Structural Poverty

Societies evolve, some faster while some more slowly. Take Hong Kong as an example. It was a fishing port in the nineteenth century. The British understood the value of its deep water harbour. They occupied it and turned it into an entrepot until the 1950's. Shipping, banking and logistics industries developed to serve the port. Less and less people earned their living as fishermen. Jobs change as the society changes. New breeds of workers emerge while others wither. Whatever the skills required, diligence has always been one of the ruling norms in work ethics.
However, as the Hong Kong society evolves into a so-called "knowledge-based" society, only those who possess newer and more professional skills are offered jobs. Diligence alone no longer guarantees a decent livelihood. A section of the society, especially those who newly arrive from mainland China, suffer from "structural poverty" because, coupled with the high standard of living in an affluent society, they lack the skills required to make the ends meet. However hard both the parents work, the families lead a sub-standard living. Their children do not have enough resources to take piano lessons, to participate in extra-curricular activities and to jump onto the tuition bandwagon etc. Their next generation will continue to suffer from this "structural poverty". Naturally, we will ask. Is there any social injustice?

The reading today is the story of King Ahab taking possession of the vineyard of Naboth (1 Kings 21:1-16).
The Israelite society was undergoing transformation. It evolved from a tribal society into a kingdom. To maintain a kingdom, the king was engineering a concentration of land into the hands of a few elites. Small land owners were sacrificed in the course. Naboth was such a victim. Land transactions were forbidden in tribal societies. People feeding on a piece of land were protected. However, to maintain his court, a king needed to feed many people who did not own land. A king needed to take away pieces of land from somewhere. He could start a war to conquer more land from neighbouring nations. But then he needed a strong army. To feed his soldiers, a king needed to confiscate land from within his kingdom. Defenceless Naboth was such a victim. Was there any social injustice?

Naboth was offered land or money in exchange. However, he refused.
And after this Ahab said to Naboth, "Give me your vineyard, that I may have it for a vegetable garden, because it is near my house; and I will give you a better vineyard for it; or, if it seems good to you, I will give you its value in money."
But Naboth said to Ahab, "The LORD forbid that I should give you the inheritance of my fathers." (1 Kings 21:2-3)
From a modern point of view, Naboth was not wise to refuse. Of course, he had the freedom not to participate in this land transaction. After all, he was the rightful owner of his vineyard. But King Ahab had not be unfair to him. Then Jezebel entered the scene. She murdered Naboth to take possession of the vineyard. Here is the injustice. There was no procedure to check and balance her greed. This is structural injustice.

Return to our knowledge-based society, are there any laws and procedures to check and balance the greed of a handful of business tycoons? Do we have enough legislature to protect the workers and the disadvantaged in the society? Can the voices of the poor be heard inside the legislation chamber? I am sure we have many King Ahab's and Naboth's nowadays. Who will speak for the defenceless Naboth's?

Dear Lord, You remain to be our shield and our guarantee. Strengthen the love in the hearts of the legislators so that justice and peace may prevail in our society. Amen.