P E R S P E C T I VAS - Princeton Theological Seminary

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Perspectivas/Occasional Papers • Fall 2006Perspectivas/Occasional Papers • Fall 2006a re American, a further reason is the very definition of“American-ness”—could we understand ourselves as a nationwithout incorporating into that understanding the categories of“pilgrimage,” “future,” and “immigration”?Immigration today is not simply a repetition of immigration inthe past. The contexts and reasons for contemporary immigrationare not just the same as those of the 19th century, for example. Inorder for me to explain what I mean, and in order to have someground on which to build a theological reflection, let me first (andvery briefly) discuss what I understand by “globalization” andsome of its consequences. I will then share with you some theologicalreflections, mostly posed as ongoing questions, on immigrationand on its importance for Christian theology. Thepresent-day reflection on immigration has been mostly left topoliticians, social scientists, ethicists and pastoral agents—andthere are plenty of reasons for this; but systematic theologianshave to face the issues sooner or later. As a systematician, I wantto suggest a few thoughts on the matter.Theology is not a monologue. From the very beginning of ourdiscipline, theologians have assumed as necessary their dialoguewith other “sciences,” and indeed with human experience as thelatter is understood and explained by the social and human sciences.That is why philosophy has always been so important fortheology, and why increasingly today the social sciences are welcomeand important dialogue partners for theologians. I mentionthis because I will need to refer very briefly here to the economyand to human culture, before addressing the specifically theologicalissues.I. Globalization and some of its consequencesBy “globalization” is meant the theoretical paradigm thatattempts to describe humanity’s current stage, with special40emphasis on the development of worldwide capitalism as the newcultural context. 5 There is no commonly agreed definition of“globalization,” but most scholars agree that globalization at leastrefers to “the increasingly interconnected character of the political,economic, and social life of the peoples on this planet.” More concretely,globalization is the extension of the effects of modernity tothe entire world, accompanied by the compression of time andspace brought about by communication technologies. 6’In the process of the “de-territorialization” of capital, not onlyeconomic strategies and institutions become globalized: ideas,thought processes, and socio-cultural patterns of behavior are alsoglobalized and “de-territorialized.” Breaking cultural, social,political, and ideological barriers (which had been built over thecenturies), the mass media and other means of massive andinstant communication have shaped (and continue to shape) atruly global mass culture. A whole universe of symbols and signsis now broadcast and distributed globally by the modern means ofcommunications, thereby defining anew the manner in which millionsof persons throughout the world think, feel, desire, imagine,believe and act. Signs and symbols are increasingly disconnectedfrom historical, religious, ethnic, national or linguistic particularities,becoming “de-territorialized” and “global.”There is little doubt that globalization has appropriated thoseelements of modernity and post-modernity that serve its “de-territorializing,”global project, although globalization should not beconfused with the historical stages usually referred to as “modernity”and “post-modernity.” Thus, for example, globalizationemphasizes the very “post-modern” attitude that relativizes allclaims to truth or to universal validity in order to bring down thecultural, political or religious barriers that may stand in the wayof the methods and activities of the transnational corporations.But at the same time, globalization emphasizes the very “modern”41
Perspectivas/Occasional Papers • Fall 2006Perspectivas/Occasional Papers • Fall 2006and universalizing scientific and technological claims made byWestern societies, since the 18th century, in their quest to controlknowledge and the creation of knowledge in the world—therebydenying scientific and technological legitimacy or equality to anyscientific or technological alternative from outside the Westernworld.The evident success of the transnational, globalization model insome corners of the world, however, has made the rest of the world(i.e., the vast majority of humans, which are deemed to be “notsuccessful” by the standards of globalization) to also wish for thesuccess they see elsewhere for themselves.It would be utterly naive to think that the “de-territorialization”of the economy, of cultural imagination, and even of humanidentities, somehow follows or obeys the dynamics of equality ordemocracy. In fact, globalization seems to imply and assume theconstruction of new hierarchies of power, of new power structuresacross the world. What globalization brings is a new, asymmetricdistribution of privileges and exclusions, of possibilities and ofhopelessness, of freedoms and slaveries. During the last three millennia,asymmetric power relations in the world were organizedso that the rich needed the poor (whether it was for the rich to“save their souls” through works of charity on behalf of the poor,or to exploit the poor through labor in order to further increase therich’s wealth). Now, in these globalized times, the poor seem to beno longer necessary. Wealth and capital increase without the workof the poor (among other reasons because the labor force neededin the globalized economy is a trained labor force which, almostby definition, prevents the participation of the poor).Globalization is a new way of producing wealth, but it is also (andconcomitantly) a new way of producing poverty.Let me argue that while the “physicality” of territory has beenimportant to humans, its importance has not been mainly due to42the “physicality” of the land, but, rather, its importance residedmostly in a people’s ability to sustain their lives and their identityas a people “there.” Put differently, “territory” is the conditionthat sustained human life and helped identify a people as such ina given “place,” while on the other hand, globalization is intimatelyconnected with “de-territorialization.” In other words,globalization causes and is caused (among other reasons) by thepossibility of not needing a “place” which would identify and sustaina people as “this” people.Identity and sustenance, in the new economy, come from thepossibilities opened by being members of the so-called “global village.”Identity and sustenance, thus conceived, dramatically alter(and clearly subvert) what has been traditionally understood by“identity” and “sustenance” and, consequently, also impact suchcategories as “loyalty,” “honor,” “citizenship,” “nationality,” and“immigration.” The very notion of “immigration,” after all,assumes a set of cultural and political definitions (such as “border”)that, thanks to the globalized economy, are gradually losingtheir hold on human experience.Boundaries between states become increasingly insignificant inthe flow of information and capital. The movement of peoples,especially rural peoples in search of the benefits of globalization,makes the meaning of “home” as an ancestral place less significant.If boundaries have played an important role in identity byhelping us define who we are by who we are not, they are now socrisscrossed by globalization processes that they seem to have losttheir identity-conferring power.I find it highly ironic that oftentimes the same individuals andgroups who enthusiastically and uncritically endorse the economicand cultural conditions which foster globalization, probablybecause they are benefiting from them, are often the same individualsand groups who then wish to hold back the consequences43
Page 1 and 2: H I S P A N I C T H E O L O G I C A
Page 3 and 4: CONTENTSThe 2006 HTI Summer Worksho
Page 5 and 6: FROM THE EDITORU.S. Latina/o theolo
Page 7: Perspectivas/Occasional Papers •
Page 10 and 11: Perspectivas/Occasional Papers •
Page 56 and 57: HTI DISSERTATION SERIES COLLECTIONI
Page 58: Perspectivas/Occasional Papers •

P E R S P E C T I VAS - Princeton Theological Seminary

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?