Radio Netherlands: Is the World Cup too expensive for Africa?

"The investments were budgeted at a few million. The real cost will be a thousandfold; 3 to 5 billion. And that in a country where a large part of the population still lives in deep poverty."



(Apologies for the lousy embedded video obtained from RNW's site.)

See this related report from Democracy Now! (an interview made prior to the start of the matches) - Raj Patel on How South Africa Has Cracked Down on the Poor and the Shack Dwellers’ Movement

Embracing the Poor

In light of the horrendous earthquake in Haiti, I am posting all of Simon Kershaw's essay - written from India, another country ravaged by poverty - appearing today in Thinking Anglicans.

As I sit typing this I can look out of the window over the city of Pune in the state of Maharashtra in India, about 100 miles south-east of Mumbai. The view comprises high-rise tower blocks, green lawns and trees, concrete and glass. It could be anywhere in the developed world (though the 30 C temperature and sun virtually overhead in a cloudless sky at noon confirm that it is not England!). But I know that just across the road, and out of sight from here, are the shacks, corrugated steel sheds, and tents that everywhere are intermingled with the lives and buildings of richer Indians and their western business partners. Pune today is a rapidly-growing city, the eighth largest in India, with half a dozen universities and growing hi-tech industrial, IT and commercial sectors.

It was in a very much smaller Pune, then spelt Poona, that in 1927 the Christa Seva Sangha made its first real home. Founded in 1922 by five Indians and an Englishman this ashram or religious community — whose name means the Community of the Servants of Christ — intended to form a life of common service and equal fellowship for Indians and Europeans. The Englishman was Jack Winslow and the community soon attracted some attention in both India and England, which enabled it to move to Poona after a few years. Winslow’s account of the Society can be read online. Originally dedicated to St Barnabas, the Society soon added St Francis as joint patron, a dedication that became more important as it adopted a formal rule and vows.

In 1927 the community was joined by a number of new recruits, one of whom was a young priest called Algy Robertson, and by 1930 there were around 30 members. Robertson was convinced that the Sangha should be a Franciscan community, but after a few years his health broke and he returned to England. Still a member of the Sangha, he became vicar of St Ives, a dozen miles north-west of Cambridge, and the vicarage at St Ives became home to several Brothers of the community as well as a refuge for visitors from Poona. There are still those in St Ives (where I have lived and worshipped for twenty years or so) who can recall the Brothers living in the vicarage and cycling around the town and to nearby villlages. In 1936, however, Robertson’s group joined with another Franciscan community in England to form the Society of St Francis, with a rule largely written by Robertson and based on the principles of the Sangha in Poona. In 1937 Robertson resigned from St Ives to move to the new community at Hilfield, near Cerne Abbas in Dorset, where he was based for the rest of his life.

The Franciscan ideal of embracing poverty and the service of the poor is one that comes swiftly to mind in the streets of modern Pune, just as it must have done in the very different Poona of the 1920s and 30s, to Francis in the thirteenth century, and just as it must have done to an itinerant preacher from Nazareth two thousand years ago. The poor are still with us, and the priority of working for the alleviation of hunger, homelessness, disease and injustice is as necessary now as it was then.

THE MYTH OF GAY AFFLUENCE

Thanks to Toujoursdan for highlighting findings in a report (PDF) about LGBT poverty from the Williams Institute of the UCLA Law School:

After adjusting for a range of family characteristics that help explain poverty, gay and lesbian couple families are significantly more likely to be poor than are heterosexual married couple families.

+ Notably, lesbian couples and their families are much more likely to be poor than heterosexual couples and their families.

+ Children in gay and lesbian couple households have poverty rates twice those of children in heterosexual married couple households.

+ Within the LGB population, several groups are much more likely to be poor than others. African American people in same-sex couples and same-sex couples who live in rural areas are much more likely to be poor than white or urban same-sex couples.

+ While a small percentage of all families receive government cash supports intended for poor and low-income families, we find that gay and lesbian individuals and couples are more likely to receive these supports than are heterosexuals.

Thanks also to Counterlight

I've always felt that "affluent gays" was a big canard, up there with "rich Jews." The rich Palm Springs circuit party crowd is a very visible, but tiny minority of the LGBT population. Most well paid LGBT professionals are in medicine and technology. High tech companies are usually very gay friendly because that's where a lot of their talent comes from. Most other gay men, especially the young, are in famously low wage jobs provided by retail, hospitality, restaurants, and arts and entertainment. And this has always been true.

Lesbians face a double whammy of the wage discrimination against women built into the economy, and homophobic prejudice.

Those who face the worst employment discrimination are transexuals. So many once turned to prostitution because there was no other work. Some businesses and professions are beginning to open up very slowly and reluctantly, but it is still incredibly difficult for them.

Proponents and opponents of Vermont's gay marriage bill have used the economy in their arguments. The Lake Champlain Regional Chamber of Commerce and the Vermont Businesses for Social Responsibility have both supported its passage. Governor Jim Douglas and opponents of the bill have scolded Vermont lawmakers for even considering it (read: wasting precious time and money). Dissing LBGTs as non-persons without proper rights - as Douglas has done with a terrific force - and saying the economy should receive priority just doesn't cut it. Loving and caring Vermont LBGT families are having just as hard a time surviving in Vermont as their hetero counterparts. Also, as toujoursdan notes in a comment over at Counterlight, the religious right have used the myth of gay affluence to argue that LGBTs don't need civil rights protections or marriage equality. The opponents - especially the anti-government folks - may attempt to use the UCLA report as ammo against the bill, that Vermont doesn't need that added burden or responsibility to help "them." With blinders on, the opponents fail to realise that, as the report points out, they would be continuing systemic homophobia and class discrimination in our cities and towns, and it's not a good thing to live in state that disregards fundamental human rights of Vermonters to such basic needs as healthcare, housing, education, social security and dignified work.

Very relatedly, connecting equal marriage rights to struggles of all Vermont families, a new advertisement from Vermont Freedom to Marry:



Cross-posted at Antemedius.

AMERICAN SUMMER 2008

UNEASY TENSIONS IN THE SUMMER OF '08:

FOOD LINES FOR FEEDING A FAMILY

WORK

VACATION

CALENDAR REMINDER: WHAT ONE CAN DO

The Most Rev'd Katharine Jefferts Schori, the presiding bishop of the Episcopal Church, will speak at a public forum on global poverty and the United Nations Millenium Development Goals on Friday, 2 November at 3:30 p.m. in UVM's Ira Allen Chapel. There's still time to obtain free tickets to this event.

Reserve your seats by calling the Cathedral Church of St Paul, 802-864-0471, to pick up at the event. Tickets are also available at the Hopkins Bookstore, 2 Cherry Street; Peace and Justice Store on Church Street; UVM Student Center; and the St Michael's Student Center.

Bishop Jefferts Schori will also preach and preside at the Episcopal Diocese of Vermont Convention Eucharist at St Paul's Cathdral, 2 Cherry Street, on Saturday morning, 3 November, at 8:30.

EPISCOPAL PRESIDING BISHOP COMING TO BURLINGTON IN NOVEMBER; WILL HOLD PUBLIC FORUM ON GLOBAL POVERTY & UN MDGS

Queer protest against Israeli Independence Day

From Orthodox Anarchist (an interesting blog I've discovered via Anglican Resistance) - A group of queer activists painted pink the memorial canon in Jersualem’s “Davidka” square, and added the graffiti “Lesbians against arms” (which in Hebrew also translates as “Lesbians against dicks”). This act is meant as a protest against the occupation of Palestine and social gaps in Israel.

Snip, cut, toss....

After listening to this interview on Fresh Air , you'll want to cut up your credit cards and toss them into the trash bin.

Sucke(red)?

This is a follow-up on a post I made about U2's Bono a few days ago. As I'm wont to do, occasionally I check my bookmarked sites. Today, while looking at the webpages of my former parish in London, St James's/Piccadilly, I cheked out a link to Pressureworks, and found this this about Product (RED). I'm sure you've seen the adverts for this trendy fashion line. The NYT ran a series of full page ads of celebrities promoting the cause a few months back. (I've got a photo of ever-so-sexy US speed skater Apolo Anton Ohno on my fridge.) But did you know.... if you

[s]imply buy a product from the RED range – a T-shirt, or a pair of shoes – [...] a percentage of the profit will go to The Global Fund, established in 2002 to channel money from various sources to AIDS programmes. Except we can’t know exactly what percentage, because the companies involved are so busy marketing themselves as saviours of the world that they’ve forgotten to give us the figure (the exceptions being Gap: 50%, from one line of products, and Amex: 1%). [...]

RED is not radically different from any of the other private sector initiatives that surround us. These days a company only has to stick an ‘ethical’ sticker on one of their products to be allowed to continue to make vast profits at the expense of the poor.

Corporations spend millions promoting the tiniest gesture, not because they care, but because it’s good for business and it keeps the regulators off their backs. So Caterpillar can continue to supply the Israeli army with bulldozers to carry out violations of international law, as long as they donate a few thousand to an educational project.

And where do these products come from?

Converse, one of the RED partners, has been owned by Nike since 2004. The latest research from Labour Behind the Label shows that although Nike have improved since the peak of their child labour infamy, up to one half of Nike’s factories currently pay wages below the legal minimum and most have been found to expect a working week in excess of 60 hours. It also shows that Nike has stopped placing orders with several factories in which trade unions had been established.

As a mobile phone company, Motorola depends on coltan, a rare mineral used to make phones. Much of it is mined by militia in the Democratic Republic of Congo, to fund the prolonged civil war that has claimed millions of lives. Of course, Motorola are keen to dissociate themselves from this, stating that they 'regularly require all of our suppliers to verify in writing that materials sold to Motorola do not contain tantalum derived from illegally mined Congolese coltan.'

The problem is, it’s extremely difficult to know exactly where this stuff has come from: like Chinese whispers, the longer the supply chain the more sketchy the details become. And business is business – maximising profits means using the cheapest materials available.

The fundamental problem -

Like the roots of war, the roots of disease are in poverty. The reason HIV/AIDS is such a massive problem in Africa is because people are poor. RED has at least got this bit right.

But, being the private sector, it fails to ask why they are poor. Or rather, it knows very well why they are poor, but would rather not draw attention to it thank you very much.

When an unregulated free market is allowed to rule the world’s economy, corporations can – and need to – keep the global South in poverty, and no amount of special T-shirts will change that.

Make Poverty History (and profit from it, too)

CHICAGO TRIBUNE: Bono, who preaches charity, profits from buyouts, tax breaks -- ``U2 were never dumb in business,'' Bono says in Bono on Bono. ``We don't sit around thinking about world peace all day.''

What a business it is. Bono's empire encompasses real estate, private-equity investments, a hotel, a clothing line and a chain of restaurants. Along with fellow band members, he also owns a stake in 15 companies and trusts, including concert-booking agencies, record production firms and trusts that are mostly registered in Ireland. U2 was one of the first successful bands in the world to have obtained all rights to its own music.

When Charity Shouldn’t Begin at Home

The article below by Robert Reich recalls 'Cadillac liberal' Leonard Bernstein's hors d'oeuvres party back in the 1970's for Manhattan socialites in his UWS swankienda to "benefit" the Black Panthers.

Even now, in 2006, Democratic and Progressive party members in our town *cough* think left, but *cough* *cough* live right. (Check out the contributor/guest list at the next Flynn Center benefit.)

Reich gives some advice to the Canapé Consumerist Culture in our midst.

Robert B. Reich/Common Dreams - 12/20/06 - Not long ago, New York City’s Lincoln Center had a gala dinner supported by the charitable contributions of the leaders of the hedge fund industry, some of whom will be receiving billion-dollar bonuses in the next few weeks. I may be missing something here, but this doesn’t strike me as charity. I mean, poor New Yorkers don’t often attend concerts at the Lincoln Center.

It turns out, in fact, that only an estimated 10 percent of all charitable deductions this year will be directed at the poor.

So here’s a modest holiday proposal: At a time in our nation’s history when the number of needy continue to rise, when government doesn’t have the money to do what’s necessary, and when America’s very rich are richer than ever, we should revise the tax code and limit the charitable deduction to real charities.