A few years ago I was perusing the internet, as one often does, and I remember coming across an interesting article. It was basically from some small news outlet in England saying that the local government was going to prioritize teaching Latin in schools to children with troubled backgrounds. Basically, instead of money going to more school lunches or something like that, they wanted to teach Latin. The rationale, as far as I can recall, was that often too much focus is given to pitying those who are less fortunate and treating them as basketcases. By teaching them Latin, they would be given access to the same type of education that wealthier families are able to give their children in private schools. I was quite shocked at this article, not necessarily in anger or in disagreement, but rather because this was a perspective that I had really never considered before.

When speaking about those in poverty or those who are in need, the conversation is pretty much always about how they can be helped. First a question is asked, what is the problem and what do they need? From there some type of solution is found, both on the local soup kitchen sort of level as well as the federal level. The solution is often mediocre and the problem is rarely completely solved, but that’s it. There is not much that happens beyond this. The article about Latin in the UK showed me that maybe it’s worth thinking outside of the box. To be blunt, maybe there is more to this conversation than the abstract idea of ending world hunger.

The reason this old article has been on my mind is because of a class that I’ve taken this past semester. It is an urban planning course, with a focus on sustainability and justice. Justice taken to mean more social justice and equity than anything else. For this class we had to look at a number of new urban developments built in a variety of contexts and environments. What I noticed was, the more impressive, innovative, or sustainability a development was, the more expensive and unobtainable it was to the average person. I then started to wonder if sustainability and justice were mutually exclusive, or to put it in a more academic way, if maybe they were negatively correlated.

It then got me thinking that the conversation should be expanded even more. Sustainability and environmental preservation is important, but in this context sustainability is really just a stand-in for progress, technological progress. The technologically modern developments were unaffordable and out of reach for most of society, and certainly to those at the bottom rungs of society. My question then became; should society focus more on progress or equity?

The answer is actually simple, probably somewhere in the middle. While this is factually correct, probably, it is very imprecise. To what degree should society balance progress and equity?

Since diving headfirst down this rabbithole, I have since learned that there were actually protests during the 1960s against NASA and against going to the moon. There were protests for a variety of reasons, but the ones of relevance have to do with poverty. Basically, there were many poorer Americans who did not think that the government should be spending so much money on going to the moon, something they saw as trivial and irrelevant. They would rather the money be spent on hungry kids and on people being able to live better lives.

I can understand the rationale and I understand why someone would think that. So often the money and focus of Western governments and society goes towards frankly random things like AI, art, Hollywood, space travel, and all manner of things. Yet, I feel like progress, especially technological progress, is not something that should be sidelined. The West has a long and successful history of producing ground breaking invention after invention. Whether it be Johannes Gutenberg’s printing press, James Watt’s steam engine, Louis Pasteur’s pasteurization process, or Albert Einstein’s theory of relativity, these are people who gave everything to invent priceless inventions and have in turn made the world a better place. They may have been philanthropists and maybe they could have spent their lives serving the poor, but they objectively helped the poor more by being geniuses and using their intellect.

This is not to say that the two ideas are mutually exclusive, or that by helping the poor, nothing will be invented, but I do think that one needs to be given explicit priority. Take the space race, sure a lot of it was theoretically unnecessary and did not really do much other than egg on two hyper competitive nuclear superpowers, but on the other hand it led to incredible research and advancement into space, space travel, and everything related. Space X wouldn’t have ever existed if not for the moon landing. I think that by focusing on progress, invention, and innovation, it also shows the youthfulness and optimism of a society. It shows that we want to be a people who make things, but not just things. We want to make things that change the world and make it a better place.

It is important to note that while money and economics are tangentially related to this topic, they are not the focus. I could see someone getting the idea that through this thinking, that something like trickle-down economics is a good idea, something I more or less disavow. Unfettered capitalism continues to be a problem and is a system that requires borders and lines to work best for the people. Likewise, I am in theory not totally opposed to the idea of welfare or to the idea of making sure the poor are taken care of by the state. I am not sure it’s the best solution, and it is important that these systems aren’t abused, but again these are not bad ideas in principle.

That being said, I want society to focus much more on progress. I do not want to be taxed nearly fifty percent of my income just to keep the welfare ponzi scheme going. It feels like most Western governments and even just regular people want to spend all of our focus on giving to the poor. My thought is, why don’t we give those less fortunate, and in fact all of us, a common goal. Would that not be more beneficial, at least spiritually? What if instead of throwing money at the problem, like we have been doing since time and immemorial, we locked in on colonizing mars, or terraforming the desert, or creating safe and affordable nuclear energy? Why don’t we really shove our full support behind writers, engineers, researchers, inventors, scientists, and anyone else with a vision. If we as a society focused on teaching kids Latin, rather than shoveling more money into inner city schools, I really think it could have a profound psychological impact, and in the best way.

In fact, I think there is biblical precedence to this. A very similar line is said by Jesus in the Gospel of Matthew and the Gospel of Mark. Jesus says that the poor will always be among His disciples and in turn, I do not think it is a stretch to say that the poor will always be with us as well.

“For you always have the poor with you, but you will not always have me.” – Matthew 26:11 (ESV)

Poverty is not a joke and society cannot just ignore the bottom percentiles. While Jesus did say that the poor would always be with us, He also said that it is good and right to help the poor. A balance is clearly needed. Balance is also needed because people need to dream.

Part of why Latin was being taught was so that they could dream and be able to be treated as more than just pitiful, and I completely agree with this idea. Why not let everyone dream? Why not tell every child that they can do whatever they want to do when they grow up? It is not just important that kids are told they can do whatever they want, it is also important that they are told they can do the toughest and most prestigious jobs.

Children should be nudged into idolizing (insofar as this is acceptable and Biblical) astronauts, inventors, and the greats of history. Children of all backgrounds and persuasions should be taught to be like Neil Armstrong, William Shakespeare, Johann Sebastian Bach, Marie Curie, and Leonardo da Vinci. Nowadays it ends up being sports professionals and celebrities (see my previous article on this topic here) who are idolized. Having famous celebrities in a society will always be the case, it is inevitable, but that does not mean that they have to be the ones who we look up to as a society.

There is still one thing lingering, and that is a question of morality. As the reader has probably ascertained, this author has pretty much made up his mind on the intersection between progress and equity. However, I do still wonder if this is a morally acceptable way to look at it. If all new urban developments are sustainable with solar panels and recycled water, but they aren’t affordable, can we justify this? This is probably worth another whole post, but is gentrification moral? Is it acceptable to leave people behind in the pursuit of progress?

When framed in these terms, everything becomes a lot grayer and a lot less black and white. On paper, it is easy to say that we should aim for the stars, give classical education, and encourage everyone to become the next Einstein. However, when thousands, if not millions still live in poverty and are struggling to get by, it is hard to just ignore that. We can colonize Mars, but if on Mars there still exists those who live paycheck to paycheck, have we really won? At the same time, as I mentioned above, our Lord and Savior Jesus himself said that the poor will always be with us. This makes me wonder if all the things done to eliminate poverty are not just a fool’s errand.

I have been chewing on this question for a few months now. It seems that the more I think about it, the less sure I feel and the more answers come up. This may be the perpetual struggle of any age, to figure out how one should order their priorities in life and in society. It is uncertain whether a satisfactory answer can be reached. All that aside and at the end of the day, it is pretty cool that some kids in England are getting to learn Latin.

Ad astra per aspera.

“For ye have the poor with you always, and whensoever ye will ye may do them good: but me ye have not always.” – Mark 14:7 (KJV)

“And let us not be weary in well doing: for in due season we shall reap, if we faint not.” – Galatians 6:9 (KJV)