Governance - Sage Advice

We discussed some of the basics of morality in the west in a discussion groujp yesterday. From our European perspective the scriptural documents appeared to be the guidelines for morality even when they were made more general with terms like care and compassion. But it reminded me of something that I read in Brain Pickings, where the writer sends us back to Confucius, living in the east between 551-479 BCE.

“The ancient Chinese philosopher and statesman Confucius recognized the indelible link between personal and political morality, recognized that interpersonal kindness is the foundation of social justice, recognized that democracy — a form of government only just invented on the other side of the globe in ancient Greece, not to take root in his own culture for epochs — begins in the heart.”, she says.

Confucius made a connection “between personal good and public good rooted in purity of heart and discipline of mind” – a relevant directive for current politicians.

How does one get there? It means an orderly and disciplined home environment, which means moving back to individual responsibility, developing priorities around what is important – and seeing these as organic categories, looking at these with the mind and moving back for final evaluation by the heart. With these in place, one can work back to through the steps in ascending order leading to good governance at local and regional levels - and ultimately to national and international ones that have developed long after Confucius.

What if these were the steps politicians took – as opposed to trying to stay in office as their only imperative?

Plastics - Everywhere

Bill McKibben has noted this week in the New Yorker that we have to stop burning things - and notes that trading wood for oil based material may create as many problems as it was thought to solve. That may be a topic for another time. He goes on to discuss the prevalence of plastics in our lives.

Who knew the extent? He interviews Judith Enck, who tells him:

“Microplastics can be found in everything from drinking water to soil to beer to table salt to a cup of tea. In fact, we’re all ingesting roughly a credit card’s worth of plastic each week. Stunningly, scientists recently found plastics in human placentas.”

Enck, who formerly worked in the Obama administration, is a visiting professor at Bennington College and the president of Beyond Plastics, It starts by framing the plastics trifecta - focusing on the three most prominent single use products that can be replaced - and suggest that citizens in the US approach all levels of government to ask for their banning. Canadians can take note. See if you can guess the three most villainous pollution products. They have even created a sample bill to send to legislators, making the case that single use banning is less effective than looking a bans for one product individually.

This is a really good site. Go to it and take advantage of all the resources it offers. There are a number of concrete actions that citizens can take - from writing tea companies to asking food delivery companies to hold the plastic in their packaging. Individual actions are good - but they have to be supported by going to the source of the polluters and telling them what we think.

Misinformation Wars

One of my favorite Dave Frishberg Songs is “Marooned in a Blizzard of Lies”. It seems to have been background music in the past two or three months, but even if we now have a twice impeached person in the American White House for a few more days, I am less confident that we have survived the misinformation wars - even with 20,000 troops assembled to reduce the risk of violence.

Misinformation has never been easier to produce. You can find an image and put a slogan on top of it and disseminate it on social media in less than two minutes and have others share it hundreds of thousands of times. Video editing is a bit trickier but possible. The effects can be visceral – immediate anxiety, increasing to anger and leading to violence. Words and images don’t always lead to violence – but when it occurs, they have almost always preceded it. That should give us pause.

Most us watching from a distance in Canada, but inundated with US news are still confounded by the actions of a rising star like Josh Hawley. How could someone with his credentials – Stanford, Yale Law School, clerking for the Chief Justice be seen raising a clenched fist to rioters and continue to claim a lost election? His local newspaper the St Louis Post Dispatch now claims he has blood on his hands and accuses him of blind ambition. His rise not be as easy for him now as he meets disgust from his own party and a lost book contract. But even blind ambition doesn’t seem to account for something so evil in either intent or consequence.

Katherine Stewart writing in the New York Times sees something deeper accounting for his actions. Citing an article that Hawley wrote for Christianity Today, she views him as part of a religious-right framework that wants America to return to religious roots that are endangered by liberal ideas of freedom. Who knew that the problem was that America had succumbed to the Pelagian heresy? Hawley says conforming to what religious leaders say is correct is how society should be governed – and that includes politics. My own response to that as a person who is still a member of a faith community (Anglican/ Episcopal) doesn’t land me in such a place – that it is okay for a lawyer to pretend an election is stolen to bring in some kind of religious oligarchy - just won’t wash.

Why do such views gain traction at all? Hawley was not alone. In another article Stewart wrote, the religious right is estimated as 28 percent of the US population who identify as white evangelical or born again Christian; 76% of them voted for Trump. Stewart cites several reasons why they prevail and why they are likely to continue to do so. Economic inequality exists and it can be used to foster discontent. Paradoxically much of this is financed by wealthy individuals who fund the religious right to protect their own wealth. Persons in smaller communities receive much of their news through local or regional religious publications that reinforce their views. Religious organizations of all types are well organized and networked. For these reasons, views on subjects like abortion, appointment of judges and religious freedom and can become key issues to organize around. A president’s appointment of 220 court judges and three to the Supreme Court is worth overlooking obvious shortcomings of misogynous bullying, racial tweets or conspiracy narratives of stolen elections.

Stewart notes:

“While many outsiders continue to think of Christian nationalism as a social movement that rises from the ground up, it is in fact a political movement that operates mostly from the top down. The rank-and-file of the movement is diverse and comes to its churches with an infinite variety of motivations and concerns, but the leaders are far more unified. . . . (They promote) a radical ideology that is profoundly hostile to democracy and pluralism, and a certain political style that seeks to provoke moral panic, rewards the paranoid, and views every partisan conflict as a conflagration, the end of the world. Partisan politics is the lifeblood of the movement.”

Are there solutions for the rest of us? Another Times writer suggests we can ask questions such as:

• Who is the author?

• What is behind the information provided?

• What is the evidence?

• What do other sources say?

When we encounter a meme that seems suspicious, we can check the original image. We can avoid using social media as a news source. We can also resist the impulse to “share” and “like” which enhances dissemination. We can also make decisions about what we choose to be our trusted sources of information.

But how do we convince others to do this? David Brooks, writing this morning is somewhat pessimistic:

“The split we are seeing is not theological or philosophical. It’s a division between those who have become detached from reality and those who, however right wing, are still in the real world.

Hence, it’s not an argument. You can’t argue with people who have their own separate made-up set of facts. You can’t have an argument with people who are deranged by the euphoric rage of what Erich Fromm called group narcissism — the thoughtless roar of those who believe their superior group is being polluted by alien groups.”

He goes on to cite another writer whose prescription is to separate leaders from the group. If Stewart’s analysis is correct this may produce some hope in a new era of government.

Epiphany

 Some quotations:

 Save me, Oh Lord – for the waters have risen above my neck ( Psalm 69.1)

 From Wikipedia: An epiphany (from the ancient Greek ἐπιφάνεια, epiphanea, "manifestation, striking appearance") is an experience of a sudden and striking realization. . . Epiphanies are relatively rare occurrences and generally follow a process of significant thought about a problem. Often they are triggered by a new and key piece of information, but importantly, a depth of prior knowledge is required to allow the leap of understanding.

 And also this: 

Western churches generally celebrate the Visit of the Magi as the revelation of the Incarnation of the infant Christ, and commemorate the Feast of the Epiphany on January 6.

 Some news stories were hard to find on television on Wednesday.  US Congress was no longer dominated by a single party.  Covid 19  hospitalizaed cases and deaths reached the highest numbers ever. There was nothing about Epiphany as a celebration of the visit of the Wise Men until a message announcing a link to a live streamed service at my parish church came via email. I left CNN to attend it online.  With the strains of Gregorian Chant, sung by single alternating voices complying with the rules of public health and an engaging homily, and the noting of the passing of two friends – one far too early from cancer and the other probably only from advanced age - it was a moment of Kairos in a world of Chaos.

 *I lived for three years in Manhattan in the early 60s. My eldest son came into the world as an American by birth.  It is a country I have admired and loved ever since my first visit as a young child. I have been totally mystified by its support of a president who seemed to have no qualifications for office and gained notoriety as a reality TV celebrity who in real life cheated on wives, businesses, banks and taxes. As someone who had inherited milions he was an unlikely saviour of people who felt left out and disadvantaged, but were eager to become his disciples.  But like everyone else I fell captive to news in print and social media that was all Trump all the Time.  His ability to capture out our attention Trumped all.

 I’m not complicit in marching, vandalizing or believing conspiracy theories. But if there is a personal epiphany, it is in realizing how much attention I gave to this person.  I read of a refusal of a sitting president to concede his loss in an election and his many attempts to contest it in the courts with baseless or non-existent claims. I thought that press accounts of correction were enough.  I thought that resignations of colleagues was enough.  I thought that invitations to protest by a sitting president to overthrow the government were disgraceful, but that law enforcement and curfews were enough.  I thought that even though some politicians wanted to engage in spurious theatre without risking the outcome - and a chairman adhering to the constitution was enough.  I was wrong.

 While those who were making those claims, thugs were invading and desecrating the Capitol, urged on to violence by the defeated president, his family members and their cohort. It appears to have been a wake-up call for some members of congress to have a similar epiphany – a sudden realization of what they have supported and how close they came to death – perhaps their own – but certainly that of democracy. 

What happens to a man or woman who runs for office with a view to making the world a better place and then loses any sense of what it true - just to stay in power?  What young person is going to undertake a position of office to risk being spit upon, called unspeakable names or even murdered?  How do you deal with someone using a Bible as a prop after tear gassing peaceful protesters - and then goes on to love thugs and domestic terrorists?

 I’m not suggesting that hanging out at an online church service is the answer.  Religions of all kinds have much to answer for. But however we find it, the sense of  decency and sacredness of places and institutions has to be part of  reality however one can find it.

 And I’m not about to join those condemning the leader of the senate and the vice president and others for finally doing the right thing as too little too late.  Sometimes epiphanies take a lifetime – including my own.  What makes the difference is a distinction between habits – some chosen, but more often learned and assumed unconsciously – and practice, which involves choices.  I along with others have choices to make – in terms of time and energy and focus and determine what I value.  It’s a new day.  

Anti or Not?

Words matter and how we use them causes confusion.  I was struck by how this works after recently finishing the book, How to Be an Anti-Racist by Ibram X Kendi. It made a much deeper impression than Robin Diangelo’s White Fragility. What both deal with at length is denial, something that Canadians as well as Americans must come to terms with, both in their roles as settlers who felt they had the right to steal lands inhabited for thousands of years by first nations people. While slavery is not as large a part of our history as that of our neighbors to the south, we are not innocent in systemic racism in Canada.  Kendi’s book helps us cut through our denial.

 Kendi, an author, professor, anti-racist activist, and historian of race and discriminatory policy in America, recently assumed the position of director of the Center for Antiracist Research at Boston University. His book combines his own upbringing and development as a memoire while also making clear argument about the distinction between “not a racist” and “anti-racist”.  It’s not hard to cite the example of a former president, who after delivering unsavory remarks about some citizens of Baltimore then stated he was the least racist person in the world. Our own gut reaction is to say, “Well at least I’m not a racist”.  Kendi’ book is a history of his own journey from racist to anti-racist. He says he used to be a racist most of the time. He no longer claims to be “not racist.

 What is an anti-racist?  He starts with two basic definitions:

Racist: one who is supporting a racist policy through their actions or inactions or expressing a racist idea.

Anti-racist: one who is supporting an anti-racist policy through their actions or expressing an anti-racist idea.

 Subsequent chapters take us through historical patterns. Assimilation results when one group suggests that another group is culturally inferior or behaves badly, and thus needs to be improved. Its opposite, segregation, suggests that one group will never improve and therefore should be segregated.  An anti-racist idea is that all groups are equal. He characterizes these opposites as dueling consciousnesses.

 He calls race a power construct with false historical roots, including differences in biology, In early childhood, his teacher assumed that his behaviour was bad and suggested that he should behave like an adult.  The converse is that many black adults have been treated as children unable to reach maturity. The bible starts with the notion that all are equal and then puts a curse on Ham who will forever be a slave. Ethnicity also enters the picture with notions of group characteristics.  Some bodies have been characterized as more animal-like or violent. Some group’s cultures are denigrated as not being really sophisticated. A bad individual becomes the poster child for the whole group.  Colour has created hierarchies within the groups themselves – including both blacks and whites. We ascribe divisions within class, space, gender and sexuality. Racism is always present and it is subconscious. To support his argument, Kendi relates amazing stories from his own life to illustrate it. The task for all of us is to bring it into consciousness.

 The struggle is to be fully human and also to see others as equally fully human. The focus has to be on power – not on groups of people – and on changing policy not on changing groups of people. It has to start with a recognition that we know and admit that such policies are wrong. What are policies that suggest certain groups of people are more dangerous or violent or mentally challenged than others?  How can policies that support such ideas be upended? How can pledges for diversity be replaced by policies for diversity? How can stereotypes based on one person – “black angry woman” be demolished as applied to any group?

 In a recent talk, Kendi cited the book’s chapter called “Failure” as the most important one in the book.  He says that to understand failure to remove racism is related to failed solutions and strategies – and that the cradle of these lies in failed racial ideologies.

These are not social constructs.  They are power constructs.  Current solutions offered to us when we feel bad or sad include reading a book, donating to a cause or marching a time or two.  But as soon as we do that we feel better – oscillating between feeling bad and feeling good means that generally we do nothing at all.

 It’s not a sequential march toward progress.  It’s a back and forth pattern.  It’s not saying “I’m not racist”.  It’s admitting, “I am racist and starting to act in a different way”. It’s not hearing stories and feeling sad about miserable mistreatment of others. It’s about attacking policies in any place and at any level where we have agency.  Education may help individuals but it may not affect groups.

 Resistance does work – it takes a long time, but it has to be constant and focus on ideas and policies.  There are two such policies I learned about in the morning paper that require my resistance.  An app to promote cheating is being used in a local university.  It does not recognize black faces. Whatever its merits in stopping cheating, it has to go.  A first nations community in the north is worrying that the vaccine is not on its way to them fast enough because of small population density, even though their caseload of Covid-19 is much too high.  I can send an email to a policy maker re both situations. It’s paltry as an action.  But I now know about ways to start being an anti-racist – and I can begin. Read this book.

 Postscript: I did send an email to the federal director of indigenous services, after finding him on the government website.  I was thanked for writing almost immediately and my short request to act was copied to three other persons in the department. No reply from the province on the cheating app yet.