Enough: Where America and McBama Are Wrong

“In a nation that was proud of hard work, strong families, close-knit communities, and our faith in God, too many of us now tend to worship self-indulgence and consumption. Human identity is no longer defined by what one does, but by what one owns. But we've discovered that owning things and consuming things does not satisfy our longing for meaning. We've learned that piling up material goods cannot fill the emptiness of lives which have no confidence or purpose.”

That was a quote from Jimmy Carter in 1979, from what is known as his “Malaise Speech” during the energy crisis. Certainly, that cannot be true? President Bush’s speeches following 9/11 told people to do more shopping. The economy will be remedied, it seems, if people went out and bought more. In fact, there is no ceiling to growth, we must merely strive forward with American ingenuity and creativity, creating more jobs and products, and find more markets to sell to. Is the American market saturated? No problem, let’s export. Let’s take all our surplus, created with fertilizers, hormones and environmentally destructive practices, which is a result of our “more is better” mentality, and dump it at cut throat prices around the world, because, after all, who doesn’t want more for less? (Everyone has our values, right??)Who cares about the national interests of the other countries… once globalization is king, it will all be international interests (for anyone but us, of course). The poor will be uplifted if companies are given more breaks so the wealth “trickles down.” If we simply consume more, we will be a nation of happier people, satisfied and secure in life. I mean, look at us now! We are so content, with our McDonalds and 3 car garages. The world is a happier and more peaceful place because of us, even if we are dehumanized, commercialized, and transformed into a mere source of consumer revenue in the process. How the face of God shines upon this Christian nation, anointed to be the example of justice and prosperity for all the world to see.

This is the American dream, is it not? The right to pursue happiness becomes the right to pursue unlimited growth without an awareness of costs or effects. This is what we have grown up with. This is the air we breathe and the water we swim in. More is simply better, therefore, the consumption and accumulation of more must be the pinnacle of best. “More is better.” This is the fundamental, unquestioned and unquestionable assumption that drives every aspect of this country, especially its politics and economics, and even its religion, when it sleeps in the same bed.

The statistics are damning. Our wealth and lifestyles consume 24% of the world’s energy even though we are merely 5% of the population. I literally laughed out loud when a commercial during the nomination conventions reported the statistic of our energy consumption, yet had the shameless audacity to suggest that we need more. The way that conservatives systematically deny our role in Global Warming is unforgivably callous. In the name of growth, we will continue to destroy not only God’s creation (and lest you don’t believe in a God), the very systems that sustain and give us life. We live as if we are above the wrath of a world that has bared its teeth at us in the forms of increased hurricanes, disease and destruction. And truth be told, most of the white middle class Americans are, for the time being, above the wrath. But the poor and the weak are not (New Orleans, Indonesia, anyone?). It is no secret that the scales of an unbalanced ecosystem are unfairly weighted against those who have the fewest resources to protect themselves. (But it doesn’t matter, since it doesn’t affect us). We don’t even need to get into the astronomical amount of waste we produce or where that goes (which, coincidentally, just happens to be where minorities and those lower on the socio-economic ladder are located). No, there can be no questioning the doctrine of growth and prosperity. Whether or not we say we believe in unlimited growth is irrelevant (because anyone with any sense can tell you, in a closed system that is Earth, there is no such thing as unlimited growth). The truth is that we live like it, raping and destroying whatever needs to be raped and destroyed, with little regard for any long-term consequence. Even for those who recognize the warning signs of impending disaster, I’m confounded by their absurd willingness to do further damage via the savior of Scientific Progress instead of working to curb our consumption (see posted item on Geo-engineering). In the millions of years that this planet has supported life, the two great lies have been, “The day you eat from the tree you will not surely die,” and “We live in a world of unlimited growth where more is better.” (A tip of the hat to Derek Webb.)

And yet, We. Need. More.

Richard Foster, and I suppose others, locate 6 great streams of tradition within Christianity, each offering an important perspective: Contemplative, Holiness, Charismatic, Social Justice, Evangelical, and Incarnational. He argues that for holistic spiritual development, we must be aware and seek to develop in all of the 6 areas. As I’ve argued in the past, our theology heavily influences the way that those 6 streams merge in our lives, if at all. If one has a dualistic view, then Evangelism comes into conflict with Social Justice. If we don’t have a healthy understanding of the affirmations of the Incarnation, then the world is simply for us to abuse at will.

I do not believe that the pervasive, assumed and unquestioned ethics of unlimited growth and “more-is-better” is a Christian ethic. What I do see in Scripture is a model in which those with more bless those who have none. I see an ethic that demands a love toward our neighbor that is equal to the love we have towards ourselves. Both in Jesus’ words and in Paul’s example, I see an emphasis on not worrying about our material needs but having a contentment that comes with less or plenty. In Scripture, I see a heavy emphasis on the poor, the aliens and strangers, the widows and fatherless, those ostracized by the status quo, which are our neighbors around the world who support our decadence and wastefulness with their blood and sweat. In fact, in the early churches, I see an extreme subversion of empire and status, so much so that believers were seen as a threat worthy of capital punishment, not a co-option by the government’s political machinery. What seems much more in line with the Biblical witness is an ethic of “enough,” as seen in Proverbs 30:8-9:

“Give me neither poverty nor riches; feed me with the food that is needful for me, lest I be full and deny you and say, ‘Where is the Lord?’ or lest I be poor and steal and profane the name of my God.”

There is no universal line that states, this is “enough.” Such ambiguity has never rested comfortably with legalists. It is true that many do not have enough, in this country and around the world. However, having been saturated with “more is better,” what is truly enough is probably drastically less than what we assume we need. I cannot, and do not need to detail all the reasons why “enough” is biblically and more practically feasible than “more is better.” There are plenty of authors who vocalize the arguments of simplicity far more articulately than I (Richard Foster, Wendell Berry, Cecile Andrews, and Henri Nouwen being a few of them). But it cannot be understated that our current lifestyles are unarguably globally unsustainable and a flagrant disregard for our neighbor. For some, more will indeed be better, since they do not enough. But for the vast majority of us living in this country, the rest cannot have enough if we simply have more. To make it all the worse, America, with its flippancy towards consequences and blind pursuit of growth, is the model towards which so many struggling countries strive.

This election, unfortunately, has shown me that despite the rampant rhetoric on change, the foundation by which they make their appeals are still grounded in the concepts of unlimited growth and “more is better.” Though one party seems to care more about some issues (McCain didn’t mention the poor once in his speech, not to mention the fact that his running mate doesn’t “believe” in global warming), I will, at the end of the day be voting for the lesser of two evils.

In the book “Ishmael” by Daniel Quinn, the author likens societies to “flying machines.” We sit in these flying machines and take off from a cliff. We are in the air, and are paddling with all our might trying to soar to new heights, yet still find ourselves falling. On the way down, we see the ruins of other flying machines, and think, “Surely, we are better than those flying machines, if we only paddle harder.” We think, “Yes, we will make it, because look at us, we are still in the air!” But the reality is that we too will end up like those other flying machines; all too abruptly, all too painfully, and without any further recourse once we’ve crashed.

If we continue in this direction, the question is not whether we are falling, but how fast we are falling and how much longer before we plow into the ground. It will not simply be a question of the War or outsourcing. The potential problems will make us wish we were simply living the good ol’ days of $5 gas and a housing crisis.

By the way, after Jimmy Carter made that speech in ’79, his ratings plummeted. When it is popularity that buys one’s path into office, how can a prophet speak with integrity?

[I’m not a political analyst. I didn’t major in international relations and I’m not an economist. I’m not a sociologist, I’m not a theologian or philosopher, or a scientist, or even a psychologist (yet). I’m 22 years old, what do I know, right? I don’t intend to talk as if I have mastered each of those fields, as if they could be “mastered”. However, by definition of being a living breathing human being who interacts with the world around me, I am all of those things, in the lowest common denominator of those terms. Undoubtedly, many of you who have been trained in the above are far more knowledgeable than I. Your arguments will be more sensitive to information I’m sorely unaware of, and your experience will direct you to have a more nuanced understanding of said issues. You will undoubtedly find my sentiments crass and unrefined, over-generalized and perhaps simultaneously too theoretical and anti-theoretical at the same time. However, I will not be dissuaded from wrestling with such things simply because I’m a layperson. By living in this world, we have a responsibility to be as faithful as possible with the knowledge that we have, no matter how limited it is. I write, unquestionably and unapologetically, as a Christian with a bias towards my understanding of Scripture and worldview. I welcome your thoughts and comments.]