Letters - 26 November 2021
From The things of heaven to Force
The things of heaven
Roger Plenty (12 November) is disappointed that, in Voirrey Faragher’s fine summary (28 October) of my Adderbury Lecture, I suggest that consumption is now the more concerning of the twin drivers of greenhouse gas emissions: namely, population multiplied by consumption.
The lecture was about my book, Riders on the Storm: The climate crisis and the survival of being. If Roger looks there, I hope he will be reassured that I very much emphasise population. But while fertility rates per woman are now falling rapidly in a growing list of countries – India 2.3, Malaysia 2.0, UK 1.9, China and Brazil 1.7, Portugal 1.2 – consumerism (as consumption in excess of what is needed for a dignified sufficiency of life) is escalating. This is a spiritual issue. It seeks to fill an inner emptiness with outer stuff that can’t give ‘no satisfaction’.
The population debate has long been blighted by ‘population control’ accompanied by racist narratives of ‘too many Indians and Chinese’. This has led to knee-jerk antipathy from the green left. It is time to reclaim narratorial control from the authoritarians. But how? As I show in Riders, fertility rates start to fall naturally and rapidly when two conditions are in place. Social security (led by social justice), and women’s emancipation – including education, voting rights, economic opportunity, perinatal and family planning access, and tackling patriarchal domination and violence. These are not agendas of the hard right. As such, the authoritarians will be delighted to see the green left continuing to shun ‘population’. Rather, these are the agendas advanced by the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals.
I am completely with Roger on the importance of keeping population on the table. But it’s a long front. As Friends, I’d love to see us focussed mainly on the applied spiritual drivers of equality and freedom. Seek first the things of heaven – ‘thy community come’ – then all else will settle into place. Including contraceptive clinics, mindful that there may be (for those who like that kind of thing) a religious mandate to fill the Earth. But not to over-fill it!
Alastair McIntosh
Sinaitic Palimpsest
I am grateful to Michael Pozner (8 October) and others for their researches and insights into the Sinaitic Palimpsest. It is true that the sayings of others were attributed to Jesus, or that he made use of them, but he was an historical figure, rather than a legendary one – if by that is meant that he was an imagined vehicle for the thoughts of others.
Unique to him was his mission statement that the kingdom of heaven had come to earth, was among us (within us, says Luke) and not in any other place. We know precisely when he died, but not when he was born. Luke connects his birth with Quirinius who was governor of Syria (AD6) and Herod, but there is a ten-year gap between them. In any case, sad to say, the nativity story is a myth as there was never any Roman worldwide census. The story is a device to prove that Jesus was the Messiah and for that he had to prove that he had to be born in Bethlehem.
We do know that he lived and was crucified because it is also recorded by Tacitus and the Romanised historian Josephus. Both also, rather scornfully, add that his followers were claiming he had risen from the dead and lived among them. Although the execution was a Roman one, it seems to have been done with the greatest reluctance, which may be attributed to Jesus having friendly relations with them and never showing antipathy towards them.
‘Give to Caesar what is Caesar’s’ Pilate seems to have been interested in talking to him and did his best to save him. Those unfamiliar with biblical criticism can find a review of its history in Albert Schweitzer’s The Quest of the Historical Jesus.
Kathleen Boulton
Peace and defence
Perhaps the main outcome of COP26 has been the evidence it provided of a clear shift in public consciousness. The newfound emphasis on awareness, cooperation, climate justice and compassion is very much in line with our Testimonies to Truth, Equality and Simplicity.
What has been missing has been peace. While it was a real step forward to mention coal in the final COP26 agreement (however hesitantly), defence spending was a glaring omission.
The developed nations have struggled to raise $100 billion to help the developing world combat climate change. The US currently spends nearly eight times as much as that on defence each year, while global military spending amounts to almost $2 trillion, or twenty times as much. This is an insane ordering of priorities. What will we be left trying to defend? On top of that there is the huge environmental impact of defence spending, even in the absence of actual conflict. Do we ever hear about the carbon footprint of constructing an aircraft carrier? I hope that as individual Friends and through QPSW, we will now do all we can to focus on the hugely harmful effects of defence spending, which has become – well, indefensible.
Jan Arriens
Cadet force in schools
In response to Christine Hayes (22 October) I can give some reassurance. Our elder grandson joined the Combined Cadet Force at the same age as her grandson. He knew that we were not in favour, but rather than try to influence him, we allowed him to make his own decision. For a while we were impressed with a positive influence in his self-discipline… cleaning his shoes, making his bed and so on, activities hitherto done only under duress!
But as time passed he came to realise for himself that the overall values of the force were at variance with those of his family and he left voluntarily. I trust that Christine’s grandson will reach a similar decision in his own time.
Jenny Gordon
Universal basic income
I can also remember (with Elizabeth Coleman, 12 November) discussing, around 1970, what we would all do with all our leisure! The basic fact is that industrial productivity has increased so enormously and food production by several-fold since world war two, so that there is plenty enough for everyone in Britain now to have decent housing, a good diet and a rewarding life in healthy surroundings with a comfortable pension afterwards.
Why has it not happened? The levers of government, finance and the law are all in the control of the powerful and wealthy, who allow people enough to keep them from rioting! Now at age ninety-one, I have seen it often enough!
National finance is a complex system and I am not convinced that a universal basic income is the route out. But how about for a start every UK national and UK resident and business active in the UK being assessed for tax on all worldwide earned and unearned income, with due allowance of course for tax paid elsewhere to cooperating countries?
Volker Heine
Force
If there is one principle which all Quakers would subscribe to it is the repudiation of force or violence as a way of achieving an end or solving a problem. We tend to think of this as interpersonal aggression, warfare, torture, mass expulsions or imprisonment, and other forms of force as applied to the person.
But what of force or violence inflicted on inanimate things, such as the deliberate damaging, disfiguring or destruction of property, for example by smashing windows, defacing or destruction of monuments and spreading graffiti? When someone deliberately obstructs roads and prevents fellow citizens going about their daily business, is this not also an attempt to impose their will by the exercise of force? Unlike other faiths, Quakerism has no priestly hierarchy to serve as gatekeepers and monitors of what is done in its name. This makes it uniquely vulnerable to exploitation as a platform for socio-political initiatives with only a tenuous connection to its foundation beliefs.
At the grassroots level of the Local Meeting, Quakers must ask themselves whether they want such acts to be done, encouraged or condoned in their name. There is a well-known legal term, qui tacet consentire videtur: someone who remains silent is presumed to consent.
Clive Ashwin
Comments
Are there some kinds of ‘daily business’ that are themselves ‘forcing’ us towards human and planetary destruction while we participate and allow them to continue? If so what emergency intervention is justified, if any? The application of ‘a well known legal term’ might not be sufficient. And if silence entails consent but the noise of those raising the alarm is being ignored, what kind of non-violent action, if any, would be acceptable to Clive?
“Quakers must ask themselves…”
By Simon C on 26th November 2021 - 3:26
Please login to add a comment
