Adherents to the ancient Persian religion of Zoroaster believe the world is engaged in a never-ending war between good and evil. Many religions even Christianity carry some of this sentiment. Therefore, calling such an idea "Zoroastrian" does not imply uniqueness; it is only a convenient handle. In its more formative years those of the Crusades and the Inquisition Christianity held this tradition more fervently than now. Is it time to let go of the last vestige of Zoroastrianism?.
I thought of this when I learned that Quakers had been singing "We shall overcome" at the Quebec protests. Overcome what? I first knew that song when Martin Luther King led it at the Lincoln Memorial about 1962. Racial prejudice was certainly evil, and overcoming it was a religious matter. So far as I can see, however, the Quebec singers were protesting so many different things, all under the loose rubric of "globalization," that it almost seemed that half the world is evil, and we of the "righteous" half must "overcome" the evil half.
In TQE #8, I told how multinational corporations (MNCs), although they do many evil things, nevertheless pay better and offer better working conditions than do local corporations. A letter from Regan Gambier, a former student of mine now married and living in London, also puts sweatshops into perspective:
I, too, have always thought of the world as interconnected. The jobs don't disappear, they go to someone else; someone else who probably needs them more.
Newsweek reported on April 30:
One correspondent has tried to persuade me that MNCs do not have that of God in them. While every live person, from CEO to humble worker, may embody that of God, nevertheless the MNC is only a legal being. Being distinct from a person, this correspondent said, it may function without God. I believe that is a rationalization, because all MNCs are managed by people.
What are the evils we should be protesting? Certainly war is one. We Westerners tend to think of war in ideological terms, such as communism versus capitalism. But consider the twelfth-century troubadour portrayed by the French historian Marc Bloch (Feudal Society, p.293): "I love to see, amidst the meadows, tents and pavilions spread; ... it gives me great joy to see, drawn up on the field, knights and horses in battle array; and it delights me when the scouts scatter people and herds in their path ... And when the battle is joined, let all men of good lineage think of naught but the breaking of heads and arms ... I find no such favor in food, or in wine, or in sleep, as in hearing the shout, 'On! On!' From both sides; ... in seeing men great and small go down on the grass beyond the fosses; in seeing at last the dead, with the pennoned stumps of lances still in their sides."
Get the idea? War was beautiful, to be observed as one would a baseball game. Learning from history, I would guess that war is still idealized by soldiers and guerrillas of Bosnia, Serbia, Kosovo, Congo, Chechnya, Israel, Palestine, Russia, Northern Ireland, and elsewhere. Yes, there is an ideology, and a nationalism (as there was also in twelfth-century France), but that is only so there will be something to fight for. Perhaps war no longer possesses inherent beauty, but it does create a surge of feeling of power. After all, what difference should it make who is the ruler of the Tutsis or Hutus, or whether Palestinians or Israelis or both govern their area, so long as they do so justly? What does it matter whether Britain or Ireland is the government of Ulster, again so long as they are fair and democratic? This is an idea of the French economist, Frederic Bastiat (1801-50).
In TQE #11 (next week) I plan to list 39 countries (including Canada and the United States) whose violations of human rights deserve far greater condemnation than do those of MNCs and sweatshops.
If we are to be Zoroastrian Quakers and that may not be a bad thing let us not think of a war between good and evil, of us being righteous and others evil. Let us not think of "overcoming" multinational corporations but of controlling the evil and enhancing the good of all people and all institutions, including MNCs. Martin Luther King understood that not all Whites were racist, and one line of "We shall overcome" tells of "Blacks and Whites together." As soon as I hear us singing, "Quakers, MNCs, and sweatshops together," I might join in. Let us think of our struggle as a way of bettering the consciences of people, so we do not idealize "overcoming" others but instead seek that of God in them.
Sincerely your friend,
The troubador was fascinating. But you may be unfair to suggest that he saw war only as a spectator sport. With the right (meaning wrong?) ideology, people throw themselves into war with gusto.
You made a nice argument about trying to boost the good in any one, though surely Hitler or Stalin would have been a challenge (unless perhaps you got ahold them at age six or something). But your message was a great contrast to the jihads that Quakers seem to join nowadays.
Steve Williams, Bethesda (MD) Friends Meeting.
[The idea that because a multinational corporation is a legal being, there need not be that of God in it] is more than a rationalization. It is an error. Only individuals act in human society. Organizations cannot act. When the individual acts, they do so, more or less, from that of God within them. Organizations cannot decide. A subgroup of individuals may be empowered to make decisions for the group, but when action is taken by the group, it is individuals who accede to the decision and take the action.
Russ Nelson, St. Lawrence Valley (NY) Friends Meeting.
It seems to be the baggage of cultural tradition and "heritage". People everywhere identify with a particular heritage or tradition: they feel they ARE a Jew, or Palestinian or Hutu, a certain religion, race or nationality. Is this the same as being a Quaker? Is it active belief selected by choice and reason? No, I think most is something very different, more of a feeling of membership based on history and closer family or tribal relationships (heritage).
What if Israelis and Palestinians were willing to drop these identities and see themselves as residents of a present 2001 community? (ok, it's not likely...) Such a combined group of people ARE, (in fact) members of the time and place where they actually exist. The historical traditions and dogmas are less relevant to life than the circumstances of economics, environment, society in which they live each day. If people were to acknowledge as their actual identity and citizenship being the real and present community they live each day within, together with all others sharing the time and place, would they not then feel like making their community more livable, a GOOD place to be? Would they not band together to eliminate not each other, but fix the threats to their own collective well-being? Like weapons, bombs, warfare, dangerous leadership. That is wishful thinking, since we can't even do it in the US. Nevertheless I see allegiance to the these separate traditions of identity as driving the divisions and differences, traditions and heritages that are less relevant to life today than the actual circumstances of those lives than today's real concerns of economy, environment, peacemaking etc.
Steve Willey, Sandpoint Friends Meeting, Sandpoint (ID).
I think the people protesting "globalization" and the MNCs are basically afraid they do not and will not have the necessary skills/knowledge to move to new/better employment. "Sweatshops" in any form are what workers with even less see as a step up the ladder of success. In the early part of the industrial revolution in the U.S. and Europe the "sweatshops" were a step up. Now, from many rungs up that same ladder, we see how abusive and inhumane the system was/is. The abuses abounded and we've moved on as an industrialized civilization. We must help the sweatshop owners understand the abusiveness of the system as Quakers (and others) helped the slave owners understand the slaves were/are human who should/must be treated in a more humane manner. Lack of understanding is the evil that must be overcome by good in the Zoroastrian Quaker world concept as I understand it.
Cynthia Stevenson, Boulder (CO) Friends Meeting
RSVP: Write to "tqe-comment," followed by "@quaker.org" to comment on this or any TQE Letter. (I say "followed by" to interrupt the address, so it will not be picked up by spam senders.) Use as Subject the number of the Letter to which you refer. Permission to publish your comment is presumed unless you say otherwise. Please keep it short, preferably under 100 words. All published letters will be edited for spelling, grammar, clarity, and brevity. Please mention your home meeting, church, synagogue (or ...), and where you live.
To subscribe, at no cost, visit our home page.
Each letter of The Quaker Economist is copyright by its author. However, you have permission to forward it to your friends (Quaker or no) as you wish and invite them to subscribe at no cost. Please mention The Quaker Economist as you do so, and tell your recipient how to find us on the web.
The Quaker Economist is not designed to persuade anyone of anything (although viewpoints are expressed). Its purpose is to stimulate discussions, both electronically and within Meetings.
PUBLISHER AND EDITORIAL BOARD
Publisher: Russ Nelson, St. Lawrence Valley (NY) Friends Meeting
Members of the Editorial Board receive Letters several days in advance for their criticisms, but they do not necessarily endorse the contents of any of them.
This newsletter was formerly known as The Classic Liberal Quaker.
Copyright © 2001 by Jack Powelson. All rights reserved. Permission is hereby granted for non-commercial reproduction.