Helpful Texts

Link zum Mandala von Bruder Klaus
Thomas Fornet-Ponse

Civilization of Poverty

Is there Prosperity without Growth?

 

From: Stimmen der Zeit, 8/2011, P. 542-552
webmaster's own, not authorized translation

 

    In view of the global crises, new economic approaches arouse growing interest. THOMAS FORNET-PONSE, scientific assistant at the department fundamental theology at the University of Bonn, compares the conceptions of the U.S. economist Tim Jackson and the Latin American liberation theologian Ignacio Ellacuría SJ and identifies similarities and differences.

 

Given the impact of financial crisis, climate change and the still striking differences between "rich" and "poor" countries, there might be to a great extent a consensus that a transformation of the world economy is absolutely necessary if we are not to lose completely sight of the goal of global justice. However, there is less consensus as regards the radical nature of the necessary measures, because most of the proposals still adhere to the ideal of economic growth and want to achieve this, inter alia, by efficiency enhancement.

Not only the various economic programs which want to achieve economic growth through stimulating the consumption but also the proposals for a sustainable development may serve here as examples {1}. However, with such efficiency strategies of sustainability - as important and correct a more efficient use of resources is - the consumption of resources only decreases insofar as it is measured relatively, but it does not necessarily decrease absolutely {2}. Moreover, the industrially important material resources such as oil, coal, ores, etc. remain limited - no matter how great the efficiency is.

In view of this, sufficiency strategies are proposed, according to which only strictly necessary resources shall be consumed. Such strategies aim at a deliberate consumption- and lifestyle and at refraining from economic processes without societal surplus value (as e.g. various financial market activities) {3}. Considering the limits of growth as they were emphasized already in 1972 by the "Club of Rome", their approach is more radical than that of the efficiency strategies; they seek to propagate an economy which is not exclusively growth-oriented {4}. These include e.g. Herman Daly's proposal for a "steady state economy", which was made already in the 70s {5}, and based on it, Tim Jackson's attempt to develop an ecological macroeconomics {6} or Niko Paech's plea for a post-growth economy {7}. For all of them it is important not to preach mere relinquishment to the industrial countries but above all to emphasize sustainability and long-term prosperity of all people and here also to underline the possibilities of a gain in quality of life. The aim is a transformation of economy and lifestyle as well as the awareness of the industrialized world - that's why in recent years we speak increasingly of a "culture of sustainability" {8}.

 


543

With this orientation towards a new culture or civilization, there is a parallel between these from an economic perspective formulated proposals and the theological and philosophical utopia of a "civilization of poverty" {9}, as it was conceived by Ignacio Ellacuría SJ ( 1989) and taken up by Jon Sobrino, SJ, under the slogan of a "civilization of a shared modesty" {10}. When in the following Tim Jackson's and Ignacio Ellacuría's approaches are considered in detail, further similarities will become visible with regard to the situation analysis and to concrete proposals for the transformation toward a "civilization of poverty" or a "prosperity without growth" but also a central difference, which is owed to the specifically Christian inspiration of Ellacuría's proposal.

 

Prosperity without Growth

Tim Jackson's approach is characterized by high topicality, and the wide range of perspectives taken into consideration. Given the undeniable finiteness of the earth and its resources and the poverty of a portion of humanity, he scrutinizes the usual growth-oriented macroeconomics and the largely usual equation of prosperity with material possessions and growth. His main goal is "to find useful ways out of the biggest dilemma of our time - and to reconcile our desire for a good life with the limits of a finite planet" {11}.

What is central to this endeavor is the criticism of the prevailing understanding of prosperity: it primarily or exclusively defines prosperity with economic concepts {12}. By contrast, Jackson emphasizes that the basic material needs must admittedly be satisfied, but prosperity has also central social and psychological dimensions, including the ability to freely participate in social life. If the emphasis is on these aspects, it is possible to have prosperity without growth, and to give everybody a share in it. He regards Amartya Sen's understanding of wealth, i.e. the ability to prosper, as a promising starting point. This ability has to be interpreted as "a series of 'limited possibilities' for a good life within clearly defined limits" {13}. These limits are on the one hand determined by the finite ecological resources and on the other hand by the factor world population, since material conditions remain necessary for a just and lasting prosperity.

Jackson refers to many studies of happiness research as well as to studies on life expectancy, health care, child mortality and education, in order to substantiate the criticism of a close connection between wealth and unlimited growth.

 


544

They show clearly that up to a certain average income significant improvements in quality of life can be achieved, but then significant improvements are no longer possible. In this respect, growth is not bad per se; it is necessary for the underdeveloped countries so that the material conditions of a dignified life are created there. But in its current form it is not sustainable because it leads to an increased consumption of resources and rising debts. At the same time, the reduction in growth is currently not stable because decreasing consumption leads to rising unemployment and a recessionary spiral {14}.

In order to solve this dilemma, either growth must be made sustainable or "De-Growth" be made stable. Since according to Jackson's analysis a sustainable growth by way of (relative or absolute) decoupling is not sufficient {15}, the structures of the market economy must be changed and above all the orientation towards an ever-increasing consumption has to be corrected. However, its harmful societal logic can only be broken by profound societal changes in values, lifestyles and social structure in the sense of a lasting prosperity {16}. In addition, we must develop an ecological macroeconomics which particularly deals with the issues of economic stability and economic dependence on ecological variables, as e.g. the consumption of resources {17}.

As a solution to the dilemma of growth, Jackson therefore plans to achieve stability even with a declining growth, which could be achieved by means of three central macroeconomic interventions: 1st a structural shift to service-based activities, 2nd investment in ecological goods, 3rd Working time policy as a stabilizing instrument {18}.

But Jackson does not confine himself to a draft on ecological macroeconomics, he also emphasizes the need for a change of consciousness, especially in view of the logic of consumerism. He does not deny the importance of a material basis for prosperity, but points to a "social recession" in Western societies, which is reflected inter alia in rising rates of depression and alcoholism, and a decreasing moral of the workers and a diminishing societal cohesion. This can partly be explained by the mobility required for steady growth. Rich societies strive for growth among other things because the individuals seek to live a life without shame, and the minimum level continues to move upward in a consumer society, given the importance of material goods. At the societal level, this leads to fragmentation and loss of values: "In the end, there remains nothing but an undignified scramble for a place near the top of the ladder." {19}

 


545

In order to escape this societal pitfall, the prevailing paradigm must be changed. This happens already in an "alternative hedonism" which is looking outside the conventional market for sources of satisfaction - as examples serve the "Simplicity Forum" in North America or various Downshifting initiatives {20}. However, the social logic of consumption can not be changed at the individual level, since such movements are still in conflict with the surrounding society and politics. According to Jackson two different structural changes are necessary, in order to break the logic of consumption. For one thing, the incentives for unsustainable and unproductive competition for one's societal status must be corrected or eliminated. For this it is necessary to reduce social inequalities. Secondly, new structures must be established, which allow it that people - on less materialistic paths - fully participate in society. This is sought by an economy that offers no-profit-oriented services:

"More recognition for people who care for children, elderly or disabled or do volunteer work would shift the balance of incentives from status competition to a cooperative, altruistic society." {21}

If this would be endorsed by a corresponding economy, the likely benefits of such changes would be obvious. The society would be happier and less anxious; there would be less loneliness and loss of values:

"For the highly advanced economies of the Western world prosperity without growth is no longer a utopian dream, it is a fiscal and ecological necessity." {22}

Although Jackson emphasizes the advantages of simplicity and a modest lifestyle, he also stresses that it is morally questionable, if a group tries to persuade an other one to abandon material wealth. In contrast, the establishment of credible alternatives must be prominent, i.e. people must really be able to live in prosperity in a less materialistic manner {23}. Two mutually corresponding balances must be kept for it - the balance between innovation and tradition, and the balance between individual and society:

"The cultural trend that enhances individualism at the expense of society and encourages innovation at the expense of tradition, is a distortion of what it means to be a human being." {24}

This tendency goes hand in hand with the pursuit of growth, but the hope of a materialistic Utopia will inevitably be disappointed. In this respect we have no alternative but to work socially and personally for a fundamental structural change.

 


546

A Civilization of Poverty

Ellacuría's analysis and proposed solutions are similarly comprehensive, but written from a theological perspective. A first brief sketch is found in the context of his reflections on unemployment as theological problem. Here he makes clear how this hinders the realization of the Kingdom of God and, among other things, advocates that

"it is necessary to work for a civilization of poverty, where poverty is not the lack of the essential things, a poverty that is caused by the historical action of social groups or classes and nations or nation groups. On the contrary, it is a universal state of affairs, where the satisfaction of the basic needs, the freedom of personal options, and room for personal and joint creativity is guaranteed; this state makes possible the appearance of new forms of life and culture, new relations with nature, with oneself and with God" {25}.

In this civilization of poverty there is a balance between the productive and creative work, and so people are not subjected to economic dynamism. In the present civilization of wealth and consumption, there is probably no other option to respond to unemployment, except for creating jobs and thus promoting an incessant consumption. The question which then arises is whether these principles have not failed and contradict Jesus' message of the kingdom of God to the poor:

""The material abundance is contrary to the spiritual abundance, but it is this spiritual abundance where true leisure, creative freedom, recreation, the indispensable condition of freedom is found." {26}

Ellacuría understands poverty not only as a socio-economic situation of shortage, but - with recourse to the New Testament - in a second meaning as the enabling of a true Christian life. Jesus' attitude toward wealth had had two fundamental aspects: First, wealth makes it considerably more difficult to get into the kingdom of God, and secondly it increases the risk to oppress the poor and thus hinders the realization of sisterly and brotherly love {27}. In contrast, material poverty and spiritual poverty of the Beatitudes are inseparable, because material poverty that is filled with and lived in the Holy Spirit will become "evangelical" poverty {26}. Even though poverty was largely the result of exploitation, it is possible to actively and voluntarily accept it, in order to seek a use and distribution of goods which allows everyone access to the material and cultural resources that enable a truly human life. Such a poverty gives really room to the Spirit and is not stifled by the desire to possess more than others do:

"The Spirit can then flourish, the immense spiritual and human wealth of the poor and the peoples of the Third World, which is now choked by poverty and alienation through culture models that are in some respects more advanced but therefore not more human." {29}

 


547

Similar to Karl Rahner SJ, with the poverty demanded by Ellacuría it is about the necessary renunciation of possessions, in order to secure the basic needs of everybody, and about the right attitude towards the possessions, in which the Ignatian indifference is reflected {30}.

Ellacuría adopts these aspects in his detailed proposal for a civilization of poverty, but, prior to this, he mercilessly analyzes the current capitalist economic system and points to its social and cultural consequences. He then does not confine himself to the Latin American perspective, but emphasizes the fact that the humanization and freedom offered by the rich countries was even for them not universally feasible and was therefore not humane. For the simple reason that material resources of the earth do not allow all countries to reach the production and consumption levels of rich countries. Ellacuría emphasizes also the spiritual emptiness of this lifestyle:

"This universalization is impossible, but it is also not desirable. For the lifestyle that is implied by the mechanism of this development has neither a humanizing effect nor gives it fulfilment or happiness ... This lifestyle is motivated by fear and insecurity, emptiness, by the compulsion to dominate in order not to be dominated by others, by the urge to display one's possessions because one is unable to communicate one's inner riches. All this implies a minimum of freedom and supports this minimal freedom more outward than inward. It also implies a maximal lack of solidarity with the majority of people and peoples of the world, especially the neediest. {31}

Such a lifestile is scarcely humane, and certainly not Christian. It contradicts various Christian ideals: To give is more blessed than to receive, solidarity and community are more blessed than dissociating individualism, the development of one's personality is better than the accumulation of things, and the perspective of the poor is more blessed than that of the rich and powerful {32}. That's why this conception of life must be rejected. Acceptable for the new humanity is only a universalizable global concept, which means here a universalism that embraces the entire wealth of the nations, and where the differences are understood as complementary and not as opposites {33}.

He sees the civilization of poverty - i.e. the new economic order of the utopia of a new earth - as such a universalizable concept. The up to now dominant civilization of wealth must be replaced by the civilization of poverty, resp. the civilization of the capital by a civilization of work. As regards the priority of labor over capital, he refers to the encyclical "Sollicitudo Rei Socialis" of Pope John Paul II {34}. Since the civilization of capital and wealth has no longer to offer positive aspects, a correction is no longer sufficient, on the contrary, it rather must be replaced and surpassed by the contrary:

 


548

"Since the days of Jesus it is the same: Especially those who are already rich or who regard wealth as the indispensable foundation of their lives always fiercely resist when - with regard to the admission into the kingdom of God - poverty is estimated higher than wealth." {35}

It is possible that the personal ideal of Jesus - adapted in the necessary way - becomes a social and historical reality. The civilization of wealth and capital is only able to advice individuals, groups, companies, countries, etc. to accumulate as much capital as possible and to amass wealth, which is regarded as the basis for security and ever-growing consumption. It has admittedly brought also many good things to humanity (as e.g. scientific and technical development, etc.), but even more bad things. Since the self-healing power of this type of civilization is no longer sufficient to ward off the destructive course, it must be radically abolished. Ellacuría demands to replace the materialistic economism by a materialistic humanism and bases his demand on Catholic social teaching, especially on "Laborem Exercens" (1981):

"The civilization of poverty, which is based on a by the Christian inspiration transformed materialistic humanism, rejects the accumulation of capital as the driving force of history and enjoyment of huge private possessions as the principle of humanization. It makes the universal satisfaction of basic needs the principle of development, and the growth of joint solidarity the basis of humanization." {36}

Ellacuría chooses the term "civilization of poverty" in order to make the contrast to the civilization of wealth clear and not to speak out in favour of a general impoverishment. He refrains from using the expression "culture of poverty", because of negative connotations in the field of anthropology {37}. This civilisation is based on the distrust of wealth, which is expressed in the Gospels and, in the course of the Church's history, in the sermons of many great saints who emphasized the Christian and human virtues of material poverty. However, it is not about poverty in itself but about the dialectical relationship between wealth and poverty:

"In a world that is shaped in a sinful way by the dynamism of capital and wealth, it is necessary to release a new dynamism, which salfivically overcomes the former." {38}

But for it an economic order is needed, which is directly and immediately oriented towards the basic needs of all people, including above all appropriate food, minimum housing, basic health care, education and occupation.

The civilization of poverty counters the capital increase with ennobling people through work. Here, the work primarily aims at the perfecting of man and not at producing more and more capital. Work has to be understood as personal and common means for satisfying the basic needs, and as a form of self-realization. With it various forms of self-exploitation and the exploitation of others can be overcome and other inequalities can be eliminated.

 


549

Accordingly, not the abolition of wealth as basic idol has priority but the goal of a new society, where not wealth is the highest value, but where a liberated and fulfilled human life is possible even without the pursuit of wealth. Such a society would look very different than today's society, because it follows a completely different principle. Such a civilization of poverty would be "completely consistent with the preaching of Jesus, a civilization of frugality, of sharing both goods and life, of human creativity as a flowering of inner grace" {39}. This civilization is open to transcendency, as it has been revealed particularly in Christ, and supports virtues such as willingness to make sacrifices, self-surrender, hope in God, humility, love, etc.

According to Ellacuría, it is possible that the renewal of society in this sense "succeeds in sharing, provided that a basic characteristic of the civilization of poverty comes into play: a solidarity that is shared by all and with all people, in contrast to the closed and competing individualism of the civilization of wealth" {40}. This corresponds to the Christian inspiration. In order to enjoy the common property, it is not necessary to acquire it privately. The Church's social doctrine, by adopting Thomas Aquinas' viewpoint, argues admittedly in favour of it, but this has to be understood as a concession to the greed and selfishness of man - due to the original sin. But a new earth with new people must be shaped according to more solidary and altruistic principles. That's why the great goods of nature, i.e. the natural resources for production, use and enjoyment, must not be privately appropriated:

"The utopian goal is not that all people, by means of private and exclusive appropriation, possess as much as possible, but rather that all people have what is necessary for life, and that they are able to use and enjoy the things which primarily belong jointly to all people, without hoarding and without exclusion of others." {41}

Although Ellacuría as a theologian and philosopher does not give a detailed blueprint for the economic system that corresponds to this vision, he gives voice to a clear tendency: With a view to the history and socio-economic consequences of capitalism in Latin America, he does not see it as a promising model, although he does not flatly refuse it. But with regard to the basic trend, socialism is probably better suited to provide such a vision.

 

Prosperity without Growth or Civilization of Poverty?

In a concluding comparison of the two proposals of Tim Jackson and Ignacio Ellacuría, some basic similarities can be found both in the analysis and in the proposed solutions.

 


550

Both start from the finiteness of the earth and its resources and emphasize that a universalization of the lifestyle of the rich countries, with its orientation towards perpetual growth and steadily rising consumption is impossible. At the same time, they point to the harmful consequences for society (such as high rates of depression, fragmentation and loss of values) and describe thus this universalization as undesirable. By a fundamental criticism both of the dominant economic system, which is oriented towards growth and capital accumulation, and of a societal logic which is oriented towards consumption, they prepare the ground for their radical solutions in both areas.

At first glance, the proposals at least clearly differ as regards the fundamental transformation of the capitalist economic system, since Jackson on the one hand emphasizes that an economy of prosperity without growth is definitely still a capitalist one, whereas according to Ellacuría a capitalist economy is probably less suitable than a socialist. This difference, however, should not be overemphasised, since on the one hand Ellacuría has formulated his thoughts before the collapse of the Soviet bloc, and, on the other hand, he speaks only of a basic tendency and has not presented a detailed plan. So you cannot compare two economic plans. In addition, Ellacuría is above all concerned with the criticism of capital accumulation and the private ownership of common goods, which are probably no necessary elements also in the altruistic society planned by Jackson. Jackson's draft, in turn, with its focus on a stable and relatively equitable income distribution and a stronger social cooperation, contains elements which would be called "socialist" from some vantage point. A significant commonality of both can also be seen in the planned strengthening of work. Jackson does it with a view to dematerialized services and Ellacuría is inspired by Catholic social teaching.

This reflects also their fundamental commonality regarding the function of an economy that is oriented towards the welfare of all mankind. In view of the detailed evidence of negative social consequences (e.g. rising rates of depression and decreasing social cohesion), both do not want to achieve this goal through continually increased growth or more and more capital accumulation. Instead, first the basic needs of humanity must be secured and it must be made possible that people actively participate in social life. This also leads to a fundamentally similar vision of the future: namely an altruistic society, which is accompanied by a change of lifestyle and consciousness of the industrialized world. Similar as with their reasoning for a strengthening of the work, the different perspectives become apparent: Jackson sees this as a fiscal and ecological necessitiy, if all people are to have their share in prosperity, whereas Ellacuría additionally points to the preaching of Jesus and emphasizes the openness to transcendency, which makes it possible to transcend the material world.

 


551

Although also Ellacuría's proposal to achieve a civilization of poverty could be classified as sufficiency strategy, there is nevertheless a key difference in the name: For if the path to sufficiency would de facto be inhibited already by speaking above all about restraints, frugality and modesty {42}, how counterproductive would it then be to speak of "poverty"? In fact, this "imposition" on the adressees is also the main reason why Sobrino prefers to speak of a "civilization of shared contentment" {43} - and probably finds thus sooner a sympathetic ear.

On the other hand, just this name might mark the Prophetic-Utopian trait of Ignacio Ellacuría's proposal: He is not afraid of using a clear language, in order to mark the radical contrast of this vision to the existing order. Already by using this term, he points both to the foundations in Jesus' preaching and to the evangelical counsel of poverty and thus opens our eyes for what lies beyond the satisfaction of material needs. The "civilization of poverty" is thus, not only with regard to its objective but also to this term, suitable to be regarded as a genuine Christian contribution to the debate about different strategies of sustainability.

 

NOTES

{1} See e.g. CleanTech Spezial Nachhaltigkeit, edited by Deutsches CleanTech Institut (November 2009); see www.dcti.de/fileadmin/pdfs_dcti/epaper/Spezial_Nachhaltigkeit/index.html; accessed on 27.4. 2011.

{2} See N. Paech, Die Postwachstumsökonomie ein Vademecum, in: Zeitschrift für Sozialökonomie 160/161 (2009) 28-31,28 and the diagram of the fuel consumption of the Lufthansa fleet in: Deutsches CleanTech Spezial Nachhaltigkeit (note 1) 30.

{3} See K. Gabriel, Die Zukunft gestalten. Der nachhaltige Finanzmarkt als Antwort auf die Finanz- u. Wirtschaftskrise, in: Grüne Reihe, ed. by Missionszentrale der Franziskaner, No. 107 (2011) 6-14,9.

{4} See D. H. Meadows, D. L. Meadows, J. Randers & W. W. Behrens III, The Limits of Growth (New York 1972).

{5} H. Daly, Steady-State Economics. The Economis of Biophysical Equilibrium and Moral Growth (San Francisco 1977).

{6} T. Jackson, Wohlstand ohne Wachstum. Leben u. Wirtschaften in einer endlichen Welt (München 2011).

{7} See Paech (note 2) 29-31.

{8} See D. Brocchi, The Cultural Dimension of Sustainability, in: Sustainability. A new frontier for the arts and cultures, ed. by S. Kagan & V. Kirchberg (Frankfurt 2008) 26-58; L. Grabe, Das "Projekt Nachhaltigkeit". Zu den Grenzen des Nachhaltigkeitskonzepts aus kultureller Perspektive (Cultura 21 eBooks Reihe zur Kultur u. Nachhaltigkeit 1; http://magazin.cultura21.de/_data/magazin-cultura21-de_addwp/2010/12/MA-Lisa-Grabe-c21-ebooks.pdf).

{9} See I. Ellacuría, Misión actual de la Compania de Jesús, in: the same, Escritos teológicos IV (San Salvador 2002) 235-249; the same, El reino de Dios y el paro en el tercer mundo, in: the same, Escritos teológicos II (San

 


552

Salvador 2000) 295-305; the same, Utopie u. Prophetie, in: Mysterium Liberationis. Grundbegriffe der Theologie der Befreiung, volume 1, ed. by the same and J. Sobrino (Luzern 1995) 383-431,414-420.

{10} See M. Maier, Zivilisation geteilter Genügsamkeit, in this issue 227 (2009) 1-2; J. Sobrino, Der Preis der Gerechtigkeit. Briefe an einen ermordeten Freund (Würzburg 2007) 31-36.

{11} Jackson (note 6) 24.

{12} See in the same place 54-65; and e.g. K. Ott u. R. Döring, Soziale Nachhaltigkeit: Suffizienz zwischen Lebensstilen u. politischer Ökonomie, in: Jahrbuch Ökologische Ökonomik 5 (2007) 35-71,49-52.

{13} Ibid. 63.

{14} Cf. ibid. 66-80.

{15} Cf. ibid. 81-99.

{16} Cf. ibid. 113 f.

{17} Cf. ibid. 132.

{18} Cf. ibid. 199. Similar requirements regarding redistribution and transformation of gainful employment are stated by N. Paech and R. Pfriem, Wie kommt das Soziale in die Nachhaltigkeit?, in: Jahrbuch Ökologische Ökonomik 5 (2007) 99-128,111-116.

{19} Ibid. 154.

{20} Cf. ibid. 154-157 or also Paech (note 2) 28.

{21} Ibid. 161.

{22} Ibid. 187.

{23} Cf. ibid. 193.

{24} Ibid. 202.

{25} Ellacuría, El reino de Dios (note 9) 303 f.

{26} Ibid. 304.

{27} See I. Ellacuría, La historización del concepto de propiedad como principio de desideologización, in: the same, Veinte anos de historia en El Salvador (1969-1989). Escritos politicos I (San Salvador 2005) 587 627,621; See the same, Pobres, in: the same, Escritos teológicos II (San Salvador 2000) 171-192.

{28} See I. Ellacuría, Las bienaventuranzas, carta fundacional de la Iglesia de los pobres, in: the same, Escritos teológicos II (San Salvador 2000) 417-437, esp. 434-437.

{29} Ellacuría, Misión actual (note 9) 241; quoted from Sobrino (note 10) 35 (slightly corrected).

{30} See K. Rahner, Die Unfähigkeit zur Armut in der Kirche, in: the same, Schriften zur Theologie, volume 10 (Einsiedeln 1972) 520-530; now in: the same, Sämtliche Werke, volume 23: Glaube im Alltag. Schriften zur Spiritualität u. zum christlichen Lebensvollzug (Freiburg 2006) 171-178.

{31} Ellacuría, Utopie u. Prophetie (note 9) 396.

{32} Cf. ibid., El reino de Dios (note 9) 303.

{33} Cf. ibid., Utopie u. Prophetie (note 9) 400.

{34} Cf. ibid., Quinto centenario de América Latina, descubrimiento o encubrimiento?, in: the same, Escritos teológicos II (San Salvador 2000) 525-539,535.

{35} The same, Utopie u. Prophetie (note 9) 414.

{36} Ibid. 415.

{37} See Sobrino (note 10) 32.

{38} Ellacuría, Utopie u. Prophetie (note 9) 416.

{39} The same, Misión actual (note 9) 241.

{40} The same, Utopie u. Prophetie (note 9) 417.

{41} Ibid. 418.

{42} So M. Linz, Weder Mangel noch Übermaß. Über Suffizienz u. Suffizienzforschung. Wuppertal Paper No. 145,46, in: www.zappo-berlin.de/content/zappopedia/pub_docs/WP145.pdf; accessed on 27.4. 2011.

{43} See Sobrino (note 10) 33.

 

Link to 'Public Con-Spiration for-with-of the Poor'