As a community, we are facing a moral dilemma posed by the big-box debate. Let me state up front that I share the antipathy of many to big box-stores coming to Belfast — especially Wal-Mart.

My reasons are familiar ones. I consider Wal-Mart's treatment of workers and the sources from which they purchase to be immoral — not to mention the impact of any big-box store on the local economy and environment.

However, there is a very real danger that my feelings can cross the line to being moralistic. That is because this is not a cut-and-dried issue of right and wrong. Rather, we are facing a choice between two unfortunate options. As a community, we are between a rock and a hard place and there is no easy way ahead. To the extent that we treat this issue as one of right versus wrong, good versus bad, we will end up with winners and losers and a permanently divided community.

Waldo County has far too many people who have been left behind in the economy. For them, a $12 roundtrip drive to Bangor in an older car represents a significant percentage of their available income. They legitimately want local access to regularly available, inexpensive clothing and food for their families.

On the other hand, Waldo County and Belfast represent a way of life that is rapidly disappearing in the United States . Many of us have come to this area precisely because of its small-town charm, lack of traffic, and face-to-face way of life. We don't want to see that lost.

How do you choose between the desires of a family with four children, living below the poverty level, for affordable clothing and food, and the desires of others who have escaped a lifetime of crowds, pollution and stress for a particular quality of life they have found in the area of Belfast?

For many, the answer lies in a moralistic approach: "My way is good; their way is bad." And in the process, it is easy to become pitted against one another. It is easy for those of us who are not poor to criticize the priorities of those who are, to point out how much they waste on smoking or alcohol or buying lottery tickets or cheap goods that don't last. It is easy to think that if they just led a more disciplined life they'd be able to meet their basic needs.

For those who want to be able to buy low-priced items without driving to Bangor or Rockland , refusing a big-box store seems immoral — the response of elites who have the means to get their goods in some other manner. We say we want a simple life, but have all the goodies that go with affluence. We speak of the environmental damage that big-box stores will bring, but we buy online and have large trucks bring things directly to our door. We want our fruits and vegetables out of season, ignoring the cost of trucking them from great distances. We fly to exotic locations in fuel-guzzling airplanes.

There is enough blame to go around. Whichever side one comes down on, the temptation to moral superiority is perilously close at hand. It is easy to get caught up in moralistic self-righteousness and miss an important truth. In the normal arrangements of life, the victims end up blaming each other, while those who control the economy remain distant and unchallenged in their position of privilege. If a big-box comes, it will make money. If we disallow it, the company will go somewhere else and make money. It makes little difference to them. But either way, it makes an enormous difference to us.

The way ahead is for all of us as a community to move beyond victimization, powerlessness and mutual recrimination. We need to work together to come up with a solution in which there are no losers. If we remain fixated on blaming those with whom we disagree on this issue, there will be no winners — except, of course, the large corporations who seem to win, no matter what.

Much of the public discussion so far has involved a series of pro and con speakers. Very little new is said, and most of us tune out those with whom we disagree. I have learned much from the circle process used in the Restorative Justice approach, where offenders, victims and others concerned sit and listen to one another and actively seek an agreement that meets the needs of each. It is important to hear each other's needs, hopes and fears. But that is not enough. We also need to understand why we're in this predicament.

We need to come together to explore the sources of our division — not just our stated different wishes, but why we're in this bind. There has been much talk of the differences between lifelong residents and people “from away.” But let's look at who is really from away. What factors, systems, institutions and players are calling the shots at a safe distance, leaving us to fight among ourselves? Who are these corporations whose exclusive interest in the bottom line has left small communities such as ours with scarce jobs or resources? And if they come, they hold over our heads the threat of take it or leave it, all or nothing, that blackmails us into submission.

Have we understood the power of distantly controlled advertising and media to constantly manipulate us to consume even what we don't need? Who is it that is seducing us to envy the lifestyles of the rich and famous? Who controls the forces of the onrushing development that are oblivious to environmental impacts?

There are real enemies, but it is not each other. We are all caught in an economic system that controls us from a safe distance — an economic system that exploits the poor and buys off the affluent; an economic system that pits us against each other so that all lose.

We are only one small community up against enormous powers from away. But we are a community, and if we do not allow ourselves to be divided by the absentee controllers, we have a chance to claim a future in which everyone in Waldo County ends up winning.

To do so will necessitate our assuming more control than we are accustomed to having. We may need to stop looking to some savior from away. It will entail organizing across class lines. One option worth exploring is the notion of a cooperative clothing and household store that could provide affordable goods. This will be discussed May 11.

Such an option will necessitate financial investment by those who have the means. But if our community can raise money for such wonderful additions as an art center and a YMCA pool, surely we can raise sufficient funds that will meet the shopping needs of everyone and also be environmentally and aesthetically healthy.

There may be other viable options. Let's explore them and see where they lead. And in doing so, let's not be afraid to risk a less-than-perfect solution.

T. Richard Snyder lives in Northport, Maine

© 2007 Reuters

Visit our Merchandise Page to see these stickers, buttons, and more.

Please help support this work -- make a tax-deductible donation to ReclaimDemocracy.org today!

Go to Home Page