Liberation theology on Capitalism

[Rick336]

Originally Posted by kara speltz

How interesting that you bring up HRC at this moment in time, as we learn that the CEOs of so many of our supposedly LGBTQ support groups are making well over $250,000/year. See that's the problem with capitalism. People see nothing wrong in this outrageous salaries.

Kara, I think you are a person of great compassion for the needs of the less fortunate in the world. I think that is a wonderful value to have. But it sounds like the underlying message here is that the leaders of some of our LGBT support groups don't deserve their salaries. I don't know how much they should make for the work they do, but I feel really uncomfortable throwing stones at those who work for our equality.

I think Joe Solmonese is a great leader and does a wonderful job as head of the Human Rights Campaign. Until he proves otherwise, he's got my support.

Rick

[kara speltz]

Originally Posted by Rick336

Kara, I think you are a person of great compassion for the needs of the less fortunate in the world. I think that is a wonderful value to have. But it sounds like the underlying message here is that the leaders of some of our LGBT support groups don't deserve their salaries. I don't know how much they should make for the work they do, but I feel really uncomfortable throwing stones at those who work for our equality.

I think Joe Solmonese is a great leader and does a wonderful job as head of the Human Rights Campaign. Until he proves otherwise, he's got my support.

Rick

Oh don't get me started on HRC Rick. They totally screwed up last year when they abandoned the transgenders and I will NEVER support them again. They promised not to do that and then when push came to shove, they did. It was the T's who started our revolution at Stonewall and they are always the first to get put aside, when it comes to compromising.

And as for those salaries, no one, needs $400,000 a year. I wouldn't give them a dime.

kara

[Rick336]

Originally Posted by kara speltz

Oh don't get me started on HRC Rick. They totally screwed up last year when they abandoned the transgenders and I will NEVER support them again. They promised not to do that and then when push came to shove, they did. It was the T's who started our revolution at Stonewall and they are always the first to get put aside, when it comes to compromising.

And as for those salaries, no one, needs $400,000 a year. I wouldn't give them a dime.

kara

It wasn't just the T's who started the revolution at Stonewall. It was also gay men, lesbian women, and bisexuals. They were all there that night 40 years ago.

But I do agree with you that transgendered people should have been included in the Employment Non-Discrimination Act even though 65% of the community surveyed thought it was okay as it was.

Still, HRC has been a leader for positive change for LGBT equality and for that reason I will continue to donate to the organization.

Rick

[RedneckDyke]

yeesh this thread has gotten a little heated. how bout them tar heels?

[andrewlittle]

I wrote this 3 years ago at the end of an essay on globalization and theology. I feel like it fits here:

The mainline church in the “First World” is in crisis and is trying desperately to re-imagine and re-invent itself to be restored to its former glory - using the same theologies and the same techniques and the same blurred vision from the same dominant cultural precepts that created the problem. Subjugated peoples the world over are trying to re-emerge and resurrect themselves from dehumanization, by faithfully, imaginatively and courageously reclaiming and contextualizing the biblical witness into a new praxis, absent the same patterns that have bound the “First World” church in chains. Is resurrection possible? Our faith demands it - and, it depends on it. The dialogue between these two extremes is waiting - waiting for the opportunity to bring freedom to God’s people. The “2/3 World” theologians are prepared and seated at the table - ready to teach and to learn. The context is established. Global vision is here. Dialogue, however, takes two participants - both willing to listen with ears eagerly pricked to learn - both willing to speak from the place of God’s abundant love. As yet, the second chair is empty – we’re too proud to hear criticism.

[Eugene]

How interesting that you bring up HRC at this moment in time, as we learn that the CEOs of so many of our supposedly LGBTQ support groups are making well over $250,000/year. See that's the problem with capitalism. People see nothing wrong in this outrageous salaries.

I don't consider $250,000.00/year an outrageous salary for a CEO. If you want the best people, you must compensate them adequately.

[Eugene]

Oh don't get me started on HRC Rick. They totally screwed up last year when they abandoned the transgenders and I will NEVER support them again.

Frankly, I was glad that HRC had the wisdom to try achieving what they could when they could. That's why I send them money.

And as for those salaries, no one, needs $400,000 a year. I wouldn't give them a dime.

Well, I'm sure all the populist furor over salaries and bonuses and so forth will dissipate over time. At least I hope so. I'm already as sick to death of it as I was sick to death of all the patriotic furor at the start of the Iraq war. I don't need people telling me how much money I CAN make any more than I need people telling me how critical of government I CAN be. It's two sides of the same coin, and that coin doesn't say "Liberty" across the face.

[Rick336]

Originally Posted by Eugene

Well, I'm sure all the populist furor over salaries and bonuses and so forth will dissipate over time. At least I hope so. I'm already as sick to death of it as I was sick to death of all the patriotic furor at the start of the Iraq war. I don't need people telling me how much money I CAN make any more than I need people telling me how critical of government I CAN be. It's two sides of the same coin, and that coin doesn't say "Liberty" across the face.

I agree. However, accepting millions in bonuses from a company when taxpayer money is used to bail out that very same company is neither smart nor ethical. Seriously, could these guys have not anticipated the outrage of doing that? Are they that out of touch with the American public?

Remember the campaign slogan "Country First?"

Yeah, right.

Rick

[Eugene]

Speaking of HRC, someone from there called me tonight to inform me that Iowa's supreme court has legalized gay marriage there. I didn't know, though I listen to NPR news regularly. Somehow I missed that bit of news.

And YES -- I am sending HRC more money.

Gay marriage isn't a big issue with me, but I figure that if this kind of progress is being made regarding marriage equality, equal job security (which is the most important gay rights issue to me) isn't far behind.

[Rick336]

Originally Posted by Rick336

Still, HRC has been a leader for positive change for LGBT equality and for that reason I will continue to donate to the organization.

Rick

I'm starting to have second thoughts about this. Even though I do respect HRC for the work it has done in the past, supporting a non-inclusive version of the Employment Non-Discrimination Act that excluded transgendered people was not cool. I'm sure there were many transgendered people hurt by their decision.

Rick

[Eugene]

Even though I do respect HRC for the work it has done in the past, supporting a non-inclusive version of the Employment Non-Discrimination Act that excluded transgendered people was not cool. I'm sure there were many transgendered people hurt by their decision.

One sure way to get no change at all is to insult those "privileged heterosexual" allies in Congress and across America who have come so far in their thinking but not as far as you'd like. You can throw their liberality back in their faces and snort at incremental change.

I am not opposed to equal employment rights for anyone. However, if Congress has enough members willing to brave their constituencies and pass laws to protect my job security, I expect HRC to be supportive. I DO NOT expect them to become ideological and stand in the way of incremental progress. And so I fully supported HRC's position. Even more so when they maintained it despite all the politically correct bitching within the LGBT community.

Somebody I don't know invented the LGBT acronym and decided it was a good idea to lobby for equal rights on a collective basis. That's all fine and good until equal rights are offered on a less-than-collective basis. You take what you can get when you can get it, and you then work for more from a stronger position. Any other approach is inefficient, and I wouldn't support it financially.

[scott snedeker]

Originally Posted by Eugene

One sure way to get no change at all is to insult those "privileged heterosexual" allies in Congress and across America who have come so far in their thinking but not as far as you'd like. You can throw their liberality back in their faces and snort at incremental change.

I am not opposed to equal employment rights for anyone. However, if Congress has enough members willing to brave their constituencies and pass laws to protect my job security, I expect HRC to be supportive. I DO NOT expect them to become ideological and stand in the way of incremental progress. And so I fully supported HRC's position. Even more so when they maintained it despite all the politically correct bitching within the LGBT community.

Somebody I don't know invented the LGBT acronym and decided it was a good idea to lobby for equal rights on a collective basis. That's all fine and good until equal rights are offered on a less-than-collective basis. You take what you can get when you can get it, and you then work for more from a stronger position. Any other approach is inefficient, and I wouldn't support it financially.

I can definitely see this point and have immense gratitude for what HRC has accomplished. I think we are talking about "lifeboat ethics" in a sense. The lifeboat representing protective legislation for gays and lesbians. try to rescue too many and the lifeboat sinks. Sacrifice a few and the lifeboat floats.

From the perspective of a survivor in the lifeboat the decision can be defended. From the perspective of the trans person not included obviously would be justified in feeling other than gratitude. That doesn't mean that trans folk won't be included in the future, however being classified as dispensable once again would certainly make me feel betrayed.

"Slum thinking" or accepting second class status and treatment by others is a psychological injury with many long term consequences and many creative compensatory strategies. My "Martyr Mind" did this very well (And probably always will to the extent that I let it.) I find that if there is a reward for my sacrifice I can handle it better and not get depressed and overwhelmed.

I honestly do not think that HRC loathes trans folk. In the future, I believe equality for trans folk will become the focus of the human rights campaign.

[Zerbie]

The distinction between a social movement and a political lobbying group.

HRC grew out of a social movement, but it is not one in itself. It's a sprawling, DC based, political lobbying organization. AS a lobbying organization, AS a political organization, they did the correct thing by lobbying for what was projected as attainable. Had they been a social movement, that gesture would have turned the tide on them, as that was a political strategy, and one that makes sense for a political group.

It took me a while to figure out why HRC's move seemed BOTH right AND wrong to me. Once I put my finger on the distinction between justice as a social movement and on the other hand, an issue-focused political lobby, I had my answer. HRC did the correct thing for a political organization. It is not, however, the correct thing for a social justice movement to do. That was one of a set of factors occurring around the same time which led me to my correct niche. I am not even remotely at home with political strategy. Social justice is where I belong. Finally, I had a focus for my energies, and for my financial donations. Social movements, not lobby organizations like HRC, are getting my pennies at the moment.

For those who were too put off by HRC's move trying to pass the ENDA, I suggest you belong in the broader field of justice as a social (as distinct from merely political) movement. For you, your donations more rightly should go to organizations that support the vision of justice you uphold.

In my opinion, real socio-political change takes both types of work. We require a grassroots social movement to keep the issues visible and to provide impetus for elected officials to act in our interests. I think we also need the political/lobbying groups to reach for shores more immediately attainable, while those of us unsatisfied by partial accomplishments can remain steering the boat towards more long-term goals from the social end of the spectrum.

[kara speltz]

Originally Posted by Zerbie

The distinction between a social movement and a political lobbying group.

HRC grew out of a social movement, but it is not one in itself. It's a sprawling, DC based, political lobbying organization. AS a lobbying organization, AS a political organization, they did the correct thing by lobbying for what was projected as attainable. Had they been a social movement, that gesture would have turned the tide on them, as that was a political strategy, and one that makes sense for a political group.

It took me a while to figure out why HRC's move seemed BOTH right AND wrong to me. Once I put my finger on the distinction between justice as a social movement and on the other hand, an issue-focused political lobby, I had my answer. HRC did the correct thing for a political organization. It is not, however, the correct thing for a social justice movement to do. .

Dear Zerbie: I think you've made a very accurate observation in noting the difference between social movements and political lobbying. And like you, I'm involved with the struggle for justice.

Your analysis also helps with the issue of outrageous salaries that turned me off. The entire Soulforce staff is paid less than one of the CEOs of these political organizations.

Thanks for your clarity. I do consider myself political, and am clearly more of a socialist than a capitalist. But I long ago chose to only support social justice movements. Kara

[scott snedeker]

Originally Posted by Zerbie

The distinction between a social movement and a political lobbying group.

HRC grew out of a social movement, but it is not one in itself. It's a sprawling, DC based, political lobbying organization. AS a lobbying organization, AS a political organization, they did the correct thing by lobbying for what was projected as attainable. Had they been a social movement, that gesture would have turned the tide on them, as that was a political strategy, and one that makes sense for a political group.

It took me a while to figure out why HRC's move seemed BOTH right AND wrong to me. Once I put my finger on the distinction between justice as a social movement and on the other hand, an issue-focused political lobby, I had my answer. HRC did the correct thing for a political organization. It is not, however, the correct thing for a social justice movement to do. That was one of a set of factors occurring around the same time which led me to my correct niche. I am not even remotely at home with political strategy. Social justice is where I belong. Finally, I had a focus for my energies, and for my financial donations. Social movements, not lobby organizations like HRC, are getting my pennies at the moment.

For those who were too put off by HRC's move trying to pass the ENDA, I suggest you belong in the broader field of justice as a social (as distinct from merely political) movement. For you, your donations more rightly should go to organizations that support the vision of justice you uphold.

In my opinion, real socio-political change takes both types of work. We require a grassroots social movement to keep the issues visible and to provide impetus for elected officials to act in our interests. I think we also need the political/lobbying groups to reach for shores more immediately attainable, while those of us unsatisfied by partial accomplishments can remain steering the boat towards more long-term goals from the social end of the spectrum.

Thanks for the information! Wow! I am impressed! I feel that I need to do more reading Any suggestion?

[Daniel]

Excellent observations Zerbie! All too often, we only see the world in which is are living in, when in fact, there are many worlds, in this case, the political and the social justice worlds. I guess the whole point is that they overlap in some degree.

[Zerbie]

Originally Posted by scott snedeker

Thanks for the information! Wow! I am impressed! I feel that I need to do more reading Any suggestion?

Thanks.
Not sure what you feel the need to read about. Could you clarify?

[Zerbie]

Originally Posted by Daniel

Excellent observations Zerbie! All too often, we only see the world in which is are living in, when in fact, there are many worlds, in this case, the political and the social justice worlds. I guess the whole point is that they overlap in some degree.

They sure do!

The distinction between the two was not clear to me until I was caught between a political campaign and a social movement, personally, not too long ago. The conflict was tearing me apart and I almost lost it.

It was only in hindsight that I saw a distinction was to be made. All I saw previously was the overlap, and I was tending to mentally translate political organizations into social justice movements. They (political groups) REALLY are their own animal. Even if we tend to view them through the lens of a movement.

The lobbying groups will speak to us in the language of the social movement that spurred them into existence, which leads to a further perception in our minds that they are social justice movements in themselves. They are more like highly-specialized offshoots.

[Rick336]

Originally Posted by Zerbie

The distinction between a social movement and a political lobbying group.

HRC grew out of a social movement, but it is not one in itself. It's a sprawling, DC based, political lobbying organization. AS a lobbying organization, AS a political organization, they did the correct thing by lobbying for what was projected as attainable. Had they been a social movement, that gesture would have turned the tide on them, as that was a political strategy, and one that makes sense for a political group.

It took me a while to figure out why HRC's move seemed BOTH right AND wrong to me. Once I put my finger on the distinction between justice as a social movement and on the other hand, an issue-focused political lobby, I had my answer. HRC did the correct thing for a political organization. It is not, however, the correct thing for a social justice movement to do. That was one of a set of factors occurring around the same time which led me to my correct niche. I am not even remotely at home with political strategy. Social justice is where I belong. Finally, I had a focus for my energies, and for my financial donations. Social movements, not lobby organizations like HRC, are getting my pennies at the moment.

For those who were too put off by HRC's move trying to pass the ENDA, I suggest you belong in the broader field of justice as a social (as distinct from merely political) movement. For you, your donations more rightly should go to organizations that support the vision of justice you uphold.

In my opinion, real socio-political change takes both types of work. We require a grassroots social movement to keep the issues visible and to provide impetus for elected officials to act in our interests. I think we also need the political/lobbying groups to reach for shores more immediately attainable, while those of us unsatisfied by partial accomplishments can remain steering the boat towards more long-term goals from the social end of the spectrum.

Zerbie. I guess that means Soulforce is more of a social movement organization than a political organization. And since HRC is more of a political organization, they don't organize protests marches and civil disobedience events.

Thanks. This all makes more sense to me now.


Rick

[DiarePrabeVal]

GA_googleFillSlot200x200Blockwithinfirstpost;If I remember rightly. today is Liberation day in Nanjing.
I was very surprised to learn, when I lived in China, that Liberation Day celebrates liberation from the Nationalists, not the Japanese....
For those in Nanjing.
Please enjoy your sense of liberation today