Comment to Erin:
I have been wanting to specifically ask you what you think of GM and the layoffs. I like the paragraph about hegemony, I hadn't thought about it that way, as the upper class will universally determine what everyone else's voice is and what is said, because the other classes will assimilate into their class. The last section on high are vs. low art, I had not thought about how art developed from one class into another. Storey's example of Shakespeare was fascinating, because it ended up being horded by those in power, the cultural elite, and was no longer available to the "lower classes." My question is how does this happen in every culture? This is why I believe the church is called to not have a "class structure." Good analysis.

Comments from Paul:
Mike: I completely agree with the statement that we don't have to "fit" into categories as the church. To help people see God's perspective is the same thought that I had about, reconciling God and man. I hadn't thought about the church as an alternative culture, which it absolutely should be. I viewed Storey's interpretation of globalization as something which is not necessarily Americanized, because this would mean that people from other cultures are mindlessly adapting American culture, forgetting their own cultural identity. He made the statement, "Commodities do not destroy culture." I interpreted this to mean that culture may be preserved in the midst of globalization. Anyway, I always enjoy your analysis, because you directly link it to the church, which I find fascinating, thanks.

comments to the guys
Michael - I liked your stuff. I added to your section and put links. But please feel free to change it. My comment is that we should link bible verses and not quote them because it takes up way too much space. But I liked what you wanted to add. Please arrange that section however you want to!
Paul - I liked your analysis and agree that many of our readings haven't pertained directly to our wiki. I think the idea of hegemony was crucial. I read your thoughts. I guess I think his idea of democracies use of the power elite to make their experience the dominant experience is really critical for us. If in general over the last 100 years the experience we hear about is the older, white male... then we won't hear about racism, or inequality. If our collective lense is of those who are rich and in power (that is changing from just the while male) but it doesn't matter who exactly is that dominant group. To be dominant is not our goal as Christians. We do not want to "be on top." And for me the danger comes in when in our current culture Christians are the elite because often times that does mean that those who are poor, disenfranchised, etc. do not get heard. OK. I am babbling. But I was fascinating with his ideas of hegemony in a democracy, which is different than in other kinds of governments. We as Americans think we are 'for the people' but those people are those in power. That can be a dangerous thing no matter who it is in power.

But I am not sure any of the stuff from the book should go in the wiki.

Hey guys. I added stuff to the wiki. Michael... I know your section is #3 but I just got on a roll with putting biblical links about poverty. Justin - maybe the stuff that details our Fuller Class cost may not be interesting to someone reading our website (as funny and interesting as we all found it). Maybe condensce some of that stuff into the quotes from Pete Ward and add a link to his Liquid Church for our resources? I just think that we need to start editing down so our website is not LOOONG. I aded stuff to some of the other sections as well. Do with it what you will!

See ya Tuesday. I will do some more later tonite after church.

In Thursday's class, I wanted to discuss the GM layoff's, causes, problems, and what should our response be. In terms of the causes, GM is not competing with forein automakers, partly because I believe GM is not making cars, that others in foreign nations will drive. The size of vehicles in Europe and other parts of the globe, are predominantly smaller than the cars GM designs. This way of doing business is nationalistic, thinking that sales in the U.S. is the way that GM can sustain profitability. The foreign automakers believe in globalization and GM doesn't. Just look at one of their advertisements with American music, and the American flag somewhere in the background. Now due to this fact and the very large and very powerful UAW, GM lays off 30,000 employees. More thoughts at another time.

Hey all

We are having membership crisis at work. I am in charge of membership so this week I am out of it!!!!! Sorry!!!!!

I added a little bit to the wiki on Sunday night. I am planning on doing more this weekend to add links and such.

Erin

Comments to Erin from Paul
In the statement about a "one world culture" that you made in your analysis, I couldn't agree more. The statement that I made a few weeks ago about the "Tower of Babel", addresses this exact issue, concerning globalization. I don't take as strong of a stand against those corporations as others, but having a competitive market is important, as well as having cities that have certain cultural centers, which can make them unique. Also you brought up a tough question concerning our responsibility concerning migrant labor, but I am not sure how it works in this state? I will ask you some of those questions in class. Thanks.

Paul
I liked your citation of product dumping and the link. That might be good to use for our corporation "structures" that give rise to poverty/rich desparity in our country - based on our treatment of the poor in other countries from our corporations. I also liked your continued look at "empowerment" of the practices rather than a fighting or demolishing of the practices. I agree that other nations need to be empowered. Since "welfare" doesn't seem to "work" or give dignity to people it gives handouts to. It may be good for me to look at issues such as voting for fair wadges, etc. when I look at the response part of our blog.

Corporation monopolies and seeming unethical practices were visualized for us two weeks ago. A row of well, dressed white, old male CEO's of oil corporations in front of a senate hearing committee. They don't have to "swear in" ... why? Baseball players had to swear in. Condy Rice had to swear in. No, the republican senator from Alaska did not allow them to be sworn in and dismissed any discussion of it. Good for the CEO's because it already seems that they lied in some of their answers. They are continuing to show record profits while all of our bills go up. Rich and poor. Our gas prices are higher and our heating bills are more. If you live on minimum wage and barely make-it month to month... an increase in a heating bill could be devastating. Do the CEO's care? Should they care? Some senators (both democrats and republicans) think the CEO's do a price tampering sort of thing and line their already rich pockets with the cash. But should we punish profit making industries? Since oil is something we cannot help but consume (unless we live in a commune in the mountains, but probably even then there is some gas being used). I wonder what is best in this kind of scenario.

This is such interesting stuff, though!

Several issues came up that I think we can address on our wiki.

First the issue of imigration. I think a look into this as a poverty issue in the US is a good idea. From a micro perspective - should we hire undocumented workers? I realize this is illegal... but why is it illegal? I mean are those laws helpful to imigrants or to us. People drive up to men waiting for work and hire them. Is that helpful for economic justice? or is that hurting them in the long run?

Also: the book brings up a factor in globalization that is "modernity." We may want to cite that as a factor in poverty in the US. I will look into some of the effects (one being "individualism" which we have discussed) it has on US economics.

Another issue this book made me think about is regional US issues. For instance would a Jesus follower respond differently or have different resources that an East Coast resident Jesus follower. Should we take regions into account as we look at what steps or encouragement we have for Jesus followers?

What I think we should add to our wiki:
This Post is from Erin... sorry so last minute guys!!!

I think we are all getting to a good point of figuring out what is relevant to US economic justice issues and bringing in our view of scripture to bear in mind in our discussions. I like how we can think both big picture and also muse on the details presented in the reading, like historical analysis of trade and the global impact of the stratification of economics that has happened over the last 60 years or so because of trade and specialization. It seems to me that all of this is driven by money rather than "sharing." Global trade seems to be entirely devoid of any altruism. I guess that should not shock me, but it does a bit. I liked what Michael said in particular about how international trade is usually a country seeing to its needs first. It makes sense to care more about the U.S. than other countries. I am just not sure that is what Jesus calls us to do, nor do I think it is very generous of us. It seems we seek to help ourselves first and if it is convenient we help others later. I find that a sad commentary on our values. Here are some things I would like to include in our wiki from each of us... quotes...

My blog:
Page 184 – This discussion on welfare I think is relevant to our economics discussion. “erosion of the employment prospects for the low-skilled workers as a result of trade places a significantly higher burden on the welfare system… thus global trade has had contradictory impacts in so far as it has increased the demands on the welfare state while undermining the political basis for funding it.” This strikes me as critical to our web-blog if we want to tie in global trade to U.S. economics.

Paul:
The apostle Paul never would have included a Gentile in anything, but yet he died as the, "apostle to the Gentiles." Sometimes I believe that we need to move beyond what "we" think and ask God what "He" thinks. Throughout history of empire's, to nation states, to trade, to globalization, the church either is doing what is right in proclaiming the gospel on a personal level, or they need to stop saying, "this is evil, that is evil, so I will not be involved, but will make it into another issue." In terms of U.S. Economic issues, money is the "god of this nation." Rich, poor, man, woman, it makes no difference. Covetousness is still sin. The apostle Paul stated in Philippians that he was rich, poor, beaten, imprisoned, for the sake of the gospel. In the midst of this, God was redeeming every place where the gospel was planted. This is what we need to get back to.

Michael:
If we assume that, as Americans, we have a natural obligation to value the needs of people within our borders more than the needs of others, we will spend in our money in certain ways. If, on the other hand, we assume that we belong to an international entity, the church, we will spend our money differently.
I also like that you added two things we can do: teach and start conversations. However, I think some of the conversations have already started. How can we affect the structures?

Justin:
something that directly confronts our topic, or at least economics! “Today all countries trade internationally and, with the odd exception like North Korea, they trade significant proportions of their national income” (p 149). After a brief discussion on what trade globalization is and its indicators (pp 149-152) and a long history of trade (pp 152-161) we finally get to the economic impact of trade. With terms like supply and demand, it made me glad that I paid attention to Econ in high school, but with all the other big words it made me wish I took it in college just to understand some of the concepts in the chapter.

Comments from Paul to Erin:
I read the article, "Who would Jesus torture?" Anyone who has interviewed someone at any length knows one thing, if the person you are interviewing trusts you, they will tell you basically ANYTHING, but if they don't, they will tell you nothing! In many classes that I took on Interview and Interrogation, taught by some of the best interviewer's in the nation, this premise was always what they preached. Make sure the "suspect" trusts you. This country needs to pass laws to tell interviewers what they already should know. Including followers of Jesus into this is paramount. I would say that it would be great if Christian's in that environment stood up for righteousness, because others that worked with them and trusted them would be able to have direct contact with Jesus in that context. Thanks for the article, I agree completely.

Comments from Paul to Justin:
Enjoyed the analysis. I especially liked the picture of re-digging the wells, which if I am correct would mean so that others could also have some water? The one main point that I liked was the fact that you mentioned that you don't think that completely getting rid of the suburban or rural church would necessarily solve the problem, but that all churches should work in unison with one another. As the way I see the body of Christ, it was not meant for only our individual congregations. In certain contexts it was, in terms of certain spiritual gifts, but the apostle Paul, mentions participation of one congregation with another. What is our responsibility with what you are saying?

Comments from Paul to Mike:
The analysis as put into your own words was good. I also thought that beginning to make this applicable to our lives is good, in regards to starting to teach and converse concerning these issues. Since this is part comments, part critique, I will only say that since this group started we have spoken concerning consumerism of the U.S., and especially the church, but should we return to slogans like, "What would Jesus drive?" Just being a little facetious, and I am not disagreeing that Americans are the last to realize what we have taken as normal, for the rest of the world, is not taken as normal. I do firmly believe that as a Christian we can redeem structures, but I don't think it will be done without our presence within those structures. That is part of what my blog say's. Anyways, I always enjoy the discussion. 2X

Comments from Paul to Erin

Hey, I didn't get to view your blog until today. I think relating to the apostle Paul was key because he lived in an environment which definitely wasn't very coddling to Christians. Also I had to laugh a little when you called this nation a "Christian nation", which I know you did facetiously. I always chuckle whenever someone refers to it as that. All one would have to do is pick up a newspaper to see that we are not a "Christian nation." Also, I believe that in the O.T., God was extremely upset at the way His people were treating others. God brought Israel into captivity partly because they were causing other nations to blaspheme the name of God. The other nations were pointing their fingers saying, "Those people think that they are followers of God, but look at what they are doing." The church needs a definite wake up call to their followers. I think that nations usually always have their own self interests at heart, because either they want to maintain who they are, or they want to build themselves.

Comments
I liked what you had to say, Paul. I, too, wonder if we can get involved in the super power structures of this world as Christians knowing that they oppress many. I wonder how to avoid it, though, and make any practical difference. I also liked your link to Babel. It is interesting that when God's people were trying to reach and usurp Him, he then scattered them. And now historically it seems we are trying to once again be one and many are grasping at power to attain some world order. I also, though, see in much of the Apostle Paul's writings that "there is no longer Jew nor Gentile... Slave nor Free" etc. So in some sense God does have the power to topple the barriers we have created both spiritualy and socially. I am just not sure how that plays out in larger world politics. For Paul Rome was the center of the world and all powerful. I wonder what he would say today?

Paul's comments: Re: Mike's analysis
I would probably have made the same opening statement concerning the book. In the chapter in the book, "From Empires to Nation States," do you think that the author was attempting to portray that these states were extremely "nationalistic" in the way they structure their political systems. I believe that when these nation states were developing, Europe was attempting to be nationalistic, but work cohesively with other states, while remaing autonomous to how they developed, economically and politically. I think that through abuses of power from one country to another, it creates fear, so a country goes back to thinking it should be empire building instead.
It's funny though in making a comparison to the way Europe developed, Empire to Nation State, back to Empire, which is similiar to the way that the U.S. had developed. I think that you are right in the statement that globalization, is taking us back to Empire building, and the fact that the church should reassess if this "world" is the kingdom of God, if that's what you were saying? If it's not, I'm sure you'll tell me. Thanks.

Hey guys
Let's plan a time maybe to meet after class not this week but the following week. We are up on Week 10 to present our wiki. It might be good to make some substance and creative decisions about our wiki before our presentation. We probably also should have the audio done by then, too.