I have written in recent posts about globalization as articulated by Thomas Friedman in his “The World is Flat.” I visited the impact this is having as cultures collide. I have hinted at what this has meant (and will mean) for the US and other technologically advanced societies. But there is yet another question. What about the roughly 3 billion people, half the planet, which are as yet untouched by globalization?
Participation in the global economy requires an educated labor pool, a healthy labor pool, physical infrastructure, just social institutions, and hope. Most people can quickly identify the first four of these.
People must be literate and capable of doing basic mathematics to interact with the global economy. Diseased and malnourished people cannot function on a day-to-day basis. In Africa, where AIDS is an epidemic, not only are the victims incapacitated, but millions of caretakers are absent from the economy. Countless orphans do not receive sufficient care and education. One of the most significant sources of disease is contaminated water. Without clean wells, water delivery systems, or roads to transport resources, there is no way to maintain healthy communities. There is no way to take advantage of labor-saving and life-saving technologies with intermittent or no power. Furthermore, it makes no difference if a healthy, educated person with access to needed infrastructure wants to advance themselves if government corruption, bribes, and absurd regulations only take back whatever they accomplish. Sexist or ethnically discriminatory values keep substantial portions of populations from reaching, or even trying to reach, their potential.
I believe that significant improvement for cultures suffering from these maladies can only happen in the context of hope. There must be the belief that the future can be different. I have written elsewhere about Walter Brueggemann’s assessment that the goal of fallen human culture is to keep us in an “eternal present.” It is the belief that what is, is what always will be. It provides meaning and order, even if many or most live in deprived conditions. Challenging the “eternal present” is always dangerous because there are always some who disproportionately benefit from the arrangement, and they will retaliate. People will not change unless a new vision inspires them to risk and struggle. They need hope.
What is the role of the Church in this context?
[Index]
Leave a Reply