The best way to understand the current economic crisis is to see that it is not economic. It is political, but even that designation is inadequate. It is a seismic evolutionary fissure that has yet to be fully identified. This post, and links to a few other exploratory posts on this blog, will seek to outline what I believe to be the prominent features of our situation and the likely avenues for a move into the future.The reason the current crisis is not economic is that our economy is by any measure unsustainable.
We cannot survive by hallowing indebtedness ad infinitum, both as a government panacea and an individual or family lifestyle or as a prominent feature of much business. A culture of indebtedness is not sustainable.
We cannot survive by palliative tweaks to our current structures under the label of "green". Current advertisements for companies that claim to be going green may lull us into believing that we can survive by moving this way and that among existing options such as various fuels.
Even if we could prop up the current system, it would not accomplish the best purpose of an economic system which is to make it possible for all within it to achieve a measure of relief from poverty, illness and ignorance. At its best our global system can be described as an amalgamation of capitalism (widely understood) and philanthropy, defined not in the amazingly narrow manner of a recent New York Times Magazine, but as the sum total of activities we engage in under the label not-for-profit. Including educational and medical institutions as well as the plethora of associations and NGOs and governmentl agencies that are non-profit (sic).
Our current system is a faltering machine whose product is benign genocide -- which I define as the sum total of global deaths that result from the way the system is set up. Any honest redoing of our global economy must at least recognize why the current mechanisms fail. Or else we shall be condemned to self-delusion. believing than incremental tweaks are a real solution and celebrating achievements whose celebration is in itself a cause for tears.
The answer to the conundrum created by acknowledging that our present economic system is unsustainable, is an integral politics which is providentially the potential of an Obama candidacy.
Such a politics can communicate that the solution to our problems is not merely a matter of moving beyond religious, racial, gender and cultural barriers, but by creating a culture of integral communication of the elements needed to conquer problems and of integral projects which exemplify such behavior in action.
If Barack Obama is elected, he will be a leader fit for these times. He will, I believe, propose not that we compete to bring our economy back but that we move to a post-oil, post capitalist-philanthropic, post-debt-enslaved, post-consumer culture based on a reclamation of key values that have been sliced and diced in our Balkanized intellectual environment.
The primacy of public space as a measure of cultural attainment.
The creation of new human settlements based on a wedding of high technology and values implicit in Christopher Alexander's pattern language. These I envision as experimental nodes where groups live independent of the need to drive cars.
The understanding that being green involves doing so on a scale that requires what the New Testament calls new wine skins. In other words, it makes sense to build something green and integral from bottom to top that can be home and workplace and cultural space for from 5-10.000.
There is clearly more to all this. But, for the moment, this is enough to get the ball rolling.
http://stephencrosehome.blogspot.com
Born in NYC, attended Oberlin & Trinity Schools, then Exeter and Williams (Phi Beta Kappa 1958). Worked with the Reverend James Robinson, finished Union Theological Seminary in NYC (1961). Joined Student Interracial Ministry in Nashville. Founded Renewal Magazine in Chicago, served The Christian Century and Christianity Crisis magazines. Covered civil rights in Oxford, Birmingham and Selma. Interviewed Martin Luther King, Jr., Malcolm X. My book The Grass Roots Church had impact on the ecumenical movement. Have authored some 15 books, been a house-husband and father of three wonderful (grown) children. I have written published music choral and popular. Most recently I served in UN agencies including UNICEF in NYC and edited CHOICES which was the flagship magazine of UNDP.
Unfortunately this is too hard of a pill to swallow for many.Live within your means stay out of debt is not the Amerikan way anymore.I have decided to live this way.
It is funny that so many so called Christians ignore this good biblical advice.
by
Michael Chavers (42 articles, 0 quicklinks, 12 diaries, 173 comments)
on Friday, March 14, 2008 at 4:36:58 PM
good ideas, but off on a false track overall - it IS an economic crisis, and we are not going to get control of our society until we stop the economic fraud we have been subjected to for a long time. Banketeering - how the banks have been stealing trillions from you, and the tap is still running http://www.rudemacedon.ca/dlp/box/box01-money.html
by
siamdave (1 articles, 0 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 64 comments)
on Saturday, March 15, 2008 at 8:17:45 AM
Our Crisis Is Ignoring Reality And Irrational Thinking
People need to know how to distinguish between good and evil, right and wrong, in order to accomplish change. For generations we have been indoctrinated to think irrationally. This is what has allowed this mess to happen.
by
arlen custer (1 articles, 0 quicklinks, 6 diaries, 222 comments)
on Saturday, March 15, 2008 at 8:39:51 AM
During the last 28 years the main problem in the world has been caused by conflicting ideologies pushed, and, in some cases, enforced, in the guise of religious righteousness.
In other words, the main problem in the world is religious bigots and hypocrites fighting for power over each other, each claiming that God is on their side. And they are in conflict not only with each other, but with moderates and progressives within their own religions.
In the U.S., the partisan political gridlock during the last 28 years has been in large part because right-wing "conservatives" have claimed to be "the true" Christians, and they’ve had a large measure of success by falsely claiming the flag and the Bible as their own.
The economic crisis in the U.S. that has been festering for the last 28 years (and really increased during the last eight years), was created in large part because the Christian Right colluded with right-wing Republicans in claiming that wealth is a "reward from God," and that the poor deserve their lot because they don’t work hard enough and don’t have enough faith in God.
Now it is time for the truth to be told in a way that everyone is made aware of it.
My own take is that we are witnessing not the resurgence but the death throes of religion. These creedal religions and belief systems are not capavle of turning back the tide opf secularism and, franlky, of reason and disenchantment with creedal religion and its manifestations. I believe the replacement for religion is and will be spirituality that is largely a matter of individual practice. I think this death rattle of religion is part of what recent history has been about. But there are other factors that include the end of oil and environmental crises and persistent injustice and denial of rights. There are no easy or exclusive explanations IMO. Cheers, S
by
Stephen C. Rose (35 articles, 64 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 56 comments)
on Saturday, March 15, 2008 at 4:51:35 PM
I agree more with Adamson that what is in its "death throes" (as you put it) are certain aspects of organized, traditional religion -- particularly those aspects that are patriarchal, theocratic, and imperialistic.
Adamson submits, and I agree, that a new reformation of religions, along with a reformation of governments, will establish a true family of religions that are compatible and in harmony with each other and with spirituality. And it will establish governments that are truly of, by and for the people.
After, all, most people in the world follow one religion or another, and growing numbers of people since the Sixties have realized the core, universal truths that are common to all religions.
Therefore, I believe Adamson is right on target with his message.
After reading Adamsons message I am struck by the fact that he seems to understand but still, somehow, misses the point. He states that god is one, meaning everything, yet claims that god is our saviour. This is doublethink and is subconsciously an indication of separateness. The idea of separateness is at the core of our problems and has been for a lot longer than 27 years. I believe Adamson could get a lot further with his message if he totally shed the use of the word god from his thoughts and dialog. God, creator, indicates seperatness. Cooperation is what has made and maintains the univers. Not some supreme entity.
by
arlen custer (1 articles, 0 quicklinks, 6 diaries, 222 comments)
on Monday, March 17, 2008 at 9:06:41 AM
Arlen, if you had read further, you would have understood that Adamson's use of the word God is in large part to turn the tables on religious bigots and hypocrites who think God is on THEIR SIDE.
That is entirely false, because as Adamson's God loves all humanity, and is forgiving and merciful.
Besides that, he explains fully how and why most people who claim to be Christians or Jews or Muslims do not know what God really is --- NOT an entity, not a man, nor a son of man, but the Supreme Consciousness; the Divine Light-Energy-Source of our existence; the primordial "Word" that was in the beginning and made flesh in all of us.
Additionally, he is very much a Jeffersonian who believes there must be a wall of separation between church and state, and that government must be secular and respect all religions as equal.
by
Sarah Morgan (1 articles, 0 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 175 comments)
on Monday, March 17, 2008 at 6:13:15 PM
The way I try to say this is to suggest that Jesus is the preeminent universal teacher of humankind and that his essential teaching is the closeness of the one he calls Abba. I am a universalist and one who with Nietzsche believes in a revaluation of values -- mine are nonidolatry, tolerance, democracy and helpfulness. I believe that Abba is both within us and beyond us and that we do best when we do not try to say things are true that we do not know to be true by our own experience. Best, S
by
Stephen C. Rose (35 articles, 64 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 56 comments)
on Monday, March 17, 2008 at 6:37:38 PM
I believe your way of nonidolatry, tolerance, democracy and helpfulness is certainly a good way.
I also like the way that Adamson puts it, that the golden rule is the universal divine imperative: Treat all others as you would want to be treated if you were them.
I think that pretty much sums up the core, universal teaching common to all religions and humanitarian ideals.
by
Sarah Morgan (1 articles, 0 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 175 comments)
on Monday, March 17, 2008 at 9:51:00 PM
Why should you love your enemies And those who curse at you Why should you pray forgiveness for Those mean mistreaters too
Why should you give a thief your coat And then your shirt as well And turn your cheek as meek as meek When you've been hurt like hell
Cause it's the only way to turn this thing around To treat them like you wish they would treat you It's the only way to put the demon down To treat them like you wish they would treat you
Why should you give to all who ask Nothing's worth clinging to Best realize that Abba has Much better things for you
Cause it's the only way to turn this thing around To treat them like you wish they would treat you It's the only way to put the demon down To treat them like you wish they would treat you
Something I wrote based on what the scholars call the Q Document. Whatever it is I like this way of putting it. Cheers, S
by
Stephen C. Rose (35 articles, 64 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 56 comments)
on Tuesday, March 18, 2008 at 5:17:51 AM
My point is that after generations of indoctrination the idea of god is the idea of seperatness, creator/created. In the dictionary god is defined as creator and ruler of the univers, supreme being. Separate. Thus the idea of seperatness invades our thoughts and effects the way we think and see the world around us. This is why I suggested that the word god should not be used.
by
arlen custer (1 articles, 0 quicklinks, 6 diaries, 222 comments)
on Tuesday, March 18, 2008 at 7:55:13 AM
We can know everything if we can open ourselves up to our connection with everything. We only use a fraction of our brains because we have closed ourselves off with ridiculous ideas about ego (self) and the univers. If you believe you can't know something, then you can't.
by
arlen custer (1 articles, 0 quicklinks, 6 diaries, 222 comments)
on Tuesday, March 18, 2008 at 9:20:52 AM
Of course we can know everything. I am talking about the sort of language that pretends to understand what we do not yet understand. hat would be my description of much theology and much philosophy and of all superstition. Best, S
by
Stephen C. Rose (35 articles, 64 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 56 comments)
on Tuesday, March 18, 2008 at 9:41:38 AM
The self-conscious human mind is puny compared to the Supreme Consciousness of the Universe, and compared to what is called The Book of Life or The Akashic Record.
Here is an article that speaks to that. I think you might find it interesting:
A human being can indeed receive the divine gift of cosmic consiousness, also called the Christ Consiousness or Buddha Consciousness.
One can indeed thereby know that we are all one with God, one with the universe, one with all humanity, and know that there is indeed no separateness, but oneness.
However, that consciousness cannot be sustained. The human consciousness and brain is not capable of containing and being aware of all that is in God's "Mind" or in what's called the Book of Life or Akashic Record.
I understand what you're talking about. But you're not understanding me.
by
Sarah Morgan (1 articles, 0 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 175 comments)
on Tuesday, March 18, 2008 at 7:48:27 PM
The beginning of wisdom is to realize and acknowledge how much you do not know.
To me, the claim that you know everything, or can know everything, is, quite simply, absurd.
As I said, we can indeed glimpse the divine reality and tap into the highest consciousness, but only those with delusions of grandeur think that they then know or can know or will know everything permanently.
The truly wise are humble, yet firm in their knowledge of universal truths.
by
Sarah Morgan (1 articles, 0 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 175 comments)
on Tuesday, March 18, 2008 at 8:01:21 PM
It sounds as though your not understanding me. No God Of Any Kind.. Please listen closely to the Beatles The Inner Light. May help understanding. Wisdom is knowing the truth when you see it.
Best
by
arlen custer (1 articles, 0 quicklinks, 6 diaries, 222 comments)
on Wednesday, March 19, 2008 at 7:27:16 AM
However, truth, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder. The wise recognize the truth, while others tend toward egotism and think they know everything.
But hey, I realize I'm revealing my frustration at your persistence in trying to make your point, but I really mean no offense.
The reason I persist is only to try to direct your attention to the work of the author who really does know the truth when he sees it. But if you're not interested in his work and would rather promote your own ideas, that's fine.
