Hello dear friends.
It never ceases to amaze me how UUs continue to find ways to make themselves irrelevant to more and more groups of people.
Let's talk about the new study-action issue that was passed at GA this year. Now before I go on my rant about it, let me be clear, I do think that how food is produced is an issue for concern.
That being said dear friends, if we're going to talk about ethical eating/food production, we need to remember that for a sizable portion of this country, food is being priced out of their reach. Especially fresh fruits and vegetables. And all these wonderful upper-class hippy ideas of co-ops and going local is just not possible for a number of people in this country.
Where is the discussion of this issue in the new CSAI? Did I miss it? Is there any talk of working with consumer groups that are working on this issue? Because this is not just about small farmers and farm workers, but about a whole system. And this is not just about poverty and hunger either. (it's not just the poor who are being priced out) This is also about geography and economic development, race and class, and so many other things.
Just a few thoughts. I'll probably have some more later.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
These issues did come up in the debate about the CSAI in Plenary, and also in conjunction with Van Jones' message from the Ware Lecture, where he challenged us to look at ways to solve environmental and social problems not by beginning with ourselves, but by reaching out to others ("Let's green the 'ghetto' first!").
What was passed at GA was not a final statement, but a guideline of what the chosen topic might encompass. The point of a "Study" issue, if it is to mean anything at all, is to study it. And that happens in congregations, by individual initiative. So, if you want these issues to be part of the eventual statement that the UUA makes as a result of the process, get to talking in *your* congregation and make it happen.
And I would offer that UUs have always been ahead of the pack in advocating social change. We do alienate people that way, but that seems to me to be different from being irrelevant.
Remember Gandhi's statement: first they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.
That very thing has happened with countless social issues which are now changed for the better.
If we just stopped with "eating green" and didn't go where you're suggesting, of course we would remain irrelevant. But that's not what will happen with this study issue.
We'll probably propose a resolution at a coming GA, vote on it, and put it out there. But we have countless UUs across the country already working on the issue at home, dealing with the practicalities of making good food easily available for all.
It's something that concerns me deeply too, Anon. Thanks to Jess for clarifying the purpose of a study issue.
I echo what the others have said...this is such an important issue, and if we focus solely on individual choices we are missing the point...that is only a first step--and i agree, for many a financially-out-of-reach step given our current food crisis. But if we look to the greater picture, work on changing food policies in the world, creating local food security in the ghettos, etc. then I cannot imagine how this issue will be irrelevant.
Anyway, my congregation has been looking at this issue for two years already...and though we started with awareness/individual choices, I would be very unhappy if we stopped there. We need a collective effort within our denomination-and beyond- to really make a difference. So I'm very happy this topic was chosen.
Post a Comment