Gerry Mackie, a political theorist and associate professor at the University of California, San Diego.

Ms. Melching, 61, came to Senegal as an exchange student when she was 24 and never left, working with street children for the Peace Corps, devising a rural education program in a village where she lived in the 1980s, and starting Tostan 20 years ago. The group aims broadly to improve health and spread awareness of human rights. Women in village classes themselves raised the issue of genital cutting. They told of daughters and sisters who had hemorrhaged and sometimes died from botched circumcisions.

In 1997, women in the village of Malicounda Bambara declared their determination to end the practice — a stand that made news.        

....

​So Mr. Diawara, 77, visited the 10 intermarrying villages of his extended family. He won over the village chiefs and convinced imams that there was no religious requirement for cutting, which predates Islam by centuries. He was tactful, never using the term “female genital mutilation,” but he explained its consequences. At his family’s annual council, the villages agreed to give up the tradition and in 1998 held what is believed to have been Africa’s first collective abandonment....

But it is getting better.  Slowly but the trend is positive.  (Now, global warming may erase all that, I admit).  China, where some 30 million people died in a man-made famine in Mao's Great Leap Forward, are pulling themselves out of poverty.

A tiny city-state, Singapore, erased corruption and built a prosperous place.

India is doing better too.  

I do not mean to suggest there are no problems--of course there are--but at least at the moment, there are also success stories.  (I worry about current economic crisis, being badly mismanaged by EU politicians).

Look.. Corporations are not going to deliver aid. That is not what they exist for. They exist to make profits. Nothing else. Drug companies do not exist to discover cures. They exist to sell pills - and it's not at all the same thing., To talk about working with corporations to change the world is nonsense. Much of the poverty in the world is created by corporations.

No, I will not give a list of items to read. Use google. I am not going to spend my days looking up the truth about Haiti. I've done it. My experience is that nobody pays the slightest attention to the sources. Google the misery in Guatemala, in Congo. It's CAUSED by corporations.

And it is dodging the bullet to say that people can help themselves. How does a starving person in Somalia help himself? How does a Haitian living in a tent help himself - with US troops watching him? How does a worker in a Congolese mine help himself when he works for close to nothing for a Canadian mining company that hires armed thugs to watch him?

Aid is not simply about giving things. It's about changing the conditions that make them poor and exploited.

Those conditions are usually caused by us - and by our economic leadership. There's reason why Iraq is poor, filled with widows and orphans and sick and ruins. And the reason is not because Saddam was a bad man. It's because very wealthy people wanted the oil. You can send all the aid packages you like. They will not make a dent because you are not dealing with the problem.

Private business must be brought under control. Only we can do it. The only way we can do it is by our wishes working through a democracy that governs as we wish it to.

Is that revolutionary? Of course. Any fundamental change is revolutionary. The advent of public education was revolutionary. The invention of the contraceptive pill was revolutionary. The abolition of slavery was revolutionary.

The takeover of the state by corporations has been revolutionary.

The teaching of Jesus was revolutionary.

Why do so many people  - particularly clergy - seem to think that democracy is a dirty word?

I have to admit, I seem to have wasted my time with my Uzbekistan thread.

I did not say people could always help themselves.  I just wanted to put in a positive story to try to diminsh in the apocalyptic, millennial type thinking that you seem to have fallen into.

I won't try any more quote/responses lest my post go into limbo again.

Responding to your quote from my e-mail caused by my post going into iimbo:

If Lehmann Brothers knew what they were doing, why did let themselves go bankrupt?   I admit, the bailout of Bear Sterns in June of that year set a very bad precedent.  (The much reviled WSJ takes that position also, it was a bad move).

But the least Lehmann could have done between June and September is dumped their subprime-backed bonds --but they didn't.

JPMorgan did figure it out, as I mentioned.  

But the proof that they did not all know was in the amount of short sales pre-crisis (Sept 2008).  A few people figured it out and started shorting construction companies, the sleazy mortgage companies, etc.   A few people got quite rich that way.  Not many went that route--why not if they knew exactly what they were doing?

Short-selling was temporarily banned after the Sept 2008 crisis broke.  Once it broke, everyone wanted to get on board.  Thus they could not all have known about it before. 

And another thing: what is the deal with the EU?   WSJ had an article this morning saying a realistic write-down of the Greek debt could be as high as 70%.   EU won't admit it, they are kicking the can down the road, stalling, delaying.

Why?  Lots of EU banks have exposure to Greek bonds and they are worried about the affect of a big write-down on those banks.  They see a repeat of Lehmann and are in a panic.

Yet the longer they delay, the longer the people of Greece suffer under impossible "austerity measures."  

Whose fault is this?  The banks?  This is not quite like the subprime in the US, where it  should have been obvious about the subprime bonds and the argument about corporate greed is more compelling.  

It was much less obvious about the Greek bonds, especially after it turned out Greece had been reporting inaccurate data for quite some time.  

apocalytic? Yes, in a way. Before your eyes, the western empire which has stood 600 years is crumbling. The west, led by the US,  has clearly decided the solution is to use military power while we still have it. And that is despite the enormous killing and the risks of greater war that incurs.

Yeah. I guess that has a touch of the apocalypse about it. No, I don't think there is anything Biblical about this. We have created it.

 You don't need sources. All you need is to open your eyes.

I know it's comforting to think it will all be fine. I know we all work hard at kidding ourselves. I know we all think it couldn't happen here.

But it is happening. Corporations, which have no souls, however much they may be "persons" have overwhelmed our society. That has happened here. That's not an extreme or panicy opinion. That's the reality we are watching.

Look at Stephen Harper's legislative agenda. Guess where his financial support comes from. Look at how the winner of the Nobel peace prize has pursued more wars than any president in history. Guess where his money comes from.

It's hard, I know. but open your eyes and see what is there.

Yes, graeme, corporation are soulless entities, motivated solely by the profit motive. Marx predicted the downfall of capitalism a century ago, but it should be obvious to everyone that making more and more money, and using it to make ever more money, solely for the purpose of personal enrichment, doesn't work in the long run.

In nature, the individual organism exists for its individual wellbeing as well as the wellbeing of the whole. The individual gives itself to the whole and thereby enriches the whole as well as all individuals within the whole. To think that the individual can enrich itself at the expense of other individuals or the whole is shortsighted, stupid, and, in the long run, suicidal. 

So you have not read any Darwin?   Don't believe in evolution?   Darwin's story is quite different than your viewpoint.

I am not suggesting that world states should operate on Darwinian principles, but your statement about "nature" is very misleading (unless, of course, you don't believe in evolution)

This, frankly, is where the modern world has gone wrong.

Corporations are not soulless.  They are controlled and populated by people and those people are motivated by the acceptance of the culture - ie the other people - around them purchasing their product. 

Creating some mythical corporate entity is what permits those real human beings within the corporation to abdicate their responsibilities; moral, ethical and legal.  This ethos then permeates into the larger culture.

All larger organizations are at risk from this, governments, business and, yes, religious denominations.  The individuals claim they have no control and, therefore, no responsibility over the actions of their "leaders"; the leaders claim they have no control and, therefore, no responsibility for the actions of their "employees".  Finally there is the consumer of all these products who claim they have no control and no responsibility so they keep buying the products that create the corporation, government or church.

At some point that cycle has to break and the lynch pin to a capitalistic corporate foundation is the consumer.  The consumer fuels the leaders of corporate, government and religious communities.  If that huge, very soul filled, entity of consumer power was motivated by morality and ethics the rest well follow.

Human beings have created this mess and human beings are responsible for cleaning it up.

LB

--------------------------

We all participate in weaving the social fabric; we should therefore all participate in patching the fabric when it develops holes.

      Anne C. Weisberg

Muskoka - what if the individuals who 'own' the organizations are also the customers?   What if control of the organization is from the ground up?  

Like in the UCC where the people in the pews choose someone from among them to represent them in the courts of the church - and the people in the pews are also the consumers who decide who to call as their minister and then decide whether they will support this minister and this congregation with their presence and their offerings.  

Or a Co op grocery store where the members elect their board of directors who 'run'  the non-profit organization.  And where these members are also the consumers who decide what items they want on the shelves and in the bins (locally grown produce whenever possible) and what they will buy - and where they have a say at at the front desk, the board of directors (from their own neighbourhood), in the suggestion box, and at the annual meeting.   

Seeler, IMO, that is the way the world should operate and those are the companies that consumers should support.  The question is are consumers supporting them?

I believe in both democracy and capitalism as systems because they are the only systems available that offer  *choice*.  With choice comes responsibility and one responsibility is recognizing that my choices affect my community, the country and world.  Where I choose to shop, bank, live and who I vote for impacts not only on me but my neighbours.  The choice is mine.

I have no desire to impose my choices on you or anyone else.  However I will remind people they are *all* part of the process.  If people do not want greed and destruction to be a defining part of their culture they must look at the organizations they contribute to and I don't mean charitable ones, I mean corporate and governmental organizations.

In the end our choices shape our life and our world.  I am suggesting that people make informed and responsible ones.

LB

----------------------------------

We stand now where two roads diverge. But unlike the roads in Robert Frost's familiar poem, they are not equally fair. The road we have long been traveling is deceptively easy, a smooth superhighway on which we progress with great speed, but at its end lies disaster. The other fork of the road -- the one less traveled by -- offers our last, our only chance to reach a destination that assures the preservation of the earth.

      Rachel Carson

Oh. LBm ...

We appear to be a social form of blind followers ... pin heads?

Is this how God puts his emotion in space ... like a spectre of porcupine pie ... thas cool ...

Hard on the said Eire tho' ... there's a feast by an unknown power ... learning from our mistakes? Symbol of the greater mind as solo out there?

What, another dimension unconscious to mortals? 

Perhaps we should watch where we step ... go barefoot even ... so you could feel your way along a rough passage ...

Mankind would rather delusion ... thus the message on the Wahl is unnoticed!

Hi EasternOrthodox:

You don't mean the pseudo science known as "Social Darwinism," do you?

If I look at nature, then it seems obvious to me that the great diversity of plant and animal life is due to individual organisms having laid down their lives to enable other organisms to thrive.

Most of Canada was a gravel desert after the ice retreated about ten-thousand years ago, but countless plants have since laid down their lives so that the top soil is now one to several feet deep. Because of this, plant and animal life became ever richer and more diverse with the passage of time.

In a mere one-hundred years of exploitative farming, human selfishness has destroyed much of the top soil that was laid down over ten-thousand years of organisms giving themselves selflessly to the whole.

My Credit Union offers "Ethical Mutual Funds." It would be easy to legislate that all consumer products be labeled according to their ethical origin, for instance: "Produced without exploiting either humans or animals,  in an environmentally save and sustainable manner, observing principles of social justice and equality."

Fair Trade rather than Free Trade.