Poverty

Earlier this year I house-sat for my friend Helen, and before clocking out I grabbed her copy of Poverty: A History by Bronislaw Gereinek without telling her (YES Helen, I will return it - will you please GET OFF MY ASS!! Or need I remind you, your cats tried to kill me???!?!!)

Anyways, I finally got around to it on the train yesterday and, since I'm a fucking idiot, I had to read the first few chapters three times before moving on, so I could wrap my head around a few things. One being a early belief (we're talking the Middle Ages, not just way back when LC and Heidi were friends) that the poor existed solely as a vehicle to help the rich gain salvation through alms (and in general feel good about themselves. Sound familiar?) Geremiek quotes Life of St. Eligius:

"God could have made all men rich, but he wanted there to be poor people in this world, that the rich might be able to redeem their sins."

Later flipped by the author by suggesting "God wanted rich people in the world in order that they might help the poor." After which you may find yourself asking "Why didn't God just make all people rich?" Either way, if we are to agree that God exists, do we really think he would've created thousands of people whose sole purpose was to suffer and go without so that those who had been blessed with so much good fortune in the first place (apropos of nothing but birth) might better their own chances of getting into heaven by throwing some bones to the poor every now and again? Seems like if there was a God running this show he coulda come up with a more dignified, less-suffering way, no? To say nothing of wasted lives. Doesn't the life of the poor soul he gave aid to equal the life of the rich man "passing the test" of alms-giving? No?

While it's understandable to think that in helping the less fortunate one might get closer to salvation, to actually believe that these poor people were created solely for such a purpose, to me, creates a kind of one-step forward, two-steps back kinda thing. At what point does pride and hubris cancel out the nickel you gave away, and set you back even further? But that's me - either way, we should be thankful for St. Eligius for bringing the world Denzel.

One thing that does drive me crazy in the book is the notion held for centuries that while living a life of poverty was a virtue, VOLUNTARILY living a life of poverty by eschewing earthly riches was even MORE virtuous. Now, at first glance, it makes sense that giving up a life of riches is virtuous - we all chime in with "good for him!!" and "awwwww, so nice" etc etc. He gave up his boat for a life of begging, good for him.

You know who might NOT be thrilled with it? POOR PEOPLE!!!

Let's say we're in a village, and there's 6 of us who are "the poor." We are homeless, and depend on alms from the rich. Well, one of the rich decides to leave his family of wealth and join the ranks of the poor. Which means 2 things: one, it's another body else we hafta split our alms up with. Everything gets divided by 7 instead of 6. Not good. Especially when one of us DOESN'T ACTUALLY HAVE TO BE THERE. Also, that's one less rich person who might've been giving us the attention and help we need. If someone who is rich is so in tune with your plight as a poor person he's ready to join your ranks, maybe everybody's better off if he stays rich, and focuses on helping from his own side of things. In other words, if you're going to the bank for a loan do you want the bank to be the bank, or to come home and live in your parents' basement with you?

While leading a life absent of opulence and excess may be virtuous, I do not see how elbowing your way into the threadbare supplies of the poor is. And I see this everyday; I live in a fuckwad neighborhood wherein trust fund kids think it's "cute" or "ironic" to pose as homeless people on the street, begging for food. And what has this accomplished with me on a personal basis? I give exactly NOTHING to anybody on the street, since I've become accustomed to thinking "fuck you, you're rich and don't need a fucking dime." And I assume I'm not the only person thinking this. Of course, every time I do this I may be saying fuck you to a REAL homeless person. Which sucks. So while I greatly applaud HELPING the poor, I see no virtue in PRETENDING TO BE poor.

Anyway - so far it's been all Middle Ages et al; I'll have an update on the book when I get to the section about me coming to New York City with three dollars in my pocket :)