Recently, a family in South Africa moved into the slums where their housekeeper lives, to get a better sense of understanding of how the poorer members of their community survived. It met with a variety of responses from advocates for the poor ranging from appreciation for their actions to criticism and a feeling they were exploiting the very group they were trying to help. The ongoing SNAP challenge, which has seen celebrities and high profile politicians attempt to live on a $4.50 a day food budget, has faced a similar response.
I traditionally have mixed feelings on this as well. But then, recently, the game changer came in when Panera CEO Ron Schaich took the challenge. His experiences are documented here.
Schaich asks the hard questions, as one of the members of society who has "made it". While he seemingly has long held these values, the stark reality of just how meager $4.50 a day is appears to have made him more determined to work to fight hunger. As he states in the article:
Throughout my SNAP Challenge, I kept returning to the same questions: What kind of society do we want to live in? Do we want to live in a country that turns a cold shoulder to the problem of hunger, or one in which we work together to face it head on?
It's easy to criticize; far harder to find solutions. While I have no doubt there are some self serving celebrities taking the challenge, I also have a fervent belief they will reap what they so. The goal of most progressives is not to impoverish the wealthy, not to redistribute the wealth, but to make the wealthy more aware of their social responsibility and the power their wealth gives them to be game changers against social inequities like illiteracy, hunger, and housing.
In other words, our struggle is not against your desire to live in opulence; our struggle is against the reality of the poor living hopelessly and in desolation. And if the SNAP challenge encourages more of those wealthy to become socially aware and work to be game changers, I'm all for it!
