we were talking about the super-rich, the elite of society in my sociology class today. wasps, as they were once called, "white anglo saxon protestants." they are those who've not only struck it rich, but also have the "class" to pull it off.
there was some serious judgement in the class about these people, about how they're so isolated in their bubbles and they probably don't take the time to see the "other" and get to know them for who they are. they're primarily disconnected from everyone else, so they have a tainted view of reality.
i thought this was incredibly true, but i wasn't going to let it just apply to them. most every american would define themselves as middle class. it's a term so convoluted, i'm not even sure if i'm middle class anymore. now the middle class is just as homogenous as the elite of society are. they stay in their little bubble as well, if they're not trying to move up.
but isn't it hypocritical to say that the elite are stuck in a bubble when we are too? they have no capacity to move up much more (although they would argue the opposite) and would never dream of moving down. we strive for the same thing. the "american dream." it's never enough. we can never get enough. but in all of this, we think it's bad to descend the ladder.
i brought up shane claiborne in the class, and his friends at the simple way and the potter house. i talked about meeting with him and talking with him and his friend chris this past summer, and how incredible it was that they decided to give up "the dream" to hang out with the poorest of the poor in america and serve them.
NO ONE SEEMED TO CARE. this is a sociology class. people are supposed to care. sociology for me is not just an academic pursuit, it requires us to get our hands dirty... especially since we're encountering some nitty-gritty stuff.
we continued our talk about social closure and examples of exclusion within society. some examples of exclusion were:
- private property ownership (most prominent)
- credentialism, e.g. "diploma disease"
- inheritance
we talked about how these things are institutional and interactional. they happen both on a personal level and on a structural level. they happen when we interact with our peers and when our classes interact.
someone brought up the question: "how would it be possible to live outside of all this?"
i raised my hand and said it's a choice. the professor kind of brushed my answer off to the side by saying that we don't actually get to determine much about our lives, etc. (sociologically, this is true) and how in our american culture, we typically play the choice card far too much. but i wasn't having it. the class talked a little bit more about it and i had to disagree.
"i'm sorry, but i really disagree with that. it's not true. we have a choice."
i explained that i can choose to continue chasing wealth and a better lifestyle, but i don't have to. that ultimately IS up to me. i brought up shane again. i brought up the fact that when we live in community, we dispel exclusion. when we include others, we dispel exclusion.
now that i've been ruminating on it a little more, i've been able to condense it down to it's most simple form:
we can choose to love. love is a choice! it may be easier for some people. it may come more naturally for some, and more learned for others. but it's our choice whether or not we choose to love. we can give to all the charities in the world, we can start the greatest movement in the world, we can die for our cause, but if we don't have love, we have nothing. without love, we have nothing.
as a christian, i look to the beginning of all things and realise they were good. i see now that God's creation is marred. we are built with the image of God -who is love- inside us, we are capable of choosing to love, but so often, we'll choose not too. but at least -like my pastor says- we've fallen from somewhere. when we see something that once worked well and now doesn't, we are made aware that it can be made well. it can return to how it originally was.
and so the word was made flesh and dwelt among us. and it was incredible! he taught us how to live, with love unlike any other, because he is God, and was able to live perfectly. his name is jesus. he came to reconcile all things. he'll come again one day to restore all things. we are invited to participate in that restoration now... he's shown us it's possible. he laid his very life down so it would be possible. so many things were accomplished through the death of the Christ... but they were made even more complete in his resurrection. death was defeated. debts were paid. and so, we join with him in fixing a broken world, at least until he comes back and finishes the job.
there's so much we're capable of. it's insane. but we limit ourselves so much... i see evidence of it all the time in my sociology classes. "that seems like a good idea, but it isn't possible." or we don't even try to ask the questions with difficult answers. we read all our theories and stories, we read about how to be more politically correct and have a proper view of the poor, but when's the last time we hung out with poor people. do we use it as bragging rights, maybe to boost our community service or volunteer hours, or do we do it because we love people and we want to see change happen in the world around us?
today's class was so concerned with the elite and changing the system. every great social movement has started from the bottom. in fact, it starts (usually) with the people that have the potential to make up the largest part of the population if they join together. aka: middle class. what if the middle class woke up and realised one day that it's not about the 9-5? that there's something better...
what if we were able to wrap our hearts and minds around the fact that change doesn't come from constantine, but it comes from us washing each others' feet. what if we actually obeyed, and decided to love the Lord God with all our heart, soul, mind and strength, and we loved our neighbour as ourselves. then we'd see some difference!
thanks for reading. :)