My loose interpretation of Maslow's hierarchy of needs: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maslow's_hierarchy_of_needs is that only people who have reached the top of the pyramid can really be concerned about and work towards making real positive change in the lives of others. However those lower needs are met; whether by tangible means, or by faith in God to meet those needs, or by a zen-like denial that they are needs; I think that (most) people who are able to focus on making positive change are ones who are not focused on meeting the needs farther down in the pyramid. Affluency allows people's lower level needs to be met; so, how do we Educate and Movtivate affluent people so they can begin to make postitive change?
Not to long ago in the history of America, many of our ancestors did not have their lower-level needs met. They suffered through the Great Depression, or they suffered through the upheaval of the South and discrimination, or just suffered to do a little better than their poor parents did. Many of today's affluent people don't have to look too far back into their histories to find relatives who were barely feeding themselves and their families. So, why do their affluent children and grandchildren not realize the good they can do?
Is one reason that the values they have been taught by their parents, the culture, and the church, do not glorify sufffering and self-sacrifice but rather safety, comfort and self-sufficiency? The 'Greatest Generation' suffered greatly and sacrificed much; but rather than teaching their children the value in suffering and self-sacrifice, they protected them and tried to 'provide' them with a 'better life'.
How do we protect our children today from suffering and self-sacrifice and instead try to provide them with a better life? How are our misguided principles of 'giving' (too many presents that are too expensive) and providing (cell phones, cars, even college tuition) teaching kids the wrong values, or robbing them of values all together?
A book I read not to long ago was written by a psychologist who treated the kids of affluent parents, and she talks about how these kids never learn to know themselves or fully develop values: http://search.barnesandnoble.com/booksearch/results.asp?WRD=the+price+of+privilege&z=y
However, very wealty families who have had wealth for generations often are very committed to doing good with their wealth: Barron Hilton, Paris's grandad, just dedicated 97% of his vast wealth to charity: http://www.people.com/people/article/0,,20168283,00.html
Ditto Warren Buffet: read his comments here: http://money.cnn.com/2006/06/25/magazines/fortune/charity2.fortune/index.htm
Some good stuff seems to be going on here too: http://www.gatesfoundation.org/AboutUs/WorkingWithUs/GettingInvolved/default.htm
There are people at all levels doing good. How can we get more people doing good? By teaching them about what's wrong, sure, but also by teaching them to value doing good. And, I'd say, by teaching them that doing good fits in with the values they already have and are not in opposition to those values. And, by giving them easy small steps to get started with, so they don't feel like giving up before they even get started. By showing them how they can do good as they struggle to meet their various personal needs on Maslow's pyramid. By chipping away in whatever ways we can and by never alienating any group; not big companies (who are really just big groups of people, some of them vary powerful and some of them making minimum wage) not government (another group of people, some of them very powerful and some just getting by).
I'm reading another great book right now: Collapse by Jared Diamond, author of Guns, Germs and Steel. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collapse:_How_Societies_Choose_to_Fail_or_Succeed
I got interested in it after reading about the Demographic Transition Model: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographic_transition and thinking about why some societies succeed while others fail.
Thoughts, anyone?
Monday, January 14, 2008
Tuesday, January 8, 2008
A Claiborne Quote
"...we got further and further from Jesus' vision, which extends beyond our rational love and the boundaries we have established. There is no doubt that we must mourn thouse lives lost on September 11th. We must mourn the lives of the soldiers. But with the same passion and outrage, we must mourn the lives of every Iraqi who is lost. They are just as precious, no more, no less. In our rebirth, every life lost in Iraq is just as tragic as a life lost in New York or D.C. And the lives of the thrity thousand children who die of starvation each day is like six Sptember 11ths every single day, a silent tsunami that happens every week."
---Shane Claiborne, The Irresistible Revolution
---Shane Claiborne, The Irresistible Revolution
Discouraging Relinquishment, part 2
I know that orphanages have come up against this problem. I know that AHOPE has started a program to help the parents, or grandparents care for their kids as they would. They provide daycare, and food, and education and medication, and everything that they would provide for the children in their care, only they get to go home to their relatives at night. (please, someone, correct me if i'm wrong on my understanding of this).
I love this. I love this solution. I want to be a part of it. I don't want to encourage young moms to give up their babies. I want to help educate them on how to keep them healthy, and provide them the means neccessary to do so. It breaks my heart to hear of relinquishment that is neccessary because of lack of finances or fear of contracting HIV. I want to be a part of helping families stay together.
But, there are lots of reasons that this can't always happen. Many mothers and grandmothers are sick themselves, and have many children, and have no means to support them. So much needs to be done.
The question we are asking is 'where do we begin'. We are beginning by adopting two...but, as my momma said 'that won't solve all the problems' No. It won't. But it will change forever the lives of those two I say. But, I believe it's just a beginning. Where do we go from here? How else to help? How do we challenge others to play a role? What is our next step? Will we start an orphanage? Will we begin a program, like the one above? Both? What is next for us, oh God? Show us. Lead us. Help us follow you...and bring others along...
I love this. I love this solution. I want to be a part of it. I don't want to encourage young moms to give up their babies. I want to help educate them on how to keep them healthy, and provide them the means neccessary to do so. It breaks my heart to hear of relinquishment that is neccessary because of lack of finances or fear of contracting HIV. I want to be a part of helping families stay together.
But, there are lots of reasons that this can't always happen. Many mothers and grandmothers are sick themselves, and have many children, and have no means to support them. So much needs to be done.
The question we are asking is 'where do we begin'. We are beginning by adopting two...but, as my momma said 'that won't solve all the problems' No. It won't. But it will change forever the lives of those two I say. But, I believe it's just a beginning. Where do we go from here? How else to help? How do we challenge others to play a role? What is our next step? Will we start an orphanage? Will we begin a program, like the one above? Both? What is next for us, oh God? Show us. Lead us. Help us follow you...and bring others along...
Discouraging Relinquishment
January 6, 2008 1:42 PM
KayakGirl said...
I'm reading Tom Brokaw's book about the 60s, 'Boom', and he talks about how aid to blacks in the 50s-60s undermined the black family structure. It removed the historical 'grandma' structure by saying mothers couldn't get aid if they were living at home with their moms. How can we avoid undermining traditional Ethiopian family structures while providing aid to them? I read lots of TINMWY (edited by Angela to let you know that she's referring to the book There is No Me Without You by Melissa Fay Greene) over the weekend and read again and again about aunts, grandmas, dropping off babies at the orphanages b/c they couldn't afford to care for them, or because they didn't want them out of fear of aids. How can we keep those babies at home with their relatives and encourage the families to raise them?
KayakGirl said...
I'm reading Tom Brokaw's book about the 60s, 'Boom', and he talks about how aid to blacks in the 50s-60s undermined the black family structure. It removed the historical 'grandma' structure by saying mothers couldn't get aid if they were living at home with their moms. How can we avoid undermining traditional Ethiopian family structures while providing aid to them? I read lots of TINMWY (edited by Angela to let you know that she's referring to the book There is No Me Without You by Melissa Fay Greene) over the weekend and read again and again about aunts, grandmas, dropping off babies at the orphanages b/c they couldn't afford to care for them, or because they didn't want them out of fear of aids. How can we keep those babies at home with their relatives and encourage the families to raise them?
Continuing the Conversation...
It breaks my heart to think we need to appeal to people's selfish "how will it benefit me" desires in order for them to make change. I believe that people all have a need to help others...and that intrinsic need could motivate them to do good, without us having to appeal to the inner beast, if they would only listen to their conscious.
As I was reading God's word this morning, crying out to Him to show us His plan for us... really asking Him what our next steps are, in detail, He responded by leading me to this:
"...anyone who is willing to hear should listen and understand! And be sure to pay attention to what you hear. The more you do thins, the more you will understand--and even more, besides. To those who are open to my teaching, more understanding will be given. But to those who are not listening, even what they have will be taken away from them." Jesus, as recorded in Mark Chapter 4, verses 23-25
I agree that it might motivate some to help others for the sole purpose of helping themselves. Many good deeds are done as a result of selfish desires... and it doesn't at all negate the good deed... I believe God puts desires in some that would not normally be there, to help His children in need. For example, many adoptions have began as a result of infertile couples. The children they adopt are blessed to have parents, they are blessed to have a child...everyone wins. Would they have had a heart for adoption if they hadn't been infertile? Maybe... maybe not. Either way, their desire to have children was what called them to adopt in the first place (in some cases...not all. I know there are those out there that want to adopt for the sake of adopting...) Don't get me wrong. Please. I think it's wonderful when children get adopted for whatever reason... I promise. I'm just saying that it seems like God often uses infertility to bring about His plan for adoption. I've witnessed this over and over again. Can't get pregnant...adopt. Have a baby naturally. Adopt again...have another one or two or three... Love it. Adopt. It doesn't matter to me where the motivation began. Good is being done. Hallelujah!
But, it somehow seems a lot different to me for God to put those desires in people, than it does for us as humans to try to manipulate people into doing good for their own benefit. "Help others so that you can gain", is not a thing that I want to encourage. At. All. It seems contrary to Jesus' teaching that whoever loses his life for his sake, will gain it.
I believe (at least I want to believe) that if people were aware of needs, and aware of a way that they could fit into the solution, that they would want to help. After being informed, I feel like I can't go on living without doing something to be a part of the solution, and I don't think I am special. I think that I'm just beginning to be informed. I think that if people were educated on the issue at hand...if those issues were told in stories of real people, than people would be compelled to respond. I think that if we begin to speak through how and what we purchase, that the big companies will be forced to listen, and act accordingly. Buying free trade coffee, for example...I haven't started yet...but I'm looking into it. I want to be an informed consumer, but I'm not. I think its just 'too much work' for others to bother looking into it. It's too overwhelming when people hear about poverty, or the environment, or the HIV crisis... they don't know even where to begin...so they don't. I don't think it is because people (or even companies) don't want to help... I think it's because no one has presented the story to them yet and ask them to audition for a part. I want to do that. I don't know how...but I want to...
As I was reading God's word this morning, crying out to Him to show us His plan for us... really asking Him what our next steps are, in detail, He responded by leading me to this:
"...anyone who is willing to hear should listen and understand! And be sure to pay attention to what you hear. The more you do thins, the more you will understand--and even more, besides. To those who are open to my teaching, more understanding will be given. But to those who are not listening, even what they have will be taken away from them." Jesus, as recorded in Mark Chapter 4, verses 23-25
I agree that it might motivate some to help others for the sole purpose of helping themselves. Many good deeds are done as a result of selfish desires... and it doesn't at all negate the good deed... I believe God puts desires in some that would not normally be there, to help His children in need. For example, many adoptions have began as a result of infertile couples. The children they adopt are blessed to have parents, they are blessed to have a child...everyone wins. Would they have had a heart for adoption if they hadn't been infertile? Maybe... maybe not. Either way, their desire to have children was what called them to adopt in the first place (in some cases...not all. I know there are those out there that want to adopt for the sake of adopting...) Don't get me wrong. Please. I think it's wonderful when children get adopted for whatever reason... I promise. I'm just saying that it seems like God often uses infertility to bring about His plan for adoption. I've witnessed this over and over again. Can't get pregnant...adopt. Have a baby naturally. Adopt again...have another one or two or three... Love it. Adopt. It doesn't matter to me where the motivation began. Good is being done. Hallelujah!
But, it somehow seems a lot different to me for God to put those desires in people, than it does for us as humans to try to manipulate people into doing good for their own benefit. "Help others so that you can gain", is not a thing that I want to encourage. At. All. It seems contrary to Jesus' teaching that whoever loses his life for his sake, will gain it.
I believe (at least I want to believe) that if people were aware of needs, and aware of a way that they could fit into the solution, that they would want to help. After being informed, I feel like I can't go on living without doing something to be a part of the solution, and I don't think I am special. I think that I'm just beginning to be informed. I think that if people were educated on the issue at hand...if those issues were told in stories of real people, than people would be compelled to respond. I think that if we begin to speak through how and what we purchase, that the big companies will be forced to listen, and act accordingly. Buying free trade coffee, for example...I haven't started yet...but I'm looking into it. I want to be an informed consumer, but I'm not. I think its just 'too much work' for others to bother looking into it. It's too overwhelming when people hear about poverty, or the environment, or the HIV crisis... they don't know even where to begin...so they don't. I don't think it is because people (or even companies) don't want to help... I think it's because no one has presented the story to them yet and ask them to audition for a part. I want to do that. I don't know how...but I want to...
Worth a Posting...
A friend of mine... do you want to remain anonymous? Said this in the comment section... I think it deserves a post of it's own, so here it is:
KayakGirl said...
I was just looking at the emergent village blog. These are just my thoughts today, the first lines in the conversation, not the end of it. I think the concept is great, for a certain group of people who have been inside a certain culture that has approached solving a particular problem in a certain way that wasn't really working. I would summarize that certain way as this: we were trying to save the individuals and have come to realize that saving the individuals is not the end of the matter. I agree with that totally. Salvation is not only about the individual but about the community. Save a bunch of individuals and it should bring positive change not only to their lives but to the communities they live in. Now, I'd say that actually has been happening always, over time, but not wholistically 'and not enough. Communities of believers have protested against moral filth and such (what is taught in schools, shown on movie screens) but *some of those communities of believers* have not protested against hunger, poverty, pollution, etc. Other communities have.
About solving those problems, here's the struggle I have: many have attempted over time to 'solve' these problems; from the hippies of the 60s to Catholic nuns, i.e. Mother Teresa. So why does this kind of change not spread, take over and last? It makes me wonder.
Are they trying to make change from the outside in, instead of from the inside out? When I talk to Beck B. about trying to get people to recycle, I tell her that only a small proportion of society will ever be motivated by 'doing good' for others. She recycles b/c it is good to do so but she'll never get 90-100% of the population to be motivated by doing good for others. But if she can get them to see how they are doing good for themselves, then more people will participate. Companies in Chicago buy solar panels and sell the energy back to the grid not because it helps the environment but because it helps their bottom line.
From a poverty perspective, for example: when some people hear about 90% of the world's wealth being in the hands of 10%, and they are in that 10%, what is the average person's gut reaction? Relief that they are in the prosperous 10%, and fear that they'll somehow end up in the poor 90%. But if bringing the 90% into wealth just involves more opportunity for the 10% to sell their goods to the 90%, to expand their businesses, to have more and better 'human' resources to participate in their businesses....that is appealing.
It seems like some of the attempts to solve the worlds problems always set themselves up against the people in power to tell them that they are wrong. And you know what, they are wrong, but they have also done some things right, which is proven because they are successful. Big Business is not bad; big business without a conscience is bad. Wealth is not bad; wealth at the expense of others is bad. Talented people with a conscience who are within those powerful organizations of wealth, security, etc. are the prime people who can implement sustainable change. Big Business, Government, the military; we need people who understand what makes those powerful organizations tick to tell us how to make positive change from within the bastions of power.
What kinds of philanthropy does Bill Gates do? Warren Buffet? They do plenty, but what kinds? How can we channel the brilliant minds of those people to solve the world's problems? How can we get folks like them to bring others along?
I think it is human nature to want to rebel against establishment, rather than to take existing establishment and improve it. Martin Luther wanted to fix the Catholic establishment, not rebel against it, but look how it exploded into the ultimate rebellion in the Protestant Reformation (which, in all truth, had and has both good and bad aspects). If only we could find a way to strip out what is rotten without killing what is good, maybe we wouldn't always be 'starting over' and repeating these same cycles. Now it is Bono and Angelina Jolie; in the 80s it was We Are the World and FarmAid, in the 70s it was something else.....why do these things drop off and get picked up again later as if they are new?
I love that you and Marrty are so passionate about these issues. I love that your journey has brought you to these places and that you are looking for things you can do on a small scale and on a large scale. I'm thrilled to know you and to get to call you my close friends. I love the way you challenge me to think more deeply and turn things every which way. I love the way that you want to bring others along with you.
Ok, I'm stopping now. What are your thoughts?
KayakGirl said...
I was just looking at the emergent village blog. These are just my thoughts today, the first lines in the conversation, not the end of it. I think the concept is great, for a certain group of people who have been inside a certain culture that has approached solving a particular problem in a certain way that wasn't really working. I would summarize that certain way as this: we were trying to save the individuals and have come to realize that saving the individuals is not the end of the matter. I agree with that totally. Salvation is not only about the individual but about the community. Save a bunch of individuals and it should bring positive change not only to their lives but to the communities they live in. Now, I'd say that actually has been happening always, over time, but not wholistically 'and not enough. Communities of believers have protested against moral filth and such (what is taught in schools, shown on movie screens) but *some of those communities of believers* have not protested against hunger, poverty, pollution, etc. Other communities have.
About solving those problems, here's the struggle I have: many have attempted over time to 'solve' these problems; from the hippies of the 60s to Catholic nuns, i.e. Mother Teresa. So why does this kind of change not spread, take over and last? It makes me wonder.
Are they trying to make change from the outside in, instead of from the inside out? When I talk to Beck B. about trying to get people to recycle, I tell her that only a small proportion of society will ever be motivated by 'doing good' for others. She recycles b/c it is good to do so but she'll never get 90-100% of the population to be motivated by doing good for others. But if she can get them to see how they are doing good for themselves, then more people will participate. Companies in Chicago buy solar panels and sell the energy back to the grid not because it helps the environment but because it helps their bottom line.
From a poverty perspective, for example: when some people hear about 90% of the world's wealth being in the hands of 10%, and they are in that 10%, what is the average person's gut reaction? Relief that they are in the prosperous 10%, and fear that they'll somehow end up in the poor 90%. But if bringing the 90% into wealth just involves more opportunity for the 10% to sell their goods to the 90%, to expand their businesses, to have more and better 'human' resources to participate in their businesses....that is appealing.
It seems like some of the attempts to solve the worlds problems always set themselves up against the people in power to tell them that they are wrong. And you know what, they are wrong, but they have also done some things right, which is proven because they are successful. Big Business is not bad; big business without a conscience is bad. Wealth is not bad; wealth at the expense of others is bad. Talented people with a conscience who are within those powerful organizations of wealth, security, etc. are the prime people who can implement sustainable change. Big Business, Government, the military; we need people who understand what makes those powerful organizations tick to tell us how to make positive change from within the bastions of power.
What kinds of philanthropy does Bill Gates do? Warren Buffet? They do plenty, but what kinds? How can we channel the brilliant minds of those people to solve the world's problems? How can we get folks like them to bring others along?
I think it is human nature to want to rebel against establishment, rather than to take existing establishment and improve it. Martin Luther wanted to fix the Catholic establishment, not rebel against it, but look how it exploded into the ultimate rebellion in the Protestant Reformation (which, in all truth, had and has both good and bad aspects). If only we could find a way to strip out what is rotten without killing what is good, maybe we wouldn't always be 'starting over' and repeating these same cycles. Now it is Bono and Angelina Jolie; in the 80s it was We Are the World and FarmAid, in the 70s it was something else.....why do these things drop off and get picked up again later as if they are new?
I love that you and Marrty are so passionate about these issues. I love that your journey has brought you to these places and that you are looking for things you can do on a small scale and on a large scale. I'm thrilled to know you and to get to call you my close friends. I love the way you challenge me to think more deeply and turn things every which way. I love the way that you want to bring others along with you.
Ok, I'm stopping now. What are your thoughts?
Saturday, January 5, 2008
Here We Go...
Welcome to A Conversing Community. This blog was born out of a desire to converse with my friends about what community is...what God's Kingdom is... How we can live in it. How we can be a part of it. What it looks like, now. What it has looked like throughout HIStory. What His heart beats for. How we can feed the hungry, and clothe the naked, and parent the fatherless. How we can love God and love others. Come along. Here we go...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)