JDV Pro, Article II: Serious debate ...

On that page, the Project Director, Dr Peter S Heslam notes in his introductory article, that in starting and continuing to completion any study that seeks to understand fully the economic forces that increasingly dominate the lives of most people,

[t]he intellectual and practical challenges are, however, enormous. After the collapse of communism in eastern Europe, Capitalism presents itself as the only viable way of ensuring liberty and prosperity for the greatest number of people. The statistics, however, reveal another side to the balance sheet. In many of those areas in which Capitalism has been allowed greatest freedom of expression, poverty, social dislocation and exclusion, family breakdown, crime, economic and financial instability, indebtedness and environmental damage pose grave threats to social well-being and human flourishing. The scale of these threats is so great that a complacent or naively optimistic attitude towards the working of the so-called 'invisible hand' and the 'trickle-down effect' now appears decidedly misplaced.

That statistics remain statistics alone (and such numbers are impenetrable to all but skilled statisticians) is unfortunate, and sadly indicative of what I think is the most common, modern approach to everyday life: an approach of pure individual concern, mottled by occasional thought for those to whom we are directly related. And it is believable that subscribing to an economic model that benefits those in a position to control it and leaves other less influential people and organisations out on a limb must have the results Heslam lists. John Bird writes in this week's Big Issue in response to an article in Ecologist entitled "Prison vs. Nutrition" that:

shouldn't it be the link between poverty and crime? Surely the great and uneven accumulations of wealth in one corner of society, with all their fine and healthy food, is more of a problem. Bad food is a by-product of a dulled and difficult life.

What Heslam hopes to write is "a theological and practical response to contemporary Capitalism". There has to be a response when from a global perspective, there is an ever-widening gap between rich and poor. We need to start taking an environmentally sustainable approach in all areas of our lives, because the areas where that approach is easy will account for only a slow-down in our unfair consumption. There have to be radical changes in our means of personal transportation, food preparation and means of entertainment. We must stop insulating ourselves and start analyse and publicise the statistics that conceal our poor motives and failed goals.

There are also reasons for why the West should lead from the front in these changes: those that would seek our broken ideals of material wealth and statistical advantage in the developing East should be lead by example. Imagine a China where even the rich 40pc alone owned two cars per family. The environmental impact would be too much to bear. There is no reason any more to believe that we were right in our process of development: the natural world has shown us the damage we've done. It is time to lead the world in sustainable development.

And, of course, when we have succeeded (and by God's grace we will), we must never slip back into the old ways. When we have turned the corner, and seen that the advancement of human health and the repression of suffering at the expense of all should be our goal, over any broken ideal of wealth or greatness, we must press on and develop in ways hitherto neglected: emotionally, spiritually, physically.