Week 10: Weight of the World

This week I really want to concentrate on Francois Bonvin's article entitled Sick Person as Object found in The Weight of the World by Pierre Bourdieu et al..

I was struck by the hospital culture in France (which is likely not very different from America). In the article, Bonvin relates how the mission of the hospital is lost. In the startling article, he articulates through Isabelle his interviewee how the sick are not treated as patients but as objects or even worse, nuisances.

Isabelle states:

You are reduced to a state of nothingness. It's a question of convenience. They no longer think that they're dealing with a human being, I think. (Bourdieu et al., The Weight of the World, 1999, 597.)

Furthermore, she says:

[The doctors] had impossibly limited minds, they reduced you to your handicap. (Ibid., 592)

It was a wake up call to me and my treatment of the HIV/AIDS crisis as I had always assumed that providing the opportunity to medical care would be the cure all to some extent. But this article has woken me up to the reality that the presence of the possibility of proper medical care does not necessarily ensure proper medical care.

What can be done about the culture of the medical world? I am afraid that the church as a body can do very little. This is something that can only be changed from the inside, that is from the doctors themselves. Jesus following doctors must be careful themselves from falling into this trap. The sick and the dying, those suffering from HIV/AIDS are not nuisances nor are they defined by their condition. Those suffering from HIV/AIDS are people. To borrow from Martin Luther King Jr., we are to embrace a universal altruism that values people as fellow people.

This exhortation is not limited to doctors. All too often, I'm afraid, the church has limited its view of those suffering from HIV/AIDS as the disease itself. That is, when we see someone with HIV/AIDS, we see HIV/AIDS, not the fellow person created in the image of God. Can we identify with that person? Or is that person someone "other", outside of our realm of consciousness, outside of the care of the family?

Week 9: Inventing Popular Culture

I found this week's readings interesting... it's just too bad that in large it didn't address our topic.

Two quotes, however, really struck me as I was reading this week:

1) "We make history and we are made by history; we make culture and we are made by culture. Culture (like language) both enables and constrains." (Storey, Inventing Popular Culture, 2003. 60.)

This was an empowering quote. It helped to read that we are not merely victims of culture. That instead we have a say. It is true that we become products of our culture. But we become products of a culture that we create. And so, with that thought, it is possible to change our culture and change ourselves and identities.

In relation to HIV/AIDS, we have noticed that there are many barriers to getting the proper care to developing countries. The immediate urge is to want to try to revolutionize that particular culture so that many of those barriers would be knocked down. But we would be wise to look to our own culture and country and see that there are barriers here as well that prevent those suffering from HIV/AIDS from receiving the proper treatment socially and medically. As products of this culture, what can we do to change/mold/shape our own culture?

2) "Consumption is a significant part of the circulation of shared and conflicting meanings we call culture. We communicate through what we consume." (Ibid. 78.)

What is implied here is that we can change culture by changing our consumption. If we are to be serious about changing the culture of the western church as many of us seem to be suggesting, we would doing well according to Storey by examining what we consume. What does the North American church consume? What does the church tell us to consume? What does the church inadvertantly advertise?

This is coming from my own personal bias, but, my limited observations thus far indicate that the North American church advertises owning property, having the latest and coolest of gadgets, dressing well with name brand products (sometimes faux name brand products that are overtly "Christian"), driving a car, having a talented motivational speaker speak every week, and listening to the in-music or playing the in-music with expensive band equipment, among others.

I wonder if we know what we're asking for when we say that the North American church needs to change. Are we cognizant of the costs? Do we realize that some of the things that we have grown accustomed to, grown to love and embrace about our churches are the very things that in very subtle ways lull us into becoming the very people we want to change within our churches?

Concretely, are we as churches willing to sacrifice buying a multi-channel sound board, and instead opt to support World Vision's work against HIV/AIDS? We would not see the results of such work immediately. We may not see it work within our community. We may not see it work with our own eyes at all. And perhaps that is just it. Perhaps it is not overt greed that prevents us from action as much as it is a desire to know for sure that our money is being used well and makes a difference. When we buy the sound board, we can hear the difference the next Sunday. The effect is felt. But when we give that same money overseas, often, we simply don't observe any difference, and the disappointment sets in.

Week 8: Global Transformations & Globalization & Culture

Both books once again did not directly address our topic but they did have some interesting thoughts that could serve as entry points.

First Global Transformations:
Global transformations continues to have a rather rosy look at the progress of globalization particularly in its effects on developing countries. Perhaps I'm a skeptic but, the teachings I've received over the years and my limited personal experience do not share Held et al.'s view of the direction that the globalization of economics, politics, and culture is a good one. They write:

In the late 1980s developing countries were home to some 3,800 indigenous MNCs; by the mid-1990s... this had more than doubled. This is an indication of the expanding reach of global production and distribution systems. (Held et al, Global Transformations, 1999, 245.)

While I do not directly refute Held's statistics, I do wonder about the way that those statistics are being presented. Developing countries' situations are wide and varied. China, for example, would be in far different position than Zimbabwe or Uruguay. I suspect that these indigenous MNCs are concentrated in a few developing countries creating further stratification of economies even amongst the developing ones.

Global Transformations seems to address this issue later with regards to FDI when they write:

Africa has become more marginalized with the decline of FDI in primary production although there are indications that this is changing. Latin America has declined in relative terms, but remains an important location. The most dramatic rise has been in East Asia. (Ibid. 250.)

But this seems to appear as an appendix or an afterthought to the overall thesis of Global Transformations.

As Tyler and I have noticed, AIDS is not a self-contained issue. AIDS is very closely interlinked with world poverty for a number of reasons which we have begun to specify in our wiki. Establishment of MNCs in developing countries have appeared to help local/national economies (the cost of this establishment is not fully revealed in any of our readings). But with this premise in mind, we would hope that the growth of indigenous MNCs in countries hard struck by AIDS could indirectly combat the AIDS epidemic.

The educational element of the AIDS epidemic is also touched upon in Global Transformations.

Standardization of production and rising skill levels in some developing countries have led to over half the world's television production being located outside the OECD. (Ibid. 265.)

What can we do to improve schooling worldwide? This seems like a ridiculous question to ask considering that many would argue that we, the US, have not done a good job at home on this very issue. But if we are serious about making some of these developing nations players in the world economy, we obviously have to start with the children. What can we, Americans, do to raise the quality of education to children in Uganda, Mongolia, or Venezuela?

To this question, we may look to Pieterse's Globalization & Culture. It seems that he is arguing that nationalization and culture at least in the way that it is popularly conceived today are the true borders and boundaries that prevent people from embracing others. He regards national boundaries as largely irrelevant in this increasingly globalized world, and instead points to our attitudes and perceptions of ourselves as belonging to a particular culture that is wholly different from other cultures. Instead, he advocates for adopting a hybrid lens, one that sees that cultures are not stagnant, unchanging entities, but moldable, everchanging things that is constantly in contact with and melding with other cultures.

Invariably it is through cultural codes that boundaries are experienced, lived, upheld. (Pieterse, Globalization & Culture, 2004. 104.)

I remember a comment someone made after our presentation in class a few weeks ago. "What about missions trips?" Could missions trips, especially short-term ones be used as a way to experience and witness different cultural codes, which could in turn be adopted in part to contribute to the creolization of cultures? That is, could missions trips be a way to break down cultural boundaries... boundaries that may prevent people from receiving medical care, financial assistance, or educational upgrading? And as these cultural boundaries get broken down, could steps be taken toward leveling the playing field worldwide?

Personally I'm not sure. Though I do see the beneficial possibilities that globalization bring, I balk at the notion that globalization offers only solutions. What of the potential problems it may bring? We must count the cost.

Week 7 & Global Transformations

I was glad to see that week 7's readings had a much larger direct correlation to our topic of HIV/AIDS.

The trade topic of chapter three was especially relevant because when we listed and researched online resources we found that one of the largest barriers to fighting HIV/AIDS on the global level is uneven trade. The most obvious example of this is the problem of little access to the ARV treatment drugs for citizens of certain countries. Perhaps a more subtle example is the problem of access to education about the pandemic. Certain countries simply do not have the resources to better educate its citizens about HIV/AIDS prevention.

I found the history of global trade especially interesting in this week's readings as it explained the "stratification of economies," that is, how it came to be that certain economies became more elite than others.

During the period from 1870 to 1939 markets for key good began to acquire a global dimention and, unlike earlier periods, this resulted in country specialization such that national patterns of production were increasingly influenced by global competition.... networks of trade for most goods were often geographically restricted... thus the trade system was highly stratified, such that economies beyond Europe and the major primary exporters often played a negligible role in world trade. (Held et al, Global Transformations, 1999. 163.)

This has vast ramifications to access to both drugs and education among a slew of other things such as financing which was covered in the following chapter of the readings for this week. With the stratification of economies comes the stratification of access. Simply put, wealthier economies enjoy higher access to medical care, education, and financial help, all major factors to the fight against HIV/AIDS.

Global Transformations also makes note of some of the regionalizing of economies through free trade agreements such as NAFTA, APEC, and ASEAN. Though Held makes the point that the regionalizing of economies is complementary and not opposed against the globalization of economies, I cannot help but notice that certain regions are neglected by this regionalization.

Extensive as they are, trade networks still appear to be concentrated within certain geographical areas, crudely Europe, the Americas, Asia-Pacific, three trade blocs with some economic coherence and including most of the industrialized economies. (Ibid. 167.)

What of the not yet industrialized countries? What of the African continent that is hit hardest by HIV/AIDS? Although I am glad to hear that the world is becoming increasingly globalized especially economically, I cannot help but wonder about the urgency that HIV/AIDS brings to having at least a temporary solution until trade becomes more accessible to those that need it the most.

The following chapter of global finance helped me further understand the current disparity between national economies. With the end of fixed exchange rates in 1971, entire economies were in the hands of investors and the global market.

This ushered in an era of floating exchange rates, in which (in theory) the value of currencies is set by global market forces, that is, worldwide demand and supply of a particular currency. (Ibid. 202)

The effects are amazing:

As well as speculating on movements in floating exchange rates, speculators periodically take positions against fixed or managed exchange rates, effectively betting that governments will be forced to devalue. The ensuing massive flows of funds against a currency have produced notable devaluation crises, involving several European currencies in 1992 and 1993, the Mexican peso in 1994, several East Asian currencies in 1997, and the Russian rouble in 1998. (Ibid. 209.)

I was glad to read, however, that international bank loans are becoming more and more accessible to developing nations. Although such developing nations are considered high risk and thus, receive higher interest rates, I was pleased to hear that international finance to them has explanded beyond aid and FDI.

Week 6 & Global Transformations

This week's reading from Global Transformations was difficult in that it didn't have direct ties to our topic. But here are a few thoughts:

1) The first chapter of Global Transformations emphasizes the metamorphosis from the empire paradigm to the nation-state paradigm which is then followed up with the second chapter where Held et al. discusses the post-Cold war shift to globalization specifically in the military realm. In regards to global health crises, although AIDS has affected every nation in the world in some way or another, it has not stirred up an international response (or at least to my knowledge). Each nation seems to be trying to address the issue at the national level, not the international. The UN and its MDGs may be a step in the right direction, but I've seen little government to government collaboration with regards to AIDS.

International law is oriented to the establishment of minimal rules of coexistence;the creation of enduring relationships among states and peoples is an aim, but only to the extent that it allows state objectives to be met.

Responsibility for cross-border wrongful acts is a 'private matter' concerning only those affected. (Held et al, Global Transformations, 1999. 38.)

Although a stretch to consider AIDS as a "cross-border wrongful act," the principle remains: The 17th/18th century European 'society of states' model still has lingering effects on foreign policy today.

2) Related to the first point, the national border lines seem to be a strong force against international cooperation in the fight against HIV/AIDS.

Exact borders have been gradually fixed. Postwar decolonization was especially important to this process. (Ibid., 45.)

Where is the global economy when it comes to global health crises? Where is the international community?

Officials in many ministries today find it extremely difficult to decided what is and what is not a domestic matter. (Ibid., 55.)

This may be true with economics or governmental instability or military proliferation, but with AIDS, the urgency doesn't seem to translate.

3) I don't know how this would affect our wiki, but the gaining success of the EU and the "pooled sovereignty" model of governance could be a macro-level solution that is beyond our control to provide tools to combat the disease. Global Transformations seems to take a very tentative approach to evaluating the successes and failures of the EU, but that may be because of the date of its publishing. In the six years since it was published, the EU has expanded beyond the four countries mentioned, established economic clout with the gaining power of the Euro, and has thus, undoubtably flourished.

Could we see the international treaty organizations mentioned in Global Transformations such has NATO, ASEAN, OAU, and OAS take the EU's lead and form a regional perspective on governance rather than a nationalistic one? That is, could we see national borders as we think of them now be replaced by regional borders. And could that then change the face of "domestic" policy making thus, affecting the fight against AIDS?

Week 5 Analysis

A quick search around on google showed me that black churches are far more proactive in addressing the HIV/AIDS epidemic. There were far fewer news articles or resources from their Caucasian counterparts and none from other minority groups. Virtually all the news articles, resources, and websites from faith based groups are found in either black churches or black church organizations. My list of links are just a small selection of what I found.

All this got me wondering as to why other churches are virtually silent on the issue? As a product of a church that was and still is silent on HIV/AIDS, I have a few hypotheses.

1) A limited understanding of the implications of the Gospel. The Gospel has been reduced to the question of spiritual salvation. Tyler and I were talking in class about the importance of undergirding our wiki with a theological treatise explaining a thicker view of the Gospel.

2) A fear of turning "liberal." A few community building events were fine but incorporating social justice issues into the fabric of the church is to some extent seen as a sign of losing our evangelicalism. Again, we need to look to Jesus and see what He has to say about the poor, the orphaned, the widows, the sick, and the marginalized.

3) A feeling of helplessness. The disease and its effects are simply too large to grasp. It is too overwhelming. Though I too sympathize with these feelings and feel even more so right now after researching HIV/AIDS, Tyler has been awesome in finding links to faith based organizations that are heavily invested and involved in the fight. A large part of our wiki will be devoted to listing opportunities that are available for churches to join.

I chose the John 8 passage for the obvious reasons: Dealing with sexual sin and judging people.

Luke 10, the famous parable of the Good Samaritan again is an obvious choice. To not view our faith as a club with membership but instead seeking people out and being a neighbor to others.

The James 1 passage came as a response to the research I did regarding what HIV/AIDS does to families and developing nations. Simply put, it leaves children orphaned, makes families impoverished, women widowed, and nations in economic shambles. To often the Western evangelical church has focused on the last part of James 1:27, to "keep oneself from being polluted by the world," and neglected the mandates prior, to care for orphans and widows or perhaps not cared enough to actively seek out the orphans and widows.

The last passage, Psalm 86 is simply a look at the character of God which then begs to ask, "If this is God, are we reflecting God well to the world?"

These were just a few passages of scripture that immediately came to mind. I hope they qualify as "links" or sources. Any other suggestions?

Week 5 Links

Shifting now to some of the Church's response thus far to the AIDS epidemic. What has God already started in the church today? This is followed with a few passages of Scripture that may be relevant as to why Christians should be involved against HIV/AIDS.

Responses from the church to the AIDS epidemic:
National Episcopal AIDS Coalition: Interesting resource from the Episcopal church.
The CORE Initiative: A resource for faith-based communities to respond.
AIDS Care Network: African American church response to caring for those already impacted by the effects of AIDS.
African American religious leaders meet about AIDS: Article from the SF Chronicle about churches coming together to discuss strategies for HIV testing and education.
African American Churches Continue Effort to Increase HIV Testing: Article about the HIV/AIDS Church Information Kits.
Church Sign Has Me Wondering: Ann Landers like article but dialoguing a gay man with HIV and a pastor of a church in LA.

Passages of Scripture:
John 8:1-11: The Woman Caught in Adultery
James 1:27: Pure and Faultless Religion
Luke 10:25-37: The Parable of the Good Samaritan
Psalm 86: "But you O Lord, are a compassionate and gracious God..."

Analysis to follow...