Category Archives: Risk

Remedial Lessons on Being a Decent Human

Posted on by under Compassion, Risk

My main takeaway from the results of the US election on Nov. 5, 2024, is that a majority of Americans have failed to identify what it takes to be a decent human being.

Seriously. Whoever thinks it is okay to elect a convicted criminal and chronic liar who violated his oath of office during his first term as president; who finds people and institutions to cruelly condemn and insult for his own political gain; and who apparently feels that being sincere or apologetic is a sign of weakness, really need to reexamine their moral fiber.

I am not sure anyone has accepted the challenge of reeducating our fellow brothers and sisters on just what it means to be decent to other people. So until someone comes along to do just that, I am offering here some very basic guidelines on how to treat others. None of this is new; all of this should be known and cherished, but isn’t.

Welcome to remedial class, kiddos.

“In everything, do to others what you would have them do to you.” — Jesus Christ (0-33), Matthew 7:12 (NIV)

Everyone should know this, often called the Golden Rule. How little it is put into practice, including by many self-proclaimed Christians. In recent years, Americans (including self-proclaimed Christians) have been okay with separating children from their parents for no other reason than having come across the border into the US; prohibiting health care for people who badly need it; and turning a blind eye on systemic civil and human rights abuses. And the rationale is that the people involved are “them” and not “us.”

“If someone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also. And if someone wants to sue you and take your tunic, let him have your cloak as well. If someone forces you to go one mile, go with him two miles.” — Jesus Christ, Matthew 5:39 (NIV)

The basic message here is don’t be vindictive even in a bad situation. Instead, show yourself to be the better person. Sadly, Americans (including self-proclaimed Christians) appear to revere egotistical narcissists like Donald Trump, who bullies and insults anyone who gets in his way, spreads lies (breaking the Ninth Commandment with alarming frequency) to make himself look better, and is generally a sore loser.

“On one occasion an expert in the law stood to test Jesus. ‘Teacher,’ he asked, ‘what must I do to inherit eternal life?’ ‘What is written in the law?’ he replied. ‘How do you read it?’ He answered: ‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your mind; and love your neighbor as yourself.’ ‘You have answered correctly,’ Jesus replied. ‘Do this and you will live.’ ” — Jesus Christ, Luke 10:25 (NIV)

Look at that! Jesus again, for three in a row! While this is a nice and simple formula for being a decent person (and, regarding the ‘love your neighbor’ part a repeat of Leviticus 19:18, so the commandment has been around a very long time), what’s really great is that here it is followed by the parable of the Good Samaritan. As any Christian will know, Jesus told the story to explain what it means to be a neighbor. Specifically, Jesus pointed out that it is not important that your neighbor meet certain minimum qualifications, such as having the same skin color, or the same ethnicity, or the same religion, or the same language, or to be of “your people” however you perceive that. Nor is it about whether helping your neighbor will leave you with a little less food or money. What is important is that you see someone in need, and you extend your help.

“Do not forget to entertain strangers, for by so doing some people have entertained angels without knowing it.” — Saint Paul, Hebrews 13:2 (NIV)

There are several places in the Bible (such as Leviticus 19:33) that deliver the message that it is our moral duty to extend kindness and hospitality to people who are not like us. I like this one because it is succinct, getting to the meat of the point that those who may appear worthless are quite possibly divine. Unfortunately, the world–including the United States–has become gripped with a fixation that all who are not “like us” are to be suspected and rejected (cue the Trump campaign speeches). It is worth noting that people who lived centuries ago lived among strange people from faraway lands, often quite successfully. We think ourselves modern and advanced, yet have failed to learn a basic lesson.

“The worth of a man is measured by his words and evaluated by his actions.” — Ibn Khaldun (1332-1406)

This one is new to me, but obviously it is not new. Ibn Khaldun was a Muslim scholar in Tunisia at a time when Europeans were still living under centuries of darkness. The fact that this comment is over 600 years old should mean that it is familiar to many people. Sadly it is not. Certainly not to people who appear to think Donald Trump and those like him are qualified to be the leaders of a nation. The words and actions of Trump and others quite plainly show otherwise.

“There is a principle which is pure, placed in the human mind, which in different places and ages hath had different names. It is, however, pure and proceeds from God. It is deep and inward, confined to no forms of religion nor excluded from any, where the heart stands in perfect sincerity. In whomsoever this takes root and grows, of what nation soever, they become brethren in the best sense of the expression.” — John Woolman (1720-1772)

The abolitionist John Woolman, an American Quaker, has been called an inspiring writer, a model of Christian charity, a religious genius, and an exemplary figure in the history of social reform. Considering that his life ended over 250 years ago, one might think he was less enlightened than we are today. But it is just the opposite: sadly many people are now less enlightened than he was. It leaves one to wonder how and why people have squandered such richness.

“Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere. ” — Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. (1929-1968), “Letter from a Birmingham Jail”

This statement is so simple that it might appear to be nonsense. But think about it. First, when injustice is left unchallenged, people become desensitized to it and it becomes an endemic part of the culture. Secondly, one act of injustice that is not corrected can metastasize, leading to more and more acts of injustice, until justice itself is at risk. I assume we want justice, right? We claim to want justice. It’s even part of the Pledge of Allegiance that we recite with regularity: “…with liberty and justice for all.” But perhaps those now are empty words.

“We but mirror the world…. If we could change ourselves, the tendencies in the world would also change.” (Be the change you want to see in the world.) — Gandhi (1869-1948)

I end with this because it is a call to action, one that does not reflect any particular political party, religion, or cultural perspective. I admit that I have mostly tuned out the election postmortem. But the few things I have heard suggest that the outcome is because people are mad, people are upset, people want things to change (without providing specifics). What Gandhi is saying is that it is not enough (or not the right approach) to wait for the world to change around you, or for someone else to change first. Instead, we are called to model better behavior. If we each accept that challenge, then the world will change, naturally. Conversely, if we don’t it will only get worse.

One might be tempted to say that these are easy things to say when one has a comfortable life. And you might be right. But consider that these ideas arose from very diverse circumstances, from people who were acquainted with hardship, but all arriving at a similar message. That suggests that the truths are independent of circumstance and instead are (or should be) universal. In that case, they apply universally.

Universally, as in applying to you and applying to me. What needs to happen is that we as people must acknowledge from an early age that these truths (among others) are part of our human heritage. They supersede the ultimately petty differences that seem important in the moment.

Only then will the strife begin to fall away.

Racial Justice Teamwork Makes the Racial Justice Dream Work

Posted on by under Connection, Risk

It’s been called a racial reckoning, a social justice movement, and maybe even a rennaissance. In the nearly two years of upheaval since the murder of George Floyd, there has been an effort for change that shows lots of promise.

From my view, however, this movement won’t move without more awareness, and better coordination. Central to this is people giving up their fractured ways of living and getting on the same path.

In my view, the catalyst for all of this uncoordination is social media. Contrary to the conventional wisdome that social media is empowering, what I see is that it is actually the means by which people stay disconnected and efforts for change remain underwhelming. I may sound like an old fogey by saying that, but hear me out

Case in point: this year in Virginia, Republicans won the governorship in large part due to the candidate constantly talking about the imaginary bogey man of “critical race theory” being taught in primary and secondary public schools.

This claim is absurdly false for many reasons, but that didn’t stop Republican voters from falling for it and electing Glenn Youngkin.

Perhaps people fell for the falsehood because of the volume of unsubstantiated accounts they were hearing/reading in their social media feeds. And here’s the thing: there wasn’t nearly enough pushback from others who knew the facts of the matter. Thus, lies spread unimpeded, like a virus. And Youngkin gets elected.

I think one obvious problem is that people advocating for social change are spending time in a social media sphere that does not at all intersect with the bubble of people opposed to social change (let’s call those people “conservatives”).

Recently, I had an experience that left me wondering about this problem. The college I graduated from put a post on LinkedIn that contained reference to “Latina educator” and a fellow alumni commented with the standard conservative bullshit about identity politics and how those who advocate for change in America are “destroying” this country (his word).

I pushed back by pointing out the flaws in his opinion. Unfortunately, I got little support from either my fellow alumni or the college. In fact, the conservative alumni’s rant got more “likes” than my pushback did. He claimed that he “won” the arguement, and perhaps that is the case (I did not intend for it to be a competition).

So I’m left wondering, where were the social justice warriors? Who had my back in this exchange? Maybe they’re off doing whatever on Twitter or Instagram, planning the next phase of the movement with like-minded people. But that doesn’t help this particular situation.

And the situation is this: given that the goal of social justice work is to call out and challenge the misconceptions and misinformation that support the status quo, perspectives such as those shared by this conservative alumni need to be revealed as what they are and challenged at every opportunity. If this doesn’t happen, then change won’t happen.

I’m not saying that people need to join social media such as Parler where people with regressive opinions take comfort in each other’s company.** That would be like joining the Army to try to change it into a pacifist organization. What I am saying is that when regressive conservative opinion appears on mainstream comment forums, it should not be given a pass.

So next time you see someone going to bat for the social justice team, give them support. Because we are all in this together.

**Parler views those who challenge regressive opinions as censoring free speech. I saw this point of view expressed in the conservative alumni’s emotional rant, that being challenged amounted to “defelection” from the “truth”. I have seen this warped view of freedom, social manners, and consitutionality in other places as well, often accompanied by a tactic where it seems they feel they will “win” the argument if they bluff and bluster long enough and loud enough, and with the right smattering of jargon and insults. But when one tries to probe for nuance, they can’t come up with a logical or coherent arguement.

Speaking Up

Posted on by under Critical Thinking, Introversion, Risk

I am an introvert.

There a number of ways in which introverts and extroverts differ, some of which are fairly obvious day to day and others that are more subtle. One of the ones that shows up rather frequently is that introverts think about what they are going to say, and extroverts talk so that they know what they think. Each can be annoying to the other but being self aware about which camp you are in helps when navigating social situations.

So, for myself, my tendency is to not speak until I have something to say. This carries over to social media (something that I’ve discussed previously here).

But in the new year, I’m resolving to make a change: to speak up more often when it is necessary.

And necessary it is in 2021. Because we have learned that there are real-world consequences to giving free reign on social media to extroverts, those who lack impulse control or self-awareness, and people for whom belief is more important than thinking critically.

I know a lot of extroverts (who doesn’t? They are a dominant force in culture). Many of them are lovely people, warm and friendly, kind and loving.

But the danger comes when many act before they think–which as I said before is part of their nature. And on social media it is SO easy to act before thinking. You click the like button or shoot off a nasty reply before you even process what you’ve seen or read. (The person who coined the phrase that it’s better to ask forgiveness than to ask permission was an extrovert.)

This is how things “go viral” (a term I hate, by the way). But it is also how things become a shit storm. People pile on, one thing leads to another, and before you can say “Facebook” you have a flame war on your hands.

Voices of reason–badly needed right now–are drowned out, buried, lost in the flood. Calm dialog is shouted down. Mob mentality prevails.

So I don’t truly believe that my effort will make any difference, at least not right away. But I do need to defy my nature and speak up when warranted. And not be upset by the inevitable nasty responses. Or apologetic without reason.

If civility is actually what we want in this country (doubtful, but it’s a worthy goal), then somebody has to get the ball rolling, Might as well be me, and maybe you too.

Music of Hope and Change

Posted on by under Connection, Music, Risk

In the summer of 1988 I went to see Steve Winwood in concert, and his opening act was Johnny Clegg and Savuka. In case you’re unfamiliar with the band, they were a South African group formed during the final years of apartheid, but their music seems as relevant today as ever.

I don’t remember much about their performance other than liking what I heard and saw. Years later, I picked up a CD of their greatest hits and each time I listen to it, I find more to like.

Their sound is fairly typical of African rock and roll of the era, with the distinctive guitar tone, steady drum rhythms, and chanting vocals. For comparison, Paul Simon’s “Diamonds on the Soles of Her Shoes” has a similar feel.

Here’s the thing: Clegg was a white South African and say what you will about the “white savior” problem in the arts, but his work shows a profound sensitivity to the issues of apartheid. In the songs that I know, the band sings of a pan-African unity, the heartbreaks of racial injustice, and the resiliency of the African people.

One song in particular jumped out at me as I listened to my CD last week. “Asimbonanga” is a slower tempo song with a lot of Zulu lyrics. But it becomes clear upon repeated listening that they’re singing about Nelson Mandela’s imprisonment on Robbin Island, and also about the many South Africans who suffered and died from the systemic racism in that country. At the end of the song, Clegg recites a few names–Stephen Biko, Victoria Mxenge, and Neil Aggett. He is “saying their names,” reminding us that these were people who dedicated their lives, literally, to ending systemic racial oppression. “Asimbonanga” translates as “we have not seen him.”

Johnny Clegg may not have understood apartheid in the same way a black South African would, but he nonetheless risked a lot. According to Born a Crime, Trevor Noah’s autobiography, “Apartheid was a police state, a system of surveillance and laws designed to keep black people under control. A full compendium of those laws would run more than three thousand pages and weigh approximately ten pounds….”

My ticket to see Nelson Mandela, June 30, 1990.

Under the system, it was illegal for blacks and whites to mingle, and the band risked attracting the attention of law enforcement every time they performed in South Africa. Despite the risk, the band was undeterred in its goals. The band was advocating radical change.

Two years after I saw Johnny Clegg and Savuka in concert, Nelson Mandela was released from prison. He made a triumphant tour of America, and my mother, my girlfriend (now wife), and I went to see Mandela live at a large rally in Oakland, California. Even considering the depth of my own white privilege, I understood that the decades of hard work by artists, journalists, and ordinary people had at last yielded results.

I can only hope for the same here in America.

Helping Hands

Posted on by under Compassion, Connection, Risk

Near my home, there is an intersection of two busy roads where people beg for money. I drive through at least weekly. It is a rotating cast of characters. You have the disabled veteran, or the older guy who has “lost it all,” or the woman with the multiple kids she must feed. I can’t tell if they’re drawn there because it’s a particularly lucrative spot, or if panhandling has now reached the suburbs and intersections are the new street corner.

Only occasionally do I give some money. But I am always moved. I just don’t know how best to respond.

Sometimes what’s needed is a helping hand. Sometimes what’s needed is a hand to hold.

Often, it’s hard to tell, at any given moment, which is needed more.
Helping hands

Last July, a friend of mine lost her partner to cancer. They’d been together only a few years, and both were married before. Essentially, she had stopped communicating during the last month of his life, and in the months following. I struggled to discern whether she needed help, and if so, what kind? What was the right help to offer?

Recently, a couple I know who are the parents of one of my son’s friends were struck by a car while crossing the street. When I first heard, my reaction was to be a part of their support network. But as each day led to the next, and the struggles of my own life claimed my attention, their need became less pressing. They have mostly recovered now, and I didn’t even stop by their house. Was that the best thing to do?

Twelve years ago, my life derailed when my wife suffered a ruptured aneurysm while carrying our second child. I’ve written about this before, so I won’t repeat the details. With hindsight, though, I can see that during her recovery, I was facing  grief, traumatic stress, the normal demands of raising small children and earning a living, and serving as my wife’s primary care-giver, all mixed together. My needs changed constantly, even several times a day. I could never, while immersed in it, say with any certainty whether I needed a helping hand or a hand to hold. Honestly, at times it was probably both simultaneously, while at other times neither. Often, when people asked if there was anything they could do, I couldn’t say because I just didn’t know.
sadness

What is the “right” response? How can anyone tell what another person needs, and when they need it?

In the book How Can I Help? Stories and Reflections on Service, authors Ram Dass and Paul Gorman say that while it natural to want to help, compassion is not without complication.

“We needn’t go deep beneath the surface before we encounter our ambivalence,” they write. “We note the interplay of generosity and resistance, self-sacrifice and self-protectiveness…. There are clearly many ways in which we hesitate to reach out or we get confused when we try.”

In spite of the complete mystery of it, sometimes people do do the right thing. That December, when it all began to unravel for me, my wife’s former employer brought us a Christmas tree. I could not have said at the time that I needed it, but I deeply believe now that it was exactly the right thing for us.
Holding Hands

Contrary to what many may think, the helping transaction requires something from each party—both the helper and the helped are giving and getting. I was very bitter and angry when I was in need of help. I probably asked for less than I needed, and was less gracious than I could have been.

In contrast, I see a cheerful gratitude in the couple recovering from the car accident. They feel lucky to be alive, which says so much about their approach to the event.

What had I to offer them? Maybe very little. Should I have done something? Probably.

Action is required, and compassion, and luck. “On this path we will stumble, fall, and often look and feel a little foolish,” say Dass and Gorman. But in the end, we’ve done what we could, and we “trust the rest to God, to Nature, to the Universe.”