Social Justice Versus Charity

Our Raindrop is usually a place where SixSeeds contributors share ideas about service projects, great family movies, or the latest gadgets for kids.  (Or, how to escape the latest gadgets-for-kids craze!)  Sometimes, conversation catches fire over something seemingly non-controversial.  In case you missed the conversation this weekend, here's the latest controversy surrounding, of all things, charitable donations of toothpaste.

Timothy Dalrymple said…

Kids Advocating for Social Justice

I thought you'd enjoy this piece from Scot McKnight's blog, in which his daughter, a school teacher, describes a "service learning" project on behalf of Haiti.  Nothing that will be a new concept to this crowd, but a good example nonetheless:

                    We served together—Muslims, Christians, Jews, and the
                    non-religious.  It was one of the most defining
                    moments of my career as a teacher.  As Christians, we
                    have opportunities through our churches to serve
                    weekly.  Prior to the event, some of my students and
                    their families had never before had an opportunity to
                    serve or participate in a project that benefits others
                    in such an important way.  I am still receiving
                    letters and emails, and teachers want to tell me about
                    what the experience meant to them.

Read it all here.

Nancy French said…

Re: Kids Advocating "Social Justice"

Thanks for sharing, Tim --  

From the title "Teaching Children about Justice," I figured it might be a nice field trip to the Supreme Court or to a local courthouse.  But -- surprise! -- the "justice" the teacher was talking about was giving Haitians toothpaste and other items. 

Remember when that was called "charity," or "obeying God," or "taking care of the least of these?"

Timothy Dalrymple said…

Re: Kids Advocating "Social Justice"

That did occur to me.  And the post was entitled "Young Children Advocate for Social Justice."  I kept waiting to hear that they were sending letters to their congressmen calling for wealth redistribution or something.

But I forgave the title by the end. 

Steve Haas said…

Re: Kids Advocating "Social Justice"

If we have it and others don't because of our neglect in not including them...that is an easy way to describe "justice." This week in a conversation with a Church leader we talked about the fact that the USA wiped out the dreaded malaria in our own country but that the effort lost steam past our own shoreline. With 3000 deaths a day due to this mossy bite, and the fact that it was easily preventable with a $6 bed net, we called that...injustice.

Nancy French said…

Re: Kids Advocating "Social Justice"

Dear Steve,

I hate to disagree with someone who's seen so much poverty in the world, but let me explain why I disagree with the terms, with an example from my own family.

My mom and dad come from the Tennessee hills.  Dad's family was a coal mining one, and they had little money. He learned his ABC's in his twenties.  He'd pretend to go home to eat during school, because they couldn't afford to pay for lunch.  He'd sit out under a tree and watch the others eat from afar, then come back rubbing his belly like he'd eaten.

Was it "unjust?"  Did someone owe something to my dad and his siblings?  Or was his condition just the natural circumstance of certain behaviors and lifestyles?

Well, Dad didn't consider it "unjust," but he did change his life.  (He got off the mountain by joining the Marines, dropping out of high school six times, and working at the Coca Cola factory in Chattanooga.  When
he was in his fifties, after getting his GED, he graduated from college!

But others on the mountain believed they were owed more, when the government started saying so.  Instead of working, many people became "disabled," and had nice double wide trailers, with huge (expensive) tractors sitting outside their hand built decks. But work?  No way.  

I'm thankful Daddy had the blessing of living in America, where there is a Coca-Cola factory.  (Or at least there used to be things called factories here.) And I'm thankful he didn't think people owed him anything.

Now that he's worked his entire life to make a life for himself, is it
unjust that there are people who don't have toothbrushes?  Does he "owe" people toothpaste?  Or, if he gave toothpaste (which he does -- he's very charitable with his tithe) is it an act of mercy?

I think painting the circumstance as a matter of justice -- especially some kids packing toothpaste to other kids -- is the wrong message to send. Both to the packers and the recipients.

And it's a much better story to get things you don't deserve than to finally get what's coming to ya.

Does that make sense?

Steve Haas said…

Re: Kids Advocating "Social Justice"

All great points. Just in from a 2-0 soccer scrimmage prior to the 13 and under state cup here in the land of strong coffee...make that ubiquitous strong coffee and rain...make that ubiquitous rain as well.

My comment was meant to simplify which I still stand by but as in all these things the "details" are what get the debates. I really loved reading the story of your Dad - a guy I not only admire but would love to meet one day.

Talk to anyone in our organization and they will be the first to tell you the disaster of simple hand-outs from the implosion of local economies, creation of various dependencies, prolonging the "god-myth" of the rich westerners ... I could go on but sense these and other strong reasons are well known. There is no doubt that appropriate development is built on recipient priority and energy, ownership and sacrifices. We see it every day and is a big reason why our staff have been successful in our nearly 100 countries.

At the same time, these values cannot so clearly be delineated. Using the malaria example - plenty of nets globally available, but the delivery systems are either inadequate or deemed too expensive by international governments or civil authorities. The fact that we can afford these resources, or don't need them because we wiped the disease out and have the ability to assist others in their plight becomes a situation in the category of justice.

Those of us who live in this great land of plenty (and here I am speaking to those who walk under a Biblical mandate to leverage that which we have been blessed with for the care of the vulnerable or have even a shady notion of the golden rule) have a responsibility to the extent we are made aware, to assist others in their plight. I am not one of those that advocates self denigration for those things you and I are not aware of, but appropriate engagement for those things that we are aware of.

In an address I made recently, as I began to spell this out Biblically, I made the quick caveat that I wasn't a Marxist, voted for Reagan, I believed in "less" government, wasn't a "card-carrying" anything! What was astonishing to me and those I was speaking to was the amount of scripture that underlined the fact that true justice was leveling the playing field. How we do it is everything and simply having the mandate that we are to disadvantage ourselves for the advantage of others, isn't license for us to run out and do this poorly - or haphazardly (although in some cases that is better than doing nothing at all...just ask the Haitians three days into the quake who had nothing to eat.) We have to be cognizant that all those lessons your father learned are in play and find constructive ways to assist and strengthen rather than avoid or often as badly - take or rob the interest in self-reliance and ingenuity from the recipient of our charity.

For the record I am a fan of collecting toiletries and personal items of that nature as long as the distribution of these items can be done in a way that restores self-respect, encourages self-reliance, builds community and personal/corporate resourcefulness. Pertinent to our conversation, WVUnited States was just slammed earlier in the year by various bloggers who picked up on our report that we were in charge of the distribution of the Super Bowl loser's gear (t-shirts, sweats, hats) to various nations that we work in... outside the US (hence the reason you won't see Pittsburgh champion gear in TN). It was a cyberspace dust-up that for all the fingerpointing and shaming toward us, rarely asked how the goods were distributed. Everyone seemed to agree that not putting the goods on a trash pile was a good idea and that media attention for good causes was worthy of some merit. It was the free stuff being given away that seemed to tilt some of the respondents toward disparaging our brand due to our reception of the gear. Truth is that the gear was turned over to indigenous community developers who are working to restore balance and viability in communities all over the world. In the instance I witnessed, Zambian HIV home-based Caregivers were given World Series loser gear which served as defacto service uniforms and built a sense of community and dignity in those who volunteered to serve 10-15 families. The 2009 Phillies would have been proud, even though the caregivers had never heard of them nor really cared who won or lost. The uniforms were free in the technical sense, but these AIDS Hero's had given up a substantial portion of their time and energy to care for nearly 100 persons either infected or affected by the AIDS virus. Good use of free stuff - we like to think, bringing justice to area's of the world that need it.

One last thing, Senior Dalrymple was onto something when mentioning different kinds of justice. My initial comment dealt with the most basic of answers (I did say "easy way to describe it"). You have opened the door a bit more on the subject with the importance of how that justice is done - great point and story!

John Kingston said…

Re: Kids Advocating "Social Justice"

Great, great conversation.  Thanks so much for sharing, Steve.

This kind of conversation _needs_ to be shared on our site -- these are all very legitimate "virtue" points, some in tension with each other, some not -- but all need to be passed along to the next generation.

David French said…

Re: Kids Advocating "Social Justice"

I'm literally at the Army Reserve center in a downtime between PowerPoints (there's nothing more exciting than a presentation about Don't Ask Don't Tell repeal, complete with relentless jokes as to which member of the unit is most relieved at the change; but I digress) and had to jump in to this one.

It seems -- as Tim and Nancy discuss -- there are competing terms, and those terms matter.  

First, "social justice."  This term is thoroughly political in origin, with its common conception quite socialist and vaguely Marxist.  From its inception, it has implied that not only are certain socialist political structures more just than others but also that those political structures should ideally result in a high degree of social, status, and income equality.  In our country, the term has become more or less synonymous with strands of thought that are not only socialistic but also -- I think -- dangerously reductionist, simplistic, and utopian.  There are many, many reasons for inequality -- and some of this inequality is in fact inevitable and quite just.  

Next, "justice."  This term is much more clear.  It implies not only moral rightness but also -- and critically -- the notion of appropriate entitlement.  If a man is wrongly convicted of murder, that is unjust.  If a person is defrauded, that is unjust.  Typically, there is a bad actor and a victim -- a victim who is entitled to better treatment.  There are unjust wars, unjust landlord/tenant relationships, unjust employment relationships, unjust treaties . . . the list could go on, but there is a common them of right treatment according to objective moral norms.  The key part of justice is that is both a moral/legal obligation AND a right.  In other words, the judge has a moral obligation to judge me fairly, and I have a right to fair judgment.  If I'm a government official, I have a moral obligation to best performance with my resources, and my citizens have a right to expect it.

Finally, "charity" or "mercy."  Here is where moral obligations and rights diverge.  We are morally obligated to be charitable, to show mercy, and to be generous.  But any given individual or nation doesn't have a "right" to our charity.  Charitable giving is a good act, a necessary act, but it is not an act taken to correct injustice but to imitate our Savior, who gave us everything when we deserved nothing.

So why does all that matter?  First, I think the very concept of "social justice" has become quite poisonous.  It corrupts both donor and recipient -- the donor though the (often wrong-headed) politicization of generosity and its ultimate divorce from grace and mercy, the recipient through their own sense of entitlement.  it defines justice down, it defines responsibility down, and its view of equality is so at odds with reality as to be destructive.

That's why I much prefer the emphasis on charity.  Social justice is totalizing (i.e. "Here is what the world should look like"), but charity is much more humble.  ("I don't know how to fix Africa, but doggone it, people need mosquito netting, and some DDT, and maybe some clean water.  I can't fix it all, but I can do what I can do.")  I think we made so much more headway in Iraq when we changed models.  We started with the "let's fix this broken world" ideal of the social justice utopian and ended with the "let's make sure nobody innocent dies today" notion that if we can just protect people from death, they've got a fighting chance.  Our guys gave everything they could give -- in a very real (if typically unintended) imitation of Christ -- to people who didn't "deserve" or have a right to their sacrifice.  And we accomplished so much more.

It goes back to Micah 6:8 . . . act justly, love mercy, walk humbly.  Act justly -- live uprightly, comply with moral norms and respect the rights of others; love mercy -- be gracious, protect the "least of these" and give all you can give; walk humbly -- know your place in the Kingdom, trusting God always.

Anyway, that's just a few thoughts.  And Steve I thought your longer email was extremely thought-provoking.  World Vision's model works, no doubt, and it was so wonderful to bounce down the road in Ethiopia and see a World Vision project and to know that -- right there, in front of me -- was a small slice of hope in a very hopeless place.

Nancy French said…

Re: Kids Advocating "Social Justice"

Thanks, David, for explaining what I only felt in my gut!  And thanks, Steve, for your note too.  I do hope you do get a chance to meet my dad.  What did he say to Andy Andres when he met him, John?  Something like "You could wrestle a bear," or something.  I don't know. He's a unique guy.  :)

But I wanted to say that the original post that Tim sent around was not heartwarming at all to me...  Maybe I was just poisoned by the title, but the whole thing seemed a tad much.

Working with Muslims and Jews is fine, but there was a grandiosity that seemed a little overreaching.  They sent toothpaste.  That's great.  But then they made tee shirts for their kids that said,"I helped Haiti."  Really?

They were really doing a wonderful yet simple act of mercy, but they were reaching for "significance."  they were trying so hard to say more than just "hey, we sent toothpaste to some kids who needed it."  Instead it seemed that they'd done something Big and World-Changing because there were Jews and Muslims and kids and toothpaste.  

Bleh.

It's probably just me, though.

Nathan Whitaker said…

Re: Kids Advocating "Social Justice"

This is really good stuff.  A lot to think about here.

As I was packing up my office in preparation for our move, six year old Ellie Kate ran across the WorldVision materials that Steve had sent in preparation for our Impact for Living seminar last fall.  She sat on the floor in my office, flipping through while asking questions, and was crying by the time that she got halfway through.  And as her dad, the issues were too big for me to deal with using ANY terminology (words, apparently, not being my, um, thing).  "Dad, why does that child not have a house or a foot?  Does she have a mom and dad?"  

I'd like to say that we crocheted mosquito nets or even sent homemade toothpaste, but I think we talked for a while, I did a Steve Martin riff to calm her for bed, and then I threw away the WorldVision stuff under the cover of darkness after she went to bed so we didn't have to deal with THAT again.

Nancy French said…

Re: Kids Advocating "Social Justice"

Steve,

This is really interesting! One of the most hilarious moments we had in Africa came when we traveled five hours outside Addis Ababa and the local kids saw the van and ran towards us.  Someone in out van made the mistake of buying a banana from a vendor and all chaos broke loose. Americans! Money!

Our van was surrounded by dozens and dozens of kids -- so young you'd never let them run into a street, let along attach themselves to the bumper of a vehicle.  It made me so anxious, because I feared our driver would run over a kid and toss money out the window for the family's loss.

Anyway, as we finally drove away, we noticed one of the guys was wearing a Mitt Romney for President tee shirt.

It was enough to crack me up on that very challenging day.

Timothy Dalrymple said…

Re: Kids Advocating "Social Justice"

Nancy, I thought you made an interesting point about the grandiosity of the story told in the original post.  Ideally, I want to invite my children to participate in projects that serve others in such a way that communicates that this is really quite ordinary, a very obvious and basic and non-glamorous application of Christ's call to serve the least of these.  I understand, I think, the point behind the t-shirts, to impress upon the children that they have done something worthwhile and maybe encourage others to ask them about it and affirm them for it.  But there is a strong whiff of self-congratulation, that we serve (as you hinted) not because it gives to others but because it gives us significance, because it makes us (or makes it evident that we are) good and compassionate and generous people.   

I want my children to understand that serving others is not just something we do on special occasions and then advertise to the world and feel smug about.  I want them to understand that this is something we ought always to do, and ought to humbly and without an iota of self-congratulation.  I take "let not your left hand know what your right hand is doing" to mean that serving the needy properly is more humble than heroic, more routine than revelatory, and that it tempts us to spiritual pride if we trumpet our own generosity.  

Also, on the multi-religious aspect of it, if there is a celebration of working together with Jews and Muslims just because this makes us feel good about ourselves as enlightened and tolerant people, or just because it is trendy and cute to have people of different colors and dress together, then I find little value in it.  If it is multi-religious in a more deeply intentional and purposeful way, believing that it is important to build bridges of friendship and mutual understanding connecting different religious communities, and important to find areas of common conviction where we can deepen those relationships laboring shoulder to shoulder, then I do find genuine value in it.  As a Christian I hope that those relationships of understanding, and trust, and common labor, will become the basis for a greater openness to the Christian message, and as an American I hope they can lead to less hostility between religious groups.  

Finally, Michael Novak has an interesting piece on the history of the term, and he proposes a new and ideologically neutral definition (also here).   

In any case, sorry for exploding SixSeeds!