It’s interesting to me. We say we want to grow as a movement. We know we have a message that is salvific. That is, we believe that our core message – the worth and dignity of each and the interconnectedness of all – can save lives. Yet among the social justice issues that we’ve chosen as priorities for our advocacy, one that effects 49 million people in this country – food insecurity and hunger – is nowhere to be found.
I am personally and professionally grateful that the UUA Stands on the Side of Love when it comes to the concerns of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender persons. I wouldn’t want that to change. We are the only mainstream (more or less) denomination that is doing that work so boldly and so publicly.
But it does seem to me that if we truly want to grow, then we need to make sure that our actions and advocacy are relevant to a larger pool of people. Okay, yes, immigration is another great issue with which to be concerned. In fact, there’s not an issue that I’d want to remove from our list of priorities.
Still, these are tough economic times. As of 2008, according to the USDA, 49.1 million people in this country were living in food insecure households. This was up from 36.2 million just a year earlier, in 2007. And we can bet the number is even more staggering now. As of 2008, twenty-two and a half percent of all children were living in food insecure homes, and over a quarter of Black and Hispanic households experienced food insecurity.
I hope that one of the outcomes of our current Congregational Study/Action Issue, Ethical Eating: Food and Environmental Justice, will be that hunger gets onto our list of advocacy priorities. But I’m dreaming of something even bigger. I’m wondering why the UUA doesn’t have a program or an office dedicated to hunger-relief and other issues related to food and faith.
The Presbyterians do. The Episcopalians do. The United Methodists do. And then there is Mazon, a Jewish Response to Hunger.
So, why don’t we?
I know, I know. Someone’s going to say, “Hey, other groups are already doing that work. We want to do something that sets us apart.” To which I would reply, “Hey, you know what? You and I both know it's really not about marketing. It’s really about people - in this case, people, including children, who go to bed hungry at night and don't know from where their next meal will come." And, by the way, some of them are already Unitarian Universalists.
Friday, December 04, 2009
Monday, November 30, 2009
"Do-Nothing Farming"
Recently, someone at church gave me a copy of The One-Straw Revolution by Masanobu Fukuoka. I've only begun to read it, but what a treat so far!
Fukuoka lived in Japan and was the son of a farmer. As a young man, he experienced a sort of enlightenment moment that led him to understand that human intelligence was fallible and that nature actually knew how to grow plants better than humans did. That sounds rather obvious, perhaps, but it truly is an utterly unconventional way of thinking.
Fukuoka believed that agricultural techniques developed by humans only seemed necessary because humans had thrown the natural processes out of balance through previous interventions. As a result, the land and its plants had become, to a great extent, dependent on them. Most agricultural practices, he concluded, were really unneccessary.
"Human beings with their tampering do something wrong, leave the damage unrepaired, and when the adverse results accumulate, work with all their might to correct them. When the corrective actions appear to be successful, they come to view these measures as splendid accomplishments. People do this over and over again. It is as if a fool were to stomp on and break the tiles of his roof. Then when it starts to rain and the ceiling begins to rot away, he hastily climbs up to mend the damage, rejoicing in the end that he has accomplished a miraculous solution."
Fukuoka developed a farming system - and a philosophy - which he called "Natural Farming" or "Do-Nothing Farming," which, although he hasn't used the term in the book so far, reminds me of the Taoist principle of wu wei or "non-doing." After reading his chapter on "Do-Nothing Farming," I think finally understand better the 29th chapter of the Tao Te Ching, which I've read translated by Peter Merel as:
Those who wish to change the world
According to their desire
Cannot succeed.
The world is shaped by the Way.
It cannot be shaped by self.
Trying to change it, you damage it;
Trying to possess it, you lose it.
My favorite translator of the Tao Te Ching, Stephen Mitchell, has interpreted the same passage to read:
Do you want to improve the world?
I don't think it can be done.
The world is sacred.
It can't be improved.
If you tamper with it, you'll ruin it.
If you treat it like an object, you'll lose it.
His interpretation of the chapter continues:
The Master sees things as they are
without trying to control them.
She lets them go their own way.
And resides at the center of the circle.
Ironically, despite my interest in farming and the natural world, in the past, I've always understood this portion of the Tao as a reference to the world's social problems. I've usually interpreted it to mean, rather pessimistically, that we ought not bother trying to change those things that are troublesome about the world, such as the poverty, the racism, the human rights violations, and even climate change. As such, I've really wrestled with this passage.
But perhaps when Lao Tse said "the world," he really did mean "the earth" - "the natural world," rather than the society that humans have created, complete with all of its problems. What is climate change, after all, but the world thrown out of balance by human intervention? To not address it, Fukuoka would say, would be abandonment. He might recall the time when, as a young man, he was handed charge of his father's orchards and, eager to put his new way of thinking into action, he too suddenly allowed the trees to take care of themselves without first doing what he could to ease them back into a place of natural balance with their surroundings. As a result of his inaction, the trees withered and failed to produce fruit. There is an immense difference between "Do-Nothing Farming" and neglect, he learned, just as there is a difference between wu wei (non-doing), and not doing anything at all.
Fukuoka lived in Japan and was the son of a farmer. As a young man, he experienced a sort of enlightenment moment that led him to understand that human intelligence was fallible and that nature actually knew how to grow plants better than humans did. That sounds rather obvious, perhaps, but it truly is an utterly unconventional way of thinking.
Fukuoka believed that agricultural techniques developed by humans only seemed necessary because humans had thrown the natural processes out of balance through previous interventions. As a result, the land and its plants had become, to a great extent, dependent on them. Most agricultural practices, he concluded, were really unneccessary.
"Human beings with their tampering do something wrong, leave the damage unrepaired, and when the adverse results accumulate, work with all their might to correct them. When the corrective actions appear to be successful, they come to view these measures as splendid accomplishments. People do this over and over again. It is as if a fool were to stomp on and break the tiles of his roof. Then when it starts to rain and the ceiling begins to rot away, he hastily climbs up to mend the damage, rejoicing in the end that he has accomplished a miraculous solution."
Fukuoka developed a farming system - and a philosophy - which he called "Natural Farming" or "Do-Nothing Farming," which, although he hasn't used the term in the book so far, reminds me of the Taoist principle of wu wei or "non-doing." After reading his chapter on "Do-Nothing Farming," I think finally understand better the 29th chapter of the Tao Te Ching, which I've read translated by Peter Merel as:
Those who wish to change the world
According to their desire
Cannot succeed.
The world is shaped by the Way.
It cannot be shaped by self.
Trying to change it, you damage it;
Trying to possess it, you lose it.
My favorite translator of the Tao Te Ching, Stephen Mitchell, has interpreted the same passage to read:
Do you want to improve the world?
I don't think it can be done.
The world is sacred.
It can't be improved.
If you tamper with it, you'll ruin it.
If you treat it like an object, you'll lose it.
His interpretation of the chapter continues:
The Master sees things as they are
without trying to control them.
She lets them go their own way.
And resides at the center of the circle.
Ironically, despite my interest in farming and the natural world, in the past, I've always understood this portion of the Tao as a reference to the world's social problems. I've usually interpreted it to mean, rather pessimistically, that we ought not bother trying to change those things that are troublesome about the world, such as the poverty, the racism, the human rights violations, and even climate change. As such, I've really wrestled with this passage.
But perhaps when Lao Tse said "the world," he really did mean "the earth" - "the natural world," rather than the society that humans have created, complete with all of its problems. What is climate change, after all, but the world thrown out of balance by human intervention? To not address it, Fukuoka would say, would be abandonment. He might recall the time when, as a young man, he was handed charge of his father's orchards and, eager to put his new way of thinking into action, he too suddenly allowed the trees to take care of themselves without first doing what he could to ease them back into a place of natural balance with their surroundings. As a result of his inaction, the trees withered and failed to produce fruit. There is an immense difference between "Do-Nothing Farming" and neglect, he learned, just as there is a difference between wu wei (non-doing), and not doing anything at all.
Saturday, November 28, 2009
The Great Post-Thanksgiving Clean-Out
I'm racing like a mad woman to eat all of the vegetables that came in the waxed-box from the Community Farm where we have our CSA share. The next (and final for the season) pick-up will be December 5th, and we still have quite an inventory from the last pick-up, including...carrots, radishes, turnips, rutabega, collards, bokchoy, leeks, brussel sprouts, lettuce, broccoli, cauliflower, napa cabbage, and mixed greens. Oh, and the potatoes in the basement and the onions, shallots, sweet potatoes and squash in the attic. How am I going to pull this off?
Sunday, January 18, 2009
Cook for America
I just read a great article by Tom Philpott filled with suggestions for how we might use some of the stimulus package dollars to fix some of our food-related problems. My favorite was the idea of a "Teach for America" style program, which would put new culinary school graduates to work in public school cafeterias. As the author points out, they may have trouble getting jobs in high-end restaurants in this economy anyway. Might as well put those skills - and that passion - to use preparing delicious and nutritious meals for students. Imagine...school lunches made from scratch...maybe even using local and seasonal ingredients. Quite a step up from chicken nuggets and Friday's ubiquitous cheese pizza. You can read the article here.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
