RyanBolger.com

My friend asked this in a previous post of mine. My answer? Well, Jesus didn’t live in a democracy, so that wasn’t a real option for him. I don’t think we can argue about voting in the abstract — is voting always a good thing or a bad thing? We need to ask what voting is doing in a particular context, whether voting is liberating or oppressing for those who live in that particular context. We will need to reason from the way of life Jesus lived in Palestine.

Jesus was about creating a community of the outcasts and marginalized and giving them a voice — transforming them from objects of God’s wrath to subjects in God’s kingdom. The ‘rule of Paul’ as some call it, was the idea that everyone got a voice when Christians got together. They didn’t know who the Holy Spirit might speak through, so, even those who were considered less important, had a voice at the gathering.

We need to ask, for a particular context and time, is voting a liberating or an oppressive activity? Was voting a Jesus-like activity in South Africa when blacks voted for the first time in 1994? I would say it was. Is voting a Jesus-like thing when a one-party government has 99% support? Probably not — voting would reinforce the illusion of support that those in power hold. 

So, the question must be asked — is this a time to vote, is it a liberating activity for those in our country or or not? Does this election offer a means by which those who have been shut out and lack a real role in the political process receive their voice?  I think for many in the country, voting in this election represents a turning of the tide. I believe we have, in this election, an opportunity to elect a person who represents voices that have rarely been heard, at this level, in the political process. Giving a voice to the voiceless is something Christians need to rally around. And back up with a vote. Today.

I don’t consider myself a liberal, or a conservative, or even a middle of the road type of person. Although others may categorize me as white, evangelical, and male, I am first and foremost (I hope) a follower of Jesus. When I make big decisions, I try to root my decisions in how I understand Jesus to have lived. I don’t believe in the divisions that create some issues to be moral or personal or ethical or secular. I believe all of life is to be lived spiritually, and life is most fruitful if we look to Jesus in all things — not just ‘religious things’ . Basing my decisions on him may put me in different camps, depending on the time and context in which I live. In the past, I’ve voted Republican, I’ve voted Democrat, and I’ve not voted out of Christian convictions. I’ve considered these three options for this election as well. For the following reasons, I decided to vote for Obama on Tuesday:

1) The poor will be better off with Obama. I believe this to be the first question we must ask of a candidate. Jesus promised a jubilee to his followers. He created a community that shared generously with one another. For a Christian to support a candidate, that candidate must look to create a system that resembles this community of sharing. I don’t call it “socialism” — I call it gospel…

2) Blessed are the peacemakers — we must support people who strive for peace. And Jesus was not saying use the sword to achieve peace — it was ‘use the means of peace to achieve the ends of peace’ (why would he say ‘love your enemies in the same Sermon?). I believe Obama seeks to end the war. I’ve been concerned by the strong military talk by both candidates. However, I think Obama is taking a more direct route to peace. We must support the peacemakers to align ourselves with the Sermon on the Mount.

3) I believe Obama will begin to repair the damage done in our relationships with other countries. I believe he will look to bring reconciliation where there are divisions. In Christian baptism, the two peoples, Jews and Gentiles, become one. The body of Christ, made up of many members from many races, is to be one. It is at the heart of our faith that we overcome our divisions while celebrating our differences. For a candidate to receive the Christian vote, he or she must seek to do likewise. In the United States, I believe that Obama will be a force in healing the racial divide in our country. It is a huge task, and we might not get very far, but I think he will move us in the right direction.

4) I believe Obama will bring other voices to the table. Jesus spent time with the outcasts and sinners shut out from the main halls of power. I believe a candidate, to get the Christian vote, must create a space to hear other voices. I believe Obama himself is one of these other voices. In addition, we need to talk to those who hate us, and we need to know why. I believe Obama will do this in foreign policy — and I believe he will do it here in the US.

5) We are to be better stewards of creation. Right now, it appears we’ve damaged the way the earth is to function through driving our cars and consuming so much of our natural resources. We need to move in the direction of better stewardship of creation as we honor God’s gifts to us. I believe Obama has a better plan to move to alternative fuels and energy than does John McCain. I believe, after 9-11, we should have pushed for energy independence for many of our families through tax breaks for solar panels on houses.

For these five reasons, I’m casting my vote for Obama on Tuesday…

A while back, Andrew Jones noted the significance of the DailyKos. For the last week or so, I have compared the political/social/religious change strategy of Jesus, in his context, with dailykos founder Marcos Zuniga’s strategy in Taking on the System. My hope is to create a hybrid of the two — to see what Jesus-like social engagement might look like in 2008. In this 3rd installment of Jesus and Kos (part 1, part 2), I look at mobilization strategy.

Zuniga discusses the need to take charge and create a group of followers who exist outside the media and political establishment. He exhorts activists to raise up an army of volunteers who, although newbies at first, become experts as they participate in change. He encourages activists to go ahead without authorization — to not wait for the experts (the gatekeepers). These political change movements create alternative sources of information that come from the margins — the unauthorized. These bloggers do not possess the sanctioned qualifications to write or speak — they lack degrees or the right kind of experience. The expert gatekeepers get very upset about these boundaries breaking down, because the experts’ great influence depends on limiting those who are considered to be credible. Zuniga encourages activists to ignore them. Respect comes to those who create great content, not to those who have all the extra letters after their name. Finally, in this Chapter 2 — he writes that collaboration is key – networking with those who share similar passions.

Jesus created a movement outside the halls of power in Jerusalem. He was not a rabbi or official leader or any kind — he probably was a carpenter. He asked people to follow him, to join him in the movement. He did not wait to get approval; he created an alternative movement, unsanctioned by political/religious authorities. The gatekeepers became very frustrated by Jesus bypassing them — if people could be forgiven on the periphery, who needed the temple? To his hearers, Jesus taught as one with authority and not like the other religious leaders. It didn’t matter that he didn’t have the proper schooling — his message of the kingdom of God captivated his hearers. Like John the Baptists’ movement (a related network?), Jesus’ activities in Palestine engaged the populace and ignited a movement of political, religious, and social change.

How do we mashup these two mobilization strategies? Here goes: 21st century Jesus-followers must consider participating in a network of bloggers who exist outside the typical church, media, and political structures. These unauthorized writers, who have no seminary, media, or political credentials, create great content about God’s dream for people (the kingdom), both inside and outside the church. The message and the movement of these bloggers may frighten the gatekeepers, because gatekeepers form their identity around the idea that they,  and not these upstart bloggers, speak for God.

Although these new forms of community may not resemble anything like a congregation, is it possible we may be seeing a new form of religious structure emerging?

I’ve recently been reading Taking on the System: Rules for Radical Change in a Digital Era,  and I’ve been impressed by Zuniga’s astute observations regarding political change and how it occurs. Zuniga (or Kos, an abbreviated form of his first name,  Markos) is the founder of the very influential political blog, DailyKos. Writing from the liberal perspective, his book would help anyone who seeks political change, regardless if they identify with his politics.

As I’ve written previously here and here, the primary task of my classes at Fuller Seminary is to help students imagine what Jesus-like social change might look like in contemporary culture.

So, I thought I would create a mashup of these two conversation partners, looking to Jesus for the primary agenda of social change (the kingdom of God) while looking to Kos for the means of change, knowing full well that I need to hold both of these ends in loosely to create opportunities for synergy.

I imagine creating a number of posts, one or more posts per chapter of Taking on the System.

Chapter One (part one)

Kos writes that today we need the media for significant social change. We can protest in the streets, but unless it is covered by the media, it is not really an event. Change happens through changing the flow of information, and if you can’t change the flow, you can’t change hearts and minds. In the 1930s, Gandhi used news reels to broadcast his protests at the salt mines. In the 1960s, protestors used network TV to broadcast their message. Today, it will be social media that transforms the landscape. It will be the bloggers.

What were the political dynamics surrounding Jesus? In first century northern Palestine, word of the Jesus movement spread through Jesus’ teaching, preaching and healing. He taught with a different kind of authority than the religious leaders, and so he garnered support. To the people, he appeared like a revolutionary zealot, as a prophet on the fringes of society. People followed him in the countryside. It was a bit of a backwater in northern Palestine, yet thousands came to hear him speak. He offered them a different understanding of reality than was given by the religious leaders — a new way to be the people of God. This put pressure on the leaders, both Jewish and Roman, to respond in some way. Unknown to the powerful — it was the powerless of society that knew who he was. It wasn’t until Jesus came to Jerusalem during passion week where his public role grew dramatically.

Kos writes that the ultimate goal of activism is dislodging conventional wisdom. HIs advice is particularly relevant for social change in democracies, but one could argue that changing public perceptions is valid in more oppressive systems as well — but you may not see the results as quickly, if at all. Jesus changed the conventional wisdom of the masses through storytelling. I’ll talk about that more in a later post.

For Kos, changing conventional wisdom takes place through changing the perception of what is true as understood by the public, the gatekeepers, and those in politics. Whoever frames what is considered to be true controls the nature of the debate. Kos cites the Daou Triangle, an article written by Peter Daou on Salon in September 2005. Daou put blogs (or netroots) on one corner of the triangle, the media on a second corner, and the political establishment on the third. At this point in history, blogs cannot effect change in conventional wisdom on their own, but they can put pressure on the media and politicians to change the conversation. Bloggers can put pressure on the media or the politicians, or both.

What does a Jesus and Kos mashup look like here? What is the takeaway for churches today? In sum, Jesus-like communities will become an online social movement challenging both the media and political power. Strongly connected to each other, they will live out, as a social community, what they preach to others. From the outside, they will seek to challenge and influence the common understandings of reality as put forth by the media and the politicians. And they will be bloggers.

More to come…Part II — Moving Past the Gatekeepers