ADBC: 36 – Liverpool and the Problem With Guaranteed Money

Here’s the premise of the conversation.

Previously in the conversation: If I was smarter I would have asked my brother what it takes to be wise. He patiently works through what I did ask him to establish some essential principles to consider on a fundamental matter of life. I find it engrossing to read my brother being honest about the nature of work and how to negotiate the world of work, it’s great writing. Speaking of which there’s a clear outline of the problem with society’s approach to the value of life. Good reading is to be celebrated and shared and it’s my delight to share the piece with you that you can check here.

He hit me with some really intriguing questions. Here goes:

Q – What is energy? It may sound like an easy question, but at times the word confuses me. Picking up a ball is said to give it potential energy. Throwing it is said to give it kinetic energy. People say they can sense or see each other’s energy. The universe is said to be matter and energy. What the hell is spiritual energy? Does it point to something truly defined? Or does it point to something we’re ignorant about?

This is one of the easiest questions you’ve ever asked me, bro. So easy.

At school, there were certain subjects that I paid careful attention to. They grabbed my interest and I was more than happy to engage in whatever was being discussed on that subject. The natural sciences were not among those subjects. Chemistry, biology and physics left me totally nonplussed. I could not care any less about those things and getting the grade I did at school was a testament to how academically inclined I was naturally to soak up whatever was told me and regurgitate it sufficiently to get by so I could ditch it.

Having ditched it, those subjects were things I paid little or no attention to. So when you ask me about energy and its definition, it’s very much like the level of engagement I have with your discussions about scientific assertions like the status of the earth and things of that nature. I largely just shrug and move on.

This question is another of those shrug experiences. And I get the whole confusion about it. What is energy indeed? If I said it’s “force” then the understandable next question would be to define “force” and what would I be left with? A shrug of the shoulders and an invitation to refer to a dictionary.

When you talk about people “sensing” energy in others, etc it’s like the thing that people refer to about aura or having a sense about a person. it’s an unquantifiable, immaterial and intangible aspect of the personality that clearly connects with others. I don’t know how to describe it, but it is something that I’ve observed before that someone is able to identify someone with emotional or relational or mental issues that they’re not clearly presenting in their demeanour but it’s identified accurately by someone who clearly isn’t going through an obviously logical process of deduction to reach such a conclusion.

My brother, I don’t have a handle on knowing the truth about these matters. The spiritual dynamic of life is referred to in the Bible and I take it as I read it there without ever having a developed a thorough systematic understanding of all that’s said about it in scripture.

Q – Critically evaluate Universal Basic Income. Is this a concept that contradicts divine principles as far as you know? If so, explain. If not, explain.

Hello and welcome to another edition of Christopher does Politics. I do like politics. By that I mean I find the subject to be fascinating in a lot of aspects in terms of how life is governed.

Universal Basic Income is an idea that’s been trialled in a few areas including Finland. The thinking behind it is that every adult citizen receives a set amount of money regularly from the government. The reasoning is about a bid to “alleviate poverty and replace other need-based social programs” (according to this source). If we look at the thinking behind the welfare state then this is an understandable development on that, especially in a time where jobs previously done by people can be done by machines.

The reasoning sounds fine. There’s a class of people who may not be able to access sufficient employment to allow what is deemed as reasonable existence. To address that the government could put measures in place to raise the level of support and give a safety net for all. When the amount that government spends is assessed arguments are made that funds could be better served to support the populace and establish a basis for everyone to flourish and never face the challenges many faces today.

It’s a noble sentiment. It’s one that I also see in the effort by some to make poverty history. The sentiment goes that rather than spending money on weapons we never use and other resources that are of hardly any benefit, those millions and billions can be poured into, what is perceived as making the world a fairer place.

There are practical questions to resolve such as where would the funds come from to support the concept and how could it be safeguarded and ensure it fits the financial times. There are eligibility questions to sort as well – would a convict lose access to UBI permanently? Why should someone who might not want to work in essence be guaranteed a basic level of life if they continue not to work?

Those kinds of reservations nudge my understanding of what a righteous perspective would be when it comes to governing people. There is no responsibility on a community to eradicate poverty, according to the reading I have of righteous principles. There is a responsibility on a community to see how they can support the poor among them. That support does not go as far as to give them a financial cushion to afford what the community deems to be basic essentials.

A righteous and harmonious society is based on the understanding that people are responsible for working to earn a living and from that position having the heart to see the needs of others and giving as and when they see the opportunity to do so. Support to be offered is the support that can get individuals to work how and where they can. Then those who are not able to work whether because of age or ability can be supported initially by the family where possible and then by the community.

The UBI undermines that principle of the basis of work. I hear the arguments based on the experiments that have been done in different places. The argument there is that UBI does not incentivise people to stop work. In some studies, apparently, people have tended to look for work more with UBI. I hear that and it might be persuasive for those who hear the appeal to “do something about poverty”. My understanding at this time of what makes for a righteous society is not about this degree of government investment in people’s lives. There’s something a lot more about the individual finding the importance of values of work in the family environment and then that being spread to the community. Dependence on the state is problematic as it is. I believe I’ve made reference to reservations about the welfare state concept in a previous part of the conversation. There’s a lot to be said about a system that cultivates and develops people to see their responsibility under God and then to each other. If that’s set up then there does not need to be such a focus on the dependence on a massive state structure that even goes to the point of a basic income from them. Thinking further on it, if I got money from them, even if I didn’t “owe” them, to a degree I’m at their behest. I’m under the government more than I’d be under my family. They really would take on the role of the most important facet of life, which is unhealthy as it is already and would arguably be made worse with the UBI concept.

I take poverty very seriously. I take work very seriously. I take what makes life worth living and what can be done to provide the environment for human life to flourish very seriously. State shaping, state interference and state sponsorship I don’t believe chime in with righteous standards for life. When people make the argument about the reduction of work available and how people are being phased out by automation – that’s a reason to encourage people to look at what work is all about and cultivate alternatives that stimulate work for people. I get the impression as a whole that our approach to work is stunted like we haven’t challenged ourselves to look at work that generates income to exist and contribute to society broadly. And while we’re not doing that but thinking about creating more state-crafted safety nets for individuals it’s establishing something rather unnerving about what makes a community. The rights and entitlement ethos that underpins some influential thought really does not help but actively hinders the effort to support a community that supports family and allows individuals to grow with those values and qualities. Unsurprisingly it’s that kind of ethos that also finds UBI so attractive and it’s why I find it so disturbing and unappealing.

Q – If Liverpool were to win a variety of cups and the Premier League, how would that impact you? If they were to win some cups or one cup but not the Premier League, same question. And what is your view of the morality of the club as a business and Klopp as a person and manager?

Idolatry. One of the things I value about knowing you at this stage of your life, bro, is how sensitive you are to the matter of idolatry. It’s a sensitivity I’ve not seen in you in all the years I’ve known you and seeing that makes me very much aware of how subtle and insidious idolatry can be.

Why am I talking about that in response to your question? Well, sport in general and football, in particular, has all the makings of religion and is effectively idolatry to many. There’s the amount of money that people spend on it. There’s the amount of time and energy … I mean focus given to it. There are the emotions it triggers in all kinds of ways. I gotta confess that I enjoy consuming quite a lot of material on football. As a result, I endeavour to be careful that it doesn’t creep in to be an idol.

For example, there’s the writing project that I’m currently working on. As that involves something that I think is of eternal worth, it’s something I endeavour to prioritise – to the point that I prefer to be working on that rather than indulging in the interest in football. This is particularly important when considering your question on the “morality of the club as a business and Klopp as a person and manager.”

People say that football is a business now as though it hasn’t always been that way. And when they refer to that it’s supposed to hark back to a golden era of the game as though things were better in a previous age. Things were not better in a previous age they were just different. Clubs would exploit players in previous times. Managers would be unscrupulous and uncaring in their management in previous times. Directors and club chairmen viewed the playing and management staff as little more than cattle on their farms in previous times. Things were not better in previous times – just different.

Which is to also look at the whole thing of the morality of the club.

I could put together an impassioned defence of Liverpool Football Club as a bastion of great virtues in life. After all, the theme that is sung by the fans and rings out in the ground at home games mesmerises people with the sentiment that You’ll Never Walk Alone. It’s a family. We’re in this together. We all stand together. Together we stand and together we win. I can talk about key figures in the club who have been hugely influential and have purported qualities that have drawn admiration from many.

I could do that – but along with that, I have to acknowledge some other aspects of the nature of the club. Other aspects do not paint such a glowing picture of the club. Today thinking about the club and its morality could go into a comparison game and talking about how we’re not like Manchester United in one way or not like Manchester City in another or not like Chelsea in another or not like Real Madrid in another. But while I’m lauding those elements once more things can be said about how the business nature of the game has led to the owners of the club pursuing ways of maximising the income generated through concepts like the European Super League which provoked an uproar because of what was perceived as “betrayal” to the values of the game. All of that, though, is a lot of hot air, really.

Why should I expect people to behave in moral ways in football any more than I expect it of them in any other walk of life that is full of episodes of people being very immoral and in some cases applauding it? I don’t refer to the club I support as a pillar of righteousness when it comes to morality. Going for the trends of the day, ticking boxes to be amenable to various elements of society and so much more can be levelled at the club when morality and righteousness come into it.

When it comes to the manager. I’ve read and heard things about him being a Christian and others have seen him for some of the social comments he’s made as being in tune with the ethos of the club. I don’t know, Klopp, though. I don’t know his morality really. His announcements and pronouncements have had a mixed response from me. I don’t look to Klopp as a paragon of virtue ad he doesn’t put himself across as someone to be held in that light.

In a real sense what I’m conveying here is that my support of Liverpool is not an endorsement of them for their moral or immoral practices whether as a club or as seen in the manager. The reference point for me for morality and righteousness remains the Bible and those who love God and follow Jesus Christ. There’s so much I see in the club and the manager and the industry as a whole that clearly broadcasts that they are not interested in godly standards. They couldn’t care less about doing what’s right in God’s sight. I see that and acknowledge that and consider their virtue signalling in whatever they promote and advocate in the light of that.

That also influences my approach to the club when it comes to their exploits. Let me be clear – I love football as a game and sport that has narratives and characters that evokes hours of conversation on things that in the larger scheme means nothing, but I can still get value from one or two key things in it. When I think about other conversations people want to have or other narratives in life that people want me to follow, I find them so inane and irrelevant that I’d rather talk about football. Hence with the support of Liverpool and them doing well at present, there’s a great reason to be happy at being a supporter of that team. When Liverpool does well, I feel happy about it.

When Liverpool won the Champions League almost three years ago, I remember spending hours poring over video material of reaction to the win and enjoying myself thoroughly. Something I had an attachment to had experienced great success and I felt it. When Liverpool won the Premier League almost two years ago, I remember the sense of great exhilaration because something that I attached myself to had experienced massive success. When Liverpool won the Carabao Cup almost two months ago, I remember watching the game with a friend and expressing tremendous joy at the result because something that I attached myself to have experienced another success. I like the things that I attach myself to experiencing success. However inconsequential that success really is in the larger scheme of things.

This then leads to my reaction and response to when things are not going so well for Liverpool. And in those cases, rather than getting morose about it and feeling down, I accept it as a part of the game and look to divert my focus and attention on other things of greater worth in life that puts Liverpool in its proper perspective.

Therefore, if Liverpool ends the season having only won the Carabao Cup, I’ll acknowledge a sense of disappointment, but get over it. If Liverpool ends the season only winning the Carabao Cup and the FA Cup, I’ll acknowledge a sense of disappointment, but be relatively pleased with winning two trophies and get over it. If Liverpool end the season winning anything else that will be seen as a successful season for Liverpool and I’ll be very happy about that and share that happiness with other Liverpool supporters that I know … and remember it and not get over it but refer to it as a happy time supporting the club. I’ll do that because something that I attached myself to would have experienced tremendous, indeed a potentially unprecedented and unparalleled success and I like the things that I attach myself to experiencing success.

Let me be clear as well – the level of attachment I had with the fortunes of Liverpool conditioned me to see winning the league as the fundamental and most essential requirement. Winning that alone would be a superb achievement to go along with the other 19 times that we’ve achieved that feat. I would be very happy with that indeed. If we did not win it, however, as referred to earlier, depending on what we won would determine how I would feel about it.

It’s also to state for the record that although all I see of Klopp is his public persona in interviews, I am delighted with him as the manager of Liverpool Football Club. He is without a shadow of a doubt the best manager of the club in my lifetime and it’s a pleasure to see the work he has done establishing the team as one of the best in the world.

In a very real way, though, these feelings and sentiments only come back again to get me to think about what real success in life for me means. Those feelings and sentiments I get at what Liverpool achieves reinforce a resolve I have to value highly what is of Kingdom value to me.

---

That was quite the mix of questions to take on. Many thanks for that.

Here are some questions for you:

Q – It is important for the human experience to gain an appreciation for nature. What are your thoughts on that assertion; feel free to define nature as you wish? Is our perspective of the environment corrupted by particular agendas that tend to find prominent exposure in mainstream media?

Q – If you were to produce and present a podcast that would seek to inform and educate, what three subjects would you focus on and why? How would you define success for such a project?

Q – You are not a Christian and you do not class yourself as a Noahide. Is there a fitting label to attach to define your position in life? Summarise your journey away from defining yourself as noahide. Where certain religions like Christianity have a desire to “make disciples”, is there a similar dynamic for your view of the truth, also share reasons for your position?

You’re consistent in delivering the goods, Hesediah. Thanks for your time.

For His Name’s Sake

Shalom

C. L. J. Dryden