Let’s value-add with altruism
Father Timothy Radcliffe’s essay in Common Theology (Summer 2005) has set me thinking about fundamental moral values. The following statements struck home to me—
“As fish were made to swim in water, human beings were made to thrive in the truth. It is our home”.
“Lies pollute our natural environment. We die spiritually, like fish in a polluted river”.
“In a society which is a marketplace, in which we are first of all consumers, how can we sustain another way of seeing the world — a clarity of sight?”
A number of years ago Sister Veronica Brady
talked to a group of us about words and the
ideas behind them that have died out. One
of the words she mentioned was “probity”.
Probity n. integrity of character.1
Like “truthfulness” and “probity” there is
another word that is going the same way. That
word is “altruism”.
ltruism can refer to being helpful to other
people with little or no interest in being rewarded
for one’s efforts. This is the least tortuous of the
alternatives.
Eugene Peterson’s interpretation of Romans
15.1-3 focuses on the importance of altruism for
Christians today, when he says, “Those of us who
are strong and able in the faith need to step in
and lend a hand to those who falter, and not just
do what is most convenient for us. Strength is for
service, not status. Each one of us needs to look
after the good of the people around us, asking
ourselves, ‘How can I help?’ That’s exactly what
Jesus did. He didn’t make it easy for himself by
avoiding people’s troubles.”2
Here from the outset Paul challenges the market
economy as the norm for a Christian. For at
the heart of the market economy is the notion
of self-interest, of consumerism, that is one of
its signifi cant driving forces. Self-interest is the
antithesis of altruism, of selfless behaviour.
Is the notion of a Christian standing against the
centrality of the market economy in our world
simply a naïve dream?3 After all, watch any news
broadcast, or stay away from church on a Sunday
morning and experience the interlocked power
and infl uence of the two great forces in Australia
today — sport and the market economy.
Those of us who have followed teams like St
Kilda in their journey to fi nd a home, driven by the
economic necessity of fi nding paying members and
sponsors, know the truth of this observation. The
great football codes are openly making decisions
based not only on the players or the supporters but
on solely economic marketing grounds. As I write
this I hear you saying “dump the nostalgia, dump
the feelings — get real — football is big business
now”.
The moral code of football was revamped by
Steve Mortimer, then the Captain of Canterbury-
Bankstown Rugby League Club when he replaced
the old stalwart, “Play up and play the game”
with the phrase, “Winning’s not the main thing
— it’s the only thing”. Competition then began
to be cloaked increasingly in economic language,
“trading players” as though they were cattle. “The
players draft” has echoes of drafting bullocks for the
slaughterhouse.
In every news broadcast there is one kind of
guru or another who informs us of the behaviour
of the market that day as though it were deeply
signifi cant for the way we live our lives. Yields on
stocks and shares and exchange rates are our new daily bread. As the early Christians unsettled the
Roman world by persisting in telling people about
the new way that Christ had ushered in, so we have
to unsettle our world by pointing out the cracks
in the economic façade and encouraging altruism
— selfless behaviour — as the only viable option if
we are to survive.
But where are these cracks?
Listen to Alan Kohler any night after the ABC
television news. He is a very smooth presenter
and speaks with authority. But listen to the subtle
change of tone in his voice, that smidgeon of
confusion, when he cannot explain why a company
that produces a larger than normal profit result is
sold off. The canons of microeconomics say the
good result should make the stock more attractive
and so drive up the demand for the stock. This
increase in demand should drive the price up, but
it does just the opposite.
That is when we should ask the question made
famous by the beetle-browed Professor Julius
Sumner Miller “Why is it so?”, and wait politely for
an answer. If enough of us ask the questions, then
we have a chance to discover the truth. The truth
may well be that there is no rational explanation
— that the Emperor has no clothes.
Jean Baudrillard, the French philosopher links
this situation with the spread of globalisation.
“We believe that the ideal purpose of any value is
to become universal. But we do not really assess the
deadly danger that such a quest presents. Far from
being an uplifting move, it is instead a downward
trend toward a zero degree in all values.
“In the Enlightenment, universalisation was
viewed as unlimited growth and forward progress.
Today, by contrast, universalisation exists by default
and is expressed as a forward escape, which aims to
reach the most minimally common value.
“This is precisely the fate of human rights,
democracy and liberty today. Their expansion is in
reality their weakest expression….universalisation
is vanishing because of globalisation...the triumph
of a uniform thought over a universal one”.4
To follow Baudrillard’s line and the line of
the early Christians, we cannot confront these
ideologies directly. We must work to undermine
them by promoting and encouraging the spread of
altruism, of selfless behaviour.
The first generation of Christians were willing
to sacrifice themselves so that others would have a
chance to hear the Good News.
A competitive system like market capitalism
understands and excels at head-on mortal combat.
What it cannot understand is someone who will
not stand up and fight for what they believe.
They cannot deal effectively with the person
who continues to ask questions that are not
confrontational. They cannot deal with a person
that cannot be suborned or coerced into becoming
part of the system. People who insist on asking for
the truth in the way Fr Radcliffe talks about.
From the globalist perspective this is the person
who asks whether it is right to pay an Indonesian
worker something like a dollar for producing a
$200+ pair of running shoes. This is generally
countered in economic terms by talking about the
different cost of living in Indonesia and Australia.
A simple photograph of a sweatshop puts that
argument where it deserves to go. Is it right that
people are cooped together in such degrading
conditions to produce our luxury goods? Not, “Is
it economic?”, but “Is it right?”
It is only by doggedly questioning the rightness
of actions and the teaching and practising the
importance of altruism as a motivating force that
we can open up the soil of our depleted world to
allow the possibility of new life to come. There
does not seem to be any other way.
The Revd Barry Paterson is Teacher of Theology at
Wontulp-Bi-Buya College, Cairns.