A SOLUTION FOR POVERTY AND CLIMATE CHANGE

They have made it a mournful waste,                                                                                               desolate it lies before me,                                                                                                                 desolate, all the land                                                                                                                                     because no one takes it to heart.  (Jeremiah 12:11)

The industrial revolution has provided great wealth for the world, but poverty prevails and the world is being destroyed by the production of artificial wealth. Can the apocalyptic threats of poverty and climate change be transformed?

World War II seems to present capitalism as the answer.  Fascism and communism were obvious failures.  The Capitalist answer to poverty is development.(desarrollo)  Gustavo Gutierrez predicted that Capitalism wouldn’t work in his 1973 book, “A Theology of Liberation.”  Adam Smith’s liberalism with the ‘invisible hand’ didn’t work; nor did Milton Friedman’s neo-liberalism which was a disaster.  “They [social scientists] have reached the conclusion that the dynamics of world economics leads simultaneously to the creation of greater wealth for the few and greater poverty for the many.”  (A Theology of Liberation, p. 25)

Massive migration across the United States’ southern border is an example of how development (desarrollo) doesn’t work to combat poverty.  Mexican President Andrés Manuel López Obrador said recently,  “The people don’t abandon their towns because they want to, but rather out of necessity.” 

“U.N. report finds world isn’t curbing global warming.” (USA Today Network, “Way Off Track,” September 9, 2023, p. 1NN)  Poverty and destruction of the earth are related.  The poor are suffering the most in the move toward global destruction causing climate change.  Solutions abound and there is no one answer, but what is the criteria?  How do we decide on an immediate action that is individual and political?  What do we do - options, political and personal options, are available.  What is the criteria for choice?

Are we listening to our children?

Gustavo Gutierrez was influential in the historic meeting of Latin American bishops in Medellin, producing the Medellin document of 1968. They agreed with Gutierrez that solutions must be judged in so far as they move the poor from poverty.  This is referred to as the “preferential option for the Poor.”  Theologian Matthew Fox suggests a preferential (non-violent) option for the children. This is a universally accepted criterion.  Who can object to loving children?

        

Bas-relief in Saint Benedict the Moor Catholic Church, Milwaukee, Wisconsin

The current horror in Israel and Palestine reminds us of “A voice was heard in Ramah, sobbing and loud lamentation; Rachel weeping for her children, and she would not be consoled, since they were no more.” (Matthew 12:18)

Jesus in the Temple with the Elders - Grace Lutheran Church, Milwaukee, WI

Are we looking for what Jeremiah predicts or will we take the moral imperative of action?

I looked at the earth, and it was waste and void; at the heavens, and their light had gone out!

I looked at the mountains, and they were trembling, and all the hills were crumbling!

I looked and behold, there was no man; even the birds of the air had flown away!

I looked and behold, the garden land was a dessert, with all its cities destroyed before the Lord, before his blazing wrath.    (Jeremiah 4:23-26)

                                                                                                                                                              

The Working Catholic: UAW Strike by Bill Droel

  

Autoworkers are not only seeking higher pay, writes Binyamin Appelbaum in N.Y. Times (10/2/23). “They are also, audaciously, demanding the end of the standard 40-hour workweek.” This is not the first-time employees have sought fewer hours. In fact, our feast of St. Joseph the Worker/International Workers Day (May First) was inspired by an 1886 Chicago protest for shorter hours. The Federation of Trades and Labor held a May rally in our Haymarket area (now a trendy restaurant spot). Late in the evening someone threw dynamite. Eight workers were rounded up, including a lay minister, a printer and others. Seven were convicted; four were hanged. The incident gave rise to an annual, worldwide day for worker dignity. Chicago Haymarket - Struggle for the 8-hour Day Mondelez Bakery, commonly called Nabisco, has a large facility in my neighborhood. Two years ago members of Bakery, Confectionary Union were on the sidewalk or in a lot across the street, striking over pay and retirement plans. As pressing, however, was their concern about shift length and overtime. Like other companies, Mondelez addressed the side effects of Covid-19 by asking or requiring overtime. This remedy became counterproductive because it created stress among the employees and added to operating expenses. Covid-19 likewise brings attention to the topic of onsite vs. remote working hours. It also prompts experiments around the number of hours on the job per week.  The popular crowd-funding platform Kickstarter, to mention one example, is experimenting with four days per week on the job. Pay remains the same. This is not a gimmick, says Kickstarter’s CEO Aziz Hasan. Other experiments in Sweden and Great Britain have favorable outcomes so far. An experiment in Iceland among several companies and backed by unions and civic groups was a success. The employees clocked 36-hours over four weekdays. Productivity remained the same. Sick days decreased. Customers noted better quality of service. Now, 86% of Iceland employees are allowed a four-day week, reports Wall St. Journal (7/31/21).         This past January Rep. Mark Takano of California (www.takano.house.gov) introduced legislation for a nation-wide 36-hour workweek. Even during our so-called labor shortage, Takano’s proposal should get consideration, concludes Appelbaum. It “would be better for our health, better for our families and better for the employers, who would reap the benefits of a more motivated and better rested workforce.” From a Catholic perspective a 36-hour workweek has a prior requirement: the principle of a family wage. That is, one worker per household with one job should be paid enough to reasonably support the family. (A family may include other workers, but that income is extra, not a dire necessity.) Presuming a family wage is established, an employer will pay a 36-hour per week employee at the former 40-hour rate. (Some employees who can afford to do so might negotiate pro-rated pay for 36-hours, but not from a distorted sense of vocation.)  Second, Catholicism says that a shorter workweek is betrayed if it really means less time in the office while bringing more work home. This caution particularly applies to salaried employees. Further, hours gained by less time on the clock cannot be spent on unnecessary consumption or excess time using screens. In other words, a change in culture must accompany any change in work hours. A whole/holy life involves employment, but also true leisure.  It means leaving behind our culture of total labor. The true purpose of time off is to establish “the right and claims of leisure in the face of the claims of total labor,” writes Josef Pieper (1904-1997) in Leisure: the Basis of Culture (Ignatius Press, 1952). Our culture currently needs “the illusion of a life fulfilled.” But instead of genuine time off, it puts forth false leisure with “cultural tricks and traps and jokes.” True leisure, Pieper concludes, is festivity or celebration. It is the point at which “effortlessness, calm and relaxation” come together. “Have leisure and know that I am God.” –Psalm 46:11          Whatever the outcome of the autoworkers job action, their proposal for a shorter workweek should not be dismissed. Droel edits INITIATIVES (PO Box 291102, Chicago, IL 60629), a newsletter on faith and work.