Post-Autistic Economics and Liberation Theology through an ADHD Analytic.

In a November 29 2009 blog post on the Real-World Economics Review Blog Jamie Morgan argued for a form of Economic Atheism in response to the Goldman Sachs CEO Lloyd Blankfien stating that he and others of the
profession engage in ‘God’s work’. Moran goes on to argue that an
Economic Atheism would insist on a salary caps and job insecurity as a
way of encouraging the work of economics into the holy work of human
flourishing . Morgan also suggests a 12-step program for Economic
Atheists to begin the work of detoxing culture.
Morgan’s Economic Atheism in many ways strikes me as being similar to
the political atheism of the early Christian communities who were
deemed ‘atheists’ by their refusal to worship or serve the gods of the
state, including Caesar. Instead they were communities of resistance
who among other things were resisting the impulse towards empire and
domination, seclusion and control and held their theos in trust. At
least before Constantine showed up that is.
While holding true Morgan’s critiques, especially the call for a
12-step program for Economic Atheism to detox our culture from
unhealthy economic processes, I want to push back a bit with a
Theological Economic rooted in the call to resistance to dominant
cultures as embodied in the early Christian communities. This will be
accomplished by looking at the idea of Utopia and Apocalypse in
Liberation Theology and my own work in using ADHD as a cultural
analytic.
In many ways what follows is an argument for Morgan’s 12-step program
to detox from and confront neoclassical economics. While my model is
rooted in a theological model and the experiences of a historic
community I can only hope that it has some relevance to Morgan’s
argument.

UTOPIC/APCOLYPTIC
Economic theorists of the neoliberal model promise us utopic existences when the rules of their models are followed perfectly. Those of us in
the fields of post-autistic or real-world economics usually push back
against these assumptions by pointing out that such models tend to
overlook and trample on those who do not succeed and the nature of
gaiacide implicit to such models.
Liberation Theology, in its Christian, Jewish and Islamic forms, all
insist on two points 1) God’s preferential treatment for the poor and
2) God’s passability – the ability of God to suffer not for us, not to
remove our suffering but to suffer WITH humanity. God suffers as we
suffer, in solidarity with us. Incarnation, in the Christian tradition,
would insist that God even suffers as one of us.
In his book ‘Toward A Theology of Liberation’ Gustavo Gutierrez
outlines the Liberation Theology model as a form of theological Marxism
in response to the exploitation of bodies by the governments and
corporations of Latin America. It is here in this text that he first
lays out his use of the phrase ‘Utopia’.
For Gutierrez Utopia is not the future world that is to come. He is not
using the work to envision a perfect day where all their work comes to
fruition and justice is served, though I am sure that as a labor
advocate, theologian and priest he believes in the ‘Kingdom Come’.
Instead he tells us that Utopia is a vision of the future that calls
the present into action and repentance .
Likewise William Stringfellow, a North American Episcopal (Anglican to
those outside the US) homosexual lay theologian – and Harvard trained
street lawyer – talks about the apocalyptic imagination of the New
Testament as not an end of the world scenario or a road map to the end
of the world (my apologies to the ‘Left Behind’ crowd) but, in the same
vein as the utopic – a call and warning to the present to envision a
new way of being so as to prevent the human exploiting tragedy that the
Hebrew and early Christian imagination used so poetically .
In this manner a Theological Economic is not utopic or apocalyptic in
the manner of the neoliberal economist. Like Gutierrez and Stringfellow
we instead engage in these activities as theopoetic reimaginings of the
present world in order to ask the essential questions that would allow
human flourishing.

ROME AND EMPIRE WORSHIP
Ancient Rome’s economic system was based around the worship of state-approved deities and the emperor as God. To engage in the
cult/tures of ancient Rome was to engage in systems that supported the
Roman war machine. Early Christian and Jewish communities by not
engaging in such practices were participating in an
alternative-economic that derived its power and strength from
communities of justice engaged in resistance to the powers that be.
Early Christian communities chose to step out of the imperial model and
create instead a model of equality. Rich and poor ate together, your
mother may be your bishop and your priest might be your slave. In an
empire of displaced persons the early churches reframed the idea of
family and equality in order to create communities of bodies displaced
by power. It should be noted that the word economy has its roots in
theology.
These communities engaged in an alternative sensibility that subverted
the national narrative of conquest. This Theological Economic then is
not an economic or theology that denies the material world but is
instead one that insists on the engagement of the concrete materiality
in which we all live.

ADHD LIBERATION THEOLOGY
In my own work I have recently been exploring the notion of a Liberation Theology for the ADHD (attention deficit, hyperactivity
disorder ). Just as economic theory has become predominated by monotone
discourses so have our view of human flourishing become dominated by
Cartesian assumptions. Just as economics must become plural – in both
teaching and communities – so must our understanding of knowledge,
learning and the human person.
In my model of an ADHD Liberation Theology I push back against
Disability Theology’s (a model of Liberation Theology) claims of
resurrection bringing us a body broken and thus revealing the goodness
of broken and disabled bodies. While a valid model I argue such a model
does not work for the Differently Wisdomed – the ADHD, autistic and
others. I instead argue for an ‘upper room’ salvic model. Here I refer
to the Christian poetic narrative of the upper room where the community
encounters the Holy Spirit experienced through chaos and disorder – a
model very similar to the ADHD mind.
In my argument I say that it is the learning of injustice which must be
disabled. That like the ADHD mind we must engage in a disabling of
learning that allows for outside the box thinking, impulsive creativity
and the ability to work well in chaos (and in a ‘speaking in tongues’
moment to bring chaos when the insistence of order begins to squash
human bodies).
In my next section I will attempt to draw the elements of my
Theological Economic together. In order to do so I will be using the
above mentioned cultural analytic of the ADHD. While I know the
real-world economic movement has sought to retreat from it’s phrase
‘autistic’ I am using the phrase ADHD in the positive.

THEOLOGICAL ECONOMICS
If we are to insist on a pluralism of economic models then it follows that we should insist on a pluralism of economic realities in
communities. A valid critique of neoclassical economics is that
insistence that the real-life, true-world costs get over looked. This
is as true for human bodies as it is for industries, Gaia and nations.
A Theological Economic would insist on an economic resistance to the
powers that be, or the gods of the state. By this I mean that
neoclassical economics will always insist on the exploitation of
bodies, the flourishing of greed and the death of Gaia. These are
principles that people of multiple faiths and no-faith can agree to,
recognizing spirituality as being a wide experience with its own
pluralities.
Here then our Theological Economic becomes a place of engagement with
models that would exploit human bodies. In the face of war, gaiacide
and crushing poverty and inhuman practices Theological Economic
communities should engage in resistance economics based in the equality
of the human person in relationship with each other and Gaia.
To begin its resistance the work of utopic and apocalyptic dreaming
must first take place. By this I do not mean ‘the sky is falling’
scenarios or thinking that if we just change how we do economics then a
perfect Kingdom Come/United Federation of Planets scenario will emerge.
I mean we must engage in these practices as ways of speaking into the
present in order to call them into a new way of being. We do this
recognizing change is slow, incomplete and ongoing.
This work requires the return to the Liberation Theology base community
model. At this point let me clarify that I am drawing from my own
Christian tradition but to the inclusion of all traditions and not the
exclusion. The base community movement began in Latin America as a
resistance to the exploitation of workers and peasants by capitalist
governments and corporations. These base communities formed a
groundswell of action and activity in the resistance to corrupt powers.
I am not advocating religious communities but communities of embodied
religious action, as I have here defined it.
In a Theological Economic base communities would again form and would
again be in resistance to exploiting economic models. Like the early
Christian communities they would seek to embody alternative practices
of inclusion, justice and mercy in the face of ‘perfect systems’ and
their injustices. What the world is not, due to its investment to the
system in which it was embedded, these communities must embody in
practice. I will borrow this from Disability Theology – the resurrected
Jesus, whom Christians see as the embodiment of perfection – resurrects
with tears in his side and holes in his feet. Brokenness is closer to
perfection than we would like to admit.
The base communities of a Theological Economy would affirm this by
being a place of inclusion for bodies broken by injustice and unhealthy
economic practices. Think of what would happen if base communities in
poor communities stopped chasing the ‘American dream’ and began to
network their own resources so as to encourage their own flourishing?
In an ADHD Liberation Theology model we are able to say that ‘normalcy
is wounding’ . Like ADHDers who spend their lives trying to be normal
and wound their sense of being and self in the process any economic
model that seeks to create or maintain ‘normal’ or status quo as its
operating procedure will inevitably wound individuals, communities and
Gaia. Theological Economics in contrast are more concerned with human
and gaia flourishing than they are with normalcy or status quo.
In the world today there are many ‘walking wounded’ ADHDers who bear
the marks of forced normality. With brains prone to disruptions,
creativity, outside the box thinking, hyperactivity and distractibility
the wounds of normality can carry deep scars. Communities who do not
fit the ‘perfect’ system of neoclassical economics can also carry deep
scars of woundedness.
To envision communities of revolution in which a counter-cultural
economic is embodied we must think beyond economics that insist on
normalacy. Indeed, we must also insist that once any counter-cultural
system becomes real – either in small communities or the wider world –
that we immediately step back and begin the revolution again. Any
system, once power is achieved, will begin to insist on its normalcy
and will begin the wounding and breaking of bodies and Gaia.

CONCLUSSION
Jamie Morgan’s Economic Atheism argued for job-insecurity and the need for a 12-step like program for a post-autistic/real-world model to do
its job. A Theological Economic is not going to challenge this, as
these are noble causes. Instead to this conversation we will add the
need for communities of revolution – base communities – that embody the
atheism of the early Christian movement. This was an atheism that
involved a lack of faith in state-sponsored ideologies. Like
neoclassical economics the Roman world was a false plurality whose
credibility was only maintained by worship of Caesar. This Theological
Economic (or Theological Economic Atheism) likewise rejects a false
plurality for the reality of the embodied and concrete realities of
people and Gaia.
If we take economic pluralism seriously then this is less an ideal for
economic classrooms – though important – but for embodied realities. In
this way we can imagine communities of economic resistance who must ‘be
the change’ the world needs. This is not just a ‘theology’ but is an
‘ADHD Liberation Theology’. This will require us to disable learning
that oppresses and wounds, think beyond normalcy and recognize that
minds and bodies are not dualistic, but partners.
This ADHD Liberation Theology will also require us to work with the
model that Dr. Hollowell develops to heal the ADHD soul . As we are
envisioning an embodied community in resistance to unfair economics
then we can see this as actions of communities, possibly the 12-step
model Morgan encourages. These skills for healing are: mastery,
interpersonal closeness or connection, practice and discipline, play,
physical exercise, imaginative engagement with life and development of
creative outlets. These are mentioned by Hollowell as skills to foster
to heal the ADHD soul. But in reflection on my own model and Morgan’s
call for a 12-step to confront neoclassical economics I believe these
can become the spiritual disciplines of resistance.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Derr, Jason. ‘Pentecost People: Theology as Disabled Learning’,
2009,http://ginkworld.net/?p=1564, (Accessed Dec. 6, 2009).
Gutierrez, Gustavo. A Theology of Liberation.Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 1988.

Hallowell, Edward M., John J. Ratey, Driven To Distraction New York: Ballantine
Books,2005.

Morgan, Jamie. “Banking on Heaven”, Post-Autistic Economic Review Blog. November
29, 2009, Available from http://rwer.wordpress.com/2009/11/29/banking-on-heaven/, (Accessed December 12, 2009).

Steiner, Jerry, ADD Church Podcast, ‘The Wounded ADD Heart’,
http://addchurch.blogspot.com/ Irving, Ca. (Accessed December 1, 2009).

Stringfellow, William. An Ethic For Christains and Other Aliens in a Strange Land.
Eugene, Or: Wipf and Stock Publishers,1973