Thank you, Holy Father
I hear in the news that you are raising awareness about inequality, poverty, climate change, tolerance and inclusion, justice for all not impunity for some, and lobbying in the corridors of power. This is very encouraging to me, a missionary who went to one of the ends of the earth instead of keeping my career options open in the comforts of North America.
Inequality is the not just about which side of the tracks you are born on, it is about which continent you are born on. Some are luckier than others in this respect. But the Refugee Crisis in Europe is evidence that we cannot live in our palaces indefinitely, untouched. Remember Lazarus...
Poverty of course depends a bit on where you are. No one where I live sees me as poor, but I am told that what I earn here is now below the poverty line in Canada. And with the Rand sinking now to almost 14-to-1 to the US dollar, my prospects of retiring in Canada get dimmer. Never mind, I will remain here for "the duration" where ironically some people resent me for what they perceive as wealth.
On climate change, next month we are concluding a project that has trained 1000 youth to be green activists. We are bidding in a tender this month to deploy these youth as "contractors" for the next 3 years at 120 sites. Those projects can become "cash-for-work" channels for another 14 000 unemployed youth. It's astounding to me, like the 5 loaves and 2 fishes, but that is the directions things seem to be going in. Remind our North American prayer partners that as the West's carbon footprint has been so heavy for so long, they need to do proportionally more to conserve and to "live simply - so that others can simply live". Including the next few generations.
Your condolences to those who lost family members at Mecca was so apropos to your teaching and example. Way to go! Did you hear that no less than 8 police officers were convicted of murder for dragging Mido Macia to his death behind a police van? They said it was an accident. Foreigners are not treated as equals here, going back to the issue of inequality.
Forget the impunity of the past. It just makes matters worse, not better. If clergy are out of line, charge them. people in authority must be held accountable. This week on Sept 30th there is a March Against Corruption. It will be held at two venues - Pretoria and Capetown - concurrently. I will be there, singing "We are marching to Pretoria..." although it is now Tshwane. Ai ai ai.
And talk about lobbying in the corridors of power! You spoke to the US Congress? Wow, good form! We have to do that. But then you went to a lunch with poor people as well. That is what validates what you say to the shakers and the movers. We have to get used to dealing at both these levels. Service is not enough without advocacy. I remember hearing that the morning that Mother Theresa spoke to the United Nations General Assembly, she was washing toilets at the convent of her order. She did a lot of that task. It says a lot about her.
I am encouraged to hear what you are telling people in North America. It's precisely what I've been telling them for a long time. But it's better coming from you. That there is no point in "Ora" without "Labora".
Saturday, 28 November 2015
Friday, 27 November 2015
The State of the Non-State
Depending on your nationality and perspective, you may call C4L a “non-state actor”, or a “non-government organization”, or a “nonprofit”, or a “private voluntary organization”, or a “civil society organization”. What we once called “civil society” is now being called “civic space”. I learned this recently when I attended a briefing by CIVICUS, an international NGO, big brother to C4L – on the state of civil society. Its members large and small come from 165 countries so it operates on a scale that means that its research sets the “gold standard” for non-state actors like C4L. Some learning points from that briefing help me to update you on the state of C4L.
First there is the concern about “defending our space”. Or as CIVICUS puts it “a cynical raft of measures to shut them up and shut them down”. C4L‘s offices have been broken into five times over the past twelve months. In one such “burglary” they took our three cumbersome desk-top computers and left ten training laptops behind! Obviously they were after data not hardware. CIVICUS reports that 96 countries “significantly violated” civil space in 2014.
Then there was mention of a new award for “brave philanthropy” (to be added to the existing categories for the Nelson Mandela – Graca Machel Innovation Awards). C4L folklore includes a 2011 poster campaign which was aimed at the January murders. Every year since 1998 at least one whistle-blower was gunned down. Three lived, but 14 perished. So we designed a poster with the familiar face of Jimmy Mohlala (one of the 17) as a background screen, onto which the 17 names were listed, by year. The poster was titled 17 Reasons to Demand Transparency. That’s all. Not one January since, starting in 2012, has this re-occured. We cannot take all the credit for there were other measures including a once-off “Whistle-blowing Week” in November 2011 and a government enquiry. But we have to engage the powers. Service delivery is not enough – but it does validate our right to speak out with a prophetic voice.
I noted at the briefing that the ‘Right2Know’ campaign has documented at least 17 whistleblowers who, in 2014, lost their jobs, faced legal harassment or were killed because of attempts to expose corruption. Come to think of it, that was the year that C4L published a calendar on African Heroes of Faith. This tracked voices from Tertullian in North Africa to Tetane in South Africa, over 19 centuries. It was Tertullian in fact who famously wrote: “The blood of the martyrs is seed."
Talk show host Steve Allen said that in South Africa, checks and balances have a different meaning. “The Mafia and crooked businessmen make out cheques and the politicians and other compromised officials improve their bank balances.” This is a near and present danger.
CIVICUS makes another good point: “Domestic civil society does not have the capacity to defend itself against attacks on civic space if donors have systematically underinvested in local organizations.” This question of resourcing is a special focus of its 2014 report. And with good reason because of significant changes on the nonprofit’s compass. For example, The European Union is now the biggest donor of all (not USAID – which ironically emerged from the Marshall Plan to aid Europe after WWII). But another one is on the rise… can you believe that China used more cement in the 2011-2013 period than the USA used in the whole 20th century? I am old enough to remember widespread severe famine in China, forcing it to look outside its closed borders for wheat. Canada made a donation, but it was more than kindness! Within 20 years, China had become the biggest buyer of Canadian wheat, and by then more wheat was flowing west off the prairies than east, the traditional export route.
Recognizing that “aid” is not always altruistic, non-state actors get this good advice from CIVICUS: “CSOs need to develop the confidence to not seek funding from sources that compromise or cause excessive deviation from their missions.”
On this point I often cite the case of Candy Lightner founding MADD (Mothers Against Drunk Driving). “In 1980 Candy Lightner’s twelve-year-old daughter, Cari, was killed by a drunk driver – a repeat offender. Brought to trial, the driver was reprimanded and released. At the time, Lightner was a real estate agent in Sacramento, California. In her 1990 memoir, Giving Sorrow Words she wrote: “I promised myself on the day of Cari’s death that I would fight to make this needless homicide count for something positive in the years ahead.”
“MADD works through its chapters in all fifty states and ten Canadian provinces, and its many international affiliates. While drunk-driving fatalities have declined, MADD believes they remain unacceptably high, and so the organization continues its campaign to educate, prevent, deter and punish. It has caused judicial reforms throughout the United States. MADD helps victims, monitors the courts and works to pass stronger anti-drunk-driving legislation. With a worldwide reputation for vision and effective action, today’s MADD enjoys unprecedented success as a charitable organization.”
The irony is that Lightner resigned in protest some years later, because the focus of MADD was shifting to a stance against alcohol - against drinking. Some call this “mission-creep”. She objected, saying that drinking can even be good for you, the problem is abusing alcohol. It takes courage to engage the powers. And it takes courage to keep the tiller going straight ahead, even when tempted to chase resource flows in another direction.
This raises a phrase I learned at the CIVICUS briefing – “the tyranny of donors”. Apparently it was coined by the CEO of the Ford Foundation? This is not surprising when you learn that only 13% of ODA is allocated to non-state actors. And only 1% of that ODA arrives at “southern partners” like C4L. We are at the bottom of the food chain! The other 12% is spent on the “fundermediaries”. This explains why CIVICUS researchers are looking for “metrics” that are not simply “northern”. Its gold standard must strive to be relevant even in the South.
One of those metrics is Volunteering. Clearly this is very different in a context of high youth unemployment, that in the affluent North. One reason, for example, that American youth join the Peace Corps is because it is always a plus on your CV. Whereas youth in South Africa are “protected” from exploitation by labour laws that require employers to pay them a Stipend. These employers are of courses NGOs, NPOs, PVOs and CSOs. This is the state of the non-state.
First there is the concern about “defending our space”. Or as CIVICUS puts it “a cynical raft of measures to shut them up and shut them down”. C4L‘s offices have been broken into five times over the past twelve months. In one such “burglary” they took our three cumbersome desk-top computers and left ten training laptops behind! Obviously they were after data not hardware. CIVICUS reports that 96 countries “significantly violated” civil space in 2014.
Then there was mention of a new award for “brave philanthropy” (to be added to the existing categories for the Nelson Mandela – Graca Machel Innovation Awards). C4L folklore includes a 2011 poster campaign which was aimed at the January murders. Every year since 1998 at least one whistle-blower was gunned down. Three lived, but 14 perished. So we designed a poster with the familiar face of Jimmy Mohlala (one of the 17) as a background screen, onto which the 17 names were listed, by year. The poster was titled 17 Reasons to Demand Transparency. That’s all. Not one January since, starting in 2012, has this re-occured. We cannot take all the credit for there were other measures including a once-off “Whistle-blowing Week” in November 2011 and a government enquiry. But we have to engage the powers. Service delivery is not enough – but it does validate our right to speak out with a prophetic voice.
I noted at the briefing that the ‘Right2Know’ campaign has documented at least 17 whistleblowers who, in 2014, lost their jobs, faced legal harassment or were killed because of attempts to expose corruption. Come to think of it, that was the year that C4L published a calendar on African Heroes of Faith. This tracked voices from Tertullian in North Africa to Tetane in South Africa, over 19 centuries. It was Tertullian in fact who famously wrote: “The blood of the martyrs is seed."
Talk show host Steve Allen said that in South Africa, checks and balances have a different meaning. “The Mafia and crooked businessmen make out cheques and the politicians and other compromised officials improve their bank balances.” This is a near and present danger.
CIVICUS makes another good point: “Domestic civil society does not have the capacity to defend itself against attacks on civic space if donors have systematically underinvested in local organizations.” This question of resourcing is a special focus of its 2014 report. And with good reason because of significant changes on the nonprofit’s compass. For example, The European Union is now the biggest donor of all (not USAID – which ironically emerged from the Marshall Plan to aid Europe after WWII). But another one is on the rise… can you believe that China used more cement in the 2011-2013 period than the USA used in the whole 20th century? I am old enough to remember widespread severe famine in China, forcing it to look outside its closed borders for wheat. Canada made a donation, but it was more than kindness! Within 20 years, China had become the biggest buyer of Canadian wheat, and by then more wheat was flowing west off the prairies than east, the traditional export route.
Recognizing that “aid” is not always altruistic, non-state actors get this good advice from CIVICUS: “CSOs need to develop the confidence to not seek funding from sources that compromise or cause excessive deviation from their missions.”
On this point I often cite the case of Candy Lightner founding MADD (Mothers Against Drunk Driving). “In 1980 Candy Lightner’s twelve-year-old daughter, Cari, was killed by a drunk driver – a repeat offender. Brought to trial, the driver was reprimanded and released. At the time, Lightner was a real estate agent in Sacramento, California. In her 1990 memoir, Giving Sorrow Words she wrote: “I promised myself on the day of Cari’s death that I would fight to make this needless homicide count for something positive in the years ahead.”
“MADD works through its chapters in all fifty states and ten Canadian provinces, and its many international affiliates. While drunk-driving fatalities have declined, MADD believes they remain unacceptably high, and so the organization continues its campaign to educate, prevent, deter and punish. It has caused judicial reforms throughout the United States. MADD helps victims, monitors the courts and works to pass stronger anti-drunk-driving legislation. With a worldwide reputation for vision and effective action, today’s MADD enjoys unprecedented success as a charitable organization.”
The irony is that Lightner resigned in protest some years later, because the focus of MADD was shifting to a stance against alcohol - against drinking. Some call this “mission-creep”. She objected, saying that drinking can even be good for you, the problem is abusing alcohol. It takes courage to engage the powers. And it takes courage to keep the tiller going straight ahead, even when tempted to chase resource flows in another direction.
This raises a phrase I learned at the CIVICUS briefing – “the tyranny of donors”. Apparently it was coined by the CEO of the Ford Foundation? This is not surprising when you learn that only 13% of ODA is allocated to non-state actors. And only 1% of that ODA arrives at “southern partners” like C4L. We are at the bottom of the food chain! The other 12% is spent on the “fundermediaries”. This explains why CIVICUS researchers are looking for “metrics” that are not simply “northern”. Its gold standard must strive to be relevant even in the South.
One of those metrics is Volunteering. Clearly this is very different in a context of high youth unemployment, that in the affluent North. One reason, for example, that American youth join the Peace Corps is because it is always a plus on your CV. Whereas youth in South Africa are “protected” from exploitation by labour laws that require employers to pay them a Stipend. These employers are of courses NGOs, NPOs, PVOs and CSOs. This is the state of the non-state.
Tuesday, 10 November 2015
Affluent People Have a Debt to Pay
Bertrand Russell said that John Maynard Keynes was the most brilliant mind he had ever met. Keynes had been a member of the Bloomsbury group with writers like Virginia Wolf and E M Forester. Up until the publication of his most influential works during the Great Depression of the 1930s, the two big names were Adam Smith and Karl Marx – and they were poles apart.
In 1933 the deepest year of the depression, Keynes published The Means to Prosperity, which contained specific policy recommendations for tackling unemployment in a global recession, chiefly counter cyclical public spending. The Means to Prosperity contains one of the first mentions of the “multiplier effect”. While it was addressed chiefly to the British Government, it also contained advice for other nations affected by the global recession. A copy was sent to the newly elected President Roosevelt and other world leaders.
Keynes' best-known work, The General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money, was published in 1936, and became a benchmark for future economic thought. It also secured his position as Britain's most influential economist. Ever since, governments have routinely run deficits during downturns to avoid economic stagnation. But when you have a case like South Africa where there are more people receiving some kind of direct government assistance than the number of people in the work force, you have to wonder when the time will come to throw away the crutch because the leg has healed?
I have written a lot about Inequality and the widening wealth gap. South Africa’s guru on Poverty is Sampie Terreblanche. He is an academic, a researcher, and his book Lost in Transformation was a landmark. Everyone now is talking about what to do, and Roelf Meyer recently called for an “economic CODESA” to try to negotiate a new Social Contract between rich and poor. New parties are forming on the Left like the Economic Freedom Fighters. And the Democratic Alliance, seen by many as a white party on the right of centre has just adopted “poverty, unemployment and inequality” as its new mantra and elected a black youth as its national leader.
So I was eager to read the cover story in this week’s issue of The Economist, and it did not disappoint… The great distortion (a dangerous flaw at the heart of the world economy) TAX-FREE DEBT.
Now I am not an economist, nor do I have a high IQ like John Maynard Keynes. I have barely grasped the article on first reading. But it is incisive. It calls tax-free debt “a senseless subsidy” and does a great problem analysis and some solutions. For example:
In the Nazareth Manifesto (Luke 4), Jesus read from the prophet of a time when the blind would see, the lame would walk, and “the acceptable year of our Lord” would come. He was referring to the year of Jubilee, every 50 years. Now every 7 years you had to leave the fields fallow, just like every 7 days you had to stop working and rest. But every 7 x 7 years (= 49) you had to take a year (#50) to level the playing field. By forgiving debts, setting slaves fee, and so forth. Call it Reform. He was calling for that like The Economist is calling for it. Reforming this distortion could have a very positive effect on closing the wealth gap that is only getting wider.
I have a dream. I dream of the affluent in South Africa and also overseas making “social investments”. Not donations, but investing surplus savings into reliable funds. If you won’t need those surpluses for a period, let’s say 3 years, then the fund manager calculates how much can be skimmed off, leaving enough to grow back to par over that period, in the fund. So that your money can be returned to you. In other words, biblically, you give the “increase”, but you keep your own capital.
The funds skimmed off are deposited into a Social Equity Investment scheme in South Africa – to enable youth who are trained and economically active. (Not those who are idly sitting around waiting for Kenyesian assistance.) Our problem at C4L is that we can tap funds from government for training, but when the youth finish their entrepreneurship and technical training, they have no funds for tools and start-up. They need a hand-up, not a hand out. They should not borrow. They should not beg. They should attract investment, along the lines outlined in the May 16 – 22 issue of The Economist. Where ever possible, entrepreneurs always need mentors too. And when they succeed, the fund will grow not from loan interest, but from economic growth.
In the past I have often said that I am not blaming the rich when I lament about Inequality and the needs of the poor. To my way of thinking, BOTH rich and poor are caught in a system that is mal-functioning. This article in The Economist is an excellent example. Reform is needed, because debt gives an advantage to the rich, and disadvantages the poor. Equity investment is better for all the reasons outlined. So if you have prospered for 50 years, then commit yourself to “the acceptable year of our Lord” and help level the playing field.
In 1933 the deepest year of the depression, Keynes published The Means to Prosperity, which contained specific policy recommendations for tackling unemployment in a global recession, chiefly counter cyclical public spending. The Means to Prosperity contains one of the first mentions of the “multiplier effect”. While it was addressed chiefly to the British Government, it also contained advice for other nations affected by the global recession. A copy was sent to the newly elected President Roosevelt and other world leaders.
Keynes' best-known work, The General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money, was published in 1936, and became a benchmark for future economic thought. It also secured his position as Britain's most influential economist. Ever since, governments have routinely run deficits during downturns to avoid economic stagnation. But when you have a case like South Africa where there are more people receiving some kind of direct government assistance than the number of people in the work force, you have to wonder when the time will come to throw away the crutch because the leg has healed?
I have written a lot about Inequality and the widening wealth gap. South Africa’s guru on Poverty is Sampie Terreblanche. He is an academic, a researcher, and his book Lost in Transformation was a landmark. Everyone now is talking about what to do, and Roelf Meyer recently called for an “economic CODESA” to try to negotiate a new Social Contract between rich and poor. New parties are forming on the Left like the Economic Freedom Fighters. And the Democratic Alliance, seen by many as a white party on the right of centre has just adopted “poverty, unemployment and inequality” as its new mantra and elected a black youth as its national leader.
So I was eager to read the cover story in this week’s issue of The Economist, and it did not disappoint… The great distortion (a dangerous flaw at the heart of the world economy) TAX-FREE DEBT.
Now I am not an economist, nor do I have a high IQ like John Maynard Keynes. I have barely grasped the article on first reading. But it is incisive. It calls tax-free debt “a senseless subsidy” and does a great problem analysis and some solutions. For example:
“Tax breaks for debt come in two principal forms. Interest rates on mortgages are tax-deductible for personal tax purposes… And across the world, firms can deduct interest payments to debt-holders from their taxable earnings.”
“Today, tax-breaks for debt are embedded in all economies and viewed as the natural order of things.”
“So what would happen if these subsidies were removed? It would be a revolutionary step because the breaks are embedded in the way firms and home-buyers behave. That suggests it would cause some short-term disruption. But the longer-term pay-off could be immense”
“Reforming the bias in the tax system is not the stuff of public campaigns. A vast web of contracts has been woven around a fiscal technicality, guarded by huge vested interests.”
“But the moment for change may never be better. Interest rates are low, profits are high, and house prices stable.”Basically to use debt as an instrument, you have to have some leverage and that means it helps the rich more than the poor. As Muhamed Yunus once put it (founder of Grameen poverty lending): “Banks ask: Are the people credit-worthy? We ask: are the banks people-worthy?” Ahem.
In the Nazareth Manifesto (Luke 4), Jesus read from the prophet of a time when the blind would see, the lame would walk, and “the acceptable year of our Lord” would come. He was referring to the year of Jubilee, every 50 years. Now every 7 years you had to leave the fields fallow, just like every 7 days you had to stop working and rest. But every 7 x 7 years (= 49) you had to take a year (#50) to level the playing field. By forgiving debts, setting slaves fee, and so forth. Call it Reform. He was calling for that like The Economist is calling for it. Reforming this distortion could have a very positive effect on closing the wealth gap that is only getting wider.
I have a dream. I dream of the affluent in South Africa and also overseas making “social investments”. Not donations, but investing surplus savings into reliable funds. If you won’t need those surpluses for a period, let’s say 3 years, then the fund manager calculates how much can be skimmed off, leaving enough to grow back to par over that period, in the fund. So that your money can be returned to you. In other words, biblically, you give the “increase”, but you keep your own capital.
The funds skimmed off are deposited into a Social Equity Investment scheme in South Africa – to enable youth who are trained and economically active. (Not those who are idly sitting around waiting for Kenyesian assistance.) Our problem at C4L is that we can tap funds from government for training, but when the youth finish their entrepreneurship and technical training, they have no funds for tools and start-up. They need a hand-up, not a hand out. They should not borrow. They should not beg. They should attract investment, along the lines outlined in the May 16 – 22 issue of The Economist. Where ever possible, entrepreneurs always need mentors too. And when they succeed, the fund will grow not from loan interest, but from economic growth.
In the past I have often said that I am not blaming the rich when I lament about Inequality and the needs of the poor. To my way of thinking, BOTH rich and poor are caught in a system that is mal-functioning. This article in The Economist is an excellent example. Reform is needed, because debt gives an advantage to the rich, and disadvantages the poor. Equity investment is better for all the reasons outlined. So if you have prospered for 50 years, then commit yourself to “the acceptable year of our Lord” and help level the playing field.
Thursday, 5 November 2015
The Giving Pledge
Hi again prayer intrepids, please never give up on this spiritual exercise
Well it's nice to know that the likes of Tim Cook and Mark Zuckerberg are listening to the noises made by recent C4L bulletins! The BBC says: "The chief executive of Apple has announced he is donating most of his wealth to charity before he dies. He joins a growing number of the world's super-rich who are giving away their wealth, including Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg. Five years ago, billionaire investor Warren Buffett and Microsoft founder Bill Gates launched the campaign The Giving Pledge. It aims to convince billionaires to give at least half of their fortunes to charity.
" Jesus said: "From everyone who has been given much, much will be demanded; and from the one who has been entrusted with much, much more will be asked." (Luke 12:48)
In my last prayer letter I asked for prayer as I walk towards remarriage. Today she came with me to a farm where close friends of mine were being feted as they have intentionally sold the farm so that they can devote more of their future to ministry. Of course for me this is the best way to go - downwardly mobile. So I was excited and wanted them to meet the lady in my life before they move away.
When we got to the farm there was a marquis on the lawn, cars lined the driveway and there was a prevalence of not only white skin but white hair too. My partner blanched. Ooops, well not exactly, let me find another metaphor... I have thought about this. She did not panic, she would not be taking me on if she lacked courage! Remember what I have often said - that the crux of the problem in this country is "white fear and black bitterness". There was resentment and even contempt mixed into in the angst that suddenly emerged. Even I had not expected the scale of this send-off, nor of the effect it would have on my partner.
There were some awkward, difficult moments of hearing her out (and feeling her pain) in the car, at a safe distance from the lawn. Inequality is not just some statistics, or a rule of thumb like The Giving Pledge. Those billionaires can still stay at a very safe distance from it, by creating ever more foundations and charities. But in my life, in 2015, inequality is a near and present danger. Resentment eats away at people who are exploited and who (in reality or perception) see themselves as disadvantaged. Or as superior, knowing that blacks out-number whites by a large margin, and thus call the shots politically if not economically? Which ever way you look at it, the wealth gap and the generation gap can be a very vivid double jeopardy in South Africa.
The brother of Jesus wrote: "Listen, my dear brothers: Has not God chosen those who are poor in the eyes of the world to be rich in faith and to inherit the kingdom he promised those who love him? But you have insulted the poor. Is it not the rich who are exploiting you?" (James 2:5,6)
This incisive comment on discrimination follows an earlier comment: "Believers in humble circumstances ought to take pride in their high position. But the rich should take pride in their humiliation." (James 1:9,10)
Far be it from me to even come near the edge of betraying confidence or worse yet of exploiting a loved one. So please just keep this in your prayers. But as Easter approaches, ask yourself why Jesus rode a donkey into Jerusalem and not a steed?
Well it's nice to know that the likes of Tim Cook and Mark Zuckerberg are listening to the noises made by recent C4L bulletins! The BBC says: "The chief executive of Apple has announced he is donating most of his wealth to charity before he dies. He joins a growing number of the world's super-rich who are giving away their wealth, including Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg. Five years ago, billionaire investor Warren Buffett and Microsoft founder Bill Gates launched the campaign The Giving Pledge. It aims to convince billionaires to give at least half of their fortunes to charity.
" Jesus said: "From everyone who has been given much, much will be demanded; and from the one who has been entrusted with much, much more will be asked." (Luke 12:48)
In my last prayer letter I asked for prayer as I walk towards remarriage. Today she came with me to a farm where close friends of mine were being feted as they have intentionally sold the farm so that they can devote more of their future to ministry. Of course for me this is the best way to go - downwardly mobile. So I was excited and wanted them to meet the lady in my life before they move away.
When we got to the farm there was a marquis on the lawn, cars lined the driveway and there was a prevalence of not only white skin but white hair too. My partner blanched. Ooops, well not exactly, let me find another metaphor... I have thought about this. She did not panic, she would not be taking me on if she lacked courage! Remember what I have often said - that the crux of the problem in this country is "white fear and black bitterness". There was resentment and even contempt mixed into in the angst that suddenly emerged. Even I had not expected the scale of this send-off, nor of the effect it would have on my partner.
There were some awkward, difficult moments of hearing her out (and feeling her pain) in the car, at a safe distance from the lawn. Inequality is not just some statistics, or a rule of thumb like The Giving Pledge. Those billionaires can still stay at a very safe distance from it, by creating ever more foundations and charities. But in my life, in 2015, inequality is a near and present danger. Resentment eats away at people who are exploited and who (in reality or perception) see themselves as disadvantaged. Or as superior, knowing that blacks out-number whites by a large margin, and thus call the shots politically if not economically? Which ever way you look at it, the wealth gap and the generation gap can be a very vivid double jeopardy in South Africa.
The brother of Jesus wrote: "Listen, my dear brothers: Has not God chosen those who are poor in the eyes of the world to be rich in faith and to inherit the kingdom he promised those who love him? But you have insulted the poor. Is it not the rich who are exploiting you?" (James 2:5,6)
This incisive comment on discrimination follows an earlier comment: "Believers in humble circumstances ought to take pride in their high position. But the rich should take pride in their humiliation." (James 1:9,10)
Far be it from me to even come near the edge of betraying confidence or worse yet of exploiting a loved one. So please just keep this in your prayers. But as Easter approaches, ask yourself why Jesus rode a donkey into Jerusalem and not a steed?
Sunday, 1 November 2015
Gain the Whole World, and Lose Your Soul
Do you remember David Lewis of the NDP capturing people’s imagination in a Canadian federal election by coining the phrase “corporate welfare bums”? He was referring to envelopes of government funding for corporations. His point was that the rich were getting benefits that were not available to the relatively poor.
Can you remember even further back to the 1930 when Ida Tarbell coined another phrase – the “robber barons”? Decades after her father’s oil company was ruined by a Rockefeller’s Standard Oil – as he set about to monopolize that industry – she got her just deserts by publishing a brilliant series of articles in McClure’s magazine. She was one of the “muckrakers” who pioneered investigative journalism. They helped turn what is called “the Gilded Age” into “the Progressive Era”. Among the changes that came to pass, as a consequence of their whistle blowing, were the 16th and 17th amendments to the American Constitution – ushering in an income tax and the election instead of appointment of US Senators, respectively.
Deep Background
Back before the American Civil War, the richest man in 1848 was John J Astor. He was a merchant trader and was worth $20 million (now equivalent to $545 million). By contrast, just sixty years later, John D Rockefeller became America’s first billionaire. A century later, when Sam Walton the founder of Walmart dies, he was worth $8 billion. Bill Gates occupies the position today with a fortune of $82 billion.
The point is that America’s economy has gone through transformations – from agrarian before the Civil War to industrial in “the Gilded Age”, to global trading in “the Progressive Era” to an information society in the here and now. Each new phase has vaulted the economy to a new and unprecedented level.
Returning to “the Gilded Age”, the question of whether or not slavery would be used to underpin an agrarian economy was soon overtaken by the railroads, steel and oil. That is, by railway barons like Leland Stanford and EH Harriman; steel magnate Andrew Carnegie; and oil king John D Rockefeller. The economy did not just grow – it morphed. 200,000 miles of track built to drain grain out of the West became a network for trading to expand. Products like Heinz ketchup or Kellogg’s corn flakes could now be manufactured and distributed country-wide. Steel enabled new products to be built and mass manufactured - like the automobile. Then distributed, leaning on the economies of scale involved.
An interesting example is the price of an automobile. In its first year of production, Ford’s Model T sold for $850. By 1916 the price was down to $360. In 1924 you could buy a much improved model for only $290. (This is not the same car being sold and re-sold! It’s the list price for a new model.)
History is repeating itself
At one stage, Rockefeller controlled 80% of the world’s supply of oil. Today, Google has 90% of the search market in Europe and 67% in the USA.
Henry Ford wanted to put a car in every garage. Bill Gates wants to see a personal computer in every office and home.
Walmart wanted to place a superstore in every city. Amazon and the iStore want you to buy on-line.
The railroad wanted a spur into every town. Uber will pick up and deliver anything to your doorstep.
Economies of scale are at the base of all this. As they are at the base of Google and Facebook. Carnegie famously put it this way: “Cut the prices; scoop the market; run the mills full."
The price of computer hardware, adjusted for quality and inflation, was far cheaper in 2009 than in 1959. An iPhone contains the same computing power as the full capacity of MIT in 1960.
Just as the gains of the Civil War in terms of social justice were overtaken by the transformation of the economy from agrarian to industrial, the gains of “the progressive era” that followed are now being overtaken by the switch from manufacturing and trading to information and technology. Power is once again being concentrated, not dispersed. Google and Apple between them provide 90% of smartphone operating systems. Over half the population of North America and over a third of Europeans use Facebook. By contrast, not one of the big five car companies controls more than a fifth of the American market.
Alfred Chandler, the American business historian, summed up the century following the Civil War as “ten years of competition and 90 years of oligopoly”.
What does this have to do with Lent?
A book called This Changes Everything (by Naomi Klein) was recently brought to my attention. It sees through the hitherto superficial efforts to address climate change, and points to the deeper need for structural economic change. It is your recommended reading for Lent!
The lifestyle of the barons – as compared to those who buy their products – tells a tale... Carnegie bought a castle in Scotland and maintained a staff of 85. Peter Thiel (PayPal’s founder) bought an oceanfront spread in Maui for $27 million. Meanwhile – as I have lamented in another C4L Bulletin - the dream of “40 acres and a mule” for every freed slave did not come to pass after the Civil War ended. The plowman overtook the reaper.
Then you have the deeper question: “do they put anything back?” in social terms. Of course the “robber barons” eventually came to be known as philanthropists. Perhaps this was a result of their own intentional efforts at re-branding? To have themselves remembered as such, rather than as malefactors of great wealth or - to quote Teddy Roosevelt - “criminal rich”? Carnegie funded libraries and Rockefeller financed the University of Chicago.
Likewise, we now have the Giving Pledge challenging the super-rich to give away half of their fortunes. The Gates Foundation has joined the ranks of grantmakers. Good entrepreneurs do make good philanthropists, when they get there. And yet the divide between rich and poor is widening again. Oxfam estimates that by 2016, over 50% of the wealth in the world will be owned by 1% of its people. Monopoly and inequality are rising as social concerns, no matter how generous the tech barons can make themselves look.
Jesus asked the question: For what shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul? (Mark 8:36) Please do what you can during Lent to speak and act in ways that will level the playing field. “The Progressive Era” ended in the 1960s, when economic equality was at its peak. It’s no coincidence that the Civil Rights movement and the Sexual Revolution occurred in that decade. For when and where there is more equality, there will be more justice and peace.
Can you remember even further back to the 1930 when Ida Tarbell coined another phrase – the “robber barons”? Decades after her father’s oil company was ruined by a Rockefeller’s Standard Oil – as he set about to monopolize that industry – she got her just deserts by publishing a brilliant series of articles in McClure’s magazine. She was one of the “muckrakers” who pioneered investigative journalism. They helped turn what is called “the Gilded Age” into “the Progressive Era”. Among the changes that came to pass, as a consequence of their whistle blowing, were the 16th and 17th amendments to the American Constitution – ushering in an income tax and the election instead of appointment of US Senators, respectively.
Deep Background
Back before the American Civil War, the richest man in 1848 was John J Astor. He was a merchant trader and was worth $20 million (now equivalent to $545 million). By contrast, just sixty years later, John D Rockefeller became America’s first billionaire. A century later, when Sam Walton the founder of Walmart dies, he was worth $8 billion. Bill Gates occupies the position today with a fortune of $82 billion.
The point is that America’s economy has gone through transformations – from agrarian before the Civil War to industrial in “the Gilded Age”, to global trading in “the Progressive Era” to an information society in the here and now. Each new phase has vaulted the economy to a new and unprecedented level.
Returning to “the Gilded Age”, the question of whether or not slavery would be used to underpin an agrarian economy was soon overtaken by the railroads, steel and oil. That is, by railway barons like Leland Stanford and EH Harriman; steel magnate Andrew Carnegie; and oil king John D Rockefeller. The economy did not just grow – it morphed. 200,000 miles of track built to drain grain out of the West became a network for trading to expand. Products like Heinz ketchup or Kellogg’s corn flakes could now be manufactured and distributed country-wide. Steel enabled new products to be built and mass manufactured - like the automobile. Then distributed, leaning on the economies of scale involved.
An interesting example is the price of an automobile. In its first year of production, Ford’s Model T sold for $850. By 1916 the price was down to $360. In 1924 you could buy a much improved model for only $290. (This is not the same car being sold and re-sold! It’s the list price for a new model.)
History is repeating itself
At one stage, Rockefeller controlled 80% of the world’s supply of oil. Today, Google has 90% of the search market in Europe and 67% in the USA.
Henry Ford wanted to put a car in every garage. Bill Gates wants to see a personal computer in every office and home.
Walmart wanted to place a superstore in every city. Amazon and the iStore want you to buy on-line.
The railroad wanted a spur into every town. Uber will pick up and deliver anything to your doorstep.
Economies of scale are at the base of all this. As they are at the base of Google and Facebook. Carnegie famously put it this way: “Cut the prices; scoop the market; run the mills full."
The price of computer hardware, adjusted for quality and inflation, was far cheaper in 2009 than in 1959. An iPhone contains the same computing power as the full capacity of MIT in 1960.
Just as the gains of the Civil War in terms of social justice were overtaken by the transformation of the economy from agrarian to industrial, the gains of “the progressive era” that followed are now being overtaken by the switch from manufacturing and trading to information and technology. Power is once again being concentrated, not dispersed. Google and Apple between them provide 90% of smartphone operating systems. Over half the population of North America and over a third of Europeans use Facebook. By contrast, not one of the big five car companies controls more than a fifth of the American market.
Alfred Chandler, the American business historian, summed up the century following the Civil War as “ten years of competition and 90 years of oligopoly”.
What does this have to do with Lent?
A book called This Changes Everything (by Naomi Klein) was recently brought to my attention. It sees through the hitherto superficial efforts to address climate change, and points to the deeper need for structural economic change. It is your recommended reading for Lent!
The lifestyle of the barons – as compared to those who buy their products – tells a tale... Carnegie bought a castle in Scotland and maintained a staff of 85. Peter Thiel (PayPal’s founder) bought an oceanfront spread in Maui for $27 million. Meanwhile – as I have lamented in another C4L Bulletin - the dream of “40 acres and a mule” for every freed slave did not come to pass after the Civil War ended. The plowman overtook the reaper.
Then you have the deeper question: “do they put anything back?” in social terms. Of course the “robber barons” eventually came to be known as philanthropists. Perhaps this was a result of their own intentional efforts at re-branding? To have themselves remembered as such, rather than as malefactors of great wealth or - to quote Teddy Roosevelt - “criminal rich”? Carnegie funded libraries and Rockefeller financed the University of Chicago.
Likewise, we now have the Giving Pledge challenging the super-rich to give away half of their fortunes. The Gates Foundation has joined the ranks of grantmakers. Good entrepreneurs do make good philanthropists, when they get there. And yet the divide between rich and poor is widening again. Oxfam estimates that by 2016, over 50% of the wealth in the world will be owned by 1% of its people. Monopoly and inequality are rising as social concerns, no matter how generous the tech barons can make themselves look.
Jesus asked the question: For what shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul? (Mark 8:36) Please do what you can during Lent to speak and act in ways that will level the playing field. “The Progressive Era” ended in the 1960s, when economic equality was at its peak. It’s no coincidence that the Civil Rights movement and the Sexual Revolution occurred in that decade. For when and where there is more equality, there will be more justice and peace.
Saturday, 26 September 2015
Santa and Austerity
The Vatican is installing showers for the homeless at public toilets just off St Peter's Square.
Pope Francis is raffling off unwanted gifts to raise money for the homeless. The Argentinean pope - who chose his papal name in honour of Saint Francis of Assisi and his devotion to the poor - has cast off luxuries such as the ermine-trimmed cape and red shoes worn by his predecessor, Benedict XVI, and focused on helping the down-and-out. He has opted out of moving from his modest apartment into the spacious papal palace.
In February, the 77-year-old pope sold off his Harley-Davidson - worth about €15000 euros and inscribed with his name - for €241500 at a Paris auction, giving the proceeds to a hostel and soup kitchen in Rome.
Meanwhile, in Mpumalanga, the provincial legislature this week rejected a motion by the loyal opposition to cut catering expenditure by half. The catering budget had been increased to an estimated R11.5 million this year from R4.5-million in the 2013-2014 financial year.
This goes against the attempts of the speaker of the legislature, Thandi Shongwe, to curtail escalating expenses, including that of catering. Legislature members are currently treated to full English breakfasts and lunches. If a legislature meeting goes on after 4pm, politicians are treated to platters of finger foods.
Basil Kransdorff, whose company Econocom Foods makes fortified school meals, said the money spent by the Mpumalanga legislature and Tshwane on catering could have funded 30 million food parcels – for 10 million children, three meals a day for a month, giving them the strength to learn. He said there was a worrying number of children in South Africa practically starving:
Advent is the season that precedes Christmas, just like the last of the great Hebrew prophets – John the Baptist - preceded Jesus, the first and foremost, who heralded a new era.
Why did John baptize? (Even Jesus went to the River Jordan to be baptized by him.)
What was John’s message?
Please during Advent can we come to terms with John’s important message? It was not eclipsed by Jesus, who was a great admirer of this prophet. Jesus said that John was the greatest man that ever lived, even though he was a recluse, and in the eyes of those in power - a renegade.
The Qur'an speaks of John's gentle pity and love and his humble attitude towards life, for which he was granted the Purity of Life:
John was a classical prophet, sort of like “spokespersons” are today, for high profile parties or movements. He spoke out boldly, denouncing both people and issues. These were not just platitudes, either, he was up close and personal… one of those guys that you either love or you hate. Luke offers a glimpse of John’s style and message:
Pope Francis is raffling off unwanted gifts to raise money for the homeless. The Argentinean pope - who chose his papal name in honour of Saint Francis of Assisi and his devotion to the poor - has cast off luxuries such as the ermine-trimmed cape and red shoes worn by his predecessor, Benedict XVI, and focused on helping the down-and-out. He has opted out of moving from his modest apartment into the spacious papal palace.
In February, the 77-year-old pope sold off his Harley-Davidson - worth about €15000 euros and inscribed with his name - for €241500 at a Paris auction, giving the proceeds to a hostel and soup kitchen in Rome.
Meanwhile, in Mpumalanga, the provincial legislature this week rejected a motion by the loyal opposition to cut catering expenditure by half. The catering budget had been increased to an estimated R11.5 million this year from R4.5-million in the 2013-2014 financial year.
This goes against the attempts of the speaker of the legislature, Thandi Shongwe, to curtail escalating expenses, including that of catering. Legislature members are currently treated to full English breakfasts and lunches. If a legislature meeting goes on after 4pm, politicians are treated to platters of finger foods.
Basil Kransdorff, whose company Econocom Foods makes fortified school meals, said the money spent by the Mpumalanga legislature and Tshwane on catering could have funded 30 million food parcels – for 10 million children, three meals a day for a month, giving them the strength to learn. He said there was a worrying number of children in South Africa practically starving:
"Rural areas are particularly affected, with the only meal that a large number of children receive being what they get at school."
"Many of our children, especially orphans, starve during school holidays. We have reports of children having to boil grass to fill their stomachs to stave off hunger."The Treatment Action Campaign general secretary, Anele Yawa, slammed the spending:
"All that will happen now is that a very small number of people will become very obese."
"People in Mpumalanga are suffering but instead of spending money on improving crumbling health facilities, they treat the province's people like used condoms. They use them once, when they need them for votes, and then flush them down a toilet like a used condom."
"We need to ask how many HIV-prevention programmes could have been rolled out and how many lives could have potentially been saved."
"Instead of being concerned about saving lives, our leaders are more interested in their stomachs. It is spent on people who have medical aids, pensions and homes."Loyal opposition spokesman Anthony Bernadie said:
"The speaker indicated that in the current financial year the catering budget must be cut from R10-million to R5-million. But she didn't table any kind of mechanism that could be used to cut R5-million."
"We have been fighting these free meals for years. We tabled a formal proposal to the office of the speaker and yesterday, during the sitting we tabled a motion supporting the speaker in her proposal that the catering budget be cut."
He said his party proposed that meals be subsidised or that members pay 100% for them.
"That's when the ANC voted against our proposal."The Gospel of John the Baptist
Advent is the season that precedes Christmas, just like the last of the great Hebrew prophets – John the Baptist - preceded Jesus, the first and foremost, who heralded a new era.
Why did John baptize? (Even Jesus went to the River Jordan to be baptized by him.)
What was John’s message?
Please during Advent can we come to terms with John’s important message? It was not eclipsed by Jesus, who was a great admirer of this prophet. Jesus said that John was the greatest man that ever lived, even though he was a recluse, and in the eyes of those in power - a renegade.
The Qur'an speaks of John's gentle pity and love and his humble attitude towards life, for which he was granted the Purity of Life:
“And piety as from Us, and purity: He was devout,
And kind to his parents, and he was not overbearing or rebellious.
So Peace on him the day he was born, the day that he dies,
and the day that he will be raised up to life (again)!”
—Qur'an, sura 19 (Maryam), ayah 13–15[45]
John was a classical prophet, sort of like “spokespersons” are today, for high profile parties or movements. He spoke out boldly, denouncing both people and issues. These were not just platitudes, either, he was up close and personal… one of those guys that you either love or you hate. Luke offers a glimpse of John’s style and message:
“Brood of vipers, who warned you to flee from the coming retribution? Produce fruit in keeping with repentance, and do not start telling yourselves, ‘We have Abraham as our father,’ because, I tell you, God can raise children for Abraham from these stones. Yes, even now the axe is being laid to the root of the trees, so that any tree failing to produce good fruit will be cut down and thrown on the fire."
When all the people asked him, “What must we do, then?” He answered, “Anyone who has two tunics must share with the one who has none, and anyone with something to eat must do the same.”
There were tax collectors, too, who came for baptism, and these said to him, “Master, what must we do?” He said to them: “Exact no more than the appointed rate.”
Some soldiers asked him in their turn, “What about us? What must we do?” He said to them, “No intimidation! No extortion! Be content with your pay!”Corruption and waste are two distinct issues. Both themes need to be addressed in our time and setting, and not only by austerity but by public exposure. John the Baptist would have had harsh words for the Mpumalanga legislature, I’m sure. (Would his head have ended up on one of its platters?) And it sounds to me like Pope Francis has taken to heart that actions speak louder than words, and that he is taking repentance to scale, as John the Baptist taught.
Saturday, 29 August 2015
Thinking Together
An old adage says that the secret to marriage is not in thinking alike, but in thinking together. Partners in marriage may not agree on everything, but if communication breaks between them, the marriage can fall apart.
This line of thinking needs to be applied to the next 2 elections in South Africa – the local elections in 2016 and the next national elections in 2019. In any democracy you get checks and balances not only from the division of powers between the legislative, executive and judicial branches. You also get it from different levels of government – national, provincial and municipal. In South Africa there are really only two moments of choice for voters – national and local. Because provincial legislatures stem from the national voting results, and premiers are even ministers in the national cabinet.
Two articles in the press this week really hit this home. The first was written by Andrew Chirwa, the chairman of NUMSA. It is a key player in COSATU which is one of the three forces in the “ruling alliance”. However, it has begun to raise questions of late about WHY the trade unions – normally leftist - are in a centrist government? His article points the finger at one of COSATU’s allies in the tripartite alliance, the Communist party. The article is titled “SACP is leading the Inkandla cover”. It is a brutal expose. It ends with the following 3 paragraphs:
“The SACP has had to formulate a theory for its rotten political practices. In a political programme adopted at its national congress in July 2012, it identified two “opponents” that had to be defeated: first, the “new tendency”, which it described as “a populist, bourgeois nationalist ideological tendency with deeply worrying demagogic, proto-fascist features”, and, second, what the party calls “liberal constitutionalism”.
“The “new tendency” referred to the ANC Youth League rump led by Julius Malema.
“Liberal constitutionalism” included those who insist on good governance, the rule of law and action against corruption.”
This is very insightful. The two largest opposition parties – the Economic Freedom Fighters and the Democratic Alliance should NOT in my opinion be seen as the left and right poles, on either side of centre, occupied by the ANC. The reasons why are best explained by Mzukisi Qobo writing in the Sowetan. His article is titled “SA caught between two extremes”. Here follow a few excerpts:
“There is, on the one hand, the Democratic Alliance, which has a long history on the opposition benches, and remains a significant numerical force, although its clout as an alternative government is fast diminishing. It relies, in the main, on reformist strategies to tackle the governing party. It has largely used legal channels to hold the ANC to account.”
“On the other hand is the Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF), whose youthfulness is its greatest asset. Many of its leaders come from a tradition that prizes slogans, rhetoric and militancy – all cultural repertoires of the struggle that used to be associated with the ANC and other grassroots movements. Remarkably, the EFF has succeeded in hogging the political limelight even though it is still in its infancy. This has been made possible precisely because its symbolism and militancy resonate deeply with the frustrations of a significant section of the black majority.
“Historically, expressive forms of protests have always captured the imagination of blacks in South Africa until the ANC and the National Party government set the dynamic of elite negotiations in motion in the early 1990s to end apartheid.
“SA’s experience of an elitist outcome of political transition is nothing unique. To borrow from Vaclav Havel’s work The Power of the Powerless, beyond its formalism in setting out rights and responsibilities, the constitution has limits to guaranteeing a rich, humane and dignified life. Havel suggests that constitutions limit themselves to whether or not the laws are upheld rather than improving the quality of life substantively.
“That there is no consistent logic in the radical policy propositions of the EFF is something that is overlooked by many who are blinded by its messianic illusion. Equally, socio-economic change through the DA is more of a fairy tale.
“In the wake of its parliamentary theatrics, the EFF received greater applause that the DA got for extracting the spy tapes – though the latter had more tangible outcomes. For our politics to be redeemed from the current extremes in the opposition, there remains a need for a strong voice of moderation on the left to champion the urgent issues of social justice alongside the imperative of defending our fragile constitution.”
In closing, he raises the prospect that real change may only come from a “powerful social agency in the civic sphere”. These are almost exactly my views, for the very same reasons. EFF and DA are like two strong oxen pulling the cart of the “loyal opposition”. But they need to start pulling together, and in one and the same direction. How will that ever happen? Who can possibly put their hand to such a plow?
I sense that faith groups can do this. Not by forming a Coalition, but simply by voicing a demand for both social justice and constitutionalism. Government has shown repeatedly that its once noble ideals have given way to elitism and triumphalism. A prophetic voice must be heard again, crying in the veld…
St Francis of Assisi has been a huge influence in the Catholic and mainline churches. The first Pope from the South symbolically adopted his name. This suggests an intention to prioritize Poverty, as John Paul the Polish Pope addressed Communism. Most Reformation churches adhere to the Lausanne Covenant which adopted the slogan “Live simply, so that others can simply live.”
Faith groups, churches mainline and African-initiated, Christian families and individuals could provide mortar to bond the red EFF and blue DA bricks together. There are old and new movements pushing in this direction already. For example, the “secular Franciscans” and also Unashamedly Ethical. There was once a group in the USA called the “Moral Majority”, whose political influence was felt in the politics of that democracy. South Africa needs voices like that at this juncture.
Even the force of prayer should not be under-estimated in this regard. One hadith says that Mohammed taught that the prayers of a person who prayed and gossiped at the same time were interrupted for 40 days. The point is, don’t invade other people’s privacy, for they even have a constitutional right to it. Don’t practice habits that are unethical and self-serving. Equality stems from such holy values, because the focus on health (i.e. shalom) can displace the focus on wealth.
If we pray and act for BOTH social justice and the rule of law, and intentionally so, while at the same time doing a self-audit of our lifestyle and practice, we will be drawing the two powerful oxen together to pull one and the same plow, in the same direction.
Oliver Tambo said that a nation that doesn’t think of its youth doesn’t have a future – and doesn’t deserve one. The triple-conundrum of poverty, unemployment and inequality is a time bomb, because it is youth-centred. Every species protects and nourishes its young. The resources of this country are concentrated in the hands of older people, black and white. The time has come to be “unashamedly ethical” and also to “live simply, so that others can simply live” - namely, our youth.
This line of thinking needs to be applied to the next 2 elections in South Africa – the local elections in 2016 and the next national elections in 2019. In any democracy you get checks and balances not only from the division of powers between the legislative, executive and judicial branches. You also get it from different levels of government – national, provincial and municipal. In South Africa there are really only two moments of choice for voters – national and local. Because provincial legislatures stem from the national voting results, and premiers are even ministers in the national cabinet.
Two articles in the press this week really hit this home. The first was written by Andrew Chirwa, the chairman of NUMSA. It is a key player in COSATU which is one of the three forces in the “ruling alliance”. However, it has begun to raise questions of late about WHY the trade unions – normally leftist - are in a centrist government? His article points the finger at one of COSATU’s allies in the tripartite alliance, the Communist party. The article is titled “SACP is leading the Inkandla cover”. It is a brutal expose. It ends with the following 3 paragraphs:
“The SACP has had to formulate a theory for its rotten political practices. In a political programme adopted at its national congress in July 2012, it identified two “opponents” that had to be defeated: first, the “new tendency”, which it described as “a populist, bourgeois nationalist ideological tendency with deeply worrying demagogic, proto-fascist features”, and, second, what the party calls “liberal constitutionalism”.
“The “new tendency” referred to the ANC Youth League rump led by Julius Malema.
“Liberal constitutionalism” included those who insist on good governance, the rule of law and action against corruption.”
This is very insightful. The two largest opposition parties – the Economic Freedom Fighters and the Democratic Alliance should NOT in my opinion be seen as the left and right poles, on either side of centre, occupied by the ANC. The reasons why are best explained by Mzukisi Qobo writing in the Sowetan. His article is titled “SA caught between two extremes”. Here follow a few excerpts:
“There is, on the one hand, the Democratic Alliance, which has a long history on the opposition benches, and remains a significant numerical force, although its clout as an alternative government is fast diminishing. It relies, in the main, on reformist strategies to tackle the governing party. It has largely used legal channels to hold the ANC to account.”
“On the other hand is the Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF), whose youthfulness is its greatest asset. Many of its leaders come from a tradition that prizes slogans, rhetoric and militancy – all cultural repertoires of the struggle that used to be associated with the ANC and other grassroots movements. Remarkably, the EFF has succeeded in hogging the political limelight even though it is still in its infancy. This has been made possible precisely because its symbolism and militancy resonate deeply with the frustrations of a significant section of the black majority.
“Historically, expressive forms of protests have always captured the imagination of blacks in South Africa until the ANC and the National Party government set the dynamic of elite negotiations in motion in the early 1990s to end apartheid.
“SA’s experience of an elitist outcome of political transition is nothing unique. To borrow from Vaclav Havel’s work The Power of the Powerless, beyond its formalism in setting out rights and responsibilities, the constitution has limits to guaranteeing a rich, humane and dignified life. Havel suggests that constitutions limit themselves to whether or not the laws are upheld rather than improving the quality of life substantively.
“That there is no consistent logic in the radical policy propositions of the EFF is something that is overlooked by many who are blinded by its messianic illusion. Equally, socio-economic change through the DA is more of a fairy tale.
“In the wake of its parliamentary theatrics, the EFF received greater applause that the DA got for extracting the spy tapes – though the latter had more tangible outcomes. For our politics to be redeemed from the current extremes in the opposition, there remains a need for a strong voice of moderation on the left to champion the urgent issues of social justice alongside the imperative of defending our fragile constitution.”
In closing, he raises the prospect that real change may only come from a “powerful social agency in the civic sphere”. These are almost exactly my views, for the very same reasons. EFF and DA are like two strong oxen pulling the cart of the “loyal opposition”. But they need to start pulling together, and in one and the same direction. How will that ever happen? Who can possibly put their hand to such a plow?
I sense that faith groups can do this. Not by forming a Coalition, but simply by voicing a demand for both social justice and constitutionalism. Government has shown repeatedly that its once noble ideals have given way to elitism and triumphalism. A prophetic voice must be heard again, crying in the veld…
St Francis of Assisi has been a huge influence in the Catholic and mainline churches. The first Pope from the South symbolically adopted his name. This suggests an intention to prioritize Poverty, as John Paul the Polish Pope addressed Communism. Most Reformation churches adhere to the Lausanne Covenant which adopted the slogan “Live simply, so that others can simply live.”
Faith groups, churches mainline and African-initiated, Christian families and individuals could provide mortar to bond the red EFF and blue DA bricks together. There are old and new movements pushing in this direction already. For example, the “secular Franciscans” and also Unashamedly Ethical. There was once a group in the USA called the “Moral Majority”, whose political influence was felt in the politics of that democracy. South Africa needs voices like that at this juncture.
Even the force of prayer should not be under-estimated in this regard. One hadith says that Mohammed taught that the prayers of a person who prayed and gossiped at the same time were interrupted for 40 days. The point is, don’t invade other people’s privacy, for they even have a constitutional right to it. Don’t practice habits that are unethical and self-serving. Equality stems from such holy values, because the focus on health (i.e. shalom) can displace the focus on wealth.
If we pray and act for BOTH social justice and the rule of law, and intentionally so, while at the same time doing a self-audit of our lifestyle and practice, we will be drawing the two powerful oxen together to pull one and the same plow, in the same direction.
Oliver Tambo said that a nation that doesn’t think of its youth doesn’t have a future – and doesn’t deserve one. The triple-conundrum of poverty, unemployment and inequality is a time bomb, because it is youth-centred. Every species protects and nourishes its young. The resources of this country are concentrated in the hands of older people, black and white. The time has come to be “unashamedly ethical” and also to “live simply, so that others can simply live” - namely, our youth.
Saturday, 15 August 2015
Affluence Extremism
I coined the phrase “affluence extremism” for the title of the last C4L bulletin. It was a counter-balance to the allegation that Pope Francis must be a Marxist for using terms like, “unfettered capitalism”, and “a new tyranny” and “the new idolatry of money”.
Since then I went to see a movie called The Wolf of Wall Street. Without suggesting that all rich people live in that kind of depravity, he lived very extravagantly. He extended the roof of his personal yacht to make it a helicopter pad. To smuggle cash out of the country he literally taped it like football pads around the arms and legs of his “mules” before they headed through Customs at the airport. He mocked his investigators because their salaries were so low they had to travel by subway to meet him.
Reviews of the film raise questions about its excesses. Director Scorcose contends that this was done to expose “affluence extremism” not to condone it. But like the “conversion films” of earlier generations, most of the entertainment focuses on the story before they say the prayer of repentance, not after. Then suddenly… they live happily ever after.
Now I am looking forward to seeing another move – Twelve Years a Slave. Although it takes place in another era (the 1850s instead of the 1990s) it is once again about a depraved system. A wealthy free black man gets captured in the USA and sold into slavery in another state. His brutal master, who is evil personified, resists social change. No doubt if he were alive today he would call Pope Francis a Marxist!
What I have recognized is that today’s economic imbalances between rich and poor, North and South, even still men and women, and in South Africa whites and blacks - are systemic like Slavery was. Change agents are needed, like the Abolitionists and later the Suffragettes. Calling them “Marxists” says more about yourself than about them!
Saying No to both Socialism and Capitalism?
As both Left and Right crowd around the Centre, the question is whether “welfare capitalism” and “market socialism” are the only two options? Market socialism brought New Labour and Tony Blair to the fore, and welfare capitalism brought you George Bush and his PEPFAR – said to be the biggest gift ever given (to fight HIV/AIDS).
Radical centrism
I am getting to the age where I can start quoting myself… here is something I wrote in 1988 in my book Thinking Communally, Acting Personally (page 136): “One new agenda - communitarianism - is gaining momentum. According to one advocate, Amitai Etzioni, “radical individualists confuse the right to be free from government intrusion with a nonexistent right to be free from the moral scrutiny of one’s peer and community... Communitarians, in other words, differ from classical liberals (known confusingly in America as conservatives) by challenging the idea that individual self-interest is a decent basis for a society. But they differ from socialists in championing small social units: the family, neighborhoods, school, churches...”
But “ideological communitarianism” is still centrist, because it combines leftism on economic issues with moralism or conservatism on social issues.
In the book Bowling Alone, Robert Putnam observed that nearly every form of civic organization has undergone drops in membership exemplified by the fact that, while more people are bowling than in the 1950s, there are fewer bowling leagues. This results in a decline in “social capital”, described by Putnam as “the collective value of all ‘social networks’ and the inclinations that arise from these networks to do things for each other”. According to Putnam and his followers, social capital is a key component to building and maintaining democracy. So Communitarians seek to bolster social capital and the institutions of the third sector or Civil Society.
The Occupy Movement (Indignados)
Also called the 99 Percent Movement, this was sparked in 2011 by Occupy Wall Street in response to what I call “affluence extremism”. Its manifesto started as follows:
“As we gather together in solidarity to express a feeling of mass injustice, we must not lose sight of what brought us together. We write so that all people who feel wronged by the corporate forces of the world can know that we are your allies.”
Marxist scholar John Holloway asserted that you can “change the world without taking power”. However, many in the new generation of activists have become painfully aware that in order to achieve real change you also need to take power; that in order to really scare the 1%, you also need to occupy the state. So some veterans of the Occupy Movement are considering a turn towards electoral politics. This change of direction reflects an increasing awareness that there is a limit to what you can do out of Civil Society.
Zapatistas
Fighter Andile Mngxitama wrote: “The indigenous people of Mexico declared a different path and very boldly told the world: “We are going to rise up to overthrow the supreme governments, to overthrow corrupt officials, to throw the rich and powerful out of this country and begin building a new Mexico with humble, simple people.”
“The Zapatistas refused to choose between two bad systems: they proclaimed dissidence to both Capitalism and Stalinism. They denounced the party and the cult of the leader, and even state power. John Holloway's book Changing the World Without Taking Power can be read as the Zapatista manifesto.
“The Zapatistas, consistent with their new ideology against money and power, refused to participate in the mainstream political process to try to take power. Instead, they formed their own autonomous governments, which get no assistance from the Mexico state. This experience is not without weakness and hardships; the indigenous people have gained visibility but not economic or cultural freedom. Twenty years later, they remain under attack and are all but quarantined in their territories.”
Economic Freedom Fighters
The front page story in today’s Saturday Star is about Wiekus Kotze, an Afrikaner who was so impressed by Nelson Mandela that 20 years ago he joined the ANC and has voted for them in 3 elections. But he has just switched allegiances - to the party of Julius Malema. He is now wearing a read beret. Why? He feels that the ANC is not closing the gap between rich and poor, largely because of all the self-enrichment going on. He sees Malema as a visionary like Mandela who is talking sense and has the courage to challenge the status quo.
Since then I went to see a movie called The Wolf of Wall Street. Without suggesting that all rich people live in that kind of depravity, he lived very extravagantly. He extended the roof of his personal yacht to make it a helicopter pad. To smuggle cash out of the country he literally taped it like football pads around the arms and legs of his “mules” before they headed through Customs at the airport. He mocked his investigators because their salaries were so low they had to travel by subway to meet him.
Reviews of the film raise questions about its excesses. Director Scorcose contends that this was done to expose “affluence extremism” not to condone it. But like the “conversion films” of earlier generations, most of the entertainment focuses on the story before they say the prayer of repentance, not after. Then suddenly… they live happily ever after.
Now I am looking forward to seeing another move – Twelve Years a Slave. Although it takes place in another era (the 1850s instead of the 1990s) it is once again about a depraved system. A wealthy free black man gets captured in the USA and sold into slavery in another state. His brutal master, who is evil personified, resists social change. No doubt if he were alive today he would call Pope Francis a Marxist!
What I have recognized is that today’s economic imbalances between rich and poor, North and South, even still men and women, and in South Africa whites and blacks - are systemic like Slavery was. Change agents are needed, like the Abolitionists and later the Suffragettes. Calling them “Marxists” says more about yourself than about them!
Saying No to both Socialism and Capitalism?
As both Left and Right crowd around the Centre, the question is whether “welfare capitalism” and “market socialism” are the only two options? Market socialism brought New Labour and Tony Blair to the fore, and welfare capitalism brought you George Bush and his PEPFAR – said to be the biggest gift ever given (to fight HIV/AIDS).
Radical centrism
I am getting to the age where I can start quoting myself… here is something I wrote in 1988 in my book Thinking Communally, Acting Personally (page 136): “One new agenda - communitarianism - is gaining momentum. According to one advocate, Amitai Etzioni, “radical individualists confuse the right to be free from government intrusion with a nonexistent right to be free from the moral scrutiny of one’s peer and community... Communitarians, in other words, differ from classical liberals (known confusingly in America as conservatives) by challenging the idea that individual self-interest is a decent basis for a society. But they differ from socialists in championing small social units: the family, neighborhoods, school, churches...”
But “ideological communitarianism” is still centrist, because it combines leftism on economic issues with moralism or conservatism on social issues.
In the book Bowling Alone, Robert Putnam observed that nearly every form of civic organization has undergone drops in membership exemplified by the fact that, while more people are bowling than in the 1950s, there are fewer bowling leagues. This results in a decline in “social capital”, described by Putnam as “the collective value of all ‘social networks’ and the inclinations that arise from these networks to do things for each other”. According to Putnam and his followers, social capital is a key component to building and maintaining democracy. So Communitarians seek to bolster social capital and the institutions of the third sector or Civil Society.
The Occupy Movement (Indignados)
Also called the 99 Percent Movement, this was sparked in 2011 by Occupy Wall Street in response to what I call “affluence extremism”. Its manifesto started as follows:
“As we gather together in solidarity to express a feeling of mass injustice, we must not lose sight of what brought us together. We write so that all people who feel wronged by the corporate forces of the world can know that we are your allies.”
Marxist scholar John Holloway asserted that you can “change the world without taking power”. However, many in the new generation of activists have become painfully aware that in order to achieve real change you also need to take power; that in order to really scare the 1%, you also need to occupy the state. So some veterans of the Occupy Movement are considering a turn towards electoral politics. This change of direction reflects an increasing awareness that there is a limit to what you can do out of Civil Society.
Zapatistas
Fighter Andile Mngxitama wrote: “The indigenous people of Mexico declared a different path and very boldly told the world: “We are going to rise up to overthrow the supreme governments, to overthrow corrupt officials, to throw the rich and powerful out of this country and begin building a new Mexico with humble, simple people.”
“The Zapatistas refused to choose between two bad systems: they proclaimed dissidence to both Capitalism and Stalinism. They denounced the party and the cult of the leader, and even state power. John Holloway's book Changing the World Without Taking Power can be read as the Zapatista manifesto.
“The Zapatistas, consistent with their new ideology against money and power, refused to participate in the mainstream political process to try to take power. Instead, they formed their own autonomous governments, which get no assistance from the Mexico state. This experience is not without weakness and hardships; the indigenous people have gained visibility but not economic or cultural freedom. Twenty years later, they remain under attack and are all but quarantined in their territories.”
Economic Freedom Fighters
The front page story in today’s Saturday Star is about Wiekus Kotze, an Afrikaner who was so impressed by Nelson Mandela that 20 years ago he joined the ANC and has voted for them in 3 elections. But he has just switched allegiances - to the party of Julius Malema. He is now wearing a read beret. Why? He feels that the ANC is not closing the gap between rich and poor, largely because of all the self-enrichment going on. He sees Malema as a visionary like Mandela who is talking sense and has the courage to challenge the status quo.
Wednesday, 15 July 2015
Charity Begins at Home
I am not an economist. Nor am I a latter-day John the Baptist. But I have to say a bit more about the two themes of “affluence extremism” and Inequality that are still on my mind…
Here, I learned that:
The April 18th 2014 interview focuses on a book by French author Thomas Piketty called CAPITAL. This book maps the concentration of inherited wealth and suggests that an Oligarchy is emerging. This is because of the disproportionate influence on policymaking that wealthy families have, because they have the money to lobby in the corridors of power. This is undermining Democracy, in the sense that while ordinary wage earners may be able to vote, they have little impact on public policy formulation.
The Economist recently ran a cover story about Capitalist Cronyism. Please note that the two words are reversed – pointing to this same phenomenon. It is no longer ad hoc, it is entrenched.
An interesting trend is that while investors can earn about 4 or 5% on their capital, economies are only growing at about 2 or 3%. In other words, private wealth is being stashed away by those who already have plenty. While economies are growing too slowly even to catch up with the rush of school leavers into the work force. The result is high rates of unemployment or underemployment, while the gap keeps widening between haves and have-nots.
Here is what I wrote in the last C4L Bulletin on April 22nd:
“The gospel of neoliberalism, brought to you by Ronald Reagan and Maggie Thatcher, said that lowering taxes would stimulate economic growth. Business would experience that “my cup runneth over” – and that would cause plenty of “trickle-down”.
“Pope Francis pointed out that the problem with this approach is that they keep making the cup bigger! His metaphor is instructive. Neither do I see it as only governments that do this, slowing the trickle-down effect.”
I then got very bold with an attempt to challenge you all (coz Bill Gates and Warren Buffet aren’t on my mailing list) to do your part. Coz charity begins at home:
“Most people gauge their giving by their income - for example, by tithing ten percent of it. But if you earn 100 000 per year, live on 50 000 and tithe 10 000, then you “store” 40 000 away in investments. You accumulate wealth by doing this year after year. What about deploying ten percent of your wealth for development, as well as ten percent of your income? That would make the cup smaller, and increase the trickle-down. We all need to do more, because the gap is getting wider as the trickle-down dries up.”
Well the best response that I got to that Bulletin so far was when one of you sent me the above link today. Thank you old friend! It makes me realize that you out there are thinking about what this voice crying in the wilderness says.
Do you remember that the Truth and Reconciliation Commission here in South Africa made a number of recommendations to government how to redress past imbalances? One was a once-off wealth tax. Desmond Tutu has recently lamented that this was never implemented, and I second the emotion. Redistribution is clearly needed – but how?
Let me come back to that question: What about deploying ten percent of your wealth for development, as well as ten percent of your income?
If you are up to this, I can put you in touch with a bona fide investment broker in Canada, although your own broker could do it as well...
Put aside ten percent of your wealth. I mean the accumulation, on your balance sheet, not the tithe on your annual income. You are not giving it away, it still belongs to you. Invest it for a specified period, let’s say a year – until you need it back. The broker will skim off what she predicts it can earn during the period specified, and release that amount to charity. Then she grows your capital back to the same amount that you invested, and returns it to you.
This is not the Giving Pledge, where you give away 50% of your wealth. Coz you are not fabulously wealthy. But if you are not part of the solution, then you are part of the problem. Some people are caught in a web of poverty, and others in a web of affluence. Please recognize that the system is stacked against the poor. But you can do something about it, without marching on Wall Street!
If you are up to this, I will make you a pledge. If C4L is nominated as your charity, we will not give that money away. We will lend it to poor and unemployed youth to start viable business ventures. They will pay it back in less than 3 years into a revolving loan fund. So others can also benefit. I am speaking about our Chaya microfranchising, which also has nutritional and medicinal benefits, not to mention the job creation and positive impact on food security.
I am talking about voluntary redistribution of wealth. Not about tithing your income. Make the cup smaller. Increase the trickle down. Then think of the mustard seed, so small, but it grows into a tree that birds can sit in. You don’t have to be a billionaire to do this!
Here, I learned that:
- The 100 top paid CEOs in America earn an average income of $13.9 million per year
- The top paid 350 executives earn an average annual income of $11.7 million
- The average income in America is $35,000
- The rate of income for those top 350 executives is 331 times higher than what most people earn
- The top 1% of the population earns 60% of the income
The April 18th 2014 interview focuses on a book by French author Thomas Piketty called CAPITAL. This book maps the concentration of inherited wealth and suggests that an Oligarchy is emerging. This is because of the disproportionate influence on policymaking that wealthy families have, because they have the money to lobby in the corridors of power. This is undermining Democracy, in the sense that while ordinary wage earners may be able to vote, they have little impact on public policy formulation.
The Economist recently ran a cover story about Capitalist Cronyism. Please note that the two words are reversed – pointing to this same phenomenon. It is no longer ad hoc, it is entrenched.
An interesting trend is that while investors can earn about 4 or 5% on their capital, economies are only growing at about 2 or 3%. In other words, private wealth is being stashed away by those who already have plenty. While economies are growing too slowly even to catch up with the rush of school leavers into the work force. The result is high rates of unemployment or underemployment, while the gap keeps widening between haves and have-nots.
Here is what I wrote in the last C4L Bulletin on April 22nd:
“The gospel of neoliberalism, brought to you by Ronald Reagan and Maggie Thatcher, said that lowering taxes would stimulate economic growth. Business would experience that “my cup runneth over” – and that would cause plenty of “trickle-down”.
“Pope Francis pointed out that the problem with this approach is that they keep making the cup bigger! His metaphor is instructive. Neither do I see it as only governments that do this, slowing the trickle-down effect.”
I then got very bold with an attempt to challenge you all (coz Bill Gates and Warren Buffet aren’t on my mailing list) to do your part. Coz charity begins at home:
“Most people gauge their giving by their income - for example, by tithing ten percent of it. But if you earn 100 000 per year, live on 50 000 and tithe 10 000, then you “store” 40 000 away in investments. You accumulate wealth by doing this year after year. What about deploying ten percent of your wealth for development, as well as ten percent of your income? That would make the cup smaller, and increase the trickle-down. We all need to do more, because the gap is getting wider as the trickle-down dries up.”
Well the best response that I got to that Bulletin so far was when one of you sent me the above link today. Thank you old friend! It makes me realize that you out there are thinking about what this voice crying in the wilderness says.
Do you remember that the Truth and Reconciliation Commission here in South Africa made a number of recommendations to government how to redress past imbalances? One was a once-off wealth tax. Desmond Tutu has recently lamented that this was never implemented, and I second the emotion. Redistribution is clearly needed – but how?
Let me come back to that question: What about deploying ten percent of your wealth for development, as well as ten percent of your income?
If you are up to this, I can put you in touch with a bona fide investment broker in Canada, although your own broker could do it as well...
Put aside ten percent of your wealth. I mean the accumulation, on your balance sheet, not the tithe on your annual income. You are not giving it away, it still belongs to you. Invest it for a specified period, let’s say a year – until you need it back. The broker will skim off what she predicts it can earn during the period specified, and release that amount to charity. Then she grows your capital back to the same amount that you invested, and returns it to you.
This is not the Giving Pledge, where you give away 50% of your wealth. Coz you are not fabulously wealthy. But if you are not part of the solution, then you are part of the problem. Some people are caught in a web of poverty, and others in a web of affluence. Please recognize that the system is stacked against the poor. But you can do something about it, without marching on Wall Street!
If you are up to this, I will make you a pledge. If C4L is nominated as your charity, we will not give that money away. We will lend it to poor and unemployed youth to start viable business ventures. They will pay it back in less than 3 years into a revolving loan fund. So others can also benefit. I am speaking about our Chaya microfranchising, which also has nutritional and medicinal benefits, not to mention the job creation and positive impact on food security.
I am talking about voluntary redistribution of wealth. Not about tithing your income. Make the cup smaller. Increase the trickle down. Then think of the mustard seed, so small, but it grows into a tree that birds can sit in. You don’t have to be a billionaire to do this!
Monday, 29 June 2015
Viva Contentment, Gratitude and Moderation!
There was a time when these three qualities were extolled as virtues. Today other forces are displacing them – like entitlement, consumerism and over-exuberance. So we hear of “lifestyle audits” and even spending ceilings to keep leaders from setting a bad example. In Canada, when Tommy Douglas was premier, he drove a Dodge – not a Cadillac. In Burkina Faso, Thomas Sankara made the Renault 5 the official car of cabinet ministers, to reduce expenditure on Mercedes limos. In the past year, Pope Francis has stated that leaders should drive “humble cars”. He has declined to move into the Vatican Palace and is leading by example. Actions speak louder than words.
On my recent trip to Canada, the Premier of Alberta had to resign for making extravagant plans for a penthouse suite at the top of a government building. The planning did not follow normal channels. In South Africa, this is exactly what happened at Nkandla. Yet here the President’s party did not ditch him, as hers did in Alberta, in spite of very clear outcomes of an investigation done by the ombudsman known as the Public Protector.
Contentment
Consumerism is the more modern, North American version of Capitalism. It is quite different from the older European version, in which wealth accumulated tended to be re-invested rather than spent. In fact, Consumerism was resisted in Europe at first, in the post-war years. It was regarded as gauche. But it prevailed. In this version, people are encouraged to be spenders not savers. The medium for this is called Marketing. How can Marketing work where there is contentment, gratitude and moderation?
The chickens have come home to roost. According to Sampie Terreblanche, it was high levels of consumer debt and government deficits led to the global economic slow-down that he calls the Great Recession (from 2008). He links this to both bail-outs of companies that were “too large to fail” and to an increase in corruption and corporate criminality. Again on my recent trip to Canada, I found that scandals in politics are not just a South African phenomenon!
Terreblanche writes: “The ideologies of neoliberal globalism and market fundamentalism that were sold so triumphantly – and arrogantly – to South Africa by the Americans in the early 1990s now stand thoroughly discredited.” (p 35, Lost in Transformation).
I am a missionary not an economist. But on both sides of the Atlantic, I would like to see more redistribution of wealth – poor people living with more and rich people living with less. In South Africa, the legacy of neoliberalism is inequality. Some people have become fabulously wealthy, while most people have not felt an improvement in their lifestyle. This imbalance needs to be corrected… there is just no question about it.
Gratitude
The gospel of neoliberalism, brought to you by Ronald Reagan and Maggie Thatcher, said that lowering taxes would stimulate economic growth. Business would experience that “my cup runneth over” – and that would cause plenty of “trickle-down”. This is where the nonprofit sector comes into Democracy. It is there to carry social benefits on through what in South Africa is called CSI (Corporate Social Investment). In this way companies express their gratitude to society by having a double bottom line – financial and social. They fund registered NGOs to provide care to the marginalized – those who fall through the cracks of the economy - like the unemployed and the destitute.
Pope Francis pointed out that the problem with this approach is that they keep making the cup bigger! His metaphor is instructive. Neither do I see it as only governments that do this, slowing the trickle-down effect. Certainly governments in the North rarely meet their pledges for development assistance, and public servants live on a gravy train where ever you go.
Sharing wealth with others is but a way of expressing thanks for what you have received. A good example is the Giving Pledge, but it is for millionaires, not for ordinary people. Do we give enough, as families and individuals? Or is our generosity diminished by the environment of Marketing, that drives people away from the values of contentment, gratitude and moderation? I have a sense that in the context of Consumerism, there has been a lot of drift from those virtues, and that each of us has a role in making the cup bigger, and thus reducing the trickle-down. This applies to prosperous South Africans living in a country where disparity is phenomenal – and to those overseas in “the West” whose lifestyles may become an issue to the Great Shepherd when he returns to separate the sheep from the goats.
Moderation
The ancient Stoics espoused this virtue. It was not Pope Francis who thought it up. The Lausanne covenant promotes the slogan: Live simply so that others can simply live.
C4L has scaled down for its own reasons – not so much there is less trickle-down, but because it recognized that it was living beyond its means. This caused it to go chasing after funding not so much to carry out its mission as to keep the wheels turning.
Some people may see this as slowdown or even failure. We don’t. We see it as a sign of the times. How can we point the finger at government “fat cats” in our Advocacy programming when we ourselves are not ready to redistribute our wealth, especially for the cause that we champion – youth unemployment?
There is a difference between your income and your wealth. One is your personal Profit and Loss Statement for a month or a year. The other is your personal Balance Sheet. Most people gauge their giving by their income - for example, by tithing ten percent of it. But if you earn 100 000 per year, live on 50 000 and tithe 10 000, then you “store” 40 000 away in investments. You accumulate wealth by doing this year after year. What about deploying ten percent of your wealth for development, as well as ten percent of your income? That would make the cup smaller, and increase the trickle-down. We all need to do more, because the gap is getting wider as the trickle-down dries up.
On my recent trip to Canada, the Premier of Alberta had to resign for making extravagant plans for a penthouse suite at the top of a government building. The planning did not follow normal channels. In South Africa, this is exactly what happened at Nkandla. Yet here the President’s party did not ditch him, as hers did in Alberta, in spite of very clear outcomes of an investigation done by the ombudsman known as the Public Protector.
Contentment
Consumerism is the more modern, North American version of Capitalism. It is quite different from the older European version, in which wealth accumulated tended to be re-invested rather than spent. In fact, Consumerism was resisted in Europe at first, in the post-war years. It was regarded as gauche. But it prevailed. In this version, people are encouraged to be spenders not savers. The medium for this is called Marketing. How can Marketing work where there is contentment, gratitude and moderation?
The chickens have come home to roost. According to Sampie Terreblanche, it was high levels of consumer debt and government deficits led to the global economic slow-down that he calls the Great Recession (from 2008). He links this to both bail-outs of companies that were “too large to fail” and to an increase in corruption and corporate criminality. Again on my recent trip to Canada, I found that scandals in politics are not just a South African phenomenon!
Terreblanche writes: “The ideologies of neoliberal globalism and market fundamentalism that were sold so triumphantly – and arrogantly – to South Africa by the Americans in the early 1990s now stand thoroughly discredited.” (p 35, Lost in Transformation).
I am a missionary not an economist. But on both sides of the Atlantic, I would like to see more redistribution of wealth – poor people living with more and rich people living with less. In South Africa, the legacy of neoliberalism is inequality. Some people have become fabulously wealthy, while most people have not felt an improvement in their lifestyle. This imbalance needs to be corrected… there is just no question about it.
Gratitude
The gospel of neoliberalism, brought to you by Ronald Reagan and Maggie Thatcher, said that lowering taxes would stimulate economic growth. Business would experience that “my cup runneth over” – and that would cause plenty of “trickle-down”. This is where the nonprofit sector comes into Democracy. It is there to carry social benefits on through what in South Africa is called CSI (Corporate Social Investment). In this way companies express their gratitude to society by having a double bottom line – financial and social. They fund registered NGOs to provide care to the marginalized – those who fall through the cracks of the economy - like the unemployed and the destitute.
Pope Francis pointed out that the problem with this approach is that they keep making the cup bigger! His metaphor is instructive. Neither do I see it as only governments that do this, slowing the trickle-down effect. Certainly governments in the North rarely meet their pledges for development assistance, and public servants live on a gravy train where ever you go.
Sharing wealth with others is but a way of expressing thanks for what you have received. A good example is the Giving Pledge, but it is for millionaires, not for ordinary people. Do we give enough, as families and individuals? Or is our generosity diminished by the environment of Marketing, that drives people away from the values of contentment, gratitude and moderation? I have a sense that in the context of Consumerism, there has been a lot of drift from those virtues, and that each of us has a role in making the cup bigger, and thus reducing the trickle-down. This applies to prosperous South Africans living in a country where disparity is phenomenal – and to those overseas in “the West” whose lifestyles may become an issue to the Great Shepherd when he returns to separate the sheep from the goats.
Moderation
The ancient Stoics espoused this virtue. It was not Pope Francis who thought it up. The Lausanne covenant promotes the slogan: Live simply so that others can simply live.
C4L has scaled down for its own reasons – not so much there is less trickle-down, but because it recognized that it was living beyond its means. This caused it to go chasing after funding not so much to carry out its mission as to keep the wheels turning.
Some people may see this as slowdown or even failure. We don’t. We see it as a sign of the times. How can we point the finger at government “fat cats” in our Advocacy programming when we ourselves are not ready to redistribute our wealth, especially for the cause that we champion – youth unemployment?
There is a difference between your income and your wealth. One is your personal Profit and Loss Statement for a month or a year. The other is your personal Balance Sheet. Most people gauge their giving by their income - for example, by tithing ten percent of it. But if you earn 100 000 per year, live on 50 000 and tithe 10 000, then you “store” 40 000 away in investments. You accumulate wealth by doing this year after year. What about deploying ten percent of your wealth for development, as well as ten percent of your income? That would make the cup smaller, and increase the trickle-down. We all need to do more, because the gap is getting wider as the trickle-down dries up.
Papal Bull or Affluence Extremism?
In a recent article called Radical Pope, Traditional Values, Robert Colderisi quotes the Pope’s assurances in responses to being called a Marxist by Rush Limbaugh:
“Marxist ideology is wrong,” he told the Italian newspaper La Stampa. “But I have met many Marxists in my life who are good people, so I don’t feel offended. There is nothing in the exhortation that cannot be found in the social doctrine of the church.”
Colderisi goes on: Francis’ economic opinions may appear naïve to those more worried about productivity trends and price-earnings ratios than the 10,000 children who die every day from hunger. But his passion and purpose are timely. Last year, the World Bank reported that the number of extreme poor (those making less than $1.25 a day) had dropped in every region of the world, including Africa, but that the number of those living on less than $2 per day — 2.5 billion people, or 43 percent of the population of the developing world — had hardly budged in 30 years. In other words, improvements in public welfare have barely kept pace with population growth, and there is still much to be done to bridge the gap between the rich and the poor.
I have often heard that the padres in Mozambique quoted as saying: “Do as I say, not as I do.” So I am impressed to note that Pope Francis declined to live alone in the Vatican palace. He opted to live in a simple apartment with 2 others. His predecessor also did the unthinkable – he retired. No one is saying so, but this could set a precedent as well. Actions speak louder than words. This is not being radical, just pragmatic.
By the way, C4L is following suit. In our case, we are calling it “co-habitation”. We have devised a way to stay on the same campus while scaling down. This converts assets from one kind to another in a way that makes C4L more sustainable. “He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain what he cannot lose.”
It has been a tough year all round, not just for C4L. Even Warren Buffet is poised to report that Berkshire Hathaway, his $292 billion company, failed to increase net worth more rapidly that the S&P 500 index during the past 5 years. This will be the first time in 44 years that he falls short of the mark since his 1965 takeover of the firm.
Was Warren Buffet called a Marxist when he endorsed the Giving Pledge? I like Colderisi’s notion that you can still take radical actions while conserving traditional values. Some years ago I quoted a film called The Blind Side in a previous C4L Bulletin. A white wealthy Southern family took in a black street kid. In one of the most poignant scenes in the film, the family invites “Big Mike” to stay with them permanently, after he has been sleeping on the couch for awhile:
Leigh Anne Touhy: Find some time to figure out another bedroom for you.
Michael Oher: This is mine?
Leigh Anne Touhy: Yes, sir.
Michael Oher: I never had one before.
Leigh Anne Touhy: What, a room to yourself?
Michael Oher: A bed.
I have to admit to choking up at this point. Two Bible verses came to mind: “Foxes have holes and birds of the air have nests, but the Son of Man has no place to lay his head” and “I tell you the truth, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers of mine, you did for me.” This is not Marxism, this is generosity. Do you have a blind side to this?
Greatest Hits
Initially, from 1998, C4L Updates - like this one - served as progress reports. This is part of C4L’s Advancement and they often takes the form of exhortation.
Then in 2006, these updates began to be interspersed with thematic bulletins. Most of these were on the theme of Childermas – transforming leadership, so that children are safe.
From 2010, the two aspects of Childermas began to diverge. Transforming leadership has become the dominant theme; in the past year its focus has narrowed – to Triumphalism vs. Constitutionalism. As for the second aspect - C4L’s focus has shifted from “child protection” to livelihood security for youth.
Quite a collection of challenging reading materials has emerged! We now invite you to visit our Drop Box… https://www.dropbox.com/sh/49c1ksy7iw66gs9/StBtCrJvPQ?m
Click on Public Engagement, to find these segregated by theme:
Colerisi wrote: The educational role of the church in the developing world has been powerful and often controversial. “All we want is a labor force,” a colonial governor lamented to missionaries in Madagascar a century ago, “and you’re turning them into human beings.”
To blog or not to blog, that is the question?
Colerisi wrote: In Victorian times, Pope Leo XIII (in office, 1878-1903) was also denounced as a “socialist” when, in 1891, he issued the Catholic Church’s first formal statement on economic and social issues. In “Rerum Novarum,” he called for a living wage, opposed child labor and (a little belatedly) supported the idea of trade unions. Leo’s strong defense of private property in the same letter did not seem to win over critics.
C4L is seeking some feedback from readers of its bulletins, which are written more or less monthly. The trickle of response we get tends to be very positive and it keeps us going. In fact we often hear someone say they wish that these bulletins had a broader readership. Some have suggested blogging, and some have suggested the social media.
We are open to suggestions and contacts. Perhaps we should syndicate the bulletins as a column? Or find a publisher? What are your thoughts? This could include feedback on which themes you deem most pertinent and useful? On philanthopy? On leadership? On youth rights? Which direction should we take this in? Just as there are no leaders without followers, there are no authors without readers. You are stakeholders, please speak up.
“Marxist ideology is wrong,” he told the Italian newspaper La Stampa. “But I have met many Marxists in my life who are good people, so I don’t feel offended. There is nothing in the exhortation that cannot be found in the social doctrine of the church.”
Colderisi goes on: Francis’ economic opinions may appear naïve to those more worried about productivity trends and price-earnings ratios than the 10,000 children who die every day from hunger. But his passion and purpose are timely. Last year, the World Bank reported that the number of extreme poor (those making less than $1.25 a day) had dropped in every region of the world, including Africa, but that the number of those living on less than $2 per day — 2.5 billion people, or 43 percent of the population of the developing world — had hardly budged in 30 years. In other words, improvements in public welfare have barely kept pace with population growth, and there is still much to be done to bridge the gap between the rich and the poor.
I have often heard that the padres in Mozambique quoted as saying: “Do as I say, not as I do.” So I am impressed to note that Pope Francis declined to live alone in the Vatican palace. He opted to live in a simple apartment with 2 others. His predecessor also did the unthinkable – he retired. No one is saying so, but this could set a precedent as well. Actions speak louder than words. This is not being radical, just pragmatic.
By the way, C4L is following suit. In our case, we are calling it “co-habitation”. We have devised a way to stay on the same campus while scaling down. This converts assets from one kind to another in a way that makes C4L more sustainable. “He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain what he cannot lose.”
It has been a tough year all round, not just for C4L. Even Warren Buffet is poised to report that Berkshire Hathaway, his $292 billion company, failed to increase net worth more rapidly that the S&P 500 index during the past 5 years. This will be the first time in 44 years that he falls short of the mark since his 1965 takeover of the firm.
Was Warren Buffet called a Marxist when he endorsed the Giving Pledge? I like Colderisi’s notion that you can still take radical actions while conserving traditional values. Some years ago I quoted a film called The Blind Side in a previous C4L Bulletin. A white wealthy Southern family took in a black street kid. In one of the most poignant scenes in the film, the family invites “Big Mike” to stay with them permanently, after he has been sleeping on the couch for awhile:
Leigh Anne Touhy: Find some time to figure out another bedroom for you.
Michael Oher: This is mine?
Leigh Anne Touhy: Yes, sir.
Michael Oher: I never had one before.
Leigh Anne Touhy: What, a room to yourself?
Michael Oher: A bed.
I have to admit to choking up at this point. Two Bible verses came to mind: “Foxes have holes and birds of the air have nests, but the Son of Man has no place to lay his head” and “I tell you the truth, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers of mine, you did for me.” This is not Marxism, this is generosity. Do you have a blind side to this?
Greatest Hits
Initially, from 1998, C4L Updates - like this one - served as progress reports. This is part of C4L’s Advancement and they often takes the form of exhortation.
Then in 2006, these updates began to be interspersed with thematic bulletins. Most of these were on the theme of Childermas – transforming leadership, so that children are safe.
From 2010, the two aspects of Childermas began to diverge. Transforming leadership has become the dominant theme; in the past year its focus has narrowed – to Triumphalism vs. Constitutionalism. As for the second aspect - C4L’s focus has shifted from “child protection” to livelihood security for youth.
Quite a collection of challenging reading materials has emerged! We now invite you to visit our Drop Box… https://www.dropbox.com/sh/49c1ksy7iw66gs9/StBtCrJvPQ?m
Click on Public Engagement, to find these segregated by theme:
- Altruism, koinonia and philanthropy
- Childermas
- Transforming leadership
- Youth rights
Colerisi wrote: The educational role of the church in the developing world has been powerful and often controversial. “All we want is a labor force,” a colonial governor lamented to missionaries in Madagascar a century ago, “and you’re turning them into human beings.”
To blog or not to blog, that is the question?
Colerisi wrote: In Victorian times, Pope Leo XIII (in office, 1878-1903) was also denounced as a “socialist” when, in 1891, he issued the Catholic Church’s first formal statement on economic and social issues. In “Rerum Novarum,” he called for a living wage, opposed child labor and (a little belatedly) supported the idea of trade unions. Leo’s strong defense of private property in the same letter did not seem to win over critics.
C4L is seeking some feedback from readers of its bulletins, which are written more or less monthly. The trickle of response we get tends to be very positive and it keeps us going. In fact we often hear someone say they wish that these bulletins had a broader readership. Some have suggested blogging, and some have suggested the social media.
We are open to suggestions and contacts. Perhaps we should syndicate the bulletins as a column? Or find a publisher? What are your thoughts? This could include feedback on which themes you deem most pertinent and useful? On philanthopy? On leadership? On youth rights? Which direction should we take this in? Just as there are no leaders without followers, there are no authors without readers. You are stakeholders, please speak up.
Wednesday, 17 June 2015
Unambiguously Pro-Poor
An article called Mission Schools Opened World to Africans, but Left an Ambiguous Legacy by Samuel G Freedman was published in the New York Times on December 27, 2013. Here are a few clips:
The accomplishments of mission schools were both intentional and not. Their founders and faculties clearly parted ways with colonial leaders by believing in the educability of black Africans…
“I’m not making missionaries heroes,” said Richard H. Elphick, a historian at Wesleyan University in Connecticut and the author of The Equality of Believers, a book about Protestant missionaries in South Africa. “Missionaries and other white Christians were alarmed by the idea that the equality of all people before God means they should be equal in public life. But the equality of believers is an idea they dropped into South Africa. And it was constantly reinforced in the schools. And that made it a dangerous idea.”
Olufemi Taiwo offered a similarly nuanced endorsement, and he did so from two perspectives: as the product of a mission education in his native Nigeria and as a Cornell University professor with expertise in African studies.
“Under colonialism, there’s a tension between the missions and the colonial authorities,” said Dr. Taiwo, author of the 2010 book How Colonialism Preempted Modernity in Africa. “There was a missionary idea that black people could be modern. And most churches cannot come out and say some people are not human. So you might have a patronizing attitude, but if you don’t think Africans can benefit from education, why would you set up schools?”
Certainly, the model of mission education was not unique to Africa. White American missionaries played a similarly complicated role as emblems of both modernity and noblesse oblige in China before the Communist revolution. Many mission colleges in South Africa modeled their practical courses in industry and agriculture — a curriculum known as differentiated education or adapted education — on those of black schools in the United States such as Booker T. Washington’s Tuskegee Institute.
Unique South African Paradigm
Just as that Chinese Church, planted by missionaries, survived on its own and has emerged as a force in that setting, one cannot lump South Africa together with most other countries in one respect. The Union of South Africa emerged early in the 20th century by amalgamating some of the Boer Republics with some of the British Colonies. Other than Ethiopia, which was never colonized, South Africa was really the first state to become recognized as independent. (Although internally, as we know, it was ruled by a repressive minority, and thus the last to be free.)
But its missiology is unique. In many Catholic settings – in Latin America or in Quebec – the development paradigm was to build a church in a strategic location – for a town would grow up around it. Even Europe evolved similarly, with once deep rural monasteries becoming the hub of trade and thus of urbanization in their vicinity.
Afrikanerdom evolved similarly, with the Boer communities building churches with high steeples visible from afar. Each and every church supported two clergy – the Pastor and the Missionary. The Boers (Afrikans for “farmers”) in the church’s catchment area were visited regularly by the Pastor. An aside is than many farmhouses had a “parson’s lounge” that was only used on such occasions; the rest of the time the family would socialize in either the kitchen or a “family room”.
On these visits, the Missionary would also come along. But his ministry was to “the blacks”. So while the Pastor met the white family, the Missionary ministered to the farm workers – evangelizing, teaching and counseling. This is why all South African cultures have become so thoroughly saturated with the Gospel. Even more so than in the better known paradigm of a Mission school in a deep rural part of Africa – like Fort Hare where Nelson Mandela, Oliver Tambo, Chris Hani, Mangosuthu Buthelezi, Robert Sobukwe and Robert Mugabe all studied. That more familiar paradigm provided some access to education for selected Africans who eventually became part of the elite. Whereas the Dutch Reformed church basically had much broader coverage – on a farm to farm basis. South Africa was thus deeply Christianized, even while deeply divided racially.
The Equality of Believers
Once more the chickens are coming home to roost - on the theme of Disparity or Inequity. And once again, there is a dialectic… for example, Pope Francis I has spoken out about this issue globally; there is too much Disparity between rich and poor, generally. Surely there is significance in his choice of name – honouring St Francis of Assisi.
But in South Africa, the peculiarity is that this tends to line up along the usual fault lines of race. Not entirely, though, as a black middle class is growing. You often hear references to “black diamonds” or to “Buppies” (black urban professionals). Some say that this suggests that apartheid is being replaced by a class system – black diamonds on top, then Buppies in the upper middle class, then the middle class, then the working class (represented largely by COSATU), with an underclass of the unemployed.
Once more, white Christians in South Africa are in an enclave. Whether that will some day become a white ghetto that they cannot escape depends on whether and how they can cease to be patronizing and rather promote wealth generation projects – particularly among the unemployed.
The Indian community has been present in South Africa for much longer than whites. It somehow manages to both remain distinct and engaged. Under apartheid Indians were “non-whites” so they now enjoy some of the advantages of affirmative action (BEE). But on the whole they too remain advantaged - generally wealthier and better educated.
Putting the right foot forward
My basic proposition is this: reducing economic disparity leads to social peace. Yet so often in South Africa, the fight for social justice has eclipsed the struggle for economic freedom. Given the history of racism not to mention sexism, one can understand why. But still, that is like coming in the back door.
Like the above mentioned “curriculum known as differentiated education or adapted education — on those of black schools in the United States… practical courses in industry and agriculture” should be the priority. Job creation, entrepreneurship, wealth generation, enterprise development, poverty eradication, micro-loans, business mentoring, incubation (call it what you will) are the new focus of Christian Outreach. And “the haves” should be investing generously and unambiguously in “the have-nots”. Or the church will become irrelevant…
The accomplishments of mission schools were both intentional and not. Their founders and faculties clearly parted ways with colonial leaders by believing in the educability of black Africans…
“I’m not making missionaries heroes,” said Richard H. Elphick, a historian at Wesleyan University in Connecticut and the author of The Equality of Believers, a book about Protestant missionaries in South Africa. “Missionaries and other white Christians were alarmed by the idea that the equality of all people before God means they should be equal in public life. But the equality of believers is an idea they dropped into South Africa. And it was constantly reinforced in the schools. And that made it a dangerous idea.”
Olufemi Taiwo offered a similarly nuanced endorsement, and he did so from two perspectives: as the product of a mission education in his native Nigeria and as a Cornell University professor with expertise in African studies.
“Under colonialism, there’s a tension between the missions and the colonial authorities,” said Dr. Taiwo, author of the 2010 book How Colonialism Preempted Modernity in Africa. “There was a missionary idea that black people could be modern. And most churches cannot come out and say some people are not human. So you might have a patronizing attitude, but if you don’t think Africans can benefit from education, why would you set up schools?”
Certainly, the model of mission education was not unique to Africa. White American missionaries played a similarly complicated role as emblems of both modernity and noblesse oblige in China before the Communist revolution. Many mission colleges in South Africa modeled their practical courses in industry and agriculture — a curriculum known as differentiated education or adapted education — on those of black schools in the United States such as Booker T. Washington’s Tuskegee Institute.
Unique South African Paradigm
Just as that Chinese Church, planted by missionaries, survived on its own and has emerged as a force in that setting, one cannot lump South Africa together with most other countries in one respect. The Union of South Africa emerged early in the 20th century by amalgamating some of the Boer Republics with some of the British Colonies. Other than Ethiopia, which was never colonized, South Africa was really the first state to become recognized as independent. (Although internally, as we know, it was ruled by a repressive minority, and thus the last to be free.)
But its missiology is unique. In many Catholic settings – in Latin America or in Quebec – the development paradigm was to build a church in a strategic location – for a town would grow up around it. Even Europe evolved similarly, with once deep rural monasteries becoming the hub of trade and thus of urbanization in their vicinity.
Afrikanerdom evolved similarly, with the Boer communities building churches with high steeples visible from afar. Each and every church supported two clergy – the Pastor and the Missionary. The Boers (Afrikans for “farmers”) in the church’s catchment area were visited regularly by the Pastor. An aside is than many farmhouses had a “parson’s lounge” that was only used on such occasions; the rest of the time the family would socialize in either the kitchen or a “family room”.
On these visits, the Missionary would also come along. But his ministry was to “the blacks”. So while the Pastor met the white family, the Missionary ministered to the farm workers – evangelizing, teaching and counseling. This is why all South African cultures have become so thoroughly saturated with the Gospel. Even more so than in the better known paradigm of a Mission school in a deep rural part of Africa – like Fort Hare where Nelson Mandela, Oliver Tambo, Chris Hani, Mangosuthu Buthelezi, Robert Sobukwe and Robert Mugabe all studied. That more familiar paradigm provided some access to education for selected Africans who eventually became part of the elite. Whereas the Dutch Reformed church basically had much broader coverage – on a farm to farm basis. South Africa was thus deeply Christianized, even while deeply divided racially.
The Equality of Believers
Once more the chickens are coming home to roost - on the theme of Disparity or Inequity. And once again, there is a dialectic… for example, Pope Francis I has spoken out about this issue globally; there is too much Disparity between rich and poor, generally. Surely there is significance in his choice of name – honouring St Francis of Assisi.
But in South Africa, the peculiarity is that this tends to line up along the usual fault lines of race. Not entirely, though, as a black middle class is growing. You often hear references to “black diamonds” or to “Buppies” (black urban professionals). Some say that this suggests that apartheid is being replaced by a class system – black diamonds on top, then Buppies in the upper middle class, then the middle class, then the working class (represented largely by COSATU), with an underclass of the unemployed.
Once more, white Christians in South Africa are in an enclave. Whether that will some day become a white ghetto that they cannot escape depends on whether and how they can cease to be patronizing and rather promote wealth generation projects – particularly among the unemployed.
The Indian community has been present in South Africa for much longer than whites. It somehow manages to both remain distinct and engaged. Under apartheid Indians were “non-whites” so they now enjoy some of the advantages of affirmative action (BEE). But on the whole they too remain advantaged - generally wealthier and better educated.
Putting the right foot forward
My basic proposition is this: reducing economic disparity leads to social peace. Yet so often in South Africa, the fight for social justice has eclipsed the struggle for economic freedom. Given the history of racism not to mention sexism, one can understand why. But still, that is like coming in the back door.
Like the above mentioned “curriculum known as differentiated education or adapted education — on those of black schools in the United States… practical courses in industry and agriculture” should be the priority. Job creation, entrepreneurship, wealth generation, enterprise development, poverty eradication, micro-loans, business mentoring, incubation (call it what you will) are the new focus of Christian Outreach. And “the haves” should be investing generously and unambiguously in “the have-nots”. Or the church will become irrelevant…
Tuesday, 16 June 2015
Straight Talk
I have been encouraged by the "apostolic exhortation" recently sent out by Pope Francis I. Without getting into its content, I just sense that he is speaking out about economic issues (global and personal) more when church-goers are more accustomed to hearing a "social gospel". An economic gospel?! Well it's about time. Not enough can be said about "exclusion and inequality" - the two themes that he addresses. Here are two samplers, in case you haven't read it:
Some people continue to defend trickle-down theories which assume that economic growth, encouraged by a free market, will inevitably succeed in bringing about greater justice and inclusiveness in the world. This opinion, which has never been confirmed by the facts, expresses a crude and naïve trust in the goodness of those wielding economic power and in the sacralized workings of the prevailing economic system. Meanwhile, the excluded are still waiting.
As long as the problems of the poor are not radically resolved by rejecting the absolute autonomy of markets and financial speculation and by attacking the structural causes of inequality, no solution will be found for the world's problems or, for that matter, to any problems.
That’s enough! I only want to say "Amen!" to a Pope talking about such issues. It is not inappropriate.
By doing so, he helps me to ask you to bear with my own diatribes about rampant fraud, corruption and Triumphalism. Sometimes you may wonder, am I a missionary or a journalist? Thanks, I'll take that as a compliment.
The most recent example is at the heart of the Nkandla-gate scandal here in South Africa. President Zuma hired an architect to work on the security upgrading to his homestead, which was initially budgeted at R30 million. Then later he appointed the same person to oversee the whole upgrading, and there were cost overruns that have already reached R210 million, and rising. Well that is Triumphalism - runaway exhuberance to spend money inebriated by power without any restraints because you have been "turned loose" by the Big Boss to get a job done. Without impunity. Eish.
My prayer for you is to remember the Lausanne slogan: Live simply so that others may simply live.
This involves self-sacrifice. In South Africa, the virtue of self-sacrifice has been replaced with Triumphalism. Some call it greed. When Pope Francis uses phrases like "a new tyranny" and "the idolatry of money", I can only thank him for not mincing his words.
Pray for me, that I will not lose my audience by speaking out, by saying what a lot of people really don't want to hear.
Inequality is getting worse, not better. In today's news, the 10 richest South Africans got richer over the past year. But the gap is widening and resentment is rising. Economist Emmanuel Saez found that the incomes of the top 1% in the USA grew by 31.4% in the three years after the financial crisis, while the majority of people struggled with a disappointing economy. The other 99% of the population grew their incomes 0.4% during the same period. Globally, the gap between rich and poor is not closing. This week 500,000 youth are finishing high school in South Africa. But jobs are hard to find.
Exclusion is the name of the game for Triumphalists. Even when their exhuberance is for a noble cause, even social service delivery, the end does not justify the means. "The road to Hell is paved with good intentions." In a constitutional democracy, you should be playing by the rules. Pray that the minorities in South Africa will still be heard, in a context where affirmative action favours the majority.
Sorry if this became more of an exhortation than a prayer letter. But I am in good company! God bless Francis I.
Some people continue to defend trickle-down theories which assume that economic growth, encouraged by a free market, will inevitably succeed in bringing about greater justice and inclusiveness in the world. This opinion, which has never been confirmed by the facts, expresses a crude and naïve trust in the goodness of those wielding economic power and in the sacralized workings of the prevailing economic system. Meanwhile, the excluded are still waiting.
As long as the problems of the poor are not radically resolved by rejecting the absolute autonomy of markets and financial speculation and by attacking the structural causes of inequality, no solution will be found for the world's problems or, for that matter, to any problems.
That’s enough! I only want to say "Amen!" to a Pope talking about such issues. It is not inappropriate.
By doing so, he helps me to ask you to bear with my own diatribes about rampant fraud, corruption and Triumphalism. Sometimes you may wonder, am I a missionary or a journalist? Thanks, I'll take that as a compliment.
The most recent example is at the heart of the Nkandla-gate scandal here in South Africa. President Zuma hired an architect to work on the security upgrading to his homestead, which was initially budgeted at R30 million. Then later he appointed the same person to oversee the whole upgrading, and there were cost overruns that have already reached R210 million, and rising. Well that is Triumphalism - runaway exhuberance to spend money inebriated by power without any restraints because you have been "turned loose" by the Big Boss to get a job done. Without impunity. Eish.
My prayer for you is to remember the Lausanne slogan: Live simply so that others may simply live.
This involves self-sacrifice. In South Africa, the virtue of self-sacrifice has been replaced with Triumphalism. Some call it greed. When Pope Francis uses phrases like "a new tyranny" and "the idolatry of money", I can only thank him for not mincing his words.
Pray for me, that I will not lose my audience by speaking out, by saying what a lot of people really don't want to hear.
Inequality is getting worse, not better. In today's news, the 10 richest South Africans got richer over the past year. But the gap is widening and resentment is rising. Economist Emmanuel Saez found that the incomes of the top 1% in the USA grew by 31.4% in the three years after the financial crisis, while the majority of people struggled with a disappointing economy. The other 99% of the population grew their incomes 0.4% during the same period. Globally, the gap between rich and poor is not closing. This week 500,000 youth are finishing high school in South Africa. But jobs are hard to find.
Exclusion is the name of the game for Triumphalists. Even when their exhuberance is for a noble cause, even social service delivery, the end does not justify the means. "The road to Hell is paved with good intentions." In a constitutional democracy, you should be playing by the rules. Pray that the minorities in South Africa will still be heard, in a context where affirmative action favours the majority.
Sorry if this became more of an exhortation than a prayer letter. But I am in good company! God bless Francis I.
Monday, 15 June 2015
Deep Reflections on Recovery
The unemployment figures in South Africa are grim. The economic indicators suggest that the economy is slowing down – the past quarter had the slowest growth rate in 4 year (0.7%).
C4L itself has been running on empty for 6 months, imposing austerity measures and looking for ways to scale down. This is typical of many nonprofits.
Eighty years ago, the world was in the grip of the Great Depression. 1933 was the deepest dip in a decade of hardship and deprivation for many. A new president was inaugurated that year. He spoke the following phrases in his Inaugural Address, which point the way for another constitutional Democracy, on another continent, in another century:
Oh, wow! There has not been a dramatic stock market crash, no single moment of panic causing paranoia in our case. But we do share the problem of unscrupulous profiteers and of a system that does not even out disparities fast enough.
Two great concerns are highlighted:
1. FDR summoned a moral fibre in these phrases that was embedded in his people, although it had been submerged below that “evanescent” post-war generation of tinsel-town self-gratification.
He made work the core determinant of success, not profiteering with other people’s money.
The old and precious moral values FDR mentions are based on the Golden Rule of doing to others what you would like them to do to you. Or even better – sacrificially.
Can top leadership in South Africa credibly make such a call as this? Yes there were moral leaders in the Struggle like Albert Luthuli and Oliver Tambo. But are there now? A recent article in the Times (“State gravy train unstoppable for now”) concludes that there are still not enough checks and balances in place. Just as was the case in the Roaring Twenties, in the run-up to the stock market crash.
The out-going Auditor-General says that R28.7 billion was wasted by the State in the last fiscal year. “It is a matter of the legislation being too loose” he says, “The offender has got the upper hand over government because the legislation is not watertight enough to hold people accountable.”
2. FDR called on national unity - that is on non-partisanship.
Whereas in South Africa there seems to be political fragmentation. Mamphela Ramphele has started a political party espousing the values of the Black Consciousness Movement. Malema has started a leftist party espousing more government intervention in the economy. And NUMSA is mulling over departing from COSATU and the ruling alliance to form another party – probably led by Vavi.
Can anyone at this stage muster national unity at the depth that will be required to overcome “our common difficulties”?
We would like to see a “Non-regression Pact” signed by all opposition parties. Yes they will each chip away at the ruling party’s huge majority. But if the congress should ever slip below the 50% mark, it will still hold the biggest vote. What will happen if it then selects but one party - like Malema’s - to form a coalition with? In the absence of a united opposition, we need these smaller parties to assure voters that they will coalesce with one another in that eventuality. Not just become a power broker that can charge the ANC whatever it demands for its rubber-stamp.
In another context, Archbishop Tutu and 80 other prominent South Africans recently signed a declaration warning of an “assault on democracy”. But two relevant excerpts follow:
“Constructive engagement on the best way forward is possible and desirable, without resort to violence, and without fomenting hate or disrespect.”
“The lack of serious leadership and authority in disciplining this form of anti-democratic behaviour carries serious risks and encourages a spirit of hate which, once unleashed, may take many years to overcome with drastic consequences for our economy.”
Moral leadership is at the core. Disabled FDR embodied the fighting spirit of recovery. Who can South Africa look to as its economy falters, bleeding from corruption and graft?
C4L itself has been running on empty for 6 months, imposing austerity measures and looking for ways to scale down. This is typical of many nonprofits.
Eighty years ago, the world was in the grip of the Great Depression. 1933 was the deepest dip in a decade of hardship and deprivation for many. A new president was inaugurated that year. He spoke the following phrases in his Inaugural Address, which point the way for another constitutional Democracy, on another continent, in another century:
- We face our common difficulties. They concern, thank God, only material things
- Plenty is at our doorstep, but a generous use of it languishes in the very sight of the supply. Primarily this is because the rulers of the exchange of mankind's goods have failed, through their own stubbornness and their own incompetence
- Practices of the unscrupulous money changers stand indicted in the court of public opinion, rejected by the hearts and minds of men
- They know only the rules of a generation of self-seekers. They have no vision
- The joy and moral stimulation of work no longer must be forgotten in the mad chase of evanescent profits. These dark days will be worth all they cost us if they teach us that our true destiny is not to be ministered unto but to minister to ourselves and to our fellow men
- Recognition of the falsity of material wealth as the standard of success goes hand in hand with the abandonment of the false belief that public office and high political position are to be valued only by the standards of pride of place and personal profit
- We face the arduous days that lie before us in the warm courage of the national unity; with the clear consciousness of seeking old and precious moral values; with the clean satisfaction that comes from the stern performance of duty by old and young alike
Oh, wow! There has not been a dramatic stock market crash, no single moment of panic causing paranoia in our case. But we do share the problem of unscrupulous profiteers and of a system that does not even out disparities fast enough.
Two great concerns are highlighted:
1. FDR summoned a moral fibre in these phrases that was embedded in his people, although it had been submerged below that “evanescent” post-war generation of tinsel-town self-gratification.
He made work the core determinant of success, not profiteering with other people’s money.
The old and precious moral values FDR mentions are based on the Golden Rule of doing to others what you would like them to do to you. Or even better – sacrificially.
Can top leadership in South Africa credibly make such a call as this? Yes there were moral leaders in the Struggle like Albert Luthuli and Oliver Tambo. But are there now? A recent article in the Times (“State gravy train unstoppable for now”) concludes that there are still not enough checks and balances in place. Just as was the case in the Roaring Twenties, in the run-up to the stock market crash.
The out-going Auditor-General says that R28.7 billion was wasted by the State in the last fiscal year. “It is a matter of the legislation being too loose” he says, “The offender has got the upper hand over government because the legislation is not watertight enough to hold people accountable.”
2. FDR called on national unity - that is on non-partisanship.
Whereas in South Africa there seems to be political fragmentation. Mamphela Ramphele has started a political party espousing the values of the Black Consciousness Movement. Malema has started a leftist party espousing more government intervention in the economy. And NUMSA is mulling over departing from COSATU and the ruling alliance to form another party – probably led by Vavi.
Can anyone at this stage muster national unity at the depth that will be required to overcome “our common difficulties”?
We would like to see a “Non-regression Pact” signed by all opposition parties. Yes they will each chip away at the ruling party’s huge majority. But if the congress should ever slip below the 50% mark, it will still hold the biggest vote. What will happen if it then selects but one party - like Malema’s - to form a coalition with? In the absence of a united opposition, we need these smaller parties to assure voters that they will coalesce with one another in that eventuality. Not just become a power broker that can charge the ANC whatever it demands for its rubber-stamp.
In another context, Archbishop Tutu and 80 other prominent South Africans recently signed a declaration warning of an “assault on democracy”. But two relevant excerpts follow:
“Constructive engagement on the best way forward is possible and desirable, without resort to violence, and without fomenting hate or disrespect.”
“The lack of serious leadership and authority in disciplining this form of anti-democratic behaviour carries serious risks and encourages a spirit of hate which, once unleashed, may take many years to overcome with drastic consequences for our economy.”
Moral leadership is at the core. Disabled FDR embodied the fighting spirit of recovery. Who can South Africa look to as its economy falters, bleeding from corruption and graft?
Monday, 1 June 2015
A Link Worth Watching
I was very challenged to watch this presentation by Dan Pallotta.
My place is the Nonprofit Sector is far away from its epicentre, where he sees a clash between morality and frugality. We are situated in a different but similar web of convictions and guidelines that underpin our work, which also needs an overhaul.
Yet I watched this in the very same week that a new Pope was selected, the first one ever to choose the name Francis. Finally! I hope that this is a signal that he is willing to tip over a few paradigms? Lest the church become nothing more than a "compassionate NGO" as he remarked this week.
Thanks for you prayers for our meetings. The Board meeting went very well. The other meeting never happened - again. Look like we have reached the end of the road in terms of "finding one another again" so dissolution of the Joint Venture is now on the horizon.
Back to the Board meeting. It has set up a task force to look very hard at the "big picture". Not just C4L and its choices but the missiology and convictions that underpin it.
This is likely to lead to more change, streamlining, and right-sizing - as we "strenghten the things that remain" and scrap what is not mission-critical.
My prayer request is for wisdom as we enter this exercise, and for the clarity of analysis and thinking that I appreciated in the video link above. As much as the content, I think that the presentation of it is superb. We need incisive analysis like that to really become social innovators.
I have sensed the power of your prayers in the past days, as I watch the Lord's creative script writing of history. It's nice to be part of a drama where you don't memorize your lines, but you are still amazed at the awesome author of the drama. He has once again shown us that He is in control and that not even a sparrow falls that he doesn't see. It looks like he has some pleasant surprises in store for C4L in the next few years. Stay tuned for more on this as it unfolds.
I echo the words repeated by the new Pope, Francis I, which also bode well: "Pray for me".
My place is the Nonprofit Sector is far away from its epicentre, where he sees a clash between morality and frugality. We are situated in a different but similar web of convictions and guidelines that underpin our work, which also needs an overhaul.
Yet I watched this in the very same week that a new Pope was selected, the first one ever to choose the name Francis. Finally! I hope that this is a signal that he is willing to tip over a few paradigms? Lest the church become nothing more than a "compassionate NGO" as he remarked this week.
Thanks for you prayers for our meetings. The Board meeting went very well. The other meeting never happened - again. Look like we have reached the end of the road in terms of "finding one another again" so dissolution of the Joint Venture is now on the horizon.
Back to the Board meeting. It has set up a task force to look very hard at the "big picture". Not just C4L and its choices but the missiology and convictions that underpin it.
This is likely to lead to more change, streamlining, and right-sizing - as we "strenghten the things that remain" and scrap what is not mission-critical.
My prayer request is for wisdom as we enter this exercise, and for the clarity of analysis and thinking that I appreciated in the video link above. As much as the content, I think that the presentation of it is superb. We need incisive analysis like that to really become social innovators.
I have sensed the power of your prayers in the past days, as I watch the Lord's creative script writing of history. It's nice to be part of a drama where you don't memorize your lines, but you are still amazed at the awesome author of the drama. He has once again shown us that He is in control and that not even a sparrow falls that he doesn't see. It looks like he has some pleasant surprises in store for C4L in the next few years. Stay tuned for more on this as it unfolds.
I echo the words repeated by the new Pope, Francis I, which also bode well: "Pray for me".
Saturday, 30 May 2015
Not Letting Go
Today I read some Dakota tribal wisdom: "When you are riding a dead horse, the best strategy is to dismount." Food for thought. But letting go is never easy.
I've been thinking a lot lately about letting go. Like Abraham climbing Mount Moriah. I can't figure out what was going on in his head, more so in his heart. The Lord gives and the Lord takes away. He had been taught to bless the name of God in adversity, like his ancestor Job.
But sacrificing your own son sounds to me like infanticide. What kind of God would really ask you to do that? What kind of father would make such preparations - even taking firewood with him, up there above the tree line? The answers can be glib - God was testing him, the God who sends angels as messengers, like the one who appeared to Abraham on that mountain top and told him not to do it. (This angel should be the patron saint of child rights activists.)
So if God placed a ram in a thicket for Abraham, why didn't he listen to the prayers of Jesus in Gethsemane? Prayers so deep that they caused him to sweat blood? His only Son. Why couldn't He do on Mount Calvary what he did on Mount Moriah? Even He had to let go...
Back to Moriah.... a three-day climb. Abraham only said to the sherpas he took along, when they reached the summit, to wait while he and Isaac went off "to worship". Child sacrifice was practised by other religions at the time, but is condemned not less than ten times in the Bible (Leviticus 18:21; 20:2-5; Deuteronomy 18:10; 2 Kings 17:17; 21:6; 2 Chronicles 28:3; 23:10; Psalm 106:37-38; Jeremiah 19:4-5; 32:35). Of course all of these came after the era of Abraham, but still...
We have all had our fill at times of our teenagers, but this was over the top. He even tied the boy up and placed him on the firewood on the altar built, before the angel appeared. Eish! The poor kid must have had nightmares about this in his later life. Worship? "WE" will worship? That was the royal "we" because judging by Isaac's questions, he was not privy to it.
Letting go is hard. Especially when you had a long wait to get the project started. More especially when the very start of it was a miracle. What kind of God asks you to give up a miraculous gift that He gave you?
Can you do it? Even if it doesn't make any sense? Is there a disconnect between worship and ethics? In South Africa, we know that devout Christians practiced apartheid. But they were not revered for this like Abraham. South Africa became a pariah among the nations.
How did missionary doctors feel when the hospitals that they built up were swallowed up by government health systems?
How did Candy Lightner - the founder of MADD - feel when she lost her daughter to a drunk driver?
Does God still test us? Or are there some questions without answers?
Please pray for me as I grapple with whether to let go. Is that what God wants me to do? Is that what he wants C4L to do? Pray for an angel who can tell me not to let go, who has the power to reverse what God ordained.
I've been thinking a lot lately about letting go. Like Abraham climbing Mount Moriah. I can't figure out what was going on in his head, more so in his heart. The Lord gives and the Lord takes away. He had been taught to bless the name of God in adversity, like his ancestor Job.
But sacrificing your own son sounds to me like infanticide. What kind of God would really ask you to do that? What kind of father would make such preparations - even taking firewood with him, up there above the tree line? The answers can be glib - God was testing him, the God who sends angels as messengers, like the one who appeared to Abraham on that mountain top and told him not to do it. (This angel should be the patron saint of child rights activists.)
So if God placed a ram in a thicket for Abraham, why didn't he listen to the prayers of Jesus in Gethsemane? Prayers so deep that they caused him to sweat blood? His only Son. Why couldn't He do on Mount Calvary what he did on Mount Moriah? Even He had to let go...
Back to Moriah.... a three-day climb. Abraham only said to the sherpas he took along, when they reached the summit, to wait while he and Isaac went off "to worship". Child sacrifice was practised by other religions at the time, but is condemned not less than ten times in the Bible (Leviticus 18:21; 20:2-5; Deuteronomy 18:10; 2 Kings 17:17; 21:6; 2 Chronicles 28:3; 23:10; Psalm 106:37-38; Jeremiah 19:4-5; 32:35). Of course all of these came after the era of Abraham, but still...
We have all had our fill at times of our teenagers, but this was over the top. He even tied the boy up and placed him on the firewood on the altar built, before the angel appeared. Eish! The poor kid must have had nightmares about this in his later life. Worship? "WE" will worship? That was the royal "we" because judging by Isaac's questions, he was not privy to it.
Letting go is hard. Especially when you had a long wait to get the project started. More especially when the very start of it was a miracle. What kind of God asks you to give up a miraculous gift that He gave you?
Can you do it? Even if it doesn't make any sense? Is there a disconnect between worship and ethics? In South Africa, we know that devout Christians practiced apartheid. But they were not revered for this like Abraham. South Africa became a pariah among the nations.
How did missionary doctors feel when the hospitals that they built up were swallowed up by government health systems?
How did Candy Lightner - the founder of MADD - feel when she lost her daughter to a drunk driver?
Does God still test us? Or are there some questions without answers?
Please pray for me as I grapple with whether to let go. Is that what God wants me to do? Is that what he wants C4L to do? Pray for an angel who can tell me not to let go, who has the power to reverse what God ordained.
Friday, 29 May 2015
South Africa has Changed
I read today that President Zuma had some pointed words to say last week at Davos. He spoke of prejudice against Africa being a deterrent to investment. In one response I feel like cheering him and like scolding him. For he is one of those former “freedom fighters” who is gaining a reputation for feathering his own nest by plunder of public resources.
Yes I have often said that Africa gets a bad rap and that it has huge potential. Yesterday I read an article which compares the South Africa of today to Yeltsin’s Russia – a time when power is consolidated centrally and when oligarchs arise who are vastly wealthy. One only has to think of Cyril Ramaphosa, Zuma’s new deputy. He was Nelson Mandela’s choice as a successor but the “elders” of the ruling alliance told to wait his turn. In the meanwhile, he has become one of Africa’s richest men, and that can be attributed at least in part to his contacts and advantages in terms of affirmative action.
I am not scolding him, let me cheer Zuma a bit more. I also read this week that the assets of the world’s three richest individuals exceeds the combined gross domestic product (GDP) of the world’s 48 poorest countries. Many of those poor countries are in Africa, but while Ramaphosa may be wealthy on African standards, he is not competing at the highest levels globally of wealthy individuals.
I want to make an apology.
It occurred to me that in writing about social and economic injustice globally and even in South Africa, some readers may feel that my finger is pointed at them. Sorry if you ever felt that, it was not my intention but sometimes communication that is sent is not exactly what is heard. I do not believe in a simplistic cause-and-effect view that says “they are poor because you are rich”. Most of my readers are from a background of privilege like myself. I am not trying to make you feel bad about it, or even to follow my example of choosing the path of St Francis in my approach to wealth. Not every Christian is called to do that.
What I am trying to say is not so complicated that I couldn’t articulate it – but maybe I never was explicit enough. My view is that you are rich and they are poor because of the same unjust system that is perpetuating itself. David Korten put it this way: “ordinary people find their choices controlled by the hierarchies of big business, big government, big education, big unions, big media, and big religion”. You yourself can probably do as little about it as any body locked down by poverty in Africa.
My missives are directed against this system, not against you! I believe that John the Baptist had a similar message, although relatively little was recorded of it – just enough for me to identify with him a lot. Just like people listened to him - a bit off-beat and outspoken but nevertheless respected by his audience – I get enough responses to my missives to be sure that they are appreciated.
I believe that Jesus also was on this frequency. Sadly, I think that his messaged has been hijacked to emphasize other things. Brian McLaren describes this as trying to put together a jig-saw puzzle when someone has switched the lid on the box! It takes you awhile to figure out that all these pieces from the Gospels don’t fit into that narrow arrangement. Finally you scrap the lid of the box and work away at getting the pieces to fit one another. Gradually, you begin to get the big picture. I found this metaphor very helpful. Could it be that you are still using a misleading puzzle-box-lid when you read my missives and wonder where I am coming from? Here I go with my favorite writing strategy – deferring to someone who is better qualified and renowned than myself to say it for me:
“Taking the story of Zaccheus as an example of “salvation” from greed and hypocrisy, we will then seek to heal the system, beginning with our own role in it. Our actions will, I imagine, have at least three dimensions:
“First, we will seek to help the poor through generosity – feeding the hungry, clothing the naked, visiting the imprisoned, showing hospitality to the homeless. In so doing, we must be careful to avoid a dehumanizing and demoralizing paternalism.
“Second, we will call the rich to generosity, as Jesus frequently did. We will call the comfortable to turn from their own endless enrichment and to instead invest their energies for the good of their poorer neighbours. In today’s world, this would often involve using their entrepreneurial skills to create good jobs, since unemployment is at the core of so many of the sufferings of the poor, including substance abuse, violence and disease.
“And third, we will work to improve the system, to detect and remove systemic injustice, so that the equity system of the societal machinery would indeed be equitable.”
C4L bulletins like this one fall into both the second and third dimensions. They try to cry out from the wilderness against a dominant system that locks some people into poverty and others into complacency. The bulletins also call you – rich or poor - to generosity. C4L is but one actor in but one country on but one continent, but its emphasis in 2013 is to create self-employment among youth in the “green occupations”. In other words, C4L exists to help the poor through YOUR generosity.
How has South Africa changed?
Since I took up residence here 18 years ago, the focus of concern has shifted from the AIDS pandemic to youth unemployment. Remember that citizens born since 1994, the year that I arrived, are now called the “born free” generation. They think differently from previous generations. Their Struggle is not against apartheid but against poverty.
The market drives the economy less and less as the ruling alliance wants it to be a command-economy. That is a huge difference. For so many business, the main customer is government. This is particularly true in the Training sector. You must understand that this is why C4L talks so much more than ever before about government “Learnerships” to train youth in entrepreneurship and the “green occupations”.
Unfortunately, another change is that government is getting more intolerant of voices crying in the veld about the need for systemic change. Speaking of John the Baptist, can you imagine him trying to get funding out of the Herodians – who collaborated with Rome - for his wilderness project? No wonder he only had locusts and honey to eat! Like him we depend on the generosity of those we call to defect from the dominant system, into God’s reign or kingdom. The jigsaw puzzle lid that I discarded promised eternal life by and by; but the pieces that I am fitting together now have more to say about justice - for abundant life.
Yes I have often said that Africa gets a bad rap and that it has huge potential. Yesterday I read an article which compares the South Africa of today to Yeltsin’s Russia – a time when power is consolidated centrally and when oligarchs arise who are vastly wealthy. One only has to think of Cyril Ramaphosa, Zuma’s new deputy. He was Nelson Mandela’s choice as a successor but the “elders” of the ruling alliance told to wait his turn. In the meanwhile, he has become one of Africa’s richest men, and that can be attributed at least in part to his contacts and advantages in terms of affirmative action.
I am not scolding him, let me cheer Zuma a bit more. I also read this week that the assets of the world’s three richest individuals exceeds the combined gross domestic product (GDP) of the world’s 48 poorest countries. Many of those poor countries are in Africa, but while Ramaphosa may be wealthy on African standards, he is not competing at the highest levels globally of wealthy individuals.
I want to make an apology.
It occurred to me that in writing about social and economic injustice globally and even in South Africa, some readers may feel that my finger is pointed at them. Sorry if you ever felt that, it was not my intention but sometimes communication that is sent is not exactly what is heard. I do not believe in a simplistic cause-and-effect view that says “they are poor because you are rich”. Most of my readers are from a background of privilege like myself. I am not trying to make you feel bad about it, or even to follow my example of choosing the path of St Francis in my approach to wealth. Not every Christian is called to do that.
What I am trying to say is not so complicated that I couldn’t articulate it – but maybe I never was explicit enough. My view is that you are rich and they are poor because of the same unjust system that is perpetuating itself. David Korten put it this way: “ordinary people find their choices controlled by the hierarchies of big business, big government, big education, big unions, big media, and big religion”. You yourself can probably do as little about it as any body locked down by poverty in Africa.
My missives are directed against this system, not against you! I believe that John the Baptist had a similar message, although relatively little was recorded of it – just enough for me to identify with him a lot. Just like people listened to him - a bit off-beat and outspoken but nevertheless respected by his audience – I get enough responses to my missives to be sure that they are appreciated.
I believe that Jesus also was on this frequency. Sadly, I think that his messaged has been hijacked to emphasize other things. Brian McLaren describes this as trying to put together a jig-saw puzzle when someone has switched the lid on the box! It takes you awhile to figure out that all these pieces from the Gospels don’t fit into that narrow arrangement. Finally you scrap the lid of the box and work away at getting the pieces to fit one another. Gradually, you begin to get the big picture. I found this metaphor very helpful. Could it be that you are still using a misleading puzzle-box-lid when you read my missives and wonder where I am coming from? Here I go with my favorite writing strategy – deferring to someone who is better qualified and renowned than myself to say it for me:
“Taking the story of Zaccheus as an example of “salvation” from greed and hypocrisy, we will then seek to heal the system, beginning with our own role in it. Our actions will, I imagine, have at least three dimensions:
“First, we will seek to help the poor through generosity – feeding the hungry, clothing the naked, visiting the imprisoned, showing hospitality to the homeless. In so doing, we must be careful to avoid a dehumanizing and demoralizing paternalism.
“Second, we will call the rich to generosity, as Jesus frequently did. We will call the comfortable to turn from their own endless enrichment and to instead invest their energies for the good of their poorer neighbours. In today’s world, this would often involve using their entrepreneurial skills to create good jobs, since unemployment is at the core of so many of the sufferings of the poor, including substance abuse, violence and disease.
“And third, we will work to improve the system, to detect and remove systemic injustice, so that the equity system of the societal machinery would indeed be equitable.”
C4L bulletins like this one fall into both the second and third dimensions. They try to cry out from the wilderness against a dominant system that locks some people into poverty and others into complacency. The bulletins also call you – rich or poor - to generosity. C4L is but one actor in but one country on but one continent, but its emphasis in 2013 is to create self-employment among youth in the “green occupations”. In other words, C4L exists to help the poor through YOUR generosity.
How has South Africa changed?
Since I took up residence here 18 years ago, the focus of concern has shifted from the AIDS pandemic to youth unemployment. Remember that citizens born since 1994, the year that I arrived, are now called the “born free” generation. They think differently from previous generations. Their Struggle is not against apartheid but against poverty.
The market drives the economy less and less as the ruling alliance wants it to be a command-economy. That is a huge difference. For so many business, the main customer is government. This is particularly true in the Training sector. You must understand that this is why C4L talks so much more than ever before about government “Learnerships” to train youth in entrepreneurship and the “green occupations”.
Unfortunately, another change is that government is getting more intolerant of voices crying in the veld about the need for systemic change. Speaking of John the Baptist, can you imagine him trying to get funding out of the Herodians – who collaborated with Rome - for his wilderness project? No wonder he only had locusts and honey to eat! Like him we depend on the generosity of those we call to defect from the dominant system, into God’s reign or kingdom. The jigsaw puzzle lid that I discarded promised eternal life by and by; but the pieces that I am fitting together now have more to say about justice - for abundant life.
Friday, 15 May 2015
Putting It Back
I read recently that Albert Einstein had two portraits hanging in his lounge for much of his life – Newton and Maxwell. This would need no explanation, for he was certainly in their league as scientist. But in later years, he took these down and replaced them with two other portraits – Ghandi and Schweitzer. When friends asked him why, he said: “It is time to remove the symbols of science and replace them with the symbols of service.”
One might respond to Einstein that science has done so much for people in need, and improved our quality of life immensely. For example, computers are easing our individual lives – and in coping with population explosion as well. They emerged largely out of the Apollo mission to land men on the moon. So there is no need to apologize for Science. We have a computer lab at C4L to train those working in witness and service how to operate computer tools. Science and technology can be a blessing.
On the other hand, as Einstein got older and wiser, perhaps he was saying something about priorities? Here I go with a lot of alliteration! The three sectors in democratic societies are public, private and philanthropic. They each have a key ingredient – power, profit and putting it back.
Abraham Maslow is probably the best known industrial psychologist. His “hierarchy of needs” helps in many settings to prioritize needs. He said that once more basic “survival needs” were satisfied, that other “higher needs” emerged. The highest one in his pyramid was “self-actualization”. In recent decades, psychologists have come to agree that he missed one. Like that most distant planet which was not perceived early on, another even higher need appeared – putting it back. So you find not only the wealthiest people establishing Foundations, but a whole sector call Corporate Social Investment (CSI).
The Secret to Perfect Happiness
I read recently in a Krishna tract that the Supreme Personality has six opulences – all strength, all fame, all wealth, knowledge, beauty and renunciation.
Huh? Where did that last one come from?! The simple answer is that it is more blessed to give than to receive. Even Einstein figured it out!
I want to wish that Perfect Happiness in this C4L Bulletin to three families - one from England, one from the USA and the third from Canada. I will not name them, but they will know who they are and more especially the Lord knows them and sees their deeds.
Each of these families has been generous to C4L for many years. One gave their annual gift last July, the other in October, and the third in March of this year. I was so intrigued when I realized that they each support one of C4L’s three programmes.
The family from England have supported the Opportunities for Youth endeavours – Kids Clubs for OVC, camps, and advocacy projects at community level. They came to visit C4L for the first time in 2010. I noted that all three of these families have visited C4L. They particularly cherish the memory of visiting a Child Headed Household in a township setting.
It is ten years since the American family visited C4L, but they have not forgotten us. Their gift in late 2011 is what finally got C4L across that vital accreditation threshold! In fact, this is the first year that C4L started as an accredited training provider. Viva! This is opening new vistas for us in terms of capacity building especially youth. It is part of C4L’s core business, Organization Development. For example, the above-mentioned computer lab helps learners to discover how to use technology to strengthen their NGOs, CBOs and FBOs.
The family in Canada visited us for the second time last November. Their gift early this year followed on from the 2-day encounter we had together when they passed through. Their preference has been to support our “livelihood security” programme – offering both technical and entrepreneurship training to youth. The technical training includes plumbing, solar water heating and some of the newer “green occupations”. The focus on renewable energy is dear to them as they are a training provider themselves – for the oil industry. So what C4L’s solar programme is doing really resonates with them.
We wish each of these families that Perfect Happiness. I am not preaching Krishna now! But your generous gifts are clearly in that category of “renunciation”. You have sacrificed a lot. You are “putting it back” and that is why nonprofits exist in the scheme of Democracy.
Bricks and mortar
I have a simple image in my mind. C4L is a strong wall, built from bricks. These bricks are the larger projects, usually funded by grants from Foundations or government donors. The three C4L programmes are slated to receive some of these in 2012:
Rest assured that C4L has applied for far more “bricks” than this, but they have not arrived yet! There are several new initiatives in the “proposals pipeline”!
What families like those mentioned above give is the mortar that holds these bricks together. Not much of the wall is mortar, relative to face brick, so you don’t notice it. But when you think of all that webbing between the bricks, holding them fast, it adds up!
You cannot build a wall only with bricks. And it is not only the responsibility of corporates, foundations and government windows of funding to fund nonprofits.
One of the opulences of the Supreme Personality is renunciation. Einstein was right about replacing the symbols of science with the symbols of service.
Thank you to all of you, beyond the three families mentioned, for your generosity and your prayers. C4L is emerging from a “funding drought” but we are very optimistic about the future, in spite of high unemployment, a water emergency and an energy crisis!
Always remember your own highest need – putting it back.
One might respond to Einstein that science has done so much for people in need, and improved our quality of life immensely. For example, computers are easing our individual lives – and in coping with population explosion as well. They emerged largely out of the Apollo mission to land men on the moon. So there is no need to apologize for Science. We have a computer lab at C4L to train those working in witness and service how to operate computer tools. Science and technology can be a blessing.
On the other hand, as Einstein got older and wiser, perhaps he was saying something about priorities? Here I go with a lot of alliteration! The three sectors in democratic societies are public, private and philanthropic. They each have a key ingredient – power, profit and putting it back.
Abraham Maslow is probably the best known industrial psychologist. His “hierarchy of needs” helps in many settings to prioritize needs. He said that once more basic “survival needs” were satisfied, that other “higher needs” emerged. The highest one in his pyramid was “self-actualization”. In recent decades, psychologists have come to agree that he missed one. Like that most distant planet which was not perceived early on, another even higher need appeared – putting it back. So you find not only the wealthiest people establishing Foundations, but a whole sector call Corporate Social Investment (CSI).
The Secret to Perfect Happiness
I read recently in a Krishna tract that the Supreme Personality has six opulences – all strength, all fame, all wealth, knowledge, beauty and renunciation.
Huh? Where did that last one come from?! The simple answer is that it is more blessed to give than to receive. Even Einstein figured it out!
I want to wish that Perfect Happiness in this C4L Bulletin to three families - one from England, one from the USA and the third from Canada. I will not name them, but they will know who they are and more especially the Lord knows them and sees their deeds.
Each of these families has been generous to C4L for many years. One gave their annual gift last July, the other in October, and the third in March of this year. I was so intrigued when I realized that they each support one of C4L’s three programmes.
The family from England have supported the Opportunities for Youth endeavours – Kids Clubs for OVC, camps, and advocacy projects at community level. They came to visit C4L for the first time in 2010. I noted that all three of these families have visited C4L. They particularly cherish the memory of visiting a Child Headed Household in a township setting.
It is ten years since the American family visited C4L, but they have not forgotten us. Their gift in late 2011 is what finally got C4L across that vital accreditation threshold! In fact, this is the first year that C4L started as an accredited training provider. Viva! This is opening new vistas for us in terms of capacity building especially youth. It is part of C4L’s core business, Organization Development. For example, the above-mentioned computer lab helps learners to discover how to use technology to strengthen their NGOs, CBOs and FBOs.
The family in Canada visited us for the second time last November. Their gift early this year followed on from the 2-day encounter we had together when they passed through. Their preference has been to support our “livelihood security” programme – offering both technical and entrepreneurship training to youth. The technical training includes plumbing, solar water heating and some of the newer “green occupations”. The focus on renewable energy is dear to them as they are a training provider themselves – for the oil industry. So what C4L’s solar programme is doing really resonates with them.
We wish each of these families that Perfect Happiness. I am not preaching Krishna now! But your generous gifts are clearly in that category of “renunciation”. You have sacrificed a lot. You are “putting it back” and that is why nonprofits exist in the scheme of Democracy.
Bricks and mortar
I have a simple image in my mind. C4L is a strong wall, built from bricks. These bricks are the larger projects, usually funded by grants from Foundations or government donors. The three C4L programmes are slated to receive some of these in 2012:
- Organization Development - has applied to the MICT SETA for 20 Learnerships in End User Computing
- Opportunities for Youth – awaits the start of 25 Learnerships in Project Management from the Services SETA
- Livelihood Security Unit – awaits the start of 50 Learnerships in Business Practice, also from the Services SETA
Rest assured that C4L has applied for far more “bricks” than this, but they have not arrived yet! There are several new initiatives in the “proposals pipeline”!
What families like those mentioned above give is the mortar that holds these bricks together. Not much of the wall is mortar, relative to face brick, so you don’t notice it. But when you think of all that webbing between the bricks, holding them fast, it adds up!
You cannot build a wall only with bricks. And it is not only the responsibility of corporates, foundations and government windows of funding to fund nonprofits.
One of the opulences of the Supreme Personality is renunciation. Einstein was right about replacing the symbols of science with the symbols of service.
Thank you to all of you, beyond the three families mentioned, for your generosity and your prayers. C4L is emerging from a “funding drought” but we are very optimistic about the future, in spite of high unemployment, a water emergency and an energy crisis!
Always remember your own highest need – putting it back.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)