It came as a shock.Raised as I was in a nation enamored of weaponry, I did not realize that many countries in the world do not have armies.In some places, such as Israel, service in the military is compulsory.In approximately twenty nations, however, people are secure enough not to require armies.It’s probably symptomatic that such nations are fairly small in land area.The more you’ve got, the more you want to protect.Without materialism would we even need militaries?Yes, we fight over different religious beliefs, but those conflicts are tied to a sense of ownership as well.This is “our land” and don’t “you” tell us what to do in it!I can imagine a world where armies need not exist.The key, it seems to me, is love.
In a Simpsonesque way, of course, hostile aliens might invade.Could we not try to come to a peaceful resolution?Or could we not learn to protect ourselves without having to be in a position to destroy those who might prefer a more socialistic lifestyle?Those who might look different?Those whose moral standards push us to think more broadly?Like many people I’m dismayed at the unconscionable size of our military budget.Killing the world once over is no longer enough.Now we have to try to pollute space as well.Where are those aliens when we need them?
The fact is nations exist on this earth without standing armies.They don’t cause trouble and some of them are extremely bookish (no surprise there).Can we imagine what our world would look like with an education budget swapping places with the military one?Do we dare even think such dangerous thoughts as peace and mutual goodwill?Is no-one big enough to stand up to Adam Smith (with kudos to Thomas Piketty for trying!)?The wealth of nations could be applied to make well-fed security mostly a reality.We lack the will.Well, most of us do.I draw comfort knowing that several small nations around the world feel no need to waste their budgets on weaponry.Their rich may not own dozens of houses fit for dozens of kings, but they have perhaps a peace of mind that no amount of military might can give.We don’t seem to understand that weapons cater to fear, and that, as one religious text says, “perfect love casts out fear.”
The other day I was in one of those stores where everything is sold really cheaply.I figure it helps balance out all those times when I’ve been overcharged for things at other stores because I was pressed for time and needed something quickly.In any case, these dollar store establishments have a constantly rotating stock, it seems (things move at a buck!), and so you might or might not find exactly what you’re looking for.While just looking around, acquainting myself with the content, I came upon a shelf of Bibles.God’s word for a dollar a pop.This isn’t a place I’d normally come looking for books.Then it occurred to me: many of those who shop in such stores are committed to a faith that keeps them in their economic bracket.
That suspicion was confirmed by other items at the store.Many of them were Christian-themed.This seemed like the opposite of the prosperity gospel.People trying to scrape by, to shave enough off the budget to make it to another paycheck.Many Americans live like this.Many of them support Trump.Selling the Bible to them cheaply definitely involves a mixed message.There’s indeed a message, as I’ve learned in the publishing, in the way books are priced.Getting a thousand-pager printed where the unit cost is below a dollar requires a massive print run.Someone knows that Bibles sell.You won’t find such cheap divine revelation at Barnes and Noble.The same content, maybe, but not at the same price point.
The economics of cheap Bibles contains a message.Those who can’t afford much can be guided toward spending some of it on the Good Book.While just reading the Bible may indeed bring comfort to those who know where to look, as a whole this book requires major interpretative work.As I’ve been indicating over the last several days, Holy Writ is not nearly as straightforward a reading experience as many suppose it to be.Trying to figure out what Nehemiah’s differences with Sanballat the Horonite have to do with the rest of us isn’t an easy task.To find out, if the internet doesn’t give us quite all the knowledge we want or need, can require some intensive study, up to and including seminary.Even then you might not get it.Studying the Bible requires further commitment than simply picking one up for a Washington might imply.But then, it costs less than a lottery ticket. And you can get it while saving money on other things you need.
Net worth—a strange concept for human beings—is calculated on the basis of how much cash you’re “worth.”While on that lonely task of sorting through the attic, I came across many boxes of books for which we didn’t have room in our apartment.Our guests, who’ve been few, feel obligated to comment on how many books we have, as if it’s an infirmity to be delicately broached.Or for which something might be prescribed.I grew up believing that what we call “net worth” should be assessed in how much a person knows.Knowledge, not money, in my fantasy moments, would drive the world forward.Books are cheap (generally, but you don’t want to know what I’ve paid for some of these volumes when I really needed them!) and don’t retain resale value, except perhaps in the textbook market.They’re considered a throwaway commodity.
Although I didn’t read it, a recent bestseller claimed you could find happiness by removing clutter, and high on the priority list of things to ditch was books.Will you ever read that again?For me the question is rather, will I ever need to look something up in there again?Surprisingly often the answer is yes.Considering the fact that books are knowledge, they’re a remarkably good bargain for the price.Regardless of clutter.Perhaps that’s a kind of wisdom itself.Books are heavy, though, especially in any numbers. Weight means something. What they contain has the potential of being priceless, even though it’s available to anyone else with a copy.
I used to watch Antiques Roadshow, back in the days when you could still get television reception with just an antenna. You always felt bad for the poor hopeful who’d brought an old book, dreaming of riches.Apart from handwritten manuscripts, books are mass produced, almost by definition.The printing press, after all, was designed to produce multiple copies.Sure, if you go back far enough, or you have a tome rare enough, you might get a nice price for it.Everyone I saw on the Roadshow left with their disappointment worn obviously on their faces.You’re better off buying a vase.That’s only if your bottom line is your net worth, though.If you want to strive for what’s really important in life, I’d go for the book almost every time.Of course, while up there moving those boxes around I began to wonder about the net worth of a good back brace as well.
What really happened? I grew up thinking that reading history gave the answer to that question. In fact, it is a viewpoint that I still struggle against. You see, historians try to marshal as many facts as they can to support their reconstruction of events in the past. Somethings, clearly, “really happened.” What those things are, however, depends on your point of view. For example we know that the twentieth century was dominated by wars and economic crises. Apart from a few periods when things seemed largely okay, it was a century of leapfrogging crisis after crisis. Historians pick a set of circumstances in this mix—let’s say the Second World War—and try to explain what led to certain results. But what if we stop to think about such events from another point of view? What if we think about it from the perspective that “nations” are purely fictional inventions? Who wins such a conflict?
This is more than an idle thought-experiment. We, as people, base our self-perception on how we view our personal histories. It can be quite jarring to have someone contradict our own personal narrative of “what really happened.” I’ve run into that from time to time—my reconstruction of events is not the same as someone else’s reconstruction. Who’s right? There’s no objective history. There are only events viewed from multiple angles. Turn the clock back a few centuries—was Jesus of Nazareth a political criminal (the Roman point of view), or a great sage out to save the world (a Christian point of view)? And these are only two out of many possible views of a political execution.
As we enter an era of post-truth politics, we’re going to find more and more historical events questioned. Facts have lost the anchoring functions they used to have. Historians built narratives by stepping from fact to fact, like using a series of stones to cross a river. They can’t tell us what really happened, but they can make sense out of an otherwise confusing stream of chaotic events. The thing about history, however, is that you have to read it to understand. Certain things we’ve pretty much all come to agree upon are now being questioned by those who see everything through the lens of capitalism. Money changes history. It is a narrative of great power as long as everyone agrees it’s true. What really happened? I think we may have all been too quick to accept what economists have told us and we have fabricated a fictional story that we can all believe.
The relief is so real that you can feel it with your fingers. Or brushing your cheek. The feeling of being done with another semester, and knowing you’ve got some time for recovery after the intensity of going flat-out for months at a time. I miss that feeling. As a guy who has often been accused of being “too intense” I tend to run pretty near the red line all the time. Pit stops are few and very far between. Once this vehicle’s in drive, there’s no stopping until the destination is reached. What do you do when there’s no clear destination? That’s what working for mere money is like. How do you know when you have enough? Just ask Mr. Trump. Too much is always too little. That’s the kind of world we live in.
Higher education, it used to be, was a place for people who believed in higher values than mere lucre. There was a time, historically, when we took transcendence seriously. The price (if you’ll pardon the analogy) that we’ve paid for letting transcendence go will become apparent. Those who believe only in what they see miss most of reality that swirls by them like a river under the ice. Yes, it still flows. Just ask the fish. There’s a wisdom outside our paltry economic efforts, if we’d only just get out to inquire of it.
Work is built around the foolish concept that you can never have enough. I have to think that our fear of a year of drought has deeply impressed itself on our psyche. Back in biblical times and up until just a couple of centuries ago people considered work to be farm work. Growing your own food. Building your own house. Knowing what to do in an emergency. If nature didn’t cooperate with that scheme what choice had you? Now, however, we labor for a concept as abstract as transcendence. When’s the last time you were paid with actual cash? What wouldn’t you pay for a little more time off? Time to stay in your pajamas all day and ponder what’s really real? Perhaps sleep until you’re not tired rather than awaking at the sound of a factory bell? The sun hasn’t risen by the time I reach my windowless office. When I step out again it’s already set. The solstice reminds me of the semester break that no longer exists. I have to believe, however, that under the ice the river’s still flowing.
Can belief be quantified? Apparently yes. I’ve spent my life trying to avoid the dismal science, yet it seems that everyone else is pretty much agreed that money is the measure of all things. Higher education has certainly been chasing that rabbit for years. My choice of “careers” has always been aimed at those which downplay finance while paying enough to cover the bills. One has to be practical. My wife recently sent me an article in The Guardian by Harriet Sherwood entitled, “Religion in US ‘worth more than Google and Apple combined’.” At first, I have to admit, a kind of triumphalism overcame me. A vindication that I had chosen a valuable aspect of human existence with which to while away my years here on earth. Then came the troubling implications.
We tend to hear only the bad news about religion. Religion, we’re told, is only super-sized superstition. It supports prejudice. It capitalizes on fear. And nobody really believes anymore. And so the trite truisms march past like tin soldiers on their way to a real war. You see, if we can’t put a dollar value on religion—or any belief system—then we have no way to assess whether it’s worth wasting our time on or not. Maybe people will begin to pay attention now. There’s gold in them thar hills. Yes, the religious are more likely to open their wallets and keep the economy moving than are the wealthy. Yes, those are antithetical groups, for the most part. When we can start toting up dollars and pence it is time for those with more dismal scientific interest to take notice.
Religions, like all human institutions, have faults. They are prone to takeover by self-interested individuals who look for the angle that will lead to personal power or fame. They do often insist that they alone have the correct interpretation of what life means and how we should go about pleasing a deity that only they truly understand. And they bicker amongst each other. It’s easy to forget that religions are based, without exception, on the belief that human life can be improved. We can do better, people. Takeovers, sometimes hostile, can occur. One sect may take out a contract on another. Love may be recast as hatred. Overall, however, religions are, to borrow a phrase from a sage, “our better angels.” And of course, the fact that you can put a dollar value on that only sweetens the deal. The dismal science has studied the matter and its conclusions are indisputable.
Reading about the things that wrong, like terrorist attacks, may not be the best way to occupy your time on a bus heading to New York City. Robert Wuthnow’s Be Very Afraid is appropriately titled, in any case. I had been warned. Discussing sociological reactions to nuclear war, terrorism, pandemics, and global warming, Wuthnow suggests, sensibly, that action is the best response. He also points out that, statistically, people tend not to panic. What I’d like to focus on is his repeated assertion that humans need to find meaning. Disasters only bring this into clearer view.
We live in an age when religion and philosophy have been relegated to the children’s table of academic pursuits. They are, however, the traditional intellectual ways of finding meaning . Economists may be paid much more, and scientists receive more respect, but when the bombs fall or avian flu really strikes, even they sometimes turn to their beleaguered colleagues for answers. Money is notoriously poverty-ridden when it comes to purchasing meaning. Reductionistic materialism may allow a final shrug as the curtain falls, but plenty of scientists hope for a little something more. Not everyone, of course, finds meaning in religion or deep reflection, but we are all human and we want to know what it’s all about. We need to have somewhere to look.
Even as a child I was preoccupied with meaning. I wanted to be the usual things when I grew up—scientist, firefighter, G.I. Joe—but when it came time to make actual choices I moved in the direction of careers that would allow me to find meaning. I swiftly learned they didn’t pay well. Money is not meaning, however. I was teaching in a seminary when 9/11—a major topic of Wuthnow’s study—occurred. I saw people desperately seeking meaning, but not knowing where to look. This was just my fear, growing up; what does it profit someone to gain the whole world if s/he is groping about in the dark for meaning? We’ve created a world where even greater causes of fear are likely to arise. In our emergency kits, it seems, we should leave a little room for meaning.