How are brands related to religion?  Read the article from Fast Company.

Please read for Monday Oct. 4

A Better Choosing Experience, from the consultants at Booz & Co.

China's Urbanization and Aid to Developing Countries

The two articles that I have chosen to write about are about China's urbanization and the foreign assistance being pledged by developed countries for developing countries.

The article on China demonstrated the division that exists between the urban and rural parts of the country that has accompanied economic growth. I was intrigued to see that the Chinese are experiencing characteristics that I have generally associated as being prevalent in the developed countries; these are a displacement of unskilled workers and the increased usage of technology. As I see the situation, this could be a sign that China will join the ranks of the other developed countries some day. If this happens, many of the products made in China may be made in other developing countries. Jeffrey Sachs speaks about sub-Saharan Africa being caught in a "poverty trap" because of their geographical location (Sachs 18, 50). However, one thing that came to my mind is the idea that manufacturing is an economic sector that could succeed if the necessary infrastructure was installed (i.e. roads, rail lines, and airports) to export goods. Maybe China's urban transition could be seen as sub-Saharan Africa's opportunity.

The information on the foreign assistance pledges made a few days ago shows how the Obama administration is committed to giving aid for developing countries and meeting the Millennium Development Goals. However, I thought it was noteworthy that the President said, "Our focus on assistance has saved lives in the short term, but it hasn?t [sic] always improved those societies over the long term." I agree with the concept articulated by President Obama. Developing nations should be asked to contribute to the betterment of their country.

References:

"China's urbanization transition causes growing anxiety," City Mayors, last modified November 27, 2008, accessed September 25, 2010 http://www.citymayors.com/habitat/habitat08-china.html.

Sachs, Jeffrey. Common Wealth: Economics for a Crowded Planet (New York: Penguin, 2008).

"UN summit ends with pledges and lingering pessimism," AFP, accessed September 25, 2010, http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5gOwm3l1tKEF1bUYUORixIdnn4Uxg.

Note: Since I already had a blog, the submission of this post resulted in the username of "Oxford Conservative" popping up. It should say "BSica."

The China problem

http://www.newsweek.com/2010/08/09/the-china-dream.html

As China thrives and begins to challenge the economic supremacy of the US, a reaction formation can now be seen. A 8/9/2010 NewsWeek article, written by Ioannis Gatsiounis, portrays this well. The article outlines how China seems to be threatening America's place as the largest economic body in the globe, and proceeds to cite evidence to confirm [frantically] that the US is still in the lead, that China still has a long way to go to be able replace America as the supreme economic body.

As citizens of a neighboring country to this rising superpower, we have mixed feelings toward its recent development. Taiwan, a self-governing region which mainland Chinese government officials like to regard as a break-away province, has a complicated tie with the mainland. In the late 19th century, China fell victim of western imperialistic colonist, and was reduced to, as Dr. Sun Yet-sun promptly put, a "sub-colony." Western powers infiltrated the Chines territories, and exploited natural as well as human resources blatantly, right under the government's nose. The regime at the time, after two hundred years of isolation, was technologically inadequate therefore powerless to defend itself. Had there not been the Open Door Policy, it would have fallen the same fate as india. At the turn of century, Dr. Sun Yet-sun led a revolution that overthrew the imperial government and established a democratic republic, led by the Nationalists' Party. In the next four decades, however, the Communist Party rose and drove the Nationalist government to Taiwan, but failed, fortunately, to "liberate" it.

Knowing the historical oppression by the western powers, we were glad to finally see the rise of our own people. Yet, Taiwan was able to remain intact from communist invasion due to the US' economical inhibition to China. As we see the inevitable change of balance, we have to really be worried. This coincides well with Sach's claim that our biggest problem is our inability to cooperate.

One Earth, Two Worlds

The rich get richer and the poor get poorer; a saying we’ve all heard but it may hold more validity than we think. In the book Common Wealth Jeffrey Sachs addresses this issue with discussion of the economic growth and decline of several countries. Over the last few hundred years, prosperous countries such as the United Kingdom and America have continued to grow economically while economically weak countries such as sub-Saharan Africa have continued to suffer.

An article published in the mid 1990s in Green Left magazine addresses this issue. This article talks about America specifically and its economic situation. The global economic tendencies as described by Sachs are illustrated on a smaller scale when we take a look at America’s economy. America’s pre twenty-first century economy was on the rise. The reason attributed to this economic expansion was essentially the need of the lower-class citizens. The poor were willing to do any job, just in an effort to get by. Their minimum wage jobs provided the opportunity for the rich to prosper even more and although their work benefited the economy overall, the poor remained stuck in the same rut.

If we do not take care to fix this problem of economic dissonance between the rich and the poor, it won’t fix itself, it will just continue to become worse and worse. Now, looking at this issue from a global perspective gives us even a better picture of what is going on. It is not rare to see a commercial or stumble across a webside that tells us of how our five dollar donation a month can feed 20 starving children in Africa. When I take a moment to think about how significant my small donation is to people living in these underprivileged countries I realize how truly great the difference is in wealth. If this problem isn’t fixed I foresee two, separate worlds. There will be a world with food, money, education and life. And there will be a separate world filled with hunger, disease, and ultimately death. If we don’t take the time now to help our “neighbors” we will only become more and more separated from them until one day we won’t regard their existence at all. We are aware of the situation our world is in; my vote is that we make an effort to fix this—now.

-Phil Giddings

Should Americans be Concerned about Water?

Water is one of the most important natural resources; we literally can’t live without it.  We use it everyday.  In fact, the average American uses 101 gallons of water each day.  Where does all this water come from?   Well, of the approximately 333 million cubic miles of water on earth, 97% is found the oceans, 2% is locked up in glaciers and polar ice caps, and only 1% is accessible to us as freshwater found in rivers, lakes, and as groundwater.  However, these reservoirs are being depleted at an alarming rate.  

As Americans, it can be easy to ignore this issue, especially if you live in one of the states with high precipitation levels.  We find it difficult to identify with the 884 million people in the world who don’t have access to safe drinking water.  The majority of the nation’s population doesn’t know what it means to depend on rain so that they can eat and make a living.  Contrarily, they most likely view rain as a nuisance that disrupted their plans for a weekend at the beach. 

Still, there are many reasons for us to be concerned. Signs of water stress are visible in the United States, as those from California and Florida can testify.  Major rivers, such as the Rio Grande and the Colorado are low, no longer flowing to their final destinations.  As global citizens, we have reason to be interested in the conditions of our home, planet Earth.  From an ethical perspective, this means that we should be concerned regarding the welfare of our fellow citizens, including those in Africa and the Middle East who are dying as a result of infection and diseases acquired from drinking contaminated water.  From a practical perspective, there is a finite amount of water on this planet that we all have to share.  It is tempting to then choose to act in a way such as to collect as much water for ourselves, leaving as little as possible for the others.  However, such a mindset may end up backfiring because if the world’s population continues to grow at its exponential rate, all the water may be used up.  Jeffery D. Sachs, in his book Common Wealth, describes the relationship between water scarcity and war.  Not only does water scarcity lead to conflicts within unstable countries, but it could also very easily develop into war between multiple countries that are competing for the same reservoir.  They need water, not only for human consumption, but also for crop irrigation.   In fact, 70% of water usage is devoted to agriculture. 

No one can predict what will happen in future years, but that is no reason to stop us from taking conservative measures now to improve water management in an effort to stabilize water usage.  As Americans, we like to be independent, we don’t like having someone tell us when we can wash our car or water our lawn.  However, the reality is that as living beings, we have an impact on our environment, and we can choose today to either move towards sustainability or away from it. 

sachs on water stress and conflict

Before engaging on this topic, I would just like to say that Sachs seems to make very bold statements and seems that he has much confidence in his plans and ideas to fix many of today's world problems. I for one, would like to see these plans in action. His statements all have factual evidence that prove the point he is trying to make. His observation and remedy to the rise of water stress, for instance, is a very good example.

Sachs takes all viewpoints and situations into perspective and tries to come up with the best solution to solve this problem. A rise in water stress, he says, combined with other pressures, will worsen food security. He goes on to mention a colleague of his who said that "drops in rainfall [in Africa] are associated with significantly more conflict...There is strong evidence that better rainfall makes conflict less likely in Africa." Pretty bold statement, no? The issue here isn't the fact that there is no water. Look around us, our earth is 70% ocean. However, there are places in the world that are either landlocked and/or dried out, and they have no means possible to retrieve clean water for their villages/towns. If any poverty-stricken places do have access to water, they most likely don't have any access to filter systems or any such device to clean all of the parasites and bacteria that live in them. Therefore the issue is always one of those two; either no water at all, or no clean water.

Sachs feels that "countries need to develop holistic plans of action" which address these 5 areas:

-Safe drinking water and sanitation for all

-Increased water efficiency in agriculture, including the development of drought-resistant seed varieties and new irrigation strategies

-Increased attention to droughts through improved water storage

-Reduced economic risks through rainfall insurance

-Economic diversification and international trade to reduce the dependency of livelihoods on rainfall

A lack of water brings up many issues, as you can see. As it one thing happens, it creates a sort of domino effect and negatively impacting something else. For example, if a farmer is experiencing a drought in his land, he can't grow crops. Because he can't grow crops, he can't profit off of anything, and he'll start losing customers to buy/sell/trade with. And with no profit, he can't support his family. For any instance, one general water problem will cause many problems with that as well. Sach's solutions like physical infrastructure (producing clean water from seawater), and rainfall insurance are great solutions to our water problems. Like I said, look around, there's water everywhere.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/13/us/13water.html

This article shares a story of a woman from Charlestown, VA who complains of problems with tap water in her home. This is also problematic because the whole town has access to the water, but many complain of their skin burning, rashing, and even eating away at their teeth because of lead, barium and other toxic wastes that don't get properly filtered out in their water. So what would Sachs do in a situation like this, a town that has access to water and a filter system, but an obviously faulty one? Many organizations, such as UNICEF and EPA need to get involved and make changes so that more people, even local people, can have access to cleaner water.

In a global perspective, this could be accomplished by more holistic plans and actions, and with effort from everyone. The issue here isn't saving water, but finding a way for people to use it for all that it can be used for.

-Aaron Suh

The Poorest Billion: Why pulling yourself up by your own bootstraps doesn't work

           In the slums of Nairobi, Kenya, two young boys, ages 8 and 5, work every day, transporting goats to slaughter houses simply to provide food for their family to survive. This kind of job is no place for children, however, many mothers encourage their children to work and provide income for their families. Police try to "help" the problem by arresting 20-50 kids per month rather than targeting the business owners. The issue remains because as soon as the kids are let go, they return right back to work. Another example of a poverty trap is in India. Recently the Indian government is trying to pay cash to couples who wait at least 2 years before having their first child. Since a majority of the world's poorest population comes from India, lowering the birthrate average from 2.6 to 2.1 per household will significantly change the dynamics of the countries poverty issues. The problem is that many of the poorest nations have the highest birthrates, usually 4 per household, while wealthier & more educated nations' averages are below two. The introduction of birth control and planned parenting are essential to these people living in the "poorest billion trap." As the article says, "an educated girl is your best contraception." 


          So, why can't the poor just stop having children, get an education, a career, and help themselves? Because they are in a trap, as economist Paul Collier, author of The Bottom Billion puts states. He suggests that the traps are due to conflicts, bad neighboring countries, lack of natural resources and bad government. Many people say the poor are poor and will remain poor until they are educated. But these people do not have the choice of education. There is no hope for them; they must fight to simply make it alive to the next day. Many countries in this trap are in civil war, with no development, communication, or transportation. This is why countries like India are paying people to decrease family size; why wealthier countries reach out with aid in the form of food and education. Organizations like Save the Children know how to empower these people: education. They focus on giving hope by educating the young generation, giving them the chance at a better life because, on their own, it would be nearly impossible. Impossible, because you could spending your entire life working and only be making less than $0.50 a day to feed your family. As for bad governments who do not wish goodwill to their own people (North Korea, for example), influence and aid must come from outside, from other developed countries. But what can average people like you and me do? Become aware. Educate yourself because you can. And if there is a cause you wish to donate to, help. Be proactive. 

Erica Evans

Urbanization: Upside and Downside

Jeffrey Sachs addresses several trends in our economy, the Urban Century being one of them.  Urbanization seems to be making its way quickly across the country.  Of course, as with anything, there are positive and negative affects to this advancement.  Each of the two articles I found speak mainly on one of those options.  The article promoting urbanization points out different states, like North Carolina, New York City, and California, and shows how each place is striving for a more individual-based community.  It is mentioned how broad areas of land take away from the close friendships with neighbors.  Cities, where houses and apartments are closer together, allow people to see more faces throughout the day and give a better sense of community.  A Massachusetts resident, I am not sure I completely agree with this statement, as I have walked the streets of Boston many times and have not felt personally connected with the people I am passing.  Cities have a "rushed" atmosphere and are very career oriented.  Most of the people you see on the sidewalks are not walking for leisure, but instead to get somewhere important.  Everyone has a destination, and I do not get the sense of peace and community that some are hoping to achieve.  However, that brings up another point.  With limited walking distances from place to place in cities, there is less usage of gas and automobiles.  It is becoming regular for people to bike to work, and bicycle lanes are rising in number across the country.

Still, there are side affects to these seemingly wonderful economic changes.  The second article I found addresses an issue that many people would be quick to oversee.  Considering ourselves the most important species, when it comes to other creatures, we are not so compassionate.  Animals are a very important part of life on this earth, and while they may not have the ability to speak and reason and have moral choices, like humans, they are still God's creations, and it is important to watch after them when we are able.  Increase in urbanization is threatening a decrease in genetic diversity.  Urban barriers make it difficult, if not impossible, for animals to cross over to different areas.  This forces them to inbreed, therefore losing relation with other species and causes them to be severely isolated.  While this may not seem like a major issue for some people, it seems to me that the more we change as a people, the more we negatively affect everything around us.  While we may be benefitting ourselves, we need to realize that we are not the only occupants of this planet.  I am not saying that I think urbanization is a horrible idea and we need to save all the animals.  However, I do think that we all, as individuals, need to take into consideration the effects on the entire planet because of our decisions, and not just the effects on ourselves.  In doing so, we are able to create a truer and deeper sense of community.

The Asian Century

The United States has been seen as a superpower for a while now—but not for long. Several scholars claim that the rise of economic power and population growth in Asia (Asia mostly meaning China, but also including India and Japan) will soon turn into domination of the world market.

According to the article, “The Asian Century”, written by Doug Bandow, “China has started from a low economic and military base and faces enormous social challenges as it develops, but is not inclined to passively accept U.S. hegemony along its border or elsewhere.” Bandow also claims that the threat of Asian dominance is not against U.S. security. He also points out that many countries do not need rely on America for anything and that the United States should learn how to cooperatively work with the rising Asian powers. “No one especially America and China, can afford one, let alone two, wars to establish future their relationship”, writes Bandow. According to Jeffrey D. Sachs, in his Fortune Magazine article “Welcome to the Asian Century”, “American power rests mainly on advanced technology, which is increasingly available to the whole world.” Based on the population growth and income increase in China and India, Sachs believes that the world’s economic center of gravity will shift to Asia by 2050. He also believes that economically speaking, the Asian Century will benefit the United States. To Sachs, Asian products at cheap prices and Asian technology will improve the American quality of life. However, politically speaking, America will have to step back from the spotlight and relinquish its power to the Asian countries.

With China’s exponential population growth comes the problem of energy. What will the Asian Century mean to the Environmental/Energy Challenge? According to David Zweig and Bi Jianhai, “An unprecedented need for resources is now driving China’s foreign policy.” China’s share of the consumption of aluminum, copper, nickel, and iron ore has more than doubled in the past 10 years. According to the director for the China Center for Economic Research at Peking University, Justin Yifu Lin, China’s economy could grow at a rate of 9 percent per year for the next two decades. With the world already climbing the energy usage charts and depleting so many of our un-renewable resources, how will China’s appetite and need for energy be satiated?

What will the Asian Century mean to Americans? Will the world stop wanting the “American Dream”? According to Jeffrey Sachs, “Assuming Asia’s continued economic success, the 21^st century could well be a period of unprecedented prosperity and scientific advance, but one in which the U.S. will have to learn to be one of many successful economies rather than the world’s indispensable country.”

Could we survive that?

The Poverty Cycle

Throughout all history, poverty has been present. Whether it be the Hebrews who were enslaved by the Egyptians around 1500 BCE, or even during our current times. Today, there are more impoverish people then ever before. As Jeffrey Sachs estimates in Common Wealth, approximately 1/6 of the world's population, is considered to be living in poverty. This amounts to around one billion people. Living in the United States can be very limiting at times because it gives you the idea that everyone in the world lives like you do. In all reality, even the poorest people in the United States aren't considered impoverish on a global standard. The poorest people in the world often live in the most unstable countries. They are surrounded by constant political instability, war and violent conflicts, and little resources. In order to survive these conditions, impoverish people use their resources until they have none left and inevitably, poor living conditions lead to disease and death. This continues until someone intervenes. I call this the poverty cycle. The problem with this cycle is one that cannot be broken unless intervened upon by an outside force.

The question then must be asked, "How can one help?" or, "Who needs help the most?" We give money when hurricanes hit or earthquakes strike, but how do we actually make a difference? By giving money to charitable companies we quell our inner guilt, satisfying our conscience and continuing about our daily lives. Lives which include clean water, shelter, and food. However, should we really even feel guilty? Maybe instead, we should just feel blessed that we are not in a similar situation. The bottom line is that there is a multitude of poor people in this world. Unfortunately, there is not enough resources to help everyone. No matter how hard we try, there will always be people who need help. Undoubtably, the percentage of population living in poverty will only increase; UNLESS, the world as a whole realizes the importance of helping others.

The Rise of China

The rise of China is not an accident that occurred overnight. China’s population is over 1.3 billion which constitutes 20% of the world’s population. This means that one in every five people on the earth lives in China. Just from that fact, the rapid growth seems to have been inevitable. Dr.Albert Keidel predicts that Chinese economy will surpass that of United State by 2035, and be twice its size by midcentury. This rapid growth will be based on enormous domestic demand not on exports. The growing economic power of China will shift the center of world’s power to the East. This shift has huge implications for the West and the rest of the world. The last time a new power emerged, the world was very violent. As China’s economy grows, more people will be living in cities, and adopt western life style. The demand for energy therefore will grow exponentially, and with limited resources, economical and political conflicts seem inevitable. The more U.S government tries to hold on to their dominance in Asia, the greater the conflict will likely be. According to the study done by Robert Sutter, there are different opinions on the effects of rising China on the United States. At the one end of the spectrum, there are people who predict that Chinese government will try to marginalize US influence in Asia using their economic power. On the other end, some believe that China will try to find ways to work with US to maintain political stability and further develop their economy. However, Chinese people’ suspicion over U.S. intentions still remains. China continues to invest heavily on developing weapons and running ballistic missile programs that are targeted at U.S. According to Sutter, China is the “only large power in the world preparing to shoot Americans”. The tension and rivalry between the U.S. and China will rise and intensify. As Sachs mentions, I think the best way to avoid unnecessary injustice caused by two superpowers it to build a new kind of global politic based on cooperation across the world. That would mean U.S. and China not abusing their power, which is difficult, but not impossible, especially in the era of global community.

There are also environmental problems to consider. More power plants will be built to meet the energy demand, and they will pollute the earth’s atmosphere and water even more. It seems like China is aware of this issue and is committed to reduce energy intensity by investing heavily in new technologies and infrastructures. According to the New York Times article, China’s cabinet passed measures that would help reduce energy use, including closing thousands of factories with outdated equipment. Although these measures are admirable, I’m curious to see how Chinese government will act when its environmental policies come in the way of economical development. Would they stand firm and pass laws that would prohibit energy intensive practices? I guess the question is whether their environmental policy be “enough”. This is the question that we need to ask ourselves first because we are not doing that great either.

Ultimately, it comes down to what we want and our attitude toward the environment. People who have a close relationship and some sort of emotional attachment to nature tend to appreciate it more. These people are more likely to be more conscious about the environmental issues and act on them. Changing people’s attitude toward the environment will not be successful by throwing numbers at them. People are unlikely to change unless the problems directly affect them, in which point it is too late. We need to start early and help our children to form a good relationship with nature. This cannot be done through textbooks and videos but by encouraging kids to touch and feel, and have fun with nature.

The poorest billion

In the book “Common Wealth,” by Jeffrey D. Sachs, the issue of the “poorest billion” and the “poverty trap” is briefly dealt with. However, I felt that the solutions Sachs gave for the problem were too broad. Thus, the two articles I found for the assignment this week further delved into Sachs discussion of the “poorest billion.” In his book, Sachs, admonishes that overcoming the “poverty trap” will require, “special policies and global efforts” (Sachs 31). Because of this statement I decided to search for articles that dealt with some of the “global efforts” that are being done to help countries escape the “poverty trap.” One of these I discovered was a CNN article entitled, “Fighting poverty $1 at a time.” This article discussed the efforts that have been going on in India to supply “micro-credit” to small business owners in order to help them start or maintain small business enterprises. An example of this concept given in the article was of a woman in India who made “sweets” but could not afford to buy the milk to produce them. However, after receiving a small loan to buy a cow her business grew exponentially enabling her to afford food and clothing for her family. While reading this article I couldn’t help but remember my experience as a student missionary in Peru. While in the country I was working with an organization that was trying to start small industries to help educate some of the poorest people in the region. The idea was that students would come and learn a trade while working in exchange for their tuition and board. After graduating they would have a marketable skill, which could be used to start a small business in order to support them and their family. I believe this concept that I encountered in Peru along with the “micro-credit” example in the article are two practical examples that can help people to escape the “poverty trap. However, I also found from my search that there are other methods that can be used to eliminate the poverty gap.

One of these was suggested in the second article I read entitled, “Africa’s Poverty Trap”, which was written in the Wall Street Journal. In it the author discussed some of the reasons behind the poverty found in certain regions of Africa. He argued that one of these is due to the way that economics have been used in the country. For example, he lamented that economists in Africa had “undervalued free markets” and instead enabled “state direction by the states least able to direct” (Easterly A.11). In addition he showed throughout the article that many people in Africa are ready to start small businesses yet lack the “free market” to do so. I felt that this article was insightful for me because many times I hear in the media that Africa is failing because of a lack of resources. However, from this article I learned that the people of Africa have powerful plans and ideas that could be enacted if they would have the opportunity to work in a “free market.”

Although these articles on poverty were insightful I feel that there is more to be learned on the topic. In addition, I feel that a smaller scale approach to many of these issues could be more effective. For example, the “micro-credit” loans that are given out in India are done at a local scale. There is not a national bank that distributes them but instead a local banker down the street. I believe this is more effective than a large international project because transactions are performed at a smaller scale that enables bankers to have a personal interest in the people they are lending to. In addition, this small-scale method is more sustainable because already available resources can be used.

Though I believe that many of the solutions to ending the “poverty trap” involve small-scale efforts I also feel that I must not simply stand on the outside and criticize those who are actually doing something to solve the problem. Instead, I feel that as a human being and more importantly as a Christian that I have an obligation to help in the effort. Whether it was serving as a student missionary for a year in Peru or serving people with a medical career in the future I believe that one of the most important ways I can help people escape the “poverty trap” is by personally taking an interest in them and finding out their needs. I feel that if I use Christ as my guide I will be able to discover new and innovative ways to help empower people on this planet to be freed from the burden of poverty.

The Rich can stay rich, as for the poor.....

More often than not, during the period of a given society's transition to a more industrialized state there is an uneven distribution of finances. Simple put only a small portion of the total population "benefits" in every essence of the word. Immediately, I can recall the Industrial Revolution in the 19th century. In History through the Eyes of Faith, Ronald Wells describe the conditions as " most brutal" and also noted the "many leading Christians reacted in horror to the appalling conditions of life and labor, and they demanded political action on behalf of the poor." Despite these effects that this period may have had on its laborers, from it we gained the liberal views of society we have come to know today. Moreover, the classic ladder of wealth distribution trickling from the business men, so to speak, down to the common workers and farmers in rural areas. Jeffrey Sachs seems so optimistic that with the inclining number of people large checkbooks the world itself will become more richer. Yet, I am not especially convinced with his theory as he further notes that the population of the world is steadily increasing thanks to the help of the poor. I will admit my ignorance to the state of the economy in many countries around the world. However, I will try to apply his theory to my country, The Bahamas. While we are a developing country, due to the costs of modernization and maintenance of buildings, roads, and other civil necessities, we are currently facing one of the greatest unemployment epidemics that our history can ever report. In the midst of all of this, there remains a great portion of my population who are unaffected, the rich. The working class and under are those who are seriously hurt by these changes. And once again, the majority of the population will come from the class of common laborers and those who have minimum wage jobs. Although there has been an increase in the income of some people, the majority of the population cannot bask in such blessings and they are the population of the Bahamas so to speak. I will agree with Sachs however, that this all comes as a result of the Age of Convergence, as we are trying to become as advanced as our neighboring countries, much to the financial disadvantage of the middle class and the poor man.

So sadly, the rich can stay rich (in the Bahamas at least), withdrawing their donations as they have recently, threatening the continuation of the Salvation Army, Humane Society and several children homes in my country, while the poor.... I believe you can finish the rest.

Africa's Poverty Trap: Future Plans, Millennium Goals, and What's Really Working

     Jeffrey Sachs, the author of "Common Wealth" (which is currently being read for this class), has been actively involved in the case of the Sub-Saharan Poverty Trap. Writing articles for both the New York Times and Scientific American Magazine, he has discussed both the hypothetical means to raise Africa from it's destructive poverty and also the current measures being taken to fulfill said task.
     Sachs states that the main contributer to this cyclic poverty is geography--the lack of access to sea-based trade, poor and irregular rainfall, high disease burdens, and political struggle can often be traced back to the relative location of the impoverished community. Also, he notes how extreme poverty can raise political tensions in an area, and possibly increases the chance of violent conflict. These problems are what the Millennium Development Goals have sought to address through foreign funding, education, and health care. In the ten years since the Millennium Goals started working in Africa, cases of the measles have dropped by 90%, longevity has improved (as most AIDS victims are now on antiretroviral treatment), malaria is dropping decisively, school enrollment has risen 16%, the economy has gained speed, and extreme poverty is declining. All of this is made possible by the cooperation of foreign powers and local leaders.
      However, there is much more that can be done--of the $60 billion promised in aid to Africa, actual aid is only $45 billion. Africa faces many more threats to its progress such as: rampant population growth (which is fueled by the influence of the Roman Catholic Church in that area), corruption by large Asian or American corporations, lack of trade, human-induced climate change, and neglect. All of these problems will take time and immense amounts of worldwide cooperation to fix. There are five more years left to go on the Millennium Goals, but through the strategies proposed by Sachs, I think that an economical revolution in Africa is possible--it will most likely take longer than solely that five years, but I think Africa is off to a better start. Rather than funneling money to people at the top, he suggests investing in those at the bottom who cannot help themselves; it follows through with the old saying "catch a man a fish and he will eat for a day; teach a man to fish and he will eat for the rest of his life". This method of help will always have its setbacks, but it ultimately pays off. It is my hope and prayer that the multitude of problems in Africa will be addressed and solved, and that in another ten years Africa can be looked on as a nation that has moved forward out of its dark ages.

P O V E R T Y

PRESENT:  

In this world, poverty is the dilemma pushed way back into the furthest corner, but not eradicated simply because we wouldn't be able to cope with the guilt.  In America alone, we generate enough food waste per year to weigh the equivalent of 74 Golden Gate Bridges! And yet there are those we know who don't have a meal for the next few days right down a few blocks.  Why are there still poor people in this world when statistics have been spewed over and over to our faces over the past years?   The answer is simple: selfishness.  It is said that the past is our biggest asset, revealing to us what we should and shouldn't do again; however, when I look at myself and this generation, I can't help but feel we haven't made that large of a difference.  The problem first boils down to individuals pointing their finger at themselves and asking, "Who? Me?!"  Today, I feel as if individuals are beginning to lose the realization and inspiration to actually believe they can make a difference.  Being the change has been rung so many times, for many it is just a cliche phrase; and when faced with the topic of poverty, I find myself thinking in the back of my head, "Ok, I'll go more to soup kitchen opportunities and let the government take care of the big picture."  It is this apathy that allows us to accomplish hardly anything.  Many people have found satisfaction in dumping problems onto the government, but even the government isn't doing much for poverty.  Surprisingly, and maybe not, we are not too different from the government.  As I read through one of my bookmarked articles on the government's role in poverty, I sensed that the government may not actually care about the poor on a personal level.  To them, solving poverty would simply take off the pressure and guilt from their shoulders, as well as benefitting the country monetarily and environmentally.  

FUTURE:  

Will poverty be eliminated in the future? No. I believe that no matter what, poverty will always be there looking at us.  Realistically, it is not possible to rally the entire world and end poverty.  I do believe that there are enough resources, money, and food for the world to all comfortably get through life, but then that would involve sharing and major sacrifices from a LOT of people.  The statistics predict that poverty numbers will in fact rise due to the link of higher populations and increase in monopolies.  Sachs said that "the poverty trap is self-reinforcing, not self-correcting" (31).  Poverty will not be eliminated, but that does not give us permission to fully sit back and relax.  It is rather all the more challenge to defy the numbers and do the best we can to make this world just perhaps a little better of a place than it is now for a lot of people. 

How To Deal With People

"It is a truth universally acknowledged that..." the world population has had a rather drastic increase in the past two centuries. Not only has the population gone up, but there has been a rather large influx of people into cities. The lure of jobs, accessibility, and comfort is calling people from the country into the cities, causing havoc for the environment, the governments, and for other people.

The two articles that I found (delicious.com/idanci) deal with urbanization in China and Mexico and what effects it is having on the counties. China is planning on funneling 3.6 trillion dollars in the next ten years, which is an obscene amount of money in my eyes, into "urban infrastructure". Every aspect is going to be affected: roadways, water systems, residential buildings, power plants, the list goes on and on. In China, the urbanization that is occurring seems to only be having a negative effect on the economy and the environment. As Sachs mentions in his books, China is consuming tons upon tons of coal and they only have plans to add more factories. In the next ten years, it is projected that over 60% of the Chinese population will be living in cities.

Mexico is also experiencing what the article calls "intense urbanization". More and more people are moving to one of the eleven urban areas that Mexico has. This is putting a great stress on the environment and it is becoming increasingly difficult for the government to implement the "green plan" for the country. An interesting side note that the article makes is that the average age is rising, meaning that there are more people who are older in Mexico. This means that soon there will be less people looking for jobs, opening up the market for others. The writer posits that immigrants will start coming back home because it will be easier to find a job in Mexico than in America.

A common theme found whenever one talks about urbanization is the effect that it has on the environment. The amount of people crammed into a small area is bound to have some adverse affects, such as the one mentioned about China. There was a book that I read once in elementary school that dealt with the future. In the book, there was a boy who was running away from an orphanage and getting into trouble and such, but one of the details that I remember is a conversation that he had with a friend. They were discussing the setting sun and color it was; the remark went along the lines of "the color is pretty bad tonight. I guess this means that we won't be able to leave the house tomorrow since the air quality is going to be pretty bad." Despite the fact that it is sci-fi, it can become reality. We need to take care that urbanization does not cause us to the push the envelope and attempt to squeeze more people into an already-packed space. It would be sad if our actions caused us to be like the children in the book, unable to venture from the house because the events from the previous day made the air quality unsuitable for human life. I know, I know, this sounds rather dramatic, but the amount of people crammed in an apartment building in Manhattan or the number of people on a city street in China should be viewed as a dramatic problem that needs to be addressed.

America's Apathy

We all know that global warming is a big problem. Right? And big problems usually necessitate action, correct? Indeed, Jeffrey Sachs spends a significant amount of energy seeking to convince us - policy makers, leaders, students, grandmothers - to do something. Or at least he insists that something should be done, and suggests a number of workable solutions. On page 97, he writes:

"To manage the carbon budget, we don't need to change everything about our society, but we do need to face head-on six important activities:

• We must slow or stop deforestation
• We must reduce emissions from electricity production
• We must reduce emissions from automobiles
• We must clean up industrial processes in a few major sectors (especially steel, cement, refineries, and petrochemicals).
• We must economize on electricity use through more efficient motors, appliances, lighting, insulation, and other electrical demands.
• We must convert point-source emissions in buildings (such as furnaces) into electricity-based systems powered by low-emission electricity"

Notice the imperative tone in all of these statements: we must. Who are we? Americans? You? Me?

I bookmarked two very different articles about climate change (at delicious.com/alaskagrown34). Both authors are aware of the threat our planet faces, and both would encourage us as citizens of the United States and of the world to do something. But while Jeff Goodell's Slate article seems full of optimistic promise in the face of developing geoengineering technology, Karlyn Bowman reports in Forbes that Americans are devastatingly apathetic about climate change. So who's telling the right story? Could they both be correct?

Goodell does note a certain skepticism in the press regarding geoengineering - "which the British Royal Society defines as "the deliberate large-scale intervention in the Earth's climate system, in order to moderate global warming"" - when he references speculative ideas about geoengineering as a new profit scheme, etc., but in general his article is quite positive. After reading it, one feels reassured that someone is doing something about climate change; that it's being discussed, policies are changing, and help is on the way. Indeed, the internet is thick with encouraging articles, blogs, and videos about developing green technologies (solar panels, biodegradable detergents, hybrid vehicles, you name it), and the general attitude seems optimistic. But are we all just reading the New York Times for columns about the latest green technology as a palliative? Oh, good, someone is doing something about this crisis, so I can continue going about my life. Sure, I'll recycle my plastic yogurt containers, but I'm too busy to do more. It's someone else's job.

This is what Bowman's depressing report about American apathy in the face of global warming seems to suggest. Listen to this: "The issue [of global warming] ranked dead last--20th of 20 issues--when the Pew Research Center asked respondents to list top priorities for President Obama and Congress." What's going on here? How can the media be plastered with "fight global warming" propaganda, which most of us probably claim to support, with no results? Further on in Bowman's article: "As a back-handed compliment to our system of representative democracy, we are content to let competing interest groups, political parties and others debate the next policy steps, reasonably confident that good policy will result from the clash of interests." We're all convinced that someone else is working to solve the problem. It's my senator's problem. Obama's problem. The UN's problem. So our nation is characterized not by a galvanized sense of duty to the environment, but by...apathy.

Impoverished

The word 'poverty' means many different things to different people. The rich think it's preventable and the poor see no end in sight. Some feel that they are "poor" because they can't buy everything name-brand and others feel that they are poor because they struggle to feed themselves from day to day. Some come into poverty as the result of a bad drug habit, others loose their jobs as a result of the current economical situation and others are born into it. Upon hearing the word poverty, some think of the man from downtown that pushes around his worldly possessions in a shopping cart and others think of the commercials they see on T.V. about the malnourished children in Africa and other third-world countries. And then there are those that live in extreme poverty: those that every time it rains, have to rebuild their "house" because the rain washed the mud away; those who in order to survive must break every rule they've ever been taught and go against all of their morals and values on a daily basis; those that with jealously, watch their children die from curable or preventable diseases and wish that it was them instead because their physical pain is so unbearable.

When politicians and economists talk about poverty, who are they talking about? Solely the extreme cases or all levels of poverty? What is the standard that must be met in order to be considered one in poverty? Most importantly how do they plan to "solve" this problem?

All of these questions have been asked, discussed and debated time and time again, but the idea of poverty cannot be confined to such characteristics.

I have had the opportunity to interact with and live among people in extreme poverty in other countries and I have seen first hand the effects of poverty. In seeing and talking with these people face-to-face, it is difficult to judge them and put them into a category. Everyday more people die from lack of simple necessities such as food and clean water, two things that most people take for granted. In books such as Common Wealth where the "curing" of poverty is contemplated, I feel that the people themselves are forgotten. In order to save them from poverty, we must first know who they are. We as Americans or any other nationality, throw our money at them and expect it to all get better. We must interact with them, teach them, respect them and help them through the process side-by-side, "When you reap the harvest of your land, do not reap to the very edges of your field or gather the gleanings of your harvest. Leave them for the poor and the alien... If one of your countrymen becomes poor and is unable to support himself among you, help him as you would an alien or a temporary resident, so he can continue to live among you" (Leviticus 23:22; 25:35).

As Christians Christ has asked us to help the poor and serve others. While we should continue to work in this area until His coming, does that mean that one day the world will be rid of extreme poverty? Unfortunately, I do not think so. Is it possible? Yes. But is it probable? No. We may be able to help our national and international neighbors and lower the number of those plagued by poverty, but to completely eliminate it is not a likelihood. There are not enough people or local resources to be able to overcome such a thing. It is also the case that many people living in poverty, no matter how many times they are dug out of it, will stay consistent in their habits and not be able to be taught how to live otherwise.

From an economic point of view we also see that the time, people, resources and money that are available are not enough to make any significant difference. In order to have more resources available people around the world would have to get a lot more generous.

Mean while, we should not sit back and give up knowing that we can't singlehandedly save the world. We must continue to put forth effort and do what we can as individuals to fulfill the mandate of service set to us by Jesus Christ.

Convergence: More than Money

One of the articles I bookmarked discussed convergence in a broader scope than Sachs deals with in 'Common Wealth'. The study suggests that many developing countries borrow technologies and process that have been optimized by developed countries. These technologies do not necessarily fit into the culture and create discord. The discord can be solved in one of two ways, either the technology is changed, or the culture adapts to meet the demands of the technology. The study shows that by absorbing the technology of developed countries to achieve a better global economic position the culture of the developed country is also brought in. So rather than just the economic per capita income converging towards that of the developed country, the cultural values are also becoming that of the developed nations.

I wonder what the implications of convergence of both economics (i.e. per capital income, etc) and other facets of society will have as the convergence becomes more widespread. Much of the design and innovation is still done in the developed countries while the technology that comes out of this research makes it's way around the globe. Once enough countries reach a certain level of development, many of them will begin creating their own technologies. As their dependence for the innovative technology of the developed countries begins to wain they will begin competing globally on all new levels. This, I would think, will have a remarkable global impact. I would guess that developed countries will, in an attempt to stay 'on top', develop ways to keep the developing countries always under their influence as long as possible.

This bring me to what I think is the greatest hindrance to global cooperation in enacting global change, and that is the self-centered nature of human beings. People are always looking for ways to make their own lives 'better', even at the detriment to others. The first step towards creating change is to instill a sense of responsibility and care for things other than oneself. This can be difficult even for Christians who have the best example of this. Once people develop a genuine Christ-like attitude, changes will begin all over out of sheer good will and care for others and the planet. I do realize that this concept is nearly as much of a pie-in-the-sky as all the other 'grand plans for global change' are, but I believe that the environmental or change for global sustainment are only a very small part of the benefits that sharing Christ will bring. If only we had a global convergence in attitude towards that of Christ.

Urbanization: A Brief Reflection

One of the more interesting trends of the 21st century is the rapid urbanization taking place in all parts of the globe. We have all probably heard that more than 50% of earth's population live in cities as of now, and that percentage is expected to grow more rapidly now than it has over the past few centuries. Urbanization is caused by several factors, but is most significantly because of more opportunities in the urban areas, which are home to more than half of all economic value in any given nation. In addition to these factors, birth rates are higher than death rates in urban areas, mostly a result of better health care methods.

Some harsh details about urbanization include the fact that the slums of major third world cities are expanding as much as 11 times more than more suitable living spaces. Nairobi, for instance, has 300 arrivals from the countryside, and that figure is three years old now. In the slums, disease is certainly more rampant, and conditions may sometimes making eve having the bare necessities in life impossible. More "luxurious" amenities such as education, safety, employment, and social services are lacking in these slum areas. Unfortunately, as the urban poor increase in numbers, developmental relief agencies have not been following as quickly, remaining behind to help rural communities.

As mentioned before, birth rates are higher than death rates due to better health care methods. However, health conditions in the slums are horrendous and only getting worse. Lack of sanitation and access to fresh water only promotes these terrible conditions. In one city, Harare, Zimbabwe, 1,300 people share only 6 communal toilets. Other disadvantages, such as increased exposure to natural disasters and an increase in crime, only further the negative impact of urbanization.

I feel like urbanization is good because it represents a mass migration of people to the city to find more opportunity and will lead to greater stimulation of the economy as population increases, as well as more opportunities for formerly rural families that may have never experienced opportunities available to them in an urban context had they remained in rural living conditions. It is of deep concern, however, that many people, at least in third world countries, may face conditions like the ones listed above while pursuing these aspirations. I believe that adequate effort should be made to ensure proper living conditions and especially for a sustainable future for people.

The Urban Century Institute, an American effort that has implemented programs to develop green neighborhoods and SMART parks in cities like Chattanooga, has caught my attention because it is an effort being made that tries to make urbanization a purely positive fact of life and one that can be used for the advantage of urban centers. More efforts like these need to be made, especially in urban centers where slums exist.

Efforts like the one mentioned above only highlight the fact that urbanization is an important factor and trend in our world today. It should be embraced and supported in ways that will create a sustainable future for humanity. The provision of jobs, education, proper living conditions, and the provision of the necessities of life will be necessary for making urbanization a helpful trend, rather than a seriously harmful side effect of the population explosion.

September 13 Lecture Presentation

September122010

View more presentations from Steve Davis.

The Wilderness experience - the two that treaded the road less traveled

http://www.delicious.com/hsu912174

Steve Jobs, funder and CEO of Apple Inc., and Bill Gates, funder of Microsoft are perhaps the two most essential figures that gave rise to our digital age. Though being arch-rivals to each other, the two had a starkly similar past. Neither of them completed his bachelors degree, while both of them took on the Personal Computer industry at its rudimentary stage, and transformed it to become the industry that affects the human race vastly.

The two, on the other hand, are very different in one fundamental aspect. While Jobs is an artist, Gates is an engineer. Being a Mac user I like to think that Jobs shaped the computer industry with his vision, and Gates set his foothold by taking the bits of Jobs vision and spreading to the world. In a documentary of this history, Pirates of Silicon Valley, the actor who played Steve Wozniak, the co-funder of Apple, commented that Jobs has definitely been to weird places, and seen different things. In his commencement speech to the Stanford University graduation 2005, Jobs recounted briefly of that history. In the three stories he shared, he told the major events in his life. While the first story revolve largely about how Apple came to be (and briefly, his resentment to Gates and his gang), the second and third story resembles closely the points brought up in Ecclesiastes. Jobs funded Apple in early 80s, but at a certain point the visions in the company diverged, and he was fired from Apple by the board. To him, it was a traumatic time, in which he lost his bearing, and suddenly felt like being hit by a brick in the head. That event, however, made clear to him what is really important. The rest, as Qoholet insightfully wrote, are all vanity. He held to his his vision, accepting the world as it is, and proceeded to create NeXT and Pixar, with the former now core of Apple's technologies and the latter the most successful computer animation company in the world.

Gates, on the other hand, has not been known to have gone through that tribulation. However, an article "Bill Gates' eleven lesson to life addressed to High School students", attributed to him has been circulating for years. Though it was eventually confirmed as an urban legend, it is worth noting for its resemblance to the central message in the book of Ecclesiastes. Life is as such, and there's nothing new about it as long as it's under the sun. Get used to it.

The Price of Peace

We live busy lives. As a young person growing up in modern America it is almost impossible to avoid the hustle and bustle that comes along with everyday life. Somewhere between school, work, relationships and recreation it is easy to get caught up in the world. However, when we take a step back from our busy lives and separate ourselves a little from society, it’s amazing what we can discover.

Matthew West, a Christian songwriter whose work I enjoy is one that has illustrated this process. For his upcoming album he decided to escape the world, and go to live in a cabin, alone, for a few months writing songs to the glory of God. He shares with us some of his experiences in a blog written during these months. One thing Matthew noted about his stay in the wilderness was how much easier it was to be close to God. He said that his life in the cabin was an “intensive, daily opportunity” for him to follow through with the longing for a closeness to God.

Wild at Heart by John Eldredge is a book that immediately came to mind when I thought about this topic. For those of you who haven’t read this book, you can classify it as one of those “finding yourself” books. John tells his readers about many of his wanderings in the wilderness, both literal and not. He says that his time in the wilderness was the time he felt closest to God, the times he felt most at peace. He even goes as far as to say that God communicates with us best through His creation. Both of these instances point out that the best way to live involves living through the simplicity of life. As Ecclesiastes suggests, there is nothing more to life that to live happily and enjoy our lives as long as we can (Ecclesiastes 3:12) If this means giving up the world so I can be at peace with my life and maybe even find a little meaning to it along it way; I’m all in.

-Phil Giddings

Examples of Ecclesiastes in the Lives of Two People

For the first blog post, I decided to write about two individuals who realized they did not have God in their lives. They are George W. Bush and John Newton.

George W. Bush was a man who came from an influential family, was educated, was married and had children, etc. However, there was one thing that prevented him from having a life with more meaning--alcohol. Shortly after celebrating his fortieth birthday with alcohol (in 1986), he decided that his life needed to change. He vowed to give up drinking. He fulfilled his goal, and he gives God the credit. To make a long story short, his life improved. In 2000, he was elected President of the United States.

John Newton, who is famous for writing "Amazing Grace" among other hymns, also came to the realization that he needed God in his life. As a child, his mother taught him about God. However, she died while he was still young. His life was without God after he read Shaftesbury. He began to have a change of heart after reading Thomas a Kempis and facing a near-death experience while at sea. Once he was reconverted to Christianity, he became a part of the clergy and wrote hymns.

What I find interesting is that Bush and Newton experienced the success that brought fame after they established a connection with God.

References:

Hymnary.org. Newton, John. http://www.hymnary.org/person/Newton_J (retrieved Sept. 2010). This website drew John Jullian's entry in the "Dictionary of Hymnology (1907)" and Annotations of the Hymnal, Charles Hutchins, M.A. 1872.

Romano, Lois and George Lardner. Bush's Life-Changing Year (1999). Washington Post. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/campaigns/wh2000/stories/bush072599.htm (retrieved Sept. 2010).

Written by BSica

What Goes Up Has a Very Good Chance of Coming Down

In the book of Ecclesiastes, the author discovers that the meaning of life isn’t hidden in success, money, lust, or anything material. He wrestles with his thoughts on what life’s all about. At some point in every human’s life, questions about life’s meaning are asked. Some may need to hit rock bottom to ask those questions and others may need to rise to the top. Through the smoke and fog of our lives, there’s a moment of clarity where a person can choose to change directions, search for something better, or choose not to change at all.

DJ Adam Goldstein (also known as DJ AM) struggled with drugs for most of his life. According to People Magazine, “a critical turning point in his life came in 1997, when Goldstein considered suicide. After a night of doing cocaine, Goldstein, 24 at the time, sat before a mirror and ‘could not move away from staring at myself,’ he said. He put a gun in his mouth and, sobbing, said, ‘God, please help me.’ The trigger jammed and Goldstein didn’t succeed in committing suicide; he vowed to never do drugs again. In the 11 years of sobriety that followed, DJ AM made it his personal mission to help those who shared his struggles with drugs. His MTV series, Gone Too Far, was his way of giving other addicts a ray of hope. Unfortunately, DJ AM didn’t stay on the figurative “mountain”; he died of an accidental drug overdose on August 28, 2009.

Mason Betha (aka Ma$e or Murda Mase), formerly a rapper on Bad Boy Records, also had a turning point in his life. As a rapper on Bad Boy Records, Ma$e led the typical hip-hop lifestyle with rappers like Notorious B.I.G and P. Diddy. However, in 1999 Betha renounced his lifestyle and decided to become a Christian pastor. He claimed that he needed to undo the damage that his secular music inflicted on the music industry. According to Betha, “Being a prophet is not much different than being a rapper. They're just serving a different master. In rap, you serve the devil and the money, and things are your god.” He wanted to reach the hip-hop audience to show them that, they too, could live a changed life. However, just like DJ AM, Mason Betha couldn’t stay away from his previous lifestyle for long. He came back to the “scene” with a new name (Murda Mase) and the same lifestyle as before. He didn’t stay on the “mountain” either.

We can search for meaning, we can change our surroundings, but we can’t change our human nature alone. Just like with DJ AM and Ma$e, our human nature will try its best to pull us back down to where we came from. Both DJ AM and Ma$e found that life’s meaning wasn’t in drugs, flashing lights, or gold chains. They tried to change and change others as well. Unfortunately, they didn’t stay changed. What we have to realize is that it is a choice to change, but it is also a choice to stay changed. Without God as the source of meaning, what goes up has a very good chance of coming down.

Matter Doesn't Matter

Okay. Just so we're on the same page -- these are not stories about people who wandered in the wilderness and found meaning there. I found such tales difficult to come by, although this probably means I was looking in the wrong places. The content I did find, however, comes from two very different men, both of whom explore the themes of Ecclesiastes and come to similar conclusions as that book's author did.

Both of my tags are TED videos - find them at http://www.delicious.com/alaskagrown34.

The first video is by David Hoffman, a successful filmmaker whose talk is about losing everything in a house fire. As he speaks, the background plays a slide show of the destroyed items from his home - collector records, photographs, awards, sentimental letters from family - in essence, the things one man collected over a lifetime to surround himself with. It is reasonable to assume that these things brought him pleasure, either for aesthetic, sentimental, or career-related reasons. This is what we do, isn't it? We collect things. We collect things that make us happy; or at least we think they will bring happiness. For David Hoffman, it's clear that he isn't thrilled about the disaster that devastated his stuff. But he's surprisingly unemotional about it. His attitude is, "Bah, it's just stuff", and he is willing to move on without it. In fact, he plans to turn the disaster into a new project.

This parallels nicely with what Ecclesiastes' author seems to be saying every time he repeats the mantra, "everything is meaningless". Both men are pointing out that everything we work for, everything we collect, everything that we think lends meaning to our lives - is meaningless.

The second talk is given by Ogyen Trinley Dorje, the Karmapa of Tibetan Buddhism. Although his talk is less about his life story than I expected it might be, it probes some of the same themes that Ecclesiastes does. Indeed, the Karmapa is interested in "how we live in the world", just as the author of Ecclesiastes is. At the beginning of his speech, the religious leader tells how he was selected as a child to become the next Karmapa. He says, when they asked him, he "thought it would be fun and there would be more things to play with." Wait. Doesn't that sound just like Ecclesiastes? When he became king, the biblical writer thought he would find satisfaction in material pleasures - wealth, wine, women, etc. You kind of know what he's going to say next, right? Whenever someone begins a story with the sentence, "I thought it would be like this....", you expect the "but...." to come soon. For the Karmapa, the "but" was that being a highly revered religious leader was a lot more work than he had expected. Not quite what our Ecclesiastical writer had to say about life, but true nonetheless.

Later in his talk, the Karmapa spoke of the incident in which some precious Buddha idols were destroyed in Afghanistan by a Muslim group. Such an act would seemingly incite anger in a man who holds the Buddha in high esteem, but his answer was generous. He pointed out that the only thing that was really destroyed in the Buddha smashing incident was matter. The phrase he used was "deterioration of matter". Basically, he's just saying, it's just stuff! In essence, one could say that he is reiterating Ecclesiastes' idea that things are meaningless. It's just matter, and matter doesn't matter.

One more thing from the Karmapa's talk. Listen to this: "Whatever you're doing right now, sink into that." Sink into it. Sounds a little bit like Ecclesiastes 9:10: "Whatever your hand finds to do, do it with all your might".

In the end, according to both David Hoffman and the Karmapa, what matters isn't stuff, it's people. To me, that sounds a lot like Ecclesiastes.

Experience Our Teacher

It has been said that experience is the best teacher.  Interestingly, it is often the experiences that we don’t choose that teach us the most, for they tend to change our perspective. Heinrich Harrer, a famous Austrian mountaineer, was changed by one such unwelcome experience.  After being part of the first team to successfully summit the 25,000 Naga Parbat, Harrer was imprisoned in a British internment camp.  He later escaped and walked across the Himalayas to get to Tibet, where he spent seven years.  While he didn’t choose the experiences he had, they changed him.  The film made from his book, Seven Years in Tibet, is a powerful portrayal of that change.  In the beginning, he is arrogant, stubborn, and selfish, caring about little other than his own dreams and aspirations.  But he is a different man at the end of the film because he has learned to value people.

In his book, he describes what he called “wasted years”, time he spent chasing too many things at once.  Yet when he finally attained his selfish goals, he found himself dissatisfied, rather than fulfilled.  Like the author of Ecclesiastes, he found that neither money nor fame could fill the emptiness that was inside him.  It was only after being a prisoner that he could truly understand what it meant to be free.  On arrival, Tibet was simply a new place to explore for Harrer, but when he left, it was a culture and a people with value that should be preserved.   

Let’s shift gears now and see what we can learn from the experience of Bigwig, one of the main characters in Richard Adam’s Watership Down, which tells the story of the flight of a group of rabbits from their warren in response to a perceived danger and of their many adventures in their quest for a new home.  An experienced officer of unusual size and strength, Bigwig has more than enough confidence to take on the world.  He often achieves what he wants through bullying other rabbits, both physically and verbally.  However, over the course of the journey, a change is gradually wrought in Bigwig.  First of all, he learns that everyone is valuable, even the “weak”.  Each rabbit in the group contributes something, be it leadership, speed, wit, prophecy, optimism, loyalty, or story-telling abilities, and they learn that they must stick together, pooling all these qualities in order to survive.  After many experiences, he becomes a humble rabbit who cares for those who are worse off then him.  He learns the importance of befriending the helpless, and the principle found in Eccl. 11:1-2 which says, “Cast your bread upon the waters, for after many days you will find it again…” is demonstrated multiple times in the story.  Bigwig goes from the mentality of  “everyone for himself” to being willing to give his life in the effort to save the lives of the other rabbits. 

The book of Ecclesiastes accounts the lessons learned by a certain teacher over the course of his life, most likely gathered from various experiences.  Over the course of the teacher’s reflections, two counsels appear repeatedly:  to live one’s live to the fullest, doing everything to one’s best ability (Eccl. 9:10) and to be content with what you have been given (Eccl. 2:24, 9:9).  Interestingly, the rabbits in Watership Down  seem to live by these two principles.  They never do anything halfway, and they never complain to their god.  They accept their lot in life and do the best with what they have.  They do give their god credit for helping them, but never blamed him when the future looked hopeless.

Wilderness and Meaninglessness

Of the many themes in the book of Ecclesiastes, the one that is most talked out is the theme of meaninglessness.  I have questioned this theme because I am not sure I fully understand which direction this "meaninglessness" points to.  The main idea is that life is meaningless--all is vanity.  I have asked myself, "but is life really meaningless?"  Doesn't it still matter to be a good person and live for God?  

I found stories on two public figures who have found themselves living in the bowels of life's greatness.  A Super Bowl champion, Thomas Henderson had high hopes of becoming an exceptional NFL player.  Unfortunately, this dream was shattered after developing a serious addiction to drugs and alcohol.  Henderson was also accused of sexual assault.  The resulting consequences of his chosen life led to 28 months in jail.  Another public figure, actor Tim Allen, had a problem with drugs and alcohol.  He was arrested for drunk driving and also injured a senior citizen.  Having his own father die from a drunk driver when he was a child, one would think he would not want to liken his actions to the reason for his father's death.  Sadly, his life choices showed otherwise.

Fortunately, both Henderson and Allen realized the danger of their actions.  Henderson has made a complete turnaround and has been sober for over 25 years.  He has dedicated his life to being a motivational speaker and philanthropist.  He also written a book about his life experiences.  Allen has also made a difference in his life.  He is sorry for his past and is grateful to have a forgiving family.  After finding a new reason for living, he has restored his relationship with his daughter, claiming that this new relationship fills the gap left behind from his father's death.  

From reading the experiences of these two people, you can see that life is not completely meaningless.  Life is defined by what you choose to fill it with; tomorrow always gives hope for changing what you did today.  I think if you live a wasted life without God, only then does it become meaningless.  Maybe instead we should say the things--material things--in life are meaningless; but life in itself is very important.  After all, it is all we have to make ourselves worthy for eternity.