Hunger in the world persists.
It is tempting to think of it as a really complex,
at times overwhelming problem. It involves issues including overpopulation,
distribution of resources, education and politics. It brings up strong
emotions of despair, fear, greed and guilt.
And yet, world hunger, more than any other 'problem'
may be the opportunity for us to experience our interconnectedness in
an unprecedented way. When viewed from a global perspective the inequities
seem glaring and the solution obvious. Consider these statistics: It
has been estimated by the UNDP,UNFPA, and UNICEF that the total cost
of providing basic social services in the developing countries, including
health, education, family planning, clean water, and all of the other
basic social goals agreed on at the World Summit for Children, would
be in the region of an additional $30 to $40 billion a year, two thirds
of which would come from the developing countries themselves.
In America, the National Institute of Health
estimates that the annual cost of obesity related health care is 39.2
billion dollars. In addition Americans spend 33 billion dollars annually
on weight-reduction products and services, including diet foods, products,
and programs. The Hunger
Project estimates that some 10 million people die every year due
to hunger related causes. Based on NIH criteria, 58 million or about
one third of Americans are overweight. (I am using American statistics
here because they are readily available. Obviously the combined figures
for 'developed' countries would be much larger, and this is not a problem
confined to America.)
We could view this as a causal relationship here,
i.e. people are starving on the planet because others are eating too
much. This view makes the 'have too muchs' automatically responsible
for the "have nots" and results in feelings of guilt and helplessness
- not only do they have to live with being overweight, they now have
to take responsibility for others starving.
The radical idea is to entertain the reverse
notion as equally true:
people are eating too much on the planet because others are starving.
There is actually some good scientific support
for this idea.
In the 1930's, a Russian called Sergei Speransky
conducted some interesting, if unkind experiments on mice. In one experiment
he divided a community of mice in half, placed them in different locations
and proceeded to starve one group. The amazing thing that he found was
that the other group began to eat much more as if some subtle sympathetic
communication was at work. (He next started killing one group, and the
other group began reproducing at an increased rate, but ... let's leave
that issue for another article on over-population.)
This idea has powerful ramifications. It indicates
that there are deep connections at work. Perhaps, the fact of our essential
unity communicates itself unconsciously through our biology.
In the light of this idea, those with overeating
issues could begin to view themselves, not as those majorly responsible
for world hunger, but as those most sensitive and unconsciously sympathetic
to it. Their weight issue is a symptom, then, of their sensitivity to
humanity, not of their lack of humanity.
The next step would be to allow the unconscious
sympathetic response to move out of the body and become conscious by
addressing it directly. Instead of spending money on diet and exercise
programmes which do not address the underlying issue, that money could
be used to respond consciously to the food needs of others. Instead
of charity, money given becomes a real investment in human welfare,
which directly impacts their own.
The balanced point of view is that many food
related problems from starvation to overeating, anorexia, etc, may at
least in part be attributed to the same underlying root - the lack of
realisation of our essential unity.
Our illusion of separateness is the origin
of fear, and the fear is what generates the uneven distribution of resources
on the planet.
Many proposed solutions to the issue of world
hunger also have fear or its offsider, guilt as the driving force behind
them and often result in a further division between the 'giver' and
'recipient' of 'aid'.
This 'radical' view of the relatedness between
hunger and obesity has the capacity to generate a partnership that recognises
and acts on our underlying unity. If we are, at root, One, expressing
through many diverse bodies on this planet, it may help us to remember
that at Christmas.
When we hear that little voice inside wanting
an extra slice of Xmas pudd, we could ask ourselves,
"Which part of Us is hungry?"