Good Morning Canada!

Very early, in fact; by my rough calculations, around 3:39 AM Central Time, exactly the time in the afternoon that it is here. If you haven't figured out where "here" is yet, I'm sure that Robin Williams (a regular reader of this blog, I'm sure) would be inclined to place you at the butt end of one of his stand-up routines - purely out of spite - if he found out. To fully ensure that this remotely possible event doesn't happen as a result of you asking me "Tom, I don't get it - where the junk are you?" in the comments section, I'll be straight up with it. I'm in Vietnam, the land of conical hats, naggy "xe om" (motorcycle taxi) drivers, and more tour bus sightings on average in one day than there are people in the Prarie provinces. I've been here since May 9th, and other than a very testing border crossing experience from Laos (a topic for another day, as I'd like to stay in a good mood), it's been a jolly good time.

However, I'm not going to reflect on it today. To my loyal Vietnamese reader demographic: don't take it personally, this has nothing to do with personal political leanings, the annoyingly tall and skinny geography of your country (makes for quite a tally of bus hours getting from point A to B!), or the fact that you gave me warm beer at the noodle stall last night. It's just that I've had a bit of a revolutionary last couple of days with regards to my personal philosophy and direction, and I'd like to let you in on a little bit of it.

I've decided that I'd like to write a bit about richness, poorness, and the relationship between the two. Again, this has nothing to do with the fact I'm in Vietnam; I've been to quite a few places in the last 5 months where I've seen more poverty that I have here. It's just that a series of recent events in my life have forced me to reconsider my place in the world in relation to others in a new way, one that I wasn't able to learn in the classroom. I gained a lot of theoretical knowledge during my time in uni, and also garnered alot of passion for social justice causes, such as human rights and poverty issues. However, the fact that I've technically been done school for almost 2 months - eerily rendering me more removed from academia than I've been since I was about 4 - has caused me to think things over a bit.

As you may know, I like school. As you may know also, I like school largely because 1) it often incorporates a good deal of discussion and debate about things that I care about, and 2) it generally involves quite a bit of reading and research, both things that I enjoy. Over the course of the last month or so, I've been applying to internship positions with various NGO's that, if I got into them, would involve me continuing to do the things that I have loved about school, only in an actual developing world environment (a huge plus) where I don't have to pay anything (another huge plus). For some reason (pride and cockiness probably has something to do with it), I assumed that I'd be accepted for at least one of the five-or-so positions that I applied for, or at least be short listed. Apparently, however, I haven't been quite as much of a shoe-in that I thought I'd be (although it's possible that a couple of the organizations could still get back to me, quite a bit of time has passed since I began submitting applications).

Unsurprisingly, this initially left me in a bit of an uncomfortable state. Generally, I'm a pretty hard worker when it comes to things related to school and other employment, and thus I'm not used to being rejected for things that I put alot of effort into (in this case, these internship applications). However, an even bigger contributor to my discomfort has been the "what next?" factor. I'd been planning on applying for these internships for the past two years or so, and pretty well assumed that they'd take up the better part of my first post-graduation year. As I already inferred, I almost viewed them as a type of continuation of my education - a "stepping stone"to grad studies, if you will. Overall, the prospect of not participating in one of these internships this year has kind of thrown me into the dark. Luckily, however, when you're in the dark, you see flickers of light that you might not have otherwise.

On to the richness, poorness, and the relationship between the two (note: I'm using these terms in a wholly economic sense this time around). Lately, I've been reading a book called "The Irresistable Revolution" by Shane Claiborne, which essentially addresses the relationship between the Christian church (meaning not any building, but rather the body of followers of Christ) and the rest of the world. More specifically, he spends a good deal of time discussing the interactions between economically rich people in the world, and economically poor people, and has inspired a good deal of thought on my part regarding this relationship. With Claiborne's help, I've come up with a bit of a rough model of three broad groups of rich people (read: those of us not living in poverty) in the world, categorized depending on their interactions with poor people. As I outline these groups briefly, please don't think that I'm trying to judge anyone; I'm going to insert myself into this scenario towards the end of the blog, andmy position isn't exactly overly virtuous.

Firstly, there are the people that don't care about the poor at all. For whatever reasons, whether it be apathy, social Darwinism, or pure ignorance, they have chosen to act as though poverty and injustice in our world do not exist, and thus feel no need to address them in any way. Luckily, I know very few of these people, so I'm not going to spend any more time writing about them. If you're one of them, I'd urge to seriously consider whether your worldview needs a big makeover.

Without conducting any comprehensive surveys or mathmatical calculations, I've assumed (pretty safely, I think), that the majority of us belong to the second category - that is, people who care about those who are suffering in the world, but really don't make that much of an effort to change the system. My conception of this category has been largely shaped by some personal study of the gospel of Luke that I've been doing, as well as my reading of Claiborne. I think lots of people make contributions to the improvement of the lot of the poor, through initiatives such as giving money to charity, volunteering short -term at places like homeless shelters and food banks, and devoting years to studying how poverty can be alleviated. In this sense, they are contributing, but contributing to what? Sadly, in my opinion, just as much as these types of actions contribute to a betterment of conditions, they also contribute to the proliferation of a system of divide between the rich and poor. As Claiborne says in his chapter entitled "The Economics of Rebirth", we have got into a habit of "brokering services" to the poor, wherein we do things like tithe, donate used clothing, or sponsor a child. A lot of the time, we contribute in this way in order to keep the poor at a distance, while at the same time easing our consciences. I know that for me, studying international development has served as this type of a "buffer" at times, in that it has made me feel involved in the cause of the poor, while allowing me to stay safely on the sidelines. In Claiborne's words, this type of "client" (the poor) and "provider" (the rich) relationship creates a system where "rich and poor are kept in separate worlds, and inequality is carefully managed but not dismantled".

The third category consists of people who have become one with the poor. These people realize that it is not enough to merely try to alleviate problems within the current context, but to overhaul the ways that we interact and live. With the help of the Bible, and more recently Claiborne, I've formed the opinion that in order to be one with the poor, one needs to alter their worldview on very basic levels. Just as Christ considered himself on the same level as prostitutes and tax collectors (considered real crooks back in the days of the Roman Empire), we need to do this also. For many, this means placing less emphasis on things like money; for others, like myself, it means reaching a new level of humility, where degrees and credentials don't elevate me to another level. When this mindset is achieved, we can truly start sharing in the poverty of the world's less fortunate, and fight it alongside them. For some people, this could involve a total lifestyle change; however, as Claiborne puts it so clearly, it often entails "redefining vocations", a process in which people use their everyday skills and expertise to serve the poor through direct interaction. I'll leave it up to your imagination to think up some ways that that could be achieved.

You may be asking, "Tom, how the heck does this relate at all to what you were telling me at the beginning of the blog?" Well, I mentioned a couple of times that I've felt very comfortable in academia, and have looked forward to extending my stay in that realm indefinitely. Although it has created a good deal of passion within me for issues such as rich-poor divides, economic exploitation, and other forms of injustice, it has also effectively secured me in the second category of people that I was just talking about. Don't get me wrong: tons of people are invovled in academics and servanthood with the poor at the same time, and have worked tirelessly to eliminate the alienation that impoverised people have been experiencing since before anyone can remember. However, I personally haven't done this sufficiently. Perhaps, if I end up being selected by one of the last couple NGO's I applied for an internship with, the experience will involve activities that help me to work towards the third category. However, I'm also becoming aware of the opportunities that will be open to me if the next year doesn't go exactly as I foresaw - totally disconnected from academia and the "comfort" offered by institutions. Now don't read all of this as meaning that I'm done with school - I have just as much of an intention to hit up master's studies at some point in the next couple of years, cause I love that stuff!

Again, I want to emphasize that I didn't mean this to be judgemental or provocative in any way, shape or form. It's just an expression of some ideas that I've had in the last few days. Someone may confront me and convince me that I've said something wrong - if I have, I apologize in advance. Please, as always, feel free to heckle me in the comments section (or on Facebook, a medium that an old friend recently used for the same purpose!). It probably wouldn't surprise you by this point that I would recommend you read "The Irresistible Revolution" by Claiborne (Zondervan, 2006). Although I far from agreed with him on every point (bits of theological and economic reasoning that I take exception to here and there), the general idea that he's trying to get across is very important, and the book also makes for a funny and entertaining read.

Cheers,
Tom

P.S. For the record, I actually wrote this post over two days (probably about the same amount of time it would have taken you to read it, if you had made it past the third paragraph!). In addition to it's sheer length, which was eating away at my final evening in Nha Trang before heading to Saigon, I needed to do a bit of re-reading of Claiborne's stuff, to ensure that I wouldn't misquote him, or get my own ideas mixed up. I guess I didn't really have to tell you that, but I thought I would anyways.