Everything Must Change - reflection 3

awake & reading : Everything Must Change - chp. 26 by Brian Mclaren | by Shaun O'Reilly

Chp. 26 of McLaren's book is titled, "Collaboration for Co-liberation." I'm interested in this section, probably mostly because I know so little about it.  I esteem "collaboration" in art and life, but I feel like I've only scratched the surface of truly working, thinking, or even living intentionally with others.
As for liberation ... do you know my stats?!  Upper/Middle class churchy white male, lived most of my life in the suburbs of DFW.  "Liberty" is something me and my stat-mates (upper/middle class white, "churched", suburban males) have just been happy our forebears fought and won for us back in the 18th Century.  Liberation thoughts aren't on my radar each day.  But, I think I miss something when I ignore them.  McLaren writes about the liberation from rampant capitalism - a system that has become a sort of religion - "theocapitalism."  Earlier in the book, he explained some principles of the system as:

The Theocapitalist Religion (p. 190)
"Theocapitalism" does for its adherents what any religion does [quoting Tom Beaudoin]:

1. gives an identity
2. helps one belong to a community
3. develops trust
4. allows one to experience ecstasy
5. communicates transcendence
6. provides conversion to a new way of life
7. promises rest for the heart

Four Spiritual Laws of Theocapitalism:

1. Law of Progress through Rapid Growth
2. Law of Serenity through Possession and Consumption
3. Law of Salvation through Competition Alone*
4. Freedom to Prosper through Unaccountable Corporations

The "co-liberation" McLaren writes about in Chp. 26th is in response to this sort of system described above.  So here are two paragraphs from the chapter, looking back and thinking forward.  I welcome discussion:

"The twentieth century was, in many ways, a battle between two economic systems.  Communism specialized in distribution but failed at production.  As a result, it ended up doing a great job of distributing poverty evenly.  Capitalism was excellent at production but weak at distribution.  As a result, it ended up rewarding the wealthy with obscene amounts of wealth while the poor suffered on in horrible degradation and indignity.  *[original analysis from thoughts by Rene Padilla]

The twenty-first century began in the aftermath of the defeat of Marxism.  The story of the coming century will likely be the story of whether a sustainable form of capitalism can be saved from theocapitalism, or whether unrestrained theocapitalism will result in such gross inequity between rich and poor that violence and counterviolence will bring civilization to a standstill, or perhaps worse."

Comments

[Brian Rhea]

I'm glad you chose this passage, because as I read this chapter this portion really jumped out at me.

Winston Churchill cleverly said that Democracy is the worst form of government except for all the others.

I wonder if the same can be said about capitalism as it's practiced in the U.S. today, and McLaren's imagining of a sustainable capitalism grabbed me. Something makes me think that McLaren has read "Deep Economy" by Bill McKibben.

There's a lot to be said for competition in the marketplace. It encourages ingenuity, efficiency and creativity. But, from p224:

"The word competition has a strange and almost mystical appeal to some devotees of the prosperity system of theocapitalism. If by competition we mean a respectful struggle that brings out the best in all competitors, this appeal seems legitimate enough. But if the term suggests a system that creates a few winners and many losers, we will find it hard to square with Jesus' emphasis on concern for neighbors, a concern that extends to enemies and that singles out "the losers" (the last, the least, and the lost) for special care."

[Nate]

I agree with Brian that this passage was the one that stood out when I read that chapter. Apparently we all liked it. :-) It was nice to hear criticism of both ends of the spectrum.

Lately I've been refining my view of the market economy we have. I think we probably have highs and lows, but generally it seems our market economy may best be tended with checks and balances similar to our government (and this relates to Brian's point). That is, totally free markets in my mind are a bad idea. The temptation to make money in the short term over and against the well being of the consumer needs a countering force.

We see the counteraction happen when our people request the politicians to a) require safer working conditions in foreign countries where our corporations have factories b) take away tax breaks from corporations that ship X% of their jobs out of this country c) protect consumers in the health insurance industry from misleading marketing etc...

...

Switching gears. The title of the chapter is interesting as it reminds me of a quote from an Australian that went something like "if you have come to help me go home. but if you have come because you realize your liberation is bound up with mine then we can walk together." collaboration for co-liberation, I think, is another great way to say this. When we realize that oppression involves everyone, not just "the oppressed" I think we are making progress.