Contact
Subscribe
|
Tweet
| (8) |
The problem of poverty transcends ideology
Heath Haussamen
The pastor of my church caught my attention on Sunday when he said that some people live in such horrible circumstances that they can’t pull themselves out of poverty, and so we shouldn’t fall into the trap of believing poor people are lazy and just need to get a job.
It caught my attention because it’s not the sort of thing you hear every day in an evangelical church. I found myself looking around to see who was offended by my pastor’s words.
To my church’s credit, I didn’t see an obvious look of disbelief or disgust on anyone’s face. But I’ve been to plenty of churches where such words would have elicited strong, negative responses.
My pastor was speaking about having a “compassion mindset” and the importance of serving others. Ever since Sunday, I’ve been thinking about his words in the context of the recent discussion about personal versus societal responsibility that has played out primarily in debates over financial bailouts and health-care reform.
There’s a lot of shouting going on right now. There’s a lot of anger, and bitterness, and hurt feelings and polarization.
Many are breathing a sigh of relief over the swinging of the pendulum to the left with the election of Barack Obama and a strong Democratic majority in Congress. On the opposite side, some are wondering whether we’re heading toward a time when it will be necessary to take up arms against the government.
Many on both sides have contributed to the breakdown in communication, and a superficial and scandal-happy media only makes it worse by encouraging such polarization.
‘A name, a face, and eyes looking back at you’
In that context, I’ve been thinking about how, at least politically, my church isn’t the sort of place that’s squarely on one side or the other. Don’t get me wrong, it’s definitely evangelical. It’s a theologically conservative place, and I suspect that most of the people who attend church there are politically conservative as well.
But last fall, my pastor asked me and others to participate in a forum about the upcoming election. The point he wanted to come across — and that did come across — is that you don’t have to belong to a certain political party to be part of the church.
I was reminded of that this weekend during my pastor’s sermon, when he quoted evangelical leader Richard Stearns as saying, “Until poverty, homelessness and despair have a name, a face, and eyes looking back at you, it is not something you can really feel or understand.”
That’s when my pastor pointed out that there are some people in this world who live in such extreme poverty that it doesn’t matter what they do, they can’t escape it without help.
He’s right. There certainly are such people in this country and world. But there’s also a nugget of truth in the statements of those who take the opposite stance that people in poverty need only to get a job and work hard. There certainly are some who milk welfare for all it’s worth and take advantage of other programs.
Neither extreme by itself is true. Some people who live in poverty need to stand up on their own. Others need a hand up. Most need a little bit of both, and even that statement doesn’t really begin to scratch the surface of the complexity of the problem of poverty.
Once we recognize that the causes of and solutions to poverty are more complex than the either/or scenario usually debated, we can start to work together.
‘Great is our sin’
I’m not surprised at all that my pastor has the wisdom to understand that truth, even though many others in the culture to which he belongs do not. He spends a lot of time working among the poor in Mexico, Zambia, the Philippines and other places. And our church is quite diverse, in terms of ethnicity and socioeconomic status.
There are lots of Hispanics and a handful of Africans and Filipinos at my church, mixed in with the white people who more traditionally fill the seats in other evangelical churches across America on Sundays. At my church, people wear anything from shorts and a T-shirt (I’m usually among that group) to suits and ties.
Such diversity creates a climate ripe for genuine discussion that can lead to understanding among people who view life through different lenses. And that, I think, is the key to understanding and combating poverty.
It was Charles Darwin who said, “If the misery of the poor be caused not by the laws of nature, but by our institutions, great is our sin.” Certainly, problems with some of our institutions and programs enable people to live off the government and remain in poverty, and that’s wrong. There are also people who are trapped in poverty because a lack of programs and institutions to address their specific needs means there’s nobody to give them a hand up. That’s equally wrong.
Perhaps if more of us were willing to give poverty “a name, a face, and eyes looking back” at us — as my pastor has done — people who are currently polarized over these great societal and political debates would find ways to come together and actually help combat poverty.
|
Share
Tweet
|
Advertisements
|
8 comments so far. Scroll down to submit your own comment.
Leave a response
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Your pastor sounds like a good person. In today’s economy, many people are having difficulties making ends meet. Homelessness in our area is terrible. Families are seeking shelter at places such as Joy Junction. There are constant drives asking for money, school supplies, food, clothing. Glad to hear that he travels to other countries to lend aid also. We all need to be more tolerant and understanding of our fellowman. Yes, there will always be folks who abuse the system. However, I think there are more folks in need than there are abusers.
Not belabor the point, but I did not mean to criticize the noble purpose (and I’m sure noble efforts of many) of NM First. But things have changed, Pete is gone for one, and it seems the non-partisan charge is drifting away. I have the upmost respect for consensus building process, in fact I used to teach facilitation of same. The meeting in Albuq. was not that at all. It is impossible to do a consensus process with 200 of your closest friends in an hour or so with well-meaning but untrained amateur facilitators. Most of the crowd (I would say 4 to 1) was of the progressive mindset (wonder how they got all the tickets earlier than anyone else?), and from the looks of their neatly printed cards (some with the union label) with talking points, their minds were made up decades ago about health care, but perhaps not by themselves.
Most people who got in and had real questions, not prepared points, were not expecting a round-table group quasi-consensus session. We had come to ask questions and be heard. We were not allowed to do that, that leads to frustration and anger. Obama made a speech to the UN a few days ago about standing up for the oppressed, like the “voter struggling to be heard”. I and many others can relate. If Jeff had his mind made up and only his staff can tell him anything, fine, just say so and that would have saved some of us time and frustration. If it all comes down to majority rule and minority shut up and go away, OK, but tell us that and don’t hold a charade of a town hall just to say you did.
NM First was established by both Sen. Domenici, and Sen. Bingaman as non partisan, and they work hard to maintain that charter. Their Board of Directors is certainly filled with members of all political persuasions. I have personally witnessed the principal of respect for, and support for hearing and expressing disparate points of view on topics such as Energy and Health at NM First activities. This effort at consensus is their highest goal, but it is not an easy goal to achieve when passions run high. There is frustration, and disappointment involved in the process, as one might realistically expect. One might do well to consider the level of difficulty in the attempt to get consensus on topics that have polarized many.
Democracy in action is not for the faint of heart…In the end, hopefully after all voices have had at least a chance to be heard at least once, as NM First strives for…votes and majority rule will have to come into play, and this is after all our democratic way. Fortunately while we may lose a few, we will also win a few over the long run, and this is realistically what we can hope for in a pluralistic and disparate society such as is our common american birthright.
If there were problems as Dr. J reports at a recent town hall in ABQ, which I didn’t attend, then I’m sure Dr. J will find NM First staff eager to hear about his views, as they take seriously the need to constantly improve. They make every effort to encourage feedback from participants with just that purpose in mind.
I stand by my comments that while nothing is perfect, NM First is one group that steadily promotes both respect for individual opinions, and belief in our democratic processes being our best hope for resolving differences of interests and points of view. There is no guarantee we will be happy with the results of democratic processes, but in the long term they are all that keeps us from anarchy and shooting it out in the street. From that perspective, we are all best off cherishing any opportunity to exchange views in a constructive manner. And we need to accept that sometimes we will be on the losing side, and our views will not prevail.
The problem with poverty, like crime, war and pestilence is that the causes o are so varied as to overwhelm simplistically thinking people. These tribulations are not to be cured by simply putting fluoride into the water.
Further, these are on a continuum so that one person’s poverty might not bother someone else. If someone owns outright their own home and auto but makes less than ten thousand a year, are they in poverty? Consider that others with higher non-poverty incomes may be in hock with their credit card up to their eyes and have no money, even less than the person making ten thousand.
We often look with eyes that apply simplistic measure as to the challenges of people. It is not lack of money that puts people in poverty. Money is the measure of a deeper malady.
When I see street people I often realize they are mentally ill and efforts to help them based upon the notion that they are like us will not succeed. Years ago they might have been incarcerated for their own safety but that time passed with budget concerns. We are not being compassionate by allowing them to grind to dust mostly unseen in our streets.
Likewise, we are not compassionate when we allow government systems that turn out to be multi-generationally ways of keeping people in poverty. We know that Third World Countries have populations in extreme poverty because they are dictatorships and that the engine of capitalism leads to greater wealth throughout that society. Dr. J is right about looking correctly at Africa (the continent with the greatest resources but also the greatest extreme poverty) and the Pacific rim countries that have poverty.
People are trapped in poverty for many reasons, most of all because we cannot stop and look at their lives without our values affecting our sight. We like the freedom of people to be on the street if they so desire, despite knowing that most are very ill both physically and mentally. We like the notion that multi-generations of a family are safely held in the embrace of our government even though they give up their ability to escape poverty in trade for a monthly check. We like the notion that when kids choose to drop out of school they are being independent, as is their right.
Each action which we put a good face upon is a human disaster. Each of the maladies of poverty is tied to government actions that are for the purpose of a political base. When will we as a society admit that and take the politics out of the human suffering?
There is a great deal of truth in the saying, “As the twig is bent, so grows the tree.” Children who grow up malnourished and lacking proper healthcare suffer brain damage (a factor in poor choices as an adult) as well as lifelong health problems. Growing up in a chaotic home, moving often to avoid paying the rent, constantly changing “boyfriends,” relatives, local gang members, (and those “boyfriends”) who are abusive, prevent development of a commitment to planning for the future and any kind of work ethic.
My daughter was a social worker for over 10 years, in a town that actually tried to help school children. She had (initially) a case load of 20 families. But they kept moving, she would lose track of them, and she told me once that she could see the children’s potential just slipping away. Then the budget cuts came and finally she said about all she could do for them was give them pep talks.
This is one reason I support abortion rights. It is difficult enough to raise a child right even when you are committed to that child. No child should have to be born unwanted, and/or to parents who do not have the financial resources or emotional maturity to undertake that responsibility. And anyone who has read Chapter 4 of Levitt’s “Freakonomics” can see the coirrelation between the decrease in the crime rate in the 1990′s and the legalization of abortion.
Poverty is created, enabled, and encouraged by government. Having spent many years in Africa and SE Asia that fact is clear and present everywhere you look. The governments in Africa, by and large, encourage poverty and work hard to sustain it, as they profit from it. SE Asia is a bit different, as government tries to help in some ways and yet the lack of true democracy and competency leads to failure. Poverty can’t be solved by government alone, people have a large role to play as well, and individual initiative and hard work are vital. Government has to create the environment for that individual initiative and hard work to make a difference. I grew up very poor, divorced single parent home, my Mom only completed the 8th grade, earned less than $1 and hour (1950s and 60s), nobody in my family even graduated from high school. Education broke that generations long cycle of poverty. Education (at least n America) is the fastest, surest, and most reliable way to get out of poverty and stay out. The government and people themselves have a role to play in that, churches can’t do it. If more was focused on education here in America, poverty would be greatly reduced, but government doesn’t support it strongly enough. Government has too many other priorities ahead of education that are just not as important. Just look at Obama’s agenda, education is just not on it so far.
I will disagree about NM First. They look good on paper, but judging from the debacle of a “town hall” they manipulated and distorted for Jeff Bingaman in Albuq. a while back, they are partisan and also inept at organizing something to allow individual input and comments on an important subject. They did “round table” discussions better suited for business corporate discussions, not a polarizing and partisan topic like health care. The result was “majority rule” type of report outs where dissent and disagreements were voted down by the largely partisan crowd that was allowed to participate. Thus it was not an open and non-partisan meeting at all. It was highly restrictive, manipulated, and produced the desired outcome Jeff wanted I suspect.
Isn’t the belief that “the problem of poverty transcends ideology” an ideology in itself?
Heath, one of your best columns I’ve read by you. Generally the problems of our country, our community, and the world, come down to figuring out solutions despite differences of experience and point of view. In fact, the strength of our democracy is that we can bring disparate points of view into the conversation, and benefit from a wide perspective when it comes to solving problems. Rarely if ever does one person or group have a monopoly on truth or useful perception.
Most often a compromise that takes into consideration a broad spectrum of interests will be the best policy to adopt. To reach such a compromise we need quality discourse and free exchange of views with respect. The kind of dialogue that groups such as New Mexico First, a non partisan cross party organization works to promote. I too admire your pastor for understanding and promoting this kind of awareness…and to you for expressing it here at your blog. Thanks Heath.