Earth Day: Subjugation
Subjugating Creation by Mark Van Steenwyk
This is an excerpt of a four part series examining the intrinsically oppressive nature of much of traditional Christianity. Go to this link for more about this series.
Empire requires exploitation of the land. Empires require the sort of surplus and hoarding that one cannot normally achieve in a simple harmonious relationship with the earth. And Genesis 1-2 has been used, more than any other passage in Scripture, to justify the exploitation of resources required to make Empire possible. In recent decades, growing environmental concerns have certainly softened our language about the subjugation of creation…though our actions would, perhaps, indicate otherwise. While our rhetoric has shifted towards a more environmentally “aware” idea of stewardship, we continue to use the earth’s resources with a primary concern for our own amusement. For many Christians, this is largely justifiable; it is, after all, in our job description.
The command to fill the earth, regardless of original intent, has been used to legitimize not only widespread agricultural development of open spaces, but also the subjugation of the land of peoples who are deemed either intrinsically inferior or inferior by virtue of their lack of land development. In other words, we are justified in taking indigenous lands because A) they are simply savages who will only benefit from us forcing civilization upon them or B) they simply don’t know how to use the land the way it is supposed to be used…they don’t cultivate it to its potential. Some would surely object: “That was a long time ago! We certainly don’t operate that way today!”
I wish that were true…but the way our corporations act today isn’t all that different. They go to the ends of the earth securing natural resources for the betterment of first world people at the expense of locals. And while it is (usually) done legally, it is the powerful that set the rules, and the effect is simply more of the same: Exploitation and oppression of locals. This leads to the ridiculous situation where local workers are paid mere dollars a day while local peoples receive a small sum for their resources; meanwhile, we get relatively cheap goods to help us have a lofty standard of living. This sort of behavior is simply a continuation of a pattern that was set by Christian imperialism and colonialism. It seems that hundreds of years of a miss-reading of Genesis have made it possible for “good Christian folk” to support such activities as part of our larger mandate to use the world for our own purposes as we see fit.
But is that we should learn from Genesis 1:28? Are we the Lords of the Earth whose divine mandate is to bring creation into subjugation? Can we assume that within these verses, we have the right to farm, mine, and build over the face of the earth as we see fit? Within the context of the first chapter of Genesis, it is safe to assume that Adam and Eve were still vegan (humans weren’t even allowed to eat meat until the time of Noah in Genesis 9) and that they were gatherers (rather than folks who raised crops). It is deeply problematic and anachronistic to read back into our mandate to “subdue” the land the right to modern agricultural practices, mining, and city planning. While these activities may be justifiable, we can’t simply justify them on the basis of Genesis 1. And it is a mistake to assume that we are, as a race, the benevolent (or malevolent) dictators of the Earth. Adam’s first act of “subduing” or “ruling” was to name the animals. It is reasonable to assume that God’s mandate to subdue the land involved the ordering of creation, not the exploitation of creation. There is no reason to assume that Adam and Eve’s mandate includes anything we might consider coercive.
I’m not saying we should all run out into the woods and become naked vegans. But, if we are to take Genesis 1 as a template for our relationship to the earth and its inhabitants, it is better to work towards a harmonious relationship with creation (one of reciprocity) rather than a top-down relationship of exploitation. Since, historically speaking, Empire requires exploitation of the land. One way of cutting imperialism at its root is to return to harmonious ways of living with the land. It is not only (arguably) a more faithful way of living into the mandate of Genesis 1:28, it is also, increasingly, necessary for our survival.
