Danielle Levy

Anti-hunger organizations are doing something new. They’re trying to go beyond the idea of just providing food for the needy. It’s not enough for them to feed people today, they are trying to make sure those people can have access to food tomorrow. As a result they’re promoting community gardens, sustainable agriculture, relationships between farmers and communities, economic justice for food producers. The organizations are after food security and believe all these, along with similar efforts, are part of one day getting there. They face big obstacles, particularly at a time when the economy is still contracted. One is complacency. After the holidays, will people forget hunger and what they ought to do about it? The latest USDA annual report reports the highest rate of food insecurity in the country, one in seven households or 17 million households cannot be sure they will not go hungry or have enough nutritious food. What’s more, this figure is much higher than the 13 million households in 2007. When new guidelines for mammos were issued recently and people felt threatened by them, they rose, rejected them with sufficient gusto, the government panel rescinded them. Where’s the same ardor when it comes to hunger, to the existence of food insecurity in a land of plenty? Why are we handling hunger differently than a recommendation for mammos?

The Swiss just banned mosque minarets. It seems a small thing but it isn’t. One could say it’s like banning church steeples, but it’s much more than that. The minaret is the tower through which the faithful are called to prayers and praying 5 times a day is central to being a good Muslim. The measure banning minarets passed with about 57% of the vote. Some 2.7 million people voted, in a country of 7.5 million. While Switzerland has traditionally been politically neutral, its citizens tend to be bound by tradition and slow to warm to change, so the vote from that standpoint is not a surprise. Polls taken just 10 days prior indicated only 37% support for the measure, so the result was unexpected. The real problem, however, is that when a group, or a country starts this kind of religious discrimination, it is much too reminiscent of Nazi Germany. Even now in Paris many synagogues are hidden. What is troublesome to the point of being scary is that this vote invites a sense of having been there before. Hopefully the Swiss people will realize that and find a way to rectify what could otherwise be a slippery slope.

Michael’s Jackson glove sold at auction for $350,000, way above what the auction house thought. The pre-auction estimate was around $50,000. The bidding opened at $10,000, went immediately to $120,000 and then eventually to $350,000. With fees and taxes the winning bidder, a Hong Kong businessman, will pay $420,000. The glove is to be exhibited at a resort on Macao. Whatever the explanation, investment, uniqueness or a die-hard fan’s last bravo, there’s something sad about a human being paying that much for a memento, even if it was called by the chief executive of the auction house, “the Holy Grail of Michael Jackson.” There’s something sad about someone with means not knowing the real value of money, of how much good that sum could have done, in food programs, HIV meds, schools, art programs… There’s something sad about a wanton and blatant exercise of material values.