Home » Opinion » Foreign Views
Great debate: Good life means bread for all
By Greg Cusack |
June 23, 2011, Thursday
|
Print Edition
Print Edition
MR Ben-Ami's response to Wang Yong's review of his book "Ferraris for All" ("Do not knock prosperity that makes the good life possible," Shanghai Daily June 15) appeared to miss Wang Yong's central points: "Is the 'good life' synonymous with endless consumption?" and "Can our planet's resources long sustain such consumption?"
Having followed Wang Yong's editorial writings for some 18 months now, I believe that he neither "dismisses the importance of economic progress" nor waxes "nostalgic" over how previous times were better.
The issue is not whether humanity has made collective strivings toward aspects of better times - improved nutrition, education, and housing, for example - but rather whether the need to consume ever more (which Mr Ben Ami seems to celebrate in his book) is wise or sustainable.
In the first half of the 1980s, I had the privilege of serving as executive director of the National Catholic Rural Life Conference in the United States. The focus of this conference had long been on promoting both stewardship of our natural resources and celebrating the virtues of a balanced rural economy.
One day I had a conversation with a Maryknoll missionary about sustainability versus scarcity. It was occasioned by my expressing concern about the Catholic Church's seeming insensitivity to the need to address population control issues.
His response took root in my heart: "The real issue," he said, "is not whether there are too many people on this planet, for clearly there is a limit on what our planet's resources can absorb and provide for. Rather, our focal point ought to be on achieving an adequate and sustainable existence for all people, and not allowing incredible surplus for a relative few.
"When we become obsessed with scarcity," he continued, "we draw inward. We focus less on the legitimate needs of others and more on our own fears for the future. This allows the reality of disproportionate resources being controlled by the few to go unchallenged. But if we start with seeking sustainability for all, our attention is directed outwards to our brothers and sisters. In that context, we are more likely to place their needs for a sustainable life on a par with our own. After all, much of what we would 'keep' for ourselves is not really necessary. By keeping more of what we do not need, we deny essentials to the truly poor."
This seems to have been the essence of Wang Yong's fine column of June 4 ("There must be more to the good life than a Ferrari") in which he probed what was essential for the "good life." For balanced persons (and societies), attaining 'the good' for all trumps attaining surplus for the few.
For it is this scramble for surplus goods for ourselves - and the inability to recognize limits on what we actually "need" - that creates the scarcity we perceive around us.
In all four of the Christian gospel accounts, the multiplication of loaves and fishes by Jesus receives significant emphasis. Why? It is not the miracle itself that is important; rather, it is that Jesus taught that from perceived scarcity ("only a few loaves and fishes") adequate abundance could be obtained for all.
Like Wang Yong, I am inspired by our wise teachers. For me, the ethical teachings of Jesus, the Buddha, and Confucius are not in tension on how we ought to orient our lives.
Mindful of others, it is possible to craft solutions to address our abundant woes, whether they are environmental pollution, inadequate housing, or insufficient food or health care. Mindful primarily of ourselves, generosity perishes and solutions fail.
(The author was a member of the Iowa state House of Representatives. He also served in the state executive branch. He retired in 2004. His email: gloster@iwoatelecom.net)
Having followed Wang Yong's editorial writings for some 18 months now, I believe that he neither "dismisses the importance of economic progress" nor waxes "nostalgic" over how previous times were better.
The issue is not whether humanity has made collective strivings toward aspects of better times - improved nutrition, education, and housing, for example - but rather whether the need to consume ever more (which Mr Ben Ami seems to celebrate in his book) is wise or sustainable.
In the first half of the 1980s, I had the privilege of serving as executive director of the National Catholic Rural Life Conference in the United States. The focus of this conference had long been on promoting both stewardship of our natural resources and celebrating the virtues of a balanced rural economy.
One day I had a conversation with a Maryknoll missionary about sustainability versus scarcity. It was occasioned by my expressing concern about the Catholic Church's seeming insensitivity to the need to address population control issues.
His response took root in my heart: "The real issue," he said, "is not whether there are too many people on this planet, for clearly there is a limit on what our planet's resources can absorb and provide for. Rather, our focal point ought to be on achieving an adequate and sustainable existence for all people, and not allowing incredible surplus for a relative few.
"When we become obsessed with scarcity," he continued, "we draw inward. We focus less on the legitimate needs of others and more on our own fears for the future. This allows the reality of disproportionate resources being controlled by the few to go unchallenged. But if we start with seeking sustainability for all, our attention is directed outwards to our brothers and sisters. In that context, we are more likely to place their needs for a sustainable life on a par with our own. After all, much of what we would 'keep' for ourselves is not really necessary. By keeping more of what we do not need, we deny essentials to the truly poor."
This seems to have been the essence of Wang Yong's fine column of June 4 ("There must be more to the good life than a Ferrari") in which he probed what was essential for the "good life." For balanced persons (and societies), attaining 'the good' for all trumps attaining surplus for the few.
For it is this scramble for surplus goods for ourselves - and the inability to recognize limits on what we actually "need" - that creates the scarcity we perceive around us.
In all four of the Christian gospel accounts, the multiplication of loaves and fishes by Jesus receives significant emphasis. Why? It is not the miracle itself that is important; rather, it is that Jesus taught that from perceived scarcity ("only a few loaves and fishes") adequate abundance could be obtained for all.
Like Wang Yong, I am inspired by our wise teachers. For me, the ethical teachings of Jesus, the Buddha, and Confucius are not in tension on how we ought to orient our lives.
Mindful of others, it is possible to craft solutions to address our abundant woes, whether they are environmental pollution, inadequate housing, or insufficient food or health care. Mindful primarily of ourselves, generosity perishes and solutions fail.
(The author was a member of the Iowa state House of Representatives. He also served in the state executive branch. He retired in 2004. His email: gloster@iwoatelecom.net)
- About Us
- |
- Terms of Use
- |
-
RSS - |
- Privacy Policy
- |
- Contact Us
- |
- Shanghai Call Center: 962288
- |
- Tip-off hotline: 52920043
- 沪ICP证：沪ICP备05050403号-1
- |
- 互联网新闻信息服务许可证：31120180004
- |
- 网络视听许可证：0909346
- |
- 广播电视节目制作许可证：沪字第354号
- |
- 增值电信业务经营许可证：沪B2-20120012
Copyright © 1999- Shanghai Daily. All rights reserved.Preferably viewed with Internet Explorer 8 or newer browsers.
