The Money Will Run Out, And Christians Will Have to Take Aim and Fire on the Poor

by , under Current Affairs, Economics, Education, Emerging Church

As the US battles with itself over the debt crisis, and Europe struggles to get to grips with economically weaker nations threatening the Euro, I’ve been mulling over a conversation I had with Tom Sine and another significant leader who’ll I’ll call B at Wild Goose a month or so ago (I won’t name him, as I feel it might be unfair to put his name to a conversation he didn’t know I might share). Tom Sine has long worked in ‘futures’ – helping community groups to think about the sort of future that they want, and how they might achieve it, and is essentially an optimist. B, who’d I’d not met before, but with whom I enjoyed a number of very interesting conversations, lives and works in a very poor city in the US, and is pretty pessimistic about where things are going.

To summarise his position: there are a number of ‘triggers’ – economic, environmental, political – which could pull the US and other parts of the world into a scenario where the normal societal structures collapse. Food distribution, welfare payments, fuel networks, healthcare and policing – all of these could effectively cease functioning (and with some US cities close to bankruptcy, how far off is that?).

The problem that B sees is that the US has developed a new type of poor person: one who is not simply economically poor, but seemingly incapable of existing independently of state welfare. Unlike the poor of, say, Malawi, the unemployed urban poor of the US have no knowledge of agriculture nor any ability to innovate with basic tools and technology. They simply await their welfare payment, and that’s it, and the huge amount of charitable money that has been put into this demographic group has done little to really change the core problem of zero positive engagement with education or labour. What this means is that if these state systems do collapse, these people will be totally incapable of supporting themselves, other than by looting.

Some people in the community B is part of run a community garden, from which they harvest vegetables etc. B’s point was this: what happens when the hungry urban poor march on the garden, demanding food from it? The garden cannot sustain everyone in the area, and if the garden is ravaged by a mob it will cease to sustain anyone in the area. So he’s foresees a scenario where he would have to train Christian people to take aim and fire on the poor – in order to survive themselves.

Both Tom and I were pretty shocked by his analysis. But on reflection, I’m not sure quite how far off he is. For those of you who have read or seen The Road, any major collapse is going to throw up terrible ethical questions. And what I like about what B is doing is that he’s not afraid to get people thinking about them now.

There’s a call to arms here: whether you are going to start making swords or ploughshares, it’s going to pay to be ready.


--//--

Click here to receive updates, and hear first about new projects

Share

  1. Brandon

    I don’t necessarily find the base analysis shocking but rather his response to the ethical quandary. Apocalyptic crisis or not, I don’t think that changes the Christian’s response to the other. Rather it should inform the response (ie, perhaps the literal creation of an alternative city becomes viable at this point…a move from his urban environment to create another type).

  2. Karen Urwin

    Interesting reading and it’s not only in the US. I work in a deprived community in South West Birmingham UK. In a recent community consultation we ran, we began by identifying the issues in the area then the organisations and then asked the residents to identify who was, or who should be, dealing with each problem. When we looked at the finished picture every problem had been placed with a statutory department even though there were plenty of private and community organisations that operated on or for the estate.