Wednesday, July 10, 2013

Giving us enough space - to enjoy ourselves in

The old territorial imperative is a real and necessary one .   So how do we manage it ?  WW2 shows how  easily it can get out of control .
The need for land was seen in the 20th century as an imperative for wealth - which it is NOT , Hopefully in the 21st then , it will be seen more as a potential poverty trap idea that is not only,  not good for the earth  or for people who try to use it as a way out of poverty.

The following is a response to a key dilmemma  to personal and corporate sustainability .  Do we need to avoid poverty by sharing more of our resources  OR  is the question - how do we encourage the use of space so we don't witness Collapse?

Jesus came to bring good news to the poor - not land and not riches . The societies that followed his lead have beecome soem of the most egalitartian and welath sharing communities ever . Does his key message  mean he didn't care about poverty ? Maybe he wasn't as preoccupied as we are with equality ; I think its fair to say he would have accepted that simple ambitions to establish  equality were often both unnatural , unnecessary and unachievable. We were created equal in some ways but different unique and diverse  to occupy different sized spaces ----that suit us as individuals.. He said there will always be the " poor with us "Commonwealths share but never fully focus on complete equality in income .
The reactionary 20th century West has been focused on  justifying the quest to create equality and its a false and unsustainable target .

Back to the primary need for "the good news" above equality.  Hope is more important than anything - resilience driven hope; Individual's sense of hope  for an  individuals given sense of space . So who should provide that hope in a concrete and sound way to them and their poor communities ? - -thats the question !
I don't suggest that being poor is always right and that the stats presented about the drift in income over the last 50 years should not disturb us
 Whats important is HOW we act for others to make societies share more and have more genuine hope. The stats tell my generation that their caring ( and trickle down, non planning , do what you feel like culture) has been ineffective and that we MUST find a better way . This could mean we stop  experimenting with the latest method of quick fix and look at resilience building in communities - ways we did things BEFORE ( don't all gasp you automatic progress worshipers )
One of the reasons our generation has been so ineffective in bringing hope in poor communities is that it  focuses too much on simple accounting stats ( blinkered views of economy as all or nothing competition policy - for example) - overly simple concepts of equality about cash can easily prevent us from seeing the hope and beauty of diversity say in shared capital assets --in paradoxes you may only see in having "the poor with us " . Poor people can choose to live in poverty because they love being on the land.
Take all the money ,opportunity and incentive drained off productivity in Australia TODAY by those seeking to make us "more equal ". Ways that work for the good of the community can see scarcity as no big deal ( God will provide ) and provide genuine hope and healing for the poor . Rural people seldom get paid properly for their produce so they are condemned to " poverty" - is that wrong ? Should we not differ in our approach when working with the poor esp as I said above in the resilience limited machine  of earth use --- a special case where collapse ( jared diamond ) is possible on the edges and hope is impossible if you don't turn around and go back
 I ask that we follow not the latest trends in development theory but hold  fast ---we follow Christ in bringing healing before  we try to bring economic development -the objective  authorship of the resilience agent should be the job of someone like a doctor - a trained gift . . Rural Resilience evaluation is my profession and its a rule there to not to interfere ( trying to create more equality ) without seeing the whole picture .
I may disagree with some in not rejecting poverty outright but I agree with any who say  ALL OF US could/ should focus much more clearly in rescuing and talking repentance on the edges of potential economic collapse . I hate the way competition policy dominates economic theory but to undermine it takes a thorough big picture recognition of the limited role it has within the cocoon.

Many of the farmers I work with here in Australia live destitute lives than those overseas because their communities don't really care to effectively support them. How many Filipino farmers commit suicide on the basis that no one understands them ?

My/Our generation,  as the presentation "the rules" shows so well has FAILED to do anything to stop the slide and therefore  we need to DO SOMETHING DIFFERENT. The question for those who want to support better and more secure development  is:  is it by reinventing the wheel or seeing what we did right to keep our societies more equal in the past ?( the story behind the story ) ; Any review should not be at the mercy of more quick fixers  but insist on FIRST THINGS FIRST -   truly understand the intransigence factors and diversity factors in poor rural communities . DISCOVER the complexity of those who understand what it is to be rich and poor in the one space .